http://www.thehoot.org/web/freetracker/story.php?storyid=54§ionId=3
Govt ad masquerades as truth
When a government adopts propaganda as a mechanism to reach out to the people,
it is a tacit admission of a people's divided thinking on the role of the
Maoists. writes MEENA GOPAL
Posted Sunday, Apr 25, 2010
These days, all major new dailies are flooded with news and analyses on naxal”
violence and the police “action” against Maoists for the past several months in
the states of West Bengal, Jharkhand, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and
Chhattisgarh which have suffered the intensity of violent occurrences the most.
Recently, the union government launched Operation Green Hunt to flush out and
eliminate Maoists in these states on the grounds that they were threats to
internal security. And, one heard and saw Union Home Minister P Chidambaram and
the Chief Ministers of these states constantly airing their views on the need
to wipe out the Maoist menace.
News reports indicated that even as the state paramilitary forces take strong
action against the Maoists, efforts to promote development would simultaneously
be undertaken in these backward districts in these states. Clearly, the message
being conveyed to the public was that the Maoists were thwarting the state's
desperate efforts to take development to the backward districts of the country
and were posing obstructions to this effort.
Of course, there is no mention, let alone a discussion, about why there was no
development in these parts, even after more than 60 years of Independence.
Similarly, there is no mention or understanding of how the state would identify
the Maoists and weed them out from the masses in these states in order to
eliminate them.
Even as these reports continued pouring in, an advertisement issued in “public
interest” by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, in several
national dailies (see The Hindu, March 20, 2010, p.14) for nearly a week added
an element of intrigue to the goings-on.
It showed a frail woman looking down despondently with the following lines
attributed to her: “First, the Maoists came promising prosperity; then, they
took away my husband; then, they blew up the village school; now, they want to
take away my 14-year old daughter. Stop, please stop this mindless violence;
(and then in bold capital letters) I want to live!”
A line pops up alongside: “Abjure violence, support development”. The
background depicts a broken hut with pots, pans and other belongings, lying
scattered, of a family squatting in front of their home, and another image of
couple of school boys standing in front of a demolished building, which is
obviously a school.
This advertisement from the Ministry of Home Affairs appeared on page 14 of the
newspaper which curiously had a contradictory story on page 12 of the same
edition. The news item on page 12 read: ‘Witnesses allege biggest anti-naxal
operation of 2009 was fake.'
According to the story, some witnesses from a village in Chhattisgarh's
Dantewada district said that 12 of the 30 people killed by CoBRA (Commando
Battalion for Resolute Action), a special force of Central Reserve Police Force
(CRPF) raised for Operation Greenhunt, had no links with Maoists and that six
of them who were picked up were killed in cold blood.
The witnesses described in detail the manner in which these men went about
their daily chores such as herding cattle before the forces picked them up and
shot them. They also mentioned the manner in which the forces destroyed parts
of a school which was already demolished.
The publication of the report and the advertisement in the same issue of the
newspaper created a peculiar situation in which an advertisement in one part of
the newspaper emphasized an issue considered untrue by the news report in
another part of the newspaper. The advertisement was issued by the Ministry of
Home Affairs which, incidentally, is also responsible for Operation Greenhunt.
The advertisement smacks of propaganda. We are used to seeing such
propagandistic advertisements by political parties during their election
campaigns in a bid to influence public opinion, or by corporates slamming one
another's products in brand wars. They project their supposed accomplishments
while deriding those of their opponents.
But, why should the government indulge in propaganda? When a government adopts
propaganda as a mechanism to reach out to the people, it is a tacit admission
of a people's divided thinking on the role of the Maoists.
An uncanny parallel ran through the actions referred to in the ad: took away my
husband, blew up the village school, and the actions attributed to the
paramilitary forces in the news report: picked up, destroyed parts of a school.
It was as though the government was seeking desperately to airbrush its deeds
and project them on those they consider their opponents. And what is the line
about the taking away of the 14 year old daughter insinuating?
Such propaganda reeks of the government's desperation to legitimise its
violent actions against its own citizens by vilifying Maoists who seem to have
gained not just the support of the people in the tribal districts but also the
sympathy of the middle class readers of these national dailies.
The government stands exposed in the claim, 'Issued in public interest.' How
can an authority whose legitimacy is shaken by the inconsistency portrayed in
the advertisement and the news report speak of the interest of the public?
Also, how can it shamelessly utilise tax-payer money/ public funds to disparage
a section of the public while seeking to influence another section? Anyone with
common sense and sensitivity can see through the dubiousness of the state role.
Finally, a couple of questions on the need for public vigilance on media
ethics: How can newspapers accept advertisements from anybody claiming public
interest when they themselves are the conscience-keepers of the public domain?
Is all advertising and such space offered by the media for revenue sieved
through some policy parameters based on morality and ethics of journalism?
Even as we contemplate the role of the state, the role of the media, which
brings to us our knowledge of the world, should also be looked at critically.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"humanrights movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement?hl=en.
