The Double Standard of the Media!

Now-a-days, there is a pretty tense relationship between the some anchorpersons and the MQM representatives. The attitude of the media persons seems to be aggressive towards MQM and its leadership and, in return, MQM has served legal notices to them as its reaction. The question is, why did such an unpleasant atmosphere erupt between MQM and the media?

Most recent factor is the ongoing investigation of the Dr. Imran Farooq’s murder and the search of Altaf Hussain’s house that had been made the most favorite topic by almost all the anchorpersons for discussion in their talk shows. Some anchorpersons became openly biased to MQM & its leadership. Their remarks, body language, facial expressions and their resistance to the clarifications or stance of the MQM’s representatives were a giving a clear impression that they, instead of being a mediator, had become a party against MQM.

This is an open secret that Dr. Imran Farooq was murdered in London and the Scot Land Yard is most relevant authority to claim anything in this respect. However, by now, its investigation is still in process and, despite investigating or interrogating hundreds of people in the case, has not come into the position to even point out or name any one as the prime suspect. So, the question is, how did the Pakistani TV channels reporters, anchorpersons and political analysts name MQM’s Quaid as the main culprit? When even the world’s famous investigating agency SLY has not identified any one, how do the people who are sitting thousands of miles away from the crime scene? Moreover, if they have some concrete and relevant evidences or proofs, why do they not convey to the SLY? But, if not, is it not a prejudiced reporting for maligning MQM and its leadership?

Similarly, when former interior Minister Sind held a press conference and leveled countless serious allegations on MQM and its leadership, the overall role of the Pakistani media was very hostile against MQM. Zulfiqar Mirza misused the holly Quran to make his allegations credible. Apparently, it was his individual shameful act, but most of the anchorpersons, political analysts, political and religious leaders, instead of condemning such a non-Islamic act, supported him. They not only propagated his racist and extremely provoking allegations and remarks against MQM and the Urdu speaking community, rather they declared believing Zulfiqar Mirza’s allegations as the “Iman Ka Taqaza” (Obligaroty requirement) of the Muslims.  None of them waited or asked him to prove his stuff in the courts.

The question is, if it was really a an obligatory part of our basic beliefs to consider the person true who picks up the holly Quran in his support without waiting for his claims coming true, then did Malik Riyaz not do the same thing? Was he not holding the holly Quran in his hands in support of what he was claiming bout the CJP and his son Arsalan Iftekhar? Then, why did the same anchorpersons, analysts and the political & religious leaders not trust him? Why did they call him a liar? Why did they not blindly believe him in the same way as they did Zulfiqar Mirza? Where had gone that “Iman Ka Taqaza” for the Muslims? Why did they behave entirely differently on the same kind of acts? Now, what should be construed with this double standard? Did they show extreme respect to the holly Quran due to their prejudice with MQM or they expressed their disrespect to it because of the love for Iftekhar Choudhry? Did the media persons ever consider its ongoing policy against MQM?      

The decision of the Karachi suo moto notice case by the Supreme Court of Pakistan had been the most common basis for the media persons to blame MQM, PPP and ANP of having the militant wings in Karachi. Legally speaking, that point was a part of the on observations of the Supreme Court and was totally based on the briefings given to the judges by the Law-enforcement agencies. Since what was secretly briefed to the judges in their chamber had not passed through the required judicial process, the judges did not use the phrase, “It has been proved that.....” but, they wrote “We have been informed that… ”. Yet, that observation is still used to target especially MQM by many anchorpersons. The question is, if the words/statements given by the secret agencies including the ISI are so credible before the media persons, why do they not believe the statements given by the head of the same most reliable institution now?

In all the above cases, from the news reporters to the political analysts, all of them gave their allegation-based analysis about MQM assuming that what was being reported especially from the Pakistani law-enforcement agencies was undoubtedly reliable and be construed as court’s judgment. However, who digs a well for others, falls into it himself.  Whatever basis was used by the anchorpersons to target MQM, eventually came to them when the Aljazeera TV leaked the report of the Abbottabad commission containing the detailed under-oath statement recorded by the former DG ISI Gen. Rtd. Pasha.  As soon as his remarks especially about the journalists came up as a part of the Abbottabad Commission Report, the anchorperson and senior analysts have been criticizing him in their talk shows. In his statement, Gen. Pasha said, “The journalists can heavily be bribed with money, woman and alcohol”.

Generally speaking ISI is the most important secret agency of the country whose reports are considered as the very authentic and reliable. It becomes an integral of every JIT (Joint Investigation Team) reports. Not only the governments and the military establishment, but also the journalists themselves give importance to its official reports and off the record leaks. Countless investigation reports or “inside stories” by different senior journalists are based on the same. So, the questions is, why are they now disagreeing to the “revelations” of the head of the same credible secret agency? The DG ISI is supposed to have given that statement after gathering the concrete evidences and the undeniable proofs in the support, so why to doubt it now? 

If the former DG ISI had given such a statement about anyone else especially MQM and its leadership, would the media persons have any importance to the rebuttal from MQM regarding this? The Asghar Khan is the most pertinent example in which Altaf Hussain’s name was not primarily included, yet some media men mischievously linked MQM Quaid’s name to the list no rebuttal was accepted from MQM. So, no matter whether the statement of DG ISI Pasha is true or it is the result of any personal rivalry, how do the media-men have now any right to deny the charge?

Taking into account all these, why should the victims (like MQM) now treat the media persons as a sale able commodity in the light of the under-oath statement of the ex-DG ISI? Why should they give a benefit of doubt to them? Why should they wait for the time when the judicial proceedings are held and the final verdict is given by the court? More importantly, the many anchorpersons had been asking MQM leaders to sue the BBC2 if it was telling a lie. Now the question is, why has none of the anchorpersons including Mubashir Luqman, Kashif Abbasi, Jasmeen Manzoor and Najam Sethi filed any suit against General Pasha if what he revealed before the commission was not true? Is only MQM an easy target for them to malign and humiliate? Shame on them!