It may sound unreal. But how do I explain receiving two contradictory mails within a span of 20 minutes on the role of journalism? One reader wanted to know the Indian parallel to the exclusive investigation by The New York Times into Rupert Murdoch, the founder of a global media empire that includes Fox News, and its disturbing hold on political outcomes. Each of the media outlets in that empire has destabilised democracy in North America, Europe and Australia. The reader wanted to know whether the broadcast of NaMo TV shows India as moving in the same worrying direction.
Claims and counter-claims
At the same time, I got a mail from a reader from Uttarakhand, who questioned this newspaper’s reportage on the U.S.’s count of Pakistan’s F-16 fighter jets. Foreign Policy reported a few days ago that it spoke to two senior U.S. defence officials, who told the magazine that U.S. personnel recently counted Pakistan’s F-16s and found none missing. The reader from Uttarakhand was certain that since the report in the magazine was not issued by an official channel, it was unverified and aimed at hurting the electoral prospects of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This reader refuses to see the overt politicisation of security measures and the use of the armed forces for political ends.
How did The Hindu report this story? Headlined “U.S. count of Pakistan’s F-16 fighter jets found none missing, claims American magazine”, the report from Washington, DC by the newspaper’s U.S. correspondent quotes the magazine as meticulously listing out the contradictions in the claims made by the Indian security establishment since the aerial engagement between India and Pakistan in February this year.
Various Indian agencies suggested that Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman had downed an F-16, based on his debriefing. Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman also repeated the claim that an F-16 was downed. The Hindu report documents the fact that India had asked the U.S. to investigate whether Pakistan had breached the terms of its F-16 deal with the Americans. The count had now been completed and the U.S. said that “all aircraft were present and accounted for”.
How can a report based on information in a respectable magazine be seen as an attempt to play politics? In its response, the Indian Air Force reiterated that the aircraft shot down in a dogfight by a MiG-21 in Nowshera sector on February 27 was an F-16. It rejected the claim in the Foreign Policy report that none of the Pakistan Air Force’s U.S.-supplied jets was found missing after a recent count. It is crucial to note that authorities tend to hide behind anonymity. The Indian Air Force’s version was circulated through the news agency IANS.
The U.S. magazine report, in the opinion of the foreign policy writer of this newspaper, Stanly Johny, confirmed that India lost a jet and a chopper, that an Indian pilot was captured by Pakistan and paraded before camera, and that there was no evidence that India’s strike in Balakot had hit the actual target and killed terrorists. In a sense, the facts negate the narrative that has been flowing from the political establishment. A close reading of the facts raises many questions.
Serving the public good
Elections do generate pressure on journalists to deviate from the core values of journalism. War has the potential to generate passion that sways both the electorate and the media. It becomes a deadly combination when war machines and the electoral processes are permitted to intertwine. If journalism has to survive and serve the public good, it should maintain its critical distance from official propaganda. It needs to retain its ability to pose questions. The New York Times story has come up with some crucial takeaways in its investigation into Mr. Murdoch’s media industry and the central lesson is that his family sits at the centre of global upheaval.
What The Hindu did in reporting about the F-16 numbering is a part of the essential elements of journalism. George Orwell once said, “In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Taking about the military and its claims in a dispassionate manner is central to democracy. It is an attempt to retain journalism within the spirit of public inquiry and not reduce it to a force multiplier for electoral gains.
readerseditor@thehindu.co.in