Are Journalists Who Question Govt Narrative Anti-National?

Whenever India-Pakistan relations touch a flashpoint, as happened during the recent post-Pahalgam four-day military conflict, patriotic feelings, understandably, run high, the mood is jingoistic, and the Indian news media goes into overdrive.

Accurate, reliable and credible information on what exactly is happening on the ground is at a premium, and one is at a loss to decide whom to believe.

In a war situation, the government seeks to frame the narrative. This is done through official statements, press briefings and blocking of enemy websites to counter the enemy’s propaganda. Maintaining a high morale of the nation and of the armed forces is a priority, and the government may even go to the extent of blocking domestic websites or news outlets which run a contradictory narrative, as happened with the news of Pakistan downing India’s Rafale jets.

There was a free flow of fake news in the Indian media with reports of the Karachi Port being heavily bombed. However, the moment some respected Indian journalists, newspapers and websites cited a CNN report quoting French officials confirming the loss of the Rafale, these news items were blocked on the internet by the government, and the journalists were trolled as “anti-national”.

The air was tense, and the armed conflict between India and Pakistan was escalating by the day to a full-fledged war. In such a situation, the government, with its sweeping authority, did what it deemed fit to control the narrative. But does this make those journalists and news organisations, who question the government narrative and present an alternative reality of the tactical and strategic gains and losses, anti-national?

No, it doesn’t.

A reporter’s duty is to report the news as speedily and accurately as possible. Since the most recent India-Pakistan armed conflict had not escalated to a full-fledged war, there was no ban by the government on the reporting, and, therefore, journalists were within their right to report news that they felt was accurate and had been adequately verified.

On receiving the sensational news reports of Indian jets being downed by the enemy, as a reader/viewer, one may wish to keep one’s judgement in abeyance till further confirmation from multiple, credible sources. This is while accepting that gains and losses are a part of the reality of any war (take the case of the latest sensational drone attack by Ukraine on Russian air bases). But to get angry at the news reports and discredit or defame journalists as “anti-national” is not a mature response for people in a democracy.

During India’s wars in 1971 and before, All India Radio (AIR) would release periodic news bulletins, which were carefully drafted and vetted by the government. There was no satellite news TV. But almost everyone who was hungry for credible news tuned in to BBC World Service for trustworthy reports. Such was the vast network and credibility of the BBC that its reports were trusted.

Having said that the government of the day has the right and the authority to control the flow of information in a war to counter enemy propaganda and maintain high national morale, this blanket authority cannot be allowed to extend for too long in a democracy.

Irrespective of whether it is war or peace, totalitarian regimes do not like a free press. Thus, a free press does not exist in China or North Korea, and the world still does not know how many million people died in the great famines in these countries in the previous decades.

Therefore, when the Nobel laureate Prof. Amartya Sen says that “famines do not occur in democratic nations with a free press”, he is, in fact, extolling the virtues of press freedom in a democracy.

In 2008, the Manmohan Singh government was forced to announce corrective measures, including farm loan waivers, etc., to prevent further distress after journalists raised a hue and cry over unabated farmer suicides in Vidarbha.

Rather than blindly accept TV reports that Karachi Port was heavily bombed by Indian forces and instantly share such news on social media, it would have been prudent to await confirmation from multiple credible sources. Ditto with the first reports of the downing of Indian jet(s), which now stands confirmed by the Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Anil Chauhan.

As the fourth pillar of democracy, the role of the press is not to blindly support the government of the day and function like a caged parrot but to inform the masses of the truth as closely as one is able to report the truth with speed and accuracy.

In the landmark Grosjean v. American Press Co. case of 1936, the US Supreme Court observed famously: “A free press stands as one of the great interpreters between the government and the people. To allow it to be fettered is to fetter ourselves.”

Independent media organisations, especially those that have credibility and high standards of journalism, deserve our fullest support. Thus, let us value and respect the importance of a free press in our vibrant democracy and not call any and every journalist who questions the government narrative “anti-national”.

The author is a journalist and former Director, Pune International Centre. He tweets at @abhay_vaidya