4 thoughts on “About”

  1. On 27th November, 08 the world has witnessed another horrifying terrorist attack in Mumbai, India. With all sympathies, a lot has been written and discussed both in paper and electronic media all over the world.

    This Piece of writing is not intended to show the loyalty, patriotism or nationalism from an Indian or a Pakistani perspective. It is a neutral view from a student of corporate social responsibly who believes business including Media is responsible to society at large which includes the global society.

    After Mumbai nightmare, the seriousness of the situation demanded controlled and responsible voices, particularly in the media. Journalists may find it hard to step back and see the broader picture, when their own countries are under siege. Naturally, anger on the Indian side of the media was running very high and from very first day they started blaming Pakistan for these attacks. Recently emancipated Pakistani media started responding back as a reaction. Both countries Media exacerbated the situation by declaring a “War” rather than playing objective responsible role.

    Sensational allegation against traditional 60 year old enemy may have increased the sales of Newspapers and more viewership of news channels. Finger pointing and allegations developed the negative opinion among public of the both courtiers. It has worked as catalyst in pushing politician to think more rigidly and take more popular decision rather then required rational and mature decisions.

    The peace process is probably temporarily, if not permanently, curtailed, which in my opinion is one of the consequences of the irresponsible behaviour on the part of media as representative of global society. On the other hand due to media pressure on Pakistani politicians, Intelligences chief is being stopped from going for joint investigations to India.

    As to my imaginations the scenario could be different, if initially Indian media had portrayed this issue differently, considering terrorist as common enemy of India and Pakistan. If rubrics of leading news papers in India and news channels screens stated “After Marriott Islamabad Blast terrorist turned to Taj Mahal Mumabi” the Possible target would then have been, the terrorist Not Pakistan.

    What could have been the implications for this hypothetical scenario? From both countries political decisions would not have been forced by emotional media pressure they could have been more rational. The reaction of Pakistan media could have been as sympathetic as was in first two days.

    At this Point of time when Pakistan and India are under terrorist attacks and Pakistan army is engaged on the western border with these elements media has to exhibit more than conventional wisdom of responsibility. I firmly believe, if media companies are right and when they are at their best, they can have an incredible positive impact on society at large. Media of both the countries could play a vital role in promoting peace and fighting terrorism.

    The situation demands a broader vision of responsibility irrespective of the regions and nationalism, and should exhibits professional maturity. Without evidence media should not indulge into conclusions and should wait for responsible and authentic sources.

    In a nutshell, the inflaming and emotionally charged role of media can generate high sales revenue for media corporations but at the cost of escalating tension between two nuclear powers and contributing to the objectives of terrorist :i.e. “TENSION”, “INSTABILITY” and “TERROR”.

    Reply

Leave a comment