People's Democracy

THE DARK SIDE OF THE MEDIA:

The Case Of CNN-IBN & Nandigram Part II

N D Jayaprakash

IN the first part of this article, I had argued that it was highly unethical on the part of the television channel CNN-IBN to conduct a nation-wide opinion poll after inflaming passions of the viewers against the CPI (M) in a calculated manner. The said opinion poll was conducted while CNN-IBN was projecting certain gruesome images in its ‘Face the Nation’ programme which was telecast from its headquarters in New Delhi on 12 November 2007

(http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/52179/debate-cpim-to-blame-for-red-rage-in-nandigram.html)  and proclaiming that CPI (M) cadres were behind the murderous attack without any supporting evidence to substantiate the allegation. The same horrible images were replayed several times over during the programme to ensure that its chilling imprints were left on the mind of the viewers. The net result was that 86 per cent of the respondents to the said opinion poll were made to believe that the CPI (M) had blood on its hands. As I also pointed out in the earlier part, my contention that CNN-IBN had acted mischievously in poisoning the mind of the viewer while conducting the said poll is unwittingly corroborated by CNN-IBN itself in its programme ‘India At 9’, which was telecast on 13 November 2007.

(http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/52234/cpm-cadres-fired-5000-bullets-in-nandigram.html)

The following statement is the introduction to the said “India At 9’ programme that had been pasted on the CNN-IBN website:

“CNN-IBN brings you exclusive images from Ground Zero in Nandigram, which show a man falling to a gunshot. This is for the first time that live images from the conflict area are being shown on TV. Projit Ghosh, a photojournalist who took the risk of entering the battleground to send us the video, also gave a first-hand account of the red terror to CNN-IBN and shared the horror that he witnessed in the violence-ravaged village.” [IBN LIVE, 13/11/07,11.23hrs IST]

[COMMENT: Please note that CNN-IBN has again attempted to link “a man falling to a gunshot” with “red terror”. As to whether “a man falling to a gunshot” had anything to do with what CNN-IBN has chosen to describe as “red terror” and related allegations is what is proposed to be examined in the second part of the article. Contrary to the farfetched conclusions arbitrarily made by CNN-IBN, the photojournalist himself never made any such assertions while replying to pointed questions that were addressed to him by CNN-IBN regarding the identity of the said masked armed man who had fired the fatal shot and the men who were seen wrapping up the corpse. For the benefit of the reader, the relevant portions of the transcript of the said “India At 9” programme is reproduced below.]

CNN-IBN: …. Let us also play for you those exclusive pictures that CNN-IBN brought to you for the first time on television. Here they are. As you can see it is a battleground literally in Nandigram where anarchy completely ruling the area over the past few weeks. There you can see we have marked out. You saw a man falling there falling to a gunshot. Armed cadres have been resisting any move to free this area over the past few weeks or so. Bodies being disposed off secretly. In fact, this particular gun battle did happen a few days ago. CPM supporters and activists of the Bhumi Ucched Pratirod Committee have clashed many many times over the past few weeks. Okay. Let us go across to Kolkata now to talk to the man who shot those very very dramatic pictures. Please welcome Projit. Projit, thank you very much for speaking to us here on ‘INDIA AT 9”. Remember he is the man who took the big risk of entering battleground Nandigram to send us those pictures….

CNN-IBN: …. But Projit, in the visuals that we played for the first time on television showing the violence where a masked man is actually shooting, is seen shooting in the footage that you gave us, who is that man? Is he a CPI (M) member or a Trinamool Congress member? Because there is some controversy about that….

[COMMENT: What controversy? On 12th November 2007, when the programme “Face the Nation” was being telecast, CNN-IBN was absolutely sure that the masked man who fired the fatal shot at the villager in cold blood was a CPI (M) cadre. On that basis a nation wide opinion poll was conducted and 86 per cent of the respondents had no hesitation in declaring that the CPI (M) had blood on its hands! The very next day, on 13 November 2007, the very same CNN-IBN claims that “there is some controversy about that”, i.e., CNN-IBN is not sure whether the masked armed man in question is a CPI (M) member or a Trinamool Congress member! Perhaps, Projit, the freelance photojournalist who shot that footage can provide the answer.]

PROJIT GHOSH: Actually, I can’t recognise him….

[COMMENT: If Projit, the photojournalist who shot that footage, claims that he could not recognise the said masked armed man, on what basis did CNN-IBN jump to the conclusion on 12 November 2007 that the said masked armed man was a CPI (M) cadre? Such presumptions speak volumes about the mind-set of CNN-IBN, which seems to have been hell-bent on pronouncing the CPI (M) guilty of the heinous crime without a shred of evidence to back up the claim and in fact CNN-IBN did so without even bothering to verify the facts from the photojournalist who had shot that footage! Preconceived conclusion on the part of CNN-IBN such as this amounts to deliberate distortion of facts.]

CNN-IBN: Projit, in some of the visuals that you also sent to us there were certain people, who were trying to dispose off a dead body. Would it be fair to say that there were a majority of the armed cadres of the CPI (M) who were involved in activities like this?

PROJIT Ghosh: Actually, I took it from very long. It is a shot, which is taken from very far away.

CNN-IBN: Alright….

[COMMENT: Projit has again claimed that he could not recognise the people who were trying to dispose off the dead body. Therefore, CNN-IBN had no basis at all to make sweeping conclusions that the men who were trying to dispose off the dead body were CPI (M) cadres. However, Projit’s claim that the shot was taken from far away is hardly credible since from the close-up frames of the said footage it is amply evident that the photojournalist was standing in a slanted position just about five feet away from the said men who are seen wrapping up the corpse in polythene sheets.]

CONCLUSION: Circumstantial evidence may be examined to ascertain the identity of the said masked armed man and those men who were seen wrapping the dead body in the said footage. During his interview, Projit admitted that he had visited Nandigram several times between January 3, 2007 and November 6, 2007. Projit could not have moved about within the said area in Nandigram without the consent of the Bhumi Ucched Pratirod Committee (BUPC), which was in total control of the area throughout the said period. Projit also admits in the said interview that on November 4th, 5th and 6th, 2007 he was “embedded” with a group of BUPC members led by someone called ‘Abdul Samad’ in an area called Sonachura inside Nandigram.

The footage in question was admittedly, i.e., as per Projit’s self-confessed version, shot sometime during November 4th, 5th and 6th, 2007. While the villager who was shot at and is seen falling to the ground was at some distance away, the masked armed man, who is seen taking aim to open fire, is just about five feet or less from the photojournalist, who shot the said footage. In addition, from the manner in which the photojournalist was focussing and spanning the camera on the intended victim before the shot was fired, it is more than likely that the photojournalist knew beforehand that the villager was going to be fired upon. Since the photojournalist was standing next to the masked armed man, who according to CNN-IBN had fired that fatal shot, the photojournalist certainly knows the identity of the said masked armed man or at least the group to which he belongs. This is because the photojournalist was admittedly “embedded” with a group of BUPC men led by one ‘Abdul Samad’ at that time when the said footage was shot.

Similarly, from the said footage it is again evident that the photojournalist was standing in a slanting position just about five feet away, i.e., quite close to the group of men who are seen wrapping up the dead body in question in polythene sheets, which according to CNN-IBN was an attempt to dispose off the body secretly. Therefore, Projit’s (the photojournalist’s) assertion that the said footage was shot from far away is completely untrue and Projit is certainly aware of the group loyalty of the said men since he was admittedly with a group of BUPC men at that time.

Furthermore, the photojournalist is either alongside the other masked armed men or is closely behind them while they are moving forward and taking positions to open fire. In other words, the pictures of those close to the photojournalist in the said footage are all BUPC men and not unidentifiable persons as Projit, the photojournalist, has claimed. Moreover, it is apparent that whatever remark Projit has made about the CPI (M) in the said interview is based on speculation, hearsay or information received from secondary sources. Nowhere in the said footage are there any scenes where Projit is seen self-admittedly interacting with any CPI (M) cadres.

As is evident from the above analysis, CNN-IBN has had no compunctions in holding the CPI (M) cadres responsible for atrocities, which the BUPC men are actually seen perpetrating in the said footage! Yet, CNN-IBN has not till date admitted to the fact that the masked armed men in the said footage are BUPC men although CNN-IBN had been repeatedly telecasting that footage over the last few days. CNN-IBN has not nullified the results of the opinion poll it had conducted on November 12, 2007, which was based on concocted stories. CNN-IBN has not apologised to the CPI (M) for the baseless insinuations. CNN-IBN has not apologised to the viewers at large for spreading falsehood. CNN-IBN has not retracted any of the unfounded allegations it had made against the CPI (M) while telecasting the said programme. Instead, CNN-IBN has repeatedly telecast the ghastly footage in question while a reference is made in some news item relating to the CPI (M) in West Bengal in order to ingrain subconsciously into the mind of the viewer a connection between those grisly images and the CPI (M). This is the extreme unethical level at which the bulk of the “free” media in India chooses to conduct itself!
It is time that CNN-IBN is taken to task under the relevant laws of the land for consciously poisoning the mind of the viewers and inflaming their passions. Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 (No.7 of 1995), states that: “No person shall transmit or re-transmit through a cable service any programme unless such programme is in conformity with the prescribed programme code.” Moreover, Section 6 [Programme Code], Clause (1) Sub-clause (d) of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 (as amended upto 8.9.2000), categorically states that: “No programme should be carried in the cable service which contains anything obscene, defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths.” (http://mib.nic.in/informationb/media/actsrules/frames.htm) The programme “Face the Nation”, which CNN-IBN had telecast on 12 November 2007 did carry “defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths”, which amounts to wilful contravention of Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995. Therefore, those responsible for airing that programme, which contained “defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths”, is liable to be punished, as has been unequivocally enshrined under Sections 16 & 17 of the said Act, for wilful contravention of Section 5 of the Act.

It is also time for the intelligentsia of this country to begin questioning the unholy conduct of the “free” media and its repeated attempts at passing off patent falsehood as unadulterated truth. Until and unless the irresponsible and unethical conduct of the “free” media is actively checked, the nation is bound to pay a heavy price.

(Concluded)