|
Even though I tried to clarify saying, "Rahul
never meant that in his statement but what he meant was that it's not
possible always to stop terror attack before it happens",
I felt I was not believed to be telling the truth. However, I maintained
my stand in the live phono I was asked to give instantly.
I soon crosschecked the the video of the Rahul's session
with media and found that the piece carried by some channels was an
engineered one and was again treated being unfaithful to what Rahul
Gandhi meant. Replying to a question whether terror attacks can be
stopped before they happen (the question came after Rahul mentioned
about the issue of corruption and insisted that strong measures should
be initiated to stop corruption before it takes place) Rahul said, “It’s very difficult
to stop every single terrorist attack. The steps that have been taken by
our government over the last couple of years are quite profound steps -
the improvement in our intelligence, the way we did about fighting
terrorism, the ideas that we have to fight terrorism at the local level,
we have improved in lips and mouth. But terrorism is something that is
impossible to stop all the time. There is an attack on Bombay that has
taken place. But you will not have heard of all the attacks that will be
stopped. So, it is something that we will fight, it is something that we
will defeat, and it is something that we work towards. But, it is very
very difficult to stop every single attack.”
Further to clarify, Rahul said that he didn’t mean it impossible but
difficult to stop. The complete statement hardly found a space in any of
the bulletins of a channel. But the piece that was used in bulletins did
more often negate to the true intention of the statement which was
completely a wrong use of anybody’s statement and an unethical practice
of journalism as well.
While the whole statement in its complete form was never shown,
reactions on the manipulated piece were taken from leaders of
different parties to create a political controversy and add more
life to a news stuff that had zero transparency.
We may engineer with somebody’s statement or sound bite in order to make
it fit to our space or time. But, in any case as display of journalist’s
obligation to the truth, the intent of the statement must be intact and
clear from the part that is used. This very first principle of a
journalist was openly sacrificed by most TV News Channels of India just
to make a sensational stuff out of a portion of the statement.
Such practice will never help in creating a healthy environment for
media to grow and exercise its freedom. It may bring some instant TRP
and business but, on the other hand, it may also increase the risk of
losing credential and trust of the general public permanently.
|