Banning The Telegraph : Agreeable response ?
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: September 08 2011 -

Copies of The Telegraph being burnt - Pix :: TSE

Is banning The Telegraph the right response to the "mischievous report" on the personal life of Sharmila ?

Is this decision an affirmative step or does it have the potential to be interpreted as a response adopted on the rebound ?

Can a ban on a newspaper have any positive impact on Sharmila's demand to repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act ?

Can a report on the front page, that too as the lead story in arguably the most widely read newspaper in eastern India derail or sabotage the 11 year old campaign taken up by Sharmila against all odds ?

It is natural for the civil society organisations to feel peeved with the report in The Telegraph, coming as it did in the backdrop of the reality that Sharmila's campaign has never been prime time or prime space news material for the media in mainland India.

For 11 long years, Sharmila and her fast unto death agitation has at the most been a passing reference or consigned to footnotes in the consciousness of the media beyond the North East region and the fact that the report on her love life, which did not exactly throw her supporters in good light made it to the front page besides being the lead story, has evoked more bewilderment than acceptance.

There was something "mischievous" in the report that was filed by one of its correspondents. The timing was wrong.

The content of the story did not reflect anything on the campaign taken up by Sharmila and it did not say anything about how the Armed Forces Special Powers Act has impacted on the lives of the people here. That Sharmila is human is well known and the fact that she has a boyfriend should not come as a surprise to anyone.

However what did come as a surprise as well as something hard to digest was the manner in which the story on Sharmila was told.

Does her love life have anything to do with her fast or with AFSPA ? What was news worthy about the love life of Sharmila ?

Moreover the insinuation in the report that her supporters are all xenophobic people was clear in the manner in which the outsider or non-local tag was attached on the identity of Sharmila's love.

All these factors taken together made the report fit for the dust bin, but did the Apunba Lup do the right thing in banning the newspaper in question here ?

The decision to impose the ban on The Telegraph seemed more like a knee jerk reaction to the report than guided by any design to help the cause of Sharmila.

In fact such a response has the potential to lend credence to the subtle hint in the report that the people of Manipur are by and large a xenophobic lot, fiercely overseeing its turf against any outsiders and xenophobia is usually a child of insecurity.

Street politics has tremendous appeal potential. It can stir a people's sentiment and it can bring them on the street to deliver a stunning blow, but it is effective only as long as its slogans remain potent.

In other words, street politics has extremely limited shelf life and the decision to ban The Telegraph falls somewhere near this description.

In as much as the report betrayed the complete lack of understanding of AFSPA and its impact on the people, the ban has not cast the people here in any positive light and in many ways it also reflects the lack of understanding the core issue at hand.

Wonder how Sharmila would respond to this decision, but it is important to keep in mind that the spirit of the gutsy young woman has everything to do against the tyranny of the State and given the situation in Manipur, it has not been uncommon to see civil society organisations donning the role usually ascribed to the State and her agencies.

And banning The Telegraph stands precariously close to conducts which are usually associated with the State.

Given the commercial interest that The Telegraph has in Manipur, with a daily circulation figure of about 8000, it may not be surprising if the Editor or a representative of the paper apologises for the report on the personal life of Sharmila, but is an apology based on commercial interest warranted ? Or does this not matter at all ?

An apology, a word of regret, is something which should carry meaning and substance and not the stringing together of some words and publishing it in the newspaper.

However this sincerity will not come if the apology is induced by commercial factors. A public expression of disagreement with the report would have served the same purpose.

Lift the ban. Educate the public on AFSPA and why Sharmila has not eaten a morsel of food in the last 11 years.

This would be a fitting answer to the 'mischievous report' in The Telegraph