Freedom of expression shouldn’t undermine national security
As suspected, a lot of hullabaloo and dust is being raised over the government’s decision to take NDTV India off air for a day. Anchors in some channels are screaming themselves hoarse, opinion pieces are being churned by the minute, PM Narendra Modi is being compared to a dictator and a despot, some veteran journalists are revisiting the dark days of Emergency and for the uninitiated watching or reading such ham-handed coverage, Delhi suddenly feels like Beijing or worse, Pyongyang.
Amid all this brouhaha, the much used, abused and misused “freedom of expression” has yet again become a handy tool for some, who feel stifled, throttled and choked by the one-day ban. And as usual, the facts of the case have been given a quiet burial as Lutyens' so-called intelligentsia launches yet another frontal attack in its desperate bid to - if not unseat - at least tame the Modi government.
Thankfully, real freedom of expression is alive and kicking in our democratic set up and if it gives rights to some to venomously criticise the government, it also gives rights to others to present the other side of the story.
The channel has not been banned because it ran a story or held a debate against the present-day government or ruling party but it has been directed to go off air for a day because it was found to be undermining national security for TRPs on the day of the Pathankot attack.
The I&B ministry has said it “orders to prohibit the transmission or re-transmission of NDTV India channel for one day on any platform throughout India with effect from 00:01 hrs on 9th November, 2016, till 00:01 hrs of 10th November, 2016” for revealing “strategically sensitive information during its coverage of the Pathankot attack".
Those who think this “transgression” is a “gag order” on the media simply forget that issues related to national security are beyond the realm of any discussion, view, or argument. This can never be compromised.
While people have the freedom and the right to criticise PM Modi and speak against his government’s policies, any action against the interests of the country under the garb of freedom of expression is a strict NO.
NDTV India's footage of that day’s attack on the Indian Air Force station in Pathankot clearly shows the reporter sharing vital information about the assets and their location on live TV, even as forces were combing the 2,000-acre area to locate and eliminate terrorists.
 |
| The channel has been banned because it was found to be undermining national security. |
In this age of instant communication where information flows every second, such crucial details about the location of the ammunition depot, fighter jets and fuel tanks can be immediately passed by the handlers to terrorists and result in unprecedented destruction of life and property.
Just eight years ago, Pakistan-based handlers of terrorists who infiltrated and caused mayhem in Mumbai, had used information from live TV to guide the perpetrators and inflict more damage.
Sadly, some in the media refuse to believe, or worse, no longer care that they are repeatedly hurting national interests in their hatred against Modi.
Such sections of our elite and liberal class have also conveniently turned a blind eye in the past when the media was reprimanded and hauled up for going against the interests of some political parties. When such incidents should have been opposed vociferously, there was not even a whimper or murmur of protest. Some of the instances are explained.
Recently, the local representative of a large English daily was confined on the instructions of the Uttar Pradesh CM just because a story in this newspaper was critical of him. The reporter was not let off unless senior editors met the CM and satisfied his ego.
The Samajwadi Party has a long history of intimidating the media. Sample this - during his second tenure as CM of UP between 1993 and 1994, Mulayam Singh Yadav had given a call for “Halla Bol” against Dainik Jagaran, and its offices across the state were vandalised by party workers.
Later, during Mulayam's last tenure as CM of UP, the Hindi news channel IBN 7 was blacked out in the entire state allegedly for a negative campaign against the state government. The broadcast could be restored only when a senior editor pleaded and assured the CM’s representative that such stories will not be repeated.
We still remember one of the most humiliating days for the Indian media when a now senior AAP leader and then a TV journalist was slapped on his face by BSP patriarch Kanshiram in 1996.
While West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee has been quick to term the NDTV ban as “shocking” and called it an “Emergency-like attitude”, detention and attacks on journalists in Didi's Bengal are the order of the day.
Similarly, recently, Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal forced the top management of a leading Hindi newspaper to fire a senior journalist for tweeting against him. In another case, the Delhi CM had challenged several news channels over a video tape's authenticity. Eventually, the tape did turn out to be authentic.
In all these instances, the broadcasters’ guild and others - who are so critical of the Modi government now for penalising NDTV India - were completely missing in action.
Unfortunately for such timid opportunists, the emergence of powerful digital media means that people are more aware and do not have to rely on a single source of information or opinion.
The citizens of this country fully understand that action against NDTV India is in national interest and not Modi’s interest. Hopefully, in the future the media will also be more responsible about issues critical to national security.