Let us analyse how Biased English media reporting is

Desecration of MaSaheb Minatai's Statue at Shivaji Park Mumbai and other issues

Read, for example, Hindustan Times, Mumbai edition of 11 July 2006 and 10 July 2006 for comparison in the way they present news material to manipulate public impressions; and, as the time goes I shall demonstrate by different examples that this is not an one-time event, but it happens to be a consistent practice with self-proclaimed Secularist media.

On page 7 (11 July) at the bottom of the page, there is news item. The header read as "Teacher convicted for student's rape". Many readers do not bother to read the details. They form an impression in their mind by looking at the header and proceed with other items. The reason: time is a scarce commodity for people in rat race of metros like Mumbai.

However, if you happen to read the details, you learn the following:

• The rapist used to teach the girl at the premises of a Mosque at Dharavi
• His name was Zulfikar Shaikh (age 25) (he was a Muslim)
• The girl was a minor (studying in the third standard)

Points to note:

• The news item header did not draw the attention of the readers that the rapist was a Muslim and that the rapist was a teacher in a Mosque (nor there was any photo with the news item showing a Muslim or a Mosque)

In comparison to that:

• The same newspaper HT, the earlier day 10-7-2006 on page 8, carried an item with more space, the header of which read as "Nayak to Khalnayak: Heros all the way"
• The item was supported with a photo by some "Durga (a respected Hindu name)"
• Photo showed a suited-booted well-trimmed guy with a rifle in his hand
• Most conspicuous was his head with a big vertical red "Tilak" on his forehead
• The details covered several names like Shah Rukh, Saif, Aamir, Sanjay Dutt, DJ Aqueel and Gautam Singhania
• All these names except one appear to be Muslim names, but the photo which draws instant attention is with conspicuous Hindu "Tilak" on forehead, whereas to look for the names you have to search from the small prints

Think about it:

• What kind of image the English media is trying to project?
• What kind of images it is trying to build?
• What kind of impressions it is trying to leave in readers minds?

Now look at the same newspaper HT of the same day 11-7-2006:

Minatai's Statue at Shivaji Park was desecrated. Mud has been put on her face. Minatai was like mother to all Shiv Sainiks. They went on rampage. Got the shutters down for shops. Crowds gathered. Noise and bit of confusion. Some odd places they put torch to empty buses, not many. TV channels called it shameful. Hindustan Times was very vocal.

• Front page has header in bold "Proof may embarrass Sena, says Deputy CM"
• Followed-up by full page coverage on page 5
• With large photographs
• With carefully crafted highlights
• Creating an impression in the readers minds that it was Shiv Sena itself which arranged to put mud on Meenatai's statue

And what was the line of reasoning based on which such impression was built:

• Was there any definitive proof?
• No, not yet
• All that seemed to be available were few assumptions
• That: why Shiv Sena failed to protect the statue it built from being desecrated?
• That: Sena is yet trying to prove that it has some strength left
• That: Sena is trying to establish that Rane and Raj's exit hasn't made Sena helpless
• That: they probably did it to get poilitical mileage

So, what is their modus operandi:

• Self-proclaimed Secular newspapers have a well defined strategy
• When it comes to Muslims, play it down carefully
• When it comes to Hindus, blow it up out of proportion
• Doesn't matter if you must fuel an unproven hypothesis to attain your goals
• Who cares what comes as the final proof so long they are able to build an anti-Hindu sentiment by wide publicity of various assumptions?
  
• Initial impressions will live long with them
• By the time proof comes, it will be in some obscure corner of the newspaper, if it is found to favor Sena
• But if it turns out to be against Sena then it will be blown up again to cement the images in public mind