A letter to the Press Council of India on Hyderabad blasts coverage

February 27, 2013

To,

Hon'ble Justice Markandey Katju,

Chairman,

Press Council of India,

New Delhikatju

Sir,

Sub: Hyderabad Bomb blasts - Issue direction to the Media houses to stop Media Investigation and Trial – To stop terrorizing Muslim community and hatred among people – Reg.

With the reference to the subject cited above in the evening of 21st February 2013 an unfortunate incident of bomb blast took place in Dilsukhnagar area of Hyderabad in which almost 16 people were killed and hundreds injured. The dead belonged to all the religions and sections.

Immediately after the blast, electronic media both regional (Telugu) and national (Hindi & English) reached the spot and started live coverage along with their expert comments. Telugu channels which telecast both Telugu and Urdu news bulletin are completely different. In the Telugu bulletins they spread hatred against Muslims where in Urdu bulletin they are very cautious in reporting such hatred. So, the Telugu and Urdu news bulletin are completely different from each other. When the whole city was under shock, media and people arising out of their caste & religion were enquiring the safety of each other. The common people came into immediate action and were trying to help injured and dead to shift to the nearby hospitals. The thought of who carried the blasts never came to the minds of the common people but they were very much concerned about saving the lives of the blast victims. But the media without showing any such concern was carrying out their own style of reporting.

At the same time, media was reporting live along with speculations which diverted towards one community and as usual that was nothing but towards Muslims. The media started investigation and jumped on the conclusions and media room trial started. By giving their own sources they named the organizations behind the blast and also the names of Muslim youths. They even said that the planning of these blasts took place in October itself. The media is diverting and linking these blasts to the revenge of Afzal Guru and Ajmal Kasab. The media also said that it is the revenge of Akbaruddin Owaisi's arrest.

Before the state investigating agencies and central investigating agencies reached the spot, the media and Hindutva elements gathered due to which the evidence of bomb blasts lost. Though the police personnel reached there but did not try to control the Hindutva elements and media mob. The Hindutva elements raised the slogans of anti-Muslim slogans.

The first thing which the media announced is that the actual target of bomb blast was not the present place but it was the Saibaba Mandir (how media got this report no one knows). Then the media started explaining how the preparations of bomb blast took place. They even said that two days before the blasts the bomb planters were roaming in that area. Media even declared the names of the persons involved in the blast. The number of channels, that number of investigation and trial was going on and all the channels had same conclusions. The target of all these channels was Muslims. The matter of concern is that the media houses do not have any evidence or any information of this incident but had only speculations. But with the type of their reporting it seemed that they knew everything in advance. The media is even showing an injured Muslim youth in the blast as main suspect and unfortunately this person named Mirza Abdul Wasey became the victim of bomb blast for the second time. He was injured even in the Makkah Masjid blast as well. A person injured two times in the blast i.e. in Makkah Masjid bomb blast and Dilsukhnagar bomb blast became a crime, only because he is a Muslim.

The common people wondered that if at all the media houses knew all the facts then why didn't they inform the police? And if they did not alert the police then it means that they have indirectly helped the terrorists. Without any evidence targeting of one particular community is to increase their TRP ratings then that is nothing but helping the terrorists. Because in this country where plural society exists, these type of incidents are carried out only to propagate the hatred and division among the people and in the society. Such type of reporting of media is making the plans of terrorists easier. This type of reporting is nothing but act of terror. Because of this type of reporting, one particular community is completely isolated, traumatised and terrorized.

This committee wants to draw your attention towards this type of reporting of media houses which is propagating hatred among the people and isolating the Muslim community. The majority community is seeing them with suspect in every walk of life. The attitude of media has become the biggest threat to Muslim community and their life and liberty is at stake.

Dear sir, we want to say clearly that at this time, Muslims are the victims of bomb terror, police terror, media terror and mob terror. This is the ground reality.

Therefore, we request you to issue the direction to the media houses to stop their own investigation and media room trial against the Muslim community which is aimed at targeting Muslim community.

We request you to collect all the reporting of the media both electronic and print and investigate the news on this issue by forming a team of experts. Take against those media houses that have not spared a single minute to show and target Muslim community as terrorists.

Dear Sir, you are the chairman of Press Council of India, on behalf of common Muslims of India I question you, don't Muslims have right to life with dignity which is guaranteed by the constitution and is it crime to live this country as Muslims with their identity.

At this high time, I want to ask you, the media houses telecasting such news just to increase their TRP ratings in not an act of terror? As far as we know there are some rules and regulations to be followed by Media in reporting the news. But that is not applied while reporting on terror issues.

Hope this will be taken seriously, positively. We request you to intervene and stop it immediately so that our plural society of India can exist without any threat.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

Lateef Mohammed Khan,

Gen. Secretary

Civil Liberties Monitoring Committee

Hyderabad

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 17,2020

Paris, Apr 17: Even as virologists zero in on the virus that causes COVID-19, a very basic question remains unanswered: do those who recover from the disease have immunity?

There is no clear answer to this question, experts say, even if many have assumed that contracting the potentially deadly disease confers immunity, at least for a while.

"Being immunised means that you have developed an immune response against a virus such that you can repulse it," explained Eric Vivier, a professor of immunology in the public hospital system in Marseilles.

"Our immune systems remember, which normally prevents you from being infected by the same virus later on."

For some viral diseases such a measles, overcoming the sickness confers immunity for life.

But for RNA-based viruses such as Sars-Cov-2 -- the scientific name for the bug that causes the COVID-19 disease -- it takes about three weeks to build up a sufficient quantity of antibodies, and even then they may provide protection for only a few months, Vivier told AFP.

At least that is the theory. In reality, the new coronavirus has thrown up one surprise after another, to the point where virologists and epidemiologists are sure of very little.

"We do not have the answers to that -- it's an unknown," Michael Ryan, executive director of the World Health Organization's Emergencies Programme said in a press conference this week when asked how long a recovered COVID-19 patient would have immunity.

"We would expect that to be a reasonable period of protection, but it is very difficult to say with a new virus -- we can only extrapolate from other coronaviruses, and even that data is quite limited."

For SARS, which killed about 800 people across the world in 2002 and 2003, recovered patients remained protected "for about three years, on average," Francois Balloux director of the Genetics Institute at University College London, said.

"One can certainly get reinfected, but after how much time? We'll only know retroactively."

A recent study from China that has not gone through peer review reported on rhesus monkeys that recovered from Sars-Cov-2 and did not get reinfected when exposed once again to the virus.

"But that doesn't really reveal anything," said Pasteur Institute researcher Frederic Tangy, noting that the experiment unfolded over only a month.

Indeed,several cases from South Korea -- one of the first countries hit by the new coronavirus -- found that patients who recovered from COVID-19 later tested positive for the virus.

But there are several ways to explain that outcome, scientists cautioned.

While it is not impossible that these individuals became infected a second time, there is little evidence this is what happened.

More likely, said Balloux, is that the virus never completely disappeared in the first place and remains -- dormant and asymptomatic -- as a "chronic infection", like herpes.

As tests for live virus and antibodies have not yet been perfected, it is also possible that these patients at some point tested "false negative" when in fact they had not rid themselves of the pathogen.

"That suggests that people remain infected for a long time -- several weeks," Balloux added. "That is not ideal."

Another pre-publication study that looked at 175 recovered patients in Shanghai showed different concentrations of protective antibodies 10 to 15 days after the onset of symptoms.

"But whether that antibody response actually means immunity is a separate question," commented Maria Van Kerhove, Technical Lead of the WHO Emergencies Programme.

"That's something we really need to better understand -- what does that antibody response look like in terms of immunity."

Indeed, a host of questions remain.

"We are at the stage of asking whether someone who has overcome COVID-19 is really that protected," said Jean-Francois Delfraissy, president of France's official science advisory board.

For Tangy, an even grimmer reality cannot be excluded.

"It is possible that the antibodies that someone develops against the virus could actually increase the risk of the disease becoming worse," he said, noting that the most serious symptoms come later, after the patient had formed antibodies.

For the moment, it is also unclear whose antibodies are more potent in beating back the disease: someone who nearly died, or someone with only light symptoms or even no symptoms at all. And does age make a difference?

Faced with all these uncertainties, some experts have doubts about the wisdom of persuing a "herd immunity" strategy such that the virus -- unable to find new victims -- peters out by itself when a majority of the population is immune.

"The only real solution for now is a vaccine," Archie Clements, a professor at Curtin University in Perth Australia, told AFP.

At the same time, laboratories are developing a slew of antibody tests to see what proportion of the population in different countries and regions have been contaminated.

Such an approach has been favoured in Britain and Finland, while in Germany some experts have floated the idea of an "immunity passport" that would allow people to go back to work.

"It's too premature at this point," said Saad Omer, a professor of infectious diseases at the Yale School of Medicine.

"We should be able to get clearer data very quickly -- in a couple of months -- when there will be reliable antibody tests with sensitivity and specificity."

One concern is "false positives" caused by the tests detecting antibodies unrelated to COVID-19.

The idea of immunity passports or certificates also raises ethical questions, researchers say.

"People who absolutely need to work -- to feed their families, for example -- could try to get infected," Balloux.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 16,2020

Paris, Jun 16: Increasing numbers of readers are paying for online news around the world even if the level of trust in the media, in general, remains very low, according to a report published Tuesday.

Around 20 percent of Americans questioned said they subscribed to an online news provider (up to four points over the previous year) and 42 percent of Norwegians (up eight points), along with 13 percent of the Dutch (up to three points), compared with 10 percent in France and Germany.

But between a third and a half of all news subscriptions go to just a few major media organisations, such as the New York Times, according to the annual Digital News Report by the Reuters Institute.

Some readers, however, are also beginning to take out more than one subscription, paying for a local or specialist title in addition to a national news source, the study's authors said.

But a large proportion of internet users say nothing could convince them to pay for online news, around 40 percent in the United States and 50 percent in Britain.

YouGov conducted the online surveys of 40 countries for the Reuters Institute in January, with 2,000 respondents in each.

Further surveys were carried out in six countries in April to analyse the initial effects of COVID-19.

The health crisis brought a revival of interest in television news -- with the audience rising five percent on average -- establishing itself as the main source of information along with online media.

Conversely, newspaper circulation was hard-hit by coronavirus lockdown measures.

The survey found trust in the news had fallen to its lowest level since the first report in 2012, with just 38 percent saying they trusted most news most of the time.

However, confidence in the news media varied considerably by country, ranging from 56 percent in Finland and Portugal to 23 percent in France and 21 percent in South Korea.

In Hong Kong, which has been hit by months of sometimes violent street protests against an extradition law, trust in the news fell 16 points to 30 percent over the year.

Chile, which has had regular demonstrations against inequality, saw trust in the media fall 15 percent while in Britain, where society has been polarised by issues such as Brexit, it was down 12 points.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 26,2020

New Delhi, Feb 26: With the government pushing for the disinvestment of Air India, industrial conglomerate Adani Group may emerge as one of the bidders for the debt-laden national carrier, sources said.

According to highly placed sources, the Group has held internal rounds of deliberations on whether or not to submit an Expression of Interest (EoI) and the discussions are still in the preliminary stage.

If the company actually submits an EoI, it would be a major move towards further diversification of the company which has business interests across sectors right from edible oil, food to mining and minerals. 

It also entered into airport operations and maintenance business and won bids for privatisation of six airports, Ahmedabad, Lucknow, Jaipur, Guwahati, Thiruvananthapuram and Mangaluru in 2019. 

On being contacted by IANS, the company did not comment on the matter.

Air India is one of the most important divestment proposals for the current fiscal to reach the huge Rs 2.1 lakh crore target.

The government in January restarted the divestment process of the airline and invited bids for selling 100 per cent of its equity in the state-owned airline, including Air India's 100 per cent shareholding in AI Express Ltd. and 50 per cent in Air India SATS Airport Services Private Ltd.

After its unsuccessful bid to sell Air India in 2018, the government this time has decided to offload its entire stake. In 2018, it had offered to sell its 76 per cent stake in the airline.

Of the total debt of Rs 60,074 crore as of March 31, 2019, the buyer would be required to absorb Rs 23,286 crore.

Air India, along with its subsidiary Air India Express, has a total operational fleet of 146 aeroplanes.

Further, the disinvestment department has extended the last date for submission of written queries on the Performance Information Memorandum and Share Purchase Agreement to March 6.

The last date for submission of written queries on PIM and SPA was originally set for February 11, following which the Department of Investment and Public Asset Management (DIPAM) on February 21 issued 20 clarifications on the queries raised and expected.

Any delay in the tentatively rolled out timeline would also delay DIPAM's plan to identify the pre-qualified bidders by March 31 and the financial bids invitation as well. It is expected to take more than two months after the selection of the pre-qualified bidders to complete Air India's sale.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.