In the last six months the intellectual rebels fighting for the cause of poor farmers, downtrodden section of the society have attached a bus carrying CRPF jawans, set ablaze a market in Bihar, looted explosives from the police artillery storage, ambushed 70 CRPF jawans killing all and many such heinous acts. How do I know all this and much more? You are right! The television media, print media, virtual media; everywhere you go you will find in-depth analysis, discussion, polling, blogs (many like mine at times) condemning and sympathizing the offensive/defensive ( based on the situation) actions of these so called intellectuals – NAXALITES.
The continuous coverage and discussions over the past few weeks on the Indian civil war got me thinking- is this what naxalites really wanted to start off with? The constant media coverage, interviews with unnamed and named naxal commanders, a devil’s advocate sessions with the home minister, the home secretary , the opposition leaders, the chief ministers of affected states all seems to be working to some extent in favor of the naxals and their agenda. Over the last one year urban citizens have grown widely aware of the broad agenda and motive of the contemporary ROBIN HOOD. The only difference being that Robin Hood was a story we loved to read and enact as kids but I don’t think the same holds good for this version.
This awareness not only attracted negative sentiment towards them but also a large number of sympathizers both from the elite and political spectrum. This got me drawing analogy to a more famous and fruitful incident which occurred in 1929. When Bhaghat Singh, Sukhdev, Rajguru, Kishori Lal and Jai Gopal were incarcerated and produced in court for the assembly bombing of 1929 and the murder of J.P Saunders in 1928, the HSRA (Hindustan Socialist Republican Association) was trying to gain a support and awareness in an environment which preached Gandhian principals. The HSRA ideology was in armed struggle, terrorism and retaliatory strikes against the British Empire quite parallel to that of the Naxalities. Bhaghat Singh ingeniously turned the situation into his favor by using the court room and the media reporting in his trial as a medium to express HSRA’s views and ideology to the public. Every morning after the court hearing Hindustan Times reported the proceedings of the trial along with the strong views and motives of Bhaghat Singh and his comrades. He went to the extend of systematically spelling out the procedure of making homemade bombs through ingredients accessible easily by the general public. And as expected, homemade crude bombs were made at every corner and used violently against the British rule. The once obscure group of violent and aggressive individuals who followed the principals outside the spectrum of Gandhi was now the face of the youth revolutionaries who believed that violence was the only way India could achieve independence. His popularity not only influenced the young but also the old and powerful cadres of the Indian National Congress like Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Bhaghat Singh had clearly understood the importance and power of the media in his fight for freedom. Within months of the trial, he became a national hero and is still remembered as one of the most influential revolutionaries of the Indian freedom movement. One may wonder, if we would have studied and watched movies about Shaheed Bhagat Singh if at that time the media would not have covered his judicial trial or printed and distributed his ideologies?
Drawing parallel to the current situation, the constant and intensive coverage of the actions of naxalites has done exactly what the media did for Bhaghat Singh- they made them a common name and drew them to the center of the conversation. The media gives a platform to Naxal Cadre likes Kishanji to come on prime time television and express their views and justify their actions. The media intensely interviews government officials, at time forcing to them to concede to certain viewpoints which depicted a weak offensive system of the government. They went to an extent of squeezing details of national security in the name of informing the people the ‘real story’. As smart and cunning as our ministers and bureaucrats are, they too play their cards close to their chest. When the government speaks out against such acts and illustrates their intention and plans to curb such offensives, media parades naxal sympathizer and human right advocates on television and print, who frantically speak against the government and their so called unjust treatments towards the poor. People like Arundati Roy , Prashant Bhushan and our own Laloo Prasad Yadav sympathize the cause and instead of criticizing the acts of naxalites prefer to say : “ what did the government expect when they call fight against naxal as WAR” or “ naxalites do not kill common people”. Aren’t CRPF Janwans common people? Where did I hear and read all this? You guessed it, the media. We have instances where the media instigate a heated debate between oppositions on the naxal issue to get some news point for higher TRP and bragging rights of saying “ you heard it first on ……”. And as a result the once obscure yet dangerous revolutionary is now on every front page and every headline day in and day out. Again one may wonder, if the media does reduce the intensity of coverage, still managing to lay down the facts to its readers and listeners but abjuring indirect Naxal propagation through their media (as I would like to call it) then would the naxal’s inflict so much pain and destruction when they realize that no importance is given to their actions?
As an irony to the situation and comparison I laid down above between the Naxal’s and Bhagat Singh it is striking to know that both not only followed the principle of armed struggle, terrorism and retaliatory strikes against the government but theoretically believed in the principle of Marx and Lenin which influenced the concept of communism and anarchism. From Bhagath Singh to Kishanji, from the court house of Lahore to streets of Dantewada the media has played a crucial role in bridging the gap from obscurity to prominence as it walks a thin line between sensationalism and factual integrity.
