Guest guest Posted January 19, 2002 Report Share Posted January 19, 2002 >"Amitabh Chhabra" >"yogi_khanna" , "vinodvk" , "vikasohri" , "Vikas_Swasti" , "vikas_ohri" , "vijay" , "Vasu" , "Tikeshwar-Pradhan" , "sunilvij" , "scgoyal" , "Ravi Sharma" , "rajnish" , "RAJESH" , "RAJESH-GUPTA" , "rajeevohri" , "pankaj" , "naresh" , "Manish" , "kunwer" , "kssachar" , "HarkeratSingh" , "gagan" , "drvin_gupta" , "chandran_home" , "bansal" , "Ashok_Kathuria" , "sumitkhan" , "rajivgera" , "Punit" , "Ajay_renu" , "abhey" , "Sanjay Ambekar \(EUS\)" , "MISHRA ANURAG" , "D.S. GIRISH" , "C. Mittal" , "Amit Kr. Garg" >Don't delete-action required >Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:05:12 +0400 > >CNN's Pro-Pakistan Bias PetitionDon't delete.Do some action this time >- >Navneet Bedi >npsbedi (AT) usa (DOT) net >Friday, January 18, 2002 3:50 PM >CNN's Pro-Pakistan Bias Petition > > > > > > CNN's Pro-Pakistan Bias > > > >View Current Signatures - Sign the Petition > > > CNN - Cable News Network > 1. Mr. Walter Isaacson, Chief Executive Officer, CNN Newsgroup > 2. Mr. Rick Davis, CNN News Standards & Practices > 3. Mr. Eason Jordan, Chief News Executive, CNN > 4. Mr. Tom Fenton, Vice President, International News Gathering, CNN > 5. Mr. Sam Feist, Executive Producer, CNN > 6. Mr. Wolf Blitzer, Anchor, CNN > 7. Ms. Christiane Amanpour, Chief International Correspondent > 8. CNN_All_FeedBack > 9. CNN_Attack > 10. CNN_Community > 11. CNN_CrossFire > 12. CNN_Public_Information > 13. CNN__Q_and_A > 14. CNN_TalkBack > > Dear CNN Team, > > We, the undersigned, as concerned US citizens and residents of > Indian origin, hereby register our protest with regard to CNN's > error-filled, shallow and biased coverage of the ongoing India- > Pakistan conflict. Since decision-makers within the US government > rely on media outlets like yours, it is our Concern that faulty > or biased coverage of a conflict between these nuclear powers > could lead to bad US foreign policies. > > We would like to draw your immediate attention to a recent column > by Mr. Rajiv Malhotra, titled "CNN's Pakistan Bias". It is online > at http://www.sulekha.com/column.asp?cid=163061 , a popular site > that caters to the Indian diaspora. The article encapsulates the > flaws in CNN's coverage and the frustrations felt by many in the > Indian diaspora over the same. Incidentally, the article provides > background information on this conflict, which your reporters may > find valuable in terms of context. > > We have outlined below a few salient points from that article > which support our contention regarding CNN's coverage. > > 1) Inequitable Coverage: > > There is substantially more air time devoted to reports from, and > on, Pakistan than India, and this despite the presence of an > older CNN bureau in New Delhi. There is also more "face time" > given to Pakistani officials and spokespersons than their Indian > counterparts. > > 2)India and Pakistan as "equals": > > This appears to be CNN's implied view, although as stated above, > the coverage is not consistent even with this fallacious notion. > > India is a pluralistic, secular, vibrant, cacophonous democracy > like the U.S. It has a tradition of orderly transition of > governments, an army that is clearly subordinate to the elected > government and an increasingly dynamic economy. It is also home > to one-sixth of the human race and encompasses every religion on > the planet, including a Moslem population that is approximately > equal to the population of Pakistan. > > By contrast, presently, Pakistan is an Islamic military > dictatorship, ruled for two-thirds of its 54 years by the army, > has an eighth of India's population and an economy that teeters > on the verge of bankruptcy. Religious minorities, including > Moslem sects like Shias and Ahmadiyas, are treated as second > class citizens. Non-Moslem minorities have dwindled to less than > 4 % of the population. The original constitution of Pakistan has > been abolished and strict Shariat Law is in place, which is > highly discriminatory towards people of other (non-Moslem) > faiths. > > 3) Pakistan as Co-victim of Terrorism: > > While this may be the view du jour in official circles, no doubt > as a quid pro quo for usage of facilities until we apprehend bin > Laden and his associates, journalistic integrity requires a more > truthful perspective. > > Yet, CNN has toed this line, turning a blind eye to the Pakistani > ISI's role as parent and nurturer of the Taliban who bear > substantial responsibility for the most heinous attack on US soil > in 50 years. There is also precious little investigative > reporting on the vitriolic anti-American curricula of the > thousands of Madrassahs (religious schools) which are really > jihad factories. The questions as to why these have been allowed > to thrive on Pakistani soil and what specifically is being done > to shut them down now are conveniently ignored. > > 4) Pakistan as a true "Ally": > > This canard has been foisted on the public since late September. > Pervez Musharaff's being dragged into it, after arm twisting by > Washington D.C. ("You are with us or against us!") and the fact > that India first offered its unqualified support to fight the > scourge of terrorism have been inexplicably forgotten. While > Pakistan may now be an "ally", is it not incumbent on the media > to handle the relationship with skepticism, given the ally's > shenanigans in Afghanistan recently? > > A significant portion of the Taliban consisted of Pakistani > nationals. The higher echelons of the Taliban certainly had > connections to the ISI and the Pakistani army, as was evidenced > by the hurried evacuation of Pakistani brass from Afghanistan in > the early stages of America's Afghan campaign. What were they > doing there? What was their role? Why were these questions never > pursued? The Northern Alliance, America's true allies on the > ground in this campaign, have repeatedly expressed skepticism > about Pakistan's intentions, past and present, in view of its > support of the Taliban. Yet, these views have given short shrift > instead of being investigated. > > 5)Musharaff as a Statesman: > > This military General who is the self appointed "Chief Executive > of Pakistan" came to power by overthrowing an elected government. > He was the architect of the naked Kargil aggression against India > less than a decade ago. He has prevaricated on the nature of the > Taliban; to wit, they are just "students", "a small group of > extremists" and at one time opined that they should be a party in > the new Afghan Governmental structure. Yet, CNN continues to pay > obeisance to him and gives him more "face time" than his > counterpart, Mr. Vajpayee of India who is the democratically > elected Prime Minister of the largest democracy on the planet. > > 6) Jammu and Kashmir: > > The correct name of this state is Jammu and Kashmir, not Kashmir. > This crucial issue is covered, if at all, with little context. At > the time of independence, the independent kingdom of Jammu and > Kashmir was given the option of joining India or Pakistan. > > The Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir ceded this territory to India > after some dithering, during which time Pakistan invaded and > captured part of the territory. This illegality notwithstanding, > Pakistan has repeatedly asserted the Moslem- majority profile of > Jammu and Kashmir as a reason for its claim to it. This argument > is mooted by the fact that India is a secular country with a > Moslem population spread out all over and at least equal to that > of Pakistan. > > A second assertion by Pakistan is the need for a plebiscite per > the U.N. Resolution on this matter, which came about because of > the dispute. What is conveniently neglected in this assertion is > the skewing of the demographics by Pakistan deliberately settling > the area with outsiders, which would render the results of any > such plebiscite meaningless. > > Finally, Pakistan has been waging its own proxy wars in this > theater, with its Al-Qaeda linked operatives, which has resulted > in a mass exodus of the native Hindu Pandits from the area. > > To keep referring to Jammu and Kashmir as the "disputed > territory" without this context is intellectually dishonest as it > puts India and Pakistan on an equal moral footing. > > The above list, in no way exhausts the instances where we have > found CNN's coverage to be biased. We have presented a sample of > your bias, which we hope will persuade you to reevaluate your > policies regarding coverage of this crisis which has major, long- > term geopolitical implications. > > Fairness and journalistic ethics certainly demand a better > understanding of the concerns of India, a democracy that has > borne the brunt of unconscionable terrorism over the past two > decades. Unbiased coverage would be much appreciated to ensure > credibility of your slogan, "depend on CNN". > > We await your response, since we are part of your valuable > audience. > > > > Sincerely, > > The Undersigned > > > > >View Current Signatures > > > > >-- > > > > The CNN's Pro-Pakistan Bias Petition to CNN - Cable News Network was created by Indians and people of Indian origin and written by Kris Chandrasekar. This petition is hosted here at www.PetitionOnline.com as a public service. There is no express or implied endorsement of this petition by Artifice, Inc. or our sponsors. The petition scripts are created by Mike Wheeler at Artifice, Inc. For Technical Support please use our simple Petition Help form. > > Send this to a friend >Send Petition to a Friend - Start a Petition - Privacy - Advertising - Comments and Suggestions > PetitionOnline - DesignCommunity - 3D Designers - Gallery - Architecture - Scrapbook - 3D Developers - Games - Search > http://www.PetitionOnline.com/cnnbias/petition.html > © 1999-2001 Artifice, Inc. - . > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.