John Pilger died in London on the penultimate day of the year that has just gone by. His passing was as tragic as it was a reminder to all of us that his kind of journalism may never be again. Those of us who have kept track of Pilger, in his columns and his books, will not forget the grave risks he undertook in pursuing a profession he deeply loved. Pilger’s bold criticism of Western foreign policy, of the terrible consequences of that policy, made him an upstanding media personality loved by those who loved journalism as a vehicle of truth around the world.
Pilger’s kind of journalism may well be on the way to extinction. Of course, there is today that ubiquity of newspapers and television channels belting out endless reports, often from places caught in crises. But purposeful journalism as we know it, or knew it, is fast turning into a thing of the past. In recent times, we have lost the journalists whose bravery in projecting the truth has been an inspiration for many. Shirin Abu-Akleh’s portrayal of journalism as a mirror holding up images of the truth of what is happening in Palestine remains a fine instance of how media practitioners should pursue their calling.
Abu-Akleh was felled by a bullet. And Daphne Caruana Galizia was blown up in Malta. We celebrate their exploits, their refusal to kowtow before governments determined to squash the truth out of recognisable shape. But how many of us are courageous enough to call attention to the manifest untruths and injustices which come from powerful political quarters around the globe?
In truth, we inhabit an era where journalism, to all intents and purposes, has dwindled into an embedded affair. The western journalists reporting from embedded positions during the two Gulf wars did not serve their profession well. But those of us who have consistently condemned embedded journalism today realise that most, if not all, of us calling ourselves journalists are symbols of embedded journalism.
Pilger was different. And different too was Christopher Hitchens. These men took up journalism as a mission. Where Pilger spoke of the tears of Cambodia and East Timor, Hitchens drew attention to the tragedy caused in Bangladesh and Chile by powerful men occupying grand offices in Washington. And there have been the others.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein brought down a president through their painstaking, relentless inquiry into Watergate. They could have stopped at some point and let it all be. But they knew that Richard Nixon had committed grave misdemeanours in office, that by his acts he had undermined the constitution. And so they went after him. They would not rest until the president was shamed into leaving the Oval Office.
Encouraging Woodward and Bernstein were their publisher and their editor. In journalism, it is of critical importance that enlightened publishers and editors serve as the bedrock of a media organisation. Along with being enlightened, publishers and editors need to be non-partisan and be guided by thoughts of the public good, by the idea of saving, once such saving becomes necessary, the constitution or reminding people that when the powerful commit crime, they must be called to account for their behaviour.
On Watergate, publisher Kay Graham and editor Ben Bradlee did not flinch from the truth, big chunks of which were being unearthed day after day by Woodward and Bernstein. Nothing frightened them, not the Damocles’ sword of national security nor threats from the White House. Nixon fell. Journalism triumphed.
In our part of the world, there have been the brave men whose record in pursuing purposeful journalism is yet the example we cite and perhaps try to build on. Zahur Hossain Chowdhury’s riposte to Field Marshal Ayub Khan’s insinuation about him has not been forgotten. His Darbar-e-Zahur should be essential reading for people who aspire to a career in journalism as also for those who are today disappointed with the state of the media in Bangladesh.
How many are there among us who can emulate Tofazzal Hossain Manik Mia, who went to prison for his views and yet would not abandon the political principles he believed in? In Pakistan, Salamat Ali underwent torture during the medieval rule of Ziaul Haq but would not satisfy the dictator through surrender.
Or go back to the War for Liberation, to Simon Dring. The young British journalist witnessed the tragedy unfolding in occupied Bangladesh in March 1971. Once out of the country, he was free to inform the world of the atrocities perpetrated in Dhaka by the Pakistan army. That report was the gateway to other reports on the genocide by other journalists, in Europe and America and indeed around the globe.
In June 1971, Anthony Mascarenhas abandoned his country, Pakistan, flew to London and published his account of the genocide in the Sunday Times. These are instances of meaningful journalism, of writing which projects the truth as it appears before the world but which truth is generationally denied by those in authority.
Journalism is always an engine for an articulation of the truth. When Pilger wrote on the new rulers of the world, he patently informed us of the machinations indulged in by multinationals in an Indonesia which had passed into the hands of General Suharto and his ilk. The multinationals were out to steal the country’s resources.
When Nikhil Chakravartty wrote on Indira Gandhi’s Emergency, on the excesses which accompanied it, he was conveying the imperishable thought that journalism must not genuflect before the powers that be. S Nihal Singh and Kuldip Nayar spoke up without fear, mindful of the consequences. They were not intimidated.
Journalism is not to be taken lightly by those who take it up as a profession. Wherever there is injustice, wherever the mighty are stepping on the weak, wherever politics turns into an instrument to steamroll rivals into submission, journalism steps in, to inform people of conditions as they are. Journalism then shines as a mirror on the wrongs committed by the powerful.
Not for the faint-hearted is journalism. Those who practise journalism ought to be willing to operate under fire, to face the obstacles that come their way. Courage is the underpinning of journalism. And with that comes another requirement, that of an understanding of global cultures and history. Journalism rests on endless reading -- of literature, of history, of the law, of the careers of those who exercise power and their psychology.
There is nothing emotional or sentimental about journalism. Journalists project conditions as they are, without having their individual political baggage influence the opinions they project before their audience. Journalists are discerning individuals, dispassionate in their writing.
It is such a discerning journalist that consistently worked in John Pilger. He faced down the arrogant, reminded them of their pettiness, travelled to regions which posed a risk to him and came away after ferreting out the truth.
That is the objective of journalism -- drawing the truth out of the hideous corners of hard reality. How many of us are ready to be that enterprising?
Syed Badrul Ahsan is Consultant Editor, Dhaka Tribune.
