After journalist's murder, is peace journalism dead in Kashmir?
In peace starved Indian-controlled Kashmir,
it’s disheartening beyond words when the region’s leading voice for peace, dialogue,
and responsible journalism is silenced.
On June 14, the editor-in-chief of the
Rising Kashmir newspaper, Syed
Shujaat Bukhari, was shot and killed along with his two bodyguards outside the
newspaper’s offices in Srinigar in Indian-controlled Kashmir. One young man was arrested in the killing, and police are seeking three other gunmen. (Rising Kashmir, June 15).
 |
| Syed Bukhari (in white, right) and I discuss PJ with his newspaper's staff in 2015 |
|
I had the honor of meeting Bukhari a
few years ago during a peace journalism project in Kashmir. We chatted in his
office and then discussed peace journalism with the staff of Rising Kashmir. It took seconds to see
that Bukhari had a keen mind—quick to ferret out the key issues and to probe
for insights. Though I’ve had dozens of such meetings with journalists through
the years, the discussion with Bukhari and his staff still stands out as one of
the most candid and valuable. (For details, see the blog below I wrote in 2015 about
the experience).
Though
Bukhari was dubious about the label peace journalism, there’s no doubt that he
and his staff practiced the concept. In 2016, I wrote, “Rising Kashmir is a fine newspaper that if anything is the
opposite of inflammatory or sensationalizing. I was so impressed with their
work that I used Rising Kashmir as an example of peace journalism in
action in my textbook Peace Journalism Principles and Practices.”
During our chat in his office, Bukhari and
I discussed Rising Kashmir’s necessary balancing act. In volatile Kashmir,
favoring either the Indian authorities or Kashmiri protesters or militants
could result in the paper being raided by authorities (as it was in 2016) or
the paper’s staff being the target of violence. Sadly, even Bukhari’s cautious
professionalism couldn’t shield him from an assassin’s bullet.
Bukhari was
noted for favoring a peaceful resolution to the Kashmir conflict—a position
that was the opposite of easy, convenient, or safe. He even helped to organize
several peace conferences in the region.
After his
murder, the tributes poured in. The Jammu and Kashmir lecturer’s form issued a
statement which said in part, “The services which this great son of the soil
rendered especially for those unvoiced sections of the society through his
incredible writings are immortal.” (Rising
Kashmir, June 18) Twitter comments included, “Well he was a sane voice of Kashmiri
people, we condemn the killing,” and “So finally we have the answer to ‘who
could have gained by killing a balanced voice like him!!’” Today, three
Kashmiri newspapers ran blank columns on their editorial pages to protest the
killing.
Even an
optimist can’t help but be demoralized by Bukhari’s murder. If a peacemaking
moderate can’t speak up in Kashmir, who can? Who can adopt Bukhari’s cause, and
further, who would want to? Under circumstances like these, how much can we reasonably ask journalists to do to
foster peaceful dialogues or promote reconciliation? Is peace journalism possible in conflict areas, and more specifically, is peace journalism dead in Kashmir? I am struggling with these
questions more than ever.
In speaking
with journalists in conflict areas, I almost always make it a point to remind
journalists that they should ensure their safety first before thinking about
their professional responsibilities.
Because of Rising Kashmir’s balanced approach and rejection of sensationalism, I
didn’t think I needed to reiterate this point to Bukhari and his staff. Sadly,
and tragically, I was wrong.
Peace Journalism Insights blog
August 6, 2015
Kashmir journalists
debate PJ label, approaches
SRINIGAR, INDIAN-ADMINISTERED KASHMIR--Whenever
journalists get together, a spirited discussion usually follows. This was
certainly the case as I met the news team yesterday at Rising Kashmir
newspaper.
The meeting was organized for me to very briefly introduce the principles of
peace journalism. As it turned out, it was much less presentation and much more
me answering thought-provoking questions about PJ and journalism in
general.
Editor Shujaat Bukhari opened the discussion with a question about the label
peace journalism. While he encourages his reporters to take a facts-based,
unbiased approach, he asked if the term peace journalism was itself
inflammatory and unnecessary. Bukhari said PJ principles could be simply taught
as good journalism, or, just journalism.
Bukhari’s point is well taken. As practitioners and teachers of PJ have
observed and written, the word peace itself is ironically inflammatory,
stirring strong emotions and conjuring distorted images of 1960’s style long
haired, pot-smoking, tree hugging hippies. In the groundbreaking 2005 book Peace
Journalism, Jake Lynch and Annabel McGoldrick admit that the term peace
journalism doesn’t appeal to everyone, and indeed will be misunderstood as open
advocacy for peace and an abandonment of the cherished journalistic notion of
objectivity. Lynch and McGoldrick wrote that the strength of the term peace
journalism lies in its ability to “galvanize, shake up, and send a seismic
energy through sedimented layers of (journalistic) tradition, assumption, and
definition.”
Agreeing with the notion that the label peace journalism “shakes things up,” I
asked Bukhari if I would have been invited to speak to his reporters if all I
was peddling was plain vanilla “journalism?”
Setting aside the label discussion, Bukhari and I seemed to agree on the
principles of balance and objectivity offered by the peace journalism approach.
The reporters asked pointed questions about subjective terms like massacre and
martyr. I suggested that if reporters use these words, they lose their
objectivity.
One reporter
asked, what if her cousin was murdered by the authorities—how should that be
reported? I said that peace journalism, and indeed good journalism, asks that
news reporters set aside their biases. Understandably, in this example, and
indeed in everyday life in Kashmir, remaining unbiased is an especially tall
order. Nonetheless, I suggested that she report her cousin’s death factually,
without finger pointing, and in a way that gives balance to both accuser and
accused. I acknowledged, however, that this is easy for me to say. I hope I
would stick to my principles under such circumstances.
The discussion
concluded with a more general discussion about the business of journalism and
the transition from traditional to digital media. At Rising Kashmir, their
website is becoming increasingly popular, and like their counterparts
everywhere, they are seeking sustainable economic models that maximize their
online revenues.
Overall, I admire the work done by Rising Kashmir in not
sensationalizing or irresponsibly reporting the news here under extremely
difficult circumstances. They can certainly teach their colleagues in New Delhi
a thing or two about responsible journalism.
Photo exhibit transcends 
Gregory, who runs Carl Gregory Studio photography,
graduated from Park University in 2011, and was one of my students. I wish I
could take credit for his work, but can’t, since he came to my classes already
possessing a fertile mind and intellectual curiosity that are evident in his
photos.
