By Yoginder Sikand

A complaint oft-heard in Muslim circles is that the ‘mainstream’ Indian media has a vested interest in painting Muslims in a particular light, tarring them all with the same brush�as unrepentant obscurantists, fanatically wedded to violence, vociferously opposed to ‘modernity and so on. Some Muslims even argue that the ‘mainstream’ media is wholly anti-Muslim and is engaged in a grand conspiracy to defame Islam, being allegedly in league with a host of ‘enemies of Islam’, such as the ‘West’ and Zionist forces.

Although this tendency to generalize about the media is disconcerting, there is no denying that there is some merit in the basic argument about bias against Muslims in large sections of the ‘mainstream’ Indian media. This media is owned and controlled largely by ‘upper’ caste, middle-class Hindus. The vast majority of the editors and staff of ‘mainstream’ Indian newspapers and media houses are of this caste-class background. This obviously shapes the way in which they look at and project Muslims as well as other non-‘upper’ caste Hindu communities. This fact about the caste/class background and interests of those who control the ‘mainstream’ Indian media is basic to understanding why it is that Muslims, as well as other marginalized communities, such as Adivasis, Dalits and Other Backward Classes, who together form the overwhelming majority of the Indian population, are often ignored or stigmatized in large sections of the ‘mainstream’ media. Negative portrayals of Muslims in the ‘mainstream’ media reflect, to a large extent, the widely-held assumption that Indian nationalism is somehow synonymous with Brahminical Hinduism, the bedrock of the world-view of the ‘upper’ castes. And today, with the Indian ruling classes, largely ‘upper’ caste Hindu in composition, slavishly toeing the American line, it is hardly surprising that the tendency to stigmatise Muslims and generalise about them has been given a new, powerful impetus by the ‘mainstream’ media.

One striking aspect of much Indian ‘mainstream’ media reporting about Muslims is an obsession with sensational events that are inevitably used to project Muslims in a particularly negative light, as a community marked out by a certain exceptionalism. This notion of Muslim exceptionalism is used as a means to reinforce the notion of the non-Muslim, particularly the ‘upper’ caste Hindu, as representing the norm or normality, any departure from which is seen as evidence of deviance or difference. Muslims are reported about in the ‘mainstream’ media almost entirely in the context of some controversy or violent incident. It is as if Muslims are considered ‘newsworthy’ only if involved in some tragic and horror-filled event, generally as perpetrators of violence, but sometimes (as in the case of some English media reporting of the state-sponsored anti-Muslim pogrom in 2002 in Gujarat) as victims. A content analysis of ‘mainstream’ Indian media reporting about Muslims would reveal its obsession with such sensational incidents as fatwas issued by arch-conservative maulvis, Muslim women being divorced at will by hard-hearted, sternly patriarchal husbands, Muslims refusing to sing the ‘national song’, Muslim involvement in incidents of murder and mayhem and so on. Moderate or progressive Muslim voices are sometimes highlighted in the ‘mainstream’ media but generally only in the context of such controversial events.

The obsession of the ‘mainstream’ media with instances of Muslim ‘sensationalism’ forces Muslim organisations to spend their energies in seeking to clear themselves of the charges of ‘obscurantism’, ‘anti-nationalism’, ‘terrorism’ and so on that are constantly hurled at them, leaving them little space or energy to focus on constructive work of internal reform. A good illustration of this is the recent ruckus over the Vande Mataram song. The selling of India to multinational corporations, the relentless Western cultural invasion of India that dominant Hindu elites, who claim to be ultra-nationalist Indians, are now so enthusiastically embracing, the irrepressible and pervasive urge among India’s largely Hindu middle-class to flee India and settle in America and so on�all unambiguous expressions of anti-nationalism and self-loathing�do not qualify as ‘lack of patriotism’ for the ‘mainstream’ media, but the refusal by some Muslims (and Sikhs as well) to sing a song that is clearly Brahminical Hindu in ethos and inspiration and that forms part of a novel that is vociferously anti-Muslim in its tone and thrust is made to appear as the height of treason. And so, some weeks ago the ‘mainstream’ media was awash with stories about Muslims singing or not singing the Vande Mataram, as if it was the most pressing issue that India was confronted with, and as if patriotism could be had for a song. Thanks to the controversy stoked by the media, Muslim organizations were forced to react, issuing a flurry of statements on the subject, thus further strengthening the image of Muslims as the unwanted exception and reinforcing the unfortunate predicament that Muslims are faced with of being constantly forced to defend themselves and prove their patriotism.

Through this media obsession with instances of ‘Muslim sensationalism’, Muslims are projected as a ‘problem’ in the popular imagination. Positive stories about Muslims are hard to come by in the ‘mainstream’ media, thus further reinforcing the tendency to see Muslims in negative terms. The very real social, economic, educational and political marginalisation of Muslims as a community and the pathetic conditions in which the vast majority of the Indian Muslims live are almost never commented about in the ‘mainstream’ Indian media. By focusing on isolated, sensational events, it is sought to be suggested that Muslims themselves, particularly ‘obscurantist’ maulvis, are responsible for all their manifold problems, and that the state, the wider society and the structures of caste, class and institutional inequality and discrimination have nothing to do with these whatsoever.

In ‘mainstream’ media discourses about Muslims, it is often the case that the most conservative maulvis are projected as representatives of the entire Muslim community. This, of course, is precisely how these maulvis see themselves and would like others to see them. Being thrust by the media and by their own ambitions as the leaders of all Muslims, their views, often reactionary, come to be presented as that of Muslims as a whole. This further reinforces the tendency to portray Muslims in negative terms, as irredeemable obscurantists. This ‘media-maulvi nexus’ works to marginalize alternate Muslim voices, such as those of Muslim social activists and intellectuals working for reforms that sometimes influential sections of the ulama oppose since they threaten to undermine their authority or challenge their understandings of religion. The voices of ‘ordinary’ Muslims, desperately poor, living in squalid ghettoes, ignored by the state and the wider society, for whom the struggle for sheer survival is more pressing than the ulama’s never-ceasing debates about the intricacies of Islamic jurisprudence and theology, also almost never get reflected in the ‘mainstream’ media. Just as large sections of the ulama would wish it, the ‘mainstream’ media appears to be complicit in seeking to set the framework of discourse about Muslims in solely religious terms.

With the ‘mainstream’ media taking isolated Islamist ideologues or conservative ulama as somehow ‘authentic’ spokesmen of Islam and of Muslims in general, counter-voices that struggle to be heard in the great Muslim debate are often marginalized and silenced in media discourses about Muslims. These voices are sometimes represented in the Urdu press, but few ‘mainstream’ papers ever report on the happenings in the Urdu media, which has been reduced to the status of a marginalized and ignored Muslim ghetto. Some non-Urdu papers have a weekly section that summarises ongoing debates in the Urdu press, but these hardly do justice to the range of issues that are passionately debated by Muslims writing in Urdu papers.

A good illustration of the indifference of large sections of the ‘mainstream’ media to alternate Muslim voices and concerns that are articulated in the Urdu media is the coverage of the recent deadly blasts in Mumbai and Malegaon. The Urdu press was replete with reports of Muslim leaders and organizations denouncing the Mumbai blasts and insisting that, supposing the blasts had indeed been engineered by some Muslims, such acts of terror have no legitimacy in Islam. Yet, these voices were hardly heard in the ‘mainstream’ press. Likewise in the case of the blasts in Malegaon last week outside a mosque that killed more than three dozen people, almost all Muslims. While the ‘mainstream’ media seemed to automatically assume that the Mumbai blasts were the handiwork of radical Islamists, few ‘mainstream’ papers seriously argued that the Malegaon blasts could well have been engineered by a radical Hindutva group, which is what the Urdu media insists, a thesis that seems quite plausible. Instead, some ‘mainstream’ papers came up with the theory that the blasts may have been the handiwork of a radical Islamist outfit or the Pakistani ISI, thus seeking, in the absence of any confirmed evidence, to reinforce the notion of Muslim culpability and Hindu innocence. Such a skewed approach points to the desperate need for ‘mainstream’ media coverage of such sensitive and vital issues that involve Muslims to be much more nuanced than it presently is, and for a more diverse range of Muslim voices, such as those reflected in the Urdu press, to be represented and highlighted.

It is not just the ‘mainstream’ media that is to blame, however. Influential sections of the Urdu media are just as sensationalist as the ‘mainstream’ press, operating within a framework defined by a narrow understanding of religion and Muslim community interests. Communalism is just as rife in the Urdu press as it is in the Hindi press or, sometimes in more subtle ways, in the English media. The need for Muslims to introspect and to stop blaming others for all their ills is echoed only faintly in large sections of the Urdu media. Instead, there is a marked tendency in much of the Urdu media to blame all Muslim ills on what are routinely described as ‘enemies of Islam’ and to ignore cases of non-Muslim suffering, whether at the hands of Muslims or others. Many Urdu papers and magazines are controlled or staffed by conservative maulvis and madrasa graduates who have little knowledge of the complexities of the contemporary world, viewing the world through a narrow religious lens. Most of the scores of Muslim publishing houses in India specialize simply in Islamic texts, and hardly any of them produce literature on Muslim social, educational, political and economic conditions or on general issues that concern people irrespective of religion. Likewise, most Muslim-owned magazines, notable exceptions apart, deal almost wholly with religious issues or with issues that relate simply to Muslims alone and almost all their readers are Muslims. The new Muslim-owned television channels that have been launched in India in recent years are no different, concerned simply with Islam and Islamic instruction alone. Like most Muslim publishing houses and magazines, they cater to an almost entirely Muslim audience. This narrow focus on Muslim and Islamic concerns thus makes it difficult for any real dialogue with the non-Muslim media to take place. For their part, organizations run by Muslims, too, mainly focus on Muslim religious and communitarian concerns. By and large, they lack any effective media policy and have made few serious efforts to seriously dialogue with the non-Muslim media. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that their views and concerns are not represented or reflected in ‘mainstream’ media discourses about Muslims.

All in all, then, a pretty sordid state of affairs, hardly conducive to promoting sensible discourse on Muslim-related matters.

[photo: Steve Evans]