When Human Rights Reports Defy Propaganda Model
According to the propaganda model outlined by famous dissident Noam Chomsky, the mass media actively engages in systematic propaganda, either with official state censorship or self-censorship, to serve the interests of a dominant elite [1].
The Propaganda Model
The propaganda model predicts that the government of Nepal and mainstream media (MSM) would work in tandem to give significantly more coverage to news that serve the interests of dominant elites and ignore or give less space to those which do not. They shape public opinion by controlling the information that reaches the public. It works even better when the MSM is owned privately, engages in self-censorship, and is dominated by the same group that control the government. In case of Nepal, the dominant elite are Khas-Aryas who control the government and also most of the influential media establishments, which are private. This makes Nepal an ideal playground to control the masses using propaganda.
Before we proceed further, it is necessary to define who an elite is in Nepal’s context. An elite is one who enjoys institutional privileges merely due to his/her proximity to instruments of power, be it political or military. In Nepal, Khas-Aryas have been historically considered as traditional elites for their political dominance of state apparatus. This is not to say that all members of Khas-Aryas are elites. Also see the article “My Elite, Your Elite and the Whatabout in between..” for a nuanced description of this term.
Chomsky further contends that a good human rights report is expected to defy the propaganda model since it ought to document violations against the marginalized groups which are ignored by the mass media since such news are unworthy and not “fit to print”.
Evidently, a human rights report published by Human Rights Watch (HRW) with the title ‘Like We Are Not Nepali’ has been severely criticized by several Nepali elites. HRW was the first organization, even before the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of Nepal to document in great detail the human rights violations against Madhesis and civilian attacks against state’s security forces. Madhesis are a marginalized demographic group in southern Nepal. This report broke the silence that the national media, most of them based in the capital Kathmandu, had maintained hitherto. The HRW report did not serve the interests of the dominant elite, was the first to reject their bias and defy the propaganda model. Therefore, it has come under severe criticism.
Response of Nepali Elites to HRW Report
In an article on Setopati, herbal healer and former UN worker Sushma Joshi accused the HRW report of being biased. She is one of many Nepali elites who claim the HRW report is biased because it gives more space to the human rights violations by the state’s security forces against Madhesis and very little to the converse. Similarly, she accuses HRW report of being biased because it did not give ‘equal’ attention to the unofficial blockade. She also claimed that the killings in Terai were triggered by the blockade. Three days later, she issued a public apology in an obscure personal blog for being wrong about her claim. She defended this by saying, “In my defense, I’d like to say I haven’t had access to a TV or even newspapers since April 25, 2015…” The fact that she wrote a 3563 word long delusional monologue to criticize HRW report without even establishing the basic facts erodes her credibility. As a former UNOCHR employee, it reflects poorly not only on her but also UNOCHR and setopati, a popular online media with 856,000 likes on Facebook and 112,000 followers on Twitter. When an educated person like her uses a popular media like Setopati to spread lies, it can have serious consequences.
Ms. Joshi deserves my sympathy however since she wrote this long article despite her multiple operations and presumably high stress. I have to admit though, her excuse is lame. My five year old nephew crafts more creative excuses to skip school when he has not finished his homework. A more credible excuse could have been, “I have been living in Kathmandu. The TV and newspapers here did not report what was going on in Terai.” The HRW report corroborates this in its report,
Many of the incidents described in this report are well known in the regions where the violence has occurred, but have not been reported in the rest of the country. While the media has consistently characterized the protesters as violent, it has also avoided reporting on the details of police violence, despite some illegal killings by the police having been witnessed and even filmed by numerous journalists. Newspaper editors explain these decisions as being made to “protect social harmony.”
In an attempt to “protect social harmony”, popular media like Setopati avoided reporting on the details of extrajudicial killings and characterized the protesters as violent. In turn, elites like Ms. Joshi believed that narrative and wrote long op-eds to reinforce that propaganda in the same media. With power and influence, MSM succeeded in instituting a real-world self-fulfilling prophecy. Ms. Joshi is not the only victim. Elites like Shiwani Neupane, Subhash Ghimire, and Subodh Pyakurel have also called HRW report biased for one or more reasons. Mr. Ghimire is the editor of a national newspaper in Nepal so, he is merely following the propaganda model.
Is HRW Reporting Fair?
It is true that the HRW report mentioned the violence committed by both security forces and protesters but did not give equal space to them. At least 36 civilians were killed by security forces while only 9 policemen were killed by protesters. A simple math shows that the ratio of civilians to policemen killed is 4. Similarly, while eight policemen were killed during two incidents in two districts on two separate days, 36 civilians were killed in 10 different districts during several incidents over more than 35 days. Make no mistake, the HRW report mentioned how seven policemen were killed in Kailali and one in Mahottari. If fair reporting were to be used, more space would naturally be devoted to documenting how 36 civilians were killed in 10 different districts over more than a month.
This fair reporting style does not fit the narrative of the mainstream media (MSM) that had been largely silent on the human rights violations or mentioned them only succinctly, giving the impression that all civilian deaths were a result of protesters clashing with the police. The HRW report described in detail how unarmed civilians were shot in the back while fleeing and children were shot at point blank. It also made it clear that several civilians shot dead were mere bystanders. This was in stark contrast to most media reports which had automatically assumed every dead civilian to be a violent protester without bothering to investigate, forgoing their journalism ethics. The HRW report also mentioned the Nepali army entering an hospital to arrest injured Tharus and taking them to the police station. Similarly, a police member shot a bystander, a female patient, a hospital admin staff and even a plainclothes policeman, all inside the Narayani sub-regional hospital in Birgunj. If the media had reported about these horrifying incidents, it would have certainly caused a huge uproar, which would be contrary to the interests of the dominant elite. Although 43% of the media in Nepal is concentrated in one district, the capital Kathmandu, most national dailies have reporters throughout the country. The privately owned media engaged in self-censorship to omit news that did not fit their narrative. The HRW report was an abomination that exposed their bias and in return earned the ire of Nepali elites.
The Impact of Self-Censorship by Mainstream Media
The Nepali media wrote lengthy reports about the killings of eight policemen in Tikapur, Kailali and one in Mahottari while giving very little space to the civilians killed. This is consistent with the propaganda model and gave the impression that the violence began when eight policemen were killed. In response, security was tightened, protesters were dealt with lethal force and and as a result, 36 civilians were killed. Although this narrative is untrue, it is popular among elites. The Tikapur incident happened on August 25, 2015 but the first civilian death occurred on August 10 (two weeks before the Tikapur incident). Eight more civilians were killed between August 10 and August 24 in various districts. Durgesh Yadav, Sunil Yadav, Sudhiram Yadav, and Rameshwor Pasi were all killed in Rupandehi district on the same day, August 20, five days before the Tikapur incident. Two days later, Shailendra Shrivastava was killed in Rupandehi again. Another two days later, Raj Kishor Thakur was killed in Rautahat. Yet, Tikapur incident is cited by Nepali elites as the precursor for violence.
Similarly, many elites believe that Madhesi protesters blocked the border first and this was followed by brutal extrajudicial killings of Madhesis by security forces. The biased narratives that Nepali media create indoctrinate even elites and although they are good humans, often educated in elite institutions of the Western world, they fail to see or accept such bias. Ms. Joshi is a fine example of how an effective MSM propaganda indoctrinated her to write a passionate and lengthy tirade riddled with factual errors. Shiwani Neupane had recently written another hollow but highly imaginative monologue against an (unrevealed) individual who questioned her “facts”. In her defense, her effort elicited intelligent feedback. Many elites such as Ms. Joshi and Ms. Neupane claim to be liberals and all-knowing. Yet, they fail to acknowledge that the underlying propaganda is crafted to serve the interests of dominant elite, which they are part of. I maintain that it is more apt to offer compassion than expose hypocrisy of ‘liberal’ elites because they are good, intelligent human beings who have been indoctrinated to disseminate propaganda and jingoistic fanaticism.
NHRC Corroborated HRW Findings
The HRW report was the first but not the only organization to report about human rights violations in great detail. The NHRC published a 59 page report in Kartik, 2072 (Oct/Nov 2016) about a month after HRW report and described in detail the excessive use of force by Nepal’s security forces but it did not get as much attention. Since it was written in Nepali, the international community was less likely to read the report and learn about the gross HR violations. This changed however when the NHRC commissioner Mohna Ansari said at the United Nation’s Universal Periodic Review in Geneva that,
Recently 55 people, including security personnel were killed during the political protest in Tarai due to the dissatisfaction with new Constitution. Findings of NHRC show that these killings and injuries were due to the [excessive] use of force. Thus, I would like to re-emphasize to accept recommendations for proper investigation and prosecution on excessive use of force. That can ensure justice to the victims.
The fact that the national human rights commissioner admitted in an international HR arena about the excessive use of force by Nepal’s security forces dismantled the state’s propaganda model. Expectedly, she was reprimanded by the state’s highest officer, the Prime Minister of Nepal. This has been heavily criticized by all notable HR organizations.
Besides HRW and NHRC, Terai Human Rights Defenders Alliance (THRD Alliance) has done a superb done in documenting the human rights situation in Terai. Such local organizations should be strengthened and given more coverage. The marginalized groups depend on human rights organizations to document the truth. In contrast, the elites have media and the state which can act immediately to protect their interests. To illustrate, after Tikapur incident, the police and army arbitrarily arrested and detained dozens of Tharus. Hundreds of them fled to India due to fear. Some of their houses and businesses were burnt by Pahadis with cooperation from security forces. The media maintained silence and did not report about these to maintain “social harmony”. Meanwhile, Tharus are still waiting for justice and investigation of war crimes committed against them almost a decade ago by both the Maoists and the Nepali army.
HRW Needs No Defense
Truth be told, the HRW report needs no defense. HRW is the premier human rights organization based in New York with offices globally. It has been reporting about human rights for longer than many of its critics and supporters in Nepal have been alive. To think that it has an ulterior motive to favor any particular group, especially a marginalized group is purely delusional. The human rights organizations such as HRW and NHRC have a great responsibility to report about the human rights situation in a fair and timely manner. The job is more difficult when the state and media are dominated by the same group of elites. Gandhi, Mandela, and MLK Jr. were all natives who inspired marginalized groups to lead domestic, grassroots movements against powerful elites. The marginalized groups in Nepal such as Madhesis, Tharus and Janajatis should also organize themselves to document and disseminate facts instead of wait helplessly for an international organization to shatter the dominant narratives and propaganda spread by Nepali elites.
Edited on May 26 to include a clarification about the term ‘elite’.
References
- Herman, Edward S., and Noam Chomsky. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. London: Random House U.a., 1988. Print.
- Human Rights Watch. “Like We are Not Nepali”. https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/10/16/we-are-not-nepali/protest-and-police-crackdown-terai-region-nepal
- National Human Rights Commission of Nepal. Human Rights Monitoring Report. http://www.nhrcnepal.org/nhrc_new/doc/newsletter/NHRC_Nepal_Madhesh_Terai_Protest_Human_Rights_Monitoring_Report_English.pdf
- National Human Rights Commission of Nepal. Statement by Mohna Ansari at UN Universal Periodic Review. http://thrda.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/NHRC_Commisioner-UPR-Remaks-March-16-2016.pdf
Featured Image courtesy of Human Rights First
