The Afghan Taliban had made threats about inflicting violence during the electoral process, so how come no incidents of violence took place? According to a report by the Afghan Analysts Network, the role of the media during the electoral process was brought to light. The Afghan journalists had allegedly done little or no reporting on incidents of violence for reasons that were editorial, political and patriotic.
By keeping mum about the attacks, journalists wanted to encourage the public to come out and vote. And they did come out to vote, because voter turnout during the elections was a record seven million which was about two and a half million more than the previous election’s voter turnout.
While the decision to keep quiet was one that had good intentions, it makes an individual question the role of a journalist. Is it a journalist’s job to keep news at bay for reasons of patriotism? The decision to keep reports of attacks hidden or delayed was one that could potentially have been harmful to voters. People have a right to know what is going on and they have a right to information. It is a journalist’s job to remain neutral while providing this information to the public.
Boycotting statements by certain groups or parties can be a good decision to prevent chaos, but the line between reporting what is necessary and choosing not to report on certain topics is a very fuzzy one. By not reporting and by delaying reports on violence during the election, the journalists could have involuntarily brought harm to some people. On the other hand, sensationalising the attacks, or any news for that matter, can be extremely misleading to and for the masses.
The outcome of the poll alone will show, once and for all, whether the media did the right thing – or not.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 16th, 2014.
1714129906-0/Clint-Eastwood-(1)1714129906-0-270x192.webp)
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ