Who is afraid of the phantom of freedom?

Khan Yasir If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. (J.S. Mill) Even today the day and night collectively amounts to 24-hours yet it seems that so many things are happenings at a pace unknown before. And how exactly we, or lazy people like me, come to know of these events? Obviously through newspapers (or news-channels)! A common man keeps track of multiplying News only if he can find some common thread running through them all; rest, one easily forgets. For last a couple of weeks I have found freedom as the common thread running through a number of reports, opinion-pieces, and editorials. And on this, I would like to make a few observations at the moment. To make my point easy and clear I will take the case of just a single newspaper, though I insist that the conclusion applies to every mainstream newspaper and news-channel. The newspaper that I select for this special analysis is DNA i.e. Daily News and Analysis (Mumbai). DNA sixth among the top ten English dailies of India is also second most-read newspaper in Mumbai. Besides Mumbai, it is published from Pune, Bangalore, Ahmedabad, Jaipur and Indore. Since its inception in 2005, it has grown remarkably and surpassed various well-established newspapers in terms of readership and circulation, mainly due to its content, presentation style and entrepreneurial skills of its managers. Under the creative head, Living in Outragistan (5 Feb), Harini Calamur as if representing what the newspaper arduously propounded since weeks asserts: In the last month, the nation, propelled by the ever increasing shrillness of 24-hour news channels, aided by the ever more intransigent nature of protesters, lurched from outrage to outrage. She mentioned the controversies related to Honey Singhs

concert; Ashish Nandys comments on SCs and STs; Shah Rukh Khans article; Salman Rushdies potential visit to Kolkata and Kamal Hassans Film Vishwaroopam... and went on arguing:
Just as a cycle of protest and outrage dies out, a new cycle of protest and outrage begins, the previous outrage is forgotten. It is almost as though this has become the Republic of Outragistan. Ask those protesting about what they are protesting about and they will tell you in all earnestness against an insult to xyz (where xyz could be religion, language, culture, nation, hero, sentiments, feelings). Most have not even interacted with the objects of their outrage.

I dont know why she failed to mention the all girl band Pragaash and fatwa of Kashmirs grand mufti against the same. But the newspaper, on the same date, editorially addressed the issue and reprimanded the government in the following manner, The Praagaash incident [i.e. its disbanding] comes days after Salman Rushdie could not visit Kolkata and Vishwaroopam needed cuts before screening; in both cases random groups held the compliant and weak state governments to ransom and got their way. In all these cases, what was needed was for the state to show some spine, to round up the persons issuing the threats, uphold the countrys Constitution and the fundamental right to freedom of expression. But that never happened. The sum total of the argument is in Calamurs words: In India, the concept of freedom has to move away from placating groups that claim to be offended, to protecting individuals who have the right to offend. Please read the italicised quote again, because this is what the author regards as test of democracy for India. Came 6th Feb. and the same paper published a detailed report on the erstwhile Pragaash band. Based on a talk with anonymous (former) band-member the tone and tenor of the report can be explained by the very title which says: Quit band for Islam: Girl. On the previous page a report was about how Mumbai police was preparing to ensure a peaceful Valentines Day under the head: Cops will pluck out thorns for V-Day to bloom. It described how gift shop owners feel insecure as V-day approaches; some coverage was given to Hindu Jagriti Samiti, Shiv Sena and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena and their arguments against the Valentines Day, but the last laugh, in the report, was reserved for a senior official from Navi Mumbai police department who said: Political parties should know that Valentines Day is celebrated by all. It is not a western concept. However, the youth should not indulge in inappropriate behaviour in public places. This anguish and anger of columnists and editors of daily newspapers was nothing new to me. At least in my view, they are far better and less intolerant in usage of words and expressions than their counterparts in news-channels. I kept reading, smiling and putting the paper down until 7th Feb. This day the newspaper published, on the front page, news of National Commission for Women (NCW) sending a notice to Arbaaz Khan for using some derogatory words for women in one of the songs of his new film Dabangg 2. To be

specific, the word laundiya from the song Fevicol Se was the bone of contention. DNA didnt stopped at reporting but carried an investigation into the matter and after talking to several linguistic experts came to the conclusion that: While most said it is used commonly to refer to girls, some said it carries a negative connotation... But this too was not enough. The newspaper touched upon the topic editorially and took NCW for some roller-coaster ride. Playing safely that whether the disputed term is pejorative or not is a linguistic dispute, needing expert opinion, the editorial pointed out that meaning of words travel beyond their origin and etymology and that the usage of the word was not a big fuss. It goes on arguing:
...the bigger issue is our growing intolerance to words or depictions that offend us. Recently, a Kashmir girls band, Pragaash, agreed to stop performing, and artists in Bangalore were forced to take down paintings, all because different religious groups claimed they had been offended. For the NCW to question the film director for the use of a particular word that is in everyday use amounts to an overreaction. Worse, it puts the NCW on a par with religious groups that constantly threaten the freedom of expression.

I then came across another report The art of manufacturing outrage, on the same day, that was about The Naked and the Nude exhibition at Delhi Art Gallery. The three paintings that were shown in the picture besides the report were simply obnoxious. The report described in detail how some VHP women were protesting against depiction of women as mere commodity (inverted commas in the report). The emphasis of the report was on the fact that the protesting women (not more than 30 despite every effort of VHP as asserted by the report) did not know what they are protesting against. This conclusion was substantiated through one or two wayward quotes from the protesting women. The clinching point of the report was: It escapes the rabble-rousers that the paintings, by some of the finest artists like Jamini Roy, FN Souza and MF Hussain, are a celebration of the body in Indian modern art. But thats not whats troubling. Nuance has never been VHPs forte (emphasis mine). On the right side of the abovementioned report a correspondent from Srinagar wrote how Liberals sulk and Radicals rejoice over the disbanding of Pragaash. The correspondent, citing some Bhim Singh, didnt forget to point out that music is popular in all Islamic countries and Omakalsum was the most popular Arabic singer in Egypt. As an Aam Aadmi, I would have avoided this all had I not incidentally seen on the front page, below the coverage regarding NCWs notice over lyrics, that DNA is inviting readers to express their opinion on the theme. My first thought was negative: Why they would publish an opinion that doesnt suit them... But at the same moment I recalled all the angry sermons over freedom of speech that the newspaper had delivered in the past week. And then I decided to write. The first paragraph of my 400-worded comment explained that: No freedom can be unlimited. A freedom that has no restraints leads ultimately to anarchy and chaos. This is so glaring a fact that any civilised person can recognise it without difficulty. The freedom implies that I have a right to disagree with the views that are expressed in the DNA. And the restraint over my freedom implies that I cannot hurl invectives on the editor of DNA, cannot cast aspersions on his caste, creed and gender, and cannot curse his family and upbringing. This restraint, as everyone will say, is necessary and more so in a plural society like that of India.

I further explained in second paragraph: However when I see DNA for some last weeks, it seems to advocate an unrestrained and unlimited freedom for the likes of Salman Rushdie etc. What is the problem with Salman Rushdie? Is it that some fanatic mullahs are after his life for no fault of his own? No. It is not so. The problem is that Rushdie chose deliberately to insult. Satanic Verses is not an academic critique if anyone is under any illusion; it is a deliberate assault and mischief on the part of the writer. And this does not and should not come under the purview of freedom of expression. After making these two rather theoretical comments over the freedom of speech I came to the issue at hand: Some points on the laundiya controversy. In your analysis Its NCWs overreaction, it seemed that you want to have your cake and eat it too, and therefore the exact position was not clear. You mentioned that etymological meaning of the words change (implying the word laundiya is acceptable); you advocated the freedom of the artists but also said that portrayal of women in the movies need addressing. In my view NCWs notice against producer of the film is fairly legitimate but this should not end here. The question is not just of one word in one song. The question is of whole portrayal and commodification of women. Women in our films are only body and nothing more. Barring some exceptions that can be counted on fingers of one hand, our films revolve around some predictable love themes since the very beginning. What has changed, and changed for worse, is only the masala of item songs, stripping, kissing and other atrocious scenes that have no relation and no connection with the story whatsoever. While addressing these and many other issues the invocation of the debate of freedom of speech and expression is a misnomer because no one disputes the importance of it but only the misuse of the same. The next day, I found my letter published in the newspaper. But to my horror, so ardent advocates of freedom had actually censored many of my comments. In the first paragraph cutting a sentence or two, due to space constraint, was understandable; but to omit the reference to the need of restraint in a plural society like India implied something fishy. The ardent advocates of the freedom to offend felt too offended to publish the second paragraph based on criticism of DNAs stand on freedom and Salman Rushdie. In the published letter I found myself saying that, ...Salman Rushdie, who some felt hurt religious sentiments through his writings thats all. Those who tire not pointing out that, agitating crowds have never interacted with the objects of their outrage, perhaps, have never interacted with Satanic Verses, which they defend so passionately? My criticism on DNAs stand on NCWs notice became, it seemed some (instead of you) want to have your cake and eat it too... No reference was given to DNAs unclear stand and almost every ominous theoretical argument over freedom of speech was omitted. The last sentence, the crux of my argument, regarding incorrigibility of invoking the notion of freedom of speech while defending the likes of Salman Rushdie found no place in the newspaper. Wasnt it strange that those people who lamented cuts in Vishwaroopam shied not in making cuts in my comment? Wasnt it strange that those people demanding space for criticism and offending tend to censor when their values and their truth-claims are at the receiving end of such criticism and freedomto-offend. I only smiled in the end, at the failure of DNA in the test of democracy in which it wants India to succeed.
(Published in Radiance Viewsweekly 24 Feb 2013)