How media influenced the Kargil War
Both India and Pakistan would never have dreamed about how Indian and global media would play an important role in influencing the direction of the Kargil War. Media coverage, became a weapon for both India and Pakistan.
THE KARGIL War was an armed conflict between India and Pakistan that took place between April and June 1999 in Kashmir. The cause of the war was the infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the Line of Control, which serves as the de facto border between the two nations. The Indian Army, supported by the air force, attacked the Pakistani positions and, with international diplomatic support, eventually forced a Pakistani withdrawal across the Line of Control (LoC).
The Kargil War was significant for the impact created by mass media by both nations, especially on the Indian side. Coming at a time of exploding growth in electronic media in India, the Kargil news stories and war footage were often telecast live on TV with many websites providing in-depth analysis of the war.
The conflict became the first "live" war in South Asia that was given such detailed media coverage, often to the extent of drumming up jingoistic feelings. The conflict soon turned into a news propaganda war with the official press briefings of both nations producing claims and counter claims. However, as the war progressed the entire media coverage became lopsided with countless channels in India showing images from the frontline with their troops .The print media, in India and abroad, was largely sympathetic to the Indian cause with editorials in newspapers based in the West and other neutral countries observing that Pakistan was largely responsible for the incursions.
As the fighting intensified, the Pakistani version of the events found little backing at the world stage, helping India to gain valuable diplomatic recognition for its counter-operations in the region. PRINTThe Indian Express reviewed the whole issue in a pro-Indian manner. It gave facts and figures and stressed on the Indian point of view only. It put Pakistan in complete bad light and India as the victim. It highlighted India’s victories prominently. The Hindu followed the story with almost the same perspective. Though it did reveal Pakistan troop information on certain occasions. The paper focused on a more opinionated and patriotic approach. It degraded army officers and the Prime Ministers quite vehemently. BROADCASTThe BBC followed the whole ordeal in a very factual and unbiased manner. They gave out necessary information without creating an opinion. It was crisp, accurate and to the point. They put forward the comments of all angles and viewpoints. CNN focused on Pakistani’s political parties. It tried to reveal Sharif’s agenda and mishaps. It predicted future movements and induced provocation. However, they did give out factual information about the issue. The Kargil War was influenced in a crucial manner by the media. It took it to a different dimension and helped india gain international diplomatic advantage
The conflict became the first "live" war in South Asia that was given such detailed media coverage, often to the extent of drumming up jingoistic feelings. The conflict soon turned into a news propaganda war with the official press briefings of both nations producing claims and counter claims. However, as the war progressed the entire media coverage became lopsided with countless channels in India showing images from the frontline with their troops .The print media, in India and abroad, was largely sympathetic to the Indian cause with editorials in newspapers based in the West and other neutral countries observing that Pakistan was largely responsible for the incursions.
As the fighting intensified, the Pakistani version of the events found little backing at the world stage, helping India to gain valuable diplomatic recognition for its counter-operations in the region. PRINTThe Indian Express reviewed the whole issue in a pro-Indian manner. It gave facts and figures and stressed on the Indian point of view only. It put Pakistan in complete bad light and India as the victim. It highlighted India’s victories prominently. The Hindu followed the story with almost the same perspective. Though it did reveal Pakistan troop information on certain occasions. The paper focused on a more opinionated and patriotic approach. It degraded army officers and the Prime Ministers quite vehemently. BROADCASTThe BBC followed the whole ordeal in a very factual and unbiased manner. They gave out necessary information without creating an opinion. It was crisp, accurate and to the point. They put forward the comments of all angles and viewpoints. CNN focused on Pakistani’s political parties. It tried to reveal Sharif’s agenda and mishaps. It predicted future movements and induced provocation. However, they did give out factual information about the issue. The Kargil War was influenced in a crucial manner by the media. It took it to a different dimension and helped india gain international diplomatic advantage
 | Previous Post |
Login
 Login through Social ID
|
Not finding what you are looking for? Search here.
