You may have seen it ‘live’, you would have certainly seen it on repeated video replays: 18 seconds, 20 bullets at point blank range and the `Mafia brothers’ became part of Indian television folklore.
The shooting of Atiq and Ashraf Ahmed, on air, is unique: I can’t remember the last time a cold-blooded murder was committed in front of rolling TV cameras. For TV reporters on the spot and for the anchors in the studios, it was a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
It’s also a lesson in how (not) to cover such an incident.
TV news excited by blood on camera
There’s nothing like a good old-fashioned shooting to set the blood coursing through news channels. From Saturday to Wednesday morning, they provided non-stop action: from the actual shooting and the three shooters to the hunt for ‘Lady Don’ (News 18 India), Atiq’s wife Shaista, and Guddu Muslim—with a detour to Turkey, Pakistan, Punjab—before returning to the mafia don’s life and times, his criminal activities captured on WhatsApp chats and audio tapes.
By Tuesday evening, after hours of TV news, you may have begun to think that Atiq and Ashraf being ‘Shot dead in police custody’ (CNN News 18) was good riddance to bad rubbish. Republic TV was succinct: ‘In 40 seconds 40 years crimes end’, while India TV was graphic: ‘Finished—mitti mein mafia’.
This view of crime and punishment dovetails with the views of certain BJP ministers in the Uttar Pradesh government. Home minister Ajay Kumar Mishra said the killing was, “bhagwan ka faisla (god’s decision)”; jail minister Dharmveer Prajapati said, ‘it was the result of people’s curse’.
Atiq Ahmed’s story was framed as good guy versus bad guy, a ‘Yogi v/s Mafia’ war in which Atiq, the ‘rakshas’ (ABP News) and his ‘jungle raj’ had been exterminated by strongman, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath: ‘What he promised, he did’ (India TV).
Atiq, we were told, had links to Pakistan – oh and wait a minute, maybe his killing had something to do with Pakistan? Sunday morning, news channels revealed the pistol used to shoot him was Turkish and had come through Pakistan via Punjab. Was the ‘mastermind’ of the crime also linked to ISI, some channels like News 18 India speculated.
Meanwhile, channels like Times Now and Republic TV attacked the opposition (what else is new?) for criticising the government over the shooting: ‘Why is the tukde-tukde gang weeping over the don?’ (Republic TV), ‘Time to shame Atiq apologists’ (Times Now).
Having established that Atiq came by his just desserts, news channels revelled in the shooting, showing it again and again — and again, dwelling on the ‘jigana pistol’ (News 24). Then, they profiled the shooters, interviewed their families but that wasn’t spicy enough for a masala murder to entice viewers. So it was back to the shooting, to a letter Ashraf had written that was to be delivered after his death (perhaps naming names) — and to Atiq’s wife, Shaista.
Aha, Shaista: by Monday, she was the person of interest—that her whereabouts were unknown only added to the charm. ‘Who is Shaista?’ asked Aaj Tak. ‘Where is she hiding? Will she take over as the don?’ asked News 18 India. Channels looked for her everywhere – in her old office, her ‘mayka’ (India TV), they showed tapes of her old speeches and promised us that her surrender or arrest was imminent (News Nation).
But Atiq was their target—his threats, his benami deals, land grabs, the ‘600 bullets’ he fired (India TV ‘Atiq ka aatank katha’) – his den of debauchery…’ (India Today). As told by TV, this was a story of Atiq’s guilt, more than of his killers.
Also read: Only Hindus are victims of violence on TV channels. Crimes are done by Atiqs, Ahmeds
TV followed Atiq, family like a hawk
It’s not surprising, then, that Atiq’s and Ashraf’s murder and the circumstances surrounding them lost out.
On Sunday, news channels did say that the UP Police had to answer for such a ‘gruesome killing’ right under their watch (CNN News 18) and that there was a ‘security lapse’ (Republic TV, ABP News). They asked ‘How did this happen on their watch?’ (Times Now) — one India Today anchor even suggested the ‘police ran away’. When you look at the video of the shooting, you don’t see any policeman in the camera frame.
But that was about it. Given that Atiq’s son Asad was killed in a police encounter, surely there ought to have been more questions by the media about the role of the police?
For instance, why was the media allowed to get so close to Atiq and Ashraf? Especially since Atiq had petitioned the Supreme Court on his security and feared for his life? The question is critical since the shooters masqueraded as TV news personnel.
Channels headlined Atiq’s fears, frequently. In March, when he had been taken to Prayagraj for the verdict in the Umesh Pal kidnapping, India Today’s reporter said, ‘Don fearful for his life’, Times Now added the gangster ‘quakes with fear’.
Another question: should news channels have continually replayed Atiq’s murder for over 72 hours? With slow motion shots showing him being shot in the head and then riddled with bullets? Isn’t there a convention to blur such violent images – what about sheer human decency? What about children or teenagers’ exposure to such murders?
Question number 3: did the media leak too much information about Atiq, his family and their locations? For the last four weeks since he travelled from Sabaramati jail to Prayagraj for the verdict in 2006 kidnapping, TV news channels have relentlessly pursued him and his family – remember them hanging out of vehicles to catch a better look at the police convoys? Each and every move by the family, by associate Guddu Muslim was announced on TV – when son Asad was in Delhi, TV news was there, when son Ali injured himself in the Naini jail Monday, news TV was there—when he went to the Colvin Hospital where he was shot, they were there to question him. Every sordid detail of their lives was public knowledge.
Why?
The author tweets @shailajabajpai. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)