PUBLISHED WORK OF ACM (Retd.,) M. ANWAR SHAMIM

PUTTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: MISQUOTES

After his retirement, Air Chief Marshal Anwar Shamim
was extremely aggrieved at how some journalists
completely misquoted him on sensitive issues. For example,
on MQM, a journalist misquoted him to show a position
opposing and harmful to MQM, most likely to create hatred for his
person. His misquotes were promptly
reproduced all over, even in Indian newspapers.
He did resort to legal action once, and won the case,
but the apology was in an obscure corner, almost
useless. He does not like taking legal action, it wastes
money and energy, and would rather
educate people about dis/misinformation, or mistake.



ARTICLES:

LEADING PAKISTAN ENGLISH NEWSPAPERS:


DAWN: Saturday March 12,1988
Afghanistan Problem: The End In Sight?....I

DAWN: Sunday March 13, 1988
Afghanistan Problem: The End In Sight?....II

DAWN: March 27, 1988
Implication’s of India’s Naval Build-Up.

DAWN: April 4, 1989
Dilemma of the Bureaucracy.

DAWN : Saturday May 20, 1989
What Does Agni Portend?


DEFAMATION ON THE INTERNET:
ETHICS OF CITIZEN JOURNALISM

MOVEMENT PROMOTION THROUGH
LINKING AND OTHER METHODS----
RESPONSIBLE CHECKS AND
BALANCES.

Internet is a wonderful arena of actual free speech,
a wonderland of fantasy and reality, all available on
one screen.

Internet is not like any other media; it is information
that is constantly present, unlike other mediums,
where once aired or published, it may not be
available, "in instant, streaming, and constantly
adaptable (i.e.,editable
capacity, to cater for previous
weaknesses and mistakes) form."

In the past, if some journalist of newspapers and
Magazines, even of repute like TIME,
NEWSWEEK; quoted "unknown sources" which fit their story,
enhanced their story, or even quoted known high level
sources, (which unknown to them, due to lack of good
investigation of the local revenge politics), were actually
defaming to destroy an individual or organization; it
was understood that such journalists
and such reporting does exist. (Google fabricated
news, Ethics in journalism, etc).

However, Internet from the very beginning has had
a strong image of credibility way beyond other mediums,
for apparently having honesty of a machine, yet
associability of humans.

With such a remarkable arena of interaction, at least a
basic consideration should be that absent solid
factual evidence, or conviction, no one should
be able to actually malign a person's reputation
by naming them directly; they can be referred to
as part of some group or such other methods, if
it is a rumor or hunch or such.

Simply quoting someone quoting someone else;
which starts it's own false authenticity; is a
disservice to any good cause for accurate
historical record keeping, or academic work.

Another, ethical consideration should be that
if names are being listed, then the inference
that is being drawn should not only be backed
by evidence, but also by counter argument
from the person named, or organization
maligned.