The Pictures-Final Thoughts and Closure

A very kind blogger gave me some very sensible advise today. He asked me to get over it and move on. If I had more sense, I would have followed it. But still, I think there are important  issues involved and I would like to make my stand clear.

My post criticizing Shivam putting up the pictures of massacre and the link on DesiPundit to Gaurav’s post has evoked some strong responses. Let me deal with the three important ones.

First, Vulturo: He defends the photographs on the principle of freedom of expression

I’ve always believed in Freedom of Expression. Absolute freedom of expression. That precisely is the reason I find people getting “offended” with stuff ridiculous.

Knowing Saket, one can say with absolute certainty that he is being consistent. But as I pointed out on his blog, the whole business of freedom of expression is simply not applicable in this case. First, freedom of expression does not mean that you can violate other’s rights. Second, it does not take away one’s right to feel offended. As long as I am upholding Shivam’s right to do what he pleases on his blog, I certainly have the right to criticize him. The reason why I cannot force him to take down the photograph is simply because I have no locus standi in this case. This does not mean, no one has the right to do so, victim’s family certainly has that right. So, it has become a convenient tool for folks to obfuscate the real issue. For example, the following comment:

That’s right. You have the right to say you’re offended, but you don’t have the right to destroy anything just because you’re offended by it. If I’m offended by people wearing bright coloured clothes, can I demand that everybody should only ever wear dull clothes?

I couldn’t agree more. But remind me, when has anyone threatened to break anything? Or hurt anyone?  Or violate Shivam’s rights? Those who don’t acknowledge the right to dissent do not understand freedom of expression. Period.

Second, Shivam: In my post, I had mentioned that the victim’s photograph was so easily published  precisely  because she was Dalit. Shivam responds by telling us  how he is a well known activist for Dalit rights and how much he has written on the subject compared to someone like me. Fair enough. I certainly acknowledge that Shivam is far more interested in caste issues and my sidebar does not mention caste anywhere. I would readily concede Shivam’s superiority in such matters. Then he asks

Two bloggers who did not feel the need to write posts about the Kherlanji atrocity in the first place, felt it important to write angry, outraged posts against my posting that photograph

Let’s see. My main source of information is MSM which did not cover the story for a month after the massacre, before a TOI story broke it. I read it, thought about blogging about it, but Greatbong beat me to it and wrote a good post. I immediately linked it on DP, a few minutes after the post was made.

Now, here is my counter question. Chalo, I am  a heartless bastard and as I have readily conceded that I do not have the same expertise as Shivam in the matters of caste. So why did not Shivam cover it? Since he is such a great Dalit activist, one would have thought that he would be the first to write about it. No sir, a mere humor blogger, a self-confessed Mithun  bhakt covered it first. And what about other folks? Dilip admits reading about the carnage a few weeks back, did he cover it? Hell no, silence. Nothing on the Other India blog too, those who claim to write for the oppressed and knew about it, sat over it. And what about  Shivam? He is not only  a blogger but a journalist who has access to resources far greater than mere bloggers. Were you sleeping  for a month? How come your newspaper never covered it? How come you never covered it on your blog?  If you say you didn’t know about it, how do you expect me to know?

Then, this

Or, as some have said, if you think the posting of the image was offensive why did you link to it and give it even more attention.

Oh, I will tell you why. Because when I link to someone , it’s not because I agree with him. It’s because I want to comment on what that person has written. And I feel, criticism will be incomplete without linking to the post. So readers can understand the original context. Just because I may not agree with something, doesn’t mean that everyone who reads this blog won’t! And yes, I don’t care how many hits that person gets. I am very amused that you quoted me without giving a link to my post. What are you afraid of? Giving hits? Or letting people judge for themselves? That in my book in intellectual dishonesty.  Wait a minute, who else quotes people without linking to them, aha, Dilip does!  At least, Shivam got the quote right  unlike our eminent journalist!

Shivam as always ends with  flourish:

For all those wanting Afzal and Santosh Singh hanged, how about arguing that the entire village of Kherlanji be hanged, bcause an entire village was involved in the crime here? That is not my case, but is it yours?

Oh, absolutely., After due process of the law, anyone who is found guilty of such a dastardly crime deserves to be hanged. No question about it! That is my case and you can quote me on that, always.

Third, Gawker:

But  before I come to the larger point, lets deal with this

And it was the poignant sight of a Michael J Fox swaying uncontrollably on television as he pled for public support towards stem cell research that caused people to take notice and changed a whole lot of minds

Dear Gawker, while agreeing that pictures are very important, I hope you can understand the difference between Michael J Fox and the case in hand. For one, Fox is very much alive while the poor victim is not.  If Priyanaka was alive and wished to tell her story by publishing pictures of her ordeal, I would have no objections at all. Since that is obviously not possible, we have to be careful about how we portray her.

Now, Shivam at least had the intellectual honesty to admit that posting pictures of the dead is a gray area. That would also explain why  the photograph he posted was not the same size as that of the original and why he has taken it down. Though, I am very amused that he says he removed it under pressure. Whose pressure? I can’t think of anyone else except me, Gaurav, and Greatbong who has openly opposed that photograph. On the other hand, a lot of posts have been written supporting Shivam’s right to publish the photograph. Either the majority of blogsphere thinks that Shivam is right or for some reasons does not wish to come out in the open.

But about those who supported Shivam, either by writing posts or leaving comments? Take this

  And let’s say, if you actually did continue to possess dignity after you were dead, wouldn’t your dignity be better served by raising awareness about the crime that was perpetrated on you, about the people who raped and murdered you who might get away scot free in the absence of a public outcry against their deeds? Wouldn’t you feel that way, if it were you who were the victim?

Or this:

The photographs were essential, we need to see them to wake us up from our slumber. To realize the brutal nature of our society, to demand justice for the victim

Fair enough. Then why are not these fine gentlemen posting the photograph on their own blogs? Since they think that only posting a photograph of a mutilated body can raise awareness of the issue, please do so.. And since, unlike Shivam, you think it is such a black and white issue, don’t worry about resizing it. Publish it as it was in the original. But, while pages have been written supporting Shivam, and some comments left criticizing his act of taking it down, no one else has deemed it fit to post it on his own blog. Why? If you think it is essential to bring attention to the crime, please make it a sticky post! But, er, surprise, surprise, no one else has done it.  Why haven’t the Gawkers, Dilips and Sakshis of this world followed their own advise? Because of the objection of two or three bloggers? What rubbish!

Before, anyone claims copyright issues, Shivam has already pointed out that pictures are in public domain. Then why? No doubt, some would claim that because we want to focus on getting justice for the victims. But, they claim that the said photograph would help in securing justice. Then by all means go ahead.

A blogger said somewhere (can’t remember who) that those who objected to that photograph wanted to divert attention and hence protect the perpetrators. I am not sure what kind of dope that gentleman smokes if he thinks that the blogsphere will decide if these criminals are punished or not. No doubt, blogsphere can play an important role in creating awareness, that’s about it. And by all means, lets try to ensure justice. How am I obstructing it? My objection to a photograph makes no difference on the ground. And as  I said before, if you think posting that photograph is so important, if the dead have no dignity, post a full size photograph on your blog. Who is stopping you? Of course, I will object, but if you are right, my objection should be immaterial to you. If I am right, I wont give a damn about what you think  unless you convince me otherwise. To expect  that everyone should agree on everything otherwise he is trying to protect the criminals is preposterous!

Finally, a word about photographs. No doubt, photographs can enhance our understanding of the brutality of the crime and sometimes are essential But there is no one glove fit all approach. Some are arguing in terms of Abu Ghairab pictures. There was no way out in that case, otherwise the US army would have flatly denied the charges. Did you see the photographs of 9/11 splashed all over New York Times? No one is denying that the crime occurred and I think words in this case are evocative enough. However, some photographs may be essential, please note, I did not object  to use of photographs per se but to one specific one. Not all photographs are equal! And as I said before, if you think it is so important, then publish it on your blog.

Walk the talk please.