(MintPress) – With media focused on reaching a fast-paced audience, complex issues tend to be covered in brief, resulting in a lack of complete coverage for consumers who rely on the sources they trust to deliver the news.
Take for example Raw Story. The left-leaning online publication, which paints itself as a progressive news organization and beacon of truth, ran a brief story Friday regarding a complicated conflict between the Buddhist and Muslim populations in Myanmar, pointing the finger of blame at the minority and oppressed Muslim population and failing to examine the entirety of the violent dispute.
For months, Human Rights Watch, one of the world’s most well-respected watchdog organizations, has been investigating the violent situation in Myanmar, pointing out that the minority Rohingya Muslim population has been subject to violent attacks, including the burning of their homes, and are being driven out of the country.
The article published in Raw Story shows the images of Buddhist monks protesting against the attacks on Buddhist temples, with a brief one-sided explanation regarding violence carried out by the Rohingyas.
Perhaps Raw Story felt that running the AFP article was OK, considering the Rohingya aren’t considered real citizens in Myanmar, despite the fact that thousands were born there and are able to trace their ancestry within the country. That blatant discrimination should be enough to highlight a possibility that the government may be bias in the way they portray the conflict.
Rather, the article published in Raw Story refers to the Rohingya Muslims as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, failing to make note of the fact that Bangladesh does not recognize the Rohingya, either. They’re stateless.
“Myanmar’s government and many Burmese view Myanmar’s stateless Rohingya population as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh,” the Raw Story article states.
What’s going on?
In August, MintPress published a story including an interview with Phil Robertson, Human Rights Watch Deputy Director for the Asia Division, who was tasked with conducting a full investigation of the conflict in Myanmar.
He told MintPress that the conflict is two-fold, but pointed out that the stateless Rohingya are subject to attacks loosely sponsored by the government — and that information regarding such attacks were, of course, stifled by that very government.
“Sadly, the rumor mill inside Burma is moving forward full tilt, spreading these unsubstantiated charges far and wide — and re-emphasizing the government’s point that Rohingya are somehow foreign when in fact most Rohingya have lived in Burma all their lives and the Rohingya have been present in Burma for centuries,” he said.
He went on to say that any reports that the Rohingya were fully to blame for the violence in Myanmar should be approached with skepticism.
“Without clear supporting evidence, the veracity of these oft-repeated accusations of ‘terrorism’ against the Rohingya should be viewed with serious suspicion,” he said.
So when Raw Story reported that Buddhist monks were protesting attacks on Buddhist temples carried out by the Rohingya, they may not have been wrong, but they didn’t paint the whole story for readers, the majority of whom are likely unfamiliar with the conflict.
The full story
Violence between the Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims intensified this summer, perpetuating a long lasting cycle of violence between the two populations. The laws in Myanmar reflect this, as Rohingyas are not guaranteed the same legal protection or rights.
The recent violence was sparked when a Rakhine Muslim girl was raped, allegedly by Rohingya Muslim men. This led to widespread violence against the entire population. A Human Rights Watch report details grave human rights abuses against the Rohingya, including abuse, rape, destruction of homes and killings, which the report claims were carried out by the Rakhine Buddhists and government security forces.
“Burmese Myanmar security forces failed to protect the Arakan and Rohingya from each other and then unleashed a campaign of violence and mass roundups against the Rohingya,” Brad Adams, Asia Director of Human Rights Watch, said in a press release sent to MintPress in August.
Amnesty International echoed similar sentiments, claiming the Myanmar government was carrying out human rights violations against the Rohingya, saying the Myanmar government was also detaining Rohingya men, allegedly subjecting them to ill treatment and cutting off their communication to the outside world.
The Rohingya people themselves are considered one of the most persecuted populations in the world. They have no official state and are not recognized legally — anywhere. While Raw Story was correct in saying the government of Myanmar considers the Rohingya illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, it did not mention that Bangladesh, too, rejects the Rohingya.
According to Robertson of Human Rights Watch, the Rohingya have very limited rights in Myanmar, regardless of whether they or their parents were born there. Before marrying, they are mandated to request permission from the government. They also lack labor rights afforded to the Rakhine government and have no access to health care and education.
Painting the picture
While the AFP story was reporting on incidents in Myanmar that aren’t up for challenge, not including the side of the Rohingya Muslims could have been damaging to the image of Muslims living abroad, especially during a time in which Americans are healing from the death of U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens.
The story was likely to lead to a knee-jerk reaction by American consumers, who have gotten used to pointing the finger at the Muslim population. In this case, it would have been responsible to look to reputable organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International to paint the full picture, which doesn’t exactly paint it as the black and white issue published by Raw Story.