Countering false claims about what the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) terms the “Islamabad Massacre” in the aftermath of the opposition groups’ global protests on 26th November is challenging for two main reasons. Each can be addressed if the Pakistani regime and its partners are genuinely interested in informing the public about what happened on that day.
Government’s own blatantly false claims
The Pakistan Government undermined its credibility by making blatantly false claims, such as the Information Minister asserting that “no security personnel carried live ammunition.” Such statements are easily debunked with common sense and available evidence. Excessive use of force, including gunfire, has been well-documented while government officials had threatened the use of lethal force all day. The solution here is straightforward: The government must avoid outright lies and address the core issue of protesters—why was lethal force used against unarmed citizens? why are government officials and proxies lying about the use of lethal force? Outrage over PTI supporters using Ai images is neither here nor there. It will be perceived as a distraction from these most important questions.
Plausible Deniability About Excessive Use of Force Against Unarmed Citizens
The government’s attempt to create plausible deniability on its use of excessive force to disperse protesters through measures like criminal tampering of medical records of police brutality complicated the truth. Meanwhile, a blanket media ban on protest coverage was in effect during the period, as evidenced by many media channels not speaking to protesters, taking the Government’s word for granted, and regime-aligned journalists ‘reporting’ from a distance as if in a war zone, making it difficult to find reliable accounts of the unfolding spectacle in the local media. The situation became a breeding ground for speculation and ‘fake news’.
This requires a bit more than common sense to address; a thoughtful, evidence-based approach is necessary when snake oil is expected to be found everywhere. But we must also respect the intelligence of ordinary people. Credibility in such scenarios is earned when the evidence presented is logical and authoritative. In the case of the bloody aftermath of the protest, PTI quickly compiled and shared a comprehensive archive of eyewitness accounts. When cross-referenced with reports from on-ground local journalists, international media, and human rights organizations demanding independent investigation on events on the night of 27th November, it appeared more convincing than the government’s pressers or state-backed narratives. The official narrative was all but decimated when journalists investigating local health centers for casualties of the contentious episode were arrested with trumped charges. Nothing smells more like foul play than censorship and proverbially shooting the few reporters asking the right questions.
Truth is a River
For any observer who aims to counter PTI’s supposed propaganda, the solution lies in being critical of power, producing credible evidence, and fostering transparency—performing these tasks rather than throwing them around like buzzwords. Creating plausible deniability, at best, fuels a logic of he-said-she-said. Or, the idea that we may never really know anything because reality is so muddy, which works in favor of the unaccountable and the powerful.
Ultimately the onus to fight misinformation lies on the government, which holds vastly greater resources and wields a monopoly on force, rather than the protesters. Speaking honestly would not only counter misinformation but also compel opposition groups like the PTI to uphold the same standards of truthfulness.
The truth navigates the marketplace of ideas with an uncanny ability to persist, much like a river reshaping landscapes. While it can face temporary obstructions, it ultimately flows unimpeded, cutting through noise.
Also read: Misinformation Won’t Be Solved Through Blanket Bans on X
