The Pahalgam attack of April 22nd, 2025, which left 26 tourists, two foreigners, and a local killed, gunned down by two terrorists, has left a deep impact on the country. In the wake of the attack that took place in the Baisaran Valley, just a few kilometres away from Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir, the tensions between India and Pakistan have reached concerning levels.
Both countries have told people from the other region to leave immediately, tightened their borders, and controlled their airspace. India suspended the Indus Water Treaty, while Pakistan suspended the Simla Agreement, and now, at least for the common people, it is just about waiting to see what happens next.
In the meantime, India has received a level of international support never seen before. However, amid all that, the Western media and other groups have come under the spotlight for their biased reporting and their unfair reactions in light of the attack, especially toward India.
Harvard’s Pakistani Conference, The Pakistan Conference 2025, to be held in late April at Harvard University’s South Asia Institute, has sparked a lot of backlash and protests from Indian students at the university. The students protested against the timing of the conference, held just days after the Pahalgam attack, along with the involvement of Pakistani officials, including Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb and Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US, Rizwan Saeed Sheikh.
Two students, Surabhi Tomar and Abhishek Chaudhari, wrote to the institute’s management to express objections to the conference and its delegates. The letter states, “Welcoming representatives of a government that not only denies accountability for but also ideologically supports such religion-based terrorism risks Harvard being complicit in legitimising those who enable or justify these crimes.”
The letter also pointed out that while Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry expressed condolences for the attack, various officials from the country have often made threats toward India and also brought up the Pakistan Senate passing a resolution to support Kashmir’s “freedom struggle.”
According to the letter, this struggle is often used as a reason to legitimise violence against Indian citizens. The letter read, “We ask for the clarity, courage, and compassion for Hindu and Indian students grieving the targeted killing of members of their faith. We request you to take a stance against Hinduphobia,” and listed three requests to Harvard, including: “1. Issue a public statement condemning the Pahalgam terror attacks and supporting victims of religion-based violence. 2. Review the participation of Pakistani officials in light of their government’s support for groups like LeT. 3. Provide emotional and institutional support to affected students through the Office for Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging.”
BBC’s Usage Of The Word ‘Militant’ And India’s Response The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and the Indian government have also been at odds, especially since the media house has been referring to the terrorists as ‘militants’ in many of its coverage of the attack. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) also wrote an official letter to Jackie Martin, BBC’s India Head, about the reporting they were doing on the Pahalgam attack.
An official was quoted by The Hindu saying, “A formal letter has been sent to the BBC on terming terrorists militants. The External Publicity Division of the MEA will be monitoring the reporting of the BBC.”
A BBC spokesperson, however, stated that “We have included Prime Minister Modi’s response to the attacks prominently in our coverage. Our long-standing position, reflected in the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines, is to use the word terrorist with attribution. Anyone who has seen or listened to our coverage will have heard the word used in quotes and interviews.”
The use of such words can be seen as minimising the ideological motivations and the intent to instill fear, which are key aspects of terrorism. By not explicitly calling it terrorism, some feel the coverage doesn’t fully acknowledge the pain and sense of violation experienced by India due to such acts.
Read More: Racist BBC Coverage Of India Is Sick & Needs To Stop Right Away As They Continue To Show India In A Bad Light
NYT Corrected By US House Foreign Affairs Committee
The New York Times was also called out for its use of words like “militants” and “gunmen” in its coverage of the attack instead of “terrorists”. On April 25, 2025, the official X/Twitter page of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee even posted a screenshot of a NYT report about the attack and crossed out the word ‘Militant’ in the title, replacing it with the word ‘Terrorists’.
In the caption, they wrote, “Hey, @nytimes we fixed it for you. This was a TERRORIST ATTACK plain and simple. Whether it’s India or Israel, when it comes to TERRORISM the NYT is removed from reality.”
NYT, though, is not the only one to use ambiguous terms like ‘gunmen’ or ‘militants’. CNN, in one of their reports, had the title “Dozens killed as gunmen massacre tourists in Kashmir beauty spot,” while a report by The Guardian had the title “At least 26 tourists killed by suspected militants in Kashmir attack.”
Some have also called out the use of the term “Indian-administered Kashmir” in international reports, claiming that it makes it seem as if Kashmir is either not a part of India or oppressively controlled by the country.
International Media Having Pakistani Journalists Cover Pahalgam Attack? In a Firstpost report by Palki Sharma, it was claimed that many of the international media outlets are using Pakistani journalists to cover the Pahalgam attack. She stated, “You want a story on Kashmir, just ask a journalist from Pakistan to write it.”
As examples, she presented the Nikkei Asia report that was done by Adnan Aamir, a Pakistani journalist who “talks about a militant strike in Kashmir,” and a NYT article by another Pakistani journalist, Salman Masood, where she claims that the reporter “attempts to draw a parallel between the Pahalgam attack and last month’s Balochistan train attack. It talks about Pakistan accusing India of sponsoring terrorism.”
According to her, this is problematic considering the conflict between the two countries and how Pakistan not only considers Jammu and Kashmir as something that belongs to them, but the government also spreads propaganda about the region. This could alter their perspective, making them biased in their reporting. She called out the international media houses for not being neutral in this situation, since having Pakistani writers report on the Pahalgam attack would be skewed, as they wouldn’t take India’s side.
Image Credits: Google Images
Sources: Firstpost, India Today, The Hindu
Find the blogger: @chirali_08
This post is tagged under: Pahalgam, pahalgam attack, pahalgam attack news, pahalgam terror attack, pahalgam terrorist, terrorist, Terrorist Attack, terrorist attack in india, terrorist attack jammu, terrorist attack kashmir, terrorist news
Disclaimer: We do not own the rights to or copyright any of the images used; these have been taken from Google. In case of credits or removal, the owner may kindly email us.
