Internet is full of websites with all kind of true and untrue material, assertions and conspiracy theories. When dealing with facts (not opinions), it is difficult to sort out what is true or false. That is the question and dilemma we, as editors, also face. In my judgment:
Videos;
1- In individual or panel discussions, only fact the videos prove is that particular person made particular assertions, but it does not automatically prove that those assertions are true. One still need documented references and cross references to prove that those assertions are true. Presence of a famous personality or personalities does not make the whole discussion kosher. It may elevate the level of discussion, but it still requires the same proof.
2- Sometime after discussions, some participants retract their statements and some are challenged later with proof, and most of the time these are not included in original videos.
3- Videos, which lack accepted back up references, cannot support another factual assertion which is also lacking such backup references.
Internet Postings;
Reliable internet postings have the same criteria as mainstream reliable print media. If a view-point is presented as fact, it should be supported by a reliable sources and references. Whether the writer is a rookie or an iconic journalist, the rules and requirements are the same. If someone writes a story and asserts that this story has many versions, but picks one version to write, then he/she has the obligation to explain why this version was chosen-and whether it was corroborated with other sources, otherwise it does not carry the water of being a reliable story.
We received an e-mail about Iqbal’s family tree with the link:
‘http://www.kahopakistan.com/pic/images/53261062767383433196.jpg
I think this belongs to the same trash can as any un-supported video or internet posting. The link refers to Kaho Pakistan Website, not to a text-book pdf. Again this posting itself does not prove that it is from a text-book or there is a cover up. It requires more proof to make that leap of faith. If it is from a textbook, it is fabrication and we should write to the author and Department of Education, Pakistan.
When we are challenging a well-documented (by both Eastern and Western Scholars) historic fact, the challenge should be supported by the equally or better documented and well researched document. I do not think un-supported internet videos or internet postings are the answer!
What kind of TFUSA website we should develop for the future? Whether we should have open format with no restrictions on true or untrue postings, and let the readers fight it out while sorting it out, or develop a well-accepted criteria of reliable material postings, so that TFUSA website is perceived as trustworthy and reliable. This is not an easy job for editors who will be making sometime controversial judgment calls. Should the editors nudge the discussion to stay on topic and prevent personal back and forth between participants, or let it go even if it is not contributing to a meaningful discussion?
The Editorial Board and Board of Directors will be deliberating on this in the next few weeks. I think you should weigh in with your opinion, after all TFUSA belongs to all of us.
Fayyaz A. Sheikh
Some topics of history are controversial from their inception with separate set of arguments backing each side. A typical example of such topics is the oldest controversy among Muslims whether Hazrat Abu Bakr was the rightful person to lead the Muslims after the demise of the Prophet, Or Hazrat Ali. You can fill libraries with the evidence produced by both side over the last fourteen centuries. All these points of trusting some material and summarily rejecting the other is for committed partisans – not for neutral intellectual, provided the person is really neutral and truly intellectual in his approach. This thread of discussions came to fore with the debate about Poet Iqbal’s Faith and his conversion to a different sect. Calling one side right and the other side wrong, is what Muslims have been doing for fourteen centuries. There are glaring controversies between the Major biblical Faiths too. The Old Testament says Hazrat Abraham was on the mount Cannan to sacrifice his younger son Issac, whereas Muslim scripture says Abraham was by the Kaaba to sacrifice his older son Ishmael. Neither of the two Belief systems can provide conclusive evidence in support of their stand. The point is that looking for a scientific proof and verifiable and authentic source would render all Scriptures as scrap, not worth a second look for serious consideration. Therefore, common sense has to be applied with intellectual honesty to separate chaff from the grain, as far as possible. Some matters are destined to remain controversial for good. Principle of verification is compulsary and effective in matters relating to pure sciences. Historical matters remain controversial because both sides have their own set of proofs albeit rejected by the other side. Who is to decide which evidence is acceptable and which is not.