সেই ফারাজের মুখোশ উন্মোচন করলেন প্রথম আলো'র সাংবাদিক | Prothom Alo Journalist | Kaler Kantho

Summary

The video delves into the controversial story of Faraz Ayaz Hossain, a victim of the 2016 Holey Artisan Bakery terrorist attack. Initially hailed as a hero for reportedly refusing to leave his friends behind, new investigations have cast doubt on this narrative. Journalist Ahmed Zaef and others challenge the widely accepted story, revealing that there is no solid evidence supporting Faraz's heroic actions. The video highlights media manipulation and misinformation surrounding his image, shedding light on the blurred lines between heroism and media fabrication.

Takeaways

• 😀 The 2016 Gulshan attack at Holey Artisan Bakery involved a brutal terrorist attack, killing 27 people, including five militants.
• 😀 Faraz Ayaz Hossain, a victim in the attack, was posthumously hailed as a hero for allegedly refusing to leave his friends behind, though this narrative is disputed.
• 😀 The media, especially *Prothom Alo*, propagated the story that Faraz was a hero due to his loyalty to his friends during the terrorist attack.
• 😀 Journalist Ahmed Jaef, who investigated terrorism in Bangladesh, argues that the 'hero' narrative surrounding Faraz is fabricated and unsupported by evidence.
• 😀 There is no substantial eyewitness testimony or physical evidence that supports the claim that Faraz refused to leave his friends and thus became a martyr.
• 😀 Jaef's investigation into the Holey Artisan attack included interviews with survivors and police, none of whom corroborated the 'hero' narrative.
• 😀 The New York Times, which reported on the attack, did not support the 'hero' story either, and there has been no correction or retraction from *Prothom Alo* on this matter.
• 😀 Faraz's portrayal as a hero in *Prothom Alo* was based on unverified information, leading to accusations of historical distortion and journalistic malpractice.
• 😀 Rubina Ahmed, the mother of another victim, Abinta Kabir, rejected the 'hero' narrative, stating there was no evidence that anyone acted heroically during the attack.
• 😀 The controversy over Faraz's heroism is part of a broader debate about media responsibility and the potential manipulation of public perception in the wake of tragedies.

Q & A

What happened on July 1, 2016, at Holey Artisan Bakery in Dhaka?

On July 1, 2016, a terrorist attack took place at Holey Artisan Bakery in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Five militants stormed the restaurant, killing 27 people, including 20 hostages. The attack was a tragic event, causing shock and devastation in the country.

How was Faraz Ayaz Hossain portrayed in the media following the attack?

Following the attack, the media, particularly *Prothom Alo*, portrayed Faraz Ayaz Hossain as a hero. The narrative suggested that Faraz, despite having the opportunity to escape, chose to stay behind with his two non-Muslim friends and was killed alongside them. This story painted him as selfless and courageous.

What specific claim did *Prothom Alo* make about Faraz’s actions during the attack?

*Prothom Alo* claimed that Faraz was spared by the militants because he was Muslim. However, he refused to leave his friends, who were non-Muslim, and chose to die with them. This claim suggested Faraz made a heroic, self-sacrificial decision to stay with his friends.

Why do some journalists and the families of victims dispute the hero narrative about Faraz?

Several journalists, including former *Prothom Alo* reporter Ahmed Jaif, dispute the hero narrative, stating that no witness reported seeing Faraz refuse to leave. Survivors of the attack and investigators found no evidence that the militants offered him the chance to escape or that he acted heroically. They argue the media's portrayal was a fabricated story.

What did Ahmed Jaif contribute to the controversy regarding Faraz’s portrayal?

Ahmed Jaif, a journalist who conducted interviews with survivors, argued that the story of Faraz choosing to stay behind and die with his friends was untrue. He pointed out that survivors, police, and other journalists found no evidence supporting this narrative. Jaif also criticized *Prothom Alo* for spreading a false story without proper verification.

How did the families of the victims respond to the portrayal of Faraz as a hero?

The family of Avinta Kabir, one of Faraz's friends who was killed, strongly rejected the hero narrative. Avinta’s mother, Rubia Ahmed, expressed disbelief at the claim, stating that no evidence supported the idea that Faraz had sacrificed himself. She emphasized that the real heroes were the 22 people who lost their lives that day.

What role did *The New York Times* play in the Faraz hero story?

*The New York Times* also covered the Holey Artisan Bakery attack and included information about Faraz, reinforcing the narrative that he was a hero. However, as reported by Jaif, the details provided to *The New York Times* were not accurate, and the newspaper did not issue a correction even after doubts about the story were raised.

What is the main criticism of *Prothom Alo*'s reporting on the Holey Artisan attack?

The main criticism of *Prothom Alo* is that the newspaper fabricated the story of Faraz's heroism, based on unverified and false claims. This led to a distortion of the facts and misled the public about the events of the attack, particularly regarding Faraz's actions.

How has the hero narrative affected the public's perception of Faraz and the attack?

The hero narrative promoted by the media has shaped public perception of Faraz as a symbol of bravery and selflessness. However, the controversy over the truth behind this portrayal has led some to question whether the real facts were distorted to create a more appealing, yet inaccurate, narrative.

Why is journalistic responsibility particularly important in the context of the Holey Artisan Bakery attack?

Journalistic responsibility is crucial in this case because the media's portrayal of the attack and Faraz's role in it has a lasting impact on public memory and historical accuracy. Fabricating or distorting events not only misleads the public but also undermines the true stories of the victims and survivors, and can contribute to the spread of misinformation.