Allegedly, some alleged terrorists belonging to an allegedly banned alleged sectarian organisation allegedly shot alleged live ammunition at members of an alleged minority sect. The alleged members of the alleged minority sect were allegedly taken to an alleged private hospital where they were allegedly declared dead. The alleged Chief Minister (CM) of the alleged province along with other alleged senior law enforcement officials visited the families of the alleged victims. While there, they allegedly offered solace and allegedly promised large sums of money to the alleged victims’ alleged families. Such are news items published that refer to sectarian violence. The old explanation that news is about who, what, when and where is entirely ignored. I realise that newspapers are worried about the safety of their staff and therefore do not want to expose them to sectarian wrath or, for that matter, the wrath of those whose name cannot be spoken. Twenty-five years ago I visited Lahore and had dinner at the place of my wife’s dear friend whose husband, amongst other things, wrote a weekly column for a local newspaper, and his brother for this newspaper. The dinner had quite a few members of the press. Even though a democratic government was finally in place, I was told in so many words that out of a sense of self-preservation ‘we’ do not write against the mullahs or the army. That was twenty-five years ago and not much has changed. Even today most newspapers and news writers go around rather gingerly when there is any discussion or news that might be sort of uncomplimentary. Even I have usually avoided writing about certain subjects during the last decade. Frankly, I have had little direct knowledge about what the ‘establishment’ and the ‘instruments’ of the establishment have been up to. But some previously taboo subjects have started to become more accessible. Until a year or so ago, writing anything that might get the MQM types upset was a big no-no if you lived and worked in Karachi. Writing about the army was usually done using euphemisms like the ‘deep state’ or the ‘establishment’ but now it is quite acceptable to call a spade a spade. When the news of the head of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) being killed in a ‘police encounter’ first appeared, almost reflexively most newspapers still referred to him as the alleged head of an alleged sectarian organisation. But once everybody was sure that he had indeed gone on to meet his maker, the allegedly part started disappearing. I am sure that writing and reporting in Pakistan is indeed a dangerous proposition but one of the problems we have is that news is rarely attributed to real sources. Even a former editor of this newspaper keeps talking of his ‘bird’ that provides him with information. Personally, I avoid reading news that is not properly attributed or if the sources are anonymous. There are major stories that appear occasionally where sources are not identified. In the US, every now and then some reporter is threatened with jail time for not revealing the source of his news story. However, that usually concerns some malfeasance on the part of the government. What Pakistani news mavens do not want to accept is that innuendo and half-truths do not constitute either analysis or hard news. There are certain basic facts of life in Pakistan that can be presented again and again, and in different ways. The government is always up to some hanky-panky. The army runs Pakistan’s foreign and domestic security policy. The bureaucrats will kowtow to the whims of their political masters. The spies will keep spying. Almost anybody can be accused of corruption with some validity. The terrorists will terrorise and the sectarian outfits will attack the sects they do not like. The mullahs will do their thing and the maulanas will as always be up to no good. And, yes, Imran Khan wants to be Prime Minister (PM). The Kemalists want Mustafa Kemal Pasha to come to Pakistan after he is done with Gallipoli. The democrats want more elections, perhaps even perpetual elections, and the religious types want the country to become one big prayer group. So, as far as I am concerned, writing any of these things does not constitute news. What would be news is if Imran Khan decides that he does not want to be PM, or if some senior bureaucrat actually does something honest against the wishes of his political bosses. And, yes, it would be news if the Sharif brothers decide that building more roads is not synonymous with progress.Fortunately, I am an opinion writer and not a reporter. My job as I see it is to read and hear what is going on around me, form an opinion and present that. Here, I must admit that my two most important sources of information about real people are my driver and my cook. One of my driver’s non-driving responsibilities is to provide me with a daily synopsis of what the television news channels are talking about. He thus serves as a filter. Clearly, what does not interest him is not newsworthy in my considered opinion. I do have some ‘well connected’ friends but over the years I have found that with the exception of matters that directly concern them, they have little useful information.Essentially, opinion writers do not have the same constraints as reporters of hard news. But that does not mean that I can make serious claims about politics or people without some substantiation. For that reason I usually write about things that are common knowledge or information about them is available in the public domain. Now, back to where I started. Yes, we all indulge in some self-censorship. Living in a country like Pakistan, that is necessary. However, it seems to me that some of the constraints about ‘reportage’ have become just a little less constraining. The author is a former editor of the Journal of Association of Pakistani descent Physicians of North America (APPNA)