Fredrica Jans says...
"After the story broke, instead of flatly denying the allegation or threatening journalists the government began to portray Fonseka’s allegation as an act of treachery. The story of the massacre was irrelevant. What mattered was that by speaking out Fonseka was betraying Gotabaya, the army and the country.
We believe the outcry that followed the story was to a large extent the result of an orchestrated campaign.
A government backed campaign to publicise particularly in Sinhala, a distorted version of the story, and present the General as a traitor. The objective behind the campaign was to convince the General that his accusations were eroding his popularity and to force him to back down in the interest of winning more votes."
"After the story broke, instead of flatly denying the allegation or threatening journalists the government began to portray Fonseka’s allegation as an act of treachery. The story of the massacre was irrelevant. What mattered was that by speaking out Fonseka was betraying Gotabaya, the army and the country.
We believe the outcry that followed the story was to a large extent the result of an orchestrated campaign.
A government backed campaign to publicise particularly in Sinhala, a distorted version of the story, and present the General as a traitor. The objective behind the campaign was to convince the General that his accusations were eroding his popularity and to force him to back down in the interest of winning more votes."
