मकवानपुरका मतदाताको सधैंको एउटै माग- 'घर र जमिनको पुर्जा चाहियो'. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Omission of key information

Leaving out important contextual details that would help readers fully understand the situation.

The article states: ‘मकवानपुरमा सुकम्वासी र अव्यवस्थित बसोबासीको समस्या जटिल छ,’ and mentions that commissions are dissolved or changed when governments change, but it does not provide concrete data (number of affected households, duration of the problem, specific legal framework, or examples of past attempts to solve it). It also notes that buffer zone residents must seek permission from the park for development work, but does not explain the legal basis, the park’s rationale, or any benefits residents might receive.

4 suggestions

Add quantitative context, such as approximate numbers of sukumbasi/unorganized settlers and how long they have been in this situation.

Briefly describe the legal or policy framework governing the District Land Problem-Solving Commission and the buffer zone (मध्यवर्ती क्षेत्र), including why commissions are restructured when governments change.

Include information on the national park’s stated reasons for requiring permission (e.g., conservation goals, legal obligations) and any compensation or support mechanisms for affected residents.

Mention any previous concrete steps taken by the commission or government to address the issue, and their outcomes, to give a fuller picture.

Oversimplification

Presenting a complex issue in a way that makes it seem simpler than it is, potentially omitting important dimensions.

The article frames the residents’ situation mainly as ‘निकुञ्जले दिने पीडा’ (the pain given by the park) and the need to get permission from the park for development, without exploring other dimensions such as environmental protection requirements, legal land status, or possible conflicts between conservation and settlement rights.

3 suggestions

Clarify that the issue involves a tension between residents’ development needs and conservation/legal obligations, rather than only presenting it as ‘पीडा’ caused by the park.

Add a sentence or two acknowledging that buffer zones are typically regulated for environmental reasons, and that this can create conflicts with local development needs.

Include any known perspectives from conservation authorities or legal experts to show that the situation has multiple dimensions.

Appeal to emotion

Using emotionally charged wording that may influence readers’ feelings more than their reasoning.

The phrase ‘निकुञ्जले दिने पीडा सहन नसकेर’ (unable to bear the pain given by the park) is emotionally loaded and frames the park as an active source of suffering, without presenting the park’s perspective or neutral wording.

3 suggestions

Rephrase to more neutral language, such as ‘निकुञ्जको नियम र प्रतिबन्धका कारण उत्पन्न भएको कठिनाइका कारण’ (due to the difficulties created by the park’s rules and restrictions).

Attribute the emotional characterization clearly to residents, e.g., ‘स्थानीय बासिन्दाले निकुञ्जका नियमलाई ‘पीडा’को रूपमा व्याख्या गर्दै आएका छन्’ (local residents describe the park’s rules as a ‘pain’).

Balance the emotional description with a brief mention of the park’s stated objectives (e.g., wildlife protection, habitat conservation) to reduce one-sided emotional framing.

Unbalanced reporting / Selective use of sources

Presenting mainly one side’s perspective or quoting only one type of source, which can skew perception.

The article quotes only the chair of the District Land Problem-Solving Commission and summarizes residents’ grievances. There is no direct quote or paraphrased position from the national park authorities or relevant government ministries responsible for conservation or land management.

3 suggestions

Include a response or position from the national park administration regarding buffer zone regulations and permission requirements.

Add comment from a relevant government official (e.g., from the Ministry of Land Management or Forests) explaining why commissions change with governments, or how they view the problem.

Explicitly note if attempts were made to contact park authorities or other officials and they declined to comment, so readers understand the limitation.