Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Analysts say the story was downplayed because it would have raised uncomfortable questions over the military's collaboration with the US, especially at a time when the army had not yet confirmed the arrest and had not formulated its public response.
Any collaboration with the US in its "war on terror" in Afghanistan has become increasingly unpopular since an elected government took power in 2008.
Some of the criticism has emanated from the military itself.
Observers feel that there would have a been an uproar in the media had the arrest taken place with the approval of the political establishment.
'Muted' Pakistan media response to Taliban arrest
Many believe that their muted response is indicative of the extent to which the Pakistani security establishment can influence the media.
'Muted' Pakistan media response to Taliban arrest
The Pakistani media's response to the arrest of top Afghan Taliban military commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar has been surprisingly muted.
Mullah Baradar was arrested near Karachi in a joint raid by the CIA and the Pakistani military's intelligence service on 8 February.
The arrest made international headlines throughout the day on Tuesday.
But Pakistani newspapers and television channels barely covered the news, with some completely ignoring it.
Analysts say the blackout was because Pakistan's government and the army are wary of being seen as an American poodle.
'Ignored'
Most newspapers on Wednesday morning relegated the story either to the lower half of their front page, or to the back page.
And all confined themselves to excerpts from the New York Times report - which broke the story on Tuesday - and the curt reactions of US and Pakistani officials.
The only exception was the Dawn newspaper which carried a detailed follow-up of the story, explaining when and where Mullah Baradar was captured - information that the New York Times report did not include.
The electronic media, which has greater outreach in a country like Pakistan with its low literacy rate, totally ignored the news except in their early morning bulletins which broadcast the news quoting the New York Times report.
There was a complete blackout of the story in all the top-of-the-hour bulletins after midday on Tuesday.
This has surprised many in Pakistan, given that a vibrant private-sector electronic media has lately shown itself to be aggressively competitive in digging up important news and follow-up stories.
Because Tuesday was otherwise a slow day for news, journalists cannot argue that they did not have enough time to examine the implications of the arrest.
Many believe that their muted response is indicative of the extent to which the Pakistani security establishment can influence the media.
The Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), which helped the CIA arrest Mullah Baradar, is widely understood to be well outside the control of the government and is more directly linked with the military.
Analysts say the story was downplayed because it would have raised uncomfortable questions over the military's collaboration with the US, especially at a time when the army had not yet confirmed the arrest and had not formulated its public response.
Any collaboration with the US in its "war on terror" in Afghanistan has become increasingly unpopular since an elected government took power in 2008.
Some of the criticism has emanated from the military itself.
Observers feel that there would have a been an uproar in the media had the arrest taken place with the approval of the political establishment.
'Muted' Pakistan media response to Taliban arrest
The Pakistani media's response to the arrest of top Afghan Taliban military commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar has been surprisingly muted.
'Muted' Pakistan media response to Taliban arrest
I have not seen anywhere in the world tanks and airforce is used on its own territory on its own people.
Part of me wants to think he engineered his own bust but I'm disinclined to go THAT FAR
Tiananmen square?? Lal Masjid??
As of four-six months ago, there was much speculation that the taliban were achieving an overwhelming military victory.
So basically according to this theory either the US and Pakistan are the best of friends now or playing each other out?THE arrest of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban's number two or three figure and perhaps its supreme military figure, depending on who you read, is "unadulterated good news", wrote the New Yorker's Steve Coll yesterday. It means Pakistan is coming around to supporting American attempts to encourage the Taliban to negotiate with the government.
Pakistan’s support for the Afghan Taliban, especially in recent years, was always best understood as a military lever to promote political accommodations of Pakistan in Kabul. Baradar, however, has defiantly refused to participate in such political strategies, as he indicated in an e-mail interview he gave to Newsweek last year. The more the Taliban’s leaders enjoying sanctuary in Karachi or Quetta refuse to lash themselves to Pakistani political strategy, the more vulnerable they become to a knock on the door in the middle of the night.
This morning, the New York Times' Carlotta Gall and Souad Mekhennet adulterated the good news a little.
(W)ith the arrest of Mullah Baradar, Pakistan has effectively isolated a key link to the Taliban leadership, making itself the main channel instead... [T]he Pakistani move could come at the expense of the Afghan government of Hamid Karzai and complicate reconciliation efforts his government has begun.
An American intelligence official in Europe conceded as much, while also acknowledging Mullah Baradar’s key role in the reconciliation process. “I know that our people had been in touch with people around him and were negotiating with him,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue.
“So it doesn’t make sense why we bite the hand that is feeding us,” the official added. “And now the Taliban will have no reason to negotiate with us; they will not believe anything we will offer or say.”
So either the Pakistanis have finally decided to stop backing Taliban military efforts as a means of enhancing Pakistani influence in Afghanistan and start supporting a negotiated settlement, or they have eliminated a Taliban leader who tried to circumvent them in cutting a deal with the Americans and the Afghan government.
Another theory. A few such number 2s and number 3s can be caught with 6 months gaps to announce American victory?Over the past decade, we've all inadvertently acquired a bit of expertise in the kind of news that comes out of the Middle and Near East. Which explanation sounds more plausible?
Michael Cohen takes Mr Coll's line, while Juan Cole is more circumspect. Most of us have little idea what the arrest of Mr Baradar signifies, but that doesn't stop us from employing the news to support our preconceptions and political agendas. (Two longstanding right-wing blogs even managed to use Mr Baradar's arrest as an excuse to restate their displeasure at the fact that suspected terrorists arrested on American soil, like anyone else arrested in America, are made aware of their constitutional rights.) Whether or not Mr Baradar's arrest actually moves America closer to "victory" in Afghanistan, however one defines that, it almost certainly moves America closer to creating the impression of having been at least somewhat victorious. That, as we are seeing in Iraq, is the major prerequisite for an American withdrawal.
Because Tuesday was otherwise a slow day for news, journalists cannot argue that they did not have enough time to examine the implications of the arrest.