Why did the Prime Minister of India frown?...Because his
camera presence was hindered by his Special Protection Group commando.
What is the similarity between Rakhi Sawant and Arvind
Kejriwal?
Do aliens drink milk?
These and many other similar statements are not the excerpts
of informal conversations among friends, but are 'news clippings' and special
reports of mainstream television news channels in the current scenario.
Media is known as the fourth pillar of democracy. It is
known as the watchdog, which keeps the people informed about the social, political
and economic progress of the country. Thus, an essential feature of a
legitimately democratic polity is the freedom of the press.
Let us have a brief look at the historic role, starting from
the 19th century, played by the media in India. Rammohan Roy, the eminent
social reformer, was a prolific writer as well. He started/edited the newspapers
Samvad Kaumudi (Bengali) and Mirat-ul-akhbar (Persian) to convey his message
to the people. Similarly, Dadabhai Naoroji propagated his 'Drain Theory'—the
drain of wealth from India to England—through the print media. Even draconian
measures such as the Vernacular Press Act (1978) during the viceroyalty of Lord
Lytton could not deter the fervour of the Indian vernacular language newspapers,
some of which used innovation (such as turning themselves to English newspapers
overnight) to keep going on with their publication without breaking the law.
The persistent criticism of that legislation led to its repeal in 1881. In
1885, about one-third of the persons who attended the Bombay Session (first
session) of the Indian National Congress were journalists or writers in some
measure. The extremist Congress leader Bal Gangadhar Tilak used his newspapers Kesari and Mahratta to spread patriotism among the people. Gandhi, too, used his
journal Harijan for appealing to the masses to curb the abhorrent practice of
untouchability. The newspapers The Times of India and Hindu have been in
publication since more than a century now.
Post independence, government directives to put a check on
the freedom of the press during the internal emergency period (1975-1976) was
severely criticized by the print media, sections of which left blank spaces in
place of their editorial columns in protest; the others just closed down for
some time rather than submitting to the dictates of the autocratic government.
The post-independence period also saw the rising popularity of the radio (Akashvani)
as a mass-medium. The 'Rajiv Gandhi era' and the Rajiv Gandhi-Sam Pitroda duo
brought the communication revolution to India. The television brought into
existence the Doordarshan as another mass-medium. Prasar Bharati has been
established as a statutory body to oversee the functioning of the Doordarshan
and the Akashvani (or All India Radio). Liberalization and privatization had
its effects on the media too. The 'market forces' and the 'invisible hands' of
the free-market economy brought increased competition, better coverage and effective
check on the functioning of the government. Meanwhile, the movie industry had
made its strong presence among the masses. Movies such as Garam Hawa, Mother
India, Sangharsh, Swades, Taare Zameen Par have tried to bring various
social issues to the attention of the people.
In the present scenario, the media can be divided into print
media, electronic media, movies, and social media. Various debates, discussions,
special coverage and articles about economic policies, social issues, politics
and its various dimensions alongwith their impact on the society have played a
laudable role of informing the people about the happenings around them. There
are, however, certain issues that warrant a debate regarding the rights as well
as the duties of the media.
Control over Media:
The State control and censorship over the press has always been
a matter of debate. There is no provision in the Constitution of India that deals
exclusively with the rights of media—the Article 19 provides the freedom of speech
and expression as a fundamental right to citizens, which includes the media.
That, of course, is subject to reasonable restrictions. But what constitutes 'reasonable'
is debatable. Thus, prohibition of movie screenings (such as that of Dam 999, Vishwaroopam) in certain states on the basis of perceived hurt to the
sentiments of certain communities, which may result in a law-and-order problem,
continually becomes a matter of discussion. To decrease control of the government
over the functioning of the Prasar Bharati, the Sam Pitroda committee has
recommended the replacement of the deputationist Indian Administrative Service officers
(controlled by the Department of Personnel and Training) by expert personnel
through lateral recruitment. Similarly, the Prasar Bharati should be privatized
to a certain limit to increase its financial autonomy. This will ensure that
the motto of Akashvani—"Bahujanhitaaya Bahujansukhaaya" (for the
benefit and the joy of the multitude)—holds true to its words.
Another issue under the same heading is the corporate
control of media and whether big 'media houses' must be allowed to have their
stake in multiple formats of the media, i.e., in print media, electronic media.
The proponents of the corporate control call this as inevitable due to the requirement
of capital. The opponents, on the other hand, call it a retrograde step that
has the risk of the content presented to the people being controlled and
filtered to suit the palate and the interests of the media house owner. Paranjoy
Guha Thakurta had written an article for the Economic & Political WEEKLY
outlining this aspect. Such a control would, certainly, be detrimental to the
substantive aspect of the democracy; the consent for a particular viewpoint
would be passively generated in the form of a Gramscian common sense, wherein
no space would be allotted to the opposing viewpoint.
The corporate control of the media has one more spin-off—the
quality of the news presented to the audience. This can be seen in the sensationalization
of news items—a feature typical of the TV news channels these days. This can be
clearly observed in the case of Hindi news channels on TV. Rahul Pandita, in an
article in The Hindu, had recently written a satire on the role of the anchors
of these channels. Further, since the supply of a good provided by the
corporate sector is determined by the demand for that good (and thus the incentive
for producing that good), which is measured by the Television Rating Points
(TRP) in this case, the news that will benefit the country is many-a-time
compromised for the attention-grabbing 'Breaking News' and features such as
'Saas, Bahu aur Saazish', 'Saas, Bahu aur Betiyan'. These features only cater
to the needs of the section of the middle-class and the rich that vies for
entertainment and not serious news items, but nonetheless, has a large power to
purchase goods. Another by-product of this is the pro-urban bias of the media
and a neglect of the rural issues.
Responsible Journalism, Journalistic Bias and Media Trials:
The role of a journalist is to present a news 'as it is' and
not 'as what (s)he perceives it ought to be'. Thus, the
reportage should be free from journalistic bias. This had been explained in
detail in an article 'The Adjective Filter' written by the reader's editor of
The Hindu in 2013. According to him, the journalist should refrain from using
adjectives as much as possible because that would run the news item into the risk
of getting coloured in a certain manner. The job of forming an opinion, on the
other hand, must always be left to the reader.
Closely related to the issue of journalistic bias is the
issue of 'media trials'. Since the judiciary is the whole and sole authority to
pronounce the innocence or the guilt of a person, the media [to increase their
TRP or newspaper sales] must not sensationalize any news item for its viewers
in a manner which may project the innocence or guilt of a person on the basis
of predilection.
Paid News, Opinion Polls and Exit Polls:
Another cause of concern is the phenomenon of paid news,
which shows the negative role played by certain sections of the media in projecting
the image of a certain candidate in the elections as conducive for development
and well-being of the people.
Then, the opinion polls and exit polls need to be regulated
to a certain extent as they can have the deleterious effect of compromising the
substantive aspect of the democracy by shaping people perceptions about a
political party or a candidate. In this case, the argument that there needs to
be freedom of speech and expression for the media does not hold valid because
ultimately, free and fair elections are the precursor of a democracy which will
in turn ensure that the freedom of the press is not compromised in the future.
Social Media:
While the use of the social media (a by-product of the
mobile telecommunication revolution) has been certified by the presence of the
Prime Minister, various union ministries and police establishments on websites
such as Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, there are certain issues that need to be
taken care of. Social media stands the benefit of absence of editorial censorship
and space constraints, and the proponents of it claim that the censorship is
ascertained by 'peer review' and 'report abuse' mechanisms. Nevertheless, the
speed with which unverified content can travel to a large number of places has the
potential to create large mass congregation capable of disrupting the law and
order and of fomenting social unrest (e.g., triggering the 'Jasmine Revolution'
in Tunisia, the congregations in Tahrir Square in Egypt and in Shahbag Square
in Dhaka in 2013, the murder of a techie in Pune in 2014). Thus, people must themselves
ensure that what they are uploading on the social media is verified and
harmless content. Further, the addiction to social media through technological
appliances can cause psychosomatic disorders, mental depression, obesity, early
ageing, decreased 'real world' contact, etc.
Despite this, care should be taken by the state not to
misuse the Section 66A of the Information Technology Act (2000) to put unintentional
acts under the ambit of criminal laws (as in the case of two girls in
Maharashtra in 2013).
As I come to the end of this essay, I ask a question—who is
going to keep a watch over the watchdog of democracy? Clearly, press censorship
should be resorted to in the rarest of rare cases as otherwise that amounts to keeping
the sentinel under the custody of the guarded. However, if the healthy role of
the media is applaudable, the irresponsible role played by the media at certain
times is equally deplorable. The media-persons need to stick to the ethics of
journalism so that the media gets the same credit as is enjoyed by the Election
Commission and the Supreme Court among the people of India.
