A Media Deficit

 A  Media Deficit

      

       The Lokpal movement of Team Anna and in fact all of us are nearing a decisive turn. Whatever happens in parliament and then to the movement onwards, the life is not going to be easy for the people from media but at the same time it may merit the attention of us to the critical analysis of the role media has played in the unfolding drama. Lot has already been said about the overdrive the live media went into in giving coverage to the agitation. But what about the print media, was the print media fair in reporting the movement? Also whether the live media truly backed the movement or just cashed on the movement to improve TRP rating? Was this media sincere, serious in reporting or just was busy creating the hype around Jantarmantar. The analysis is necessary because in the democracy the role of the media in shaping the opinion of the country which may or may not translate in the ballot boxes that can turn the polity upside down.

      Right from the beginning the print media was against the team Anna movement. I have been following at least three newspapers, all were against team Anna. I don’t remember even a single article questioning the political system that failed to pass the Lokpal bill, not the ultimate and the only solution but a step in the direction of making the corrupt accountable to their crime. The questions were never raised about the immoral, undemocratic behavior of the members of parliament be it in cash for vote scam or horse trading or not allowing the tabling of the women reservation bill. As soon as the agitation began print media was unusually sharp in suspecting the response it might possibly get from the people of India. As the movement gathered momentum, response poured in, the news papers were inundated with the articles questioning claim of the movement of being the voice of the people.

       The favorite tag almost all the print media was eager to pin was a page three middle class movement that does not represent the voice of the people who are excluded in the development. They were easily labeled as the candle wielding groups who seek solace in gathering at gateway of India for the issues not so much affecting the poor people of country. And the argument that this class claims the moral high ground in pointing the fingers at the govt. but never there, when it comes to sharing the responsibility as a citizen. They don’t vote; take it as a holiday and so on. Honestly there is some truth in it but such people are in all classes, then why target middle class. Is it because they are more aware of their rights? Better educated? It was as if the support of this class to this agitation had no echoes in the deprived class. The larger question is why they looked at the picture with so much of negativity? Why no focus on the issue? Did the presence of a particular class dilute the gravity of the corruption? Print media did not take this line.

         A closer glance at the assessment reveals the carefully crafted, blatantly painted picture of middle class that whole heartedly supported the movement. The middle class is always accused of being idle even indifferent to be on the street when it comes to the social cause. As part of the unions they are excellent in holding entire country for ransom for the perennial demand of pay hikes with minimum workload, they will burn the roads through marches but as an individual participating in a social movement is often not on the agenda. It changed when we saw the middle class outraged, mobilized hitting the streets in the Priyadarshani Mattoo murder case, then in the fight for the justice in Nitish Katara murder case. They were trend setters and the class with upward mobility started gathering at various places in metros, protesting, lighting candles in the memory of deceased in terrorist attacks. What’s wrong in this? Is it because some of them belonged to page three? Some celebrities might have had a ride on the wave of sympathy but can anybody deny the reality that it built the pressure on the system that was bent on denying the justice to these families.

        In the anticorruption movement print media first spun the web around middle class. As the support swelled they shifted the target area to preservation of democratic set up. The entire movement that was non-political was painted as being anti-democracy. Have anybody heard anything against democracy, the parliamentary system? What the men in charge there were questioning was the sincerity of the political establishment in institutionalizing a system that would rein in corruption in corridors of power. The unprecedented anger boiling in the society due to the exposure of series of scandals, the common factor being the collusion of those in power, burst at Jantarmantar. No doubt some of the rhetoric could have been avoided but the shameless approach of the establishment in condoning, looking the other way when plunder of national assets was running full swing smashed the image of political class. Why while scrutinizing the moral authority of the men in the movement, political establishment was rarely questioned?

     The assessment of the media about the middle class and the movement is open to discussion but can anybody deny that it was constructed on regressive note?  Why so anti team Anna line? Almost all the columnists, politicians as guest writers failed to appreciate the positives of the movement. Those politicians who behaved most undemocratically in parliament were eloquently writing about the traditions, sanctity of the parliament. The news papers failed to expose this duplicity. There can be no delusion about the Lokpal, not being the sole savior in this corrupt scenario but more than providing the credible alternative to the Janlokpal the govt. always seemed to be on war path or attempting to discredit the Janlokpal. Why print media was loath to comment on this? It did not challenge the political class on these anomalies. Those who jumped on the so called revelations about the members of team Anna, attempting to put them to trial in the media on frivolous charges were not put to question by the media for diverting the attention from larger and more important issue of anticorruption, and also on how those cases suddenly surfaced. Let the truth prevail but focus must not be shifted from the bill, was not the line most papers adopted.

     Why print media is so much biased against the anticorruption movement? A little peep into the business of newspaper gives a different picture. Gone are the days when newspapers were started to educate people, today its only business. Almost all news papers run with the budget of hundreds of crores. The govt. has control over paper, advertisements and also has the power to arm twist potential advertisers to reduce the revenues, may be the reason we generally don’t find anti-establishment line, moreover some big print media houses are aligned to major political parties. How can these papers take a line that is against the party their masters are affiliated to? Which news paper is ready to compromise its interests for the sake of fair projection of a crusade? This is an irreparable scene. The caution is not to form the opinion based on one news paper. We must take the second opinion but final judgment must be left to our own discretion. From paid news to planted stories to perverted opinion, the print media is all scattered, there are balanced voices but are not loudly heard.

     The live media runs on TRP. In the competition they will do all insane things to retain viewership. They are ready to go for overkill just for it. The coverage was good but the frivolity could have been avoided for it only induced the suspicion that they only wanted to build and cash on the wave of popular sentiments, leaving them open for manipulation. Apart from some serious debates and discussions I am sure all of you will agree that they failed to create an environment where people tuned to them to learn about the pros and cons of the bill. Once the die rolled in favour of team Anna they just caved in. We only saw discussion with political orientation. But the credit is definitely due to them for taking the cause to remote corners of country.

    This media is also not free from committing damaging lapses. The Radia tapes exposed the active involvement of some prominent figures in the print as well as live media in using their influence in the govt. for specific purposes obviously not the social cause. These channels are also run with the huge budgets. Apart from some respectable exceptions the overall quality of the reporting is poor, and analysis horrifying. The responsible coverage and quality analysis is terribly missing from the media. The overzealous channels resorting to breaking news of no significance, occasionally wrong, presents a funny but on more serious note damaging picture as to how we have been squandering the freedom of media bestowed upon us by our constitution.

    The new significant media is internet. It still is in infancy but has the potential of mobilizing the people as has happened in anticorruption movement. The world witnessed the role of social networking sites in revolutions in Arab world. Now the discussion has shifted to can internet shape policy? Can a leader emerge from this? It is too early to comment. In our country the internet users are growing but still they are not significant in number. There are facebook users who are freely expressing themselves sometimes even crossing the barrier of decency. We have to admit that they can spread news, share views but cannot help shape the opinion. This role can be played by bloggers.

     We have bloggers but either they are celebrities or insignificant freelancers, add to it our tendency to focus on who is writing than what is being written. A brilliant idea, interpretation may die because it came from a non distinguished writer but a tweet about a gossip may well spread like a wild fire. Our internet is used more for free expression, not much for the in depth analysis, innovative idea exchange, but it is going to change as more and more young people are using it in novel ways. Our bloggers must establish themselves as quality writers who don’t resort to copy-paste. The onus is now on those who want to use this media for writing freely. The better they write and more join them, faster the community will grow and closer we will come in exploiting the gains of free internet.  As we mature in developing a chain of bloggers for balanced analysis, forum for discussion, the situation will change. People are already using facebook not just for updating the status but also for sharing good information, rest assured quality information will also be shared. It has been proved time and again that the internet cannot be censored, it will always remain free. In India we have a media deficit; question is who is going to fill it? Are we ready to contribute to the quality information, analysis? Are we going to write freely, share generously? Are more and more writers going to occupy the e-space with analytical, critical articles? When we do we will be seriously taken by establishment. When many turn up single blogs will not be armtwisted.

We have celebrities who are bloggers but will bloggers become celebrities?

A challenge we have, are we going to stand up to it?