JUSTICE KATJU- MEDIA ETHICS DEBATE ‘Every particle is in a condition of half night’

topographic map of India

Image via Wikipedia

Nirupama Subramanian in The Hindu

Justice Katju’s criticism has triggered a welcome debate and introspection in the media but it is also expected of the Press Council chairman to take a more nuanced view of the complex terrain before him.

A Pakistani columnist once asked me: “What is it with you all? You claim to have a free media and yet, when I was in Delhi last year, it took me less than 15 minutes to run through some six or seven papers. They’re full of trivia. There’s nothing to read in them, not even on the front pages.” His words came back to me after Justice Markandey Katju‘s outburst against Indian journalism. It is not just the two of them either.Some months ago, a well-known Delhi-based Bharatanatyam dancer told me how “sad” she felt about the Indian media scene. She was an aggrieved party: “I cannot understand this,” she said, “no paper will review my performances. They have all done away with their review pages. Yet journalists call me all the time to find out what my favourite restaurant is, or what my favourite food is. There is an excessive focus on me, and none on my work.”

Let’s face it: plenty of journalists too would agree that both Indian electronic and print media are obsessed with celebrity and trivia and are given to sensationalism. In fact, journalists have long been concerned — much before the Press Council chairman voiced his criticism — about the amount of journalistic energies and space/time devoted to the coverage of fluff, and the shallow treatment meted out to what Justice Katju described as the “real” issues.

The impulse to dumb down is only increasing under the pressure of 24×7 news cycles, and as the competition to snare young readers and viewers grows. On television, all news is spectacle, and even the irrelevant gains importance as ‘breaking news.’ I remember switching on the television in my hotel room in Jaisalmer some years ago, to be greeted by this important Breaking News: “Jail mey karva chauth” — a report about women prisoners celebrating this north Indian festival of wifely piety.

Journalists get constantly told by those who claim to know better to ‘lighten up,’ that Indian readers are getting younger, they have short attention spans, and they do not want to read gloom and doom stories about India not shining; if these stories have to be covered, they must be delivered to these attention-deficit readers/viewers in bite-sized pieces; coverage must be about personalities, even if about politicians; the coverage must cater to young, aspirational India’s race for upwardly mobile lifestyles rather than the multiple crises in the country, even if these crises will ultimately work towards thwarting those very aspirations.

So bring in the beautiful people, go easy on farmers’ suicides and rural employment generation. In this model, science journalism cannot get more cerebral than whether mobile phones give you cancer; international news would ideally feature breaking up — or breaking down — teenage pop stars, film stars, and supermodels, and the Jasmine Revolution would fare better as a new line of perfume, and Arab Spring a brand of sparkling mineral water that Angelina Jolie drinks on her UNHCR trips.

“This is what young people want today” is the market mantra. If that is correct, and we do not know that, the question is, as media — presuming that media are a substantially different entity from a fizzy drink — do we lead our ‘consumers,’ or should we allow ourselves to be led by what sections of these consumers consider ‘boring’ or ‘interesting’? Steve Jobs, whose market strategies are much admired by the pundits, is said to have nursed a healthy disrespect for market research, saying “customers don’t know what they want until we’ve shown them.”

Dumbing down aside, in the past couple of years, the gory stories of media corruption, paid news, and the Radia tapes controversy have all taken the sheen off Indian journalism.

Yet I find myself disagreeing with Justice Katju’s broad swipe. It is easy to tar the entire media with one broad brush of criticism. But not all journalists are the same, just as not all judges are the same. There are many journalists who are doing exactly what Justice Katju thinks journalists should be doing, and they are not necessarily all high-profile. It also needs to be said that the media have made a lot more positive contribution than they are given credit for. Much of the corruption that has come to light over the last one year, all the scams that are currently churning the Indian polity, would have gone unnoticed had it not been for exposés by news organisations. Just in the last year, the government has had to sack Cabinet Ministers and Chief Ministers in response to the great 2G heist, the CWG and the Adarsh scams, all of which were unearthed by the media.

We are living through a complex period of economic, social and demographic change. Even Justice Katju, in an article inThe Hinduon the media that was a forerunner to his interview with Karan Thapar on CNN-IBN‘s Devil’s Advocate programme, quoted his favourite Firaq Gorkahpuri couplet to make this point:Har zarre par ek qaifiyat-e-neemshabi hai, Ai saaqi-e- dauraan yeh gunahon ki ghadi hai. Translating this literally as “every particle is in a condition of half-night; it’s a time of sin,” Justice Katju spoke of the pains of living through an era of transition.

It is a nice thought that the media must separate themselves from the flux in which they exist, but the truth is that the media, and the people who work in them, are also a reflection — a snapshot — of society at any particular time. My Pakistani columnist friend who complained about the lightness of Indian newspapers is used to the steady high-fibre fare of strategic and political analyses offered up in the Pakistani papers. But that is a reflection of Pakistan’s country situation.

India’s situation is a bit more mixed than that. For that reason, any newspaper or television channel has the challenging job of accommodating a wide variety of interests, and there is no point being in denial about this. At one end is the need to cater to a mass of people who seem to be on an endless buying spree, from cars to clothes and everything in between; at the other, the need to remind them that there are people who cannot buy even one square meal a day. The challenge for media organisations is to get the mix right, without compromising on the essentials of journalism. The world’s best newspapers (not necessarily the ones with the largest circulation) are the ones that have mastered this mix.

For instance, the visit of the Pakistan Foreign Minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, excited much criticism that the coverage focussed more on her looks, clothes, Birken bag, and her glasses than on the substance of her discussions with her Indian counterpart, S.M. Krishna. From a reporter’s perspective, when a Minister of a country with a worse Human Development Index than yours lands at your airport with a $10,000 handbag, pricey shades, and “classy pearls,” it is bound to attract media comment. This is not trivialising news. It is news. The criticism that the coverage of her film star looks was excessive and breathless may not be misplaced. But there is nothing startlingly wrong if a newspaper’s fashion reporter dissects the pearls, and a foreign affairs reporter covers the substance of the visit, as most mainline newspapers did.

Yes, it is true that journalists could be better informed about the subjects they cover, and could be possessed of more general knowledge. But that is more a commentary on our education system than on journalism itself. Some of the best journalists may not know their Shakespeare or Emile Zola, but that has not been known to affect the quality of their work.

It must also be said in defence of my tribe that journalism is far more open to criticism than some other professions. Who can criticise the judiciary this way and get away with it? Partly, this is in the nature of the work we do — the ‘product’ of our labour and its authors are out there in the public realm, for everyone to evaluate. There is no hiding.

Journalism may lack a capacity for introspection, though that too is not entirely true. But there is absolutely no doubt that outside regulation, such as by using government advertisements as a weapon against media organisations as Justice Katju suggests, is dangerous. It is already used by the government to silence media criticism, and it is hardly a solution that one would expect someone of Justice Katju’s calibre to come up with. To the extent his comments have triggered debate and introspection in the media and jolted us out of smug back-slapping complacency, he has made a positive contribution. But it is also expected of the chairman of the Press Council to separate himself from Everyman, and take a more nuanced view of the complex terrain before him.

SOURCE:  http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article2630733.ece

Advertisements

JUSTICE KATJU – MEDIA DEBATE : Bring electronic media under Press Council

PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU

Writes to Manmohan Singh seeking more teeth to council

Press Council Chairman Markandey Katju has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh suggesting that the electronic media should be brought under its purview and should be given “more teeth.”

“I have written to the PM that the electronic media should be brought under Press Council and it should be called Media Council and we should be given more teeth. Those teeth would be used in extreme situations,” Justice Katju told Karan Thapar on CNN-IBN’s Devil’s Advocate programme. Mr. Katju said that he had received a letter from the Prime Minister that his letter had been received and “they are considering it.” The former Supreme Court judge said he had also met Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj and that she had told him probably there will be a “consensus.”  Mr. Thapar had asked Mr. Katju whether he was seeking more teeth for Press council.

More powers to PCI

“I want powers to stop government advertisement, I want to suspend license of that media for a certain period if it behaves in a very obnoxious manner, impose fines,” Mr. Katju said while maintaining that all these measures would be used only in extreme situations.

On if these measures would not threaten the freedom of the media, he said, “Everybody is accountable in a democracy. No freedom is absolute. Every freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions. I am accountable, you are accountable, we are accountable to the people.”

Media regulation

Mr. Katju said that he thought TV debates were “frivolous”, and there is no discipline among panelists. “It is not a shouting contest,” he opined.  He also spoke about how he thought things could be changed. “There must be some fear in the media,” he said, quoting Tulsidas’ Ramcharitmanas that ‘bin bhay hot na preet’ Mr. Katju said, “I have a poor opinion of the media” and added that “they should be working for the interest of the people. They are not working for the interest of the people and sometime they are positively working in an anti-people manner.”

He said, “Indian media is very often playing an anti-people role. It often diverts the attention of the people from the real problems which are basically economic. “80 per cent people are living in horrible poverty, unemployment, facing price rise, health care (problems)”. “You (media) divert the attention from those problems and instead you project film stars and fashion parades as if they are the problems of the people,” he said. “Cricket is an opium of the masses. Roman emperors used to say if you cannot give the people bread give them circuses. In India send them to cricket if you cannot give the people bread,” Mr. Katju told Mr. Thapar.

The Council Chairman said, “Whenever bomb blasts take place, in Bombay, Delhi, Bangalore, within a few hours almost every channel starts showing an e-mail has come or an sms has come that Indian Mujahideen has claimed responsibility or Jaish-e Mohammed or Harkat-ul-Ansar or some Muslim name.”

“You see e-mail or sms…any mischievous person can send but by showing it on TV channels you are in a subtle way conveying the message that all Muslims are terrorists and bomb throwers and you are demonising the Muslims…99 per cent of people of all communities are good people,” Mr. Katju said. “I think it is a deliberate action of the media to divide the people on religious lines and that is totally against the national interest,” he said. Mr. Katju said that India was in a transitional period moving “from feudal agricultural society to a modern industrial society. This is a very painful and agonising period in history. When Europe was going through this period, media played a great role.

“In Europe, great writers like Rousseau, Voltaire, Thomas Paine, Junius, Diderot helped. Diderot said that man would be free when the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest,” he said. During the interview, Mr. Katju said, “Here the media promotes superstition, astrology. 90 per cent people in the country are mentally very backward, steeped in casteism, communalism, and superstition and so on.” He said, “Should the media uplift them to a higher level and make them a part of an enlightened India or should the media go down to their level and perpetuate their backwardness?”

The former Supreme Court judge said, “Many TV channels show astrology which is purely humbug.” In response to another query, he said that though he respected certain individuals in the media, in “general the rut is very low, I have a poor opinion of media people. I don’t think they have knowledge of economic theory, political science or literature or philosophy.” He said, “People need modern scientific ideas but the reverse is happening.”Citing an instance, Mr. Katju said that “the photograph of a high court judge was shown next to the photograph of a notorious criminal for two consecutive days” on a TV channel. Mr. Katju, who had been a high court judge, said the channel had done a story on baseless allegations against an upright judge. “You condemn a corrupt person I am with you but why should you condemn an honest person.”

Mr. Katju said, “I have a poor opinion of the media” and added that “they should be working for the interest of the people. They are not working for the interest of the people and sometime they are positively working in an anti—people manner.”

He said, “Indian media is very often playing an anti— people role. It often diverts the attention of the people from the real problems which are basically economic. “80 per cent people are living in horrible poverty, unemployment, facing price rise, health care (problems).”

“You (media) divert the attention from those problems and instead you project film stars and fashion parades as if they are the problems of the people,” he said.

“Cricket is an opium of the masses. Roman emperors used to say if you cannot give the people bread give them circuses. In India send them to cricket if you cannot give the people bread,” Katju told Thapar.

The Council Chairman said, “Whenever bomb blasts take place, in Bombay, Delhi, Bangalore, within a few hours almost every channel starts showing an e—mail has come or an sms has come that Indian Mujahideen has claimed responsibility or Jaish—e Mohammed or Harkat—ul—Ansar or some Muslim name,” he said.

“You see e—mail or sms…any mischievous person can send but by showing it on TV channels you are in a subtle way conveying the message that all Muslims are terrorists and bomb throwers and you are demonising the Muslims…99 per cent of people of all communities are good people,” Katju said.

“I think it is a deliberate action of the media to divide the people on religious lines and that is totally against the national interest,” he said.

Media for development

Mr. Katju said that India was in a transitional period moving “from feudal agricultural society to a modern industrial society. This is a very painful and agonising period in history. When Europe was going through this period, media played a great role.

“In Europe, great writers like Rousseau, Voltaire, Thomas Paine, Junius, Diderot helped. Diderot said that man would be free when the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest,” he said.

During the interview, Mr. Katju said, “Here the media promotes superstition, astrology. 90 per cent people in the country are mentally very backward, steeped in casteism, communalism, superstition and so on.” He said, “Should the media uplift them to a higher level and make them a part of an enlightened India or should the media go down to their level and perpetuate their backwardness?” The former Supreme Court judge said, “Many TV channels show astrology which is purely humbug.” In response to another query, he said that though he respected certain individuals in the media, in “general the rut is very low, I have a poor opinion of media people. I don’t think they have knowledge of economic theory, political science or literature or philosophy.”

He said, “People need modern scientific ideas but the reverse is happening.” Citing an instance, Mr. Katju said that “the photograph of a high court judge was shown next to the photograph of a notorious criminal for two consecutive days” on a TV channel.

Mr. Katju, who had been a high court judge, said the channel had done a story on baseless allegations against an upright judge. “You condemn a corrupt person I am with you but why should you condemn an honest person.”

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2582746.ece