Radia tapes are but a glimpse of today’s journalism

My editorial in Intelligent Pune of Dec 10-16 (www,intelligentpune.org)

Radia tapes are but a glimpse of today’s journalism

When we were taught journalism two decades back by Prakash Kardaley, it was the quest

for truth, objectivity and uprightness. We were trained to be the eyes and ears of the society;

humble representatives to deliver the truth; wield the power of the pen to amplify the trial and

tribulations of the common, faceless man who is often strangulated by self-styled fiefdoms of

the executive and legislature. We were taught to use the might of the pen to question without

fear any wrong-doing by the mighty and by the powers-that-be. The editorial and marketing

departments of a newspaper office were water-tight compartments, wherein intellectual wealth

overpowered material wealth.

The recent Radia tapes exposing top brand journalists of the country has brought to the fore the

unholy nexus between mediapersons (holding important positions in newspapers/television) and

PR agencies, corporates and powerful politicians. Suddenly, the dark truth of journalism has

come out in the open. That, it is tainted, tarnished and filled with vested interest; that, journalism

is more for the interests and profits of the uncommon man than for the common good. While the

spirit of true journalism is still alive, has it generally been subverted by market forces?

The scant regard for good and hard-hitting journalism begins from educational institutes that

teach journalism. Amidst the sophisticated and exorbitant infrastructure, the foundation of true

journalism is overpowered by the glamour of acquiring skills for Public Relations (PR) and

audio-visual journalism (electronic media). Public and civic journalism is a by-the-way part of

the curriculum. The Right To Information Act (RTI) which is the most powerful tool/weapon

for a journalist today is hardly taught as a serious subject. It passes off as a couple of lecture

sessions by a guest faculty in the one or two year curriculum. There’s more accent on inviting

celebrity journalists, corporate heads, advertising gurus and organizing seminars than field work

that would teach on how information should be gathered for a story and how a journalist needs to

have his/her ears to the ground.

The `Page 3’ culture has given an impression to young journalists and young readers that the

real value in society is money, brands, lavish lifestyle, sexy clothes and partying. That, your

status in society depends on the parties you are invited too. With such loyal editorial support

what with parties being blown in full colour in newspaper pages, editors unwittingly become

of the rich and famous and find it difficult to be objective when it comes to controversies

involving them. My argument against Page 3 is this: If I am a mathematics teacher, it is my duty

to enhance the knowledge of the subject. However, if one fine day, I decide to play tambola (the

game of numbers), my students are going to be thrilled at this entertainment and tell their parents what an entertaining class it was. But am I supposed to do that? Similarly, the very priorities of journalism are to inform and to educate and in these times of corruption and scams, to take up sustained campaigns for the public good. Should we be playing an entertaining role and that too in such a colourful way? Fashion in journalism has killed its passion.

The chair of the editor has in several cases become that seat of power which loves to rock with

the influential forces of the society instead of creaking with anger at any injustice to the `Aam

aadmi.’ Partiality towards those in power in the government and in corporate to the extent of

not hesitating to publish `selective’ truth or hiding falsity or any vital information has shorn the

sheen of incisive journalism. Several times requests from the powers-that-be to go slow on any

expose overrides the publishing of hard truth procured by the journalist. Sometimes you find

abrupt end to a cause that has been taken up by a newspaper. Corporates arm twist marketing

departments of newspapers, threatening to stop giving advertisements which run into lakhs of

rupees if anything adverse is written about them. Marketing departments in turn put pressure on

editors and often the former is triumphant.

Good looking newspapers have become more important than good content newspapers. The

layout designer often dictates the rules of the game. Journalists are asked not to file more than

350-400 words so that it goes well with the look of the page, never mind if the reader yearns

to know more about a particular news item. Editors and General Managers give sermons on

how newspapers should lure opinion makers of the city to read it so that it enhances value of

the newspaper. A common man reading a newspaper is looked as `down market.’ Newspaper

surveys boast of categories who read their newspapers – accordingly advertisers decide on

releasing advertisements – if the moneyed read your newspaper, you get more advertisements

as the moneyed can buy goods. So, it’s again pressure on editors – interviewing the rich, writing

about glamour and so on. Though in reality, the rich do not want to be away from reality. Like

Sumatai Kirloskar once said to me once, ``I am not interested or impressed by knowing who

goes for which party. I would like to know real issues of my city from newspapers – why these

potholes and so on.’’ When journalism narrows down to appeasement to a certain section of the

society at any cost, its sanctity is destroyed. So, what’s left of this fourth pillar? Has it lost its

true essence?

At the core of it, the reader is the ultimate judge. He or she is intelligent and smart enough to

read between the lines. Newspapers need to understand that readers are today clamouring for the truth which is relevant, one which will upgrade the moral and living standards of the society. It’s time we in the media live up to that before readers completely reject us.

Vinita Deshmukh

Editor

ends