Radia tapes are but a glimpse of today’s journalism
Copy: 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
Intelligent Pune
(www.intelligentpune.org)
ends
