|
|
|
Wither serious journalism?
The truth is that times have changed and "serious journalism" is now under challenge. Present day journalism goes even to the extent of introducing headlines in Hindi.
ARE newspapers under siege in India? That seems to be very much the case judging by the recent press reports. Recently the Karnataka High Court framed contempt charges against as many as 11 (eleven) newspapers and periodicals for publishing reports about three judges of the same Court that allegedly amounted to vilification. By the time this appears in print trials against the accused politicians in South India and they include The New Indian Express, The Times of India, Deccan Herald, Vijaya Karnataka, Kannada Prabha, Prajavani, Udayavani, Lankesh Patrike, Agni, Nota and The Week.
On March 17, the Karnataka High Court observed that neither the court nor the press was above the people but it could not accept the vilification campaign as legitimate criticism. According to the court, "the reports were published without due caution and without verification of facts" and "have scandalised the court and lowered its authority."
Furthermore, the Bench comprising Justices T.S. Thakur, H.L. Datta and V.G. Sabhahit added: "Neither judges nor the judiciary as an institution are immune from criticism, but the publications tend to suggest as though the administration of justice in this court is in weak and morally corrupt hands. When criticism goes beyond the legitimate limits and brings an institution to disrepute or ridicule, as for instance by scandalising the institution, action in contempt is not only permissible but also necessary to ensure that the confidence of the people in the constitutional mechanism provided for the administration of justice is not impaired".
Course of vilification
One awaits the judgement of the Court literally with bated breath. It is difficult to imagine eleven newspapers and journals deliberately pursuing a course of vilification of the court. The respondents, of course, have pleaded "Not Guilty".
But there is another instance in which the Tamil Nadu government has filed a third defamation complaint against The Hindu. This complaint was filed in February. The government took exception to a news article published by the paper on the transfer of the then Chief Secretary Sukavaneshwar.
The AIADMK government, it comes as a shock to learn, has so far filed a total of 22 defamation complaints against various publications including The Hindu, The New Sunday Express, India Today, Outlook, Dinakaran and Dinamalar. Dinakaran alone faces seven defamation charges. The Hindu has been slapped with three other complaints. Some upcountry dailies like The Times of India, The Statesman and The Telegraph face at least one complaint each.
It would seem that the AIADMK government is very touchy on the subject of transfer of officials. Isn't that part of the public domain and shouldn't the media have the right to question the propriety or otherwise of what is considered 'mala fide' transfers?
Then there is the case of the Kolkata-based The Telegraph which was hauled up earlier in the year by the Press Council of India for showing the bare back of a woman. The Council had initiated an inquiry 'suo moto', following the publication of the photo along with an article captioned "Desperately Seeking Susy". The Council held that the impugned picture had no relevance whatsoever to the write-up and "its primary aim seemed to be attracting the attention of the readers".
The Telegraph in its written arguments had tried to give a scientific explanation for the use of the picture, but the Council felt that the "media has to realise its responsibilities in curbing commercial exploitation of women which is most evident in the advertisement sector".
The Press Council, it would seem, does not pay sufficient attention to the kind of pictures that are these days published by a certain section of the English media. It would be a mistake to dismiss the entire English media as irresponsible. Publication of semi-nude pictures of women is confined to some four English newspapers and to date there has been no Press Council condemnation of them.
The transformation of newspapers into commodities and brands is a recent development. But the transformation was not noticed as it took place slowly, almost imperceptibly. This was accompanied by the slow downgrading of the role and status of the editor and the simultaneous 'dumbing down' and 'tabloidisation' of serious morningers. The matter was subject of some considerable discussion at a two-day national colloquium held in Chennai under the auspices of the Media Development Foundation. The truth is that times have changed and "serious journalism" is now under challenge. Present day journalism goes even to the extent of introducing headlines in Hindi. The Asian Age (March 24) thus has four headings in Hindi:
Ankola Bollywood Ka Dil Chura Lega?
Kya hua? Kaise hua? Kyon Hua?
Khel khatam, paisa hajam.
That last heading right on the front page of the paper to a story on the defeat of the Indian team at the World Cup finals. This has now become standard procedure. Hindustan Times thus had a heading which says:
Alec Smart Ko Gussa Kyon Aata Hai?
It is considered Clever-Clever. Smart. The Done Thing. The In-Thing. Just as in everyday conversation educated people not only switch from English to Hindi (or Marathi), they would also switch to Hindi right in the middle of a sentence.
Standards, we are now told, are not falling, but changing, that what was once frowned upon is now acceptable and what is more accepted.
Journalism, indeed, is changing. Sunday papers have now become a riot of colours. That again is the In-Thing. No colour, means no circulation. Take any of the major newspapers, whether it is The Times of India, Hindustan Times, Asian Age or any other.
Revenues tripled
The March 23rd issue of the Sunday Indian Express was literally swimming in colour. According to Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta, Express circulation has "more than doubled on Sundays, revenues tripled and the order-book is overflowing". The statement speaks for itself. Does colour and serious journalism go together? Writes Mr. Gupta: "There is no contradiction between good journalism and the market. Good journalism is not about boring political punditry..."
No one has asked why political punditry should be boring? The Economist has more splendid political punditry and it is not at all boring. To associate political punditry with boredom is an excellent excuse for trivialising journalism. There is a place in the marketplace for dumbed down tabloid journalism. Equally, there should be a place in the marketplace for serious journalism. Or is that too much to ask?