As Messenger Becomes the Message ...... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ May 08, 2016

As Messenger Becomes the Message, Media Must Scrutinise Itself to Retain Reliability

The media is under threat from within. It is no longer seen as a credible medium. Its messages are massacred mercilessly. Never before has its credibility and dependability been under so much scrutiny. Profanities like crooks, paid media, sponsored news brokers, and ‘bhakts’ are heaped on journalists. As competitive and confrontationist politics, coupled with valuation and TRP-driven media organisations, dictates political engagement, the entire tribe has been tarred unilaterally with the black brush of scepticism. Numerous news outfits and prominent journalists are being exposed for their coloured ideological views instead of being lauded for earth-shattering news breaks. They are known for what they speak and not by what they write. Agenda-driven opinion and biased news peddled by some of us as ‘exclusive’ or explosive stories drive the print and electronic media. This has provided political parties and their promoters tactical tools to destroy the fourth pillar of democracy. Are newspersons the most preferred targets because they are asking too many inconvenient questions? Or because some of us do not mind our own business and meddle in someone else’s?

For the past few months, it is not political leaders but the media, which has been targeted by the social media and rampant rumour-mongers to tar and test the image of the journalists as a genre. Last week, over half a million references were made on myriad Internet platforms to unnamed scribes, who are suspected to be involved in defence deals in the past few years. According to media reports, one of the journalists was called for interrogation by investigative agencies. Another is under their scanner for receiving prodigious payoff from defence dealers. The agencies are yet to come to any conclusion. By not naming and shaming the journalists, the ruling establishment and power-seekers are shifting the blame from the real culprits to the fringe players. Journalists involved in shady criminal deals should be treated at par with other suspects. By revealing their names in public interest, the profession’s credibility as a whole will be rescued from ignominious insinuations. Jurists and legal luminaries are convinced that by going public with the names of those summoned for questioning on their role in the AgustaWestland and Rafale deals would only strengthen the case of the agencies and save various institutions from becoming victims of a sinister scheme.

Defence procurements are a major source of tainted money worldwide. Many global leaders have been named in scandals involving defence deals. It’s been proved that loot stashed in tax havens was from purchasing hardly required defence equipment. Over the past four decades, a multitude of dirty deals on Bofors guns, Scorpene submarines and fighter aircraft have been exposed. Since the Congress ruled India for over five decades, most such deals were signed on its watch; hence its leaders and followers have always been perceived as the suspects or beneficiaries. As India spends over $12 billion annually on importing defence hardware and software, this provides enough scope for middlemen, senior officials and their political masters to tailor specifications according to the highest bidder’s wishes. As the market for weapons, including fabulous flying machines, grows, multinationals hustling them use sophisticated skills to influence the decision-making process in the government. Some in the media and defence analysts and security experts have become the most sought-after influence peddlers. These corporations fund a multitude of well-funded think-tanks in the US, Europe and the UK to enrol prominent journalists, opinion writers and retired defence officials as faculty members or visitors. Many of these think-tanks have opened shop in India to camouflage their real mission. According to reliable sources, the government has already started the scrutiny of Indian frequent flyers, who spread their carbon footprint to participate in seminars dealing with defence and strategic issues. The inquiry is also aimed at unearthing the financial supporters of the think-tanks to discover if the defence industry is supporting any of the big fish. Some Indian civil servants, journalists and opinion-makers have been part of these institutions for short or long durations. 

Undoubtedly, there are some bad apples in the media basket. But that doesn’t give the enemies of freedom of expression the right to kill the medium through the massive and ominous use of state machinery, corporate muscle power and a malicious whisper campaign through the social media. With the rise of trolls as the most effective agents to counter propaganda-driven dissemination of views and news, the mainstream media is under pressure to mend the way it reports news. Some of us have gone cyber-active not to give news but unpalatable views against the established political and corporate order. Once journalism was an institution, which encouraged hard news rather than advertising the faces behind it. Young journalists were told to report facts and carry both sides of a story. Now many credible civil society leaders feel that numerous journalists draw conclusions first and use convenient facts to bolster their predetermined views. Many journalists express their opinions on the social media in a way that exposes their ideological or personal predilections. Some names are associated with a leader or a party. As journalists and media owners claim to be serving the  public cause, they are entitled to all the facilities and courtesies available to other institutions performing similar responsibilities. But if the media has to retain its reliability, it has to subject itself to robust scrutiny. All mediapersons should follow the same rules and regulations, which elected representatives do. The declaration of assets, contacts, corporate and political affiliations and sources of income by leading journos and editors would definitely help in restoring the people’s faith in the profession. So far, the media had the monopoly of seeking accountability in others. Times have changed. Now readers and viewers—the real patrons of the media—are asking it to be accountable or perish.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Media Must get Rid of ..... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard / April 12, 2015

Media Must Get Rid of the Enemy Within to Fight the Hypocrisy of Political Class

Condemnation is savagery through subjectivity. Opinion is outlook of objectivity. Emotion is the alchemy that binds both. In the larger biological metaphor of history, politics and the press are twins with incompatible DNA. They are meant to be adversaries during times of conflict between public interest and political profiteering. The recent outburst of General V K Singh, the Minister of State for External Affairs, against sections of the media reflects the growing conflict between the might of the pen and the powerful politician. Enraged over negative reporting about his earlier conduct as former Chief of Army Staff, Singh continues to carry his hostility in his holster. He has coined an innovative term of abuse, ‘presstitutes’, against journalists who have been hounding him. He has perhaps forgotten that he is no longer an Army commander who can command an independent media. He pulled off a stellar performance by leading from the front in getting stranded Indians evacuated from Yemen, but he couldn’t wait for his work to speak for him.

Singh’s excessive ire has raised questions about the credibility of the cursor. More and more politicians are veering towards his opinion. The India media has been at its most fearless when it pulls on its gloves to take on the establishment. In the past decade, however, ‘media’ has become a dirty word and journalism an adjective to describe all that is rotten in the industry. With over 250 news channels, 50,000 newspapers and magazines, and websites at their disposal, almost all literate persons have become either reporters or commentators. Most of them not only contradict each other but also provide innovative versions of the same story. The perception among readers and viewers is that the media—particularly the electronic—is like a stage on which actors are performing their roles with sound and fury, signifying nothing but according to a script. Anchors have replaced reporting with rhetoric. TV panelists are asked in advance about their opinions instead of letting them evolve their views during the debate. If any of the participants don’t agree with the pre-drawn conclusions, they are dropped as panelists or aren’t allowed to express views in print or on TV. The illusion of independence was perpetuated during the last elections by TV channels, which gave hours of live coverage of political rallies without even informing viewers that the source of the feed was the parties. What is source for the goose is not sauce for the gander.

Such selective self-imposed censorship has perhaps provided a handle to Singh and his type to hit out at the media, which needs to do some introspection. In the wake of fierce competition for ‘breaking news’, regurgitating old news or stealing from other papers and labelling them as exclusives, some of us are forced to dole out novel nuggets which destroy the credibility of the truth. Let us accept that the recent sting ops have exposed the vulnerability of many journalists who try to extract information from sources by engaging them in indiscreet conversations. The recent Documentgate and earlier the Radia tapes damaged the credibility of many journalists. The leakage, however, was selective and unrelated, passed out by a few politicians and civil servants who meant to protect some journos and defame others. Then the media did not question the tapping of phones, like it is doing now. Even I have received puerile payback for speaking to Neera Radia, though I don’t mind reiterating that I would speak in the same language with her, or someone like her, if she was to call me again. There are manufactured ‘truths’ and the real truth that will prevail. Curiously, I seem to be the only journalist to put the entire conversation with Radia on my website for social scrutiny. None of the other 36, including famous and infamous names, dared do that. Incidentally, both the previous organisation where I worked and the current one carried stories on my banter with Radia. From breaking news, I became news.

The media is under much severe scrutiny now than ever. Since the public, which doesn’t own any press platform, is mounting pressure on the mainline media to speak the truth and nothing else, we have to be more transparent in our practices. We must inform the public that journalism today is a lucrative career. The average monthly salary of a mid-level journalist is over Rs 1 lakh. Some editors draw seven-figure salaries every month. But it isn’t enough to rant against morality while sipping a Macallan 18 or a glass of exclusive wine and sharing cozy club gossip about politicians they are beholden to. All of us in the media, especially the titans, must declare our assets. We should also make public the shares we bought of companies at what price and sold to whom at what price. It should be mandatory for every columnist and editor to disclose his connections with ministers and corporates, government agencies, NGOs and foreign think tanks. Even media owners should disclose subsidised land or any other benefits they got from a particular state or the Centre, and whether they have sold it accruing huge commercial gains.

Unless the media becomes more transparent than the government and big business, it will remain the target of politicians and others who subvert the system. There are clear signs of a class and corporate coalition taking shape in the media industry. Ominous signals aimed at maiming independent opinion are emanating from various parts of the country. Contrarians are hounded by the establishment. Surprisingly, such a trend was noticed years ago by social scientist Noam Chomsky. At a lecture, he said, “Those who occupy managerial positions in the media, or gain status within them as commentators, belong to the same privileged elites, and might be expected to share perceptions, aspirations and attitudes of their associates.” Journalists entering the system are unlikely to make their way unless they conform to these ideological pressures. Chomsky concluded by saying “those who fail to conform will tend to be weeded out by familiar mechanisms”.

The media needs to restore the balance between news and views, and subjectivity and objectivity. Unless it gets rid of the enemy within, it will continue to be targeted by the political class, which thrives on demolishing those who challenge its hypocrisy.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla