Anil
Sinha
A media which is subservient to the establishment and the market can not remain honest and neutral. It is bound to become dishonest and partisan. How can you expect it to work without profit? And profit could include whole range of benefits from advertisement to contracts. Many things which were earlier more collateral benefits for media houses have now become part of their commercial operation. We need to evolve a new model of media operation if we want media to play its required role in our democracy.
The
legal battle between Navin Jindal and Zee TV has exposed weaknesses with which India has been
infested since long. Jindal called a press conference to say that two senior
journalists, Sudhir Choudhary and Samir Ahloowalia from Zee TV demanded
advertising commitments of Rs. 100 crore over five years for suppressing
news related to alleged involvement of Jindal Steel and Power Limited(JSPL) in
coal-block allocation scam. Jindal arranged a sting as the purpose of journalists’
visit was known to them.
Mumbai
High Court has already issued notices to Zee Tv owner Subhash Chandra and the
two journalists who had gone to visit JSPL’s officials allegedly to
negotiate the deal. Zee has filed a suit of defamation for trying to
bribe his editors and releasing a doctored video of the conversation between
Jindal’s officials and editors to defame the channel
Both
the sides aggressively pleading in favor of their respective
versions of the same incident. Jindal has also filed a police case
which means there would be a police investigation into the case and the
government machinery would be involved. It is clear that Jindal is relying on
his money and political power to fight against the channel. On the other hand,
the channel is relying on nuisance value media enjoys. In my view, the battle
could expose only a part of the disease Indian media has chronically been
infested with.
Those
who know Jindal are aware how he manages media in Chhattisgarh and elsewhere. I
was in Raipur
with Jansatta and have seen his style of functioning. No media can go against
him. He manages it effectively and in this case he might have tried the same.
Here is every possibility that they were negotiating some deal which could not
materialize due to some obstinacy on either part
I
wish to suggest that it is pointless to attempt a probe whether Zee tried to
extract an advertising commitment or Jindal attempted to bribe the channel.
There is no point in it. Both the things have similar consequences, the news
would be compromised
We
seem to have forgotten Radia controversy. Editor of Hindustan Times Vir Sanghvi
and NDTV’s Barkha Dutt were recorded assuring Radia they would help
her to snatch a favor for her company. Even by risking their credibility, both
the media houses did nothing against two erring journalists. Do we need to
explore the reason? It is clear that they had been working for their houses and
must be aware of wrongdoings by their masters. How come their masters would
have acted against these journalists
We
have already Press Council’s report on paid news and we know how newspapers and
channels have been working to subvert elections by planting fabricated news. It
will be hypocritical on the part of media-persons if they show ignorance of
what is going under the garb of producing news. After all four media houses wee
found involved in coal block allocation scam. Do we need any imagination to
understand that these media houses were doing something which does not fall
within the purview of the profession we call journalism
It
is well known that, in recent years, journalists with extra-journalistic
capabilities have risen to unexpected heights. Some of them have themselves
become owners of media houses. Only few newspapers are there who really care for
ethics. It means that some thing is being done in the name of media which is
much more remunerative than the simple professional work.
I
have heard defenders of the current state of affairs in media. One among such
arguments has been that Indian media has been depoliticized and has grown
to become more professional now. They say how in earlier times speeches of
prime ministers and presidents made news and were getting high priority over
other news. I would like to remind that those were also the days when even
interviews of Naxal leaders like Kanu Sanyal , Satyanarayan Singh
or Vinayan were getting due importance in newspapers. This shows
that media was not towing government lines. Now naxalies are termed criminals
and policemen fighting against them with all the illegal means at their hands
are being termed as martyrs. The state is waging war against its own people,
and media is supporting it. This convergence of ideas and purpose certainly
takes us to a terrain where no democracy could survive. Both the state and
media have connived to submit to the wishes of market
A media which is subservient to the establishment and the market can not remain honest and neutral. It is bound to become dishonest and partisan. How can you expect it to work without profit? And profit could include whole range of benefits from advertisement to contracts. Many things which were earlier more collateral benefits for media houses have now become part of their commercial operation. We need to evolve a new model of media operation if we want media to play its required role in our democracy.
