by VJ » Thu Mar 04, 2010 5:46 pm
I quite commend the fullhyd team for this initiative. The problem is serious indeed. However, it brings up too many concerns at one go and demands, for its resolution, introspection on the part of citizens - each one of us - too.
There are three entities here.
1.Reporter
2.News channel
3.Viewer
Reporter: lacks in sensibility to report accurately, courage to report impartially, and the restraint to not pass inferences as facts. One of the biggest challenges for accurate reporting is information asymmetry. How many reporters are taught about this? All he cares for is the byline, an impressive add to his CV, a pat from his boss, an encouraging appraisal, and to wake up the next morning with his job intact. The boss is as anxious and concerned about his job. Effectively, they exploit their copywriting, articulation and filmmaking skills to hype any event that has scope for sensationalism. In short, they "make" news and broadcast. Mavericks are, let's be honest, very very few in number. Vinod Mehta, one of the very few upright chaps in media, admits that objective journalism is dead. Reporters believe that cracking a sensational story is the shortest route to success in their career. And when we ourselves think, driven by the need for security, that it's sensible to rather conform than to put the job at stake when it comes to it, how do we stop such reporters from conforming?
Nonetheless, it'd be better if reporters value accuracy, impartiality and fairness.
News channel: marketing-driven rather than content-driven. Operates like any other business house. Profit is its objective. News has been reduced to entertainment. Varma's latest flick Rann gives good insights into how the media houses run. An absolute sorry state of affairs, but that's what we have. How do we make them realise their primary responsibilities? Are they open to it at all? As one of the readers rightly mentioned, the obsession with "exclusive" footage was taken to an unhealthy level during 26/11. The news channels actually helped the terrorists by airing the footage live! And, curiously, it took a foreign documentary filmmaker to research the "behind the scenes" role of media! What hope can we have?
Doordarshan still does good reporting. But how many of us watch DD!!? We like conspiracy theories, and the shameless news channels give us the same. So, shouldn't we also reflect how harmful our viewing habits are?
Viewer: the end user. The consumer. You and I. Prefers to watch everything "live". Readily believes in conspiracy theories (it's useless to deny this, for it's just too obvious). He is the one who actually spreads the news by word of mouth. He hypes the event himself, when he reports it to another! It's another matter that he refuses to see or admit this (just like the reporter or the news channel do, too). Enjoys watching (although it sound unbelievable, sad news also contribute to enjoyment!) the crap and gets back to another anxious day in his life.
So, frankly, who cares!?
I hope, though, that whoever has taken part in this discussion is earnest in his stand and genuinely seeks a more responsible media and, importantly, also realises his own responsibility.
I quite wish this campaign makes a significant impact (given that media are too careless and irresponsible to hear the voice of the people).