National

Watched On Our Watch

The media must take a hard look at how it has conducted itself

Advertisement

Watched On Our Watch
info_icon

Not since the Emergency in 1975 have I seen such a sustained and organised attack on the press. We are in a state of siege. Hardly a day passes without some functionary proclaiming a desire to impose outside control on the media. Perhaps even statutory control. The government seems poised to introduce some form of regulatory mechanism; politicians insist the media is irresponsible, often criminally irresponsible, and should no longer be treated as a holy cow. The Press Council, mandated to defend and promote press freedom, is itching to frame rules and punishment. The SC is seriously contemplating guidelines for the media to ensure a fair trial. The Lokpal activists want editors to be included in the ombudsman’s remit. We are supposed to be the watchdogs of society, so naturally our critics ask, “Who will watch the watchdogs?” In normal times, the media’s powerful constituency (readers and viewers) would have spoken in one voice denouncing those who attempt to undermine the freedom of the press. These days, I hardly hear a sound.

Advertisement

Why? Because we in the media are recklessly squandering the trust the aam aadmi has bestowed on us. The newspaper-reading and TV-watching public observes, almost on a daily basis, flagrant professional transgressions carried out casually. If the media loses public trust, as it is rapidly doing, we will have no one to turn to. We will be opening the doors for outside intervention.

Last week, at a meeting of the Editor’s Guild in Delhi, there was almost complete unanimity that the media was facing an unprecedented crisis of credibility, the like of which we have not seen since 1975. The wise journalist Inder Malhotra, sitting next to me, passed me a note which read: “If we don’t regulate ourselves, we will be regulated by force.”

Advertisement

So where is the much-promised, much-discussed self-regulation? News channels have set up a body called the National Broadcasting Association (NBA) under former chief justice of India J.S. Verma. It is too early to pass judgement on the NBA, but initial reports indicate promise. At least, the aggrieved have a forum where they can take their grievances. In the press instead, we have a non-stop talking shop where procrastination reigns supreme. I have been on, I forget, how many Editor’s Guild meetings, examined how many blueprints—yet the talking continues. As far as the press is concerned, self-regulation is always for the other guy.

Consider the monumental hypocrisy. We in the press believe we have a sacred duty to set other people’s house in order, but when it comes to our own house, we throw our hands up and say: “Freedom of the press in danger.” We are quick off the mark when politicians and public servants are caught with the slightest hint of wrongdoing. We seek their resignation. Now, if we can make all these demands from others, people surely will ask: “What about you?”

Even as the bad-tempered debate in India on how to strike a balance between press freedom and responsible journalism is raging, an instructive and riveting drama is being played out in Britain. A powerful media baron is having his nose rubbed in the dirt he and his hand-picked editors created. A parliamentary committee is investigating Rupert Murdoch and his editors, who in their obsession with agenda-setting and scoops, indulged in acts of criminality. Never before has there been such a comprehensive probe of how the media functions and what can be done when it crosses the lakshman rekha. It’s more than likely that Murdoch will be divested of all managerial and editorial control of his empire.

Advertisement

Self-regulation did not work in Murdoch’s newspapers because News International publications were wilfully blind to the means by which news was gathered. Happily, in India, things haven’t yet come to such a pass. But we are perilously close. Self-regulation is a total failure. The various ways in which the chief of army staff, Gen V.K. Singh, was sought to be discredited is too recent to be recounted. Nevertheless, it emphasises the need to move swiftly and effectively to meaningful self-regulation. I believe a new body like the Press Complaints Commission in Britain, set up by the press and funded by the press, is urgently needed to monitor the press and hold it to account. Thus, the press will be judged by the press. The naming and shaming of the offending media will serve as a deterrent for even those publishing houses who refuse to participate in the exercise. Make no mistake, this matter can no longer be put off. We journalists must demonstrate that we are sensitive to the concerns being expressed. Besides, I suggest all senior editors should make a voluntary disclosure of their assets.

Advertisement

I think Shobhana Bhartia of the Hindustan Times who simultaneously wears two hats—the proprietorial and editorial—would be the perfect person to lead such a body.

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement