Media in times of anarchy

Media in times of anarchy

This is the kind of event that brings back the debate about the nature of Indian democracy and the role media can play in it.  The case of encounter killings in Andhra Pradesh and the polarity of opinion reflected in the media....

Posted on The Hoot on Sunday, Dec 21 21:51:54, 2008

The dust still hasn't settled on the Mumbai attack and its aftermath. But life goes on and Telugu media are on to another round of shocking events. This time it is terror against young women. According to reports in media, Shakamuri Srinivasa Rao (25), Potharaju Hari Krishna (24) and Bajjuri Sanjay (22), degree students of Masterji College, were arrested 48 hours after an acid attack on two engineering students, K. Swapnika and T. Praneetha. One of the victims is in danger of losing her sight and both are battling for life. Rao had a known history of threatening Swapnika, burning her father's (an ex-serviceman) bike. No help came forth from the local police despite repeated pleas from the parents of Swapnika, as the perpetrator is the son of an influential builder. The Superintendent of Police V. C. Sajjanar said the trio admitted to having committed the crime. The SP said the three were caught around 4 pm and would be produced in a court soon. But a day later (13 December 2008), the channels are agog with the news that the police (in 'self-defense') killed the three arrested men in an encounter. A former Police Chief (Mr P Ramulu) asserts on television that the police were well within their 'right to kill'. 'No case' in such instances. This is the kind of event that brings back the debate about the nature of Indian democracy and the role media can play in it. Unfortunate as the whole sequence of events is, the electronic media launched into their saturation coverage: at the homes of the girls who are the original victims and later the homes and encounter site of the men killed by the police. One got to see public filing past the dead men's bodies at the encounter site, with the police standing by. ETV2, TV5 and TV9 gave sound bites of the police, interviews with politicians, coverage of scenes at the homes and neighborhoods of the affected, and sound bites of the human rights activists. Each of the groups was deeply conscious of the importance of media in taking their views to the larger constituency. Quickly within minutes of the encounter killings, a polarity of opinion emerged. One, that of people who believed in the rule of law and more importantly, the duty of the state agencies to respect the rule of law; the other, man-on-the-street reactions from the friends of the victimized girls, which began to praise the swift closure the police brought to the crimes against the girls. The channels also showed people burning crackers and offering pedas to the police in celebration of the 'encounters'. Now, what are the media expected to do in instances of this kind? It is their job to reflect public opinion that is baying for blood and revenge, and it is also their responsibility to give adequate play to the voices of sanity - that of human rights activists like Dr Balagopal and Lok Satta chief, Dr Jayaprakash Narayan. For a change, the channels have shown remarkable maturity by highlighting the various dimensions of the issue in equal measure. The media after all need to reflect what they see on the ground to the viewer. The problem in such instances is with what they see on the ground: ... They see a terrified family which did not get any help after repeated requests; the local police who chose to ally with the local goons; when public opinion turned in an election year, the state that allowed the police to kill the arrested men with impunity, therefore allowing the rule of law to be undermined, and in the process covering up their complicity in the original crimes against the young women; the police that emerged once again as a deeply criminalized force that has the complete support and protection of our lumpen polity; the usual noises about enquiries that are being made; a state minister who is courageous enough to say that the 'encounter' satisfies public sentiment;  a home minister who is challenging those who question to prove wrong-doing on part of the police. The media have done their job bringing all this and more to us, blow-by-blow. Only the nature of packaging sometimes puts different kinds of emphasis on different items. For instance, every time the theme begins, they will have a gory graphic splashed in red/yellow/orange, recapping the events in detail to the accompaniment of filmy music. Dead bodies are repeatedly shown satisfying the prurient curiosity of the viewer. Screaming, posturing kin gesticulating to the cameras complete the picture in a gut-wrenching display of the uncontrolled passions ruling our society. What more can one want? It's like watching a hit Telugu film. Paisa vasool. As an add-on, ETV2 got a large number of girl students to roundly applaud the encounters. While the other channels did show similar bites in brief, the ETV2 anchor concluded that 'whatever anyone has to say, a large number of people wanted the men put to death'. The highlight was, of course, the grievously injured girl (from her hospital bed) expressing satisfaction that the men are killed by the police. First a graphic account of her intense suffering and then her endorsement of the police action, in her own words. In contrast, the sane voices of the human rights activists pale before the drama of the rest of the coverage. We, the so-called civil society, tolerated anarchy and absence of rule of law that we see today when it hit political groups beyond the pale, like the Naxalites. The systematic rigging of evidence and falsification of encounters is ok if the police label someone as an extremist through the media. No further evidence is necessary. It satisfies public sentiment. According to television news reports shown on the day, in a horrifyingly primitive manner, the same Warangal police in an earlier encounter put the severed head of a man on display at a public place to make an 'example' of him.  One would not have believed that the 'law and order' machinery of the state could do this, in 21st century India that has ambitions of being the next superpower on the world stage, if one did not see the footage. Dare we even claim to be a democracy? Somewhere along the way, the state institutions in Andhra Pradesh, with active collusion of the media built a consensus against the views of human rights activists. It is anti-national to question the abuses of state power. Today there is a pervasive environment of abuse of state power that appears to be beyond anyone's control. The political leadership itself is from among lumpen elements who don't set much store by democratic ideals. In large parts of the state of Andhra Pradesh, under successive governments, anarchy was allowed to thrive. The state machinery has been systematically abused and corrupted by the criminalized polity for its own gain, to the neglect of the day-to-day needs of the law-abiding citizen. More specifically, Andhra Pradesh leads the country in the number of crimes committed against women and ranks second in the country for cognizable offences against women, as per the 2007 statistics of the National Crime Records Bureau. Over the years, there have been several sensational cases (Pratyusha, Balakrishna, Ayesha) involving film stars and other powerful people where media have given extensive coverage but ended up without any outcome. Media coverage or not, netas stood watch to ensure that their kin are protected from any answerability to law. Today, some of the worthies involved in those cases are either leading political campaigns or are supporting political parties. The electronic media avidly follow their careers and their twirling of mustaches and slapping of thighs in challenge at roadshows. Rarely does one see the electronic media revisiting the past of the netas who want to rule us come next election. True, without electronic media one would not get to put a face to the victim and to the bluster and falsehoods of authority. But will this daily display of the powerful getting away with murder not erode our faith in democracy? In this case, the state swung from complete dereliction of duty to complete violation of human rights and the public opinion swung from antipathy to hero worship of the police. The coverage in this instance appeared to be balanced, but the 'public opinion' showcased on television chose to applaud the lawlessness of the state. If true, this is a classic case of Gramscian hegemony at work where the victim voluntarily accepts what is detrimental to him/her. When a complex web of influences are tearing apart the social fabric, can television news alone be blamed for holding a mirror to it? May be not. But television news certainly can use the events to stir the civic consciousness of the viewer by providing well-calibrated coverage for greater social good. In this instance, perhaps by refraining from embellishing the news with additional packaging, curtailing live coverage of unbridled responses and sobering the tone of coverage to give the saner voices a chance. Interestingly, a day after the encounters, two channels, TV5 and TV9, turned off the heat completely and moved on to other stories. It is ETV2 that is doing follow ups. ETV2 is doing follow ups on the story, but it is the sudden silence of the other channels that is strange.

When the going gets tough....

When the going gets tough ...

Anchors on NDTV have been pushing viewers to invest. One is not sure if there is conflict of interest in such advice from ESOP holders in a listed media company...

Posted on The Hoot on Monday, Oct 27 22:43:22, 2008

It will not be an exaggeration to say that NDTV taught India how to do television news in style. The reporters and anchors of the channel remain iconic to this day and those who left have become celebrities in their own right on other channels. The channel has credibility in public perception.One watches the channel for authentic coverage of all major events. The economic melt down happens to be one such event. As can be expected, from the first day when the events began to unravel in US and Europe, the channel carried news items, discussions on news bulletins with experts, specials after news bulletins, Big Fights and more recently an interview with the Governor of the Reserve Bank. One is not an economist, even so one has felt unease at some of the anchoring. From the earliest moments  of the recent Indian stock market crash, two NDTV anchors, Vikram Chandra and Shivnath Thukral, kept encouraging the viewer to go and invest in the market, that it is the right time to pick up low-priced stock. One is not sure if there is conflict of interest in such reporting, considering two facts: 1. NDTV stock which was selling at Rs 511 or so a year ago now has fallen to Rs 94.50 or so; 2. NDTV has given generous employees stock options (ESOPS) over the years. One does not know if this continues to be true. If this is true, this kind of market promotion firmly in the conflict of interest zone. In the interview with the Governor of RBI too, the anchor did his best to push Dr Subba Rao into committing some policy sop for those 'who are affected', repeatedly saying that the market is not satisfied with the piecemeal measures taken by the government and more 'substantial bailout' is required. Dr Rao, however, was firm and clear in what the government was attempting to do. After about a week, when the Reserve Bank has taken some measures to stabilise the economy, a new issue is picked up by the channel - the need to invest pension funds in the stock market. The big fight and interview with Farooq Zakaria, and every other opportunity was used to raise this issue. The big fight debate (25 October) reiterated 'we don't want some bureaucrat to manage our money' while looking to the state to salvage the situation and complaining that the state is not doing enough. The debates seem to be still relentlessly fuelled by the LPG (liberalization, privatization, globalisation) framework. The token CITU man barely got a chance to put his point forth. While once again confessing that one is not an economist, it appears quite strange that the channel pushes for a hotly contested issue that involves the hard-earned savings of poor people who have struggled to make ends meet in low-end jobs. The least they can hope for is the right to decide where and how their money is invested. The fate of pension funds in the United States is well known after the collapse of Enron and now the recent meltdown. The present crisis is also declared at the end of the Zakaria interview, more dangerously, as 'a crisis of democracy and not a crisis of capitalism'. Implying wistfully, if India is armed with dictatorial powers it would find it easier to implement the 'much needed' anti-people policies. Critics say that 'financialization' of the world economy is at the root of the present crisis. Greta Krippner of the University of California, Los Angeles, refers to 'financialization' as a "pattern of accumulation in which profit making occurs increasingly through financial channels rather than through trade and commodity production."  (Emphasis mine.) RGerald A. Epstein discusses the narrower use of the term by some scholars as 'the ascendancy of "shareholder value" as a mode of corporate governance; or the growing dominance of capital market financial systems over bank-based financial systems'. At the time when US economy began to unravel, close to 80% of its economy was of this kind. The globalisation process has exported the problem to other shores. The several debates could have perhaps focused on the neglect of productive sectors of the economy and pandering to the speculative sectors. There is complete silence on the activities of some of the major players who led the trend aggressively over the years and were instrumental in pushing for major policy shifts. None of the 'experts' are held accountable for their single-minded pursuit of such policies. The unapologetic 'market fundamentalists' who appear on show after show, have been advocating the need to take the financial reforms further (euphemism for more of the same policies that caused the crisis in the first place) with better regulation. In the popular BBC comedy show "Goodness Gracious Me!", a Buddhist monk arrives on a pest control mission at a flat, takes out a bonsai bodhi tree from his sack and proceeds to meditate in front of the rat-hole to convince the mice not to be such difficult pests! One could argue that if one did not like what was being dished out, why not just change the channel? But that would not be the solution, as our entire collective fate often seems to rest with the corporate media and their unprecedented ability to set the policy agenda of the state. The anchors are on first name terms with the central ministers. The politicians, with few exceptions, appear to defer to the media persons. The issue here does not seem to be so much as moulding public opinion as shaping policy agenda, with high power support from the experts. If a media house is publicly listed, with all its expertise and understanding of the market mechanism, is it too much to ask that it should manage its business without jeopardising or in any way compromising public interest? Otherwise, NDTV does excellent investigative reports and outstanding documentaries on important issues. One would think, for a news organization credibility is a great asset.

Manufacturing Hindutva?

Manufacturing Hindutva?

The entire story is a web of self-incriminating confessions from the accused that render any need for fair trial that all citizens of India are entitled to, unnecessary.

Posted on The Hoot on Monday, Oct 13 22:40:32, 2008

When I read the cover story: Inside the Mind of The Bombers, carried by India Today, 13 October 2008, as an average reader I expected some minimum credibility in the story. I read the story with increasing disbelief and dismay. It signifies a new and unfortunate phase in Indian journalism. Mr Mihir Srivastava, the Principal Correspondent of India Today, claims to have met the 'culprits' twice. They were apparently not allowed to meet with their own families or lawyers but for some reason have been allowed to meet with the journalist and pour their hearts out to this sympathetic listener. What do the interviews contain?  Repeated caution from the 'patriotic' journalist to the ordinary Indian on the street: In this 21st century utopia of Hindutva that we are building collectively - do not be fooled by the education, youth or innocent looks of the modern Indian Muslim. He may be sipping coffee at the next table in a Barista, but report him immediately for who knows how many bombs he may have planted in all the cities of India? The blurbs in the story shout at the reader the self-confessed, unrepentant penchant of the accused for evil. One does not see such crass profiling of the 'other' at least in major publications that are concerned about objectivity. I am awaiting similar advisories about Christians, Sikhs, Parsees and (after they are sufficiently tamed), dalits, people of 'other' regions, 'other' castes who settle in any 'other' state of India, people who speak a language 'other' than the one you prefer to speak, Hindus who worship 'any other' gods and not Rama, youth who have fun on valentines day, women with short hair, women who work, women who do not perform kadva chauth ... The second significant thing about the piece is the eagerness with which the stunned, hand-cuffed men have confessed self-incriminatingly about their willingness to kill not just enemies but their own mothers in the name of their God. They not only confessed to waging jihad but incriminated their dead colleague who got killed in the Jamia encounter of indoctrinating them. The story tells us that the dead colleague (who cannot speak) has been proclaimed the mastermind of the day. For some reason, the three accused see a messiah in the journalist and elaborately narrate their movements from city to city, their recces and their final acts of 'terror' and provide the much needed motive for their hatred - Gujarat riots and lack of action on Sri Krishna Commission. The story will have you believe that if you are a Muslim worth your salt in India, you really ought to be upset enough about these things to go and bomb your neighbourhood. Thirdly, the story carries just the close ups of the trio, repeatedly splashed across the story, in blood-red for effect. Great journalism was built on legendary interviews with rebel leaders, extremists or inaccessible bandits. But invariably, photos of the journalist speaking with the interviewee would accompany these stories. In this case too, at least one photo of the accused being interviewed by the 'impartial journalist' would have set the reader's mind at rest. I am sure, the police who were kind enough to allow the interviews in 'public interest' would have allowed the photographs too. In the entire piece, there is no attempt at corroboration or cross-verification from anyone other than the three accused 'corroborating' each other's confessions. What are the facts in this story? - That these boys have been arrested on suspicion of being party to the acts of terror. Beyond that, the entire story is a web of self-incriminating confessions from the accused that render any need for fair trial that all citizens of India are entitled to unnecessary. The report ignores the fact that these boys are picked up on suspicion and are yet to be proven guilty. There has been outrage at the police jumping the gun and holding press conferences before adequate investigation is done into cases and painting the accused guilty. Now, an independent, fair journalist has stepped forward to do the job for the police. The objective is to render fair trial irrelevant. In the court of public opinion, these men are condemned. Is any of this admissible evidence in a court of law, assuming that the confessional interviews did take place? Whatever the courts finally say, the story has deliberately tarred the image of Muslim youth in popular perception. Human rights laws explicitly prohibit the extraction of self-incriminating confessions. In this case and in frequent instances of the police press conferences that are extensively reported in the media, the journalists dutifully report these 'facts', knowing fully well that such stories have a long way to go before their veracity is legally established. In the McCarthy era, the American national media dutifully reported McCarthy's accusations and the denials of the accused trailed far behind. Herbert Altschull of Johns Hopkins University writes. 'The McCarthy experience caused journalists to question their traditional value system for it became clear how easy it was for the code of objectivity to be used by unscrupulous politicians to present utter falsehoods to their public'. In such cases, the journalist can be given some benefit of doubt for being an unsuspecting carrier of dubious information and encouraged to be more vigilant. How does one categorise a proactive effort like Inside the Mind of the Bombers? When the journalist takes it upon himself to bolster stories from 'official sources' (that are high on fire power and creativity and low on diligence and concern for human rights), the damage to the polity is lasting. We are already gone too far down this path. As if these encounters and 'fast food' reports on terror organizations are not enough, the editorial of India Today exhorts the state to adopt a policy of  'zero tolerance', 'get tough on terror', 'enact and implement laws required to capture the culprits'. What is the esteemed India Today attempting to do by this cover story?  Shore up the case for POTA/GUJCOC? The same issue of the magazine also carries stories on Hindutva groups. The story on Bajrang Dal quotes the Dal leaders daring anyone to compare 'nationalists' like them to anti-national Muslim groups. The magazine can, in a technical sense, claim objectivity. But the treatment is different. It is not sensationalised in its layout or presentation as the cover story is, but powers the cover story by its juxtaposition. The 'War on Terror' project has put a potent weapon in the hands of states to erode democratic rights. This is happening elsewhere in the world, but has taken a uniquely Hindutva hue in India. A fear psychosis is being created with active collusion of a section of the media around a particular community while completely diverting attention away from similar militant groups and their activities from the mainstream consciousness. The 'war on terror' is also trying to force a civil society consensus by silencing sceptics who are concerned about human rights violations by calling them anti-nationals. Are those who question the media/police versions less concerned about the deaths of innocent people in bomb blasts? Certainly not. However, in a democracy, in the name of special powers in crisis situations, the state cannot deny the right of due process to its citizens. Only the guilty must be punished. The process must be transparent. Today, the Right to Free Speech afforded by a secular, democratic Constitution is being used to undermine the democratic state.

Keep this alternative alive and healthy

Keep this alternative alive and healthy

If anyone wants a model for socially responsible, public interest broadcasting as an alternative to the commercial cacophony that satellites pour into our homes, the Lok Sabha channel would fit the bill. The idea is to recognize that one cannot please everyone.

Posted on The Hoot on Saturday, Jun 28 17:25:55, 2008

By July 24 the Lok Sabha channel completes two years of its interesting existence as a 24/7 channel. The channel was running under the supervision of Bhaskar Ghose, former I&B Secretary and is believed to be the brainchild of Somnath Chatterji, Lok Sabha Speaker. According to The Hindu report before its launch, it has a revenue model designed for self-sufficiency. The channel has a well thought out programme mix. It has discussions on current affairs like the nuclear deal with people who have shaped the policy and those opposing the policy participating. It has discussions on the various Parliamentary standing committee recommendations with experts. It has interviews with eminent people from the arts and literature. It has documentaries that closely examine programmes like the NREGA. It also transmits FTII diploma films and NFDC films. For instance, last Sunday, 22 June 2008, the channel had a discussion programme on Standing Committee recommendations on Labour in its 'Searchlight' programme. The show was anchored by Siddharth Varadarajan of the Hindu. The anchor and the experts participated in the discussion to enlighten the audience as much as possible. Varadajan's incisive questioning and unobtrusive anchoring steered the debate through the intricacies and shortcomings of the policy on unorganized labour. Varadarajan is probably the best anchor on public affairs on Indian television today � dispassionate and incisive. He does not crinkle his eyes and clench his teeth to question the experts. Refreshingly, neither the anchor nor any of the participants interrupted each other to score brownie points for cleverness. The staging of the show is frugal but attractive. The same day there was a documentary on the problems of implementation of NREGA in Karimnagar district of Andhra Pradesh. The programme was ably anchored in Hindi but showed both the successes and failures of aspects of implementation. Through the course of the show, one is educated about the specifics of the NREGA and what the beneficiaries and social auditors should look out for. Again, the execution of the documentary was direct, simple and intended to communicate with clarity and not to clutter it with sensational claims and counter-claims. A fair lesson in objectivity. The other highlight of the day of course was the interview with the iconic Gloria Steinem in the 'In Transit' programme. This programme, of all the others, needed better handling. Listening to Gloria Steinem was a treat in itself, but the interview was obviously shot with a single camera, and the anchor's questions were recorded later. No care was taken to ensure the direction of the look of the anchor. Recording questions later also needed to be done carefully because the anchor sounded stilted and rehearsed. The interview and the anchor would have worked out so much better if a little more attention was paid to the production. Mrinal Pandey does the 'Bathon Batnon Mein' show for the channel. It is a simple interview show with personalities from the arts, public affairs and cinema. The relaxed and gentle presence of the anchor, and the well-researched interviews she does are worth watching. The programme 'Gender Discourse' brings excellent, in-depth discussion programmes on women's issues, Women and Property Rights, Working Conditions for Women etc. The experts invariably are those who have hands-on knowledge of the policy formulations and implementation. And all this without anyone selling you Coke, mobile phones, junk food, fast bikes, fast cars and other such urban delights. There are short breaks for public service announcements. Being a regular watcher of the channel, one feels that if any one wants a model for socially responsible, public interest broadcasting as an alternative to the commercial cacophony that satellites pour into our homes, Lok Sabha channel would fit the bill. The idea is to recognize that one cannot please everyone. In trying to make programmes that will please everyone, one not only ends up lowering cultural and intellectual standards but subverts the very democracy we all profess to defend through 'free' media. It is a boon that the channel is a must carry channel and is available on DTH platforms like TataSky. Early this month, Mr Ghose demitted office. There is a search on for his successor. One hopes and prays, whoever is the successor continues the great work the channel is doing and takes it a notch higher. In some ways, the Lok Sabha channel has demonstrated what is possible given modest resources and good ideas, if only there is a will.

News or Reality TV?

News or Reality TV?

Do we, citizens of this country, actually need protective laws to save us from the ugliness of media?

Posted on The Hoot on Saturday, May 31 13:28:27, 2008

Indian commercial television is in terminal decline. Specially the news channels. A couple of weeks back a young Indian woman, Jyothirmayi, was murdered by an Indian student in UK. Her family is from Vijayawada. TV9, the channel that pompously sports the tagline 'for a better society', pounced on this story digging up the family, any one remotely connected with the victim (including people shooting the breeze at the street side tea-stall) it appeared. In their anxiety to 'break' the news, they put out unverified information about the victim and the aggressor being classmates in India, being 'lovers' in UK and such other details. Unfortunately, the anchor of the bulletin was a woman, the reporter was a woman. The reporter held forth extempore about loose behaviour and over-familiarity of the victim that could have led to her murder! This, when neither the family nor the UK police or any one has given any information to them, based completely on the need to spin a story from the basic information. To hell with the family. The shattered family had to plead with the channels to leave them alone to cope with the loss and trauma. Now there is  Arushi murder case in Delhi. It suits the Delhi police 'force' fine so far to let the media run amuck and destroy all evidence. The force could teach a trick or two to our young enthusiastic journalists about spinning a yarn that can be made to stick without a shred of evidence. The journalists were breathlessly repeating every thing the official said (the official referred to Arushi as Shruthi at least thrice during the press conference!) about the two families. Serious aspersions about their personal affairs like wife-swapping, and Arushi-Hemraj affair were thrown about by this official with impunity and no evidence, and instead of questioning the official for proof, the media ended up hounding the families. Entire news bulletins were devoted to the case and the great analytical skills of the daring young reporters on the streets of Delhi, who repeated the same information ad nauseum, and attempted to whip up passion about 'how can a father kill his own daughter?'. The need for careful investigation, real experts from forensic departments and other material evidence is completely forgotten. Does the police have the right to think aloud about motives at a press conference without adequate ground work? Can they build the story on the spot, while answering the questions from journalists? Can the Talwars and Durranis sue the police force for floating the rumours about their life style, and their dead child? Can they sue the media for spreading the police statements and spicing them up further to cater to the prurient curiosity of the viewers? Do we, citizens of this country, actually need protective laws to save us from the ugliness of media?      It is universally acknowledged that the Indian police force does not set much store by diligent investigation. It is either third degree confessions or the art of cooking up evidence and planting evidence for a quick and dirty solution. It suited the state to pander to this in the case of left-wing extremism. Encounters and illegal detentions and gross violations of human rights are tolerated by the state in such cases and now it has become the style of functioning of the police, about which senior retired officials are aghast. One finds that media plays footsie with the police because they need them While these kinds of cases are meaty with possibilities, where the 'force', bless its soul, is with the journalists, one hardly sees similar guts and passion on part of the journalists when it comes to the murder of a young social activist, Lalit Mehta, who was killed for tracking the implementation of NREGA programme in Chattisgarh. This may not deserve even a mention on a prime time bulletin and the invisible hands at work can rest assured that no misplaced media attention will be wasted on such trivia. Dr Binayak Sen is under illegal detention for a whole year and the issue does not exist for the electronic media. There was no murder. No muck to chase. Ironically, this kind of reporting has an oxymoron to describe it, 'human interest!' Which human's interests are served by this frenzy? Jyothirmayi's shattered family? The Talwars and the Durrani's? Or is it the corporate interests? The extended advertising breaks on the channels between prurient, gushing gossip that keeps the cash coming in? The SMS frenzy  'are urban fathers turning killers?' 'TYPE QOTD Y for yes, TYPE QOTD N for no'; 'do you think the Durranis are innocent?' (I just heard about them from the policeman at the press conference, for heaven's sake!) Never mind. 'TYPE QOTD Y for yes, TYPE QOTD N for no' Half the revenue for the channel and half for the phone company. Keep it coming. Reviewing 'The Fourth Network', a book on Fox Network in America, the reviewer says, Murdoch is a baffling creep: "the poster boy of the cultural contradictions of capitalism," as John Powers calls him in Sore Winners, "whose enterprises subvert the very institutions and values he claims to be conserving." If one watched some of the big brother English news channels like the IBN-CNN or Times Now, the reporters expressed outrage at how obtrusive the media has been and how they may actually have destroyed the evidence, while being senior participants in the enterprise. The channels would merrily go on nevertheless to milk the story in its various possibilities through the day. This was a tragic twin-murder but the impact is confined to Delhi and the families. Does it deserve to hog the entire bulletin, every bulletin of the day that goes to the entire nation? But Dr Binayak Sen's detension or Lalit Mehta's murder would certainly be of great consequence for those hundreds of dedicated people who are working for the poor and fighting for justice in this country. That, one would have said, was human interest. Two likely outcomes are possible from this madness. One: The viewer gets sick and tired and keeps his own counsel and learns to do without the media. Two, it leads  to complete depoliticization of the population into chasing individual lives and crimes, instead of focussing on the issues that impact larger number of disenfranchised lives. The corporate media is drunk on its money-spinning abilities. More so, the news channels, which seem to be a new genre of reality TV for us. Sadly, one does not see good sense prevailing any time soon.

Cheerfully partisan

Cheerfully partisan!

Y.S.R Reddy's family newspaper Sakshi lays bare the nature of investment in the Telugu media.

Posted on The Hoot on Wednesday, Apr 09 13:53:11, 2008

March 23, 2008 saw the launch of Sakshi, a Telugu newspaper in full-colour with 23 simultaneous editions. The initial print run was 12.7 lakhs. The USP of this paper is that it has been launched by the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister's son, Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy. Befitting the family of a chief minister, the paper was launched with expected fanfare and hype. What is not understandable is the reaction of the two market leaders, Eenadu and Andhra Jyothi. Soon after the launch of the paper, the leader of the opposition, Chandrababu Naidu tabled a no-confidence motion against the government and in the course of his speech on the floor of the Assembly, laid bare the various sources of finance in Sakshi. He questioned the propriety of some of the investors supporting the project, apparently because they were also beneficiaries of the largesse of the government. This led to a counter attack from the Sakshi group, questioning the investments and methods of financing that their rivals Eenadu and Andhra Jyothi have adopted over the years. Both the rival papers gave extensive coverage to the opposition leader's allegations against the chief minister and his government. The front pages carried first lead stories with the headlines punning on Sakshi (witness) and detailed reports of what was said on the floor of the house against the paper. Both Eenadu and Andhra Jyothi gave equal play to the CM's counter attack, while juxtaposing Chandrababu Naidu's attack against Sakshi and its sources of revenue. The slant/opinion of the papers is prominently displayed through the headlines and the leads of the stories. Eenadu from its inception has made no secret of its anti-Congress/pro-TDP stance. Andhra Jyothi began with a distinguished record of fair journalism and excellent literary standards under KLN Prasad but went under later. It was bought out by a reporter/correspondent and re-launched in 2002, raising a lot of speculation about proxy investments by the then ruling party, Telugu Desam.(The profile of the MD, Radha Krishna, on the website of Andhra Jyothi omits to mention his journalistic background, describing him as an all-rounder and an entrepreneur). Andhra Jyothi in its new incarnation has been louder in its criticism of the government, and has built up a respectable circulation in a short time. In the recent spat between the Congress government and Eenadu, by extensively covering the Congress attack on Eenadu Andhra Jyothi logged up more circulation. Eenadu's invocation of the threat to freedom of the press when it had to contend with several court cases regarding its other financial interests brought the question of 'whose freedom' into focus once again. Before the dust could settle on that, the launch of Sakshi brought up the question of the sources of finance being pumped into media enterprises. If one is a believer in competition in the market place, this is the time to feel vindicated. Just a year ago or so, the Telugu newspaper market was more or less a monoculture farm with a few weak challengers to the market leaders Eenadu and Andhra Jyothi. The man on the street hardly knew who was investing in the newspapers, much less the issues of conflict of interest. With the launch of Sakshi, true, a lot of dirty linen was washed in public but it certainly laid bare the nature of investment that was backing each of the newspapers and the economic interests that dictate their news operations. It is clear that to launch and sustain a newspaper one needs the backing of unlimited resources, often from speculative financial activities or real estate. Newspapers are being launched primarily to acquire and exercise political clout to protect one's financial interests, not necessarily in the public interest. Today there is no such thing as a politically neutral paper in the Telugu market with each of the papers reporting most political news from a partisan point of view. The page one lead story on   April 3, 2008 on the issue of Andhra Jyothi played up Chandrababu's attack on the manner of financing Sakshi. Several inside stories leave the reader in no doubt about which side the paper is taking. In an interesting reversal of journalistic practice, the editorial of the day tries to give a balanced, non-partisan view on the issue! Should one conclude that biased reporting and neutral editorials are perhaps the future of Telugu journalism or is this an exit strategy of the paper to protect itself should it need to switch political affiliation in an election year? Interestingly, this strategy of attacking the newly launched paper may actually benefit Sakshi .It got unprecedented mileage in public perception as both the leading papers spent reams of paper to discredit it. This may have provided welcome free publicity to the paper, much like the banning of a film soon after its release! Designed by Mario Garcia, Sakshi is a good-looking paper if a little too colourful, printed on very good newsprint. The content is yet to stabilise but this may change soon as the paper appears to have poached well-trained professionals with very attractive pay packets. However, by showcasing the state government's achievements and pursuing attacks on the proprietor of Eenadu, the content has so far not shown signs of much neutrality. The factionalism of the Congress may turn out to be a boon for the paper as it can target rival factions and cover itself in the glory of journalistic neutrality for attacking its own party leaders! With competition the Telugu media market has scaled up with attractive pay packages and unprecedented demand for experienced professionals. If only these professionals could prevail on the managements to understand that journalism is about public interest and not about partisan politics. In the long run, it is the balanced newspapers that win the credibility stakes with the public.

Survival Tricks of Telugu TV Channels

Survival tricks of Telugu TV channels

The channels are leading a wave of religious revivalism purely because religion and culture can also be packaged and sold.

Posted on The Hoot on Thursday, Apr 03 23:11:07, 2008

Over the last several months, Telugu TV channels have been  resorting to a new revenue generation strategy: carrying advertisements for precious stones with magic remedial powers (Divya Diamonds) and rudrakshas that can fetch a seat for your son in medical school or a visa to the US! The ads are generally of several minutes in duration and appear like talk shows with the presenters talking directly to the audience, often endorsing the magical powers of the stuff from curing disease to all manner of other wish fulfilment. It is believed that the advertisers pay Rs 80,000 and above for 10 seconds for these long commercials on some of the stronger channels like TV9 and ETV2. The channels air several insertions a day. TV9's tag line proudly proclaims that it is 'for a better society' and Eenadu has always resisted even horoscope columns in its many publications. The easy revenue provided by the products of this kind seems to have broken through to these channels. This was unthinkable on public broadcasting channels till the golden age of media liberalization dawned on us. The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955, explicitly prohibits such ads. The Act is to control the advertisement of drugs in certain cases, to prohibit the advertisement for certain purpose of remedies alleged to possess magic qualities '... The Act defines drugs and registered medical practitioners besides defining magic remedy. According to Act the Magic remedy includes a talisman mantra kavacha, and any other charm of any kind which is alleged to possess miraculous powers for or in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation treatment or prevention of any disease in human beings or animals or for affecting or influencing in any way the structure or any organic function of human beings or animals.' AIR and Doordarshan more or less steered clear of such ads. Two other phenomena also frequently appear on the leading channels. One, they carry live coverage of Brahmotsavams from Tirupati/ Rama kalyanam from Bhadrachalam. Hours of transmission time is devoted to religious events that excludes all other programming needs of the viewers. When Doordarshan carried such coverage, there was considerable amount of criticism, questioning the secular credentials of the state broadcaster. The commercial channels have no such answerability. The channels are leading a wave of religious revivalism purely because religion and culture can also be packaged and sold.  Two, the established channels also have explicit crime shows, 'Neralu-Ghoralu' on ETV2 and 'Crime watch' on TV9. The tone, tenor, vocabulary, graphic and detailed visualization of these programmes and the anchors who host these programmes appear to be a direct invitation to crime. Each episode of these programmes is like a distance education primer on how to commit crimes. The opinion in both the channels about the shows is similar, both claiming that the shows are mostly watched by women! Several news channels have entered the Telugu market and more news, Bhakti and general entertainment channels are waiting in the wings. Already the new news channels have proven themselves adept at challenging the market leaders through sting operations and sensational coverage of film releases and petty misdemeanours of state functionaries. The competition is likely to heat up with many more channels coming into the market in the run up to the elections. New channels, instead of aiming to excel with better programming, are dishing out more of the same in much worse taste. If the commercial channels do not believe that they should be governed by any voluntary and in-house vetting of content, a public outcry may provide the government an excuse once again to find ways of reining in TV channels.

Short story: Epiphany

Epiphany

“Don’t call me again. We’ve all but forgotten you…”, Shankar cut the phone line on his mother. He looked down at his mobile and then the knuckles where his mother hit him with a steel ladle, screaming “Don’t touch her!”. Several years on, he can still feel the pain.

It was the day Munni, his mother’s fourteen-year-old sister - the joyous, sparkling kid - went silent. It can’t be that she was missing her parents or anything. Shankar’s father married mother who had no one but Munni and vowed to take care of them both.

He remembers father walking in that day, looking neither left nor right ... just going straight to the plate of food that was laid out for him. Munni gulped her last morsels and darted out of the room.

After lunch, father announced that he plans to rest at home. Picking up his bag to go back to school, Shankar caught the horrified look on his mother’s face. He saw her go after Munni, getting her ready to take her with her. “Where are you taking the poor thing? Thought she needed rest!”, father called after mother. By then both of them already found a rickshaw.

It was getting late. After a lonely dinner father was sitting on the front porch, smoking. Old Binayakda passing the house on his post-dinner stroll caught sight of the pale, shaken Munni being helped into the house by mother. “One of those mysterious female ailments!”, father muttered to Binayakda by way of explanation and went on to pull harder on the cigarette.

After that day, mother was somewhat lost. She no longer sat with Shanker to help with homework. Never came to the school to speak with the teacher. Mother, to whom Shanker’s schooling was the single biggest obsession.

Soon mother pulled Munni out of school and set her up as a trainee health attendant with the lady doctor. Munni began to live at the nursing home. The doctor needed her so much that she wouldn’t allow Munni to take a break to be with Shankar’s family.

“Why have you pulled Munni out of school, ma? The Principal is upset and wants to see you. She thinks we are not all that poor and Munni is too young to quit school to work”, Shankar mustered enough courage one day to say to his mother. Mother just stared at him and let it pass.

Munni died soon after. She seems to have popped some medicines without knowing what they were for. Throughout the funeral and the lull thereafter, it was like both father and mother were frozen inside. They listened to everyone. Said nothing.

That weekend mother left. Father kept telling everyone who cared to listen that she was living with an old flame of hers and that she just used him to bring up her sister. Shankar began to loathe the selfishness of his mother and couldn’t fathom how his mother could just leave him, her own son.

And then this desperate phone call on the day his girl friend has come to meet his father and his marriage is all but fixed up! Where was she when he was growing up and needed her the most?

Shankar turned impatiently from the window back to the dining table. For a moment he forgot where he was … he picked up the ladle on the table and hit his father hard on the knuckles, screaming “Don’t touch her!”

Shankar walked out of the house dragging his girl friend with him, all the while looking for the last caller’s number on his mobile …

Indian Media

Crime, Punishment and Indian Media

This is New Delhi, India. Little Anant Gupta is back in the loving arms of his doting parents. On his baby’s day out, he had his first brush with the brave new India of 8+% GDP growth rate that’s in store for his generation. The grateful father thanked the police, the politicians and the administration! Understandable. The media which held back in the initial stages till Anant’s safe return, has begun pealing the layers off the kidnap drama and the role of the politicians and the police in it.

The ‘urban educated middle class’ is finally convinced that there’s something wrong with the system after seeing extensive media coverage of cases like that of Priyadarshini Mattoo, Jessica Lal and now Anant. However, the victims are not always the elite. For every Priyadarshini Mattoo, there is a faceless victim who has come under the wheels of a Nanda-BMW, or the marble table top of a film star’s front lawn. We do not even know the names of these people and where their orphaned families are hiding, as if they are the criminals who need to hide from public glare. If the victim of the powerful belongs to the middle class, there is a greater likelihood that media will take interest.

The common man’s protests, (as in the case of the Bhandara dalits) invite violent repression from the State, leading to loss of more lives. While dalit groups are still actively challenging the oppression, the human rights activists have been maligned into silence whenever they attempt to question the brutal repression and killings that are a daily feature against the so called political ‘extremists’, often poor and faceless youngsters. On media, it is not politically correct to raise human rights issues in such instances, it appears.

The last one year has seen a dozen killings a week in Andhra Pradesh in the name of anti-Naxal operations. The State does not think it is accountable to these lives, whoever these people are. The State is offering out-of-turn promotions and incentives to the ‘encounter’ artists among the police. The media, for whatever reasons, seems to have fallen into the trap of accepting police reports as fact. The ‘encounter’ method liberates the State completely from answerability – there is no need for arrests, cases, investigation, falsification of information or any other trouble.

Barring one or two Telugu channels and newspapers, the media, bowing to its middle class constituency is not attempting to build a strong case for accountability in these violations. The “Lakshman Rekha’ appears to be drawn at a politically correct, comfortable liberal agenda that does not extend to a belief in equality before law. There has been an aggressive negative attitude on display on electronic media against those who speak up for Human Rights.

Media often describe with relish Bihar or UP as the centres of kidnapping industry, or this or that city as the crime capital. If we look around in today’s India, much of the crime is being committed with the active participation of the new urban and rural elite who can control both administrative and legal fall-out in each instance. It cannot be denied that some of this fuels sympathy for the extremist cause. Though for media crime may be entertainment, films like ‘Rang De Basanti’ have struck a chord with the common man.

The politician/police nexus which is supposed to protect the Constitution and the rule of law shows the greatest contempt for both. If a person who is shot dead in an ‘encounter’ by the police and labelled an extremist, the ‘educated vocal middle class’ somehow accept that the victim does not deserve the due process of law as he has no rights in this democracy of ours. We do not even question whether the victim was indeed an ‘extremist’. A woman is raped and killed. By questioning her morals or politics, you and I can be made to believe that she does not deserve justice. Barring a few exceptions, media is happy reporting the police version in these cases.

It is this pervasive acceptance that law need not be equal for all in this country that the police use to justify blatantly illegal killings and repression. Often the fine arts of planting evidence, creating false cases, intimidation of witnesses are perfected with the so called ‘Maoist cases’. The Government of India also sees the political challenge from the Maoist groups as more of a threat than terrorism and crime (As per a recent statement of the PM).

The new economic policies have resulted in large-scale dispossession and displacement of the poor from their lands and livelihoods, both in urban and rural areas. The resultant widespread impoverishment leaves the victims with three choices – commit suicide, join the mafia or take on the Beast of Oppression by joining hands with left-wing extremist groups. Of all these responses of the people, the only response the State violently counters is the left-wing extremism. Committing suicides is fine. Joining the mafia is better.

The State is not protecting the interests of the poor and marginalised in the country either by its actions or its policies. It is presiding over a porous regulatory environment and is ill-equipped to stand up to national or international pressures of globalisation. In this political-economic mayhem, the privileged citizens of India of 8+% GDP growth rate are the real estate mafia, the smuggler and the white-collar colluders in the system. Any suggestion to reign in these forces (even from people like Aruna Roy or Medha Patkar) will not be discussed. All mainstream political parties across the board are heavily dependent on the muscle of this underworld and benefit in various ways from it.

This is reminiscent of Latin American dictatorships propped up by US that systematically protected and funded mercenary armies and drug dealers as a counter to left-wing political forces. The Indian State today favours physical elimination of left-wing groups without any attempt to negotiate with them on issues that they are raising. Land reforms, for instance. SEZs seem to have put paid to the issue!

However, in India it is still possible for the media to speak up for alternative political agenda and resist the temptation to be an instrument in the hands of the State to build a middle class consensus against political alternatives. At least, let them be heard and let the people decide.

Media are often on the bandwagon while promoting anti-people policies of the government and paradoxically bring outraged coverage to consequences of those same policies! Farmers’ suicides and riots by dalits make for good television events. Instead, media need to provide more critical coverage to policy initiatives when they are being conceived and put in place. Post facto analysis does little to prevent great human tragedies.

Media seldom pursue issues like why India today is a land flooded with illegal small arms, and why in the name of security politicians are allowed to maintain private armies. There is also a need to ask – can law enforcement agencies and investigative agencies that work under the control of a criminalised polity act in public interest? How can judiciary ensure justice when the case comes rigged in to the court? Shouldn’t media push for systemic changes extrapolating from individual cases?

Already the tail is wagging the dog. Legislation that curbs the arbitrary powers or puts the investigative agencies under the autonomous control of the courts is likely to be resisted strongly both by political parties and the law enforcement agencies. Media need to re-educate the ‘educated middle class’ that baying for a “terrorist’s” blood or a “political extremist’s” head is not fair when the Chief Justice of the country publicly declared that the even the Supreme Court is not infallible but only Supreme. In a civilized democracy establishment of guilt beyond doubt is essential before handing out punishment.