The Indian media has been by history and tradition a
fairly independent voice, linked prior to independence to core struggles
of emancipation and mobilistion. Today, with the advent and impact of
television, it enjoys an influence that must lend itself to some rigorous
rational scrutiny. During the past decade we have seen television (and
private television channels where there was only government controlled
Doordarshan earlier) enter our homes and dominate public discourse. We
have also seen the burgeoning growth of Hindi journalism (which today
enjoys the largest readership or viewership) as also a large number of
alternate publications.
A restlessness with the direction the media is taking,
coupled with an acknowledgement of its influence and role, forces us to
ask some serious questions. In this issue of Communalism Combat we
attempt to look at some of these ticklish questions. Has, for instance,
the national ‘mainstream’ media turned its back on fair and adequate
coverage of the lives and concerns of the large majority of the country
and does this exclusion amount to a mere increasing elitism or something
harsher, such as bias? And is this bias driven by class or does it also
have a caste and communal tinge?
Rajdeep Sardesai, editor-in-chief, CNN-IBN and IBN 7, in
an interview with CC admits that there has been a big shift in the
media becoming "metro-centric" but denies anything more active at work
than simply an urban bias. "The fact of the matter is that the media is
metro-centric and as a result we do lose out on the less shining parts of
the country. The reason for this however is much more the tyranny of
distance than any bias."
The relative or complete absence of media coverage of
issues arising out of Adivasi struggles in the states of Chhattisgarh and
Jharkhand, or even the seven states located in the north-eastern part of
the country, is matched by the dominance of frivolous and titillating
coverage of ‘happenings’ in metros. Worse, the distinctly upper caste tilt
and twist to the manner in which developments are viewed and interpreted
can be gleaned, for instance, from the epithets that were used for a whole
decade against a politician like Laloo Prasad Yadav. A survey conducted by
the Delhi-based Media Study Group points to a distinct absence of caste
diversity and a predominance of the ‘upper’ castes within the upper
echelons of the Indian media (see "Media pundits", CC, July-August
2006).
Only last month India lost a politician who – like him or
hate him – changed the course of this country’s politics decisively. The
death of Kanshi Ram and the ensuing coverage by the media (barring a few
exceptions) reflected a dismissive upper caste bias. The first quarter of
2006 saw the dramatic story of the shooting (and subsequent death) of BJP
leader Pramod Mahajan by his brother and, a few months later, the
unsavoury conduct of his son, Rahul Mahajan. Excessive and
disproportionately wide coverage of the first episodes and later, a
delicate dismissal of the son’s involvement with drugs by an otherwise
vigilante media, do leave some questions unanswered.
Following the July 11 bomb blasts in Mumbai the media,
especially television, came in for sharp criticism. Repeated images of
police round-ups of youth in minority dominated areas created the public
impression that dozens of Muslim suspects were being interrogated. The
subsequent release of all these persons, save one or two, did not
attract comparative coverage. This raised questions about the ethics of
television channels that actively contributed to creating a public image
of who the guilty are but then remained silent when the answer proved
indecisive. A specific case related to a prominent Hindi television
channel. The channel broadcast an inaccurate report relaying that after
the bomb blasts firecrackers were burst at Padgah village, off Mumbai. The
fact that the village is minority dominated and that it is home to persons
allegedly accused of participating in earlier terror attacks, added spice
if not truth to the broadcast. Agitated residents protested this coverage
to the village sarpanch and registered an oral complaint with the
police (who refused to register a first information report, FIR). A
meeting was thereafter held with various members of the mohalla
committee condemning the coverage. Several sarpanches and gram
panchayat chiefs attended the meeting. However, the said channel carried
no correction in its subsequent telecasts. Similarly, an accompanying
story reveals local and national media coverage of the recent violence in
Mangalore where the role of the police has also escaped any media
scrutiny.
"If properties are sealed in Delhi I will have four OB
(Outside Broadcast) vans stationed there to capture the story but if a
much more serious issue arising out of farm labourers’ struggles erupts in
Chhattisgarh or Jharkhand or the North-east, I am limited by the fact that
I just do not have an OB van located there," says Sardesai. "How do I
telecast a protest in Chhattisgarh or Jharkhand when I do not have an OB
van stationed there? Therefore a protest in Chhattisgarh or Adivasis being
shot at in Kalinga won’t make news the same way as workers being beaten in
Gurgaon, just out of Delhi. It is the tyranny of distance at work here."
Barkha Dutt, managing editor of NDTV, strongly disagrees
with the contention that the media suffers from any negative tendencies
except an urban tilt or bias. "Whether it’s farmer suicides, judicial
mistrials, corruption and government accountability, television in
particular has been unsparing and relentless in its scrutiny. I would
concede to a certain degree of urban bias – perhaps language and
identification issues tend to make us highlight urban issues in a more
focused way than rural stories. But this does not diminish the validity of
either set of stories."
She adds, "I don’t think there is any motive or any
necessary blackout. Several reports have been done on the mining
controversy in Jharkhand. The cola issue is a perfect example where big
corporates have been taken on in the media in the backdrop of the
pesticide controversy. I do not buy the argument that some hidden relation
with corporates defines editorial choices. Absences may go back to the one
bias we are guilty of – urban oriented reporting. "
Increasing space given to religio-ritualistic stories is
also a relatively recent phenomenon. It is not only the channels but also
pages of the print media that are lending more and more space to festivals
like Holi and Diwali and even customs like Karva Chauth! On October 2 this
year, Dussehra day, 16 lakh persons (at the minimum – the outside figure
is 20 lakh) converged at Nagpur to celebrate the golden jubilee of the
mass conversion of Dalits, under the leadership of Dr Ambedkar, to
Buddhism. While the local Marathi press did cover the event, providing its
own colour and interpretation, the national media and television channels
simply skipped the story.
"CNN/IBN did a forty-seconder on the event but it is true
we did not carry the pictures. We did however follow this up with a panel
discussion on the contribution of Ambedkar. There is a point there in the
absence of coverage but it is the geographical factor – Delhi is easier
but it is true that we must introspect on the issue. Maybe we are making
excuses," reflects Sardesai. "I am not however convinced that there is a
caste bias actively at work. There is a high degree of ignorance. Maybe
ignorance and bias can often converge."
Besides these stark exclusions, celebrity and the
glamorous lifestyle – page three journalism – have also eaten into public
space. "Both media and society are also trapped in the celebrity fame
game. We seem to be interested in titillating rather than informing,"
admits Sardesai, adding that this excessive coverage of parties or fashion
shows in society prevent rational thinking. "They do not go beyond being
titillating."
Dutt differs. "Page three was the invention of newspapers
before it became an event on television. I think all of this stuff has its
own place as long as it doesn’t diminish the core values of news
gathering, as long as it remains the equivalent of the back pages of a
magazine."
On September 29 a ghastly gang rape and mass murder at
Kherlanji in Maharashtra’s Bhandara district left four members of a Dalit
family brutally massacred with Bhaiyyalal Bhotmange, the father, being the
lone survivor. The Maharashtra police and administration have continuously
been making irresponsible statements (see accompanying story) and
events so far already suggest a clear attempt to suppress evidence of the
crime during the primary stage of investigations itself. The post-mortem
report is a travesty of a document and despite the gory conditions in
which the mother and daughter’s bodies were found, Section 376 of the
Indian Penal Code (which is applicable for the offence of rape) has not
even been applied. Can or will the Kherlanji case become a Jessica Lal or
Priyadarshini Mattoo case for the media? Will it symbolise the fight for
justice or the need to critically revamp our criminal justice system?
Both Sardesai and Dutt agree that this could be a test
case for the Indian media. "Justice for Jessica/Priyadarshini and the
recent brutal killings in rural India is a test case for us. Will we run a
sustained national campaign on it? Will there be sustained interest?"
Sardesai asks. Adds Dutt, "We need to cross the glaring rural urban
divide… and, more importantly, move our viewers out of that disconnect as
well."