Media’s Delimma or?
Saurabh Thapa
It is very inappropriate to say that the Press of India is not free, though it has its own limitations that are
infact drawn by themselves. There are many instances where the freedom of the
press has been in question. May it be the recent case of the cartoonist Aseem
Trivedi or the Supreme Court’s verdict on the Sahara Company’s plea to stop the
reportage of their ongoing trials. There have been numerous discussions on the
media, specially the electronic medium, regarding these matters, where there appeared
various personalities with their own personal views. But still the question remains
intact that, Is the media doing what it needs to do?
Objectivity is something that should bind any hand that tries to
write any news report meant to be read by the common people. But it has been
now that, objectivity is often been looked down upon and there appears some
sort of biasness, when it comes to the economy part. Now, it appears the media
to be in a dilemma when it comes to be in between the government and the big
corporate houses. In the process, inorder to seek favours or to maintain a good
relation with both the two, the media often tends to ignore its main
responsibility, i.e. to bring out the facts before the people and play an adversary
role.
It is very important for any media to find out the wrong doings and
lay it before the common mass. Investigative journalism is a very powerful tool
to do so, and is often feared by even the biggest personalities as well. But
there have been very few cases in India, where the media has brought out big scams
and scandals before the public. ‘Tehelka.com’ roused a big fire when it first disclosed
a scam in the media. But, was it sufficient? is another question. It can be analysed
that the decade’s biggest scams were more unveiled by common men than the media.
May it be the 2G spectrum scam or the Coalgate scandal, one was revealed by a
high court lawyer and the other by the C.A.G (Controller of Audit General)
report. What was the media’s role in it? The media simply followed the story that
was already boiling and just reported who said what to whom. This has been
proved more by the recent Robert Vadra (son-in-law of the U.P.A’s chief Sonia Gandhi)
case.
The I.A.C (India Against Corruption) member and co-founder Arvind
Kejriwal has recently laid some questions before the Congress, D.L.F and Robert
Vadra, on Vadra’s boost of property from Rs 50 lakhs to Rs 300 crores. He had alleged
that Vadra has been provided with an unsecured loan in the name of Rs 65 crore,
Rs 85 crores. Also brought out that the current U.P.A government is providing
it’s chief’s son-in-law unreasonable favours. He has even said to be exposing
some other prominent politicians on the 10th of October. Hence, the
media is in wait for the time to arrive, so that there will be more to write in
that matter. But, here arises the problem. Why does the media needs to wait for
that moment? Why the media needs to be dependent upon some other source? Why
doesn’t the media check the facts for themselves and act more as a whistle
blower?
When we examine the reportage by the media on the matter, we can
find a similar kind of resemblance of behaviour within all the national newspaper
houses, i.e. their neutrality. It is very interesting to know that the media
just stood numb and acted more as a third party. Isn’t it more logical for the
media to be further active in these kinds of matters then that by others and be
involved more? The Indian media scenario is very interesting in its own terms. At
one point of time, argues bout the absence of absolute freedom of press in the
country and in the other hand doesn’t act accordingly. It can be understood that
being on the other side can jeopardise their financial conditions but why
doesn’t it adapts the example of some sincere (as it claims to be) media like
the ‘factscheck.org’ (produced and published by the University of Pennsylvania,
U.S.A). This website contains information about their financial sponsorships as
well as to show the absence of any political party influences.
Therefore, the Indian media though has done a great deal with their media
trials and some revolutionary writings, but it’s a fact that the media in India
still needs to develop their investigative department. Gone should be the days
when the media to be waiting for any information from the third party. Being
one of the most powerful tools of democracy, it should function as it is
expected. One doesn’t insist the media to be always on the opposite side but rather
it is expected to act responsibly and it should not forget for whom and for
what it is functioning, for the good of the common people. Hence, the Indian
media has yet to learn more about their responsibilities (or they do this
intentionally) and keeping a note of the past wrong doings and as well has to
overcome what has be ignored or neglected. Thus, the Media to play an adversary
role is very important for democracy to survive.