8th Letter to Editors Guild: Coverage of Parliament

Dear Sirs,

For the past three days, members of Lok Sabha have rasied questions/discussed on topics such as supply of food grains; on promotion of commercial farming; on Somali pirates attacking our ships; on disappearances of people in police custody; on a 4 crore scam in Bihar; on the non-inclusion of Bhojpuri in the official language list; fires in farms because of the heat; on water sharing disputes; missing Indian in Afghanistan; declining ground water table; about Kendriya Vidyalaya; of the cyclone in West Bengal and Bihar; on oil spill's near our shores affecting the livelihood of fishermen; on farm credit; on oil and gas blocks.

Also longer discussions were held on Grants for Railway Ministry and the National Green Tribunal Bill. I did not know about the National Green Tribunal Bill until I heard the discussion. Now, if you are wondering that I got all this information from our media channels/newspapers - you are grossly mistaken. I had the good fortune of having found some time during office hours to listen into the live webcast on Lok Sabha website.

Not one of these topics were shown as news/breaking news on any ofthe channels. Not one of the news channels mentioned about the discussion on the National Green Tribunal Bill. Hitherto unknown MP's were brilliantly articulating many points over the past three days, and some channels were obssesed with the flair with which Shashi Tharoor spoke in the Parliament.

It is impossible to believe that TV channels could not find a 5 minute slot in the entire day, to cover the delibarations in Parliament. It is impossible to believe that newspapers couldn't find atleast half a page space to cover the deliberations in Parliament. While it is media's freedom to playback the same tape about an issue day long, doesn't it also become its responsibility to show what's happening in the Parliament?

I have tweeted as much as I could about the proceedings, but unfortunately my reach is miniscule compared to the reach the media has. As much as we love to be cynical about how our MP's disappoint us, don't they deserve better space when they actually perform as mandated by the constitution? Can the Editors Guild frame guidelines on this matter?

PS: As I write this, Lok Sabha is now discussion Demands for grants to Rural Affairs Ministry.

Regards,
S. Sudhir Kumar

7th letter to EG:Absence of deciding authority

Within minutes of writing this letter, Rajdeep Sardesai was kind enough to reply :) His reply is appended to the post. Thanks for the prompt reply Rajdeep.

Sir,

The recent fiasco bought to light by the Chief Minister of Gujarat again strongly underscores the need for a ombudsman mechanism to be established in the media.

Allow me to first present the facts threadbare. On March 11, The Hindu broke a story saying SIT issued summons to the Chief Minister of Gujarat to appear before it on March 21. All the TV channels immediately picked the news up, had hours of discussions with attractive and eye catchy headlines. Subsequent to that, they have been continously reminding their viewers/readers that as the "day of reckoning" is nearing, there is yet no word from the Chief Minister of Gujarat.

Some TV channels, like IBN have clarified on the first day itself that Mr. Modi was summoned "in the week of March 21" and he can "either appear in person or send in his representative". However, in subsequent days, I do not recall this fact being stressed upon with the importance it deserves. And upon his "non-appearance" on the 21st, sections of the media went ballistic asking what exactly is that the Chief Minister is fearing, why did he not attend the hearing, and above all why isn't he respecting the law.

And when the Chief Minister of Gujarat released an open letter to the people of this country, he has specifically mentioned that he was not summoned on the 21st of March as was being reported, and there was absolutely no reason to vilify him as was being done for his "non-appearance".

Unfortunately, most sections of the media, went on the offensive claiming that this is just a mistake on the date and there is no need to make a big deal out of it. I beg to differ sir. Viewed in isolation, it might just be an error in the reporting of the date. However, like it or not, most of the media used this date as the benchmark to decide on the respect for law a Chief Minister of a state has. It used this date as the deadline to decide whether or not a Chief Minister of a state can be vilified for purpoted cowardliness and willfully avoiding the due process of the law. How does questioning this wrongful coverage based on an imaginary date amount to side tracking the issue?

And even if it is viewed in isolation, doesn't courtesy demand that a clarification be issued saying an error was made in the reporting of the date? And viewed in totality, doesn't this whole judgement passed by sections of the media on the character of a Chief Minister of a state demand a stronger apology? The Hindu has clarified on the date today, sadly others still haven't. Infact Indian Express ran an editorial decrying Modi for not appearing on the 21st despite SIT keeping its offices open!

And here's where I wish to bring in the total lack of absence of an authority to which we can go and complain. There is no authority in the country as of today, who can judge if you (as in media) or me (as in viewer/reader) is right in this case (or for that matter in any case). Let's leave aside an authority of the government. Except for The Hindu, no other newspaper or TV channel have an independent authority within themselves to assess the errors in factual reporting or to discuss with us their ideological leanings.

As much as I appreciate your drive to make paid news an offence, don't you also think that that by making it the only issue, the EG is sidestepping on other very important and pertinent issues such as these? On the same lines that it petitioned the EC, why doesn't the EG petition the I&B ministry asking to formalise a regulatory authority? Surely the least EG can do is this.

Best Regards,

Sudhir

PS: Here's Rajdeep reply:

Firstly, let me say that we are pushing for an independent regulatory authority.. Hopefully, the govt will accept our recos. Secondly, on narendra modi's date, yes, the date of 21st was erroneous. Yes, we shld have been upfront abt the mistake. But the mistake was not deliberate as the cm seems to suggest. More importantly, the crucial fact in the story was not the date, but the intent of the cm. Having said that, we in the media shld be ready to concede mistakes more readily than we do. Rgds

6th letter to Editors Guild: Loose use of "India"

Dear Sirs,

The recent M.F.Hussain controversy has bought out an hitherto unobserved phenomenon back into limelight. The loose use of the word "India" by most of the media.

Many of the media houses ran shows with the headline "Has India failed M.F." or something to that effect. The commonality between all those headlines is that "we" or "India" has failed M.F.Hussain. The unrestricted use of "India" to potray what maybe a small minority of our vast population care about is totally uncalled for.

Whilst I do not wish to get into the M.F.Hussain debate right now, I wish to point out that there are 10's of crores of Indians who don't even know who M.F.Hussain, let alone care for the "injustice" (if any) was done to him. And also there are crores of Indians, who haven't violently protested against the disgusting potrayal of Hindu Gods and Godesses by M.F.Hussain, but have protested through proper constitutional methods (as in discussions, debates, coffee table chats, court petitions etc). While the electronic media so conveniently ignores the opinion or the lack of it by such a large number of Indians, how fair is it for it to take the liberty to blatanly question if "India" has failed him for the actions of a few?

This example is one of many such instances where the electronic media has taken undue liberty in using the word "India", or for that matter names of cities too. The recent MNIK controversy is another one that immediately comes to mind. Just what is it that represents "India" ? We are a large population with such remarkable diversity that the loose use of the word "India" does a whole lot of injustice to many of the real direct problems many of the crores of Indians face. It is seldom that we see the media take up such language to potray or dicuss their problems.

No one is denying that the freedom of speech is something that needs to protected for every Indian, but when not so celebrity authors get arrested for hurting religious sentiments, isn't it a trifle unfair that "India" doesn't rise up to their protection? Please see this report in The Hindu to know what I am referring to.

My suggestion to the Editor's Guild, is to ask the editors to desist from using the word "India", or names of states/cities on such loose terms. It doesn't do real justice to our diversity.

Best Regards,

Sudhir

PS: Please click on the "editors guild" label below to read the other letters.

5th letter to Editor's Guild: Coverage of Bt. Brinjal

Acutally I just pasted the media section from this long post of mine on Bt Brinjal public forum, and sent it as a suggestion mail to the Editor's Guild. For the record, am pasting it here. Please click on the Editors Guild label below to access the other four letters.

Dear Sirs,

I was at the Bt Brinjal public forum in Hyderabad last Sunday. I wrote a detailed blog about my observations of the views and mood across the hall, Jairam's good moderating skills, and my comments on his comments. I have provided links for the CNN-IBN expose, the environment's ministry's primer etc.

I also wrote about my observations about how media could have better covered it too. Am pasting only the media part of it here. Hope you take it as a positive feedback while considering framing guidelines.

First major complaint. Jairam said that he was disappointed at the ways of expression of displeasure. TIMES NOW says this "Jairam Ramesh disappointed by dissent against Bt.Brinjal" !!! At no point did he say he was for or against Bt.Brinjal.
There were scores of cameras in the auditorium. All of them were just pointed to the dias. Seldom (or maybe at no point) were they turned around to capture the video of those concerned, patriotic citizens who made time to participate in this process. Most of the views were not even recorded, most of them not photographed. But the moment a group of people barged in shouting slogans, they were all over the place! The moment the session concluded, they were all over the dias (like a swarm of bees) surrounding the minister. What were they losing if they tried to film all those who were making their points? Wouldn't it have been great if bits of their arguments (both for and against) were telecast in the media, instead of just showing shouting protestors? Wouldn't it have set a fine example of journalism?I had a premonition from the morning that the media will just cover the protests part of it and nothing else. Were there protests at the event - yes. Were they an eyesore/earsore at times - yes. But for crying out loud, there was about a 2 1/2 hour discussion (and I was there for the latter half) at the auditorium on this issue and all we get from a reputed journalist by name Sagarika Ghose is this - "Bt Brinjal causing large scale protests. jairam ramesh needs to make a comprehensive statement". When infact he made as comprehensive a statement can get from that very dias!

If you wish to read about the different views expressed across the hall, please feel free to visit my blog here:

http://serious--fun.blogspot.com/2010/02/at-bt-brinjal-public-forum.html

Best Regards,
S. Sudhir Kumar

4th letter to Editors Guild

Dear President,

The following letter has been prompted by a suggestion by Mr. N. Bhaskar Rao in his article " Paid News - a deep seated malaise" in today's Hindu news paper.

Specifically he mentions in his point number 4 that: "Academic bodies, independent research agencies, and civil society groups should be encouraged to monitor media contents and articulate their views from time to time."

I fully concur and agree with him, but the sad part is we (civil soceity)just dont know who to write these views to. Some citizens are more than willing to set aside some time and articulate their views, but are just not clear to whose notice they can bring such things so that they can expect immediate action.

Editors Guild as a body can be approached for broad policy guidelines, but for specifics and nitty-gritty of the contents on TV media and newspapers, the only option available so far is to write to the editor. In this matter, the mechanism followed by The Hindu is laudable. The Reader's Editor is an ideal channel for us to interact on a very regular basis our concerns/clarifications on content in the newspaper (It is another thing that I have some serious concerns about the manner in which the present RE is functioning vis-a-vis the previous one, but that is my personal opinion :) ).

1. Is it possible to evolve a rule that makes it mandatory for all news media (print and electronic) appoint such ombudsman mechanisms, so as to be more approachable for the common man. The mechanism should not be a mere "your concern is noted" kind of thing, but has to be interactive to the maximum extent possible (like the previous RE of The Hindu was). The mechanism has to be such that, it can also put a check to the owner driven news that dominate news channels. Relevance of news should take precedence over TRP's ( I know this is easy for me to say, for at the end of the day, the business also has to sustain, but a fine balance is missing as of today). An immediate example that comes to my mind is when Saif and Kareena were guests at HT Leadership summit and their section was aired more number of times than others. Surely, they wouldn't qualify as "leaders":).

2. If not, I suggest that the editors guild take a bold step and recommend to the Government of India to appoint a autonomous commission. The terms of the commission will be similar to the Ombudsman mechanism stated above. In addition to that, periodic interactions with public, in various cities should also be conducted by this commission. Streamlining the mechanism for better interaction with viewers/readers will go a long way in not just curbing paid news but also in making the content more relevant and meaningful.

It is not my intention to constantly berate the media through my letters, but it is an honest attempt to bring in some much needed feedback mechanism. I know how much impact the media can create on the nation and hence these letters. Hope they are taken in the right spirit :)

3rd letter to Editors Guild

My third letter to Editors Guild. The context is explained in point number 2 here.

Dear President,

In my effort to bring to your notice specific incidents of media's over zealousness, I am writing about an incident that took place last evening (7th January, 2010) in Andhra Pradesh. My earlier two letters also had specific examples and suggestions too, and this letter will be in similar vein.

Last night, at about 7 pm, a news channel TV5, started telecasting breaking news that a Russian tabloid "The Exile" has published a conspiracy theory on its American edition that in India, the Chief Minister of AP might have been killed by none other than Mukesh Ambani! To any person with a little common sense, the theory in itself sounds preposterous and laughable.

The Exile published this "conspiracy theory" within hours (yes, within hours) of YSR's death being confirmed. The Exile is neither an acclaimed investigative website nor is renowed for serious journalism (quite evident from the content of the website).

However, TV5 seems to think differently. In its attempt to grab some headlines (I cannot think of any other explanation), the editor had a full 3 hour talk show on this conspiracy theory.

Emotions are already running high in the state. With such news breaking out, the hooligans were at it again. Practically all over the state, rowdies began to attack all Reliance outlets (it didn't matter to them that Mukesh and Anil owned them differently). Another spectre of vandalism taking precedence over logic was witnessed in our state, which is already reeling with heavy losses.

If this is not irrepsible journalism, then what is? The DGP of AP has done the right thing by filing cases against TV5, but now the channel is saying they did no wrong. The violence is not their responsibility. They did not at any point suggest Mukesh did it, and they were merely quoting from the internet. Legally they might be safe sir, but morally, ethically they have behaved in a most detesting manner and are refusing to take responsibility for escalating violence in the state.

It is nobody's contention that the delayed investigation might lead to more questions. The correct path is to question why there is this delay, not to quote some obscure website that prides itself in yello journalism, and then say such doubts arise because of delayed investigations.

I keenly hope that Editors Guild takes a note of this blatant disregard to journalistic ethics by TV5 (and subsequently by Sakshi TV and NTV) and issues some kind of statement condemning this shameful decision.

PS: A condenation was issues by Editors Guild later in the evening. I am not saying it is because of this letter :), just giving the information,lest people think no statement was issued.

2nd letter to Editors Guild

Am pasting here, the second mail I sent to Rajdeep and the Editors Guild. In his first reply, Rajdeep said he'd be happy to take specific complaints/suggestions. This letter is the first in a series of such complaints/suggestions. Please feel free to add any more suggestions, we can send them in the next mail :).

Thanks for the reply Rajdeep. I wish to now bring to the notice of the Editor's Guild a key issue regarding media coverage during violence in cities.

I wish to present two examples briefly, and then suggest remedial measures.

1. During the ongoing agitation on Telangana, recently there were some stone pelting incidents in Hyderabad. I was in one of the shops when the incident occured and could walk back to my home in the exact same route the miscreants took out their march within the next half hour. However, the local media hyped up these small incidents of violence to unimaginable levels, using banner headlines like "Hyderabad is tensed", "City citizens are tensed", "There is war-like atmosphere" (I am not kidding sir, Sakshi TV reporter actually used the word war-like to describe this situation). Media even ran banner saying two buses were burnt in the city. Till date, we have never seen a picture nor a video of these buses burning. The result of this hype - establishments in the entire city were shut down in 2 hours. The 48 hour bandh subsequently called also resulted in many such establishments remaining shut. Full details on my blog here.

2. My fellow Netizen Anand Bala in his blog here describes how TIMES NOW channel ran scrolling headlines that entire city of Bangalore was burning (after Vishnuvardhan's death) when there was small scale violence in some parts of the city. Again, a sense of fear permeated into the minds of people, there by creating an unnecessary volatile situation

I think we have to blame the media squarely for allowing such fear factor to creep in. Instead of telecasting reality, an agenda driven media in AP and some irresponsible reporting in Bangalore has caused so much hardship for the common man.

I feel it is high time we have some regulations on the media while reporting incidents of violence.

1. Use of superlatives has to be avoided at all costs.
2. Specific areas where there are disturbances have to continously telecasted.
3. Extension of tension is pockets of the city to the entire city is totally unwarranted and should be avoided.
4. Infact, it would be great if the media went ahead and instilled confidence in people.
5. Repeated telecast of the same incident over hours is fine, but it has to be displayed prominently the time at which the video was filmed. For example, if the incident took place at 12pm, and if I swtich on the TV at 2pm, there is a split screen. Right side shows the violence. Left side shows a panel discussion and reads LIVE. I will be under the assumption that the violence is also LIVE.
6. Please let us know if framing such rules does come under the purview of Editors Guild. If yes, it would be great if you could have a discussion on this. If no, can you please let us know who in the government we should be contacting?

Happy New Year and hope we bring about the much needed change in media behaviour in this year :)

Regards,
Sudhir

To, The Editors Guild of India

To,
The President
Editors Guild of India

Sir,

I rise to the call of the Editors Guild that "urged all stakeholders to join this endeavour to push for a clean and transparent media." I am glad that you decided to make 2010 as an year of campaigning against paid news scandal. While I don't mind waiting for the results of this campaign (given the fact that we wait for longer times to get normal justice delivered in this country), I have some particular questions in my mind right now.


1. Can you also have public forums in various cities wherein the ethics committee can directly take suggestions/complaints from the general public?
2. If I have a grouse against a particular editor/newspaper (based on content, not personal ;-) ), can I approach the Editors Guild?
3. How do I exactly contact the Editors Guild?

P. Sainath in his expose here, clearly states that Lokmat, Maharashtra Times and Pudhari have published the same report in all three newspapers. Vir Sanghvi openly berates Delhi Times and Bombay Times in his article here.

4. Were these editors also part of this meeting?
5. The statement by the guild says both the media organisation buying and the guy selling are guilty. From Sainath's piece, I infer that Ashok Chavan, Lokmat, Maharashtra Times and Pudhari are guilty. From Vir Sanghvi's piece, I infer that DT and BT are guilty. Why is the editors guild shying away from naming these people?
6. Why can't this report be made a good starting point for some immediate action instead of dilly dallying on framing some code of conduct?
7. How much binding is the code of conduct on all editors of this country? What if someone does not adhere to it? I hope we dont just stop at just issuing show cause notices like the EC does!
8. "In the coming months, the Guild plans to work with other media organisations to sensitise the media and civil society – including political parties and the Election Commission – on the need to eliminate this “unacceptable practice.” " How exactly are we going to sensitize political parties not to buy news? Political parties, in conjuction with media are killing journalism, and instead of calling for stricter norms, we are being content with trying to "sensitize" them?
9. Also sir, the media propaganda of AP is as worst as it can get. Can the editors guild please take note of this too.

It is with disappointment that I read Sainath's recent articles (1, 2, 3) wherein he clearly exposed the ugly dealings of many newspapers in Maharashtra. The usually alert media, which takes no time in claiming an exclusive corruption scandals of leaders and officers, finds this news not worthy of fitting in the "breaking news" slot. The news died in just one day. Theres absolute silence since then till yesterday when the editor's guild released a statement condemning the "pernicious practice of publishing paid news". Mere condemnation, sir, has become a fashion in our country (as we so often see). In the coming months, we hope to see that the national media can highlight corruption amongst its ilk with the same fervour that it exposes other scams.

Vir Sanghvi might think that we don't care, but clearly we do.