Regulating Media: A Bad Idea, Certainly

When the country is severely reeling under endemic corruptions and politicians have taken a ride on the sentiments of citizens of this nation, the very naive idea of pushing a private bill (by a first-timer MP Meenakshi Natarajan) to regulate media not only indicates how ignorant the MP is about the very basics of Indian Constitution that enshrines freedom of speech as fundamental rights, but also she intends to advocate a democracy to function without freedom of press. In a democratic setup, media is the only institution outside governance that acts as an independent watchdog and brings truth to the fore.

Freedom of expression is the corner stone of democratic evolution. Conventional media run by professional journalists and editors represents the pillar of free speech. Although recently few media houses have crossed their ethical limit and displayed downgraded standards in reporting biased, frivolous news pieces; nevertheless, the idea of regulating media by state agencies is altogether an untoward move.

As law makers, the legislators have the privilege to bring in any draconian law which would suit their political objective; however, in a functional democracy, the most stringent, anti-democratic law is even subject to complete abrogation when the government changes. India has already witnessed the fate of a draconian law like TADA in the last decade.

The developed democracies like US, UK, and France are the greatest upholders of the principle of freedom of speech and expression. Despite myriads of exposes against the ruling class in press, these nations have even ensured free and independent media. The law-makers of these nations are true democrats who believe in freedom of expression. A self-regulated media is undoubtedly a great partner in a long, meaningful democratic journey.

However, in India, majority of politicians are tainted, corrupt, and law-breakers, so a free press becomes a huge roadblock for their escapades. In the history of high-decibel scams in India, whether it's Bofors, 2G, or CWG, it was only media that exposed the matter in public domain first, and then the police or judiciary executed their responsibilities later.

With regulated media, the freedom of speech will be strangled and every report that will be published in media will be nothing more than a public relation exercise because of excessive state monitoring and hegemonic bureaucracy. Post enactment of law, no government would like to support an independent media, and eventually state-run media will take the lead. Are we heading to transform such a vibrant democracy into a communist country like China? Maybe, that could be the hidden agenda of many political parties. Nevertheless, India as a nation of great political diversity won't afford to take that route.

Life of A Bubble

In journalism, facts are always sacrosanct, but the facts alone never rise up to a conclusive truth, both are different. When facts come from various heterogeneous sources, the validation, analysis, and inferences drawn on them all depend upon the intellectual mettle of the editorial team of a media house. The editor is the judge who always balances between the outcome of facts and rational conclusion. In no circumstances, a precariously inferred editorial judgment can be contested with the veracity of facts because if that could have been so the media could have turned into a soap opera house where skepticism and conjecture rule the roost. Of course, some media houses do believe in this kind of tabloid journalism to increase their readership or viewership.

In the post-Independent period, if any media report has gone formidably wrong is the report "The January night Raisina Hill was spooked: Two key Army units moved towards Delhi without notifying Govt" published in the Indian Express on April 4. The report not only reflects the collective penurious judgment of the editorial team of this newspaper, but also it dangerously reveals the low institutionalized IQ that the tribe called journalists possess and often use it for creating jitters among readers. Well, this is another media gimmick to perpetuate sensational reports for acquire more eyeballs when the newspaper internalizes the fact that it's ABC rank is moving southward.

Well, let's get down to brass-tacks. There are two theories that influence the genesis of this story. First, what prompted Sekhar Gupta to put him in the shoes of a reporter and push such a stinky, unintellectual, hyperbolic story on the front page is an indication of the plummeted readership of Indian Express in all these years. Second, in the nexus between arms lobby and bureaucracy, media has turned out to become a harlot in displaying all wrong innuendos to attract customers (read readers/viewers). In a democracy, the role of media can't be enfeebled, but the growing instances of pulverizing truth and promoting sensation have put a question mark on the probity of media. Fewer facts and a blunt ego of understanding the facts from the pith of real issue, without even having deep domain competency, are a dangerous outcome of free press.

The myopic “coup” story is just the menacing tip of the iceberg called investigative journalism a specialized domain in media studies that prompts all and sundry to tread on the slippery slope of truth seeking, but that aspect of human endeavor is neither a child's play. And investigation is rational when all sides of the story have been scrutinized threadbare and the analysis is done based on considering all possible parameters that have a stake in shaping the singular, incontrovertible judgment. Mr Gupta, are you listening? Take a snap before the bubble goes burst.