A NEW LOW IN JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS

With two Telugu news channels devoting almost the entire air time on Tuesday (June 1,10) on a non-issue, as if nothing else happened in the world, it becomes very clear that the powerful visual media outlets have become a tool in the hands of the proprietors to settle personal scores. Besides, television channels have come handy for the disgruntled elements in society to misuse this medium for their own personal agenda.

Let’s take the case of Nityananda. I am not here to hold brief for him. The very fact that he hid himself in a remote village in Himachal Pradesh for two months and chose to be in touch with the outside world through his website does not speak high of his personal character. You don’t expect this from someone who calls himself “Swami” and much worse, “Paramahamsa”. A disgruntled disciple in his own Ashram thought of using the television medium to “expose” Nityananda and a channel which allegedly had some problem with him on land deals, readily obliged the estranged disciple. The channel may claim that it telecast the tape showing Nityananda in a compromising position in “public interest”. May be. I am not here to dispute that. In the process, the channel only helped a grumpy disciple to settle scores with his master. In other words, the channel allowed itself to be used by someone who had a different agenda. Is it ethical?

Close on the heels of this episode, someone who did not like the style of functioning of a Swami in Shimoga, planned to prepare a CD using the look alike of the Swami and showing him to be in a compromising position with women and to circulate it among the television channels in Karnataka. Timely intervention by the Police saved the Swami’s honour. Otherwise, the channels in Karnataka would have gone to town with the tape without any verification.
Whatever may be the defence of the channels in obliging such interested parties, what is irrefutable is that it sets a dangerous trend in the media world.

What is that dangerous trend was seen on Tuesday when two Telugu news channels – NTV and ABN-Andhra Jyoti – kept on telecasting charges and counter charges throughout the day. The issue revolved around another Swami. This time, it was Swami Swarupananda of Vizag-based Sarada Peetam. This Peetam itself is a new one and may be, he is a self-styled Swami. That is beside the point. Bhakti TV, a devotional channel from the NTV stable, has been telecasting Swarupananda’s religious discourses in the channel. The charge by the Swami was that the CEO of NTV demanded one crore rupees for telecasting his discourses and blackmailed him. Incidentally, the same CEO had to quit two television channels earlier under a cloud and the allegations, (one does not know about the veracity of the charges) were similar – extortion and blackmail. The Swami recorded the telephone conversation with CEO of NTV and other business executives and gave the tape to ABN-Andhra Jyoti which readily obliged to telecast the audio tape.

Why did the Swami give the tape to this particular channel when there are twelve more news channels in Telugu? Thereby hangs a tale. Proprietors of NTV and ABN-AJ have long standing rivalry though both belong to the same caste. It appears caste does not seem to be a uniting factor when it comes to business rivalry. ABN-AJ found the tape a wonderful weapon to run down NTV and to paint the proprietor as a blackmailer.

How can NTV take it lying down? It started a propaganda war against ABN-AJ proprietor and Swarupananda. The channel, without any shred of evidence made all sorts of allegations against the Sarada Peetam chief, like land grabbing, misuse of funds donated by the devotees. NTV also carried a spoof in Telangana dialect poking fun at the Swami in a most disgusting language. It was a mockery of press freedom. It is for the legal pundits to examine whether the channel crossed all limits of press freedom and abused it for personal vendetta without any iota of public interest. To make matters worse, the channel used journalists to wage a proxy war against ABN-AJ proprietor and recalled all his past misdemeanours.

This does not mean ABN-AJ emerged as a paragon of virtues. The proprietor himself, a journalist of sorts in his “Poorvashram”, came on the screen in a Q&A programme and dared the rival channel to come out with evidence, if it has any, against him.
We have seen sensationalisation of news, trivialisation of news; but Tuesday saw a new low in journalistic abuse by the proprietors. If NTV blackmailed the Swami, he was free to approach the Police. Of course, he did it, but only after inflicting damage on the channel, for which another channel was a party. Thus, the channels, as I mentioned earlier, have become a tool for blackmail. It will be a misnomer to call them “news channels” or we may have to redefine the concept of “news”. There was a time when a newspaper will not even carry a clarificatory rejoinder if the original story appeared in another daily. But the competition and entry of people who have no commitment to the media except for the political clout one derives to erase the past , the rules of the game have changed. These proprietors have even usurped the office of “editor”. Editors’ prerogative no longer exists and this institution of “editors” itself is facing the threat of extinction.

Someone asked me what is the remedy for this disturbing trend. We need a media council with enough teeth and powers for punitive action to closely monitor these channels and pull them up whenever they go astray. In a democratic set up, we can’t prevent anyone from starting a channel or launching a newspaper. We can only activate the civil society to form media vigil groups so as to create awareness among the readers and viewers to shun those rogue media outlets. Of course, this is easier said than done.