The Greatest Threat To Media Is Media Itself

The already strained relations between India’s mainstream media and the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government deteriorated further as earlier this week, Union Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Smriti Irani, promulgated a directive that sought to curb accreditation of media organisations on the basis of fake news put out by them. There was a predictable uproar, the ever present spectre of Emergency was raised, perfunctory protests held across press clubs before Prime Minister Modi intervened to stop the directive from taking effect. Media celebrated it as a victory and even some members of the right on social media castigated the Prime Minister for asking the I&B Ministry to rescind its directive.

In such a heated discourse, the real issues often face the risk of being ignored, so an impartial analysis of this entire issue seems to be in order.

To begin with, it is very important, for the sake of free speech, to carefully frame the context of the issue and understand if it meets the criteria for government suppression of free speech as commonly accused by the mainstream media. A quick look at the punishment will reveal that even in its original format, it could scarcely be called as infringement of free speech. The punishment restricted and eventually cancelled access the journalists get due to accreditation. Nothing stops such a journalist to continue working and reporting on the government as they are employees of private organisations. If anything, by restricting access, government was creating the possibility of not getting a chance to respond since the journalist in question could cite his/her lack of access as a reason for not giving the government’s side of a story.

So, while lack of access can be a legitimate hindrance for the journalist from discharging their obligations, it is by no way a gag order or a restriction of their free speech. It is very important to keep this distinction in mind since lately a lot of causes are piggybacking on ‘free speech’ whenever their proponents in the mainstream media find the government’s position on an issue contrary to their interest. This clever sleight of hand must be resisted, most of all by free speech advocates as it chokes the bandwidth and dilutes the scope of the debate.

The next question, naturally, is then that why were journalists so upset with this directive? I recommend everyone to read this excellent piece written by Gayatri Jayaraman in the same place about access journalism where she writes about how cash-strapped media organisations raise money from corporates by trading in the only currency they hold - a chance to rub shoulders with those in power. And that is also the reason, that they find the prospect of being expelled from corridors of power particularly appalling. It is not getting in the way of their primary duty, it is getting in the way of their primary model of business.

That said, as media’s work directly affects all of us and as recent events have shown the destructive power of fake news, it is important to analyse their stand on self-regulation and fake news and then decide if the government needs to step in.

Indian mainstream media’s stance is riddled with self-contradicting ideological positions as far as free speech is concerned. So, on one hand while a majority of them support the right of the Kashmiri separatists in JNU to shout “Bharat tere tukde honge”, one of them also suggested trying former international cricketer Gautam Gambhir for sedition for speaking his mind. While on one hand the raids on a New Delhi-based channel offices were vehemently protested as government clampdown, Congress leaders pushing certain TV channels representatives around was cheered by the same lot. Members of mainstream media have written op-eds seeking to silence the Chief of Indian Army and have cheered when the rights of a private citizens were trampled by a TMC MP when he mentioned the name of the citizen using his parliamentary immunity. While each one of us may have different positions on all of the above issues, it is safe to conclude, at the very least, that Indian mainstream media as a sentinel for free speech is an illusion.

Nor is media denying the existence of fake news as a new age media phenomenon. Reams of paper have been devoted by various journalists crying wolf over the fear of rampaging rumour mongers of social media taking over the discourse and destroying the ‘secular fabric’ of our country. When Postcard News’ founder, Mahesh Hegde, was arrested by Karnataka government for allegedly tweeting a false news, the only thing mainstream media asked was why some leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were supporting Mahesh Hegde.

This stance is further exacerbated by some in the mainstream media declaring themselves to be a prominent force in the news business. A casual look at statements made by leading journalists would reveal a naked contempt for new age news platforms like Swarajya or OpIndia. So, the mainstream media that feels they are still the only voice serious people listen to, also feel that the unimportant social media platforms are dangerous tools for fake news dissemination. This is like the American pharmaceutical industry acknowledging the opioid epidemic and then refusing to accept blame for the same.

In my opinion, a part of this problem originates from mainstream media’s sense of entitlement. A sense that was carefully nurtured by the earlier rulers to force their writ on the unwitting masses. This has resulted into a continuous rhetoric aimed at evading responsibility by bending definitions of terms like fake news, as Vineet Jain tried here. No other professional malpractice claim requires you to prove intent, just that the malpractice was done. This position from the leader of a leading news organisation that insists on a distinction between incompetence and malevolence (even if they result in equal harm) points to a disturbing characteristic of irresponsibility as a perk of the job.

A couple of years back, at the Idea India Conclave, I had asked a senior journalist about the media’s problem of loss of credibility. Her response - there is no loss of credibility, those claiming so are doing it out of spite for mainstream media. Jain’s tweet above is the logical extension of the senior journalist’s position about credibility. They refuse to acknowledge that a problem exists.

In the larger context of present day discourse, media’s desire to promote a particular narrative can be linked to fake news. The alleged church attacks in Delhi, the filmmaker getting threatened over a leather bag are just two of the many examples where a fake news just happened to conveniently validate the narrative the media was promoting. I call this as the Almighty Complex. In late Irving Wallace’s novel The Almighty, the owner of a newspaper begins to engineer events like assassination, bomb blasts in order to get the news first which in turn would increase his circulation. Even with its exaggeration, this novel is a good look at what happens when media begins to view itself as builder of narratives instead of reporter of news.

And that is the reason that, as ill-thought out as the Information and Broadcasting Ministry’s directive was in my opinion, I don’t think self-regulation of mainstream media is going to work in India. The media is too deep in their denial of the problem, too much in love with their victim-martyr narrative, too invested in access journalism to think about setting their house in order.

Meanwhile, as tempers flare and passions run high, every misstatement, every half-truth and every lie uttered by a man or woman with an access to a TV channel, a newspaper or a periodical, will have life and death consequences for ordinary people like us.

Even in the alcoholic anonymous rehabilitation programme, it is insisted that the alcoholic acknowledges that he/she is an alcoholic, alcoholism is referred to as a self-diagnosed illness. It is worth remembering that whenever an addict continues to deny the existence of a problem and keeps pushing the “I am in control of my addiction” narrative, the problem would destroy not only his health but also the well-being of those around him.

Media’s refusal to accept their diseases is inflicting a high price on us as a nation. They might have evaded accountability this time around but I am afraid the status quo can’t persist much longer.