The media has been a key player in Raj Thackeray‘s hate campaign against “outsiders” in Bombay. In giving him the oxygen of publicity, in editorialising news, in fanning the flames by repeatedly showing file pictures, in dealing with the issue as if there were no other sides to it, the media has come under scrutiny from the Union cabinet, from independent analysts, and from sections of the media itself.
Thackeray himself has used the local Marathi media adroitly in turning this into an “us versus them” issue a la Narendra Modi. He has written a signed article in Maharashtra Times (of The Times of India group), he has responded to an open letter in Lok Satta (of the Indian Express group), and he has kept his media conferences out of bounds to English and Hindi media (whom he sees as antithetical to the local interests he is championing).
The veteran journalist Jyoti Punwani has some fine questions on all this on The Hoot:
# Should a newspaper offer its pages to a politician who has been promoting hatred against other Indians on the basis of region and language, and whose followers have assaulted unarmed innocents on that basis?
# If that politician uses the space offered to him to justify and further his hate campaign, should the newspaper carry his piece without any strong editorial rebuttal alongside?
# As a political leader entitled to invite to a press conference journalists of his/her choice, based on language/region? In that case, what should be the response of journalists, especially those invited?
# Should TV cameras telecast incidents of violence during communal riots again and again without specifying that these are file pictures?
# Finally, how should the media report on the acts of a politician leading a hate campaign based on region and language?
Read the full article: Lending hate campaigns a platform
Cross-posted on sans serif
Tags: Churumuri, Indian Express, Karnataka Rakshana Vedike, Lok Satta, Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, Maharashtra Times, Narendra Modi, Raj Thackeray
25 February 2008 at 3:08 pm
No madam, newspaper’s real estate is the holy property of you celebrity jholawallahs, please give our lawmakers some time to amend the Constitution, to reflect that.
25 February 2008 at 5:45 pm
Since when did News reporters become arbiters of what can be published or not? Isnt that against the idea of journalism itself? I am sure Jyothi Punwani is a fine women, but maam, “please shut up and report” instead of brow beating poor mortals like us on morality lessons.
25 February 2008 at 7:56 pm
Answers.
*Everyone has opinions and newspapers accommodate this –as news reports, as opinions and as letters to editors. As a politician has some constituency– big or small– he or she is given a chance to explain his theories, the readers decide if he is right or wrong. Whether it is a hate campaign or call for identity reinforcement.
*Newspapers normally carry their viewpoint in editorials. Newspapers need not necessarily agree with every opinion piece they run.
*Politicians are ALSO free to engage with those who share their ideologies or background. Journalists normally attend press conferences unless otherwise busy –as for coverage, if it is not their beat they inform the beat correspondent as well. Sometimes interactions between same state or region politicians which are not “formal’ press conferences also take place. No journalist will miss the opportunity to get information, inside story and sometimes exclusives too.
*If it is related to the news story, it may be done. If the subject is still in the news, file pictures may be used especially when it is known to all that the violence is not “live”. The broadcast should not use an old set of visuals passing it off as current visuals –in such cases, file picture should be specified. As TV has been around for sometime now in India, television industry has its own code of conduct. The “file picture” super is given when (or if..at all) an old quote is being used, or all the people in the visuals are clad in heavy woollens in peak summer.
*The spot news should be factual, analysis should go beyond the facts into what led to XYZ, opinions should reflect what the writer thinks, editorials should take a stance.
PS: Blogs can however question everything –the facts, the opinions, the newspapers, the coverage, the motives and so on and so forth. Giggle.
25 February 2008 at 8:01 pm
There are five questions here, and there is no one answer to all of them. Of course, the media should gave space even to hate mongers because that is what the media is here for. The belief that the hate won’t spread if the media shut their doors belongs to another era, when newspapers were the only means of communication. That has changed. If the hate monger wants to spread hate, it can send an SMS as the BJP has become so adept at doing. in the Raj Thackeray case, the man had shut himself out, so it is a coup of sorts for Maharashtra Times. But it is also a matter of record in future litigation.
Thackeray’s piece belonged on the comment page, not page one. But then that is one of a piece in Indian media where the distinction between news and comment is fast vanishing. Then again, why should the newspaper intervene and have a rebuttal. It may well be that the paper believes in that view much as the Jyoti Punwanis may not like it!
Barring journalists from press conferences on the basis of language, region and religion is highly debatable because MNS is a registered political party. Thackeray is using the local media. By shutting the non-local media out, he is painting them all as adversaries. By giving local media access, he is ensuring that they eat out of his hands without any discretion.
File pictures should not be repeatedly used, but that is not just in the case of Thackeray’s goondagiri, but in so many news stories that are shown over and over again.
25 February 2008 at 8:27 pm
hate mongering? that should apply to the media in this case. the first time raj thackeray raised this issue, the self-declared moralists in the media simply pounced on him and made a caricature out of him. these same journalists would have I’m sure declared Gandhi as anarchist if they had been in the 1920s.
these guys made the whole issue a taboo and slammed raj thackeray utterly disproportionate to his initial comments. its as if the media wants MNS to kill more people so that they can make a moolah out of this. these journalists should try more honorable professions like prostitution.
ps: Vir Sanghvi and Outlook though have woken up recently and have highlighted the dangerous trends in immigration.
25 February 2008 at 8:33 pm
The Times group seems to be playing a very devious double game. While its English publications have perfected itsy-bitsy, tits-and-ass journalism that celebrates individualism, it seems to be using its language publications to fan grassroots right-wing flames, be it in Maharashtra through ‘Maharashtra Times’ or in Karnataka through ‘Vijay Karnataka’.
Vandals like Raj Thackeray and Narendra Modi should be given space, but should it only be through a hate-filled first-person piece? Would we have allowed Hitler or Stalin to write a first-person piece on “How I exterminated millions…” Don’t these publications have reporters and editors who can engage with these thugs?
If a newspaper wants to give unbridled space for the “other view” unmindful of its damage potential, Thackeray could well have been asked to take out an ad. But since it appeared in a Times publication, it may well have been a paid advertisement masquerading as news. Navbharat Times is presumably read by Bhaiyyas and Biharis. Wonder what view the Times group provided its readers in the heartland.
25 February 2008 at 10:07 pm
Media has been giving space to hate mongers from the time of british rule in india. It elevated Jinnah who was the biggest hate monger of all to a demi-god status and still bats for the other butcher from across the border, Mushy.
Domestically, it has given and still continues to give ample space to communists like yechury,karat, surjeet, sonia,arjun singh etc. So why is punwani questioning the propensity of the media to give space to right wing leaders? This is a typical JNU jolawahalla tirade against people they want to demonise.
25 February 2008 at 10:42 pm
Good and bad are relative. Journalists should report news as it happens.
26 February 2008 at 6:15 am
Its surprising that when news papers blackout letters sent to editors because it doesn’t suit their editorial policy (sic), it allots columns after columns to such sick politicians like Raj Thackeray and Modi. It amounts to free advertisement to their hate mongering. If they cann’t be avoided (?) then there should be articles on the same day by equally well known people countering their distorted vision.
2 March 2008 at 8:31 am
Why is it that when Marathi people rally around their self interest it is called hate mongering. When others do the same it is called reformation.
You may want to check the legal status of India. It is a federation and not some monolithic country occupied by a homogeneous race. Get over it. It is going to come unglued. Soviet Union last 70 years, I will give India another 10 years.