If you wish to access the archives, please go to the Das Ka Dum tab on the website’s top navigation bar or click here: https://www.mxmindia.com/category/columns/das-ka-dum/
Q: There are many who say that news media these days is very unbiased. But should media entities really pretend to be unbiased? Readers after all have a choice of rejecting them….
A: Your question has put me in a quandary and compelled me to meander around the whole concept of neutrality— a kind of philosophical dilemma.
First, is there anything called “absolute neutrality or absolute non-bias”? Any position, however polemically sound, will affect one party or the other. Hence, any party affected by a declared position or stand would make the affected party aggrieved. One can take a stand saying that basic principles of jurisprudence in a civilised society need to take such a stand in the interest of governance.
Now that a meta point is out of the way, let me share my views on news media. I agree with you (unstated though) that unbiased is boring and news media should ideally take a stand (even if it doesn’t stand the scrutiny of jurisprudence or fact-based conclusions) and the audience has the right to reject or avoid such media.
Your position can’t be disputed. After all, in a democratic society it is in order. It’s a different matter that as of today, taking a position happens more covertly or in a camouflaged manner than transparently. For example, New York Times usually announces during the presidential election that it is supporting a particular candidate. In such a situation, the audience can go through content with that filter. The problem happens when the position taken by a media title is nebulous.
I also have a different take on the subject. Do we think that the audience is neuro-divergent and can’t decode what is being served as content at the behest of some hidden agenda? It may be so for illiterate or aliterate audience base. It is their choice. But there is an uncodified protocol in news journalism that facts of both sides should be presented to the audience in an unbiased manner and let the audience decide on their own stand. Serving news dishes isn’t the same as ‘masaledar’ khana. The onus is on the media titles to follow high standards of jurisprudence, rather that participating in ushering in a fractured polity and population.
It may be relevant to mention here there is a hidden market for social solvency and/or political influence. Quite often, these considerations influence confirmation biases, and not necessarily to take a biased stand for ideological reasons. Expediency or to curry favour with the powers that be compels a particular stand. And in a thick culture in many developing countries, this is a normative approach to content creation, as opposed to a thin culture.