MxMIndia

Tag: freaking news

  • If your place of employment has taken a policy decision to ignore the sort of stories that you feel strongly about, protest or even better, quit, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: The new, sloppy world of Indian journalism

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The Prime Minister of India is apparently upset that the media targeted his minister VK Singh for his “presstitute” remark, while ignoring the good evacuation work that the former chief of army staff had done in Yemen.

     

    In these media-obsessed times, where we are given more importance than we are worth, perhaps the PM’s comments are understandable. What I find intriguing is the number of working journalists who agree with Narendra Modi about the lack of attention paid to India’s exemplary role in evacuating people from the dangers in Yemen. If you work in a newspaper or a TV channel or a website, then you have a say in what goes into your paper or appears on your channel or on your website. To come on Twitter and start ranting about “the media” as one entity which ignored events in Yemen is childish and exposes your own irresponsibility. What were you doing? Does your job have no value or meaning? Can you not make your voice heard in your newsroom? In that case, what sort of a journalist are you? The best newsrooms after all are those in which there is healthy discussion and that is a euphemism for a fight!

     

    And if your place of employment has taken a policy decision to ignore the sort of stories that you feel strongly about, take a stand. Protest or even better, quit: that way you will show the world the depth of your beliefs and your ideals.

     

    But no, you have that loan, your child’s education, your weakness for shoes or whatever. So much easier to do a sloppy job at work and then come to social media to slam this entity called “the media”. Imagine how good a journalist you are when you pretend that there is such a thing as “the media” which thinks and acts as one. I use the word “sloppy” deliberately because if you are a job-worker then you have no business being a journalist. I find this category of journalist more repulsive than those who openly support a political party. At least they take a position openly in their professional life, whether you agree with them or not. But these say-nothing-at-work-and-rant-on-social-media journalists are nothing but snivelling cowards who pretend to have principles but only care about their pelf.

     

    But given the state of media managements today and the general standard I see around me, I give thanks that I have been unemployed for five years now and counting. And thanks to this column, unemployable as well!

     

    **

     

    Since I wrote about how no one knows what Rahul Gandhi did when he was away from public life for two months or what he did, this joke on Twitter after his speech at a rally and in Parliament seemed appropriate: apparently, he’d been learning to speak Hindi!

     

    **

     

    Other political parties in India must be either tearing their metaphorical hair out or hugely relieved that the national media’s obsession with AAP means that this Delhi-based parties regularly wins newsprint space and airtime over even the prime minister of India. One of those bane and boon situations…

     

  • We are indeed lucky the news channels did not tell us what Rahul Gandhi was eating for breakfast and so on, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Rahul G is back. Yawn

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Given that the prime minister and chief newscatcher of India is away in foreign lands, Indian TV media found its dose of breathless excitement in the return of Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi from… somewhere. He’s back after 56 days or 57 days or eight weeks or six weeks or the Indian Express told us this morning, 53 days. Many days obviously, but we are short on detail even there.  We don’t know where he went, we don’t know for how long and we just about vaguely know why: Introspection or some such political excuse. So much for all the Ws and Hs, once essential in the practice of nuts and bolts journalism.

     

    What we got was a moving picture of a car window through which I at least could see nothing. In one newspaper this morning, there was a shadowy face worthy of a Dan Brown conspiracy theory but two very cute little doggies. The doggies were not named or identified so the reader is none the wiser on pointless trivia.

     

    Some Congress party members burnt fire crackers in celebration and provided some anodyne sound bytes. Some BJP people sniggered. In short nothing unusual or newsworthy was on offer apart presumably from the fact of Gandhi’s return. With nothing to say, reporters egged on by anchors, speculated on what Gandhi was doing, could be doing, should be doing, might not be doing, would do if he was the reporter or the anchor or another person. We are indeed lucky they did not tell us he was eating breakfast, having a bath and so on. Or who knows, maybe any facts would have been more interesting than this piffle.

     

    So there we are. Rahul Gandhi is back in India. Yawn.

     

    **

     

    There is an intriguing difference between city coverage in newspapers in Delhi and Mumbai. Mumbai newspapers are obsessed with crime, civic issues (this covers just about everything), infrastructure development (whatever’s left) and the green narrative. Politics takes a backseat. Delhi newspapers are obsessed with politics and its colleges. I read a whole page on some childish little fight in St Stephens College that was neither spicy nor exciting nor even that interesting. Who woulda thunk that the Dalliwallahs were so big on education? All right, I apologise. Having spent most of my life in Mumbai, I do know that when Mumbaikars speak education, they’re talking money. Not: my principal is so mean.

     

    And for an outsider, it seems like crime should be a big Delhi thing…

     

    The Delhi obsession with St Stephens College is odd, though. Why?

     

    **

     

    Prime Minister Modi is away of course but not forgotten. His tours of France, Germany and Canada have been covered extensively by all the new channels. If you think there has been any shortfall, blame it on the time difference. The Canadian media has also covered the visit, especially the uranium deal. Time Magazine has got US president Barack Obama to write a profile on Modi, surely a coup.

     

    Indian newspapers however, have been more on the deals struck than the hoopla around the visit. I must here admit that I am sorely disappointed with the NRIs of Canada for not providing a song-and-dance show like their counterparts in the US and Australia.

     

    Or maybe the evil media didn’t show it?

     

  • Newspapers often waste space on some unknown person of Indian origin winning a municipal election in an obscure American town just because of the Indian connection so it was unfortunate to see Sania Mirza not making the cut, notes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Not enough on Sania!

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The world of Twitter exploded when Indian tennis star Sania Mirza became world number one in the women’s doubles version of the game. She is the first Indian woman to scale those heights; Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi have both been number one in men’s doubles. Mirza and her partner, the uber-talented multiple Grand slam winner Martina Hingis, won three titles on the trot to claim the ranking.

     

    So congratulations were in order, except for a few well-known internet dyspeptics who dislike Mirza because she’s female, a Muslim, married to a Pakistani or not a singles player. I have not been able to find similar bile directed at Paes or Bhupathi, who also did not reach number 1 ranking in singles either. Hence, my conjecture at the reasons for the hatred of Mirza.

     

    But loons on social media aside, how did traditional media respond? Sunday, April 12, had also seen two Indian Premier League matches and two English Premier League matches. That is, cricket being played in India and football, being played in England with not a single Indian player in sight.

     

    Here’s a roundup of some of the newspapers I looked at on Monday. The Times of India reduced Mirza to the middle of an inside page, after the IPL stories which get the first sports page. TOI though is notoriously skint when it comes to tennis stories. The Hindustan Times, which has much better tennis coverage usually, stuck Mirza on that annoying front page jacket but had a Manchester United player above the masthead on the, er, real front page. The story was relegated to the inside sports pages.

     

    DNA and Asian Age carried the picture on page 1. Mumbai Mirror also had a front page mention. The Economic Times did not mention Mirza at all. I gather from tennis fans across India that major language papers were no different.

     

    Anyone who works in a newspaper understands the pressures and pulls of a newsroom at deadline. But it is still intriguing, especially when we have become so collectively jingoistic about India, Indians and their achievements. Newspapers often waste space on some unknown person of Indian origin winning a municipal election in an obscure American town just because of the Indian connection. But Mirza clearly did not make the cut.

    Ah well.

     

    **

     

    The other big stories of the week were obviously the prime minister’s overseas trip, the declassified files on Subhas Chandra Bose’s family being under Intelligence Bureau surveillance and the Indian purchase of Rafale jets. I am ignoring the twitter squabble between some journalists and Modi fans over the shawl the prime minister has been wearing in Europe because it is so silly.

     

    But if you ever want to get really confused, you could concentrate on the Nehru-spied-on-Bose’s-family and why-did-we-buy-the-jets stories. For those who are not obsessed with Indian contemporary history or India’s defence deals, these are veritable minefields which are impossible to traverse safely with mind and body intact. My point is, the media don’t help!

     

    **

     

    What is more easily accessible is the online and now offline fight to protect “net neutrality” or that is, to stop mobile and internet service providers from allowing access to websites that pay them. And make you pay for the sites you want to go to.
    Get into it!

     

  • I would suggest that working journalists who feel so strongly about abhorrent media practices invented by the people who pay them their salaries need to take a strong stand and pay the price for their principles by becoming jobless, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: The curious use of the term “presstitute”

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    A little storm whirled around in the world of Indian journalism when former chief of army staff and a junior minister in the NDA government at the Centre General (retired) VK Singh put out this tweet:
    Friends what do you you expect from presstitutes. Last time Arnab thought there was ‘O’ in place of ‘E’ #TimesNowDisaster
    – Vijay Kumar Singh (@Gen_VKSingh) April 7, 2015

     

    This was compounded by former Supreme Court judge and current Press Council charman Markandey Katju who came up with this tweet:

    The vast majority of mediapersons wld certainly fall in d category mentioned by@Gen_VKSingh , as my experience in Press Council taught me.
    – Markandey Katju (@mkatju) April 9, 2015

     

    One could argue successfully that there is nothing wrong with criticizing or disapproving of journalists and their behaviour. After all, I do it twice a week in these columns. But the choice of language used by a prominent member of society and backed by another is certainly open to question. The term “presstitutes” is not new but it is derogatory. It is also, in today’s climate, deeply insensitive to those who are now known as commercial sex workers. There is a long ongoing struggle to phase out the word “prostitute” because of its obvious connotations.

     

    But when a former army chief and a former Supreme Court justice think they have made a clever joke then you understand the stranglehold of regressive patriarchy on our society.

     

    Then there’s the question of journalists. The term “presstitutes” was used through the 2014 general elections specifically for journalists who did not support the BJP campaign or Narendra Modi’s candidature. These journalists are also called “paid Congi agents” – that is the Congress Party pays them to attack Modi and the BJP.

     

    However there is a logical fallacy here. A presstitute by definition would do anything for money and would therefore switch allegiance without any problems. So here’s a further dilemma. Many journalists have switched allegiance to the BJP after Modi’s dramatic rise to prime ministership. Is Singh therefore addressing a support group within? Of course, the mistake is mine because the theory goes like this: All journalists who support parties other than the BJP are presstitutes and all journalists who support the BJP are patriots.

     

    It is fascinating to see how many pro-BJP patriot journalists have jumped in to support VK Singh. Some of these have been journalists who have become PR people (er, what term is one supposed to use for them given what they now do for a living?). Others work for media groups which practise the worst forms of selling editorial space without informing the reader. Since these people do not quit their jobs, it makes you wonder whether they are practising some form of self-flagellation when they call journalists “presstitutes” or whether they are only pointing fingers at other people. I would suggest that working journalists who feel so strongly about abhorrent media practices invented by the people who pay them their salaries need to take a strong stand and pay the price for their principles by becoming jobless.

     

    But you know and I know that these journalists are not just shameless but are also caught up in that old trap of left versus right and everyone versus the BJP. They see no irony in the fact that they are attacking people for doing exactly what they themselves do. So all journalists who criticize the BJP are abominable and yes sir, of course I will remake the page to fit in all those paid news, Medianet, private treaty stories.

     

    And how is anyone supposed to respond when well-known journalists and columnists who spend all their time on TV and in print supporting the BJP then agree to become board members of large corporate and at the same time applaud the use of the term presstitutes?

    http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/columnist-dasgupta-joins-l-t-board-115020901148_1.html

     

     

  • As a journalist (or indeed as a citizen) you are free to call yourself what you want and criticise whoever and whatever you want, notes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Journos get hysterical on Twitter on Mihir Sharma’s religion

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Last week, Twitter went into frenzy mode over the religion of journalist Mihir Sharma, who writes a popular column for Business Standard. Let me amend that sentence: the Indian right wing of Twitter was most agitated. Apparently, according to the tweets, Mihir Sharma, whose name indicates he is a Hindu, is actually a Christian called Simon Mathew. Your first thought on reading this should be, so what? And indeed, it would have been even a year ago.

     

    But Sharma, you see, is often critical of the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Narendra Modi-led government and that is reason enough to attack him. The logic, if you really don’t understand it, is clear: Mihir Sharma is hiding behind a Hindu name to criticise a pro-Hindutva government because he is actually a Christian minority. Or that is, no real and proper Hindu would criticise a pro-Hindutva government. If any do, then they are communists, liberals, naxalites, anti-nationals, secular and so on.

     

    Dig a little deeper and all you find is a reaffirmation of the Hindutva creed – that all Indians who do not embrace their Hindu origins are traitors. Underlying that is the other idea that religion determines your loyalty. So an Indian Christian automatically pays allegiance to the Vatican and so on. The idea that all Christians are not Catholics or all Muslims are not Sunnis and so on is irrelevant to your argument.

     

    The flip side is the reaction to Julio Ribeiro’s column in the Indian Express about his fears as a Christian as attacks on churches and Christian gatherings have gone up in the past few months in India. Ribeiro, one of India’s most respected police officers, was immediately dismissed as someone who was given to exaggeration and whose intent was to malign the Narendra Modi government at the Centre.

     

    A tangential view of this defence is visible in the columns of Tavleen Singh, also in the Indian Express, where everyone else but the prime minister is to blame for the Central government’s shortcomings. Singh also called the reactions of Christian’s “hysterical” in her Sunday column.

     

    But at the bottom of it all, lies this: as a journalist (or indeed as a citizen) you are free to call yourself what you want and criticise whoever and whatever you want. There is no rule and there cannot be a rule which says that you have to belong to X religion to comment on Y government. Who cares if Sharma is a Christian? Why should that invalidate his opinion? Similarly, journalist Rana Ayyub is attacked because she investigates and writes about atrocities committed on Muslims in India. Her name becomes reason enough to question her journalism.

     

    There would be no need for this comment if the “hysterics” on Twitter about Mihir Sharma’s religion had been limited to those known as “trolls” and to BJP supporters. But when journalists themselves jump in, then you have a problem. As we do.

     

    **

     

    One problem that thinking editors face is how to deal with “source” journalism used commonly by all reporters. Veteran journalist and author Katherine Boo suggests doing away with it altogether and using freedom of information acts instead. Here, the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism makes it clear how dangerous “source” journalism can be. It tears apart a Rolling Stone report on rape through sharp forensic analysis.

     

    A strict lesson in how journalism should not be practised: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/business/in-report-on-rolling-stone-a-case-study-in-failed-journalism.html?smid=nytcore-iphone-share&smprod=nytcore-iphone&_r=2

     

     

  • It was a rare journalist who questioned Ujjwal Nikam because in today's India that can be akin to sedition, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: When journos fried community believing cooked up claims

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    When public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam revealed at a conference recently that he had cooked up the story about Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab demanding and being served biryani in a Mumbai jail, there was understandable shock and distaste.

     

    But let us set aside for now Nikam’s professional integrity or the smug satisfaction with which he revealed how he had in effect demonised a community in order to stop a sympathy wave for Kasab. Instead, let’s ask just why Nikam became such a media hero that no one thought to question his claim in the first place.

     

    Nikam first sprang into the limelight as the public prosecutor into the March, 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts case. The case took so long that by the time the sentence was pronounced most of India – and many of the young Mumbai reporters I worked with at DNA – thought that the bomb blasts preceded the post-Babri Masjid demolition riots of December 1992 and January 1993. Such is the curiosity of the “patriotic” journalist of today – and we can see the result on our TV channels. Indeed, it mattered to few that there had been no justice at all for those who suffered in the riots. Bollywood films like Black Friday, for all its good intentions, further cemented the myth that the bomb blasts caused the riots. I met reporters who used the script of the film as the basis for their reports.

     

    Nikam capitalised on this sentiment and thus sprang to prominence as the public prosecutor who fought for justice. It was a rare journalist who questioned him because in today’s India that can be akin to sedition.

     

    It was hardly surprising that Nikam was public prosecutor in the 2008 terror attacks case. However, when it came to Ajmal Kasab, there was no doubt about his involvement or his guilt. The world had seen him on television, there were many witnesses and policeman Tukaram Ombale made the ultimate sacrifice in making sure that Kasab was caught alive. By that one act, India had proof that Pakistan was involved in terror activities against India – whether by the state or by “non-state” actors. Whichever you prefer to believe.

     

    Nikam therefore had little to do. In fact, what his large group of admirers in the journalistic community prefer to forget is that the only two Indians who the investigation managed to charge were acquitted. Nikam and the police investigation therefore failed to convince the judge except when it came to the open and shut case of Kasab.

     

    So what were our reporters doing? If Nikam was lying about the biryani, then a simple questioning of the jail authorities should have been enough. In fact, we had a huge media uproar about how much Kasab cost the government and why was the government feeding a terrorist from across the border a choice dish like biryani and a clear belief that this was some sort of appeasement policy of Muslims by a Congress government.

     

    By these insidious means, Nikam managed to demonise a community – Muslims and their supposed undying attachment to biryani – by creating a “meme”. And parts of the media helped him. For those who claim to be too innocent to get it, the connection is clear: Kasab is a Muslims; Muslims like biryani. The lens therefore shifts to all Muslims, especially Indian ones. This connection was used by the BJP in their 2014 election campaign as well.

     

    In a superb piece for Mumbai Mirror, its editor Meenal Baghel reveals that Kasab’s last meal was a tomato: http://www.mumbaimirror.com/mumbai/others/Dum-lagaa-ke/articleshow/46648313.cms

     

    I reserve the right to chuck tomatoes at my fellow journalists who use jingoism as an excuse to ignore their primary responsibility to their profession.

     

  • One understands that journalists based in Delhi are under tremendous pressure, almost as much as bureaucrats are. But is this enough reason for the sort of sycophancy and cowardice some of these journalists display, asks Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Stand-outs in the world of selfie-taking journos

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The conversation continues to be about internet sites which provide a higher class of journalism than many mainstream newspapers. This is mainly because so far they run on investor money and not advertising or corporate pressures say the cynics and cynics are usually right. The focus for all journalists therefore has to be how to find a better mean between money and good journalism. The money is necessary, no point pretending that it is not and taking a Commie-leftie position on it. A state-sponsored media is no media at all (I leave aside for now all jokes about how many senior journalists and media houses have become de facto PR agencies for the current government).

     

    Meanwhile, congratulations to Supriya Sharma of scroll.in for winning the prestigious Chameli Devi award for an Outstanding Woman journalist for 2014-15. Sharma is the first online journalist to win this award and has done some ground breaking work for scroll on election coverage, the “ghar wapsi” programme of Hindutva rightwing outfits and workers’ security. Scroll.in has been praised here and elsewhere for the excellent job it has done in promoting old-fashioned journalism based on hardcore reporting. The future is here.

    http://scroll.in/article/713959/Scroll.in’s-Supriya-Sharma-wins-prestigious-Chameli-Devi-Jain-award

     

    **

     

    The Indian Express stands out as a newspaper which has been doing great stories, sticking to news gathering and taking difficult positions. This is not new for the Express which has a long reputation of being effectively and consistently anti-establishment. But the recent months have seen the paper step up the ante when others have succumbed.

     

    One understands that journalists based in Delhi are under tremendous pressure, almost as much as bureaucrats are. But is this enough reason for the sort of sycophancy and cowardice some of these journalists display? It is particularly disappointing to see middle level journalists – those ready to handle the reins – falling to the level of autograph hunters. How else would one describe this trend of taking “selfies” with politicians?

     

    The poor Aam Aadmi Party must be wondering however why it can never get that level of “luurrrve” which Narendra Modi and Amit Shah of the BJP manage to garner. AAP, having built up expectations in the media and with the people of Delhi is under very close scrutiny from journalists. Modi, Shah and the BJP however have been given a comparatively longer rope.

     

    The tragedy which these middle-level journalists have not understood yet is that eventually, the rope will win. And all those selfies may not be quite so useful then.

     

    I decided when I started writing this that I would not either take on or mention Arnab Goswami of Times Now. But I do it now to agree with him – the cosy club of Delhi journalists is one which needs to be challenged and taken on by all those in the media who live and work in the rest of this vast and wonderful nation.

     

    **

     

    Having started off by praising internet sites for the new blood and enthusiasm they have transfused into traditional journalism, I end with a complaint. Those websites which expect people to write for free and those journalists and columnists who succumb for the sake of publicity are doing a great disservice to the profession as a whole. They are the equivalent of scabs which are brought in by the management to break strikes and trade unions. I don’t mean to sound like a Commie-leftie so I’ll end like a good right winger instead: they are traitors to the profession. To loosely translate a good old desi phrase, they are kicking those who write for a living in the stomach.

     

  • In many ways TV in India has gone beyond journalism. There is almost no space for the boring, anodyne, journalistic stuff any longer. It’s now all hysterics, outrage, anger, reaction and provocation, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: News or Entertainment?

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    This is a story which I heard the other day. A friend who lives abroad went to a restaurant in Mumbai one evening to get some food packed. He found that the TV screens were all on Arnab Goswami and Times Now. He asked the owner how he could bear it. The owner laughed and said, “But sir, this is more entertaining than any soap or serial.”

     

    I write this as several media commentators have made some very succinct, incisive and well-argued comments on the damage done to journalism by Goswami in his crusader mode, especially when he fought for India’s image with his #NirbhayaInsulted hashtags, railing against the India’s Daughter documentary.

     

    However, I might want to argue that in many ways TV in India has gone beyond journalism. There is almost no space for the boring, anodyne, journalistic stuff any longer. It’s now all hysterics, outrage, anger, reaction and provocation. And finally, you just have to laugh. I would argue that Goswami is a pioneer in India who has redefined TV news. There was a time when I compared him to Howard Beale in Sidney Lumet’s 1976 classic Network. But Goswami has gone beyond Beale and created a distinct and enviable persona of his own. The mood at dinner time or in drawing rooms rises and falls to the cadences of his voice as he builds up his case for the night.

     

    And whether they admit it or not, half the news anchors in India either emulate, copy or want to be like him. There are a few who are hanging on to their shreds of sanity. And there are some star TV anchors who bemoan what TV has done to journalism. But those are just the last remnants of a lost civilisation.

     

    News is now entertainment in India and it will take a revolution to change that.

     

    **

     

    The most intriguing love-hate relationship in India is between TV journalists and the Aam Aadmi Party. When it was the India Against Corruption movement, TV loved it. TV cameras exaggerated crowd figures as did reporters. TV anchors made us believe the whole country had come to a standstill. Even I believed it and dragged a friend interested in politics to Azad Maidan with me to watch this phenomenon. It was sorely disappointing to watch a straggling crowd of a few hundred when I had been led to believe it was thousands. Luckily, the Mumbai Press Club and cheap Old Monk is close enough to drown all sorrows and outrage at TV, er, lies.

     

    That was 2011. Since then it was been a very rocky relationship between TV and Kejriwal and clan. No other political party in India, and this is in spite of all the efforts of Sanghi trolls and Congi agents, has been under such close scrutiny as the AAP. Every move it makes or doesn’t make is analysed in high decibel theatrics.

     

    The AAP has been peculiarly obliging to the media too, letting itself and its supporters down with clockwork regularity. All its shenanigans seem to be made for TV too, with sting operations and press conferences and public dissent and revolution. AAP and TV media are now involved in one of those symbiotic or parasitic relationships you read about in nature, where one organism cannot survive against the other.

     

    All the established parties can spend millions and try as much as they like to win PR battles. AAP has figured out the publicity game perfectly even if it is often to its own detriment.

     

  • At the risk of being dramatic, there is no part of a journal or a broadcast which is not for sale, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Journalism touches new low with Essar leaks expose

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    As the Indian media was trying to cover the Union Budget in as dramatic and in some cases as unbiased a way as possible, it was being hit by an internal crisis. The Indian Express has published internal correspondence between employees of the industrial giant Essar which reveals that favours were done not just to politicians but also to senior journalists across media houses. The result is that at least two have lost their jobs and others will follow.

     

    So far, Sandeep Bamzai has resigned as editor of Mail Today and Anupama Airy as energy editor of Hindustan Times. The other people named in the leaks from Essar include Meetu Jain of Times Now, Mayur Shekhar Jha of News24, Dev Sharan Tiwari and Shereen Bhan of CNBC.

     

    There are also allegations that Tehelka attempted to spin stories in favour of Essar since Essar was a sponsor of the magazine’s “Think” festivals. Other journalists in Jharkhand seen as “sympathetic” to Essar also got various favours.

     

    Interestingly, most of these favours as seen from press reports seem to consist of offering cars and cab services, hosting parties for journalists and allowing them to use Essar facilities like guesthouses. By any of today’s standards when it comes to freebies, these are small cheese. But judging from the way top journalists have resigned, one suspects that the actual transgressions are much bigger.

     

    Indeed, as anyone in journalism knows, ethical standards when it comes to accepting favours and junkets have practically vanished. It more or less depends on the personal value system of every journalist. For the past 15 years at least, managements have even encouraged journalists to accept particular favours, if it cuts down on their newsgathering costs. In the worst case, the hand-over-fist bartering of editorial space in newspapers by journalists led to Bennett Coleman introducing Medianet, so that the company could take over the sale of news space.

     

    As the fight between Airy of Hindustan Times and her bosses shows, the lines have become very blurred in media houses, over what is acceptable and what is not. At the risk of sounding unbearably self-righteous, when I started working in journalism in the 1980s, nothing was allowed. Colleagues who were caught accepting favours lost their jobs. Within 10 years, all that had changed. Managements encouraged journalists to go on junkets. Business press conferences were all about gifts which were flaunted around offices. Senior editors openly wrote puff pieces about politicians and were rewarded with flats.

     

    Just about every media house which raised its eyebrows when the Times of India started Medianet has since succumbed in one way or another. One very senior journalist who wrote very strong pieces against Medianet was exposed by the Radia tapes. If Medianet is restricted to glamour news, the phenomenon of “paid news” refers to the pages once seen as sacrosanct. Business sold out long ago. At the risk of being dramatic, there is no part of a journal or a broadcast which is not for sale.

     

    The Radia tapes dented the credibility of all of us. The Essar leaks have pushed us to a new depth. Or rather, Indian Express has exposed to the public what we within the profession already knew. Contrarily, I can only hope that this is just the opening of the can of worms. For a profession that is so sanctimonious about corruption in other fields, if we cannot clean our own stables then we deserve all the opprobrium placed on our heads. I can be even more self-righteous and say that if we do not take heed then we are doing not just ourselves but democracy a disservice.

     

    The Indian Express expose: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/essar-leaks-2-journalists-resign-third-put-on-notice/

    http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/wooing-politicians-with-high-end-phones-journalists-with-cabs/99/

    The Tehelka angle: http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-essar-links-take-its-toll-on-media-2064909

    The Airy-Hindustan Times fight: http://www.newslaundry.com/2015/02/28/allegations-and-counter-allegations-at-hindustan-times-after-essar-leaks/

    **

     

    After this, are you really interested in the Budget? You haven’t had enough of it? I have!

     

  • All too often, people with minimum or no experience are made heads of departments and what they teach is open to speculation, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Faulty faculty at journalism schools

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Discussions about the future of journalism and journalism trends in India tend to get terribly depressing, especially if the discussion is amongst journalists over the age of 40. A friend who has started guest lectures at a well-known journalism school is appalled at the quality of both students and faculty. One uses the word faculty cautiously here. All too often, people with minimum or no experience are made heads of departments and what they teach is open to speculation. As for the students, they are caught up with the glamour of TV and dream every night of their families watching them interview Ranbir Kapoor and Narendra Modi every single day.

     

    But one cannot blame the students. It is not their fault that teaching in schools is pathetic – at least judging from the entrance tests that I have conducted over the years where both general knowledge and language skills have been dismal. It is not their fault that the way they understand journalism is from TV. The young do not read newspapers and when and if they do, it’s usually that glamour stuff. And in today’s India, the glamour stuff is not journalism but paid content cooked up by PR and marketing people.

     

    Is it surprising that a growing number of young journalists who cut their eyeteeth in the “glamour” beats switch to PR? They know that that is where the real power is when it comes to film stars and movies.

     

    But there’s another conundrum at work here, brought up by a conversation with another old friend: older journalists who turn to general PR and then become experts on how journalists should behave. Unlike the young people, this lot is excessively annoying. In many cases, you know just how good or bad they were in their former profession and how badly placed they are to be “experts” in anything at all. And yet they hold forth on how journalists should behave.

     

    Unfortunately, as with any profession, the more you stay away the less connected you become. But journalism being what it is, the pull remains and this causes a sort of bitterness and resentment at what you have given up. And, let’s be honest, the power you’ve lost. It is this bitterness and regret that tints their diatribes against journalists.

     

    I am willing to concede that journalists can behave very badly with PR people, ask for all kinds of favours and not do their homework. And those are genuine complaints from PR people, whether they were former journalists or not. But if journalists-turned PR professionals do not want to lose all respect of their former colleagues, they need to hold back on the gratuitous and frankly often idiotic advice.

     

    **

     

    The Railway Budget, as is our wont in India, led to interminable discussions on matters that most people are not really interested in. I wish TV anchors would ask their “experts” just one question before they invite them to share their views: “How often do you travel by train in India?”

     

    That might give us some real opinions instead of what we are saddled with. No doubt, The Budget on Saturday will give us more of the same…

     

    **

     

    The world of Twitter on Thursday/Friday was consumed by a question of whether a particular dress was black and blue or white and gold. Yeah, right. Priorities.

     

    As ever, mashable.com had the answer: http://mashable.com/2015/02/26/dress-white-gold-blue-black/?utm_cid=mash-com-Tw-main-link

     

     

  • Having surfed through most news channels in various Indian languages, it was clear that the most exciting channel was Times Now, writes Ranjona Banerji

    AAPHEW! Ranjona Banerji: Times Now, Twitter score with Delhi results

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    “ARNAB GOSWAMI JUST CONGRATULATED ARNAB GOSWAMI FOR HIS VICTORY IN THE DELHI ELECTION!”

     

    This is a tweet, capital letters and all, from Overrated Outcast (@Over_rated). Because without a doubt, Times Now was the only channel worth watching, for its entertainment value at least, as the results of the Delhi state elections were being counted.

     

    It started soon after 8am on February 10 as the counting started. Other news channels started putting out trend figures. Goswami was spitting scorn. Other channels, he said, were “psephological paparazzi”. Some hapless guest tried to claim that phrase as his own. I laughed so much that I missed who the guest was: mea culpa. But Goswami used the phrase through the morning as results poured in and has effectively made it his own.

     

    He carried on with it and by 11.40am was even asking for a CBI enquiry into news channels which put out figures which inflated the BJP’s wins!

     

    Times Now and Goswami also took great glee in pointing out that exit polls and forecasters got the Delhi election wrong, since the Aam Aadmi Party effectively swept through Delhi. But one might point out that the night before, on February 9, Navika Kumar of Times Now said that the BJP could not be written off since the BJP claimed that there was a voting surge for them between 3 and 5 in the afternoon on voting day. Goswami did not at that time react as fiercely as he did with such claimants on February 10.

     

    Instead, Goswami, who is often seen as pro-BJP, took off on the BJP as the results became clear. Shazia Ilmi walked out of the studio after being asked tough questions. This is a sure way of getting ahead of the rating points for any channel and Times Now has won.

     

    Having surfed through most news channels in various Indian languages, it was clear that the most exciting channel was Times Now. And all credit for that has to go to Goswami for being compelling viewing, with all the attendant melodrama and hysterics. He interrupted the discussions to show us where in the world the hashtag #TimesNow was trending. The US apparently, where he told us, Times Now has a huge following. No ad breaks, however.

     

    But having doffed my hat to Times Now and it is still blaring as I write this, the winner has to be Twitter across all media. There is no better way to track news events. You don’t just get the news but you get humour, analysis, wit, scorn, anger, bitterness and rubbish as well: the whole human experience.

     

    And as for tracking the election results, the Election Commission is surely the most reliable: http://eciresults.nic.in/.

     

    You can track the results through constituency, party and vote share. You can therefore be ahead of the hysteria of news channels. Though the fun of Arnab Goswami cannot be beat! NDTV, too civilised and calm. Headlines Today looks like a CNN-IBN copy unless Rahul Kanwal and Gaurav Sawant are allowed to prance about. NewsX looks like a copy of all. CNN-IBN looks like His Master’s Voice except the BJP master and his main puppeteer are missing in action after this drubbing.

     

    **

     

    Jokes aside though, there is an urgent need for India’s best known journalists, especially those on TV, to do a little thinking. Their all out sycophancy for the government at the Centre has run its course. No?

     

  • Should the morality of an individual reporter be magnified and portrayed as the morality of an entire society, asks Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: Do TV reporters need to develop a sense of humour?

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    That we are somewhat short on humour as a nation is well known. And that we are somewhat too concerned about upholding the conservative aspects of our notions of culture is also well known. So it is hardly surprising that the various professional saviours of Indian culture have jumped up to protest against the All India Bakchod Knockout, a “roast” of Bollywood actors Arjun Kapoor and Ranveer Singh by filmmaker Karan Johar and a group of India’s top stand-up comedians.

     

    All India Bakchod videos found on Youtube – so in a sense it is part of the free world of the internet. It makes fun of our attitudes and us and god knows we need someone to take us down a peg or two. For instance, after the Times of India versus Deepika Padukone fight over a tweet about her cleavage, it took on the TOI with a must-watch “Times of Boobs” edit meet. After actor Alia Bhatt revealed her lack of general knowledge on Karan Johar’s talk show, they made “Genius of the Year” where Bhatt goes to a “mind gym” to get smart.

     

    The AIB Knockout however was a live performance, done at Mumbai’s NSCI in Worli and the profits went to charity. The language was scatological and so were the jokes. But the humour was to the point, it followed the old American tradition of attacking the target and the result was great fun. The audience – which had bought tickets – and the stars were being roasted seemed to enjoy it.

     

    I can hear you thinking, where does the media come into this? Here you go. In the land of 24 hour news television, there is an understandable need to fill up the time. Especially, I assume, if you are bored with Narendra Modi, Arvind Kejriwal, Kiran Bedi and the Delhi elections. So India News decided to make the AIB Knockout its focus. It asked a series of questions which were more to provoke a negative reaction than to actually report on the news: Should such a show be allowed, does not such a show attack our culture, should such terrible language not be condemned and so on.

     

    The reporter then pulled out some people from some protesting group and gave them airtime.

     

    I have a question for India News as well: Should news channels report on news or create news? I thought we’d gone past those days when TV reporters begged people to immolate themselves just to get TRPs? And also, should the morality of an individual reporter be magnified and portrayed as the morality of an entire society?

     

    I know I know. Why do I even ask? Meanwhile, do watch the Knockout. Even if you are squeamish about people naming body parts, once you get past that, it’s great fun.

     

    **

     

    The new Times Now “Action begins here” ads are intriguing to say the least. You see images of India’s soul-destroying poverty. You hear a voice talking about numbers. You hear Arnab Goswami taking on the voice. Or, you see a woman being molested and chased by a group of men. You hear Goswami and a voice talking about women’s safety with Goswami attacking the voice’s claims.

     

    The screen says “Times Now. Action begins here”.

     

    Yeah man, great. But what does it all mean? How will action begin on Times Now? Will Goswami be a one-man crusade to solve the nation’s problems? If so, where does that leave the other two one-man shows Narendra Modi and Arvind Kejriwal?

     

    **

     

    In other news, all news on TV is about the Delhi elections and the fight between the various candidates. That is mainly the BJP and the AAP with the Congress lurking about somewhere. The rest of India will have to wait for another week.