MxMIndia

Tag: Press Council of India

  • Mr Sujay Gupta meets the allegations head-on, saying his newspaper is clean and will remain so.

    Herald editor refutes ‘paid news’ charge

    This is with reference to the complaint to the Press Council of India, by our esteemed and senior colleague in the profession for many years, Mayabhushan Nagvekar.

    Since the matter concerns issues of editorial and journalistic propriety even though the conversations and interactions Mayabhushan, posing as one Bernard, has with our marketing Manager Tulsidas Desai, I have chosen to respond to this.

    Firstly, I wish to emphatically deny that any editorial content which has appeared in the Herald, without the “advertorial” tag line has been paid for. In his complaint, the complainant has attached newspaper clippings of several interviews we have conducted as part of our kins and kinship series of prospective new candidates in the fray.

    The only exception was that of Somnath Zuwarkar, whose interview we carried after his return to politics. To even suggest that these interviews were part of a paid news package is hugely defamatory. Herald will respond to these allegations urgently and appropriately in a proper forum.

    I wish to emphasize that I have been informed by my management that Desai’s remarks, (as heard on the audio) file in relation to any assurances given to “Bernard” for disguised editorial favours is absolutely incorrect.

    As Editor, my stated position both within and outside the organisation has been that paid content cannot be disguised as news. Whenever politicians have sent out messages, statements of their achievements and other such information, through a paid route, we have prominently stated that they are advertorials. A case in point is the birthday of Deputy Speaker Mauvin Godinho where there were more than 2 pages of “news” items about Mauvin’s career and achievements.

    Recently there was a four page advertorial supplement Vision 2015 where the Chief Minister’s interview was carried along with information on other departments. However, Herald has not softened its attack on this government on several issues, making a clear distinction between advertisements/advertorials and editorial.

    Herald is the only newspaper which used the tag “advertorial” on top of their news pages so that the difference between editorial and advertorial is clearly established.

    Coming to the proposed interview of the fictitious “Bernard” in HCN, our marketing team confirms that that such interviews are conducted with clear supers entitled “SPONSORED, indicating that its an advertorial.

    The letter/email sent by Tulsidas Desai to the fictitious Bernard also clearly states that the rates were for advertising /advertorial rates. The marketing department is within its purview of seeking advertisements and advertorials with a clear understanding that they would be treated like any paid advertisement.

    Lastly and most significantly, Editorial was not in the know of any such negotiations or discussions the marketing had with any candidate or anyone else. The stray remark that “editos people” would be in the know of any interview to HCN is also incorrect.

    I am also clear that ultimately issues of newspaper ethics need to be addressed by the Editor directly since he is the custodian of content. At no given point of time have I allowed disguised and paid news to slip through as genuine editorial content.

    However, it is imperative to ask if the media in Goa has done a serious introspection on whether we try hard enough to eliminate the ghost of paid news slipping through as genuine news.

    In the present case, too, it is naive to expect that the said Bernard’s interview would have been carried in any form. The final decision to run a story or not rests with me and my senior editorial colleagues so a clear distinction needs to be made between news and advertorials. The two cannot and don’t mix in The Herald.

    If the complainant had indeed wanted to test Heralds mettle and transparency in these matters he should have tried paying the amount and getting his interview published as news and then taken us to task.

    However, I agree that with elections around the corner, we need to be more vigilant and watchful to ensure that the media continues to function as a neutral and independent watcher and not an interested part.

     

    Sujay Gupta, Editor, Herald

  • Broadly speaking, the Indian media is run by proprietors and not by editors. So however honest and diligent the editor might be, the control room is really run by the owner of the publication or the TV channel.

    Hard Knocks: Katju’s unreal expectations

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    The Chairman of the Press Council of India, Justice Markandey Katju, reminds me of a very strict uncle. You don’t mess with the guy. You quietly listen to him and obey his orders. Or else get ready for some nice punishments. Katju thinks the Indian media tends to be irresponsible, that it’s not doing its job, which is to serve the people. That there’s too much of celebrity journalism. And yes, he gets really riled on the issue of paid news. And yes, he wants to change things around. By carrot or by stick… whatever it takes.

     

    Of course the man’s heart is in the right place, and he means well. And good luck to him in his mission to clean up the desi media houses. But am afraid it’s not going to work. This issue is too complex and layered to be solved by Katju’s simplicity and good intent. And even threats of punishment won’t work. Here’s why.

     

    Broadly speaking, the Indian media is run by proprietors and not by editors. Let’s be clear about that. So however honest and diligent the editor might be, the control room is really run by the owner of the publication or the TV channel. And these people are businessmen. They don’t worry about public service, they are focussed on return on investment. They are not in the game to make India a better place, they are here to liven up their own balance sheets. They are not saints, they are suits. In this scenario, dodgy practices is a sad but logical outcome. Because there is too much competition in the mass media. Hundreds of channels and thousands of print brands are chasing the same ad pie. In how many ways can you divide one cake? Mouths have to be fed, no? This then results in excessive celebrity coverage. What to do, everyone wants a piece of SRK! And irresponsible journalism. How can you get eyeballs by following boring rules in the news room? And yes, paid journalism. If the advertisers aren’t gonna entertain me, I have to find other revenue channels, thank you very much.

     

    Anyway, good luck to Mr Katju. He deserves no less than a Nobel if he can clean things up out here.

     

    ***

     

    PS: It’s common sense to me, but I don’t understand why the TV chiefs don’t get it. The ONLY reason some goons hurl chappals and rain punches on important people is to get noticed, to get their 15 minutes of fame. And beaming their actions on screen is playing right into their hands. Just don’t feature these incidents, simply report them. Is that so difficult to understand? There are other ways to get TRPs. Try SRK!