|
ROLE OF MEDIA
Like a mirror the
media shows to the society whatever is happening in it. If plane mirrors
are used reality is seen in whatever form or colour it is. But distorted
images of the reality are formed if a convex or a concave mirror is
used. If, instead of a mirror, a convex lens is used the virtual images
concentrate the energy at one point and the reality starts burning.
While assessing the role of media it has to be seen what kind of
reflectors or refractors have been used.
The Study Team
received a large number of complaints against alleged ‘biased
reporting’, ‘non-objective attitude’ and ‘anti
Gujarat cospiracy’of Delhi Media. The team felt it necessary to objectively
observe and analyse the role of Media both regional and English language
newspapers published from metropolitan cities. It also solicited
comments about the role of media from about 500 persons with whom the
members of the team interacted. The team’s observations are:
1.
Local
and regional papers at times seemed to be emotionally surcharged and
lost sight of objectivity. However, Gujrati newspapers, by and large,
were factual in day to day reporting.
2.
The
editorial pages of local and regional newspapers maintained a balance in
projecting all viewpoints.
3.
Newspapers published in English from
Delhi
invariably editorialized the news. Direct and indirect comments in the
news writing were so telling that the personal likes and dislikes of the
news reporters were too obvious to be missed.
4.
English
language newspapers published from Delhi appeared to have assumed the
role of crusaders against the State Government from day one. It coloured
the entire operation of news gathering, feature writing and editorials.
5.
The
edit pages of English language press carried comments that clearly
indicated biases:
a.
against
the State Government of
Gujarat,
b.
in
favor of Congress, leftist parties and the secularist intellectuals,
c.
indifferent to the carnage at Godhra,
d.
against
the Hindu organizations, and
e.
against
the NDA government at the Center.
6.
Most of
the national newspapers and news channels played down the intensity of
Godhra carnage and projected it as a result of provocation by pilgrims.
Not many reporters were deputed to dig facts or do follow-up stories.
This resulted in large number of editorials and articles that projected
Godhra as a reaction to provocation by ‘karsevaks’ and riots in
rest of the state as "state sponsored terrorism".
7.
A
distorted image of sectarian violence in the state was projected by the
electornic and print media based in Delhi.
8.
Repeated telecasts of arson and violence contributed in spreading the
tension to unaffected areas. TV channels ignored warning from officials
and kept telecasting communal riots like infotainment.
9.
Coverage of Machhipiti in Vadodara is an example. One national news
channel went overboard to telecast police firing at Machhipit as if it
had taken place in Ahmedabad.
10.
On
27.02.02 the Government of Gujarat announced a compensation of Rs. 2
lakh for the next of kin of victims of Godhra carnage. There were
protests about discrimination between Hindu and Muslim victims and the
Government announced on March 9 that all victims would get Rs one lakh.
Yet, as late as the first week of April a Congressperson in USA cited a
report in an Indian newspaper to accuse the Government of discriminating
against minorities in the grant of compensation. Did the newspaper
concerned inform its readers of the correct information?
11.
The
code of ethics prescribed by the Press Council of India was violated by
the media with impunity. It so enraged the citizens that several
concerned citizens in the disturbed areas suggested that peace could
return to the state if some of the TV channels were closed for some
days.
12.
Media
did not help to cool down the tempers. It failed to act as a platform
for a dialogue between the Hindus and Muslims on the one hand and
between the people and the establishment on the other.
The Study Team is of
the considered opinion that the media in general failed to perform as
conscious and socially responsible gatekeepers of information. It
followed in the footsteps of an American journalist who said, " My job
is to report the facts. I give a damn to the consequences". Telecasting
images that spread hatred and instigated violence is unhealthy, but
their repeated telecast is lethal. The media appeared to be one of the
interested parties in the confrontation, not a neutral reporter of
facts. The team was alarmed at the intensity of hostile attitude among
the people of the state for Delhi press and television news channels.
This attitude was especially articulated not only by delegations of
intellectuals like lawyers, doctors, and businessmen but the vanvasis
also complained that the media pays no heed to their agony.
|
