GS Paper II

News Excerpt:

The Fourth pillar of Indian democracy serves simultaneously as witness, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner in the current time.

• In ancient times, India put its accused through agnipariksha, a trial by fire; today, we put them through a trial by media.

Current status of Indian Media:

• Media now is driven by the “breaking news” culture and the search for the villain of the day.
• It has long abandoned any pretence of performing a public service, with "breaking news" stories emphasising sensation over content.
• It serves simultaneously as a witness, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner.
• Social media, with its culture of unconfirmed "fact" and viral opinion, exacerbates the problem by providing a convenient forum for content that would not have passed editorial review.

• Print media too is now under pressure to publish without the customary recourse to fact-checking.

• In its eagerness to air the news, Indian media has succumbed to the unavoidable rush to judgement, becoming a willing collaborator to the motivated leak and malicious allegation.
• The differences between fact, opinion, and speculation, reportage and rumour, sourced material and unsubstantiated allegations, which are instilled in journalism schools around the world, have faded into obscurity in today's Indian media.

Way Forward to inculcate better journalism:

• Engender a culture of fact-verification and accuracy:

• • Journalists should not feel pressed by their employers to “break the news”, but empowered to hold stories until they are sure their facts and accusations are accurate. 
  • The rush to judgment based on partial information must stop.
• Better journalistic training:

• • We must insist on better journalistic training at accredited media institutes that emphasise the values of accuracy, integrity and fairness in their students. 
  • These standards should extend to media organisations: when false claims or intentionally misleading statements are published or broadcast, TV and print news outlets should issue retractions with equal prominence.

• Building the culture of adopting different perspectives in the newsroom:

• • We must welcome different perspectives in our newsrooms and not allow them to become echo chambers forcing an opinion onto their viewers in the guise of “the nation wants to know”. 
  • Newsrooms must be required to maintain a more diverse journalistic environment. 
  • Every story plugging a point of view must be required to provide some space for the alternative view, or for a refutation.

• Creating an environment of trust between the consumers and the media:

• • Journalists must welcome comments and feedback from their viewers and readers, to generate both an environment of trust between the consumers and the media and the feeling on the part of the public that they are not merely passive recipients of a point of view. 

• Appropriate framing of laws and regulations:

• • The government must introduce laws and regulations that limit control of multiple news organisations by a single business or political entity, thereby encouraging an independent and robust press in the country. 
  • A powerful business interest, vulnerable to government pressure, will usually override ethical journalistic concerns. 
  • India is one of the few major countries where no restrictions currently exist when it comes to media ownership by its affluent citizens.

• Designating single overseer for print and television news companies:

• The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and the Parliamentary Committee on Information Technology recommend this to limit the power of corporate and political behemoths over our media and help promote media standards.

Conclusion:

India’s population is becoming more literate by the day, resulting in ever-growing media consumers. But they deserve a media that contributes to shaping an informed, educated and politically aware India, one ready to hold its governments accountable, its society safe and its people ready to push boundaries.