Wednesday 22 December 2010

Satanic Verses - Pimps of Power Pretending to be Prophets


This post is not an attempt to throw mud or stones at those people of the media, who were pretending to be prophets but were “allegedly” caught doing acts which are usually associated with those of pimps. More precisely, this is not a witch hunt against them. Rather, it is an attempt to understand how and why they acted and spoke so, and what can be done to curb such outbursts. A caveat: all of this is merely allegation, if you want to sue me for defamation; I only have 600 INR in my bank account!

The liberal world finds public hanging, stone pelting, and other such forms of punishment without being proven guilty by a capable and authorized body, acts that run contrary to human rights. This is despite the fact that they are clearly involved; as Jaswant Singh put it, the law actually is at times an 'ass'. Even I agree. To circumvent this state of affairs, there must be vigilant protection of law and order providing effective justice. This is only possible if you have unbiased and fair governance. In a country as expansive and diverse as India, the only source of national governance awareness is through a medium, plural of which is the Media.  The three pillars of the constitution (the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary) are accountable to the people of this nation, and there is a very clear separation of powers which holds them to keep a check on each other.

Yet what happens if these powers collude at the cost of the development of this nation? Who will check that? Well, 1.1 billion people can, but only if there is a very effective and credible Media. Also, though it is more than often said than believed, the media is the fourth pillar of our constitution. In the democracy that we are and that we aspire to be, freedom of expression and speech are fundamental and our constitution has blessed us with this right. The question arises, however, what if the Media then colludes with one of the three pillars?  Our constitution neglects to mention who will check and balance the media, nor does it provide any insight as to who the media is accountable to. As discussed above, if the faith is lost, stone pelting as immediate deterrence is the only way ahead.

The Indian English Media

Given the liberalization of India’s economic and social systems, not to mention globalization, the knowledge of the English language has been the biggest boon for this nation. To a great extent, even today knowledge of English is still treated as an indication of a superior level of education, not simply as another mode of communication. Hence, the credibility of the English language media is granted largely unquestioned. This can be well assessed by comparing Hindi and English news channels, even those of the same company. Anyone who speaks English would want to pick the English ones for they provide more relevant political and economic information.


We, the Indians (especially the English speaking middle class Indians striving for liberalism, because I don't think any other Indian has benefited so much as this class from liberalization), are typically preoccupied in the name of being "peace-loving". I don't blame anyone, with a population of 1.1 billion and a total scam of almost about 1.86 trillion Rupees (1.76 trillion Rupees of 2G scam plus almost 100 billion Rupees of CWG scam), we are definitely going to need money to survive and we are busy earning what is left. Any spare time we do have needn't be unduly stressful by further researching or critically analyzing Editorials, Opinions or Talk Shows; for that we are paying our newspapers and our news channels.
From that one DD channel that hardly aired English news, to a minute by minute development of who rented the toilet paper for $100 per hour at the CWG, and how will they return it to the persons in charge; from how many almonds and raisins were the terrorists carrying along with ammunition to burn the city; from how many Muslims were burnt alive in the Godhra riots; to how many hands Varun Gandhi has collected! Where do we as educated Indians stand other than to believe them? Do we have an alternative opinion other than what they think? And pelting stones - figuratively as well - how can we do that? We are ‘peace-lovingly complacent’.

The media today has capitalized on this preoccupation of some, laziness of a few others, and above all the flamboyance and flair of language, to become Prophets. Their reputation is saintly and their word is taken by the youth to be as true as that of the said Prophets. Out of numerous incidents which they have brought into focus, it was the Jessica Lal case that turned the whole thing about-face. Surprisingly, the media came out for justice. Apart from this case, is there any other where they have claimed victory? The media know what they say will shape the mood and the opinion of the people. Essentially, (most) people are not aware of what they want. The media picks up a story, if it likes it, makes it an agenda for the whole world by showing it again and again.

Now the media tries to emulate what Lord Buddha, Guru Nanak Dev Ji and Sant Kabir, Sai Baba did - although technology has made it little easier. They host shows, bring together the most knowledgeable from all around, and then sit and talk about what they think is important. They initiate the conversation, they speak and interrupt, listen to the pros and cons, they openly criticize what they think is wrong, and then most of them support their ideas. Those who don’t are booed. The final word is their final word, we just watch and hear. Our understanding and our arguments are hence started by them, debated by them, and resolved by them. The print media, for that matter, does not even give this opportunity. They put it out as the written word, to be blindly absorbed by the reader. Of course, the Letters to Editors are always there, but how many times has one prayer of yours been heard? These Prophets speaking and writing the holy words are here in society and we are governed by their word. But is their word the word of God or are they Satanic Verses and who is to judge? We the ‘peace-lovingly complacent’ people.

Narendra Modi, hated by the media, is loved by corporations and even more importantly, by Gujaratis (a love I don’t think is diminishing). Varun Gandhi quite comfortably won his election and is getting stronger every passing day. Advani is the Iron Man that has perhaps melted according to them, but what he fought for is slowly and steadily coming through. The Ayodhya dispute (so far, the High Court has accepted to 66% of what Advaniji worked for!) and the weakness in the intent of our Prime Minister (especially, when we have information of how A Raja had time and again discarded his suggestions and advice) are the two main agendas picked by the media against him. So my question is, what is the Media really representing and more importantly who?

Varun Gandhi is virtually crucified when he talks about the protection of Hindus and lambasts those who are exploiting the minorities, but the media does not make an equivalent agenda when Rahul Gandhi ‘wikileaks’ to the US Ambassador at a luncheon party that Hindu extremism is more dangerous than cross-border terrorism (I wish the Ambassador actually leaks why did Rahul Gandhi think so and I also hope that this does not soften the commitment of the international world against cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan). We the people do not have the time or the energy to think. We might ask why we let someone else make these decisions for us. Who has given them the right? We fund them with our loyalty to obtain unbiased and true information from all the sources possible. Yet we are betrayed.

We the Viewers

Viewers have become nothing more than the prisoners from Plato's Allegory of the Cave. They watch the shadows form behind them as if reality. The prisoners will have to believe these shadows until they have the courage and the thought to unshackle themselves by realizing what the images are and what the truth is. They will continuously remain in awe of the shadows because they do not have the courage to go out and explore, or they lack the will to venture out due to laziness, or they are simply not permitted to. Therefore, those philosophers who venture out and explore the truth build hegemony.

Is it that we will always believe them without any question or reason and live ignorantly until some honest men who have voyaged outside the cave, break their own pact and uncover the lies of other philosophers?

Like every other person, when you watch news coverage or read dailies, you tend to appreciate a certain style of expression, the depth, the analysis of issues, the interrogation, the courage, the fearlessness, the audacity of certain persons in the media- I was 17 years old when a friend told me that a newspaper's quality can be judged by its editorials; better late than never! Barkha Dutt is the same woman who reported on the Kargil war, becoming a brave new symbol of womanhood (I have nothing against womanhood having any symbols, many symbols of manhood have risen and fallen over the period of time, let’s get back to the issue) and was pronounced the star of Indian media. Vir Sanghvi, often seen on her television shows, started as a prodigy as one of the youngest editors in the country. His flair for and command of language, as well as his knowledge is widely appreciated.

Yet there is division in the guild, which usually happens when some people behave as though they are the ones who set the standards, or when some hold a larger cadre of followers: others want to bring them down. The infamous Niira Radia tapes were one such event. Had this not taken place, we would have still continued to blindly believe in the darkness and the shadows. During the night we sleep, our eyes are closed and when we open them, it is still dark. The tapes were indeed an alarm to stop being an "ullu" to such darkness, or a prisoner to such philosophers who are misusing their knowledge and courage, as arrogance and ego have taken over the better part of their character.

Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi claim they did all for the story. As ’political journalists’ they have to sometimes ‘go with the momentum’. How else would we, the innocuous viewers, receive the sensational news that they are delivering? So what if this involved negotiating with a lobbyist to get one of the most corrupt men in India the Telecom Ministry, then trying to create a bad image of a company in dispute when the matter is subjudice. Are we asking for it? Do we deserve it?

We forget they are here to voice our opinion. We forget that they are here so that we can live a peaceful and progressive life where justice prevails, not to push forward what they think justice is and what should prevail. The media wants you to believe that Modi is a mass murderer, that Varun Gandhi is a classical Fascist, that Bal Thackray is anti-liberal and that all of this is unacceptable by us, the “peace-lovingly complacent” people.

Now two questions arise in my mind:
          1. Amidst a storm of such nature, do we decide to take any action against this?
          2. If yes, then what should be our approach?

 Remedy

The Indian English media has been very quick to out-rightly criticize the involvement of two of the biggest names in their fraternity who have, to a great extent, shaped its very functioning. All other channels and their top editors out in the Open (pun not so intended) have elaborately discussed the link between the media and the corporate world.

NDTV 24x7 ran a show where a number of leading journalists questioned the authenticity of the revelations in magazines such as The Open and The Outlook. I thought it was nothing but a desperate attempt to save face in the wake of the shame that she has brought to the channel whilst trying to advocate that it remains ethical. Of course, she also brought many TRPs and controversies which somewhere were forces for change. Yet whether they were for good or bad is for those masses to decide, to whom she communicated without any questions from them.

Should we the viewers be appeased and move ahead with life until something more disastrous is revealed? This is the first time something of this sort has happened within the media and I don't think we may ever get such a second chance. Hence, this should be the last nail in the coffin of our ignorance and blind-belief: it is high time that we buried naivety and started afresh. 

In the modern age of Information Technology, if we are still waiting for the philosophers’ hegemony to break by a natural turn of events, then we are the biggest sufferers in the end. We will have no one to blame but ourselves if we wait as prisoners for one of the shadows to kill us!

If you do not have the time to go out of the cave and explore things yourselves, fair enough. However you do have the capability to analyze and comprehend what these people are trying to explain. The democracy that we live in is elitist by nature. The media is our only weapon but it is more for self defence than attack. It is for us to use in our time of need, and we cannot wait for it to rust through our own ignorance, looking forward to it to fail at the time of war. Time and again we must service it. Now is that time.

Media reporting is like brewing superior coffee: the aroma is strong, and the beans are being spilled. You as a brewer want to be appreciated for the end product; you want the taste to remain good till the last sip. You want them to come to you whenever they want coffee. But why poison it? Why adulterate it? Put simply, the idea is to get us addicted without us even realizing. We need to get this sorted immediately. We need to be conscious of what we want and more importantly who we want it from. We want the great tasting coffee we are paying for, directly or indirectly, it doesn't matter! We do not want to be begging for hooch, accepting an inferior quality, adulterated and reduced in quantity. Our addiction will render us always at their disposal. Yet it is not their privilege to present any bollocking story and hook us, but rather it is our right to demand only the truth and not what is portrayed to be the truth. It is their responsibility to tell us the truth, and our duty to be critically aware at all times of what part of the news to believe. 

It is exactly like those advertisements of "Jaago Grahak Jaago" and "Jaago Re" from Tata Tea. The media can never be held responsible for our own stupidity in blindly believing them, nor for our reactions towards certain events or people following the reporting of news. They are simply doing their job. Or are they? Generally, the media are not closer to the Prophets closely observing the words of God and conveying the Truth to us the viewers or the lesser mortals, but they are doing nothing but noting the minutes of meeting of Satan and his devils in a dungeon keeping us away from the truth. It is just that this time, some of them remained human enough to surrender to goodness. Thank our luck.

Luck, like lightening, does not strike twice. Otherwise, we would have continued as the same ullus, happily living in our own world of darkness. Mind you, it is not at all an easy job to spot the sun; it is to fight the taboo of staying up even when the darkness ends. We must not be afraid to see a new colour to replace that of night, or to break free from the idea of shadows as reality.

Sensationalism has always had a special place in our lives. Being a Punjabi, I can afford to take personal pride in that too. Eventually though, the biggest loser is us, the viewers. We who trust the media as the word of God may find ourselves at judgment day trying to prove our ignorance as innocence. Activism is necessary. You cannot give your busy and hectic metro lifestyle as a reason, because it is a very weak one.

Once sensationalism is put aside, we can think better and clearer. It is important to ask the same question Ram Jethmalani famously asked a media personality: "Who the hell are you to decide?” Second, kindly view more than two to three channels. Third, question the questions being asked. You will observe a trend of how sometimes easier questions are asked to one and harder questions to another. Fourth, give the benefit of doubt to the person who is defending the ‘bad’ news. You may not sympathize, but give him an unbiased hearing. After all of this, shape your opinion and make sure it is heard and shared not only on the channels that you view or the Twitter accounts you follow, but also by discussing and writing if you believe that you have found something more.

For injustice to be avoided, mudslinging and public humiliation are traditionally used for deterrence purposes. But the problem is that an act has already been committed, a person or a group is now suffering as a victim. Whistle blowing is the first way to control any further damage, but one’s own alertness will be more rewarding and peaceful.

Jai Hind.



2 comments:

  1. My issue here is that you seem to draw a pretty firm line equating the Indian English media with being somehow "anti-Hindu" and therefore "anti-India". I've come to this conclusion based on the examples you've chosen to illustrate your point.

    You comment that: "Varun Gandhi is virtually crucified when he talks about the protection of Hindus and lambasts those who are exploiting the minorities, but the media does not make an equivalent agenda when Rahul Gandhi ‘wikileaks’ to the US Ambassador at a luncheon party that Hindu extremism is more dangerous than cross-border terrorism." Now, to me, these are two completely different things that do not deserve an equivalent agenda. Varun Gandhi's little hate tirade is in no way similar to Rahul Gandhi's opinion that home-grown Indian violence poses an equal or greater threat than mad Pakistanis.

    You also comment that Bal Thackery is frequently lambasted by the Indian English media. Unfortunately he leaves himself open to criticism by making statements such as: "They [Muslims] are spreading like a cancer and should be operated on like a cancer. The... country should be saved from the Muslims and the police should support them [Hindu Maha Sangh] in their struggle just like the police in Punjab were sympathetic to the Khalistanis." This type of language is simply unacceptable. Not because it is "anti-liberal", as you seem to suggest, but because such condemnation of any human being by another human being like this is disgusting.

    I agree with your argument that one cannot take the media at their word, regardless of which media that is. However I would caution two things:
    1. be careful you do not fall into the trap of committing the same crime you accuse the "liberal" media of - condemning without just cause.
    2. those Varun's and Bal's of the world make it particularly difficult for the "liberal" media to paint an attractive view of them, when they so often seem to spout such vitriolic rubbish. I'm sorry, but: "That is a conspiracy, that is not my voice, those are not my words"...oh please Varun.

    As I say, essentially I agree with your core point. But find me the trustworthy, upstanding, un-hateful, peace-loving Modi's, Bal's and Varun's and I might be a little more convinced.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good start,subject you have started with is vast, and should be handled with care. Make your points with more clarity.
    All Indians in my opinion wish, India to be a peaceful, developing and one of the top economies in the world. All political parties, corporates, media and a few individuals have personal interests, where the tend to compromise with national interests and forget the basics of their duties. More over we all know it is not a perfect world,so a few small deviations are expected and are tolerable.

    ReplyDelete