Responsible journalists are an endangered species, says Madhu Trehan

Recently, Arnab Goswami, editor-in-chief and co-founder, Republic TV, hurled abuses at Brijesh Kalappa, a Congress spokesperson, during a television debate. This called into question the regulations governing news channels as well as the quality of debate. In an email interview, Madhu Trehan, founding partner of Newslaundry, an independent news media and media critique platform, tells Manavi Kapur that the quality of journalism can change when users decide to vote with their TV remotes and switch off from the ranting.
 
What are the laws and regulations that currently govern news channels, especially when it comes to offensive or abusive language used by anchors?

 
There are enough regulations in place but the TV anchors’ behaviour in insulting people and manipulating public opinion on cases still in court, cannot be regulated. How do you regulate anchors who call a party spokesman a “worm”, tell someone to “shut up” and throw them off their shows? A noxious culture appealing to bloodthirsty, applauding masses, watching gladiators being devoured by lions is the mode. TV anchors are this era’s Amitabh Bachchan’s “angry young man”. It is as fake as a Bollywood film but as popular as a Bollywood hit. Pseudo-nationalism is being used in crass commercialism to boost viewership. Indo-Pak wars are being fought in newsrooms regardless of the effect on the morale of our armed forces.  All lines of decency in journalism have been crossed.

 

Are these regulations not stringent enough or is there a problem in their execution? How would you compare it with, say, the Central Board of Film Certification?
 
Regulations are stringent enough but regulations are not the answer. Responsible journalists are an endangered species. The unraveling began with the invention of paid news, when owners sold journalism for profit over integrity. In the past, the public always stood by journalists in their role of speaking truth to power. Today, normal questions raised by journalists leave them branded as “anti-national”. Journalists are not only crawling, they are willing instruments in hitting opposition parties, pushing a particular political agenda and have become powerful agents in spreading propaganda.

 
The CBFC is supposed to certify not censor. It is colonial and arrogant to decide what citizens can see or not. It shows lack of trust in the public.
 
What influence does this declining quality of prime-time television debates has on other forms of news media, especially in regional languages? How can this change?
 
It not only influences other media in competing in crassness and crudity, but it has influenced Indians enough to become a nation of sheep — misinformed, angry and hateful. It influences judges as can be seen in the incarceration of Aarushi Talwar’s parents. Now it is being done to Shashi Tharoor. “Sub judice” is hardly considered something to respect. It can change by citizens voting with their TV remote. Switch off from the ranting and watch good journalism. Yes, it exists.

 
Where does one draw the line between free speech and an ethical presentation of news?
 
There are enough laws to control free speech. No law can control TV anchors from manipulating the news. Ethics come from building the character of the nation and a discerning public. That is not being done. It is a crucial subject. What kind of citizens are we creating? Social media has given a voice to millions who would never be heard but it has also brought down the levels of debate to mere abuse, giving a fake sense of power. We have become an angry nation of abusers. We have millions of intelligent young people who have no idea of how to be the best they can be.  They are being misled. Rajya Sabha TV, Lok Sabha TV and Doordarshan have a crucial role to play in creating ethical and discerning viewers. Unfortunately, they prefer to be handmaidens of the party that happens to be in power.