On his very first day as editor of The Boston Globe in 2001, Martin Baron suggests to the Spotlight team that they might want to look into allegations of a cover-up of child sexual abuse cases by the Catholic Church. Spotlight, the investigative unit of the newspaper, works for months - at times even a year - on stories. Soon after the edit meeting, Baron meets the publisher. He tells him he is planning to file a motion for access to sealed documents that could reveal the Church's involvement. The publisher just points out that a majority of the readership of the paper is Catholic, then okays the lawsuit.
It is a small, almost insignificant scene in this year's Oscar winner for Best Picture, Spotlight (based on actual events). But to anyone interested in a free media and its linkages to a functioning democracy, it is the most critical scene of the film. That a Jewish editor is hired for a paper with a large Catholic readership, that he suggests an investigative story that ultimately exposes the Catholic Church and that it wins a Pulitzer for the paper indicates three things.
One, a society where anyone can question anything, no matter how sacrosanct it is considered to be. There is no ban on thinking, on discussing and in trying to find out the truth. And a democratic system that is robust enough for an investigation like this to proceed to its logical conclusion.
Two, a media industry where publishers, editors and reporters are well-trained, know their job and are not afraid to do it or to admit their mistakes - which they do in the film. There is no talk of self-censorship, influence or pressure, though there must have been some.
Three, the real difference that the media can make. The faces of the people, who share their stories of being sexually abused as children, in the film remain with you for hours afterwards. And that they finally get some justice feels good.
India is far from being such a world. There are a bucketful of problems with the Indian news media: militant advertisers, non-paying audiences, a broken business model, a private news media that is owned by real estate developers, politicians and others having little to do with "good media". And, the lack of that final check, which any good democracy has - an independent, not-for-profit news media. In the UK, the BBC or the trust-funded The Guardian are counterfoils to the for-profit media. The only such brand in India, Doordarshan, has its hands tied administratively and financially.
The impact of these factors - which this column has discussed several times - is embarrassingly obvious at times, the latest instance being the terribly ill-informed, ill-investigated and judgemental coverage of the episode at Jawaharlal Nehru University on TV. That a purportedly fake video found its way on air speaks of journalism standards way below that of the Third World. Note that the BBC has an entire team that checks the videos it gets.
And that brings me to the two questions this column seeks to raise. First, how did things come to such a pass that Indians are asking for the country's news media to be grabbed by its throat and shaken hard by the state? Journalists are being attacked with vile comments on social media. The credibility of the profession is in a shambles. You could argue that TV is colouring our entire view of news, that many newspapers continue to do a good job. But that doesn't seem to cut ice.
Two, if good content is the core of this business shouldn't the media be fighting back with the one weapon it does have - its ability to research, analyse and tell good stories? There are dozens of examples of good reportage by The Hindu, The Telegraph, The Indian Express or The Times of India among others. There are scores of cases where the media did make a difference, such as the Jessica Lall murder case and the coal scam. If these stories had an impact, got more readers and therefore, more advertising - the main source of revenue for the industry - shouldn't the Indian media be investing more in long-form, take-your-time-to-research pieces and thus put to rest all discussion around their quality?
The Editors Guild of India, Press Council of India, News Broadcasters Association and other media industry bodies could facilitate this by pushing for better standards, mandatory training hours, fellowships and research grants for special projects. It means more than just having codes and ethical guidelines on their websites. How about coming together to invest in a credibility rating for media brands, a la the Michelin Star for restaurants?
If "good media" is the fodder for a healthy democracy, why not fight the ignorance on social media and television with the kind of work that only a good, trained bunch of reporters can produce? That is the inspiration that Spotlight offers.
Twitter: @vanitakohlik
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
