A vast majority of us browse through the morning news every morning. Just like everyone else, I too have developed this habit especially now since work is sparse and browsing through the happenings around the world seems more inviting than staring listlessly at the monitor. The first news I noticed is "80 men rape two women in Mumbai". Disgusted more with the 80 men who did it or with the gleeful report of the website – I don't know? I tried another website and no prizes for anybody who guesses the headlines once more. The first few minutes were a war within me. One half arguing that it is in fact the job of the media to report what happens – Black & White. The other half protested vehemently that freedom of the press does not extend to freedom of blatantly posting snaps of gruesome incidents which shouldn't have happened in the first place.
Finally giving in to the fact that news is news, I tried to read through the article. It was a mistake. Should have listened to my other half. It was difficult not to notice the reporter's barely concealed glee as he reported the crime with giving specifics of how it happened and which garment of clothing came off first to initiate the heinous act. The other website was nothing better with fingers pointing to the ruling government who had just released their crime report the previous day stating that crime was under control in the city. What about the two women who not only had to be subjected to all this cruelty but also have to relive it every time they read these tabloids.
It's happening everywhere now. Today journalism has developed into something unrecognizable. Come on, what else did you expect? Every other field is being corrupted, so why leave out journalism? Even a natural calamity is not spared. The ghastly pictures of people suffering make headlines. Sensational tabloids have always been popular. Isn't there a small gossip loving creature in every one of us?
A few months ago I was looking for a specific incident which had happened. The specifics of a judgment of a popular Bollywood actor covered the first half of the page, the second half dedicated to the happenings of a millionaire's daughter's wedding ceremony. After searching for quiet sometime, I came across the story I was looking for. In the second half of the second page, with few line dedicated to it – the outline of how a regiment had overpowered the members of a militant gang; the chief of the regiment had lost his life in the process. This didn't even deserve a mention.
I'm sure if we were to ask the so called journalists of today they would quickly defend that they write what the public reads. Is that so? So is the fault within us?
To divert a little, the same could be said about our movies. I remember reading a popular Bollywood actor's statement "Cinema is for entertainment, messages are for post boxes". Nice to hear, but a recent movie on dyslexic children which is steadily rising in popularity has proved the actor wrong.
Couldn't this be the same with all forms of media? One could argue that a journalist's job is to report as-is. But isn't a little bit of subtlety (for want of a better word), asked for here? What about priorities? What is more important? Sensation or news? Mind you, the website or newspapers mentioned above were not of any cheap tabloid but those which are reputed. I'm not even starting on the news channels which I'm sure would extend this article to a dozen pages!
But what we need to consider is: are "we", the public, at fault? Or is it that we are never given a second chance?
