17

It is not uncommon to find among our friends today who have stopped reading newspapers or have switched off television sets – out of mere frustration. Human violence - and sometimes mental depravity – has become unbearable to read in newspapers. In earlier times, journalists, especially photographers, were taught how not to take a frontal view of dead bodies. Subtlety was a virtue – both in words and visuals. Today, the television and newspapers hit us right in the face- with all the blood and gore. True, facts are facts; they cannot be distorted. But there are many ways of reporting incidents, without making them repulsive for the readers or viewers.

Media people are often accused of ‘manufacturing’ news.  Today there is paid news, there is fake news; there is lobbying – and all this has raised questions about the credibility of the media. Media’s credibility depends on how much it represents the common man – not the business or political lobbies. That is why it is important that the media relearns how to be ‘gentle’ on the reader or viewer. The whole purpose is lost if the reader gets re-pulsed by the media coverage. The eccentricities of the medium (of some celebrated anchors or presenters or editors, for example) are an added nuisance. The basic rules of good journalism – (for example, don’t show the face of the dead body) – need to be revived. Good style demands subtlety.

The Supreme Court’s verdict to decriminalise section 377 of the Indian Penal Code is welcomed. The section is from the colonial era. But why should the media go overboard with it? Man’s (or woman’s) choice of a partner is an extremely personal matter. None should interfere with it. Not even law. On the other hand, everybody has a right to his or her own opinion. A man can live with a man or a woman with a woman; that is their choice and none can question it. But there may be others who may think (and they too have the right to think so) that this is a deviation in behaviour. The media needed not be so effusive about it.  It takes time to decriminalise a mind; and society too will take time to change habits. The media in order to be objective cannot reveal its preferences so easily.

There is a common defence from the side of media too that if society becomes increasingly violent, the media’s coverage naturally will be more inclined to become violent. But media also has a role to play to quell excesses. It advocates rationality. It needs to become a benign force on the society. The media is amoral; but it needs to have a heart - and mind - at the right place. If society is on the decline, the media needs to suggest ways how to stem the rot. It will certainly investigate the wrong; but not underline the mistakes of the society. Admittedly, we are in troubled times; and the media has a role to play, showing (or at least suggesting) the right path. At critical times, the media has to participate in advocacy – advocacy of reason, and not side with depravity, blood, and gore.