Media needs to be tamed!

The way out is to vote with your feet, or rather your eyes. Stop watching news on television, stop reading the so called "news"papers and save yourself some precious time every day. And log on to Praja where you can have more interactive and intelligent discussions and spend that time usefully instead :)

If enough of us start doing it, the system will eventually clean itself. You definitely dont need them in ANY way, they however need you to exist.

idontspam, will try answer you first, will jump to the last question, which is what you wanted to get at I think.

1) Why do you assume that they all have to carry the same story? Right now, I would say that there are a lot of uncovered stories out there, so many that there needn't be this race to cover the same story in in "my different way". The assumption you want to attack is that most media thinks that only certain types of stories can "sell". Everyday stories, daily hassles, local stuff, whats happening around the street - not that all this type of stuff is not covered. But perhaps the best brains are put to analyzing global warming, sub-prime mortgage, obama's policies etc, while the stuff you and me deal with everyday is left to the freshies out of mass communications and NMIMS like colleges.

Wonder if it has become like a funny circle where people who have the power to shape the trends are in the business of following the trends.

2) Lets say above is not true, and that there are more media houses than stories out there. So, there is a need to provide different "perspectives". Even then, the job I would expect the media to do is to report on various "perspectives" out there in the society, and not supply new ones of their own. There is a slight difference.

However, yes, when you are in the business of selling anything, market forces certain things on you. And media can certainly hide behind that excuse.

Suhas - you do need them. The best ecosystem perhaps is the one where big media houses are feeding on hundreds of Praja like entities around the country. Big papers = car makers, and Praja type things = supplier of parts, the ancilliary industry. Such a system could ensure better "connection", coverage, access to more . This could also be cost effective for the big media houses as some basic "bubbling up" would already have happened before things reach them.

But, media houses first have to realize that this thing is complimentry and not competitive. Just last month, a senior journalists from Indian Express was making fun of "citizen journalists" (he spoke at graduation ceremony or similar at NMIMS Kengeri). His point was (quoting from DH) - "show me citizen docotrs, citizen engineers ... there are no such people". So, naturally, there can be no citizen journalists, this was his line of thinking. How dumb and ill designed a logic, hah.

When people can get to connect directly with the sources, journalists may start getting regarded as unwanted middlemen. I am being more harsh than I should be there, but the point is that Internet (people to people connectivity) would bring this pressure to add more value besides simple conveying or fudging the messages and information. Media needs to be ready.

And they have about 7-8 years, not more :)

Oh yes, forgot to mention that the original post here is not using the right words - there is nobody to be "tamed" here. Knowing Mayank's own biased opinions etc (from past and moderated posts here), he is thinking curtailed freedom and regulations. Imposing regulations usually means running with an ideologists rule-book.

You and me are on this tangent of making media do more to play the part that is missing in our public space - true public auditing and accounting with broad coverage on the ground.

If someone can write a better worded, and example filled lead post, we can try to restart this discussion.

IDS, good questions, unending discussion, if this needs to be taken off, pls do so. My answers and I will close with it

Before we go around taming the media etc help me understand

Taming is the wrong word. In my case ignoring would be better. I am not of the opinion  that we need an oversight or regulatory body. That will just add its colouring to the existing mess. We definitely need to keep freedom of speech and free market. Mine was a suggestion at an individual level (my freedom of speech:)

1. What is the objective of news?

The big problem is I think news is getting confused with entertainment. But leaving that aside, an ideal scenario is where news is both a feedback mechanism as well as forward looking mechanism which helps society correct its problems and improve on itself.

Simple eg: could be storm water drain accident. Alerts the public, they are safer, puts pressure on authorities to improve.

2. What is the objective of analysing a story? 

Get in different perspectives. Help understand the issue better. More well researched solutions

3. What is a perspective? 

I get where you are driving at. Perspective is OK, distortion is not.  Eg:

Correct news:

In riots between Delhi'ites and Bangalorite's 3 delhi'ites and 2 bangalore'ites were killed

Distortion:

Bangalore'ites killed 3 delhi'ites in commercial street .......//.. ......... A total of five people have died from the violence so far.

There could be different perspectives on why the riots took place and what is the solution to it. That is OK

Got the difference ? 

4. What is the differentiator between news channels if they all carry the same story? 

My point was more driven at Mayank. If you are unhappy with food at a resturaunt, you dont go there again. Similarly if you find the news channel not of good quality, you always have the freedom to switch it off.  Utilise it.  Thats all I am saying.

Media did its part in exposing the system failures in our flawed democracy for longer than expected.  The subject is passe and does not increase the sales graph anymore. Masala is the mantra for survival with the new motto - the more you bare your pages and prime time, the more you survive and the more the lucre.

Jounralism appears to have compromised in 'quality' and 'quantity' and is resorting to gimmicks like arms twisting of political sector - (you scratch my back and I will scratch your back attitude), corporate (gifts) sector and criminal  (contacts) sectors.  Applies mutatis mutandis to print and electronic media.

The more one 'bares' the pages the more a journal can survive - page 3 shifted to page 1, bikini-babes on back pages, who swindled whom, who raped whom, who conned whom, who succombed to whose flowery 'operation', who ditched who whom, whose wardrobes malfunctioned while walking the ramps by figurine faminines... the list is long.  The bread, butter and now JAM also through these...

Aam aadmi's sufferings are printed in the smallest of small fonts in an obscure corner.  

'Dinaa saayuvavani aluvavaru yaaru'?   (who is there to cry for those who die daily?)

- To hell with his vote; it can be bought anyways.

Development is a continuous process and media is undergoing a make over for the worst.  

Survival of the 'barest' is the mantra.

PS: Praja is also a form of media but luckily with more merits; it is not a DOT COM and I am sure it will remain so and also will not succomb to the 'call of the commerce' at any time in future.

- Vasanth Mysoremath