INDIA boycotts anchors: Media at crossroads in times of free labels
INDIA presser
By Manish Anand
Two decades ago, a military veteran had refused to give byte to a reporter of one of the leading English news channels. He had bluntly told the reporter that first his television channel should prove the standard of journalism before coming to him for bytes. In two decades, the television channels are identified by the shrill and cacophony, and even the spokespersons of the political parties who go for panel discussions in their studios routinely say that they go for cockfight.
The media committee of the Indian National developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) took an unprecedented decision with arguably no parallels in any parts of the world to name 14 television anchors for alleged bias to announce the boycott of their shows and events. Congress leader Pawan Khera said that the decision was taken with a heavy heart, while a few television channels will be on the watch by the Opposition bloc.
Editors Guild of India, Press Club of India and Indian Women Press Corps have so far maintained silence on the decision of the INDIA media committee. Indian Broadcasters Associations, which consist of the members from television, condemned the decision. The Indian Express also came out with an opinion piece, calling the decision unwarranted.
One of the anchors named by the Opposition block referred to her caste in a post on X, formerly Twitter, to assert that she is unafraid. Others have also shared their statements, claiming that they are unfazed.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came down heavily on the Opposition block, accusing the rival of resorting to gag the media and take steps which remind of the curbs imposed on press during the Emergency imposed by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
Scribes have been debating the issue, and the voices are split. A section of the scribes justify the decision of the Opposition bloc, arguing that the anchors named by them have indeed been guilty of the deplorable lapses in journalistic standards. One of the boycotted anchors had hosted a debate in which a BJP spokesperson had made insinuations against Islam, which unleashed backlash from the Islamic countries. Others had been accused of fanning hatred, and aiming their adrenaline against the Opposition while being soft on the ruling dispensation at the Centre.
There are voices also within the media fraternity which argue that the Opposition spokespersons should have shamed such anchors in their shows by exposing their lack of journalistic standards. But the bottomline admittedly remains that the anchors named by the Opposition bloc fail to garner sympathy from the larger fraternity.
These anchors must take the onus of freely making the labels of being biased to particular set of ideologies available to the people and the politicians to stick to journalists. Now, a scribe asking an uncomfortable question in pressers is routinely ridiculed of carrying an agenda or working at the behest of a rival party. This often takes place. Neutrality of journalism has undeniably been harmed the most. You are either this or that side is now the norm. Being neutral is now a liability.
The onus is also on the audience, which now lacks the appetite to appreciate neutral journalism. The popular norm is that you have to take sides to gain the audience. Being neutral is just boring!
About The Author
