The expanding footprint of India’s national media and its campaign style journalism have projected India as a nation in perpetual rage. It is debatable whether this rage is national in its sweep and depth or it has such an appearance because of the media’s projections of it, reflecting the concernsand priorities of those whose task it is to determine what constitutes the story.
It is through the media that a people spread over a vast geographical area evolve common perceptions about the vital issues pertaining to them, thereby developing a sense of belonging to a national community. The content of the media is consequently deemed to reflect the quality of conversation the nation is engaged in.The conversation India is seemingly engaged in, as discerned from its media, is one of shock, disenchantment, and seething rage. Last year, fledgling politicians Arvind Kejriwal and Prashant Bhushan riveted the nation for weeks through allegations of corruption against the rich and powerful. The media’s fervour for corruption, though, seemed to dampen as soon as the irrepressible duo brought the corporate czars into their crosshairs.
Campaign style journalism reached a new apogee after the brutal rape of a 23-year-old physiotherapy student in Delhi. The extensive media coverage of the tragic incident, and the debate on patriarchy and gender inequality it sparked off compelled Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to deliver a nationally televised speech and institute a commission to recommend changes in laws to deal with sexual offences.
Even before the fury over the rape had abated, the nation found yet another reason to turn apoplectic: this time over Pakistani troops beheading one of the two soldiers killed. The bristling tone of media reports, with a little help from protesting Shiv Sena activists, led to the return of Pakistani hockey players and New Delhi temporarily suspending the agreement to grant visa on arrival to those above 65-year-old.
Corruption, rape, Indo-Pakistan relations share certain common features. Delhi was the proscenium on which the drama of corruption and rape unfolded. All the dramatic personae, the heroes and villains alike, belonged to Delhi or had made it the epicentre of their activities. Jammu and Kashmir is far removed from India’s capital, yet it is here that occurrences have been traditionally interpreted and transmitted India-wide.
Perhaps the problem stems from the use of the word ‘national’, which is often synonymous with Delhi. Since Delhi also happens to be the place where most national media houses are located, their extensive coverage of agitation in the city catapults them into the national consciousness. They are subsequently discussed and analysed threadbare, reality is what we see on the tv screen.
Perhaps in a country of a billion-plus, the turnout of crowds agitating at different places over an issue can be a barometer of the national mood. We could also quibble over what the size of the crowds ought to be. Perhaps some would want to factor in social media. Others would say a rage is national based on the impact it could have on the voting pattern.
The growing role of the media in determining what constitutes the national, despite its inherently contentious nature, is provoking a litany of complaints, particularly against the 24x7 tv news channels. One has to just drive out of Delhi to sense the popular discontent, even anger, against the media. This is largely because people believe the media is short-sighted and self-obsessed, guilty of conflating Delhi and the metros with the national, and ignoring what they describe are the ‘real issues’ confronting the nation.
For them, the creaking infrastructure, interminable power cuts, galloping prices, grinding poverty, and rampant unemployment are issues the national media should build its relentless campaigns on. The marginalisation of the local in the national media, in some ways, mirrors the earlier failure of national political parties to respond to regional aspirations, ultimately culminating in the fracturing of the Indian polity and emergence of a clutch of regional and caste outfits. It is a failing which seems to have afflicted the media as well.
Think of the last time an incident outside India’s metros prompted the national media to launch a campaign on it. Think why the stories of brutality reported from outside the metros don’t shock the media into demanding justice. In other words, the media is being accused of what the Indian political class has been for decades: neglecting the hinterland, allowing it to languish and decay, and concentrating its energies on cities where its members reside.
In the 21st century you don’t exist if you are not in the news. It is the job of the media to ensure that people living
in the periphery also feel that their existence and problems matter in the national schemeof things.ashrafajaz3@gmail.com