The scenario of Indian media under the current Government's regime facilitates the trust of upper caste and Hindu people
India is not far from being entirely considered as a Hindu Rashtra. Swami Anand Swaroop, a Hindutva religious leader, attended and later defended the controversial Dharma Sansad in Haridwar on December 18. “In India, Hindu people and those who identify with the General/Upper caste category are less likely to be generally untrusting,” according to a report published on September 9 from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. India is a country wherein non-marginalised groups like Hindus, and the upper caste category continually benefit from a system favouring them, which has created a comfortable space for them. The extent of the comfort that these people experience is evident in the ease with which hate speeches such as the one held in Haridwar can take place. The unresolved piling cases of caste atrocities that continue to occur in our country and the undeterred upper-caste superiority is evidence of the kind of space the Government and its forces, such as the media, has created for the marginalised and the power it has given the non-marginalised.
One of the most effective solutions to produce good journalism is media literacy. However, while using media literacy as a cop-out, most media organisations fail to acknowledge their role in contributing towards content that promotes sensationalism, ‘clickbait’, and another widespread and extremely condemned practice conducted by Indian news publications, that is selling editorial space to politicians in the form of "paid news."
While the basis of democracy lies in the fact that the people have the power, power truly lies in the hands of state bureaucracy, who obtain monopolistic control over the media and delve into official censorship to serve the ends of the dominant elite. Since most aspects of our society lie in politics, particularly the economy, the media output becomes much closer to being influenced by the narrative that best suits the company and consequently the Government due to its power in benefitting the companies in their businesses. That means the controlling power supports significant corporations, essentially the bourgeoisie who boast a higher economic power than the larger populace of the country ends up getting power in aspects other than their business. It is evident in contemporary society in big companies such as TATA and Reliance. These companies have economic prowess and exercise their power in other aspects of society by extending their reach into media houses and the political spectrum. Through this privatised media ownership, these companies can alter and create a narrative that can reflect their beliefs, ideologies, and culture, the elements that become the country’s zeitgeist. Naturally, critical journalism takes second place to the needs and interests of the conglomerates. Alternate media organisations that do not report to the dominant elite must be given more support in order to have journalism that is not influenced by those who look for the benefit of their and perhaps the country’s economy.
While a significant part of the media system’s news depends on its ownership, a considerable portion of it also depends on its advertisers’ ethos. The advertisers only invest in media channels that receive high TRP and align their news with the zeitgeist and the brands’ views and morals. As soon as the media channel diverts from the ethos of the advertisers that fund them, the brands have the power to pull their financial aid and stop investing in those particular channels. By placing the interests and views of their advertisers over their consumers, the objectivity of media diminishes. Considering how toxic news content feeds into harmful ideologies, top advertisers must take action and make sure the media they fund boasts of good journalism, especially considering how much media organisations are dependent on advertising.
In a video interview with journalist Madhu Kishwar, Modi singled out NDTV as the channel whose coverage he disapproved the most. He mentioned how he had personally phoned journalists, Rajdeep Sardesai and Barkha Dutt and lashed out at them for fanning the 2002 Godhra riots. He said that he had threatened Rajdeep with a temporary ban on the channel if they were to continue their “provocative coverage,” and when NDTV refused to budge, Modi blacked out their channel for a day. The fear of retaliation forces most journalists to stick to the narrative that is fed to them. In this way, the people in power shut down any dissent and mere sign of opposition, and in its process, destroy any objectivity to prevail in the media system. There should be a way to monitor and restrict any form of involvement by the Government or any powerful forces with any aspect of media, particularly the journalists.
Indian media must make space for marginalised people, primarily in its system but particularly its media representation. Media content continually accommodates the feelings of the non-marginalised at the cost of the marginalised people’s trust being compromised. The problem lies in the fact that media content is accessible to and caters only to the privileged. The primary reason the public trust in media is diminishing is that the ones reporting are the non- marginalised, the same people being reported for and about. The media do not see marginalised people, nor are they written by them, and therefore they do not care for and trust it.
Sources:
https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/haridwar-hate-speech-event-attendee-says-no- one-can-stop-india-from-becoming-hindu-rashtra/843724 https://www.scoopwhoop.com/NDTV-And-Modi-Cant-Stand-Each-Other-And-Its-Roots- Lie-In-2002/ https://chomsky.info/consent01/ https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/what-we-think-we-know-and-what-we-want-know- perspectives-trust-news-changing-world https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-09/Toff%20et%20al%20- %20Overcoming%20Indifference%20FINAL.pdf
Comments