Free Media From the Nexus of Corporations and Political Parties

Once again, on the eve of Lok Sabha polls, questions have arisen about the role and objectivity of the media. These questions call out for an answer, and cannot be dismissed.

Certainly, an objective and independent media is crucial for any democracy. The question is: what defines such ‘independence’? Is it enough for the media to be free from censorship by the state or direct control by the ruling party or the? Are there not less obvious forms of control that are exercised? When big corporations own most media houses, can the print and electronic media possibly remain free of the economic and political priorities and interests of their owners?

The media, the world over, is no longer what its name implies; i.e. it is not a mere ‘medium’ to convey and analyse news; it is a massive industry that manufactures consent. Media wields enormous power to shape political opinion, to decide which issues acquire national importance, and which opinions capture the popular imagination. And we have ample evidence to show that there is very little to keep this power accountable and transparent. 

Let us reflect on the so-called objectivity of the media in post-liberalisation India. Before the 1990s in India, the only TV channel was Government controlled, and its lack of objectivity was a standing joke. The fact that DD News in those days gave disproportionate and reverent coverage to the ruling party and Government was widely recognised, and the sarkari channel would certainly never expose scams or investigate Government wrongdoing.

In the era of the liberalised media, with countless private channels vying for TRPs, is the situation really very different? From channel to channel, paper to paper, we often find the same news, the same faces, playing over and over again. Instead of diversity and debate, what we get is monotony and homogeneity, with very little space for dissenting views. Much like in the old DD monopoly days, we find speeches of certain politicians telecast extensively, with very one-sided editorial comment.

Even the print media suffers from the same sickness. Be it coverage of Narendra Modi in the run-up to Lok Sabha polls, or handling of news in the early days of the Nitish Government in Bihar and the Raman Singh Government in Chhattisgarh (to name just a few instances), the loss of objectivity and balance of print and electronic media is quite undeniable.

Bias is apparent on other occasions and issues too. For instance, the Delhi gang rape received non-stop coverage, but the failure to ensure justice in custodial rape cases in Kunan Poshpora (Kashmir) or Manorama’s rape and murder in Manipur, or acquittal of all accused in massacres by the Ranveer Sena in Bihar, barely gets a mention in national media.   

In the aggressive response to the AAP’s accusation of biased coverage, some media channels have demanded ‘proof’ of corruption and bias. The Radia tapes had already shown us a glimpse of the insidious ways in which corporations influence media and politicians alike. Today, can there be greater proof of bias, than the colour and character of the election coverage? For many channels, even the coverage of Holi celebrations in Varanasi was a thinly-veiled excuse to propagate Modi.

The Snoopgate tapes revealed evidence that Modi, as Gujarat CM, violated the law and used the police and intelligence machinery to spy on a young woman’s personal life. How come, in election season, no paper or channel or anchor, however aggressive, are asking the Gujarat CM and BJP’s PM candidate to break his silence and tell the country whether or not he violated the law? Surely, such an issue is newsworthy. Yet, even in a climate of cut-throat competition, there is consensus among the media houses to play down this explosive story!

While the dominant media is fond of telling us that this election is a ‘personality-based’ one, it is strange that there have been hardly any interviews of the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate! The only interview of Modi in recent times (the Reuters interview where he made the ‘puppy’ comment in the context of 2002) was conducted by a surprisingly reverent reporter of a news agency, who asked no tough questions. The scam of Reliance’s gas pricing was exposed and raised by Left leaders long back. Yet, most of the media ignored or played down the story. What explains such silences and omissions and blatant biases?       

There is widespread evidence of paid news – some intrepid whistleblowers from the media itself, have exposed its widespread tentacles and demanded actions (such as public disclosures of equity shares and contracts/agreements) to ensure greater transparency. 

Kejriwal’s remarks about the biased/paid media have come in for some justifiable criticism, however. The problem was not that he brought up the burning issue of paid media. The problem was that his sweeping remarks threatening to jail journalists smacked of high-handedness and also hypocrisy. After all, he seems to be complaining about the media only during elections, when the bias is tilted towards the BJP. He did not express any such criticism when the same channels threw away objectivity and conducted unquestioning 24/7 coverage of the Anna Hazare events at Jantar Mantar, effectively making the channels participants in the event rather than objective commentators.

Moreover, the recent expose of Kejriwal ‘fixing’ the nature of an interview by a senior anchor, showed how he himself colludes with media houses to craft a favourable image of himself, and avoid questions about his stance on economic policies! In that video, Kejriwal can be seen asking the interviewer not to ask him questions about the corporate sector or privatisation since this might ‘turn the middle class against us’. Posed strategically in front of a photo of Bhagat Singh, he asks that the portion of the interview where he makes a comment on Bhagat Singh be highlighted, so as to project him as ‘revolutionary’! Is this really that different from the Radia tapes’ revelations of anchors and columnists taking corporate dictation as to how certain issues are to be covered?  

Worldwide, the corrupt and biased nature of corporate media and its role in manufacturing opinion, is now recognised and exposed. The Murdoch scandal in the UK and the Radia tapes in India are landmark moments that exposed the degree of corporate control over the media. The struggle against corruption cannot stop with politicians – it must struggle to free the elected bodies, political parties and elections, as well as media from corporate stranglehold. Meanwhile, the people are learning to be as sceptical of the media as they are of political parties, and to be alert to recognise and expose media bias.

Back-to-previous-article
Top