The evening news and what follows….

Watching evening news on television has become the routine accompaniment to dinner in our household – that is practically the only time that I watch TV. Fed by the usual desire to find something thought-provoking, I often switch channels around. I am constrained to make the following observations.

Why are several of our respected anchors so strident, judgemental and overbearing when they anchor discussions? If a legal luminary is interrupted repeatedly when the law is being discussed, if the police officer is rudely dismissed when he is speaking about departmental procedure, if the political leader is incessantly badgered with asides and comments  before he/she can make a point – and all this by the anchors – I see no way in which we as the viewing public can form sound opinions! If we cannot get cogent information from the media, where shall we get it from?

The decibel levels at these discussions and debates is a again a disincentive to responsible discourse. News channels are not soap boxes where participants can be pelted irresponsible and the last man standing goes home the winner. I wonder sometimes why learned people consent to take part in debates again after they have been through this kind of assault.

I am particularity disturbed by the over simplification of issues. We would not need the Constitution, Parliament, Courts, Executive and Institutions with their codified methods of working if a matter could be dealt with  in a TV studio as a response to a question that runs somewhat like this: “Tell me, tell me straight, the people of this country are watching you and will judge you – are you/ is ******/your party etc. etc.. guilty or not?” Which form of democracy are we upholding, and what rule of law? This was precisely what was done in kangaroo courts! The good people who appear on these shows would have sued for defamation/slander for much less had the insinuations been made in the print media – why does the visual media revel in such practices? The contagion seems to be spreading – anchors that used to be pleasant, polished, suave and impressive are today appearing predatory in their endeavour to grab “eyeballs”.

The anchors in many cases are the Editors themselves – who then do we appeal to? I have to make this appeal here to the editors of all these channels:

1. Promote discussion – let facts come out, not “views” alone
2. Do not pre-judge an issue, however provocative or emotive it is – let the judgement be formed at the end of the discussion
3. Focus on sound key points – do not let the discussion go astray with snide remarks and digressions
4. Keep sound levels low – we can hear all you good points equally well at normal volumes
5. Do not strip away the dignity of participants by making observations about them, and not giving them an opportunity to disagree with you on air
6. Do not intimidate, but encourage, if you think something is being deliberately concealed, bring it out politely but firmly
7. Repeated expressions of incredulity regarding what is being said reflects poorly on your own choice of participants – it you don’t believe them time and again, why do you call them?
8. Eyeballs and TRPs can flow from the relevance, variety and importance of the issues discussed – the anchors ability to browbeat participants can only bring about the base instincts that ragging and bullying do among watchers.

I hope CNN-IBN, TIMES NOW, HEADLINES TODAY, NDTV, TV 9, NEWS X and my own regional channels will take heed.

I have this friend M. Not the one Ian Fleming created, but a flesh-and-blood one. Personally charming, great raconteur, fierce sense of loyalty, dedicated to work and devoted to loved ones. Has a profound dislike for desi characteristics – behaviour, conduct, habits, cleanliness, morals, past, present, future, etc.., etc.., etc.. A person one would hold in high esteem, but for this line of thought.

There are many others like this that I have known; open to ideas of every kind but profoundly resentful and plaintive when it comes to their Indianness. Easy to put it down to snobbery, but is is anything but that. They are modest about their own capabilities, appreciative of those that do well. They have very laudable goals in their lives. They are helpful, human in the broadest sense and fiercely opposed to injustice and understanding of human suffering. But……they passionately dislike what they call Indianness.

I am not sure if this is seen in other nationalities……