Author: M.V. Kamath
Publication: Afternoon Despatch & Courier
Date: February 9, 2007
URL: http://cybernoon.com/DisplayArticle.asp?section=fromthepress&subsection=editorials&xfile=February2007_mediawatch_standard179&child=mediawatch
Introduction: The Indian people seem to be
comfortable with dynastic rule - and that is one subject that needs to be
deeply analysed
First it was ideology that separated Indians.
The Indian National Congress under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru wanted
"a socialist pattern of society" whatever that meant. That the socialist
pattern turned out to be a pattern for bureaucratic corruption is another
matter. At least Nehru was sincere and whatever errors and mistakes he might
have made he still deserves our respect for giving a lead to the setting up
of Non-Alignment Movement and at home the Indian Institutes of Technology
and Management. But Nehru had no use for caste and he made it clear enough.
He should have dissolved the Congress as Gandhiji wanted it to be, as its
main function - fighting for freedom - had been accomplished. That suggestion
was ignored.
Caste issues
Over the years our politics has been caste-based
and increasingly inter-caste hatred is becoming noticeably apparent. The latest
to add to the fire is Mahatma Gandhi's great grandson, Tushar A. Gandhi who
has apparently written a book entitled 'Let's Kill Gandhi'. The Times of India
(31 January) reported him as saying that "Brahmins made several bids
on Mahatma's life". Deccan Herald (31 Jan) similarly carried a headline:
"Gandhi Was Targeted by Brahmins: Tushar". Nothing more stupid could
have been said, least of all by Gandhi's great grandson.
One Monindra Singh Pandher at Noida in Uttar
Pradesh has been arrested for killing in cold blood over thirty children in
the most brutal manner possible. Are we to attribute those killings to the
community to which Pandher belongs? Tushar Gandhi damns the entire "Brahmin
community" as wishing to kill Gandhi. Yes, a grenade was hurled at Gandhi's
car in Pune when he visited the city during the Harijan Tour in 1935. But
millions of Brahmins had supported Gandhi's reformatory movement. It was a
revolutionary movement, and not just Brahmins, but many other castes were
also opposed to what Gandhi was preaching.
The violence against dalits frequently reported
is not the work of Brahmins but of other castes. Tushar Gandhi should have
his head examined. There is trouble enough in this country on caste issues.
The Hindu (Jan. 31) carried a story that carried
the headline: "Deve Gowda blamed for the growth of communal forces"
in Karnatak. Janata Dal (S) rebel leaders P.G.R. Sindhia and H. Ekanthaiah
were reported as saying that Deve Gowda "was responsible for the growth
of Hindutva forces and the recent communal incidents in the state".
We have a highly illiterate media in India
which uses language carelessly. Words like 'fundamentalism' - a charge made
by the Pope, for instance against Hindus - 'fascism' etc. are freely used
and many who use such terms had never heard of Mussolini or the time in which
he lived. Many of our media men are blissfully ignorant of history. Writing
in 'Vidura' (Oct-Dec. 2006) the journal of the prestigious Press Council of
India, Maya Ranganathan laid stress on the fact that journalism education
cannot remain just skill based considering that journalists are called upon
"to deal with a range of issues that cover anything under the sun".
Under the circumstances, she said, "students
need to be provided with a strong academic base to facilitate this understanding".
It is not just students who need to be educated. One is afraid even some editors
too need to be educated in history, especially social history.
Amartya Sen is quite correct when he says
that Indians are "argumentative". Truth becomes the victim. Events
take place because of a whole range of reasons that need to be carefully studied.
Why have we turned casteist? It is not Deve Gowda alone who can be charged
with communalism, or with a desire to "take the party and the coalition
government (in Karnataka) under the control of his family". That charge
can be made against leaders of some other parties as well.
Need we name them? Doesn't anyone know? It
is not just under the Mughals that we had dynastic rule. The Indian people
seem to be comfortable with dynastic rule - and that is one subject that needs
to be deeply analysed. Our media has no time for such serious journalism.
The Janata Dal (S) leaders also complained
that the H.D. Kumaraswamy government was silent on the issue of the Sangh
Parivar conducting Viraat Hindu Samajotsava. Where was the necessity for holding
such a Samajotsava? Would the RSS have gone for it if the Prime Minister had
not made very provocative statements concerning aid to Muslims on a priority
basis? God knows all people in India who are poor need desperate help though
a recent issue of 'Hindustan Times' noted that a majority of the people feel
that their lives are better today than they were a couple of decades ago.
There were riots in Mangalore over the brutal murder of a BJP leader, by a
couple of Muslims.
The Muslim community understood what happened
and when a Virat Hindu Samajotsava was held in the city, the Muslim leadership
volunteered to provide sugar for free distribution of lime juice for the thousands
who attended the Utsav. That was not only generous, but indicative of Muslim
understanding. Our secularists are as much responsible for communal riots
as the so-called 'communalists' are.
The trouble is that our leading political
parties have no vision except that of capturing power. And the media has come
to be vulgarised to such an extent that one is almost ashamed to pick up a
paper.
Profound crisis
The duty of a paper is constantly to analyse
events as objectively as possible, to pull up politicians who cross the Laxman
Rekha and to ignore the likes of Tushar Gandhi. 'Vidura' quotes the International
Federation of Journalists as wanting the Indian Government to provide a "strategic
vision of the future of the country's media" in the face of what it describes
as "a growing and profound crisis within Indian journalism".
In a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
the IFJ's General Secretary Aidan White is reported to have written that "the
information landscape in India is changing dramatically, but not all of these
changes will benefit Indian values of press freedom, social justice, democracy
and diversity unless regulators properly manage the process". Do we need
a foreigner to give advice to our Prime Minister? Or to our editors? It only
shows the degree to which our media has degenerated. There is need for a great
deal of self-examination within the media, even if it is market-oriented.
To publish provocative rubbish - and there are enough agent provocateurs in
the country - may make saleable copy but it is poor journalism. There is such
a thing as discriminative reporting that should not be forgotten.
