Author: G Babu Jayakumar
Publication: News Today
Date: November 25, 2004
Sensationalism seems to be the driving
force for the media. Besides revelling in mindless muckraking, dishing
out conjectures, speculations and plain lies under the pretext of unravelling
facts behind an event has become the norm that mainstream media, too, seems
to be keeping with the unseemly trend, set by the gutter press. And it
is evident in the media coverage of the latest controversy on the arrest
of the Kanchi Sankaracharya.
Of course the gutter press still
remains unbeatable in scandal-mongering. But then when a lurid work is
acknowledged by a national daily through a laudatory editorial write-up,
a certain legitimacy is granted to the style of journalism that is actually
far from being acceptable and fair to society.
Though, it is with their eyes trained
solely on sales figures, publishers of the rags vie with rivals in allowing
their journalists colour the reportage with the deepest hue of yellow,
in the public domain their game is not seen through.
How may actually know that highlighting
the contents of a magazine through screaming headlines and catchy posters
is done just to snare the curious but unwary reader, who reaches out for
a copy at the stands? Does the reader realise that but for sales there
is nothing - definitely not social responsibility - that matters to them?
However, to add a sense of credence
to reports, the publications are now indulging in attributions that the
lay reader takes for real in the present never-ending story relating to
the arrest of the Sankaracharya.
Putting up a facade of having done
a bit of digging and enjoying some access to inside information, the publications
spike their reports overwhelmingly with fictitious details that at best
can be termed guess work.
That the publications unabashedly
indulge in such a practice is because they normally get away with it. Though
at times, the speculations turn out to be true, most of the time they do
not. But then, the average reader of rags not only happens to have a short
memory but seldom remembers which of the magazine carried what. Besides,
what was written about one controversy is totally forgotten the moment
the next one erupts to fill up the pages.
Indeed, for the Tamil gutter press,
the second half of the year has been an awesome season to splash sleaze
on its covers and go laughing all the way to the bank.
Starting from Jayalakshmi to Sri
Jayendra Saraswati with Muthulakshmi and 'Veerappan spy' Priya coming in
between, they have been going gung ho over intrigue after intrigue.
Of course, the whole thing about
Jayalakshmi was carnal and they exploited it to the full. But in the case
relating to the Sankaracharya, a heavy dose of sex is being infused into
the murder with the sole aim of bolstering sales. Who will want to know
how a murder conspiracy was hatched beyond a point of time, other than
the police and the courts? But who will not get titillated if revelations
revolve around the libido of an alleged killer? The gutter press knows
the answer.
So add a dash of sex to murder and
you get a broth that can intoxicate the reader, who will go for it issue
after issue. Of course one should hand it out to the brains behind the
publications for most of the magazines do sell like hot cakes. So what
if the taste buds of the readers have been scalded by the heat and spice?
After all, it is a good marketing strategy.
But in the marketeer's clever ploy
to achieve results, honest journalism is defeated and the reader is short-changed
by the palming off of imagination as investigation and speculation as news.
In the latest controversy, despite
the police remaining tightlipped, the gutter press claims that it had unravelled
a lot. Whether the readers are blissfully unaware that they are being taken
for a ride in many counts or they just derive bliss by reading interesting
things, whose veracity they are not bothered about, is not known.
To make up for the silence of the
police on the investigations, the gutter press is coming up with cock-and-bull
stories. Take for example the so-called interview with Appu, the alleged
leader of the gang that killed Sankararaman inside a temple in Kacheepuram
in September, carried by a Tamil magazine.
The claim is that the reporter zeroed
into the hideout of the wealthy gangster but could not meet him, but was
asked to give in a questionnaire for which answers came back in two hours.
So far, it sounds credible. But once you start reading the interview, some
doubts arise: How could have questions be framed in the manner in which
they have been published?
While preparing questionnaires for
such an interview, one cannot ask supplementary questions based on the
answer for a previous one but in that report some of the questions hinge
on what Appu has said just then. How is that? It is a different matter
that Appu has not revealed anything other than denying the charges in that
'interview'. But did the reporter know in advance what Appu will say for
his initial questions?
The tragedy, however, is that many
readers will take the interview as true. So is the claim of many 'so far
unreported' mysteries carried by the magazines. Most of unsavoury anectodes
have been floating around in the form of rumours for a long time, at least
in the domain of media persons. By suddenly presenting them in black and
white, the magazines are suggesting that they had dug out those information
after the arrest.
Sadly, most of what that is being
published are not being substantiated. Yet, the editors are passing them
because the rival publications might carry such stories and keep ahead
of them in sales. So to be one notch ahead of the rivals, thrash is passed
on to the readers.
Of course, all these influence the
readers and are tantamount to a trial by the media on the Sankaracharya.
But that does not bother the publications because sales id important to
them. So, they achieve their targets. So what if truth gets buried in the
avalanche of sensationalism?
