P Kharel

Roiled in bias and embroiled in controversy, the media is not above criticism. In the practice of journalism, tabloid taste for titillating tales and lurid details might enrage its victims but provides grist to the rumours mill, whetting the appetite of the target audiences yet more. When the media get felled to the lure of partisan policy, independent investigation becomes an early casualty because of the news outlets’ involvement in motivated interests. At times, the situation deteriorates to give a serious competition to the worst of tabloid journalism, broadcast, broadsheet or otherwise.
Candid opinions are often confined to private conversations whereas they share faint hints of their opinions in media interviews and at public forums. When actually penning their views in black and white, they exhibit tremendous reluctance to come anywhere close to offering clear and straightforward comments. This deprives the content of substance.

This gatekeeping
British Queen Elizabeth’s late spouse Prince Philip every now and then passed remarks in public, which smacked of racism. So the public/state-funded BBC made use of euphemisms aimed at reducing embarrassment. A media critic noted that “in a typically BBC kind of a way”, the hint of racism is attributed to Philip’s “gaffes from decades on royal duty, unintentional unfortunate remarks” as it was. BBC does not spare others with such whitewashing. Facts and history speak on all for all. And this is 2021.
On another plane, the earlier denial by the United States of the advances made by China in technology did not deter or delay Beijing’s advances nor did charges of “copycats” and “industrial spies” come to American aid. Eventually, it began recognising Chinese technology as “unique” but kept day dreaming that it would not travel beyond Chinese shores.
Journalists are looked at like scavengers foraging for clues to scandals closely guarded. News hounds want to reveal what some influential people want concealed while most others receive the reports as ammunition for their next series of public discussions. They dish out what many others call dirt emanating from the personal prejudices and unusual tastes of the scrutinised. Disturbing diction is redone to lend the façade of sensitive sound and appear correct in the choice of narrative construction.
Information connecting the world does not mean disconnecting the truth and facts. Political party press paves way for institutional/individual blackout (ignoring/shunning opposing views) and institutional exclusion (anyone without party membership or carrying recommendation from party leaders) are excluded from public domain.
In print and broadcast forms, tabloid news media invade global society. Sensation-driven contents pandering to the baser instincts of the target are contagious. In the name of colour and human interest, the outlets go amuck with the muck presented as news. Peephole journalism carrying too much of dirty laundry, crime and underwear earns the tag of scandal screen or scandal sheet. Far from pure professionalism, the overwhelming motive is trained on attracting a spurt in audiences and large advertising placements to fatten the flow of revenue intake.
A news item carried in the Nepali media recently serves a case in point. When the ward president of a local body in Baitadi district was with a woman other than his spouse at a hotel, the police, tipped off by an enraged wife, arrested the two at 3 in the morning for questioning. Is this public service journalism? Since last reported, the twosome was being taken to the district headquarters for investigation. Needless to say, the arrested man’s name was identified while the woman’s went missing. The arrested representative claimed being involved in “party activity”.
The 1830s in the United States witnessed Benjamin Day (1810-89) taking an innovative approach to boosting the sales of his New York Sun by offering a copy for only a penny. He hoped for sharply increased volume of advertising orders and offsetting the loss borne by the reduced copy sales tariff. It worked well. So well that others, including William Randolph Hearst (1863-1951) of operating the nation’s largest newspaper chain, minted money from penny press approach. In the process, “yellow journalism” was coined and circulated with gay abandon. Tabloid journalism and the paparazzi have caused mental consternations to many famous figures. Britain’s Prince Harry was reported to have once asked the Buckingham Palace to use its relationship with the tabloids and “call the dogs off”. He was then told: “This is how it is”.
Holly Lynch, a Labour Party MP in the House of Commons, earlier this year called for putting a stop to hounding of women in public life. “We might start needing to think about a case to government about how we stop hounding women in public life and put them in a position where they feel suicidal,” he warned.

Facts not enough
Journalism is much more than crime and underwear. The press is a pubic platform and not a primary commercial enterprise or political tool for propaganda. The line between public interest news and entirely personal matters is undoubtedly difficult to draw. Democratic Party candidate for the 1988 American presidential contest, Gary Hart announced his resignation midway through the campaign after a newspaper reported that he was with a wrong woman at a hotel room in the southern city of Miami. The woman who Hart was locked with during the whole night was not his wife.
A number of media critics concluded that the coverage scooped by the Miami Herald went over the board in an imitation of tabloid journalism. During the Iraq war, the news media popularity dipped so low that 62 per cent of the people, in a Washington Post poll, said that the US-led allies should bomb a Baghdad hotel which accommodated Western reporters. More than 80 per cent those surveyed were for strict restrictions on the media.
In India, a renowned lawyer Harish Salve said media activism is welcome where the state and police indifferences failed the poor when pitted against the rich, influential and politicians. “It does a great job when it takes up the cause of the poor failed by the system and police.” He cautioned: “It becomes a problem when the rule of noise displaces the rule of law. Media seldom believes in law of evidence and often runs a campaign to embarrass (someone) through selective leaks.”
The noted lawyer hit the nail right on the head.

(Professor Kharel specialises in political communication.)