Sunday, December 09, 2007
Friday, March 30, 2007
Is this the end of imagination?
For those of us who read and write about topical issues on a regular basis, the two recurring problems are the lack of different things to read and write about.
When I sit with my computer and think about what to write, I rarely come up with something novel. Even if the idea is not novel, the execution should be. But I rarely come up with either. I wonder how many of you feel the same way…
Therefore, I think that unless future writers are innovative and intelligent, writing, and hence reading, will lose their importance. How many stories have we read on the issue of reservations, for example? How many gave you any new angle to the debate? I remember reading one by Amit Sen Gupta three months ago that had new ideas about why reservations should exist. But other than that I just skim through the articles on reservations because all are repetitive.
Similarly, many issues today are done to death and hence our worldview is limited to only these issues. Only a few people can think about new, creative ideas to express. This is true of all forms of expression/communication. We see similar films, similar TV programmes and similar plays.
Moreover, people believe in either speaking for or against the given issue, few see the grayer shades of the picture. So if you read blogs regularly you will find that there are thousand different people saying the same things in the same boring manner. Perhaps even I am one of them sometimes. If you read a few of the previous posts on this blog you will know what I mean. I sometimes wonder why we insist on limiting our writing to the set framework of ideas and execution? I have no convincing answers. I tried for a long time to write about things differently or about different things. But it is an effort to do so.
Have you experienced the feeling of happiness when you read a novel piece of writng? It is truly fulfilling. I genuinely hope that there will be a time when we get to read more of them.
I believe that human capability is immense.
Raksha Kumar
When I sit with my computer and think about what to write, I rarely come up with something novel. Even if the idea is not novel, the execution should be. But I rarely come up with either. I wonder how many of you feel the same way…
Therefore, I think that unless future writers are innovative and intelligent, writing, and hence reading, will lose their importance. How many stories have we read on the issue of reservations, for example? How many gave you any new angle to the debate? I remember reading one by Amit Sen Gupta three months ago that had new ideas about why reservations should exist. But other than that I just skim through the articles on reservations because all are repetitive.
Similarly, many issues today are done to death and hence our worldview is limited to only these issues. Only a few people can think about new, creative ideas to express. This is true of all forms of expression/communication. We see similar films, similar TV programmes and similar plays.
Moreover, people believe in either speaking for or against the given issue, few see the grayer shades of the picture. So if you read blogs regularly you will find that there are thousand different people saying the same things in the same boring manner. Perhaps even I am one of them sometimes. If you read a few of the previous posts on this blog you will know what I mean. I sometimes wonder why we insist on limiting our writing to the set framework of ideas and execution? I have no convincing answers. I tried for a long time to write about things differently or about different things. But it is an effort to do so.
Have you experienced the feeling of happiness when you read a novel piece of writng? It is truly fulfilling. I genuinely hope that there will be a time when we get to read more of them.
I believe that human capability is immense.
Raksha Kumar
Monday, March 26, 2007
Why everyone needs to know NEWS…
It's a Sunday. We are in the newsroom trying to tackle the overwhelming flow of news in this Information Age. This is how: we start by staring at each other's faces (perhaps trying to see if anyone has a clue about what can be news), we are desperately looking at all the news agencies for scraps of news, we drink cups and cups of tea hoping that something will happen somewhere in the world.
Newspersons are like vultures, a collogue said. True. You can feel their eyes prying at everything that they believe is potentially newsworthy. And the moment it happens (sometimes, even before it happens) they pounce on their prey and tear it into pieces.
Therefore, a typical newsroom is like the calm before the storm. It is quiet. Calm. We are all working in peace, punching information into the computer, completely oblivious to the world outside. And suddenly, a phone rings. In seconds, we are all screaming, staring at the other channels and looking at all the wires (news agencies) and literally running around in the newsroom. Only few know what they are doing, though.
This process slows down further on Sundays. Why, we say. Why does nothing happen on Sundays? The whole world seems to be on a holiday. Except for the newspersons. Trying to wait for the news that does not seem to be happening.
It's crazy, this news business. We insist on giving news 24 hours, irrespective of whether there are takers for it. We insist on giving news all day, irrespective of whether there is so much news or not. And we insist on sticking to our definitions of news, irrespective of how narrow the definitions are. This defeats all the classical principles of economics. There is supply without much concern about the demand, there is production without much concern about the supply and there refuses to be any market expansion.
Are you bowled over by all the economics? Well, most people in the news business are also like that. However, ironically, they constantly give you news about the stock markets and financial securities.
Similarly, most people here are adept at telling the public what they themselves know little about. Perhaps, that is the reason why if they do not understand anything they do not consider it newsworthy.
Do you think I’m rambling? Well, you must know that I’m in the news business as well. If, by the end of this, you feel that I have said nothing in these 10 paragraphs, then I’m surely cut out for the job!!!!
Raksha Kumar
Newspersons are like vultures, a collogue said. True. You can feel their eyes prying at everything that they believe is potentially newsworthy. And the moment it happens (sometimes, even before it happens) they pounce on their prey and tear it into pieces.
Therefore, a typical newsroom is like the calm before the storm. It is quiet. Calm. We are all working in peace, punching information into the computer, completely oblivious to the world outside. And suddenly, a phone rings. In seconds, we are all screaming, staring at the other channels and looking at all the wires (news agencies) and literally running around in the newsroom. Only few know what they are doing, though.
This process slows down further on Sundays. Why, we say. Why does nothing happen on Sundays? The whole world seems to be on a holiday. Except for the newspersons. Trying to wait for the news that does not seem to be happening.
It's crazy, this news business. We insist on giving news 24 hours, irrespective of whether there are takers for it. We insist on giving news all day, irrespective of whether there is so much news or not. And we insist on sticking to our definitions of news, irrespective of how narrow the definitions are. This defeats all the classical principles of economics. There is supply without much concern about the demand, there is production without much concern about the supply and there refuses to be any market expansion.
Are you bowled over by all the economics? Well, most people in the news business are also like that. However, ironically, they constantly give you news about the stock markets and financial securities.
Similarly, most people here are adept at telling the public what they themselves know little about. Perhaps, that is the reason why if they do not understand anything they do not consider it newsworthy.
Do you think I’m rambling? Well, you must know that I’m in the news business as well. If, by the end of this, you feel that I have said nothing in these 10 paragraphs, then I’m surely cut out for the job!!!!
Raksha Kumar
Thursday, February 22, 2007
The story of the sting
(Sting operations in India)
There are no half-truths.
There are only bits and pieces of truth, depending on how one chooses to see it. No issue must be looked at in isolation, but must be placed in a context. I, therefore, present my arguments before coming to a conclusion on the issue of sting operations (in India).
At the onset, let me distinguish between investigative journalism and sting operations.
A sting operation is an operation designed to catch a person committing a crime by means of deception or exposing a wrong deed by a hidden camera. Sting operations are just one of the tools of investigative journalism.
Sting operations are a matter of contention because there are myriad questions of ethics, which are very subjective. Traditionally, the role of the media has been that of a ‘watchdog’. With the coming of the TV, that role has begun to change-infotainment is a necessity. The media saw sting operations as a news strategy that would fulfill their role of a ‘watchdog’ at the same time provide a sense of entertainment. Sting operations make people sit up and watch. The problem is that, somewhere the distinction between exposing a wrongdoing and sensationalizing it is lost. Stings have been a part of UK’s tabloid culture for a long time now. But in India, it is difficult to distinguish between serious and tabloid journalism, thus the situation is dangerous.
Another common contention is that sting operations are an invasion of an individual’s privacy. The problem is compounded by the lack of a commonly accepted definition of privacy. Right to privacy in India is derived both from the common law and the constitutional law (Article 21). But when we discuss Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression of the media in the same length as the privacy of an individual, we reach a deadlock. In that, there cannot be a rule to place one above the other at all times.
Therefore, the next question will be, if we accept that the sting operations uphold the freedom of speech, is it for our common good? Who decides what is common good or ‘public interest’? The media have time and again proved convincingly that they are capable of sensationalizing issues in the name of ‘public interest’.
On the other hand, our democracy has come to such a pass, that people take its evils as a given, and you need the media to use newer, innovative methods to induce the public into action. For instance, corruption in the Army/ Defense Ministry was public knowledge but the Tehelka investigation made people react to it because it was a visual document.
There is always a danger of the public taking these sting operations for granted, if they are too many in number. There are weekly TV shows full of stories obtained from hidden camera investigations like parda fash or sansani. These are, beyond doubt, sensational, and are a gimmick to draw more eyeballs.
Sting journalism in today’s time is considered to be nothing more than ‘entrapment journalism’. The media induce people to commit a crime and then cry foul. One school of thought believes that this is unethical because it could be assumed that the crime would not have been committed if there had been no ‘deception’ or ‘entrapment’.
But this argument is on shaky grounds because of two reasons. First: that the crime was committed is enough to justify that the person is guilty (assuming that the sting was authentic). Second: it is only an assumption that the crime would not be committed had there not been an entrapment. However, an expose would be on sounder ethical grounds than ‘entrapment’. Also, those who mount an entrapment story themselves commit offenses of impersonation, criminal trespass under false pretenses et al.
Sting operations break two classic journalistic traditions/ practices. One: the distinction between ‘off-the-record’ and ‘ on-the-record’ briefing is blurred. This typically happens in the case of an expose. A journalist’s responsibility towards her source is questioned here (again ‘public interest’ becomes the parameter to judge whether the story must be done or not). Second: with the coming of sting operations, not all ‘breaking news’ is topical- they are constructed and created. How many times have we seen ‘breaking news’ which are hidden camera exposes by the channels? All this makes us wonder if stings are merely sensational, done in the interests of the commercial media.
Due to the technological advancement authenticity of the hidden camera exposes are questioned. You don’t need a technologically savvy person to concoct tapes. In most cases, proving the authenticity of the tapes takes up a lot of valuable time and the public would have lost interest in the case by the time the report comes out.
The easy availability of technology has brought about the phenomenon of ‘citizen journalism’. Exposes by individuals could be another gray area. The photograph of Shahid and Kareena taken from a camera phone by a by stander was a clear case of invasion of privacy. Especially in the area of sting journalism if the lines between a journalist and a common man is blurred, it could be dangerous. However, the channels have to take utmost care while accepting tapes from citizens and check its authenticity.
To a great extent, sting operations have contributed to the change in the media-government relations. When the state tries to gag the media freedom it shows the success of the media. Hidden camera investigations have kept the politicians on their feet. This was clear when the present government tried to regulate sting operations immediately after the cash-for-questions scandal.
While politicians have been the targets of the stings very often, corporate firms, big MNCs have rarely/never come under the scanner. This tells us something about the media. They cannot take on the corporates, who form the major source of their revenue.
It wouldn’t be wrong to say that sting operations have the potential to affect a social change. But today’s journalism is fast paced. Follow-ups are not vigourous. Thus perhaps, stings end up being isolated events and have a limited impact.
Having gone over the pros and cons of sting operations, I have a few conclusions to draw. If we have to choose between the people in power and the media then, like Thomas Jefferson did, I would choose the media because Indian media is very diverse and can accommodate many viewpoints. However, the day is not far when the media is in the danger of losing this trust.
Despite all the shortcomings sting operations are a powerful tool in the hands of the media, they are justified as long as they are used responsibly.
Raksha Kumar
There are no half-truths.
There are only bits and pieces of truth, depending on how one chooses to see it. No issue must be looked at in isolation, but must be placed in a context. I, therefore, present my arguments before coming to a conclusion on the issue of sting operations (in India).
At the onset, let me distinguish between investigative journalism and sting operations.
A sting operation is an operation designed to catch a person committing a crime by means of deception or exposing a wrong deed by a hidden camera. Sting operations are just one of the tools of investigative journalism.
Sting operations are a matter of contention because there are myriad questions of ethics, which are very subjective. Traditionally, the role of the media has been that of a ‘watchdog’. With the coming of the TV, that role has begun to change-infotainment is a necessity. The media saw sting operations as a news strategy that would fulfill their role of a ‘watchdog’ at the same time provide a sense of entertainment. Sting operations make people sit up and watch. The problem is that, somewhere the distinction between exposing a wrongdoing and sensationalizing it is lost. Stings have been a part of UK’s tabloid culture for a long time now. But in India, it is difficult to distinguish between serious and tabloid journalism, thus the situation is dangerous.
Another common contention is that sting operations are an invasion of an individual’s privacy. The problem is compounded by the lack of a commonly accepted definition of privacy. Right to privacy in India is derived both from the common law and the constitutional law (Article 21). But when we discuss Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression of the media in the same length as the privacy of an individual, we reach a deadlock. In that, there cannot be a rule to place one above the other at all times.
Therefore, the next question will be, if we accept that the sting operations uphold the freedom of speech, is it for our common good? Who decides what is common good or ‘public interest’? The media have time and again proved convincingly that they are capable of sensationalizing issues in the name of ‘public interest’.
On the other hand, our democracy has come to such a pass, that people take its evils as a given, and you need the media to use newer, innovative methods to induce the public into action. For instance, corruption in the Army/ Defense Ministry was public knowledge but the Tehelka investigation made people react to it because it was a visual document.
There is always a danger of the public taking these sting operations for granted, if they are too many in number. There are weekly TV shows full of stories obtained from hidden camera investigations like parda fash or sansani. These are, beyond doubt, sensational, and are a gimmick to draw more eyeballs.
Sting journalism in today’s time is considered to be nothing more than ‘entrapment journalism’. The media induce people to commit a crime and then cry foul. One school of thought believes that this is unethical because it could be assumed that the crime would not have been committed if there had been no ‘deception’ or ‘entrapment’.
But this argument is on shaky grounds because of two reasons. First: that the crime was committed is enough to justify that the person is guilty (assuming that the sting was authentic). Second: it is only an assumption that the crime would not be committed had there not been an entrapment. However, an expose would be on sounder ethical grounds than ‘entrapment’. Also, those who mount an entrapment story themselves commit offenses of impersonation, criminal trespass under false pretenses et al.
Sting operations break two classic journalistic traditions/ practices. One: the distinction between ‘off-the-record’ and ‘ on-the-record’ briefing is blurred. This typically happens in the case of an expose. A journalist’s responsibility towards her source is questioned here (again ‘public interest’ becomes the parameter to judge whether the story must be done or not). Second: with the coming of sting operations, not all ‘breaking news’ is topical- they are constructed and created. How many times have we seen ‘breaking news’ which are hidden camera exposes by the channels? All this makes us wonder if stings are merely sensational, done in the interests of the commercial media.
Due to the technological advancement authenticity of the hidden camera exposes are questioned. You don’t need a technologically savvy person to concoct tapes. In most cases, proving the authenticity of the tapes takes up a lot of valuable time and the public would have lost interest in the case by the time the report comes out.
The easy availability of technology has brought about the phenomenon of ‘citizen journalism’. Exposes by individuals could be another gray area. The photograph of Shahid and Kareena taken from a camera phone by a by stander was a clear case of invasion of privacy. Especially in the area of sting journalism if the lines between a journalist and a common man is blurred, it could be dangerous. However, the channels have to take utmost care while accepting tapes from citizens and check its authenticity.
To a great extent, sting operations have contributed to the change in the media-government relations. When the state tries to gag the media freedom it shows the success of the media. Hidden camera investigations have kept the politicians on their feet. This was clear when the present government tried to regulate sting operations immediately after the cash-for-questions scandal.
While politicians have been the targets of the stings very often, corporate firms, big MNCs have rarely/never come under the scanner. This tells us something about the media. They cannot take on the corporates, who form the major source of their revenue.
It wouldn’t be wrong to say that sting operations have the potential to affect a social change. But today’s journalism is fast paced. Follow-ups are not vigourous. Thus perhaps, stings end up being isolated events and have a limited impact.
Having gone over the pros and cons of sting operations, I have a few conclusions to draw. If we have to choose between the people in power and the media then, like Thomas Jefferson did, I would choose the media because Indian media is very diverse and can accommodate many viewpoints. However, the day is not far when the media is in the danger of losing this trust.
Despite all the shortcomings sting operations are a powerful tool in the hands of the media, they are justified as long as they are used responsibly.
Raksha Kumar
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Waves of Life
A Short Story
The more she saw them the familiar they seemed. Those waves were like her life- Undecided. They would approach the land eagerly and quickly retreat into the deep sea like they had never wanted to come out of it.
She loved staring at the sea, that is all she had done twenty-one years of her life at Mangalore.
Mangalore - the land of her ajji (grandmother), meenu (fish) and her shale (school).
Her parents ensured that she got the best education, she was considered to be intelligent by all she knew and was very hard working. Hence, she grew more and more ambitious over the years. Her ambition to ‘succeed’ brought her to Delhi.
Delhi - the land of her kaam (work), kamyabi (success) and…Kunal.
In her three years at Delhi, she had risen considerably in the hierarchy of the firm she was working in. She had grown used to admiration and appreciation she received everywhere. And she had also met Kunal, whom she thought was a ‘perfect march’ for her.
But Mangalore and Delhi were two parallel worlds that she was trying to hold together. Much like the waves that were desperately trying to feel at ease both on the land and in the deep sea.
She loved her family unconditionally. Though she visited them often, she longed to be a part of their smallest of joys and sorrows. She wanted to help her father mow the lawns, knit that blue-grey sweater with her mother, solve her sister’s maths problems and take those long walks with her grandmother.
The house was all sunshine with her around. And she knew, though they didn’t tell her, that her absence saddened them all. Immensely.
Her work in Delhi was also dear to her. She enjoyed her fame. Money. Success. And then there was Kunal…
She felt like the waves that leave the land barren when they go to the sea; and the sea would lose its meaning without the waves.
To make her two worlds meet was the biggest challenge in her life. Especially now.
Her father had telephoned, “ your ajji’s condition is critical. She might not live longer. She would never say it herself, but she needs you to be with her.”
She listened silently, not knowing how to react.
She thought of all those days when her ajji had put her to bed; when she taught her the secrets of life; and when, in those difficult times, ajji had lent a shoulder for her to cry on. Like the unpredictable waves that insisted on disturbing the calm waters, one news after another disturbed her.
Kunal had called her, just before her father had, to say that he would not give her anymore time to think about their marriage as he had already done it enough. “You’ve got to choose between Delhi and Mangalore,” he had said “and I know you love Delhi.” He had hung up.
‘I love Delhi…perhaps,’ she had muttered into the phone after he had hung up.
Now, she sat on the beach in her hometown, staring at the familiar waves.
Raksha Kumar
The more she saw them the familiar they seemed. Those waves were like her life- Undecided. They would approach the land eagerly and quickly retreat into the deep sea like they had never wanted to come out of it.
She loved staring at the sea, that is all she had done twenty-one years of her life at Mangalore.
Mangalore - the land of her ajji (grandmother), meenu (fish) and her shale (school).
Her parents ensured that she got the best education, she was considered to be intelligent by all she knew and was very hard working. Hence, she grew more and more ambitious over the years. Her ambition to ‘succeed’ brought her to Delhi.
Delhi - the land of her kaam (work), kamyabi (success) and…Kunal.
In her three years at Delhi, she had risen considerably in the hierarchy of the firm she was working in. She had grown used to admiration and appreciation she received everywhere. And she had also met Kunal, whom she thought was a ‘perfect march’ for her.
But Mangalore and Delhi were two parallel worlds that she was trying to hold together. Much like the waves that were desperately trying to feel at ease both on the land and in the deep sea.
She loved her family unconditionally. Though she visited them often, she longed to be a part of their smallest of joys and sorrows. She wanted to help her father mow the lawns, knit that blue-grey sweater with her mother, solve her sister’s maths problems and take those long walks with her grandmother.
The house was all sunshine with her around. And she knew, though they didn’t tell her, that her absence saddened them all. Immensely.
Her work in Delhi was also dear to her. She enjoyed her fame. Money. Success. And then there was Kunal…
She felt like the waves that leave the land barren when they go to the sea; and the sea would lose its meaning without the waves.
To make her two worlds meet was the biggest challenge in her life. Especially now.
Her father had telephoned, “ your ajji’s condition is critical. She might not live longer. She would never say it herself, but she needs you to be with her.”
She listened silently, not knowing how to react.
She thought of all those days when her ajji had put her to bed; when she taught her the secrets of life; and when, in those difficult times, ajji had lent a shoulder for her to cry on. Like the unpredictable waves that insisted on disturbing the calm waters, one news after another disturbed her.
Kunal had called her, just before her father had, to say that he would not give her anymore time to think about their marriage as he had already done it enough. “You’ve got to choose between Delhi and Mangalore,” he had said “and I know you love Delhi.” He had hung up.
‘I love Delhi…perhaps,’ she had muttered into the phone after he had hung up.
Now, she sat on the beach in her hometown, staring at the familiar waves.
Raksha Kumar
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)