Flavour of the season

GROUND ZERO

RUNNING THIS WINTER - MEDIA BASHING

This has been a week dominated by media bashing. Agreed that media hasits flaws, its practioners increasingly part of a rat pack or crabpack trying desperately to best one another, but even then media'ssocietal role cannot be wished away. From Ram Gopal Varma to LalitModi, lately everyone seems to be having a go at media. Rightly orwrongly, it is everybody's favourite whipping boy and hobby horse.There used to be an old adage which seems to have resurfaced recently- when pushed against the wall, lash out at media. Ramu, of course hashis own reasonto launch into media. Remember, that they gave him a torrid time whenhe visited a bombed out Taj Mahal hotel after it was destroyed in the26/11 terror attacks. Ramu hasn't forgiven the media for that andgiven his penchant for real life edgy realism, he has decided to pick onmedia, putting it under the microscope, exposing its obsession withratings and revenues. So, he has made Rann. Sample this quote from afrustrated Ramu - ""What the media basically does is, it just stripseverybody and makes money out it. The only difference between astrip-teaser and the media is that a strip-teaser bares herself sothat others can enjoy her and give money, and the media strips othersso that some others can enjoy and give them the money."
Now no self respecting journalist will tolerate a comment like this. Iappreciate your art and craft Ramu, I like some of the movies that youhave made and will probably like Rann as well, but I am certainly notenamoured of this remark of yours. While the rest of the blog postedon 14/8/2008 dealt with the film frat media, I don't think Ramu cangeneralise about all journos like this. The filmi press in India isnothing compared to the paparazzi in the west which sometimes isdownright demonic and nasty. Rann will probably be another milestonein Ramu's hardhitting genre of cinema. It might even be successful because the hoipolloi often shares Ramu's aformentioned sentiment. The classes andthe masses began to examine the role of media very closely in theaftermath of the 26/11 terror attacks. Till then the relationship wasmore or less hunky dory with the electronic media, but the unabashedrighteousness and sob sisterdom type of journalism had everyoneflustered. More so because a lot of it actually helped the handlers ofthe buddy pairs of terrorists in giving crucial directions. But thatcan also be put down to a lack of experience in covering events ofsuch magnitude. Indian telly journos had never ever been exposed tosomething so shocking. Restraint and caution was certainly not one ofthe virtues of the news wallahs and this led to angry outpourings onfacebook, orkut and other social networking sites. It was also acoming of age of the telly viewer as he showed his sensitivities.
Now let us turn to this business of IPL franchise owners closing ranksagainst the interloper, in this case Pakistani players which hasconfounded one andall. More so, because the sequence of events does not add up. When theauction was completed on January 19, everyone was stunned that none ofthe franchises had bothered to pick any of the 11 Pakistani playerson the table. It was clear that some sort of a diktat was at work,otherwise why should all eight franchises decided against recruitingeven a single player from Pakistan. Agreed that the franchises hadlimited slots and nearly all of them were keen on bagging an out andout fast bowler. But even then, specialist T 20 cricketers like ShahidAfridi, Umar Gul, Akmal brothers - Kamran and Umar et al were prizedcatches. There is one small caveat which I would like to introduceinto this piece here and now. While I have an extremely strong opinionon sporting contact with Pakistan, that is not material to thistreatise. I believe thatIndia should have no sporting contact with Pakistan. In fact, I reckonthat this people-to-people contact is hogwash, for till Pakistan comesclean on 26/11 and its perpetrators, Pakistan should be ostracised.Remember how South Africa was sunned by one and all when it practisedthe abhorrent system of apartheid. For over 20 years, South Africa wasblacklisted by the global community. Remember that in the first flushof 26/11, India too took a tough line and decided not tosend its cricket team to Pakistan. This only accentuated Pakistan'smisery for no one has traveled to that country for cricket ever sincethe Sri Lankan team was attacked in Lahore. In hindsight, India'sdecision to scrap its tour of Pakistan was a wise one given that thepoor Sri Lankans survived a horrific terror attack.
Anyway, those are my personal thoughts and one shouldn't confuseobjectivity with subjectivity. The media always in need of a hotbutton subject decided to rake up the selective amnesia that thefranchise owners suffered from while not bidding for Pakistan players.As is their wont, they went beserk ratcheting up the temperature onthis sensitive issue. Wild stories began to do the rounds - that theGovernment had passed an unwritten fatwa to not recruit Pakistaniplayers etc. The silence from the IPL organisers and franchise ownerswas deafening. Media was even accussed of being provocative on thisnon issue. Till home minister P Chidamabaram punctured the balloon.But not before IPL Commissioner Lalit Modi who in the past has usedmedia adroitly fulminated at the media. Modi while rejecting allegationsthat Pakistani cricketers were deliberately snubbed at the players'auction blamed the entire furore on media bias. "The media isbiased. No one talks about the players from countries like Australia,Canada and Zimbabwe not being picked in the auction. There was nopreconceived conspiracy to leave Pakistani players," Even as thematter has outraged players, politicians and fans across the border,the Pakistani government has gone to the extent of saying that thecountry would give a befitting reply to the "humiliating" treatmentmeted out to its cricketers.
Bollywood actor and Rajasthan Royals team's co-owner Shilpa Shettyalso denied any planned conspiracy against the players from Pakistan."I don't owe any explanation. We are not a small country and thedecision was not a contrived one. There is nothing bigger than cricketbut everything is getting murky," Shetty said. "I am very hurt andthere have been hate mails also. We have lost some of the greatestplayers in the world, but why doesn't anyone talk about Australia,England and so many others who were not picked in the auction?" sheadded. That is because Pakistan is not Australia or England, India ispretty much in state of war with Pakistan.
Well, the media which has in recent times been handed a thrashing forits ways and scoring self goals had just landed a banana kick swervinginto the opposition's goal for a change. It is the committed media'sfusillade that made India's politicians, the general public and the IPLorganisers to come out of their cocoons. Immediately after the auction Modi hadsaid, "I don't think that there's any mishandling, the franchiseesdecided on their own. We never said in the first placethat the government in any way nudged us in that direction. So it wasa decision that was taken by the franchisees and let's leave it atthat. There was no pre-decision. They were all worried about theavailability and that's why the Australians weren't picked up alongwith many other players and all that we keep hearing now is one story- about not bidding for Pakistani cricketers. BBC News reported aftera few days, "I requestthe media and people in India and Pakistan to respond to the situationresponsibly," Ms Shetty told a press conference in Mumbai. "We are acricket loving country and so is Pakistan. Sport is above everything.Were we in a position to provide security [to the players]?," she saidemphasising security concerns because of "certain political partiesand lunatic fringes". IPL team owners say too much is being read intothe issue. "We did not want to take onus for players security. We were thelosers. We have lost greatest players," she said.
"Teams have made their decisions depending on player availability.Their reasons are understandable looking at the current situation."IPL Commissioner Lalit Modi said the controversy was media-generated."You have to respect what owners want. You're making a story out ofthis... You're damaging an already fragile relationship. Some of mybest colleagues and friends are in Pakistan," Mr Modi told reporters.Following the IPL auction and the perceived "insult" of Pakistaniplayers, protesters in Pakistan have burnt effigies of Mr Modi andthere have been calls for an apology. "Why should we get intoapologising or not apologising?" Mr Modi asked. The perceived IPL snubto Pakistani cricketers comes at a time when relations between Indiaand Pakistan are already strained.
Actually the flutter in the dovecotes began well and truly when homeminister P Chidambaram stepped up to the plate, terming non-inclusionof Pakistani players in IPL as "disservice to cricket." Adding thatthere was no "hint or nudge" from the government to do so. So, whatwas essentially a tacitagreement between the franchise owners snowballed into a full blowndiplomatic war. Describing some of them as "among the best Twenty20"cricket players,he said "these players were coming as individuals, it was not aPakistan team." Asked whether he thought that Pakistan wasover-reacting on the issue, Chidambaram said "well, you see, if noplayer from a country is picked, obviously the country does feelinsulted. But whether thereaction is proportionate or not it is not for me to comment. "But asI said, cricket lovers are disappointed that no player from Pakistanwas picked. I think that could have been avoided." Noting that thegovernment had issued 17 visas to these players, he said "in fact, Iam disappointed that the IPL teams, IPL organisersdid not pick any Pakistani player ." "...We gave the visas and we havenothing to do with this," he said.
And then came the real twist in the tale, more like the sting in thetail. Kolkata Knight Riders owner actor SRK whose team was involvedin the auction and chose Shane Bond over the Pakistanis decided tomake a statement. A cat had got his tongue earlier when he could havebid for a Pakistani player as a franchise owner? "I truly believethey (Pakistan players) should have been chosen," said Khan. Khan,however, said that since "some issues" were involved the mattercould have been handled by the IPL "respectfully".
Now what were these issues? What was the understanding arrived at bythe team owners? What was this law of omerta, a dignified code ofsilence, which none of them want to break? Rooting for the Pakistaniplayers, Khan said they are the best T20 players in the world. "Theyare the champions, they are wonderful butsomewhere down the line there is an issue and we can't deny it," hetold a news channel. The issue is very clearly Pakistan's position on26/11, its blase attitude and its logistical support for the perpsbehind the carnage.
Khan said it was humiliating to him as a KKR owner that no one bid forthe Pakistani players despite them being put up for auction. "We areknown to invite everyone. We should have. If there were any issues,they should have been put on board earlier. Everything can happenrespectfully," he said. Then why is it that you kept quiet earlier MrKhan? "Everyday we blame Pakistan, everyday Pakistan blames us. It isan issue," Khan, who had five players from Pakistan playing for KKR inIPL's first edition, said.
Khan felt that the youth should circumvent all that is said aboutIndia and Pakistan by the politicians and say, "It (Pakistan) is agreat neighbour to have. We are great neighbours, They are goodneighbours. Let us love each other." One cannot run away from thereality of the death by a thousand cuts strategy employed by thePakistani establishment against India, one cannot live in a utopianworld. "Let me be honest. My family is from Pakistan, my father wasborn there and his family is from there," he said.
If there was no consensus amongst the franchise owners, if the housewas divided, then you cannot engineer a cover up by blaming the mediafor doing its job adequately for a change? It is clear with SRK'scomments that there was a division of opinion and while they closedranks on January 19, the floodgates burst subsequently.
Now, let me fast forward. Back to Ramu and his invective against media- "The media is a reporting agency. It reports news. News is what youhear for the first time and for it to catch your attention the mediahas to make the news sound as dramatic as possible. The publicationsand channels have no choice but to do that so as to be able to stay inbusiness and make money. So finally is it only about just makingmoney? Not necessarily intended by all concerned, it could also be forthe individual egos and clamouring for fame among the journaliststhemselves. Most of the media people bitch about each other as much asthey bitch about others. But again like any other industry you cannotgeneralize them. Like there are good, bad, ugly filmmakers, there willbe good, bad and ugly media people as eventually they are all human.The interesting point is that how smoothly and without anybodyconsciously realizing the media has transformed from a truth tellingmachinery to a power-mongering and money-making enterprise. I know itsounds far fetched but does anyone out there believe that anybody inthe media truly feel the gravity or the tragedy of happenings. Theycan hardly conceal the glee in their eyes when bad things happen. Thebadder the better, as there will be more eyes reading and watchingthem. Did you notice the pleasure they get in ripping films orpersonalities apart? But wait a minute. The film people are worse."
Media's invasiveness and intrusiveness has got people worried. Finallylet us listen in to Amitabh Bachchan who over his 40 year career hashad several run ins with the media frat. Let us listen in to what MrBachchan says, "Electronic media now has become a huge industry. It'sa very intricate process, a very difficult task and extremelycompetitive. I have been to some of the (news) studios and I have seenhow they function - (it's) a massive task." On media per se, he says,'Media is a very powerful medium. It's the voice of the nation. Itinforms and also forms opinion. It has the power to be able toinfluence you in forming a decision. It has a power to changegovernments... Now, when one entity has so many powers, are there anydrawbacks? Are there any loopholes there? Do people use them or misusethem? These are some of the issues that the film Rann deals with."
Finally in an interview to this writer, Bachchan says, "Newstelevision media is still young and in its infancy, but growing upvery rapidly. For a nation that has gained its independence just over 60 yearsback, we have done remarkably better than many others coming out fromsimilar conditions. In order to forge ahead and keep up with the rest of theworld we would have to make 'quantum leaps'. Every time we do that we shallcreate and leave behind a vacuum. The vacuum is the reason for some of our'warts' and 'inadequacies'. This is a normal and natural occurrence ; onethat we shall have to face, but one that I sincerely believe we have thecapacity to overcome." On being probed further on whether media isexercising restraint and caution while reporting and presenting news,Bachchan said, "I am not an authority in judging whether television inIndia has remained> restrained or effective in doing its job. The onus of this must fall on those> that construct guidelines for media in the country. As I see it media has a> job to do, much as I and others have a job to do. How we execute our> respective jobs should be be guided by our own acumen, or within the acumen of> those that set examples and principles for us. In a rapidly changing world of> communication it would be difficult to maintain a set given code of conduct. I> would imagine that the apparatus that the medium is in possession of would> give an indication how best to use it. You may be owning a private jet and> never use it to travel. Conversely you may be the owner of a bicycle and> making optimum use of it to get from one place to the other. Depends on what> and which philosophy you wish to follow. Having said that we cannot ignore the> pressures of competition that various media now faces. Competition may well> push one to extremes and I wonder whether restraint and effectiveness are> necessarily being considered in the middle of a news and entertainment battle.> Well, any battle actually!"

(Impact)