An Interview with a Reporter
Hey all,
A very good friend of mine, Mr. Prabhakar Kumar, who is also a news channel reporter for one of the leading news channels in India (don't want to disclose the name here), helped me clear some of my doubts regarding my previous post..
Plz go through the conversation below.. its interesting and truly an eye-opener!
"
me: Hi
hw r u?
i had a question...
prabhakar: fine
what's up
pucho
me: can you just go to my blog..
otherwise..
prabhakar: sure
me: wait
lemme just ask it here..
there was an incident in jaipur
where a priest was beaten up by some VHP members
prabhakar: k
me: a news channel camera covered all this live..
prabhakar: k
me: right from the time the VHP members were putting on their masks..
prabhakar: k
me: now this reporter was aware of the crime beforehand..
so why did he not go to the police n complain?
prabhakar: that's yellow journalism
me: one of my friend has a diff view here..
oh..
wats yellow journalism??
prabhakar: people can go to any extent to get a spicy news
that's the fact
me: ouch..
ok..
prabhakar: no ethics are followed
me: ok..
prabhakar: its the cost of competition in media
me: hmmm
prabhakar: its a mad race here
me: hmmm
prabhakar: looks glittery from outside
me: ![[smile]](http://mail.google.com/mail/images/cleardot.gif)
prabhakar: but dirty from within
me: uh-huh..
prabhakar: we are part of it
if i practise ethics
its my peersonal choice
me: ok..
prabhakar: there r N examples like this
stop getting shocked over these incidents
me:
prabhakar: & accept it as it is
me: hmmm
my friend had a diff point of view here.. and after talkin to u.. i feel he is wrong..this is what he had to say on my article.. Neil said...
Hmmm... So this may be the first time in ur posts but I think you got carried away here.
Its generally not the responsibility of the media nor is it recommended... whether it is Gopalan as in case of Veerappan or some CNN news reporters reporting from Serbia, reporters are meant to provide a coverage and thats all. Heck, they are not even supposed to voice their opinion (which is violated innumerable times) or display their emotions. There is no point of interfering in the actual event lest they are shunned and prevented from doing their jobs or worse actually affected by it. Dint mean to be verbose here... But this is open for a debate.
Sent at 5:10 PM on Wednesday
prabhakar: u r also right here
but this is just one aspect of the whole story
me: can u plz explain it a bit
prabhakar: as u said.......reporters are not supposed to do blah blah is correct
me:
prabhakar: but at the same time........reporters can even get these kinds of events organised to get some EXCLUSIVE footage
me: hmmm
prabhakar: that's other aspect which needs to be condemned
me:
thanks a lot..
wow things really are clear now..
prabhakar: welcome buddy
me: if you dont mind.. can i post this conversation on my blog..
prabhakar: hehe
sure
i don't mind
carry on
me: wow.. thanks.. great.. "
great.. "
6 comments:
Too much to talk sbout in this context. The interview you did was great, but it raises more questions.
Lets talk about yellow journalism first, from what I researched, this is yellow journalism; Yellow journalism is a pejorative reference to journalism that features scandal-mongering, sensationalism, jingoism or other unethical or unprofessional practices by news media organizations or individual journalists.
What I am saying is that Yellow Journalism refers to the sensationalization of news, so you may have some pretty ordinary news that is reported with a lot of, what can I say, salt and pepper?! Yes, its meant to increase circulation/TRPs, well basically anything that indicates a widening of the audience.
To quote something I read somewhere "While bland infotainment and unethical corporate media practices may be considered "yellow" in the sense of "cowardly," the term yellow journalism traditionally refers to news organizations for whom some combination of sensationalism, profiteering, propaganda, journalistic bias or jingoism takes dominance over factual reporting and the profession's public trust."
I think the big issue here is not just sensationalism, I think what worries you is the fact that the reporter/journalist, who was aware of the incident before-hand, did not take any action against the assailants. Its a grey area, on the one hand, if journalists start revealing their sources to the authorities, the wrong doings of the powers that be will not be exposed, as clandestine information will not be so willingly divulged by sensitive sources! Incidents like the Watergate Scandal in the US would not have come to light if the sources of the journalists had been jeopardised by the journalists themselves, and no one who is also a party to a crime would ever feel secure revealing possibly incriminating information to the Fourth Estate, would your journalist friend call the part by part revelation of the Watergate Scandal an example of Yellow Journalism? On the other hand, abusing this privilege could lead to Journalists & Reporters being used in power games, and thus defeating their purpose as guardians of truth.
I think neither side is completely wrong or right, I think, all said and done, this would have to be left to the editor to decide. Hope he/she takes the right decision, well the editor can always replace any offensive material with some photos of Ash and Abhishek's wedding!!! :-)
OK...just realised that you have censorship set up on your blog comments...I tried to post my comments twice...before I came to that realisation....I am disgusted by this, I mean it!!! I was under the impression that you supported free speech as a fundamental right, but looks like you do not!! I am pretty sure this comment will not show up in the blog comments...but i don't care, had to vent!!! If you moderate comments on posts, you should not let visitors post any comments at all!
Again, I apologise for my naivete, I will never post a comment to your blog, unless you convince me that this little piece of censorship you implement is not to hinder free speech.
Hey there..
Not at all.. I dont even read things posted by people I know .. i just publish them..
This censorship is to prevent someone from posting vulgar comments on my blog..
Hope you realise the need of this..
I am sorry if this offended you in any sense.. but trust me.. it is really in place for the reason i mentioned above and nothing else!
Well I guess there has been a slight ocnfusion..
According to you..
"Yellow Journalism refers to the sensationalization of news"
and I guess the general context, from watever i can gather, is that its also used for creation of news..
There is a very slight difference.. between creation of news.. sensationalizing news.. and news in the context of what we were talking of..about a planned assassination.
Well.. as far as scandals are concerned your point is correct.. but here the point being discussed is about some freak group taking law in their hands! I understand the delicate relationship between a journalist and his sources..
I agree that there are a lot of things on stake.. and the journalist, may be correct.. in not revealing this information beforehand.. but why only talk about this one news.. tell me in general is Indian Media really Responsible?!
I agree with you to some extent, but I still think its a grey area, political scandals that I mentioned are incidental, its still a crime nevertheless. Anyways, no, I don't think the Indian media acts responsibly, but in the time that I have been in the US, I have realised, neither does the media here, so thats two countries, I don't know about the rest but I don't think its too farfetched to believe that most media, almost all over the world is corrupt, in some cases the corruption might be too much.
Well I guess you are right..corruption has seeped so deeply inside in this today's world..its almost like blood pumping continuously through the veins of this nation!
Post a Comment