Journalism In delimma?

Undeniably, media the world over is bestowed with the responsibility of the fourth estate. This reflects how central a role the media is been given in the process of nation building, both as a prop to the other pillars of state, and as a reservoir and outlet to public information. At the same time, media is also conferred with a much greater responsibility than it is deemed to fulfill. It is the overseer of the democratic system and institutions in place. No wonder, to use the clichéd phrase, media has been called the ‘watchdog of democracy’ time and time again. Therefore, the need for any media to be objective, non-partisan, apolitical and if possible, a non-commercial entity, is a vital requisite. Media professionals have no ideologies, as such. Journalism is supposed to be their ideology. The onus of being a journalist is therefore huge. The media or the people who run the media cannot be subject to manipulation. Ideally, they are the messengers of truth. Bhutan has both a budding media and a fledgling democracy. Period. To make these two succeed will be the test of our times. In fact, history is unfolding its course, and there is no room for any fatal mistakes. The road ahead may not necessarily be a smooth ride, but we cannot afford to be the ‘take it easy’ kind. Not at any cost. However, a few developments in the recent times have been very disquieting. This is apropos of the bitter, almost outspoken and open finger pointing between the two leading print media of the country. Bhutan Times wrote a story that literally tried to correct the story Kuensel ran regarding the Pay Commission’s new pay package for the civil servants. In return, Kuensel got back with an answer that was more debilitating. And again in retaliation BT stuck back even harder. Underneath the calm surface is an ongoing media war. This is just a case in point. In wake of these events, one thing stands out clear-the purpose of journalism is lost, if not totally, it is at least dying. Credibility, the greatest asset a media organization can claim to, is at stake here. And to protect it, they can cross all lines of propriety and ethics. Cheap, tabloid contents are seeping into our media too. The forum has become a spot for blame game, naming and shaming, accusations and counter accusations. It is made worse when media organizations themselves are licking the dust, trying to prove the other wrong, in some kind of desperate move to maintain its status quo. This is not journalism. A closer look confirms that a bitter rivalry is brewing up actually. If we read between the lines, a primal battle for supremacy, an intention writhed with vengeance, and at times, a blatant display of sheer heavy headedness seems to be at play. There is no greater shame than this. True journalism it seems can only be taught in the classrooms. Not practiced in the field. Journalism is about FACTS. The ever increasing competition between the news organizations to feed these facts to their audience at the earliest has added a new dimension to the business of news. Journalism has become a slave to information, and time is a hard task master. Often in the maddening rush to be the first to break the news, media organizations have jumped the gun. In doing so, they have made mistakes. Forgivable mistakes though. What can be done at best is to follow the old rule: if you are in doubt, leave out. Or if you are in doubt, find out. Journalism is at its cross roads, not just in Bhutan but across the world. From its serious, social bent, journalism has become a thriving money minter. It is a business, through and through. No matter how hard you try to segregate the news from the business, the two is bound to each other like Siamese twins. Therefore it is no surprise when editorial decisions and autonomy are over shadowed by commercial interests. It is indeed no surprise that news has become a commodity like any other. Survival is the question here. And to survive, a few rules are bent easily and justifiably so. To cite a popular example, before writing a negative story on any corporate organization that gives the media huge lot of advertisements, which means money, the media would re-think its decisions for the umpteenth time. And somehow somewhere down the line, a compromise is made. This is not journalism. This is a freakish blow to the whole concept of good journalism. It’s time for the media to do some soul searching. Bhutan as a developing nation has a plethora of development issues to be addressed. But there is barely any coverage on the rural issues. There is a gamut of health and environment issues too that media can pick up. News these days is about sex, crime, and controversies because nothing sells like them. In the course, many crucial issues of social importance are getting willfully neglected. Who knows much about what is happening in the most remote and backward regions of Bhutan? I would like to believe that people they are anyway happy because a few studies have shown more than ninety percent of Bhutanese populace as living a happy life. (Courtesy National Housing and Population Census, 2005.) But in reality this is far from true. Which reporter would want to walk five days at end for a story? Which media house would spend more than it takes to do a story to send its reporter behind the mountains where people live in absolute poverty, in dire need of help and development? Media has increasingly misplaced its priority. Prioritizing what is news and what is not, is not just defined by the so-called theory that media gives what the people want. The ABCD of journalism-Accuracy, Brevity, Clarity and Discretion-is what media professionals need to go back to. The discretion here is giving not just everything that people want to know but what they need to know as well. And of course, people will want everything. If they ask for a nude picture of a celebrity, will the media flash the picture on the front page the next day? Many tabloids do this. It is visual pornography, not journalism. In Bhutan the media is starting to believe that they are all powerful. They can criticize the government, the judiciary, and the parliament. They are the ultimate voice of democracy. Even the Constitution has bestowed so much right and freedom on the media. These are positive developments. Which country will not want to have an independent and a brave media? But if they lose track of their focus and responsibilities, and why they are what they are, they do not have the right to be. We do not need a renaissance of some sort. Many things are still going in the right direction. Media houses are trying to out do each other, and in the process, they are producing good journalism. But that does not mean the media has the right to come out in the open, crying foul, trying to settle scores and prove that they are an edge ahead of the other. What happened is a bad precedence; a little maturity will undo the harm. Remember saying this; “This story is in the interest of the public.” Many journalists would have justified when they are doing a sensitive story by saying that they are doing it for the public interest. If that is so, the medium belongs to the public. Journalists and editors are mere actors. So let’s not over-act. Bhutanese audience and readers have been so far forgiving. It is a pity that they can still be so forgiving. But may be not for long. It is time Bhutanese media comes of age.