03-11-2007, 12:00 AM
*The Reddy-Eenadu war*
http://cybernoon.com/DisplayArticle.asp?se...=editoria\
ls&xfile=March2007_mediawatch_standard183&child=mediawatch
Friday, March 09, 2007 10:39:31 IST
Secularism has many faces, practically all of them distorted. But that is
what contemporary journalism is
As early as 27th December 2006, the Chandigarh-based 'The Tribune' raised
its voice against the government of Andhra Pradesh whose Chief Minister Y.S.
Rajasekhara Reddy has been at war against the media, especially
'Eenadu'. 'The Tribune' then dismissed the behaviour of the Congress
government in Andhra Pradesh as "outrageous" saying that it "shows scant
respect for the institutions that make up a democracy and is a reminder to
all citizens that media freedom must constantly be defended against those
who would like to suppress it for their convenience".Mr. Reddy, the Congress
Chief Minister, had targeted the 'Eenadu' group led by Mr. Ramoji Rao for
launching a series of investigative stories bringing the Reddy government in
bad light, including the one relating to the chief minister's dubious
surrender of surplus land he had come to possess over the years.
*Muzzling the media*
'The Tribune' said that "instead of directly attacking Mr. Ramoji Rao's TV
channels and the 'Eenadu' newspapers, Mr. Reddy chose to take on a group
finance company, Margadarshi Financiers, belonging to Mr. Ramoji Rao for
over three decades. Said 'The Tribune': "With shocking cynicism and
brutality, an attempt was made to discredit the company, in order to cause a
run on its funds", even when the Reserve Bank of India had not shown any
concern about the depositors' money with the company.
'The Tribune' went on to say: "That a state government can launch into this
kind of persecution, simply to harass a newspaper publishing reports
critical of its acts of commission and omission, is nothing but the ugly
pressure of the kind the 'Indian Express' used to experience during the
heydays of Sanjay Gandhi". The Congress chief minister, Mr. S. Rajsekhara
Reddy seems to have been noticed by the overall critical attitude of the
'Eenadu' group towards the Andhra Pradesh government. Pointedly, 'The
Tribune' courageously noted: "It is about press freedom and the powers of
truth, about politicians resorting to desperate actions to deflect the
probing light of inquiry focused by a media group.
The attack on 'Eenadu' shows the press cannot afford to take its freedom for
granted. It has to remain vigilant against direct and indirect threats that
are lurking round the corner." That editorial was written by 'The Tribune'
on 27th December 2006. Two months later, on 23rd February, 2007, the Chennai
based 'The Hindu' ran a story that said that "in an extraordinary move, the
Andhra Pradesh government has issued orders according permission to Special
Commissioner, Information and Public Relations to initiate legal action
against publishers and editors of newspapers/TV channels, which have
published or telecast reports defamatory to the government". The permission
was accorded to the commissioner for lodging a complaint and for filing
defamation cases through a Special Public Prosecutor.
'The Hindu' published the full text of the order. The order clearly is
intended to punish Ramoji Rao and the 'Eenadu' group of papers in Andhra
Pradesh. That a Congress government should be indulging in this form of
Emergency terrorism has evidently not come to the full notice of the Indian
media which has been â with the exception of 'The Tribune' â remarkably
silent. One does not need a special gag order. There are enough laws on
board to tackle defamation. What the Congress Chief Minister obviously has
in mind is to terrorise Mr. Ramoji Rao into submission.
That the Prime Minister's Office has not so far taken any cognizance of the
matter comes as a surprise. Even more surprising is that the Congress party
seems unaware of what is going on in Andhra Pradesh. Muzzling the media
seems to be the order of the day that even 'The Times of India', usually a
defender of the Establishment was forced to write a strong editorial
(January 8, 2007) against the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting that
said that "there is no place in an open society for a ministry that muzzles
the media by laying down draconian, and often ludicruous, guidelines".
It is in this connection that one is reminded of an article that appeared in
'The Hindu' (2nd July, 2006) in its 'Open Page' that is worth recalling. The
article by one R. Lakshminarayanan noted that "there have been disturbing
trends" in the electronic media also. It said: "There seems to be a shortage
of good reporters. A good many are seen to be not voluble enough and
questions put to people are, to say the least, not courteous enough".
More to the point, the article said: "The most disturbing aspect is the
total insensitivity of the news channels to the visuals they bring on the
screen. If the news is about a violent incident, the visuals must have gory
shots of blood pools, blood soaked clothes, blood-smudged floors and dead
bodies â and these visuals get repeated so many times that one dreads to put
on the channel. It is crudity at its first".
The article further said: "Have you noticed that whenever anything gets said
on Babri Masjid, the background will invariably show the 1991 shots of the
mosque being pulled down by the zealots. Why show these old visuals and
re-open the emotional wounds?" But then, isn't the answer obvious? How else
can one damn the BJP except through such visuals? Luckily for our
secularists there was no photography or tapes in those golden days when
Muslim rulers tore down temple after temple â literally hundreds of them â
for showing. Secularism has many faces, practically all of them distorted.
But that is what contemporary journalism is.
*Utterly indifferent*
That the Congress party can remain utterly indifferent to the brutal
laws being passed by a Congress government in Andhra Pradesh comes as a
shock, but perhaps it shouldn't. Wasn't it the same Congress government that
brought in the Emergency? The voice of truth must be stilled whether it is
that of 'Indian Express' or 'Eenadu'. The media, it would seem, has no
business to inquire into how politicians make fortunes. Making such
inquiries in public interest becomes defamatory.
The Reddy-'Eenadu' controversy needs to be extensively gone into and
discussed, threadbare. There is a law to protect journalists who make
statements in good faith. There are enough laws to handle defamation and
they are open to Chief Minister Reddy to use in all genuine cases. To enact
new and stringent orders is to admit to guilt. Reddy in his more relaxed
moments can reflect on this. If he had a good case, he has nothing to lose.
If he hasn't he will only invite disgrace.
http://cybernoon.com/DisplayArticle.asp?se...=editoria\
ls&xfile=March2007_mediawatch_standard183&child=mediawatch
Friday, March 09, 2007 10:39:31 IST
Secularism has many faces, practically all of them distorted. But that is
what contemporary journalism is
As early as 27th December 2006, the Chandigarh-based 'The Tribune' raised
its voice against the government of Andhra Pradesh whose Chief Minister Y.S.
Rajasekhara Reddy has been at war against the media, especially
'Eenadu'. 'The Tribune' then dismissed the behaviour of the Congress
government in Andhra Pradesh as "outrageous" saying that it "shows scant
respect for the institutions that make up a democracy and is a reminder to
all citizens that media freedom must constantly be defended against those
who would like to suppress it for their convenience".Mr. Reddy, the Congress
Chief Minister, had targeted the 'Eenadu' group led by Mr. Ramoji Rao for
launching a series of investigative stories bringing the Reddy government in
bad light, including the one relating to the chief minister's dubious
surrender of surplus land he had come to possess over the years.
*Muzzling the media*
'The Tribune' said that "instead of directly attacking Mr. Ramoji Rao's TV
channels and the 'Eenadu' newspapers, Mr. Reddy chose to take on a group
finance company, Margadarshi Financiers, belonging to Mr. Ramoji Rao for
over three decades. Said 'The Tribune': "With shocking cynicism and
brutality, an attempt was made to discredit the company, in order to cause a
run on its funds", even when the Reserve Bank of India had not shown any
concern about the depositors' money with the company.
'The Tribune' went on to say: "That a state government can launch into this
kind of persecution, simply to harass a newspaper publishing reports
critical of its acts of commission and omission, is nothing but the ugly
pressure of the kind the 'Indian Express' used to experience during the
heydays of Sanjay Gandhi". The Congress chief minister, Mr. S. Rajsekhara
Reddy seems to have been noticed by the overall critical attitude of the
'Eenadu' group towards the Andhra Pradesh government. Pointedly, 'The
Tribune' courageously noted: "It is about press freedom and the powers of
truth, about politicians resorting to desperate actions to deflect the
probing light of inquiry focused by a media group.
The attack on 'Eenadu' shows the press cannot afford to take its freedom for
granted. It has to remain vigilant against direct and indirect threats that
are lurking round the corner." That editorial was written by 'The Tribune'
on 27th December 2006. Two months later, on 23rd February, 2007, the Chennai
based 'The Hindu' ran a story that said that "in an extraordinary move, the
Andhra Pradesh government has issued orders according permission to Special
Commissioner, Information and Public Relations to initiate legal action
against publishers and editors of newspapers/TV channels, which have
published or telecast reports defamatory to the government". The permission
was accorded to the commissioner for lodging a complaint and for filing
defamation cases through a Special Public Prosecutor.
'The Hindu' published the full text of the order. The order clearly is
intended to punish Ramoji Rao and the 'Eenadu' group of papers in Andhra
Pradesh. That a Congress government should be indulging in this form of
Emergency terrorism has evidently not come to the full notice of the Indian
media which has been â with the exception of 'The Tribune' â remarkably
silent. One does not need a special gag order. There are enough laws on
board to tackle defamation. What the Congress Chief Minister obviously has
in mind is to terrorise Mr. Ramoji Rao into submission.
That the Prime Minister's Office has not so far taken any cognizance of the
matter comes as a surprise. Even more surprising is that the Congress party
seems unaware of what is going on in Andhra Pradesh. Muzzling the media
seems to be the order of the day that even 'The Times of India', usually a
defender of the Establishment was forced to write a strong editorial
(January 8, 2007) against the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting that
said that "there is no place in an open society for a ministry that muzzles
the media by laying down draconian, and often ludicruous, guidelines".
It is in this connection that one is reminded of an article that appeared in
'The Hindu' (2nd July, 2006) in its 'Open Page' that is worth recalling. The
article by one R. Lakshminarayanan noted that "there have been disturbing
trends" in the electronic media also. It said: "There seems to be a shortage
of good reporters. A good many are seen to be not voluble enough and
questions put to people are, to say the least, not courteous enough".
More to the point, the article said: "The most disturbing aspect is the
total insensitivity of the news channels to the visuals they bring on the
screen. If the news is about a violent incident, the visuals must have gory
shots of blood pools, blood soaked clothes, blood-smudged floors and dead
bodies â and these visuals get repeated so many times that one dreads to put
on the channel. It is crudity at its first".
The article further said: "Have you noticed that whenever anything gets said
on Babri Masjid, the background will invariably show the 1991 shots of the
mosque being pulled down by the zealots. Why show these old visuals and
re-open the emotional wounds?" But then, isn't the answer obvious? How else
can one damn the BJP except through such visuals? Luckily for our
secularists there was no photography or tapes in those golden days when
Muslim rulers tore down temple after temple â literally hundreds of them â
for showing. Secularism has many faces, practically all of them distorted.
But that is what contemporary journalism is.
*Utterly indifferent*
That the Congress party can remain utterly indifferent to the brutal
laws being passed by a Congress government in Andhra Pradesh comes as a
shock, but perhaps it shouldn't. Wasn't it the same Congress government that
brought in the Emergency? The voice of truth must be stilled whether it is
that of 'Indian Express' or 'Eenadu'. The media, it would seem, has no
business to inquire into how politicians make fortunes. Making such
inquiries in public interest becomes defamatory.
The Reddy-'Eenadu' controversy needs to be extensively gone into and
discussed, threadbare. There is a law to protect journalists who make
statements in good faith. There are enough laws to handle defamation and
they are open to Chief Minister Reddy to use in all genuine cases. To enact
new and stringent orders is to admit to guilt. Reddy in his more relaxed
moments can reflect on this. If he had a good case, he has nothing to lose.
If he hasn't he will only invite disgrace.