The other day while I was passing on the tank bund, I saw a commotion. One shirtless youngman was rushing towards the railing trailed by a battery of video/still photographers. He then sat on the railing and was talking to the microphones. My vehicle moved on. Next day I saw a news-item with a good-sized photo in the papers that a person claiming to be the head of an outfitcalled Rahul Priyanka Brigade attempted suicide in protest against the behaviour of opposition parties. The photo showed two expert swimmers with lifebuoys holding our leader.
Now this was nothing but a fraud. The plunger, the rescuers, the mediamen all knew that what is being enacted is a drama and were willing participants whether under the influence of power or pelf.
I would suggest a few don'ts for the print as well as visual media:-
1) Do not participate in sham events.
2) Do not cover events which result in traffic chaos.
3) Do not cover events which are obscurant superstitions are depicted.
4) Do not cover events depicting violence especially on women and children; evev enacted ones.
5) Do not show visuals showing damaging of private/public property during the course of demonstrations/protests.
6) Do not show victims of violence or traffic accidents on close-ups in gory detail.
Our society has degenerated enough. Media should not accelerate the process.
...ponder
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Friday, August 17, 2007
Responsible Media
About a month ago while passing on the Tank Bund, I noticed a sudden commotion. One bare chested youth was rushing towards the tank railing trailed by a battery of still and video photographers. He sat on the railing and was hectoring to the battery of mikes. By that time I moved out of the vision. Next day in the papers I saw a news item, accompanied by a good sized photo of his rescue from the lake by expert swimmers, that he was heading an organisation called Rahul Priyanka Brigade and that he tried to commit suicide in protest against the behaviour of the opposition parties towards the benign congress government.
His arrival with a battery of cameramen and next day's coverage in print and visual media tells its own story of this sham episode and the absymal depths to which the media has sunk. They have succumbed either to power or pelf.
I would request the media to indulge in some introspection. Covering such fraud is not only immoral but also diminishes their own credibility. They encourage innocent people into committing such acts without proper back up resulting in tragedy.
I would suggest a few don'ts to the media for overall good of the society:
1) Do not cover any rallies/marches/demonstrations that disrupt traffic.
2) Do not cover any gruesome crime in graphic detail; especially in enacted dramatisation. This is teaching impressionable to commit crimes.
3) Do not show graphic details of accident/crime victims.
4) Do not repeat the same footage in one single telecast; this is abnoxious and tiresome.
5) Do not cover pre-planned frauds as described earlier. News has to be necessary spontaneous and not contrived.
6) Do not cover demonstrations involving violence/destruction of property.
7) Coverage of any news story should not be one-sided. Space must be given for all shades of opinion.
8) Reporting should be even handed. No kid glove treatment for a certain party and hostile treatment for another.
9) Do not crawl when you are asked to bend.
These are but a few. Media is the fourth pillar of our democracy. Where as there are rules and regulations for the other three, media should not misuse its liberty.
...ponder
His arrival with a battery of cameramen and next day's coverage in print and visual media tells its own story of this sham episode and the absymal depths to which the media has sunk. They have succumbed either to power or pelf.
I would request the media to indulge in some introspection. Covering such fraud is not only immoral but also diminishes their own credibility. They encourage innocent people into committing such acts without proper back up resulting in tragedy.
I would suggest a few don'ts to the media for overall good of the society:
1) Do not cover any rallies/marches/demonstrations that disrupt traffic.
2) Do not cover any gruesome crime in graphic detail; especially in enacted dramatisation. This is teaching impressionable to commit crimes.
3) Do not show graphic details of accident/crime victims.
4) Do not repeat the same footage in one single telecast; this is abnoxious and tiresome.
5) Do not cover pre-planned frauds as described earlier. News has to be necessary spontaneous and not contrived.
6) Do not cover demonstrations involving violence/destruction of property.
7) Coverage of any news story should not be one-sided. Space must be given for all shades of opinion.
8) Reporting should be even handed. No kid glove treatment for a certain party and hostile treatment for another.
9) Do not crawl when you are asked to bend.
These are but a few. Media is the fourth pillar of our democracy. Where as there are rules and regulations for the other three, media should not misuse its liberty.
...ponder
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Dignity of High Office
This is the age of transparency and skeletons tumbling out sooner is better than later. Since the People, who are not the electors, are already inured to high offices being debased, dignity is a non-issue here.
Despite Article 74, there can be individuals or situations, when the President can be proactive. Just recollect how the President directly interacted with the American Ambassador and UK High Commissioner when the PM was busy defending his Defense Minister in 1962.
I am afraid undue expectations from the present hapless contestants, are being aroused which was not the case earlier. Only time will tell whether the eventual occupant will measure up to the call of duties or she/he is also a frail human being. Just to refresh the memory how some past individuals performed, let me give a very few critical examples.
One President swore in an individual as PM who was yet to be elected the leader of the majority party in Parliament. The icing on the cake was that he later unsuccessfully conspired to unseat him.
Another President signed proclamation of Emergency without a Cabinet resolution.
Yet another President dismissed a state Government in comfortable majority even without a Governor’s report.
If we diligently catalogue, the list will be very long indeed. So the future incumbent need not worry that only lofty precedents are to be lived up to though that would be ideal. Our country is resilient. Let us be happy and watch the fun like Laxman’s Common Man.
Despite Article 74, there can be individuals or situations, when the President can be proactive. Just recollect how the President directly interacted with the American Ambassador and UK High Commissioner when the PM was busy defending his Defense Minister in 1962.
I am afraid undue expectations from the present hapless contestants, are being aroused which was not the case earlier. Only time will tell whether the eventual occupant will measure up to the call of duties or she/he is also a frail human being. Just to refresh the memory how some past individuals performed, let me give a very few critical examples.
One President swore in an individual as PM who was yet to be elected the leader of the majority party in Parliament. The icing on the cake was that he later unsuccessfully conspired to unseat him.
Another President signed proclamation of Emergency without a Cabinet resolution.
Yet another President dismissed a state Government in comfortable majority even without a Governor’s report.
If we diligently catalogue, the list will be very long indeed. So the future incumbent need not worry that only lofty precedents are to be lived up to though that would be ideal. Our country is resilient. Let us be happy and watch the fun like Laxman’s Common Man.
Monday, August 6, 2007
Snehalata Reddy, Sanjay Dutt and Film Fraternity
Ever since Sanjay Dutt had been sentenced and sent away to jail, the film fraternity is acting as if some subversion of justice had occured and an innocent has been made a fall guy. There is a talk of candle light vigil, protests, support, appeals, etc. Those indulging in this shrill cacaphony include the 'patriotism monopolists' like Shatrughan Sinha and 'Champions of secularism' like Mahesh Bhatt.
In this context, I would like to refresh the memory of some of my age who had seen emergency days and enlighten youngsters, who were too young at that time or were not even born, to the persona of Late Mrs. Snehalata Reddy and what happened to her.
Snehalata Reddy was a very sensitive artiste and wife of a sensitive director late Mr.Pattabhirama Reddy. Both had acquired international fame with their movies like 'Samskara'. Basically they belonged to the upper crust of the society solely immersed in creativity of the highest order with thier own political beliefs.
Despite their political beliefs and association with people like George Fernandez and other socialists, both the Reddys were law abiding, did not dabble with terrorism or befriend objectionable and potential plotters of mayhem and assassins of the innocent.
During emergency, when fundamental rights were abrogated and the Hon'ble courts held that there is no right to life enshrined in the constitution, there was an arrest warrant pending against George Fernandez who was underground. On the mere suspicion that Snehalata Reddy sheltered Fernandez, she was arrested and put in jail. No formal case nor any trial.
Her health was frail. She was not a hardened criminal to take the vagaries of jail life in her stride. (It may be worthwhile to recollect here that the likes of Rajmata Vijaya Raje Scindia and Maharani of Jaipur were kept in death row cells.) Such was the vindictiveness. Her health steadily deteriorated. She was released without a case almost on the day she breathed her last.
Now, let us juxtapose this episode in our national shame with that of Sanjay Dutt's. Sanjay Dutt had cases booked against him. He was afforded a long drawn trial during which time for nearly 90% of the time he went about his life nonchalently. He had a very fair and upright judge who was quite lenient to him. Even while sentensing him, the judge showed his sympathy due to a mis-guided but dangerous-to-society youth. Sanjay Dutt still has further avenue open to him. Due process of law has been ensured and is being ensursed. His crime is such that except for a Presidential pardon, he cannot be condoned without subverting the law.
What happened to Snehalata Reddy? No chargesheet. No trial. No bail. No privileges but an accelerated death given with the heavy hand of a tyrant. Where was the film fraternity then? Where were these secularists and apologists of criminals? Where are they even today? Do they recollect her name or are they too embarassed to be bothered? Will they hold a candle light vigil on her death day now?
Ponder...
In this context, I would like to refresh the memory of some of my age who had seen emergency days and enlighten youngsters, who were too young at that time or were not even born, to the persona of Late Mrs. Snehalata Reddy and what happened to her.
Snehalata Reddy was a very sensitive artiste and wife of a sensitive director late Mr.Pattabhirama Reddy. Both had acquired international fame with their movies like 'Samskara'. Basically they belonged to the upper crust of the society solely immersed in creativity of the highest order with thier own political beliefs.
Despite their political beliefs and association with people like George Fernandez and other socialists, both the Reddys were law abiding, did not dabble with terrorism or befriend objectionable and potential plotters of mayhem and assassins of the innocent.
During emergency, when fundamental rights were abrogated and the Hon'ble courts held that there is no right to life enshrined in the constitution, there was an arrest warrant pending against George Fernandez who was underground. On the mere suspicion that Snehalata Reddy sheltered Fernandez, she was arrested and put in jail. No formal case nor any trial.
Her health was frail. She was not a hardened criminal to take the vagaries of jail life in her stride. (It may be worthwhile to recollect here that the likes of Rajmata Vijaya Raje Scindia and Maharani of Jaipur were kept in death row cells.) Such was the vindictiveness. Her health steadily deteriorated. She was released without a case almost on the day she breathed her last.
Now, let us juxtapose this episode in our national shame with that of Sanjay Dutt's. Sanjay Dutt had cases booked against him. He was afforded a long drawn trial during which time for nearly 90% of the time he went about his life nonchalently. He had a very fair and upright judge who was quite lenient to him. Even while sentensing him, the judge showed his sympathy due to a mis-guided but dangerous-to-society youth. Sanjay Dutt still has further avenue open to him. Due process of law has been ensured and is being ensursed. His crime is such that except for a Presidential pardon, he cannot be condoned without subverting the law.
What happened to Snehalata Reddy? No chargesheet. No trial. No bail. No privileges but an accelerated death given with the heavy hand of a tyrant. Where was the film fraternity then? Where were these secularists and apologists of criminals? Where are they even today? Do they recollect her name or are they too embarassed to be bothered? Will they hold a candle light vigil on her death day now?
Ponder...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)