Need of an impartial media?

In the recent days we have seen many events that has questioned the credibility of Main Stream Media, also called in short as MSM in the cyber world.

We witnessed how the whole media collectively blacked out the news story of reputed journalists caught red handed as power brokers / go between for a particular political party. That was so much that this in the beginning was not even reported as a news story leave aside to debate. While only two MSM magazines Open and Outlook published this story rest completely white-washed it. The blackout was opposed vehemently in the shape of a movement, in the social media like twitter, facebook etc. For example in twitter where all journalists spent significant time writing comments and chatting with people, on the trends #barkhagate, #mediagate, there have been 10 posts per minute approximately on this subject. The pressure and the crescendo of opposition that was built against the media blackout forced some channels to atleast broadcast debates initially on a softer note but later when they realised it is of no use running away then on a more confrontational tone.

Two things that came out very clearly from the tapes was that the main stream media which we look for information is partisan with vested interest in most cases. And those journalist who are considered as of highly educated, reputed and of high ethical standards are actually as hollow as the people they professes to expose. How can we expect an unpartisan news from a news channel whose reputed journalist was caught red handed acting as a go-between for a political party?

What the MSM today represents is a coterie of socialites, politicians, corporate houses, bureaucrats, film stars etc therefore the system which protects their interests is defended while the news stories which are of public interest do not find any mention.

One immediate example is the death of Rajiv Dixit of azadi bachao aandolan and General secretary of Bharat Swabhiman who did not find any mention in the news from any of the news channels despite of such a huge fan following. Was Rajiv dixit a nobody for the media? Simply because it hurts the interest of the coterie. By reporting events incidents related to or that may kindle the flames of Swadeshi, despite of the fact that many people may be interested in it and want information, the news channels do not show such news as they run a risk of loosing advertisements from their esteemed corporate clients, if they broadcasts it. At the end it is all about money for them.

So where can the masses turn to for information. If any media is established with the help of corporate houses, it will always bear the risk of promoting vested interest rather than public interest. No matter what a media house claims if they are not for service, they are for profit. There will always remain a motive of profit which will drive their stories and kill the true objective of impartial reporting for larger public interest. However if a media is established with wider participation and collective efforts of like minded people for the sole objective of service and larger public interest then it will have the freedom and ability to work independently. Such a media organisation should also be run by people who see journalism as a means to an end where end being a selfless service to benefit society, not individual gains.

Hope as the dawn of new era ushers in 2011, we will be able to see some light in the field of journalism to carry forward the legacy of the likes of Pandit Shri Ram Sharma Aacharya, Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi and other journalists of the freedom struggle days.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: