Opinion - News Analysis   

Where the print media can score

K. Narayanan

One of the earliest messages to confront me as I took this hot seat — it came a couple of days before I started functioning as Readers' Editor — was from the Director of the Sri Siddartha Centre for Media Studies, Tumkur. While welcoming the new experiment in Indian journalism and wishing it success, his note also raised some questions.

Referring to the coverage of political developments in Karnataka in the preceding few months, Prof. Suchetana Swaroop posed the question: was the coverage correct and justifiable? The verdict was also given: it was one-sided and full of imbalance; the reports lacked credibility and minimum reasonableness. And a response was asked for.

The tortuous negotiation for the formation of a Congress-Janata Dal (S) coalition government in May 2004, the uneasy existence of this combination, the split in the Janata Dal (S), the rumblings in the Congress, and finally the end of the experiment in January 2006, occupied a lot of space in the media (for which political parties and their activities form the staple diet). When H.D. Kumaraswamy rocked the Congress-JD (S) boat and after a lot of drama formed a JD(S)-BJP coalition Ministry, the focus naturally was on his father, JD(S) President and former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda.

The Hindu's coverage at this time gave major play to the father. There was an interview with him on Page 1, the first time he spoke to the media after the crisis blew up; there was a long report on his interaction with journalists of The Hindu in Chennai, and many reports on what he did and thought. At the same time, the moves and the counter-moves, the claims and counter-claims of all groups were reported. Critical comments about Deve Gowda and his activities also found place.

An analysis of what appeared in the paper in this period leads to the conclusion that Deve Gowda was the centre of attention. Here arises the question of judgment — which is the key to the final content in a newspaper. Every centimetre of space on the pages is the product of constant evaluation. The judgment varies according to the person making it, the issue, and even the day, subject of course to certain basic rules. And whatever be the conclusion arrived at, that will not be something acceptable to all and will be questioned by many. This is part of the profession of journalism, where unanimous approbation is a chimera. Every step will have some critics.

It is undeniable that in our coverage, Deve Gowda got more attention than all the other leaders put together. Those who made the decision have a valid defence — they cite Deve Gowda's stature as former Prime Minister, chief of a major party, and a leader with secular credentials, as the reasons for what they did.

The prominence and space that was given to Deve Gowda can be said to be not fair to all parties. But there was no "angle" to the coverage. It did not take sides. The reports were factual and did not show any prejudice. Nor was credibility involved: there was no inaccuracy cited in any report. The imbalance was in the space given to other groups and their leaders. My enquiries did not reveal any conscious attempt to project one group.

The real lacuna in the coverage, in my view, was that no analysis was offered. There was no attempt to look behind the scenes and tell the reader more than what the leaders said. No insight was provided into what made them say or do things the way they did. Providing the background and analysis is where the print media can score over the visual media, and this advantage has not been pressed. Analysis need not mean pointing accusing fingers; it is to place the developments in perspective and explain to the reader their significance.

Thus the "angle" or "perspective" alleged by Prof. Swaroop is not substantiated by the reports published. Nor are the claims of lack of credibility and reasonableness. The questions of correctness and justifiability are answered by the evaluators' view of Deve Gowda's stature. That there was "imbalance" — I would call it a lack of comprehensiveness — has to be accepted, along with gaps in coverage.

The gaps are seen in other areas also. The Hindu has always had special links with Karnataka, particularly the old Mysore area and the old South Kanara district that formed part of the old Madras Presidency. It was but natural that when the paper decided to expand beyond Tamil Nadu, the first centre it chose for a printing unit (then using the facsimile technology) was Bangalore. What was a satellite unit has now developed into a full-fledged editorial set-up. Mangalore is now the second printing centre in Karnataka.

With this growth and spread, the paper has also shed its image of a Chennai-centric newspaper. It has been a long-drawn effort, which continues. The main hurdle to be overcome is the lack of vigour and aggressiveness in news coverage. Some major developments, within the State and some originating from New Delhi, have made only delayed appearances, after the competition had covered them. A conscious attempt is being made to overcome this deficiency. Better coordination and communication, and a multi-pronged drive to be ahead of the news, is what is required.

And an awareness that the critical reader is watching and assessing your every step.

readerseditor@thehindu.co.in

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

A useful dialogue
No breaking the deadlock
Victim's rights and criminal justice reforms
Where the print media can score
Countering the naxalites
Love & loathing across the Channel
Abolition of slave trade: easy on the euphoria
Laudable
Give her credit
It backfired
Unrealistic

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu