Opinion - News Analysis   

When criticism loses its sting

I always wonder — what purpose do anonymous contributions serve, as also abusive ones? Do the writers expect these to be read, to be taken seriously? Read them I do; it is fun. Probably they satisfy the senders' egos, or sometimes pander to their masochistic instincts.

A response to my column on January 1, 2007 ("Fundamentals of a demanding profession") signed "A sympathiser" (post-marked Chennai) was one such. The letter had valid points: "The basic skills of a journalist have been aptly outlined (in the column) but are these followed by your staff?" The long letter was convincing in part, but strayed into unnecessarily acidic, bitter remarks. Anonymity combining with intemperateness deprived the letter of what value it might have had.

More interesting was a bulky cover, again with no indication of its source, containing about 15 clippings from The Hindu, each one scribbled with corrections, questions and criticism. That must have meant quite a lot of time and effort. I admired the skill on display. Undoubtedly it was the handiwork of an experienced professional, familiar with the nuances of editing. But again, why hide? And what was sought to be achieved? It brought to my mind an ex-colleague, an expert in such hacking, who did it for a few days, and did it well, but he would have done so openly!

That column, and the one that followed, both on editing and writing faults, had understanding and sympathetic responses too. Badri Seshadri (Chennai) says the blame for the fall in standards should be collectively shared — society in general, and newspapers in particular, have allowed literature to take the backseat. An easily obtained journalism degree has become the passport for a newspaper job, not literary skills. Y.M. Rao of Musheerabad, Hyderabad, offers another perspective. He is amused by the obsession of readers with typographical and spelling mistakes. One reads newspapers for news and not to enrich one's language, he says. "So long as facts are not distorted and views are presented intelligibly, there is nothing to cavil at."

My old colleague C.V. Gopalakrishnan (Thiruvananthapuram) — he satisfies his undiminished urge to write with long notes to me — thinks readers who have all the time bask in their own sunshine of having picked mistakes. They have no idea of the breathtaking haste with which "the unsung angels" of the newspaper work.

As good as anonymity in posted mail is the protection e-mail offers: the ID on the mail, real or fake, does not reveal the identity of the sender. Full postal address — which we ask for as a sensible rule, partly for legal reasons and partly to know the geographical spread of those who communicate — is often not provided, more so when abuse is proffered. A sample: "What a joker you are. You do not even know what journalism is ... propaganda by traitors and frauds like you masquerading as journalism."

Mercifully such rantings and ravings form only a small portion of our mail. Many of those who contact us are well informed and well intentioned. They seek to help us in the efforts to improve quality. Their communications are always welcome. There are also strongly worded messages. Anger I can understand; criticism I accept; but hate and venom? Those who spew this do not hurt; they amuse; and evoke my pity for them, for their mental state.

There is yet another category that indulges in not professional but personal abuse (I am not the target in these), using words like "mad dog," "stooping to accommodate thugs and manipulating and exploiting Indians," and so on. These writers, assuming the names and addresses are genuine, are obviously not aware that they lay themselves open to a charge of defamation and ensuing legal proceedings. Those who use false names and addresses perhaps do not know that law enforcers have ways of finding out the identity of the offenders.

Any statement that exposes a person to contempt, hatred or ridicule, or tends to injure him or her in the profession or trade, is defamatory under the law. Communication to a third party other than the person defamed is held to be publication and can be a cause of legal action. An attack on the moral character or attribution of disgraceful conduct can be defamation.

Letters to the editor, articles, news items, continue to be sent to me. The Readers' Editor has no pre-publication role and I can only forward these to the persons concerned. And my activity extends only to what is published in The Hindu: not with a printed circular from "the District Collector (CS) of Visakhapatnam." The numerous mistakes in English in the note have been marked as "Queen's English" and it is addressed to me by name by "Despatch clerk, O/o Dist. Supply Officer (City), Visakhapatnam."

readerseditor@thehindu.co.in

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

Stories in this Section

Weakening the LTTE
Serena's comeback magic
Can IT-enabled services lower corruption?
When criticism loses its sting
The myth of John McCain
Costly defections in Sri Lanka
Generic drugs and the fate of the global AIDS response
Why Africa now relies on Arnold Schwarzenegger
Farewell Faizal!
R-Day gift
On reservation

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu