Journalists -- Are they crossing the limits?

Can somebody cover all the events in the World and make news out of them? What qualifies as news? What news are we interested in? Who should decide what is news to us? Media has become too powerful and pervasive to leave our lives untouched. 24-hour news reporting has certainly created clarifications/doubts in our minds about every single entity around us - be it family or society. Are they true impressions? Are they ephemeral since the next news is already a history by the time current one sinks in?

Consider the following definitions from Oxford Dictionary.

News :- Newly received, or noteworthy information, especially about recent events

Journalism :- The activity or profession of writing for newspapers or magazines or of broadcasting news on radio or television

In a nutshell, News is a noteworthy information and Journalists are people who present it. There is no mention in these definitions about what can be regarded as "NEWSworthy" and who should decide that. So, in principal, Journalists should deliver news in terms of plain facts and not in terms of assumptions or assessment. They should capture the latest factual happenings and pass on the same to us without being judgmental in any respect. As a receiver, it should be left to us to pass any verdict or not.

The reality is quite opposite though. More than the news bulletins, the News channels air the analysis/debate shows of some kind or the other. Each news channel declares its show, its analysis and its outcome as the best. Often, they give a hint that the similar proclamations by their competitors are useless. Arnab Goswamis, Barkha Duttas, Rajadeep Sirdesais of Indian news channels have long lived on the premise of fooling us into believing what they assess and presume to be true. Yes, I hate the conclusions they make for us.

While I was in college, I had programmed myself to watch the 8:45 pm News Bulletin on Doordarshan. There were no other news channels so the choice was easy. Now, I can listen/watch the same news in different Avatars on different channels many times in a day. Now, when I compare the quality of that 15 minute nutshell kind of news delivery to the incessant dissection of any news item, I thank the college authorities to not beam these atrocious channels of today during those times.

Everything is a news item these days. Anything can be dusted, polished, extra-coated, debated upon by self-proclaimed experts

and then declared good or bad with a classic looking, teary or hair-clenching adjudication. Sample this from last year's general election campaign.

Rahul Gandhi visits a Dalit home in a Uttar Pradesh village, eats and sleeps there.

The news channels, barring only a few which I missed keeping track of, showed this item 15 times a day, debated on it in a special programme with experts and pronounced the following.

He will swing Dalit votes towards Congress.

We all know what happened afterwards. The question is not about how did they arrive at the outcome but why this debate in the first place on a extremely stupid activity. Take another really stupid item to be debated on Prime Time National channels.

Sanjay Dutt gets a 14-day furlough from Yerwada Jail.

Why in the world are we concerned about Sanjay Dutt when there are many criminals with more ghastly crimes to their names sitting outside? The Newshour on Times Now devotes two episodes to debate this non-issue? Who cares about this discussion when at the same time something more serious like terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo is in news?

Talking about Charlie Hebdo, what paucity of news items in today's 24-7 world forced them to use Prophet Mohammed in a cartoon? How many prints did they sell more, how many advertisements did they get extra, how many actually enjoyed that cartoon, and many more such ROI questions. I am more concerned about the bankruptcy of ideas than the freedom of expression. They unnecessarily provoked a mindless, insane faculty of people to do what they did. And how did Charlie Hebdo respond? Another Prophet cartoon on the front cover. Whole of the Muslim world is burning with protests, from Nigeria to Malaysia.

Regulations on what should be termed as news item for public consumption should be put in place now. Exactly what those regulations should be, I leave it to my readers to ponder till I can take the subject further.

 

Obama vs Osama

May Osama Bin Laden quickly complete his ordeal in the Hell and attain Salvation. He might have been a terrorist and could have spent most of his adult life in doing things which are to be abhored but he still deserves all the prayers to help him rest in peace. After all he was the brother of Barack Obama.

I am not joking. "All humans are brethren of each other". That is what US wanted to prove by killing Osama and announcing that his death will make the world a much better place to live in, a place full of love and harmony. The brotherhood existed before and exists now. Hence, Osama and Obama were brothers before and brothers now.

Let us try to answer the following questions.

1. Should Obama regale in the death of Osama? 
2. Should US consider itself safer and believe that Osama won't take an incarnation? 
3. Will the strife in Afghanistan, Iraq and rest of the Islamic world lessen a bit? 
4. Will there be no more Jihadis? 
5. Will the US greed and bad motives come to an end?
6. Will the Islam vs Christianity crusades end?

One thoughtfully written blog post describes why it is a pity that Obama was killed. Why killing of Osama is a pity? Obama may garner hopes of a second term based upon the immediate popularity soar that he has got among the US voters. In the long term though he has chosen to tread on a dangerous path that his predecessors starting George Bush senior had opted for. He leads the world in general and US in particular to another cycle of hate begetting hate. Without pronouncing a verdict, I would also predict a backlash from the Al-Qaeda and other similar terror-driven outfits to continue to target US directly and innocent people indirectly. It would be foolhardy for Obama to rejoice at this moment.

Osama was a commoner but acquired a larger than life image through his resolve and atrociousness. He got invaded by the virus of mental whitewash preached by those who are now at the receiving end of the US Foreign Policy. Many others are also affected by the same insanity but Osama went a step ahead and got himself a leadership role. As there is in any other sphere of life, the leadership doesn't stay in vaccum for long and Al-Qaeda will also be able to pick somebody equally menacing if not more as its head. So, US cannot assume the end of Osama's philosophy because it was never his in the first place and will find another flag-bearer.

The countries that have borne the brunt of US the most are Iraq and Afghanistan. The landscape of these countries has changed for ever. They were culturally and resourcefully rich. Now, they are left at the whims and fantasies of the US to survive and progress. No matter how bad was the position inside these countries, it should have been left at the citizens themselves to figure it out. A civil war of some length and intensity may have helped overcome the negativity of Saddam Hussein and Taliban. International community should have helped in negotiations as it may choose to do in case of any other sovereign state. But because of the ulterior motives of US, NATO invades them and seizes the control on the polity and the economy of these countries. Nobody else can do business in these countries without US permission and involved interests. This means control of worlds significant share of oil which influences the world economy like anything. US also gained an irremovable military foothold into the heart of oil-rich West Asia. It will flex its muscle and keep everything under the control as it it likes.

Off late the same tenet is being propagated to other Islamic countries as well. Alas, there seems to be no end to the misfortune of these nations which are struggling from enemies within and outside their territories.

Radical and unrelenting face of Islam converts young men and women into Jihadis, people who are ready to die and kill for the so-called upkeep and progress of Islam. The root cause of this ideology lies in the poverty, illiteracy and exploitation of people and misinterpretation of Islam. The Muslim world has to step up their efforts and resolve to cater to these problems. Until then, the whole of Muslim community will be branded incorrectly as Terrorists and remain secluded from the World Order. Indonesia, Malaysia and India are home to the largest population of the Muslims in the world but they have been successful in making the Muslims feel and think progressively and respectfully towards their brethren practicing other religions.


What conspires on the strategy drawing boards of White House and Pentagon may be kept as a top notch secret. But the damage those strategies do around the world is for anybody to see and contemplate. Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Saddam are all pieces of policies which have been nurtured and bred to espouse a particular US cause at different times. When these folks grew out of their shoes, they started thinking big and out-thought US at some stage. They wanted their own share under the sun and US said NO. Things started getting out of hands and it promoted events like Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan invasion. Egypt, Syria, Iran, North Korea and many others are on the card. All US business, political and military agencies work directly or indirectly towards these plans. The biggest threat that we have is not from the Jihadis but their godfather, US.


The struggle between Muslims and Christians has been very old. Crusades had happened regularly in the past. Followers of both the religions have continued to tweak the scriptures to suit their thinking and action. And unfortunately the evangelism efforts from these two religions' followers have resulted in  loss of peace and life instead of the love and peace they wanted to achieve through conversions. US and NATO countries can be seen as Christian evangelists and the Islamic nations are the Islamic evangelists. Both don't see eye to eye on almost every matter of day-to-day business. Yet, they befriend each other to work against a common hostile state. So, we can see UAE helping NATO in Syria, US in Iraq and Afghanistan, France in Tipoli and so on. But in the far run both want each other to be unstabilized, fall into mires of poverty and scarcity and finally leave space for the other to move in and capture.

In a nutshell, the killing of Osama may portray a temporary lull in the activities of the terrorists but he will very soon become a martyr in the eyes of those who want motivation to keep supporting the unjustified violence and hatred. US must correct its intentions and foreign policy to make sure it doesn't meddle with other nations and help them at one point and bomb them at others.