Journalism in the ages

Longsing Teron, Rongkhelan Diphu: Journalism is awesome as it has all the powers to command and access to every place that is inaccessible to the general public. It is immune to security like frisking etc., and in fact respected by all, even by those who sits on the chair. It is very adventurous. This was the other definition of Journalism I have in my mind. But I was not clear upon the journalist, whether they are respected or feared? And why the journalist is always depicted as a simple person? It haunts my mind until I boarded the wagon. It was very funny at the beginning as I feel the journalist enjoy special status especially in the eye of law, like the journalists are immune to law. So with basic impression about the immunity and special right I ventured out fearlessly with a little bit of bossism. Then I started to read lots of articles, magazines and books on journalism which gradually slowed down my impression which was always in mind; and from this reading I was very clear that the law applies equally to everyone and there is no such special right for the journalists to be above the law or the general public. The law applies the same to the journalist as like to other citizens. I am by then very much concern about Article 19(1)a Part III of the Indian Constitution. Then I have come across the case between The Indian Express Vs union India, from which I could concluded the real meaning of Article 19. But whatever be the right in regard to my initial impression, this did not deter me of my profession as I entered in to journalism out of interest and passion. In fact I enjoyed very much which later made me glued more in journalism, and moreover was when I read about the father of our nation Mahatma Gandhi in the role of journalist; and it is because of his journalistic interest and passion that landed him to success as this was the path through which he disseminated his views, opinion and ideology by writings through The Indian Opinion and Young India, through which he had been able to penetrate into the minds of the peoples and able to infused what he intend to explain and direct the masses to the movement. It is because of the practised of true journalism in those days that it works like magic potion, which had wakens up the peoples and makes them conscious on the necessity of our freedom. This ultimately led to the mass participation in the movement led by Mahatma Gandhi. True journalism can change our society and achieve our goal; this was accepted by Mahatma Gandhi. Thus he says “Journalism should never be prostituted for selfish ends or for the sake of merely earning a livelihood or, worse still, for amassing money” “The press is called the Fourth Estate. It is definitely a power, but, to misuse that power is criminal” and “The sole aim of journalism should be service”. But what we see today is on the contrary of what Mahatma Gandhi and Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak was as a journalist. They instead prefer to go to jail rather than compromising on their profession. On that, if we go back to 19^th Century we get to see that Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak was jailed twice in 1898 and 1906. He was even transported to Burma for six years accusing of sedition for his article in Kesri, in Marathai language. Mathama Gandhi was also punished for his writing in Young India in 1922 for six years. They were charged under Sedition 124A IPC which was enacted in 1870, Law of Sedition. But still then, they cling on to practice journalism in the true sense. Not only Gandhi and Tilak, many journalists during that period had endured such harsh laws of 1857 which was enacted after the Sepoy Munity and The Press and Registration of Book Act. 1867; still prevalent today. This was what our leaders have taught us about journalism in the true sense. But after our independence when corporate began to venture into this business the scenario have changed drastically. This had incorporated the media as an industry under Industrial Dispute Act. 1947. To add to more teeth on the business after the free radicalisation of press in 1991, more business corporate have come up into this business like the MRF Tyres, which own The Times of India, one of the largest circulated newspaper in India and Malayala Manorama and popular TV news channel Times Now. Birlas also own The Hindustan Times and Nav Bharat Times and some TV channels. After allowing the FDI in media more corporate have come up with foreign tie up and many more are expected to come up as Budget 2016 has raised the FDI limit from 26% to 49% even in the media related to news in the electronic sector.

So what we have observed and seen is that after the series economic liberalisation in 1991, the media houses, to sustain in the market indulge in crass and cut-throat competition keeping aside principle of press and the ethics at the cost of someone privacy and happiness and at public exchequer especially in the 2000s. This on the other side, for a state like Assam to sustain a media house, especially the electronic media is very difficult. Advocating on such, at times the house had to compromise on some matter as corporate advertisement is not much as like in other places. It is not that it is practise only here, but also practise elsewhere too as money is the greatest of all powers which any person could seldom resist it. So in this new era it is the Ethics Vs Survial Vs Sustentation Vs Yellow Journalism. These are the nectar which is very difficult neither to avoid nor to adopt it. To substantiate my point; journalist, other than those employed in the big house cannot afford to exchange with the luxuries life style as they are either paid low or most of their service are just used, without any remuneration. But then they enjoy all the life style and amenities that a family need. This system also applies the same to the media house. We can ask some questions in our mind on that; how are they able to sustain, despite little or no advertisement especially from corporate and government? Yet it is beautifully managed with all the well furnished office and a luxurious life? And we ask again, where did the money come from for their sustentation? So, the freedom of press, is it really free from all hindrance and able to deliver all their duties faithfully? Does the depiction of journalist as a simple person as shown really justified? But in reality what we see the difference between the age old journalists and the present generation journalists is they drive luxurious sports car in lieu of the joggling scooter or a bicycle. Or is it the change of the changing generation, which the new innovation in the media like paid news had to be intervened by the honourable Supreme Court in 2011? Answers to all the above is known to all, but in two angles, though the answers are difficult to answer. So the word Yellow Journalism seems to be redundant and obsolete in the new generation.