Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Proponents of sting operations would argue that the accumulating proof of the extent of frame-up in the recent story on a Delhi schoolteacher must not be used as an argument against the use of secret cameras. They may have a point there. The Live India 8216;sting8217; seeking to show the teacher as actively forcing students into prostitution had sparked off violence on the Capital8217;s streets. It turned out that the 8216;student8217; making the allegations was in fact an aspiring journalist. The matter is now in court, and the motivations behind the story will probably be uncovered. But by all appearances, the story was more a fraudulent construct than what we call a sting operation. But that very fraud must serve as an occasion to examine the propriety of the method of sting operations as such.
Sting operations draw upon undercover methods used by law enforcement personnel. It is routine in many countries for law enforcement agencies to use their own personnel or to take assistance of citizens to catch offenders 8212; whether it be bribe-seekers or molesters. There are, even here, issues of deception and entrapment 8212; but these are sought to be overridden in terms of the larger public good. Sting operations used by journalists on their own amplify these issues. The tools of this trade are few: a camera in these times of the telephone camera, it sometimes doesn8217;t even have to be secretly installed and an invitation to the offender-to-be to do something wrong. It is the manner in which that invitation is made that separates the ethical sting from possible frame-up, blackmail or invasion of privacy.
