Opinion News TV on DMK

Me: No,no,but I have been up most of the night thinking about DMK.

Caller: DMK! My god,what are you saying,oh my god…

Me: Take it easy,na,Delhi Media Kerfuffle,that’s what I mean,I have shortened it you know,so that when I write my column on TV news I can save on words.

Caller: Your column,is it widely read?

Me: I have no idea. Probably not. I assume it isn’t,anyway.  

Caller: Well,whatever,I will take my chances with you. You know why I am calling.

Me: Haanji,you are the head of a lobby group that wants to improve television news,backed by millions of ordinary viewers. Your motto is: when they emote,use your remote.

Caller: Ya. Now I have some interesting stuff on news TV coverage of,as you are calling it,DMK.

Me: I am proceeding with this conversation with an open mind and a logical outlook. I am not asking the caller,tell me what should I say,neither am I asking the caller,tell me what should I write. This conversation is entirely in journalistic and public interest. If at some point of time it appears that I am agreeing with the caller,it’s only because I am stringing my interlocutor along to get more insight.

Caller: Who are you talking to?!

Me: Never mind. You were saying…

Caller: Anyway,my first point. On Times Now,Congress’s Manish Tiwari,in a debate on corruption,said something along the lines that the media can’t just hold the torchlight on politicians,it should hold it on the media,too. That’s a very Manish Tiwari thing,of course. Like when he once admonished panelists in another TV chat,don’t erupt,when he meant,I am guessing,don’t interrupt. But,torchlight is a useful expression.

Me: Really?

Caller: Yes,because,look at NDTV’s special programme on DMK…I wish you wouldn’t call this thing DMK.

Me: Let’s not sacrifice linguistic freedom here. Are you going to stop saying okay,tata to someone while finishing a phone conversation? If you have doubts,just clarify that when you are saying “tata”,you mean it in the sense of saying bye-bye.

Caller: Clarify to whom?

Me: Never mind. NDTV’s special on DMK,you were saying ‘torchlight’ is relevant.

Caller: Yes,because it was more torchlight than searchlight. The NDTV anchor who was supposed to answer questions…the anchor had so many questions! And the other NDTV anchor,who was supposed to moderate,was way too moderate while moderating. You get what I am saying? When someone erupts,you got to interrupt.

Me: Yup. The anchor who was moderating told the anchor who was simultaneously interrogating and getting interrogated that one shouldn’t get personal. But that didn’t seem to help much.

Caller: Ya,only when one of the panelists told the NDTV anchor under the torchlight that the programme was expressly aimed at clarifying one journalist’s actions and not media ethics in general,that there was some clarity.

Me: There’s a lot of misogyny in India,including in the public space. It’s true.

Caller: What are you talking about?

Me: The NDTV anchor in the DMK story said there’s also misogyny in this whole thing. I have been wondering.

Caller: Well,most of the other journalists in the DMK story are men.

Me: True. But what about the social media’s reactions?

Caller: Listen,the bloggers,the tweeters,the guys who leave comments on websites,they seem to make no gender-based distinction. Those who are critical are as hard on the male journalists. Certainly,the mainstream media doesn’t make such distinctions either. So,how can misogyny explain one part of the DMK story? I don’t get it.

Me: Hmm,I see what you are saying. Oh,and did you notice,when NDTV’s website posted the NDTV anchor’s response to the DMK story,the “comment” button wasn’t there. A reader of that post couldn’t leave a comment.

Caller: Oh dear,media websites should never appear to be like politicians under scrutiny,you know,saying “no comment”,not even once,and not even briefly.

Me: Yes,you know,it was good of NDTV to host that show but they could have handled it so much better. In fact,I hope NDTV realizes there has been a “learning” from the Headlines Today show on the DMK story.

Caller: Yes,Headlines Today did a better job,but what’s this “learning”?

Me: Didn’t you hear the NDTV anchor say that the DMK story has resulted in learning? See,on the Headlines Today show,the two journalists involved in the DMK story used the word “sorry”. The sorries seemed to be conditional. But I like“learning”. I have decided if I mess up in my work,as can happen — you know,we hacks make mistakes even when Niira Radia doesn’t call us — I am not going to tell the boss,boss I am sorry. I am going to say,boss,there has been a learning. I think that will make me appear more sophisticated.

Caller: I am not so sure about that. It’s your choice anyway. But there has been,as you say,some learning for Headlines Today also. I thought the fact that one of the journalists in the DMK story only took questions from the anchor and didn’t participate in the panel discussion made the show less effective than it could have been.

Me: The anchor tried to explain that.

Caller: True,but the show suffered,if you are willing to take questions,take everyone’s questions. Headlines Today should have insisted.

Me: Yes,NDTV’s show was at least better that way. But where Headlines Today scored was that they got the anchor to actually anchor the show,you know. NDTV’s show…at some points it seemed no one was in charge,or that the charged person was in charge.

Caller: Did you notice in the Headlines Today show,when one of the panelists said one of the journalists in the DMK story had no case to answer,the latter responded as if the panelist had said the opposite!

Me: Yes,yes,and it took another round of discussion for that point to get through. Maybe this is another learning. Don’t say you have got no case to answer,say that for you there’s no learning.

Caller: Another thing you should note…

Me: I am clarifying here; I am not taking any notes from this conversation. I hope I have made that clear. Ok,now tell me…

Caller: I have got it! You are doing this strange thing now and then because you think someone’s listening in on this phone conversation.

Me: No comment.

Caller: What,you are like that NDTV post now,really!

Me: I have nothing to do with anything involving that NDTV post or anything related to it in any fashion whatsoever,except as a humble reader of that post. I am clarifying again.

Caller: Man! Anyway,what I was saying…news TV channels mentioned other news TV channels by name while doing the DMK story. Whatever the context,that’s a healthy development. A panelist on NDTV mentioned he was on CNN-IBN and,everyone was okay with it.

Me: I know what you mean. Normally,the most you can say on one news channel is “some other channel”. I mean,since the same panelists frequently appear on all the channels,that’s especially strange.

Caller: Yes,like Manish Tiwari,he seems to be on all channels all the time.

Me: Let’s be fair. He’s a party spokesperson.

Caller: Yeah,shining a torch on the nation’s problems. Ok,I got to run now. Tata. And best of luck on your TV column on the DMK story.

Me: I am clarifying. Tata here means bye-bye. I am also clarifying,DMK means Delhi Media Kerfuffle. And I am requesting,if there are doubts on whether my mind has been open and whether my outlook has been logical,please get in touch with me before publication.

saubhik.chakrabarti@expressindia.com