MEDIA - Replacing the Judiciary

- Juhi Bhatnagar

 From the very beginning in 1780, in the form of Bengal Gazette, a two sheet newspaper, published in Calcutta to the innumerous dailies and News Channels today, Indian Media has definitely come a long way. While traversing this path, the media has earned the status of being the Fourth Pillar of Indian Democracy, alongside Legislature, Executive and Judiciary.

             The close knit relation that exists between the Judiciary and Media cannot be overlooked in today’s scenario. As two pillars of democracy, the media and the judiciary need each other and the public need both. The role that media has been playing in the Judicial Processes has shown many faces from time unknown. Ever since it came into existence, it has always played the role of an efficient information disseminator. The actual role of media can be defined as the institution which not only provides the information to the general public, but also highlights and weeds out the important facts and figures which may otherwise escape the reader’s eye. This ultimately  helps in the formation of Public opinion.

             This role of the media could be termed as “reactive”, because it consisted of the Media and journalists reacting to the daily events. Such a media helped the central point of our democracy i.e  We the People in keeping ourselves updated of the on going processes in the law making agencies, Government, and also around the world. Such a definition could be dated back to the starting era of media, when the news papers and news channels very seriously and monotonously listed the happenings of the day. But the irony is that the very definition of media no longer exists.

             The first face change that the media received was in the later 90’s .This new, pleasant (certainly not for law-breakers), and socially invigorating role could be termed as “Pro-active”. In this period the media persons, mainly electronic media, started feeling a rush in adrenaline to bring about that very much needed change the country needed. They kind of took it onto their shoulders the responsibility that lay with the Judiciary. This is very evident from the constantly decreasing number of pending cases in Supreme Court after late 90’s. The kind of positive support that media has extended for judiciary by appropriately encouraging and discouraging their various decisions, has only bettered the judicial system’s overall performance.

             It goes without saying that the judgement in cases like Priyadarshini Mattoo case and Nitish Katara case could have been delayed much further, had media not played the kind of active role they played in bringing the judiciary out from their hibernation. Also the phenomenal speed with which the news has been broadcasted in these times has left the citizens spellbound. Even before the Police could reach the terror stricken Twin Towers on 9/11, the media was there to cover the second attack. The instant broadcast and constant review of the Parliament attacks to viewers was one key factor in the early arrest of the prime suspects and also one of the fastest trials involving Terrorist attacks.

       The constant concern expressed by media over cases other than criminal proceedings made a soft corner in the hearts of crores of Indian youth. The kind of anti government stand taken by the Media, without any exception, in the Reservation Bill issue, made the general citizens of the country to stand up and fight for what belonged to them. It was media, newspaper as well as electronic media, which made the judiciary revoke some of the most biased court decisions, like that of Alistair Pereira case, who killed 7 people sleeping on a pavement at Carter road while drunk driving in wee hours of the day, giving rise to a public outcry. 

             One of the most powerful tools which a website called Tehelka introduced to the world of media was Sting operations. From the first sting carried out by by Mr.Tarun Tejpal’s agency on a certain JD MP, called operation West End, the sting operations too have had a facelift. On certain occasions the covers have been lifted from some shoddy details that could not have been otherwise. In such cases sting has proved to be a very useful means of journalism, unearthing some important facts that the citizens of a democratic nation have all rights to know.

             But as the elders say ”Excess  of anything is bad”, so is happening with media. The next face change that media has gone through is evident these days, with the ever increasing news channels, which are hungry just for TRP’s. This new face can be called “Overactive” and any superlative is most welcome. For most of us it has become a routine to look for news in the evening on television, find nothing but gossips, film reviews, public polls, or some sport’s  news, which remotely looks like one. The media these days has gained an unprecedented amount of power and thus become more influential than the Judiciary and Executive. The number of cases wherein journalists are being held and prosecuted against for contempt of court are increasing. In a similar case where Mid-Day journalists were sentenced to four month imprisonment for publishing some content against ex-Chief Justice of India Y.K.Sabharwal, the journalists kept on saying that no court of law is greater than the truth. Such stand being taken by the media houses and journalist’s community leaves a wrong impression on today’s youth, who start thinking that they can easily escape from the law, even after disregarding it.

             None of us is unknown to the term called Yellow Journalism, which means  journalism that exploits, distorts, or exaggerates the news to create sensations and attract readers. It is fundamentally unethical reporting that twists the small facts and makes them into large fictitious statements. Considering this definition and seeing the state of majority of news channels today, the similarity is striking, isn’t it? If we look closely Yellow Journalism had seeped into the country when in 1989 the Ruling party, which till then had enjoyed two third majority in the people’s house, was brought down by the effect that a single newspaper put on the citizen’s mind structure. Nowadays, things have gone way beyond, with  Newspapers and News channels, showing biased and pre-determined conclusions, instead of facts, which depends on the owner or the major share holder in that News agency. Is this what journalism was supposed to be when it started?

A Arushi Talwar, who when alive was not even known to the whole Noida district, has now become a household name in the whole country. And her father, who god knows is guilty or not, has already been made into a daughter killing pshycho. Ex-External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh, instantly turned into a villain over his suspected involvement in the Iraq oil-for-food scam as minister without portfolio. The media pre assumed his and family’s  role in the scam and just didn’t give any chance for the diplomat turned politician to clear his stand. Call it a media witch-hunt if you like, but in the end an overactive media driven by competitive chase of stories ensured that nobody was ready to believe him.

             One can say that if media had not played such an overactive role in certain cases in recent past and present, the judicial outcome of those cases could have been different and may be more correct. Its not that we are pointing fingers at the sanctity of Media houses alone or proving that the Judiciary of the country is not to be blamed anywhere, but what we trying to say is that why do we need  four different pillars, if one pillar can take care of the democracy? Shouldn’t the inter dependence of Media and Judiciary be limited to the line where both can be beneficial to each other and the public? The question remains unanswered but it still looms on the present system as, the answer will definitely decide the future of this system.

 Regards,

Juhi