A good case could easily be lost by a bad argument. The threat that POTO holds for genuine journalistic ventures is real but that does not mean that the fraternity, even if it means only a misguided few, should lapse into a fit of paranoic euphoria without even a semblance of fair introspection whenever someone from its midst is sought out by the law of the land.
If the media community were to expend its energy on such undeserving candidates, it would only end up spoiling its own case for legitimate protection under the impugned legislation, besides making a mockery of itself for gross naivette. Now, can the journalists, like that incorrigible middle-class that has so offended some senior bretheren, afford to show themselves up as naive?
Imagine a scenario wherein a journo is hauled up for jumping traffic signals by an overzealous cop who also punches the hack on his nose, not perhaps knowing that the rider belonged to the fourth estate, which is possible what with the ‘ Press ‘ stickers becoming scarce these days. Assuming even that the journo was only embarking on his daily beat and that he believed he was just driving through the yellow when the cop cried red, can he still claim immunity under press freedom?
If anything, he has a case under law for violation of his human rights, for every citizen is entitled to retain his nose intact and the long arm of the law should think twice before raising its fist against even nosey journos. But the journo would certainly have to face the traffic notice and prove his innocence or pay the fine as the case may be only at the appropriate forum. Instead if he seeks to raise a stink, if not a fire, in this hallowed city of Cooum and also manages to rope in a few journalistic organisations in his support how would it augur for the profession?
What is happening now in the media world – or should we say, media under world? – can only be likened to the above though the offences alleged are definitely not as mild as a trivial traffic violation. One can ignore such absurdities if it was a phenomenon just confined to the underbelly of the media, which certainly exists, but when such blatantly undesirable elements also hijack important issues using the banner and labels of media organisations, which also has several honourable members who are ‘ only and truly ‘ in the profession of journalism, can one just wink at it? What if this spark becomes a major fire, given the perennially inflammable situation prevailing in the State, not to mention those waiting to fan the flames and then bask in its warmth?
Of more concern is the ensuing scenario of even seasoned journos and the reputed publications they work for allowing such underground yellow stuff to surface in their columns and worse still, issuing clarion calls to all mediamates to break their silence in support of their dubious comrades.
The jungle sojourns of the emissary-editor and his staff have been anything but transparent. Also not all their trips can be truly classified as journalistic ventures as by their own admission, they made many visits at the behest of the government to get whoever was hostage at those points of time released.
By the same logic, it is also possible, if not totally certain, that many of the trips could have been at the instance of the brigand himself who may have wanted his views articulated to the people of the land as well as to the powers that be.
It is no secret that the emissary-editor has been advocating the case for amnesty to the brigand and to imagine that it was wholly his personal view would be, well, naive. If anything he was only promoting a brigand ‘ s agenda with his own convictions coming as a prop – His Master ‘ s Voice, but with a dash of some of his own background music, that ‘ s all. And it so happened that the government of the day also possessed a sympathetic ear, making the duo ‘ s surrender song a super hit and actually the flavour of the season.
If the emissary could have extracted even a draconian, self-defeating and patently outrageous document of surrender from the rulers themselves, then one can imagine his clout, which without doubt, was backed by the brigand ‘ s invincible might. Now, did the governments of the day, oblige the emissary only because he was an editor or because they believed he could ‘ influence ‘ the bandit? Obviously, only the latter could be true.
Given such a relationship between the brigand and his media pal, however tortuous it might have been, how can the intelligent and the discerning ever rush into issuing clean chits for the emissary-editor, when they do not know anything about what had transpired between him and the brigand? We need not pass a judgement that the emissary too is as culpable as the brigand, but all the same would we not be forfeiting our common sense and spirit of inquiry if we were to be content with being spoon-fed by the emissary-editor and his cronies?
Would we not be guilty of stopping the due process of law when, first, there is no locus standi for us to protest, as much of what happened does not fall under the realms of media activity, and second, what is involved is the right of the people of the country to live peacefully without having frightful bandits knocking on their doors at ungodly hours?
Why should we allow ourselves to be used by such men, even if they happen to be our bretheren though of a different hue, when we can neither vouch for their motives, which may be suspect, nor for their activities which were wholly clandestine? Why should the editor himself, lobby so hard, even in Bangalore, if reports are to believed, and shy away from enquiry, if he truly and totally believes in his own innocence?
He could have at least taken his mates into confidence and granted them an audience, instead of vanishing completely. The arrest, then, would have been a great grand-stand in the overall march towards towards absolute press freedom. But nothing of that sort would happen because skeletons have this nasty habit of infesting every cupboard, without regard for such courtesies as press freedom!
Yes, sure, we must all break our silence. And then proceed to lend our collective weight to keep down the underbelly to where it truly belongs. The anti-POTO torch should be handed over to safer hands that can shed more light on the inconsistencies and dangers inherent in the Bill, so that they are meaningfully redressed.
But the current torch-bearers, for whom the anti-POTO agitation is just another photo-op, run the risk of setting our own house on fire. If only the larger media fraternity bothers to keep an ear to the ground, it can hear the alarm bells, loud and clear. If only!
| POINT OUT : What is happening now in the media world – or should we say, media under world? – can only be likened to the above though the offences alleged are definitely not as mild as a trivial traffic violation — T R JAWAHAR |