Leading Questions Not the Same as Follow-up

editorial:

Journalism is increasingly becoming about creating news. In a media circus of too many channels competing for easily distracted viewer attention, journalists across the board are succumbing to the pressure of creating, rather instigating, news when their essential task is to report it. The nation received one sampling of this when new channels screamed that Pakistan cricket skipper Afridi had sworn that he would not allow Sachin to score a century in their World Cup semi-final clash. What had actually happened is that he was first asked who he saw as a threat in the Indian camp. His obvious answer, to a Pakistani TV host, was Sachin Tendulkar. He had even qualified his comment further by stating that although he respected Sachin as a cricketer and wished him well, he obviously did not want Sachin to do well against Pakistan in the semi-finals and hence the team would do its best to stop him from scoring big, i.e. hitting a century. In fact, he had even admitted that a Sachin century would not really deflate the team morale since such performances by Sachin notoriously figure in matches lost by India. This was an obvious answer to a boring question, but in the hands of crafty editing, it became a declaration of war; “Sachin won’t get his 100th ton”, ran TV scrolls which aired selective excerpts from the interview and a painted a completely different picture.
Apart from the fact that this was not a statement volunteered by Afridi, it was not even an accurate representation of the conversation. In fact, there was nothing even negative about what he said because it is expected of a team to reassure supporters that they would do their best to win the game, and how else does one do that except by ensuring that the stars on the other side don’t shine in their match? And yet, the story was played out ad nauseam and soon the context was forgotten and Afridi became a villain when he was only a rival. And he continues to be sourced for news even after India has lifted the World Cup. His batting obviously reflects his personality and if he continuously barraged with questions on Indo-Pak relations [way beyond his brief] he will occasionally put his foot in his mouth, as is happening quite often now. The media obsession, and thus the frequent digressions from the sport, with the sensationalism quotient of Afridi speaking before he can think tantamounts to entrapment and does not even flirt close to journalism.
The tendency to create news out of instigated statements has visited Sikkim as well. The Statesman of Kolkata recently ran a three paragraph report headlined, “Centre takes note of Sikkim resolution”.  The resolution in question is the one adopted in support of Gorkhaland by the Sikkim Legislative Assembly during its budget session. The Resolution appealed to the Centre to resolve the statehood aspirations of the Darjeeling people favourably. The Centre was always expected to “take note” of the Resolution, that was the whole idea; but the news-report in question, datelined New Delhi, claimed that the Centre had taken “strong note” of the resolution, implying that it too, like the West Bengal State Government, was disturbed. The report quotes an unnamed “senior home ministry” official as stating that the Union government had taken “note of the development in Sikkim and was keeping tabs on the situation”. The report also specifically recorded that the official “refused to comment on whether the Centre would seek a report from the state government”.  This report does not qualify as news because, for one, this information was fished for, not volunteered by the Ministry. What else can a Home Ministry official say in response to a query on what they were doing about the Sikkim resolution? It is their job to take note and keep tabs. However, put in the context of West Bengal’s protest against the Resolution, it gives out a whole different meaning. The “strong note” inclusion is obviously an addition by a casual copy-editor. As for seeking a report from Sikkim, which, incidentally even this report admits the source refused to comment on, none will be required. The Resolution was a Government Resolution, adopted by the Sikkim Legislative Assembly, and will automatically be forwarded to the Parliament for record and follow-up. A copy will obviously also be marked to the Home Ministry and the explanation which West Bengal seeks is included in the Resolution itself. A non-news has been followed up and published, and the moment this happens, especially in the incomplete manner that it has in the present case, it opens doors for speculation. While these might not lead anywhere or cause any real harm to anyone, they are distracting and a waste of time. The media is unfortunately succumbing to more and more superfluity, as even some of our readers would accuse us of collapsing into often, so it becomes all the more important for the receivers of the ‘news’ to soak up information more carefully and taking some time to step back and question before the barrage sweeps them along into a pointless, and at times dangerous, diversion.