Broken News (May 21, 2020)
https://www.newslaundry.com/amp/story/2020%2F05%2F21%2Fgovernment-should-view-journalists-as-allies-not-adversaries-especially-in-a-pandemic?__twitter_impression=true
Phase four of the national
lockdown to contain the spread of Covid-19, announced on May 17, also marks several
important developments on the media front.
On May 19, the Supreme Court granted Arnab
Goswami of Republic TV, a three-week extension from arrest in cases filed
against him for his remarks about Congress president Sonia Gandhi on his
television channel. Multiple FIRs had been filed against him in different parts
of the country. The court vacated all the cases except the one in Nagpur that
was shifted to Mumbai. At the same time, it turned down Goswami's request that
the case be referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The significance of this interim order lies
in some of the remarks made by the judges. According to the Indian Express, here are some of the
court's observations:
“India’s
freedoms will rest safe as long as journalists can speak truth to power without
being chilled by a threat of reprisal” and “free citizens cannot exist when the
news media is chained to adhere to one position.”
“The petitioner is a media journalist.
The airing of views on television shows which he hosts is in the exercise of
his fundamental right to speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a)”.
“The exercise of that fundamental right
is not absolute and is answerable to the legal regime enacted with reference to
the provisions of Article 19(2). But to allow a journalist to be subjected to
multiple complaints and to the pursuit of remedies traversing multiple states
and jurisdictions when faced with successive FIRs and complaints bearing the
same foundation has a stifling effect on the exercise of that freedom”.
“This will effectively destroy the
freedom of the citizen to know of the affairs of governance in the nation and
the right of the journalist to ensure an informed society”.
The court also quoted the Israeli
historian Yuval Noah Harari when he said, “questions you cannot answer are usually far
better for you than answers you cannot question”.
These observations must be viewed against
the reality of what the Indian media faces today in India. While Goswami has
been granted relief, there are several journalists still facing serious charges
including under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) as in
the case of the journalists
in Kashmir, under sedition as in the case of the journalist
in Gujarat whose apparent crime was to report that the Gujarat Chief
Minister might be on his way out, and several others including the founding
editor of The Wire Siddharth
Vardarajan who faces charges filed by the UP government. Journalists are
unable to "speak truth to power" in India because of the way the law
is used to attempt to silence those who do.
The International
Federation of Journalists, in its recently released report on press freedom
in South Asia, documents the assaults, killing and legal cases against scores
of journalists across India and argues that this does not augur well for press
freedom.
The court also spoke of the "freedom
of the citizen to know of the affairs of governance". This is another aspect
of press freedom, perhaps less noticed, that has been dented during the current
Covid-19 crisis.
If you read newspapers or watch television,
you will not necessarily be aware of this.
Every day, we are bombarded with statistics, as well as human interest
stories that leave you numb -- of the continuing plight of the lakhs of workers
and their families as they struggle to return to their homes, or of the afflicted
who struggle to find a hospital bed in some of our better served cities. There are dozens of such reports that can be
cited but here
and here
are two such stories.
But behind this abundance of data and
reports there appears to be a deliberate effort to fudge data, or at least to
prevent access to accurate and verified data. Above all else, citizens want transparency
from those who govern at a time like this. And yet, that is precisely what is
being denied by the cover-up taking place in various forms.
One hint of this was evident recently when
a report in the New Indian Express
was taken down. According to Priyanka
Pulla writing in The Wire, the report
observed the sudden absence of representatives of the Indian Council of Medical
Research (ICMR) from the daily press briefings held by the Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare since April 23. It
wondered if this was connected to the bungling of the import of antibody test
kits from China by ICMR that were found to be sub-standard and costly. The reported also mentioned the unexplained disbanding
of an expert panel on Covid-19 within days of it being constituted as also
experts and scientists being disuaded from speaking to the media. The newspaper
gave no explanation for why the article was taken off the website.
Pulla also points out that the absence of
scientists from the daily press briefings has meant that no clear answers are
being given to specific questions, such as when we expect to hit the peak with
Covid-19 infections. Such a question can
only be addressed by a scientist who is conversant with the data and not a
bureaucrat.
On the new digital platform, Article
14, Mridula Chari and Nitin Sethi go further when they argue that the
decision to ease the lockdown is based on "a flawed data base". The
article, a detailed long-read, points out that while state governments have
always relied on data by the National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) and the
Integrated Disease Surveillance Programme (IDSP), the Centre had stipulated
that only data by ICMR would be used. As
a result, there are several evident discrepancies between different lots of
data.
Even if you are not interested in the minutiae,
there is more than one reason to suspect that we are not getting the full
picture of the spread of Covid-19. For instance, despite the rapid spread of
the disease in the dense urban poor settlements in Mumbai, the government
continues to insist that there is no community transmission. Similarly, the percentage of workers
returning to their home states who are testing positive is much higher than the
percentage of infection in the cities from which they left. How do we account for this? Did they pick it
up enroute, or were they already infected but not detected in the cities where
they worked?
Even if one gives the benefit of the doubt to
the government that this is not deliberate, it certainly speaks of
mismanagement. Because when there is a crisis of this proportion, the response
must necessarily be based on accurate data from the ground up, about the number
of cases, the number of deaths, and the availability of beds for people at
different stages of the disease. If this
is not available, how can people in-charge plan effectively? And how are citizens to feel confident that
the crisis is being managed well?
Compounding the confusion on data was the
unexplained decision to suspend the daily press briefings since May 11, that
have only just restarted. As a result, journalists were unable to even ask
routine questions, even if the answers consist of a substantial amount of
obfuscation. This surely comes in the way of "the
right of the journalist to ensure an informed society”, as mentioned by the
Supreme Court.
This government, like many others around
the world, appears more anxious to prove how effective it has been in dealing
with the pandemic rather than acknowledging the challenge it poses. A free and
questioning media can be an ally at these times; it should not be seen as an
adversary.
1 comment:
While reaching out to reckon Journalists as allies, journalists and protagonists should realize that exercise of freedom of expression to nit prick actions of government and actions on reactions is detrimental and silences the real intent with which actions are intended. Journalism should bring out the truth by collecting information and sifting the realities from rumour in order that public support is garnered and wasted. Any partisan attitude with vindictive approach begets harsh reactions which boomerangs violently. In democracy reaction to unrealistic vituperation would be instantaneous and devastating.
Post a Comment