This article has been written by Aarushi Chawla, Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies, Delhi. This article talks about the importance of the media as an important pillar for democracy. 

Introduction

Democracy is considered to be a rule of the people through their elected representatives. One of the merits of a democratic system is the freedom of expression and the space that is provided to disagreement by different sections of society. It has namely four pillars: Judiciary, Legislative, Executive and Media. The three former ones maintain a system of checks and balances in Indian context. Whereas the latter that is the Media is the most powerful entity on earth. It ensures transparency in all the three systems. It’s like a mirror that shows the real side. It makes us aware of various social, economic and political issues that surround up in a country. With a number of new channels, newspapers and social media platforms which provided the most accurate news covering all types of news, it is now a puppet of polarized politics. Just not to blame only politics, religious dominance also puts up a blanket on the authenticity of the news showered upon us. As said, “What the mass media offers is not popular art, but entertainment which is intended to be consumed like food, forgotten and replaced by a new dish.”. If there is a perfect blend of technology and media no stone will be left unturned in unearthing corruption and politics in our society. But due to loss of credibility of the media and people’s trust in it democracy is at stake and all at risk.

Historical Background

In the history of India, the media has been recognized as influential, patriotic and trustworthy in the socio, the economic and political climate of the nation. The legislation pertaining to control media can be traced back to the British era.

In 1799, Lord Wellesley promulgated the press regulation act which imposed a regulation for mandatory print of names and addresses of printers, editors and publishers as well in the newspapers. Then in 1857, a gagging act was passed which made it mandatory to obtain license for running a printing press and gave wide powers to the government to prohibit publication or display of content which in its opinion was against the government. Then comes the Press registration and Books Act, 1867 which continues to remain in force till date. Again the vernacular press act, 1878 gave powers to the British government to impose restrictions on publication of news and at the same time gain extreme control over media as it is believed that people easily believe what is shown rather than having their own opinions and a will to know the truth. So it is the duty of the media to show what is right as it shapes the mind of people. A number regulation came to reduce the influence of the media thereby gaining more of British control. But revolution came in the history of the media when the coming into force of the Constitution of India, 1950 which regarded freedom of presses as a fundamental right. Though not expressly mentioned it is evident that freedom of press is inherent in the right of freedom of speech and expression.

Judicial Response to the Freedom of Press

In Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras, Patanjali Shastri, CJ observed that “Freedom of speech and of press laid at the foundation of all democratic organization for without free political discussions no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the process of popular government, is possible.”

In Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi Patanjali Shastri, J observed that” William Blackstone in his commentaries said that every free man has undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public, to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press, but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous or illegal, he must take consequences of his own temerity…. Pre censorship of a journal is a restriction on the liberty of press…”

But due to ‘transitional media’ with the progress of communication technology it became necessary to impose certain legal checks and bounds on transmission and communication. With this came restriction on freedom of press “Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.”

Bennett Coleman and Co. v. Union of India as per dissenting opinion of KK Mathew, J ‘…Art 19(1) (a) is not a “guardian of unlimited talkativeness”…’

In Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of freedom of the press in these words:

“…..The expression freedom of the press has not been used in Article 19 but it is comprehended within Article 19(1)(a). The expression means freedom from interference from authority, which would have the effect of interference with the content and circulation of newspapers. There cannot be any interference with that freedom in the name of public interest.” 

In Tata Press Ltd. V. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. the Supreme Court held that a commercial advertisement or commercial speech was also a part of the freedom of speech and expression, which would be restricted only within the limitation of Article 19(2). The Supreme Court held that advertising, which is no more than a commercial transaction, is nonetheless dissemination of information regarding the product-advertised.

So it is crystal clear that freedom of press is essential for proper functioning of the democratic process. And thus, freedom of press flows from freedom of expression which is guaranteed to all citizens by Article 19(1)(a). And it is the duty of the press to disseminate real and all types of information within the limitations imposed under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India, 1950.

The Supreme Court in a recent plea seeking action against media houses for criminalizing coronavirus pandemic stated CJI SA Bobde “We cannot gag the press. We will not pass interim orders/directions.”

Pseudo Authenticity of Media

The world of sponsors

“The credibility of the media has reached a Nadir” are the words of the editor R. Rajagopal of Calcutta based The Telegraph newspaper. He said this in a recent interview in February when accusations were made on him regarding bashing PM Modi and while going soft on Mamta Banerjee. 

What kind of democracy is we even living in, where one is not supposed to question the other or express his or her views. The debate of nationalist and anti-nationalist depends upon whether one is pro-government or anti-government. I am pretty sure this is not the world our constitution-makers must have foreseen for us. The lust for money has made the media lose its real objective that is to open the minds of people and show them the mirror or reality rather it focuses on shaping the minds of people towards or in support of people who provide them with more money. Just switch on a news channel and see whether they are showing news or mere commercial advertisement. An honest suggestion of daily soups instead at least they aren’t faking it. 

Recently, Justice Deepak Gupta the renowned judge of the Supreme Court on May 6, 2020 in his virtual farewell speech said that “Our laws and our legal system are totally geared in favor of the rich and the powerful. If somebody who is rich and powerful is behind bars then time and again, he will approach the higher courts during the pendency of the trial till some day he obtains an order that his trial should be expedited.  This is done at the cost of the poor litigant whose trial gets further delayed because he cannot approach the higher court. On the other hand, if a rich person is on bail or wants to delay a civil litigation, he can afford to approach the superior courts time and again to delay the trial or the proceedings till the other side gets virtually frustrated.” 

There are no fewer instances where the polarized politics and the paid news have made a remarking influence on the people.

In 2010, the Press council of India had set up a committee to investigate violations of the journalist code of fair and objective reporting. There were accusations that papers have rate cards for election candidates and these rates are for different types of news coverage- for interviews, for reporting rallies, even for trashing political opponents. In the same year the Hindu newspaper reported that while the chief minister of Maharashtra Ashok Chavan in elections to state assembly, showed an expenditure of just 72 Euros on advertising, stories extolling his achievements appeared for several days in rival newspapers. If the stories had been advertising, as they appeared to be, Chavan’s bill would have been many times higher.

Recently, in 2017, when Haryana’s CM Manohar Lal Khattar was asked about demonetization’s effects on people by journalist Mahendra Singh, he didn’t answer him properly and refused to say anything further. Later, that journalist was asked to resign by Zee News channel. His fault was that he questioned the minister.

In 2018, we all know how the scamster Nirav Modi fled the country last month with his entire family and on how he perpetrated a Rs 11,400 crore-rupee scam in the seven years from 2011 to 2018 (which includes not just three years of the Congress-led UPA tenure but also almost four years of BJP-led NDA rule), viewers could wonder if the news-channel is overlooking the wood for a tree!
And as well taking about the AAP government in Delhi where accusations were made regarding Delhi’s top bureaucrat (the senior IAS officer Anshu Prakash) being abused at CM’s residence how the TV news-channel’s own correspondent from drawing the same inference which AAP spokesperson had taken to defend while maintaining that the body language of the bureaucrat while leaving the CM’s residence was “normal”. One wonders how many times the TV channel’s correspondent has been beaten up if he can deduce from a mere glimpse of the silhouette of a bureaucrat’s back on the CCTV footage whether the body language is “normal” or “abnormal”.

“The widespread emergence of multiple media platforms including social media is redefining the role of the media in politics and government, and the relationship between the two. Given Narendra Modi’s earlier history with the news media as chief minister, particularly with some elements of the English media following the 2002 riots, his prime ministership created a new template for media-government relations. In the five years of the Modi-I regime, party and government operated on a simple formula: delegitimize existing media and create your own channels of communication with the voter and citizen.”

Ranging from paid news to the race of TRP media houses are trying their best. When the actors like Rishi Kapoor and Irrfan Khan recently dies it received a lot of media coverage but I guess a barely of us know that four Indian army soldiers including a high profile Colonel and a police officer died in a gunfight with militants in Indian-administered Kashmir on May 3, 2020. But who cares about the people who give their lives every day for us to remain safe in our homes. Just on May 10, 2020 An AIIMS doctor removed his safety gear to save COVID’19 patient. But who cares! The only care is TRP.

The media houses have made the minds of people a box which doesn’t have any opinion and only works on what they say. Corruption in India media has devoured the Indian journalism.

Do we really think we are living in a free state where democracy isn’t for the people, by the people and of the people but is for the sponsors, by the sponsors and of the sponsors.

The world of communalism

Media houses are the shapers of hatred and communalism in the country for over all the years. Muslims who account for about 18 crore population are still a minority; this is the irony of Indian secularism over the years. The recent case of brutal killing of Sadhus at the palghar district in Maharashtra got no media coverage but when a Muslim man was beaten up for being thought of as a corona carrier got media flashes. Both these acts were wrong in their sense but classifying them on the basis of religion is what leads to hatred in the society. This is the actual reason why we are still not able to gear up in a secular world. 

On the other side of the coin what if Tablighi Jamaat were Hindus would it have been such a big issue even if they were responsible for spreading coronavirus in various parts of India. Instead they would have been called ‘bhakts.’

Earlier in 2019, Cobra post reported how some media houses were prepared to strike business deals to promote the Hindutva agenda and help polarize voters in the run up to the 2019 elections. The website had released a second batch of video recordings shot surreptitiously by an undercover reporter that shows managers and owners of some of the largest newspapers and TV channels succumbing to the same package of Hindutva advertorials.

Media runs “parallel trials”

Recently in 2018, Senior advocate Indira Jaising, assisting the court as an amicus curiae, told a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur, S Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta that the media was running “parallel trial” in sub-judice matters and the court should frame guidelines on how to report the cases of crime against women.

She referred to the sensational Kathua gang rape and murder case and said that even before the charges was filed in the court, the media pronounced the decision that some of the accused were innocent and not guilty of the offences. An eight-year old girl, belonging to a minority nomadic community, was allegedly gang-raped and murdered in Kathua in the Jammu region on January 10. Her body was found in the same area a week later.

“Media trial is a matter of serious concern. In my view, it should not be held. Media trial creates a perception of prejudice against the accused. Judgment should be delivered in court only”

By conducting these parallel trials the media almost influences the judicial decision. How can one forget the Aarushi Talwar case in which the media just proved the girl as characterless. Media invites upon these experienced people then at the end of the show the anchor pronounces the judgment even before the court does. Media houses are the best way of speedy trials in India just saying. But such things hamper the real administration of justice. Before getting into such things lets go on to the intention of constitution makers who have made provision for separation of powers in the constitution and various other judicial pronouncements such as Ram Jawaya Kapoor v. State of Punjab, have shaped the system as of separation of powers and checks and balances.

Media should only focus upon disseminating real news to the masses instead of dwelling upon the work of judiciary and causing serious miscarriage of justice.

Conclusion

In any democracy, weakening of pillars is always damaging. We need to reach the main trunk, to trim the vicious aerial roots that are spreading and poisoning the society. So, in a nutshell, the media is forced to be a puppet of the government. They are not allowed to go against the government, they can’t question them. Whatever policies the government makes should follow that blindly. But in this way, there won’t be any medium for the public to know the truth of the government and its policies. In the hide of freedom of expression the watchdogs of democracy are having a nexus with the political parties, corporate and big organization for their own petty gains. The greedy media is killing the people and the democracy, not at the rate of authoritarianism but killing the same.

This spells danger for the future of democracy in India, unless it is urgently remedied. Journalists have forgotten the craft, which does not mean linguistic felicity alone. Language is important but only to communicate with clarity. The craft of journalism packs a value system too, starting with the question why we became journalists. I am afraid they are not asking such questions but sleepwalking sheep-like into the slaughterhouse. The problem lies not just with media houses but with an indifferent audience who is the worst threat that the media can face and the irrelevance cannot be far behind.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join: