Media matters

I tend to avoid posting journalism-related links, on the assumption that such stories don’t really matter to anyone outside of the profession [and not even to many within it, come to think of it]. And then I break my own rule, post the odd story, and get pleasantly surprised by the feedback. Examples, the feedback in the comments field, and as I noticed just now, in emails, to an earlier post on the Sania fixation, and to the two TED talks on the nature of news.

Apparently journalism — what we do, and why we do what we do — does matter to a lot of you. So, continuing in that vein, here’s a think piece worth your while. It relates to the coverage of Hispanics in the US media space — but go beyond that specific, and you’ll see parallels to much that is happening with our own media.

This isn’t just about manpower. It’s about time. Most of us contribute to blogs at our shops. Or we are feeding the online beast with urgent news. Or we are tweeting or live-chatting. That means less time brainstorming stories outside of the news cycle. We are now left with newsrooms increasingly relying on the easy crutch of breaking news and event coverage.

As always, appreciate feedback if any.

3 thoughts on “Media matters

  1. One of the things about the media is the selective/biased covering of issues. And am not referring to the mouthpiece-of-a-party/Govt. kind of reporting, which is the lowest form of such.

    Most of us, who spend the greater part of our lives on couches know and form an opinion about something only from the media. Most issues to us are what the media tells them to be, for the simple reason that no other source of information is available on the same. In such a case, when the media covers one side of the story, but not the other, everyone goes back thinking there is only one side to it. In fact, its one of the most effective weapons of the state.

    Like the amount of news you get from the North-East of the country. Am sure in a region which is under AFSPA, there would definitely be more happening than as much makes its way into the papers (read: none). And even that which makes its way is so one-sided.

    Another example thats already in the face is the whole Operation Green Hunt story. Every byte that drops out of PC’s mouth everyday is quoted in every possible media, over, over and over again. No one tells you anything about the tribals. Am sure there is a lot to be heard about from the other side too (The Roy piece, as almost always, is more about herself and her writing than about the tribals, so thats not an example of what am talking). [And this is not a cue for a debate on who is right, and who is wrong; am merely talking the journalistic side of things.]

    It is understandable that the Govt. would want only one story to make it to the pages, but given that this bias percolates via the media to anywhere that news reaches, should the media not strive for more balance on any issue than happily coloring it with blacks and whites?

  2. Incidentally, just got this one on buzz from a friend. Its only tangentially related, but since this post is about ‘news’ in one way or another, I thought I’ll post it. If nothing, its just funny.

Comments are closed.