Indian journalism's credibility crisis: Double standards in reporting, diluting or demonizing on the basis of person's name or faith is shameful

Shams Ur Rehman Alavi

Indian journalism is in a deep crisis. Just go through this example and see how incidents are reported--diluted, hushed up or sensationalized, selectively. A few days ago, this serious incident involving national security took place.

Amal Tiwari was arrested from Buxar. Not in hurried operation, but after long investigation & when a lot of info was obtained.

But media that is quick to sensationalize, avoided mentioning it as 'international terror plot' & no serious follow-up stories were done. No reports of ATS teams or reports about NIA or mikes in front of officers. Generally, for weeks there is hysteric reporting in case where there is just a suspect or a wild claim, but the words are inserted and it remains in headlines. But this serious case was turned into a 'security breach'. Nothing about modules, probe teams or what came out in the form of investigation report and no 'sources' mentioning what was found in interrogation and nothing about family, past act, other aspects. In one case, a name is thrown and everyone gets into frenzy, reporting by using sensational terms and getting actively involved. But on the other hand, paying less attention despite seriousness of the case.

The reporters and journalists, they have certain inherent inclinations or biases. That case after case, one incident gets excessive focus and other is diluted. In one case, the focus is too much and even without much evidence, attempt is made to turn story sensational. But in other case, effort is to totally ignore the news or write in a manner that despite all the stuff, it should be relegated to inside pages and no serious follow-up reports. In most countries, media faces criticism but in India, there is much more strong tendency to report stories based on 'who' is the suspect. A man who has not been involved and just a wild claim and someone has made an allegation against him, case be demonized by use of sensational terms to destroy life, while... ...the other who has not just been booked and arrested but convicted and jailed for a horrific crime, is termed as 'man released after ten years', not even a mention of charge or crime or prison. The template and the method is quite clear. Most newsrooms have this issue and the person writes story depending on his personal biases and thoughts, not on the basis of standard journalism practices. The standards should be the same. If a person is suspect, then he should be suspect and he should not be treated as criminal or convict. And it should be in all cases. Not just national security, but the worst cases of crimes too, it is seen that people report with zeal in one case and just ignore other case. Keep similar standards and basic practices, if not ideal as idealism is too tough to expect in the times we live.