The Life and Times of Media

The assessment of the life and relevance of media has become a constant requirement, particularly in a time where the media is facing a crisis. The description as “Godi,” or media mired in partisanship, is seen as one of the major symptoms of this crisis. It acquires such a description because it is accused of violating two crucial conditions that go into making media one of the strong pillars of democracy. First, the media, in one objective sense, needs to step out from the field of reality and map it out—as it unfolds itself empirically. This defines the objectivity and neutrality of media. Second, it is considered as the harbinger and defender of human values as well. On a more promising note, the role of the media becomes even more important in a humanitarian crisis. Its role is to nudge political forces towards achieving sublime sociality or a decent society that is without fear and violence. However, in contemporary times, certain sections of both print and visual media in India do seem to contribute to the humanitarian crisis. These mediapersons—particularly television reporters and anchors from some of the channels—seem to show disrespect for the system of human values.

The recalcitrant repetition of hate speech and communal violence that is being incited allegedly by some of the television anchors has led some of the public intellectuals and leaders from the opposition to suggest disengagement from these so-called television discussions. Although, such determination does carry a moral protest suggesting that the public intellectual decides the terms of debate and ethics of framing the right questions that require urgent deliberation to be conducted in the wider public. These opposition leaders thus suggest that participating in so-called television discussions does become a logical requirement for the television anchors and their political patrons to gain public endorsement for their public positions that, for some, may be morally indefensible.