Note, ‘Media’ here refers to ‘News Media’ which could be disseminating the news through means of any media.
Merriam Webster dictionary defines democracy as “A government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free representation.”
Democracy is the best available means of reconciling views on economic and political matters through debate and discussion rather than agitation, strikes, and riots. (Sah,2004)
Although people often equate ‘politics’ and the ‘government’, they are very different things. Politics is a process, while governments are an institution.
More specifically, politics is the process by which a society decides how power and resources will be distributed within that society. Politics enables a society to decide who will reap the benefits, and who will pay the costs, of its public policies.
The word politics is sometimes used in such a way that it is somehow immoral or something to be avoided. But again, politics is the means by which a government is conducted. It is neither ‘good’ or ‘bad’, but it is necessary. Indeed, it is impossible to conceive of government without politics.
So, unless the ideas and perspectives of citizens are transmitted to the political arena, we cannot talk about the power of people. Education is crucial here. With better education, people’s voting preferences might have better bases. However, this does not make the system any more democratic than it is now unless people have more chances of effecting policy-making. This needs a better systematic environment than electoral politics. Here, I think deliberative and participatory models offer great ways of political decision-making (Gul,2013). In my opinion, ‘media’ can, and does, serve the role of that model.
Lawrence K. Grossman wrote in 1996, “The general belief holds that representative government is the only form of democracy that is feasible in today’s sprawling, interactive telecommunications now make it possible for tens of millions of widely dispersed citizens to receive the information they need to carry out the business of government themselves, gain admission to the political realm, and retrieve at least some of the power over their own lives and goods that many believe their elected leaders are squandering.”
Ideally, the media serves several essential roles in a democratic society. Their primary purpose is to inform the public, providing citizens with the information needed to make thoughtful decisions about leadership and policy. The media acts as watch-dogs checking government actions. They set the agenda for political expression. They also facilitate community building by helping people to find common causes, identify civic groups, and work towards solutions to societal problems.
Public support for the watchdog is substantial, with a Pew Research Centre study finding that 70% of Americans believe that Press reporting can “Prevent leaders from doing things that shouldn’t be done” (Chinni & Bronston,2017). Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein inspired a generation of investigative journalists after revealing President Richard Nixon’s role in the break-in at the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel, forcing his resignation. The Washington Post’s ‘Fact Checker’ identified almost 1500 false claims made by President Trump in just over 250 days in office.
Thus, from the above examples we have come to know that the media has the potential to enhance people’s access to political information, facilitate wider ranging political discourse, and foster participation.
The two basic concepts of democracy, to which the present ‘media has not been able to stand by are:
1. Equal weightage to both, the politicians’ mouthpiece and the common mans’ mouthpiece.
“Journalism Cultures that follow an interventionist approach may act on behalf of the socially disadvantaged or as mouthpiece of a political party and other groups whose interest are at stake”. (Hanitzsch, 2007)
But, in the present context, something else has been happening.
India Today published an article on August 14, 2019, titled ‘Did BBC and Al Jazeera choose to ignore the terror angle in Kashmir protests?’. The article went on to say “As the government prepares for the challenge of ensuring peace in Kashmir on Independence Day, two news reports from international media organizations (BBC and Al Jazeera) are generating a lot of heat on social media.”
Then, The Economic Times, on September 8, 2019, reported: ‘Kashmiri Pandits stage demonstration against Washington Post for “biased” reporting on J&K issue’. The report said that “The protesters alleged that the prominent US daily has been giving “one-sided and biased coverage” after the Indian government withdrew Jammu and Kashmir’s special status under Article 370 of the Constitution. Kashmiri Pandits, who had gathered in Washington DC from various parts of the United States, raised slogans in support of Prime Minister Narendra Modi for taking the “bold and historic step.”
There’s a term for this: ‘media capture.‘ Capture is different from the old-school forms of control with censors marking up copy in red ink or government agencies issuing directives as to what should be covered. It’s a form of soft pressure that is ubiquitous and increasing in many parts of the world.
Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, professor of democracy studies at the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin, defines media capture as a situation in which the news media are controlled “either directly by governments or by vested interests networked with politics.”
The definition provides a useful framework for understanding the continuing rise of right-wing populism and how governments maintain their hold on the public. It also helps to explain the increasingly tangled relationships between repressive regimes and the news media they seek to dominate (Schiffrin,2017) . The above examples depict the dominance of right-wing on Indian Media houses.
2. Acceptance of the necessity of compromise.
Uttar Pradesh Minister Sunil Bharala gave a statement. He told ANI, “Temple of Lord Ram will be built during the tenure of Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. He is a decisive man, he will be the one to build the temple with his own hands, he has ‘apaar shakti’ in him. The day-to-day hearing on Ayodhya matter is taking place in the Supreme Court and a decision will be taken soon in the favor of the construction of Ram temple… Even the Muslim community supports this.”
“Everyone believes now that removal of Article 370 has united the country. Now a grand Ram Temple will be built and we all witness it soon,” Pragya Singh Thakur said while speaking to reporters in Bhopal.
By propagating such statements and certain ideologies like ‘Hindutva’, I feel the media is strengthening and glorifying it and conceptualising the minds of the preachers of that particular ideology not to compromise and narrowing the room for adjustments.
Thus, I feel we can conclude that despite the fact that the ‘media’ possesses capabilities of reforming democratic politics, it is making democracy lose its very essence.
This article was first published here.