The government of
India wants to stop spread of fake news. The
Information and Broadcasting ministry on April 2 issued a circular laying down
a protocol for dealing with fake news appearing in “various mediums (sic)
including print and electronic media”. It details how it will punish accredited
journalists found faking news –ranging from suspension of government
accreditation to revocation.
The note is put up on
the website of the Press Information Bureau (PIB) (http://pib.gov.in/PressReleseDetail.aspx?PRID=1527361)
that comes under the I&B ministry. It is a job-done-in-a-hurry. Not much
thought, other than the intent to punish, or get back, at journalists, has perhaps
gone into it.
*One, the title of the PIB press note is
hilarious. It says the new guidelines are to “regulate” fake news – as in
“good” fake news is ok, but “bad” fake news is not ok. Had this been a headline
in a newspaper, the desk person’s head would have rolled by now. Is it that the
I&B ministry has no intention of “fighting” or “banning’ or even “curbing”
fake news? It is happy with merely “regulating” it? Like what? One fake news a
day? Or two? Or three?
*Two, it talks of fake news as if the phrase is
understood by one and all. What is the definition of fake news? Sometimes,
where national security is concerned, the media intentionally withholds crucial
facts or shifts attention to somewhere else. Or, in case of a rape
victim, it uses a fake name to identify the person – like ‘Nirbhaya’. It is
technically fake, but is it fake news? No. You cannot have a new law or
legislation or order about something without defining what that something is.
*Three, the
guidelines can come into force only when there is a complaint. Should the
complaint be filed with the I&B ministry? The note does not elaborate. I am
sure there is going to be a deluge of complaints in the coming days – after all
the note does not say the complaints should not be fake!
*Four, either there
are no digital media accredited journalists or it doesn’t matter if accredited
journalists work also for the web because the note does not mention the new
media at all. Strange, considering much of the so-called (in the absence of any
definition in the note) fake news traverses through the web and social media.
*Five, the last para
of the note is absolutely meaningless. “While examining the requests seeking
accreditation…” it begins. Is it about new accreditation applications or
re-accreditation requests from journalists whose accreditations were suspended,
etc? Nobody knows.
These observations
show how ad hoc, reactive and even non-serious the note is. Let me ask a simple
question. What if a non-accredited journalist produces fake news? Will that
journalist get a commendation letter or what? I certainly am not being
flippant. Let me explain. Go to the PIB website and take a look at the number
of accredited correspondents. I did that to save your time. Here are the
details:
There are a total of
2264 accredited media persons. Four of them are cartoonists. There are 503
camerapersons. There are 76 officials belonging to PIB or Doordarshan or
government media agencies and eight press officers. There are 92 technicians.
That leaves 1578 journalists who are correspondents (1490 correspondents, 17
camerapersons-cum-correspondents, 1 founder editor and 70 long and
distinguished journalists).
The reputation of the
1578 accredited journalists has been singed in public memory by simply
identifying them as the only pool of journalists in India capable of producing
fake news. But that is not the real issue. The real issue is that in a country,
where there are over 80,000 print publications, over 400 news channels and
hundreds of digital portals, employing millions of journalists in all, a mere
1578 of them are targeted. Obviously, the government has failed to see the big
picture in this instance. Because it has traded the big picture for the narrow
picture of controlling what the media writes about the government.
The government’s
reason for going this way is not difficult to understand. The Press is free in
India despite frequent attempts by the government at the Centre or in the
states to muzzle it or at best regulate it. Therefore, the millions of journalists
are simply out of the government’s purview. The government, in its wisdom,
seems to think it can exercise “power” over accredited journalists. Even if
they are only a few. Journalists apply for accreditation for ease of access.
That is all. They do not become lesser journalists if their accreditation is
removed. Their freedom is not compromised whether they are accredited or
not. That is the point to be understood and reiterated.
Yes, there is fake
news. Newsrooms across the country are seized of this problem. Editors have
been brainstorming over this. Internal gate-keeping systems and other checks
and balances, which have always guided us journalists, are monitored and
modified to check this menace. The media has its own regulatory bodies which are
seized of this matter. A matter that is an internal matter of the media.
Having said that, can
I question the moral authority of the PIB or I&B ministry to issue the fake
news guidelines? I merely point at just two instances.
Instance one. In
December, 2015, Prime Minister Narendra Modi undertook an aerial survey of
Chennai hit by flash floods. The PIB out a tweet in the form of a picture
showing Modi looking out the craft’s window. For reasons best known to itself,
the PIB inserted an edited and sharply focused picture of the floods to fit the
rounded window through which the PM was shown looking down. It became the butt
of ridicule on social media. The picture was hastily pulled down. Isn’t that
faking news, even though the PIB will surely have what it feels is a
justifiable reasoning?
Instance two.
In May, 2017, the PIB put out a release on its web-site listing the
achievements of the Modi government on its completion of three years in office.
The bureau became the butt of ridicule on social media because the article,
highly critical of the government, was actually lifted from a daily newspaper.
Isn’t that a fake news, even though the PIB will surely have what it feels is a
justifiable explanation?
What did somebody say
about practising what one preaches?
