Book Review: The Rape of News

BY Frederick Noronha| IN Media Practice | 12/06/2003
Many comments in this booklet, naturally, strongly criticise this trend. Some point out that the facts of the case arenøt exactly clear.
 

Frederick Noronha

What happens  when a prominent newspaper begins marketing editorial space in its
news columns? Recently, the Times of India worked out a sort of a new arrangement. Under this deal, emerging reports in other sections of the media suggested, corporates and individuals could pay for getting features in news columns and other editorial space.

Journalist Sunil K Poolani -- we knew each other from his Sunday Observer days -- felt "angry, dejected, disappointed, disillusioned, humiliated and raped" enough to put a booklet together on this subject. "The Rape of News" is a 32-page slender compilation brought out by Frog Books, which probably is the author’s own publishing venture. Each booklet is priced at Rs 30, and the author resorts to the time-tested  journalistic strategy of just culling the views of many others, in this case other journalists..

Many oppose the mixing of news with advertising. Interestingly other journalists have defended it, or opted not to challenge it. And yet others point out that it is only legitimising the corruption in journalism that  is already there.Mumbai-based columnist Dilip Raote has a two-word response: "No comments!"

Another columnist from Mumbai, Rohit Gupta, has a tongue-in-cheek response:
"They are selling editorial space? This is great news. I hereby offer my services

to The Times of India as a columnist. I am, of course, assuming that since they

are selling that space, that they will pay their writers  more. Share and enjoy (wink, wink)!"

Chennai journalist V Jagannathan argues: "It`s only facts that are sacred and not

the news story per se. If the editor ensures the credibility of the facts of the story,

 then there is nothing wrong in monetising the editorial space up-front as the advertisement department will do the same after publication."

One may not agree with that. But you can`t disagree with Jagannathan`s point that "selling news for a price legitimises what some reporters or news editors have been doing and profiting on the sly." He makes another interesting point.: "Actually journalists should really practice what they preach. For instance, they write reams against subsidies. But (they) are conspicuously silent when it comes to subsidised houses for themselves."

A Pune-based poet and writer says: "For years it has been possible for corporates

and individuals to cosy up with media representatives and get themselves featured

in well-placed articles. So it does not surprise me..." Goa-based Margaret  Mascarenhas calls this "advertising masquerading as journalism", and  points out that it has been going on for quite a long time. She adds that "the only difference now is that this form of corrupt journalism is now being legitimised".

Mid-Day chief editor Aakar Patel argues that (i) the owners of a newspaper are free to sell whatever space they see fit, but it is "advisable" they inform the reader if certain `content` is paid for (ii) India is the only market in the world where newspaper readers are subsidised by newspaper owners. Patel`s theses, particularly the second one, is surely debatable. Subsidised by owners? Are they running newspaper businesses as loss-making enterprises?

His assertion is based on the fact that Sri Lankan and Pakistani dailies, for instance, "retail at Rs 15 or more per copy". Therefore, he says, the "ethical right of the reader" who is unwilling to pay, to determine how the product "should be constructed" is greatly reduced in the eye of the owner.

Newspapers across the globe have circulation-costs partly offset by advertisements. Some, like the free-sheeters of Chennai or
Goa, make their publication available at zero-cost to the reader. But does this mean they can dish out just about any thrash? If they did so, they would have to start paying the reader to take their product.

At the other extreme, publications like the travel guide `Lonely Planet` can demand a price of almost US$ 30 for their guidebooks, because they believe in giving the reader a honest viewpoint. They even opt to avoid all advertisements altogether, so as not to get unduly influenced.

If Indian newspapers are sold at so low a price, is it some indication that we are not able to produce content that readers would be really willing to pay for? Couldn`t this itself be an indication of the woes of excessively depending on the advertiser and the lobbyist?

But Patel concludes nonetheless: "In the long term, this sale of news space is severely damaging to the credibility of news reporting and its delivery, and I do not think too many papers will wish to follow suit."

Many comments in this booklet, naturally, strongly criticise this trend. Some point out that the facts of the case aren`t exactly clear. The bottom-line is: What is the role of a newspaper? Do we have to make money at all costs? Does the media have any social responsibilities?

To get a copy of this book, contact editor@netactcommunications.com


The Rape of News
Sunil K Poolani (Ed)
32 pp, 2003
Frog Books, Navi Mumbai