We don't need more education

An apocryphal quote attributed to George Bernard Shaw says: “Journalists are seemingly unable to discriminate between a bicycle accident and collapse of civilisation.” The daily harangues on media that confuse bicycle accidents with collapse of civilisation and vice versa have justifiably angered Press Council of India Chairman, Justice Markandey Katju. His proposal that all journalists must have ‘education’ has predictably raised a lot of dust. On the face of it, Justice Katju’s call seems much needed. What is wrong in demanding an educated press/media?

The respected judge has put his finger on lack of education as the real problem from which all its multiple maladies arise. But in reality, the problems that we breast-beat about appear to be ethical in nature. It is the moral vacuum in which journalism is being practised that seems to be a problem, not whether the journalists have university degrees to their credit.

If we look at the shining stars of today’s journalistic firmament, we find that most of them have studied at the top national and international educational institutions. Several of them have post-graduate qualifications in journalism, economics, sociology and anthropology. Some of them are also known for their transgressions of the ethical boundaries, beyond the call of duty, to favour corporate/political interests. The last couple of years in Indian journalism have shown numerous instances like the Radia tapes episode or the paid news problem where not just the highly educated journalists but their even better educated bosses indulged in dubious practices.

There are a large number of universities offering post-graduate journalism programmes all over the country. There are also several in-house training programmes being run by media houses themselves.

A major difference that one observes between the two kinds of training is, in the university system, the orientation is towards providing a larger perspective to the students by introducing them to mass communication theory, international media issues, ethics, laws and history of journalism, along with skills training in reporting, editing, photojournalism, video production and so on.

Just as a law student learns jurisprudence and the origins and philosophy behind laws, a journalism student learns the larger social context in which a media practitioner works, and how their work impacts the democratic polity. The courses also incorporate the structure of media industries, ownership patterns and such other issues like commissions of enquiry and wage boards. The university degrees also pave the intellectual way for those who wish to pursue doctoral studies in journalism by equipping them with research skills.

The industry-led training programmes mostly equip the students with skills required for day-to-day news production. They concentrate on producing ‘good hands’ for the beat, desk or panel. It is rare for a media-run course to include either history, social impact of media, research or ownership patterns and wage boards.

It is an interesting phenomenon in Indian journalism that in the 1970s and 1980s, media houses steered clear of formally trained media graduates from universities for some time, partly because of the need to pay highly qualified candidates better salaries and partly because of the ‘over-confidence’ of the graduates who are not intimidated by the newsroom environment. Till the 1990s, the salaries were notoriously low in media industry and media graduates also would look for greener pastures in advertising and public relations.

While a few newspapers began recruiting some, most would also complain that the products of the universities were not trained well enough in skills to fit their roles with ease. While some senior journalists would take the young journalists under their wing and groom them into the profession, setting high ethical standards (as might happen in the case of a young lawyer who would learn the ropes of practice from a senior), most would complain that the schools were not providing them with ready ‘hands’. In my view, this disregard for the education about the profession that the young graduate brings to the table, and the seniors not grooming the new entrants into the nuances of the profession, also contributed to the loss of professional traditions.

When the media boom took off after the mid-1990s, the commercialised news media came up with new recruitment strategies altogether. Most of the big media houses began hiring from the rarified social circles the bosses themselves belong to, irrespective of the journalistic training. It was more important to have access to the bureaucracy and the political elite than to be well trained or have an ethical understanding of journalism. It is easier for the children of the same social set to ease into the role of journalists, providing unlimited access to power.

At a lecture in Delhi in April 2012, Prof Robin Jeffrey spoke about the near absence of dalit/tribal journalists in the Indian newsrooms. (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/missing-from-the-indian-newsroom/article3294285.ece). The much-debated issue of under-representation of women in decision-making positions in media also compounds the problem of lack of diversity in newsrooms. It is the cause for Justice Katju’s oft-repeated complaint that the news priorities are skewed in favour of urban elite interests  instead of addressing the real issues facing our people.

The language media employ a number of stringers and journalists who are not trained in the profession. But, here too there are two specific breeds that operate. One kind is the underpaid ones who are forced to find advertising for their media houses. The pay at this level tends to be abysmally low and erratic. They may learn to blackmail and get rich quick.

The other kind, the ones who are underpaid but driven by a passion to serve society, endanger themselves by reporting on people’s struggles. Neither may have university degrees in journalism. But one group rides on the power of media for personal gain; the other uses the power of media for greater good. The former may quickly go on to establish their own media houses, the latter may fall as martyrs in people’s causes. The problem here is not so much with education as with the nature of the industry both are working in and which path the industry tends to privilege.

The media boom, orchestrated as a major shift from the middle class conservative media of the 1990s, made the transition from urban, educated middle class orientation to urban educated middle and elite class orientation. Going by the number of lifestyle pages and channel content, the media prominently show this class characteristic because the media are now advertising driven, and it is the classes with purchasing power who matter. The 1970s definition of ‘education, information, entertainment’ as primary functions of mass media is ridiculous in the present context.

Media today is a cultural industry wielding enormous power on the political economy of the nation-state. The commercialisation of media has drastically shrunk the democratic spaces for real issues that matter to people. Corporate interests and political power play now occupy much of the mind space.

In this media environment, university education in journalism has become increasingly critical and adversarial, making the ‘intelligent student’ either reject the entire ethical, moral baggage and climb the ladder of institutional success when they enter the profession or retreat into the higher studies mode where there is less likelihood of ethical dissonance.

The highly commercial, competitive ownership of media brought in major changes – decreased role of editors, increased emphasis on revenue generation, proprietors using journalists for garnering advertising and negotiating deals, individuals with major role in other sectors of the economy foraying into the media.

Looking at the nature of investment (from politicians, real estate, finance, proxy investments from big business houses, etc) that has fuelled the media boom, it can safely be concluded that few among the new breed of owners are excessively concerned about ethical journalism. Their primary intent in acquiring media interests is to leverage the opinion-making power of media to control the cultural and information space for their own economic advantage. Some journalists, whether for reasons of survival or in collusive faith, choose to advance the cause of the owners.

The problem of the missing moral core of the profession, therefore, cannot be remedied by tweaking education. The problem is that of the kind of industry that our polity allows. It requires statutory regulation of ownership, control of monopoly power, control of proxy investments, control of horizontal and vertical integration that is rampant, controls on using media interests to promote other business interests by invoking the protection of free speech, truthful redefinition of commercial media interests as commercial activity that is subject to all the reasonable oversight that any such activity is subject to and so on. Recruitment of journalists, levels of professional autonomy, conditions of work and nature of work extracted are no less important issues for regulatory oversight.

Despite everything, there are media houses and journalists in India and elsewhere, who still uphold the highest values of journalism and have kept the dignity of the profession, to show the way for new entrants. It is these democratic voices that need to be strengthened. While the good guys are the role models for some, they also have to fight hard to survive in the shrinking space without regulatory support. We need statutory regulation that maintains the ethical compass of the industry and makes journalism of integrity more glamorous than journalism of leverage. A university degree alone is unlikely to help.