NDTV Finally Pulls ‘The Buck Stops Here’

Wisdom seems to have finally dawned on NDTV. The channel has quietly pulled Barkha Dutt’s program ‘The Buck Stops Here’ from its usual night time slot of 10pm.

It would be apparent to Prannoy Roy & Co. that it is probably difficult to even get panellists to appear on a program hosted by a maligned journalist. In the face of mounting public anger and criticism it was probably getting difficult for Barkha Dutt to continue sermonising us on ethics, corruption and the like.

So what’s the next stop? That insufferable program ‘We The People’ should be the next to go and finally end the divisive discussions that have encroached our TV comedy channels for the last decade.

And what about Barkha Dutt herself? Well, I have to state that everybody deserves a second chance. If idiots in a nation can keep electing corrupt politicians then a bad journalist too deserves a second chance. So it might be wise for her to cool her heels in the backrooms of NDTV for six months or go on a reporting spree to foreign countries.

There is one more thing that NDTV needs to do. There are Facebook groups who have campaigned against Barkha Dutt ever since the 26/11 attack and the Chetanya Kunte episode. It may not be a bad idea to start a dialogue with members of such groups to recover lost ground and assure people that the channel intends to establish fair practice in reporting and analysing news. NDTV should also reopen its feedback and comments page on its website. That takes courage and humility at the same time.

Let’s see if NDTV has the courage and humility to interact with its strongest critics.

Note: This post is based on the fact that Barkha Dutt has not been hosting 'The Buck Stops Here' for some days now and the program is also not listed on the NDTV schedule on their website.

Changing Lanes: Alternative Career Choices For Barkha Dutt

The transition from journalism to another career will be quite easy for Vir Sanghvi.  The tainted journalist was already writing on ‘food’ and a full-time career as a ‘foodie’ would be the obvious choice for him to change lanes. He has already taken a break, in Bangkok, to contemplate his choices.

Changing lanes, however, is a problem for Barkha Dutt. Especially in her current mood she is unlikely to think straight.  For all the self-righteous kicking and screaming in her own defence her credibility has been severely dented.  More so after her particularly outrageous and disgraceful self-defence on NDTV (November 30) for which I asked her channel to FIRE her. 

So out of concern for Ms.Dutt I spent some time pondering what could be the alternative career choices for her. This is, of course, unsolicited advice, but that is of no consequence since the lady is not known to listen to any kind of ‘wisdom’ so frequently delivered to her. And I have been careful to restrict myself to offering only 5 choices, just in case she decides to try all of them. (My fear was that if I had offered 10 she might have taken up all, damaging many more industries or domains.) So here goes:

1.       Teacher in a school for journalists: This would be an excellent choice since she will be able to tell aspiring journalists what NOT to do as a journalist and how lack of ethics did her in.  I must admit I had thought of it on my own but I find someone else had thought of it long back. Sushant Kumar’s advice in December 2008 can be read here.

2.       Spokesperson for Hurriyat Separatists:  Swapan Das Gupta mentions he jokingly taunts her being the “Voice Of Hurriyat”. I for one think he wasn’t really joking. So this is another choice. She can become a full-time spokeswoman for the Hurriyat. In any case she understands the separatists and their goals quite well and has spoken up for their plight on many occasions. Hurriyat’s gain could be our gain too. A true win-win for all. 

3.       Campaign Manager for Musharraf:  It was Musharraf’s suprise breakfast presser in 2001, hosted by Prannoy Roy, that helped launch NDTV in Pakistan. Since the Kargil war-criminal has recently launched his own political party she might just fit the bill as his campaign manager. She does love interviewing this guy and she knows a lot about Kargil too.

4.       As model for M.F. Hussain: Since moving to Qatar we haven’t heard or seen much of Hussain’s nude paintings. Obviously, with a lot of women in ‘Burqa’ he would have struck a lean patch in the inspiration department. Who better than Barkha to fill in that void for her friend? Relax, I am not suggesting nude modelling by any stretch of imagination.

5.       Waitress at Starbucks:  In my own bloated opinion this could well do the trick for Barkha. Let’s see – she is definitely a ‘STAR’ and who in the world knows more about ‘BUCKS’ than Barkha? This could really be a perfect FIT!

Many of us have had to change careers at some point on account of one reason or the other. And at this moment if there is someone who dearly needs more suggestions and offers it has to be Barkha Dutt. Do you have any more suggestions? Barkha could surely do with some help!

Update: Quite a few people called me up and asked "why not spokesperson for Congress (I)?" I have specifically excluded that since she is already doing that job.

An Open Letter To Rajdeep Sardesai....

Dear Rajdeep,

In this blog I had written about the media silence with your favourite line “Hammam mein sab nangen hein”. Since then CNN-IBN has twice talked about the Radia tapes and its repercussions. My compliments to you for breaking the silence and showing the courage to air the news report and the discussions. First on ‘Face the Nation’ (November 22) and then on ‘The last word’ (November 26).

I have an uncanny feeling you may have read the posts on this blog on your line “HMSNH” and your ‘Quid Pro Quo’ article. I’m sure you’re aware there is a site called Rajdeep Sardesai on the blogosphere which lists all posts concerning you. However, in case you haven’t yet read what I have written, I invite you to do so. You will find your panellists have echoed sentiments similar to mine and many other bloggers.

That both, Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi, could have redeemed themselves by expressing regret over ‘bad judgement’ and we could have moved on. I don’t think any one is really accusing these journalists of being outright corrupt. But their arrogant stands point to that possibility being open. I have also written that being openly in favour or support of a political party is no crime and is much more honourable than pretending to be impartial or independent of political leanings for a media house. This is what generates the heartburn among viewers and readers.

N. Ram on the panel yesterday stated that if these two journalists had been working for the BBC or the NYT they would have been immediately sacked. I tend to agree with him. However, I am not calling for any sacking but I am sure an expression of regret over an error of judgement can definitely do no harm to the tainted reputation of these journalists. You, as their industry colleague, can enlighten them on this wisdom. Sanjay Baru also talked about the insidious connection between politicians, corporate houses and the media.

Andrew Gilligan, the BBC reporter of the famous “sexed-up” intelligence reports of the Tony Blair government was fired by the BBC. Gilligan’s source Dr. David Kelly was found dead, apparently a suicide. Fortunately, nothing of that sort has happened here, but such tapes could well hold the potential for such disasters in India too. That’s why the media needs to clean up its house.

Once again, my compliments to you and CNN-IBN for showing the courage to carry the news and the discussions openly. I have no problems with anyone defending the tainted journalists, but a ‘black-out’ of such explosive news raises more suspicions than clearing doubts.

Best Wishes,

Ravinar.

Rajdeep Sardesai on ' Quid Pro Quo '...

Following the exposure of the Radia tapes involving journalists Rajdeep Sardesai was among the first to defend Barkha Dutt. He tweeted "Conversation between source and journo is legitimate. if quid pro quo is shown, expose it. else, dont destroy hard earned reputations”. When I looked up I found no better article/speech than one by Rajdeep himself on the matter of quid pro quo (sometime in 2001). Here are excerpts from one such speech/article by him. I repeat these are 'excerpts' and a link to the entire article is provided at the end of this post.

Quote:


... In each instance, the system operates on a clear quid pro quo.... In particular, when it comes to celebrity journalism in the country today, the lines between reportage and public relations are slowly getting blurred.
....Take also the so-called ad supplements .....For example, journalists are taken on a full, all-expenses paid holiday for the Dubai shopping festival. The newspaper gets ad revenues, the festival gets publicity, and the journalist gets a perfect junket.

....As indeed can the political journalist who enjoys the privilege of travelling with the prime minister or the president on an official tour.... How is the Black Label whisky and box of chocolates that are left in the hotel room of any journalist any less of an inducement than the gifts offered to army officials on the tehelka tapes?
And yet few, if any, of us journalists even bother to consider that this may be a corrupting factor, an attempt by the government to break the dividing line between journalist and establishment and ensure that the press writes positively on the ‘achievements’ of those in power.....

....It’s no different with corporate houses who have select journalists on their payroll.

....In Delhi, a senior political reporter can ensure an appointment for a businessman with an important civil servant for a fee..... And at the very top of the journalistic pyramid, an editor may be able to ensure that a television channel gets the benefit of a major satellite project in return for a prime time news programme. Indeed, as the stakes get higher, the ‘journalist as fixer’ concept has become more and more prevalent. 

Another reason for the problem is the changing self-image of the journalist, and his role in a democratic system. For a long time the journalist’s role was seen to be that of an independent observer of events. But observation alone can be rather tedious, and not very financially productive either. So, over the years, the journalist has chosen to move from the margins of the fourth estate to being firmly on the centre-stage, closer to the first estate. Ideological corruption is as much a part in this process as anything else. A journalist can get close to a political party, business house or an individual in a manner that compromises his independence. Having acquired that proximity, the journalist can then use his clout on a larger scale, playing kingmaker in cementing political alliances at the centre, or in providing the link between a minister in the Union cabinet and a business house in need of a favour.

In the process of becoming power centres in their own right, the journalist has acquired a new profile and status within civil society. Ironically, in the process of acquiring this new image the journalist has become less of a watchdog and more of a lapdog of the system. For once a journalist is corrupted – either ideologically or financially – his space for challenging the system and playing an adversarial role keeps shrinking.
Unfortunately, few media persons have chosen to even look at the extent of the problem. Perhaps, it suits us not to look inwards since the reflection in the mirror won’t look very attractive. Perhaps, it suits the newspaper owners and channel bosses to keep the status quo since they have been prime beneficiaries of a corrupted system. Certainly, none of the so-called media watchdog bodies, be it the Press Council or the Editors Guild, have chosen to focus on media corruption – political, ideological or financial.

There are no rules or regulations that govern media ethics, or tell us whether it is acceptable for a journalist to receive a gift from a corporate house, or a junket from a ministry. With no clear-cut guidelines, it has become almost open season for those who wish to manipulate the system to their advantage.

Unquote

Rajdeep wants the "quip pro quo" to be established, knowing well that will be impossible. Else many corrupt politicians and journalists would be in prison by now. It doesn't strike him that even where there is strong evidence and proof the criminals walk around free in this country. His own words explain the media silence on the Radia tapes and to use his own words "the system operates on a clear quid pro quo"...

Read the full article Here.