News Media Track and Political Coverage...
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 13th April 2014
Some praise first for the commercial media.
Some of the smaller channels seem to be taking some initiatives to bring out inside stories of Match/Election Fixing by parties/individuals ready to stand as dummy. Though some of the journos may argue that this is not a first happenstance for media, however initiatives of the small time channel is likely to inspire more channels to get to real news or stories this time round is likely to be more systematic, given the competition levels and stakes. Earlier it was more about a personal coup for journos with no focus on developing a system to ‘break news’ being in focus since this was considered to be a game reserved for high risk takers reserved for those who have reach or potential to get into such games and not ordinary although there may have been exceptions. Smaller channels are also managing to engage with ‘popular leaders’ who hitherto restricted themselves with A-class journos and prime time slots. However much of this is happening due to readiness of the channels to ‘carry’ message of these leaders as of now, rather than pressure created by them to ‘reply’ to the charges coming up as a result of some journalistic endeavors.
Second, we also have group interviews of constituency candidates by media anchor with the audience of the constituency chipping in. Though this is still a nascent technique, however the report card of incumbent candidate along with the reason/conjectures that why party is changing candidate and what is the position on ‘failure to punish non-performers’ is being focal points of such discussion. Certainly some data gathering by NGOs is being put to some use. The news rooms would do better if they research more about the past commitments of the candidates to people from their own records as well to be played up on large screen during such interviews for questioning. Otherwise old as well as new channels are likely to be nearly on same footing for viewership very soon, since branding differentiators can only sustain for so long. The smaller channels with their thoughtful content may steadily erode the advantages enjoyed by larger channels.
A clear gap is limited coverage of the commercial media of the bureaucrats who can give up incisive insights on taint and scams that have been numerous at center as well as at state. There is limited coverage for important industry sectors Real estate, food/fertilizer distribution (in government as well as in private sector) that has bearing on the elections. The view of industry regarding credibility of a leader’s promise to grow the constituency is being covered in an objective manner.
Media also keeps on playing up a leader’s views of controversial subjects with generalist debates. Like the view on Rape should draw a smaller punishment was criticized without analysis on how such comments would impact different segment of voters with assumption that all female voters should be against such comments. It may have been better to check if female voters in the minority/scheduled segment are still checking up with their male family members for vote and the comments may bring rejoice to some to the families to actually use their influence to garner support for parties/leaders in question.
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 13th April 2014
Some praise first for the commercial media.
Some of the smaller channels seem to be taking some initiatives to bring out inside stories of Match/Election Fixing by parties/individuals ready to stand as dummy. Though some of the journos may argue that this is not a first happenstance for media, however initiatives of the small time channel is likely to inspire more channels to get to real news or stories this time round is likely to be more systematic, given the competition levels and stakes. Earlier it was more about a personal coup for journos with no focus on developing a system to ‘break news’ being in focus since this was considered to be a game reserved for high risk takers reserved for those who have reach or potential to get into such games and not ordinary although there may have been exceptions. Smaller channels are also managing to engage with ‘popular leaders’ who hitherto restricted themselves with A-class journos and prime time slots. However much of this is happening due to readiness of the channels to ‘carry’ message of these leaders as of now, rather than pressure created by them to ‘reply’ to the charges coming up as a result of some journalistic endeavors.
Second, we also have group interviews of constituency candidates by media anchor with the audience of the constituency chipping in. Though this is still a nascent technique, however the report card of incumbent candidate along with the reason/conjectures that why party is changing candidate and what is the position on ‘failure to punish non-performers’ is being focal points of such discussion. Certainly some data gathering by NGOs is being put to some use. The news rooms would do better if they research more about the past commitments of the candidates to people from their own records as well to be played up on large screen during such interviews for questioning. Otherwise old as well as new channels are likely to be nearly on same footing for viewership very soon, since branding differentiators can only sustain for so long. The smaller channels with their thoughtful content may steadily erode the advantages enjoyed by larger channels.
A clear gap is limited coverage of the commercial media of the bureaucrats who can give up incisive insights on taint and scams that have been numerous at center as well as at state. There is limited coverage for important industry sectors Real estate, food/fertilizer distribution (in government as well as in private sector) that has bearing on the elections. The view of industry regarding credibility of a leader’s promise to grow the constituency is being covered in an objective manner.
Media also keeps on playing up a leader’s views of controversial subjects with generalist debates. Like the view on Rape should draw a smaller punishment was criticized without analysis on how such comments would impact different segment of voters with assumption that all female voters should be against such comments. It may have been better to check if female voters in the minority/scheduled segment are still checking up with their male family members for vote and the comments may bring rejoice to some to the families to actually use their influence to garner support for parties/leaders in question.
