It was disgusting,to say the least,to see the way the electronic media portrayed/presented the recent sensational news of a young woman who was molested and stripped to nudity by a mob in the presence of a police contingent.
I dont want to go into the graphical details of what was shown in the popular news channels. I do not wish to,and that would contradict the very point which I am trying to drive home here. I can only say that certain parts of the incident where the hapless victim's modesty was outraged to the extreme were shown again and again and again, each time with Suggestive specific commentaries on HOW the act was being done.
From here,one can proceed to elaborate on many aspects: gullibility and escapisn of the human mind(which we have discussed before),commercialisation of the electronic media(keeping in mind the negative consequences)etc.
Should an official gag be put upon the media in certain aspects?Whenever this topic has come up before,the media and the intelligentsia have always come up with CRY FREEDOM. Freedom to express,Right to know etc. are referred to specific paragraphs of the constitution,and a frenzied rhetoric is whipped upto such an embarrassing pitch that the poor voice which had pronounced the word Gag cowers down to a long and secret hibernation.
Even I am,personally,against anything which tends to curb conscious,spontaneous and healthy expression and sharing of thoughts/informations/knowledge on any platform.But if someone would propose that the above-mentioned presentation of the news qualifies to be healthy sharing of information with people who have got a right to know,I would strongly beg to disagree.
What is the effect of a gag and what purpose is served by a gag order?A literate person of average intelligence like me would say that the effect of a gag is restriction and its purpose is to restrict potential elements from influencing the society in a negative way.A good example of a gag is censoring of movies by boards which assume the role of watch-dogs.Censoring of movies is carried out mainly to minimise graphic representations of irrelevant violence including sexual violence,to exclude irrelevant dialogues and songs which are obscene,and to avoid aspects which can potentially hamper ethno-religious coexistence of the human community.Out of these,the first 2 are more specific as they target impressionable minds of children,adolescents and the volatility of the young mind rising out of despair and frustration due to social unequality.
I agree with censorship in movies in specific cases when I see that the actual purpose is being served. And I also point out that presentation of news by the electronic media in the expression and format similar to that of the Bihar incident,can affect the minds of children, adolescents (or frustrated youths) when they watch it over the electronic screen in their own homes and in presence of their own parents.(Being at home with parents adds another dimension featuring sensitive mind-games of a thinking child,as the child accepts that what is taking place on the television screen,is taking place in agreement with the parents and the security of home ).
I can imagine myself as the eight year old boy that I was,watching this news item on television, lapping up the graphic details, listenin the suggestive commentary again and again. I dont think I am feeling good.
Freedom of Press has to exist.For that the Press has to ensure officially and practically that whatever it is expressing,serves the actual purpose-Right to know and Freedom of knowledge.If it is not, then it is outside the domain of Freedom of Press, the Press should dissociate itself from such subverses.And then censorship by appropriate watch-dogs should come down heavily upon them to nullify their existence once and for all.
Of course, the feasibility of appropriate watch-dogs is another matter.
I dont want to go into the graphical details of what was shown in the popular news channels. I do not wish to,and that would contradict the very point which I am trying to drive home here. I can only say that certain parts of the incident where the hapless victim's modesty was outraged to the extreme were shown again and again and again, each time with Suggestive specific commentaries on HOW the act was being done.
From here,one can proceed to elaborate on many aspects: gullibility and escapisn of the human mind(which we have discussed before),commercialisation of the electronic media(keeping in mind the negative consequences)etc.
Should an official gag be put upon the media in certain aspects?Whenever this topic has come up before,the media and the intelligentsia have always come up with CRY FREEDOM. Freedom to express,Right to know etc. are referred to specific paragraphs of the constitution,and a frenzied rhetoric is whipped upto such an embarrassing pitch that the poor voice which had pronounced the word Gag cowers down to a long and secret hibernation.
Even I am,personally,against anything which tends to curb conscious,spontaneous and healthy expression and sharing of thoughts/informations/knowledge on any platform.But if someone would propose that the above-mentioned presentation of the news qualifies to be healthy sharing of information with people who have got a right to know,I would strongly beg to disagree.
What is the effect of a gag and what purpose is served by a gag order?A literate person of average intelligence like me would say that the effect of a gag is restriction and its purpose is to restrict potential elements from influencing the society in a negative way.A good example of a gag is censoring of movies by boards which assume the role of watch-dogs.Censoring of movies is carried out mainly to minimise graphic representations of irrelevant violence including sexual violence,to exclude irrelevant dialogues and songs which are obscene,and to avoid aspects which can potentially hamper ethno-religious coexistence of the human community.Out of these,the first 2 are more specific as they target impressionable minds of children,adolescents and the volatility of the young mind rising out of despair and frustration due to social unequality.
I agree with censorship in movies in specific cases when I see that the actual purpose is being served. And I also point out that presentation of news by the electronic media in the expression and format similar to that of the Bihar incident,can affect the minds of children, adolescents (or frustrated youths) when they watch it over the electronic screen in their own homes and in presence of their own parents.(Being at home with parents adds another dimension featuring sensitive mind-games of a thinking child,as the child accepts that what is taking place on the television screen,is taking place in agreement with the parents and the security of home ).
I can imagine myself as the eight year old boy that I was,watching this news item on television, lapping up the graphic details, listenin the suggestive commentary again and again. I dont think I am feeling good.
Freedom of Press has to exist.For that the Press has to ensure officially and practically that whatever it is expressing,serves the actual purpose-Right to know and Freedom of knowledge.If it is not, then it is outside the domain of Freedom of Press, the Press should dissociate itself from such subverses.And then censorship by appropriate watch-dogs should come down heavily upon them to nullify their existence once and for all.
Of course, the feasibility of appropriate watch-dogs is another matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment