by Javed Jamil
publishing houses began to flourish. Then came the invention of radio, followed by tape recorders. The audio companies emerged offering mind-boggling variety of music to the listeners. The invention of cameras heralded a revolution in the media. The television soon appeared on the scene and within a few decades entered every decent house. Films had already started captivating the imagination of people who would throng to the cinema halls whenever a film was released. Lately, the video companies have been doing roaring business all over the world. The Internet Revolution has given an unprecedented boost to their plans. Not only did the media-men engaged in the audio, video and film industries find these extremely lucrative but soon the whole industry realised the extraordinary potential of the media as the supporter and promoter of market. Earlier, the newspapers and magazines were published mostly by those whose aim was to educate, inform and reform the people. They set high ideals for themselves and adhered to their convictions even at the cost of financial losses. The radio and television were generally controlled by the state and the business tycoons were not in a position to fully exploit them. The advertising had already commenced but it was limited to the wall-paintings, or loudspeakers and newspapers and magazines. With the ongoing privatisation of economy, the media too went commercial and a complete metamorphosis was brought about in its structure and functioning. The small newspapers and magazines owned and edited by dedicated persons who used to revolutionise society through ideological and patriotic fervour paled before the new media blitz backed by the industrialists. The big newspapers had the volume and appearance that attracted the masses. These newspapers survived because their managers were able to successfully commercialise them. In the late twentieth century, the television also slipped into private hands. Earlier, the media aimed to inform, educate and reform. Entertainment was very much there but this also invariably carried implicit or explicit social and moral messages. The advertisements, too, did not flout the social norms. With the media falling in the hands of the economic fundamentalists, it has ceased to be a teacher and reformer. Instead, it has become an electronic salesman of unparalleled efficiency. Whatever little contents of information and knowledge it disseminates are also a part of the marketing strategies or the attempt to silence the critics. Apart from the great heights the advertising has acquired, every single programme presented on TV is consciously produced with the purpose of changing social norms corresponding to their long-marketing strategies. The entertainment now offered on various channels has nothing to do with the intellect, humanist sentiments or spirituality; it only seeks to galvanise the basic instincts and to electrify the physical desires. This kills many birds with one stone. The channel itself enhances its position on the popularity chart, brings in advertisements in large numbers and changes the perceptions and tastes of men, women and children; their galvanised desires drive them to markets of different kinds. The latest trends in fashion take them to the garments bazaar. The inherent desire to attract the opposite sex makes them empty their pockets buying gorgeous dresses, stimulating perfumes, cosmetics, jewellery, shoes and thousands of other items. Sex too is available to them in various forms: still pictures of 'naughties' in the soft porno magazines, depictions of sexual act in the films and on internet and women themselves in the red light areas.
The objectives behind the privatisation of media are not limited to making money through advertisement or through the sale of newspapers, magazines and cassettes. The real aims are much bigger. One is to maintain pressure on the government to follow the 'desired' policies and to defeat a democratic government not following the diktat of the economic fundamentalists through vituperative and slanderous campaigns against it, and to assist a new political group in ascending the throne by mobilising support for it. Sometimes it also happens that the industrialists are not in unison over the question of support to different political parties. In that case the newspapers, magazines and TV channels controlled or backed by them may support the opposing groups or leaders. But more often, the choices of the whole business-world converge on a single political party or leader. Obviously, the media leaves no stone unturned in building up the image of that party and its leaders. When a government refuses to pursue a market-friendly approach, the news media openly indulge in slanderous portrayal of its ministers; and stories are planted to spoil their images in the eye of public. Even the positive actions of the government are given ugly twists. Any steps taken by the government that are even marginally in favour of the common people and are at the same time detrimental to the interests of the bazar are promptly labelled 'populist'. The fascinating terms like 'populism', 'povertyism', 'minoritysim' and 'casteism' have been invented to describe the policies that are aimed at elevating the life standards of any of the downtrodden segments of society. A political leader who has genuine concern for the masses and loathes the exploiters is presented by the press in the darkest possible colours; he is reviled as backward, retrogressive, rabble-rouser, anti-development and what not. The probity and dedication of a leader impresses the press only till he is supposed to do nothing against the economic fundamentalists. No wonder then that the men of integrity are becoming a rare species in the public life all over the globe; such are the requirements for success in politics that it would be repulsive for any upright man who quivers at the very thought of dealing with the criminals and looters of public money and therefore remains safely confined to his own profession or career.
The press is extremely choosy in reports and articles of various hues. These are always aimed at promoting individualism, sexual freedom, aristocratic lifestyles, capitalistic economics and rightist politics. When the elections approach, the role of media becomes even more notorious. The big industrialists and their minions and cronies hold regular conferences to chart out their strategies. The political choices are clearly spelt out and scrutinised. It is followed by discussion on how to promote specific parties or leaders. The media becomes abuzz with attractive stories that seek to alter the political environment. In the recent past, pre-election analyses have become a favourite tool for the media to further the interests of their political friends. The surveys are so planned so as to give a misplaced account of political sentiment prevailing in the country.
The media has been playing dirty tricks for quite long. In the eighties, the Shah Bano case was blown into a huge controversy that triggered the Muslim reaction who wholeheartedly stood against the supreme court verdict in the case and successfully campaigned to get it reversed through promulgation of Muslim Women Act. The media projected the whole controversy in a way so as to gave the impression that Islam suppressed the fair sex and only the media knew what was good for Muslim women. The Muslim ulama, intellectuals and legal experts had numerous objections to the judgement, many of which were understandable; but their views were brutally trampled upon. The result of the unilateral debate was that Hindus and other non-Muslim communities of India developed a sort of disregard, even contempt for Muslims and their religion. This was promptly utilised by the protagonists of Hindutva to fan hatred against Muslims and then use it in their campaign for the demolition of Babri Mosque where they planned to build a monumental Ramjanambhoomi temple. When the BJP leader, Lal Krishan Advani, mounted on the rath which rolled on the roads of the country, the media turned saffron. Similarly, V.P. Singh who was earlier an epitome of honesty in the minds of the majority of lower and upper middle class people was converted into a despicable villain overnight after his government accepted the Mandal Commission report providing reservation in government jobs for the backward classes. The economic fundamentalists and the media supported by it have always defended the status quo. The Mandalised politics would help those sections of society to prosper that had historically been subservient to the upper castes. The acceptance of Mandal Commission report came as a caveat to the status quoists; the future of their generations was in jeopardy. Such was the threat to their economic and social hegemony that it prompted them to launch a highly abhorre
nt campaign during which a number of students tried to immolate themselves. The press lavished on these unfortunate incidents a highly invidious coverage. What happened in the aftermath of that frenzy is history. The country witnessed brutal polarisation of the masses on the caste and communal grounds. The whole political scenario has since undergone a total metamorphosis.
The media plays the same political games in all the democracies of the world. One objective it has achieved without exception everywhere is that it has succeeded in sweeping all the social issues under the carpet. The matters having no economic significance are no more in discussion. The governments are grilled not for their failure in solving the real issues of life but only for the failures at the economic front; and the failures at the economic front are limited only to the failures related to the interests of market.
Another significant 'contribution' of the media has been its role in driving masses to the markets of all kinds. The
