There is a report on the Worst Journalists of India, 2014.
I am posting excerpts below.
Mean while,one should remember Media is also a part of the Society in which we live.
Just as they used to show in films about Judges as the ones beyond Human failings of corruption,which is not a fact as we know at least now, we , unfortunately still believe that the Journalists are as pure as driven snow and are beyond corruption and partisan views.
The fact is they are so , so are we.
Burkha Dutt
Under the circumstances, I do not follow or listen to one Journalist or another.
I watch all of them, independently verify stories from different sources and arrive at a conclusion on my own.
The perception that some are worst or good is a subjective .
Let me leave it at that.
But to expect some journalist to be of the standard of say GK.Reddy, even he was biased, is too much to expect especially after Rai tapes implicating Burkha Dutt, Vir Sanghvi, (Check for audio under Radia Tapes)
However I have a few impressions of some Journalists.
Arnab Goswamy, though he is overly aggressive, forms opinions for himself , wants others merely to endorse him , by and large is as independent as The channel allows him.
Karan Thapar,Arrasive to the point of repugnancy, yet he makes the people whom he interviews squirm and generally make an ass of themselves.
In the process, in both these Journalists cases, the people spill the beans.
That’s it for me.
Now to the worst Journalist of the year 2014.
You would find most of them to be tainted.
”
10. S. Varadarajan (New entrant)
Till recently S. Varadarajan or “Varadabhai” as I fondly call him, was the editor of ‘The Hindu’ which is famous for its anti-Hindu articles. Lately, Varadabhai is a TV panellist who helps to continue pounding the redundant theory that Modi abetted the 2002 riots. He came out strongly in support of Rahul Gandhi’s bogus allegations on January 27 with Arnab Goswami. Incidentally, RG stated journalists told him Gujarat govt was involved in the riots. I guess RG just missed naming Varadabhai directly. Peddling opinions as news articles was one of the reasons the anti-Hindu claimed he was sacked from the newspaper. The most hilarious article carried in the The Hindu under Varadabhai was one which more or less claimed the “masculine pose” by Swami Vivekananda was one of the causes of rapes in India. So if Varadabhai ever strikes that pose I don’t want to venture a guess on what’s on his mind.
KK stays where he was last time. He retains his old habits of hate-RSS, hate-Hindutva and anything remotely connected with BJP. Of course, most would remember he’s also a former speech writer for Congress. Lately, he’s an “acting” defence lawyer for the AAP party. Following the anarchic acts of Arvind Kejriwal & Co. outside Rail Bhawan in January 2014 Ketkar quickly defended them by telling CNN-IBN India has always been anarchic. He recalled events like the Ayodhya movement to defend Kejriwal’s stupidity. KK has a rare distinction though. He’s one of those media heroes who has been provided police protection following police complaints and threats for abusing a certain caste in Maharashtra. And that contempt is because he hated a certain politician. There’s also a case relating to defamatory articlesagainst the RSS and also abusing judiciary. It’s unlikely the man will change. A hate-filled heart remains the same.
8. Nikhil Wagle (New entrant)
Frankly, this media moron is in the bad news not so much for journalism but for his filthy tweets and some allegations by one Nitin Rane. I haven’t watched him on IBN Lokmat nor have I had the misfortune to read anything he may have ever written. Like some others in this list he is most known for peddling of untruths. His most stupid outburst was against the middle class people. Hetweeted in March 2012: “I am surprised by the low IQ of middle class in this country. Their understanding of politics is so dismal that they vote BJP. God save!” In another tweet he brazenly claims “Not a single PM of India has defended communal riots directly or indirectly. If @narendramodi dreams to become PM he should know this!” Of course, this Congress crony apparently backs what Rajiv Gandhi said justifying killing of Sikhs with a great tree falling. While Wagle often screams about corruption, readers and voters are quite aware of his bosses being alleged to be involved in the Coal scam. I don’t see any reason why Wagle why will ever move out of this list.
The “Larger picture” has made progress and has gone up the list. If she is angling for a permanent spot among India’s worst then she’s doing just the right things. With a permanent scowl on her face and permanent contempt for some panellists, her show called “Left, right, centre” is nothing more than filler on NDTV. Sort of bench-warming for passing the “buck”. Nidhi delivered one of the most shameful episodes on Indian TV in her mindless rant against a British MP for inviting Narendra Modi to speak in the British parliament. She even claimed she had the right to “question” SC judgements. If you watch the video of that shameless spectacle Nidhi mentions “controversial/controversy” as many times as Rahul Gandhi mentions empowerment or systems in his speeches. A thorough disgrace to journalism.
6. Karan Thapar (6)
India’s only “bow-tie” journalist (he often reminds me of thebow-tie killer). He has earned the nickname ‘The Tool’ after infamously ridiculing PA Sangma, the presidential candidate, of being a tool in the hands of some political parties. His standard pose is the dangerous “masculine” pose that The Hindu warns us of as the cause of rapes. Often also called a Paki-Tool, KT sort of proved it when he was handed a quote of Nawaz Sharif about friendship with India. This quote was planted by the Pak news agencies after Sharif became PM and KT grandly discussed the “hand of friendship” on his show. It just turned out the statement was made by Sharif to none other than KT earlier (before Sharif became PM again) and the Pakis made KT a “useful idiot” to peddle that old statement in the midst of LOC violations. The other thing KT is fond of is making others (like Sibal, Jaitley) sit in his chair and play Devil’s Advocate and pay him compliments. His 2007 statement hoping for a “sudden removal of Modi” may hold more interest now in many quarters.
5. Rajdeep Sardesai (3)
If Rajdeep has fallen one place it’s only because a bigger disgrace has made a grand debut in this list. “Point taken, fair enough” is now the standard defence RS offers when zapped by a panellist (much like Nidhi’s “larger picture” diversion). From defending Robert Vadra and the Gandhis, RS is now seen as grand campaigner for the AAP party. The number of interviews and promotions of Arvind Kejriwal on CNN-IBN and the whole IBN group would stand as proof. His most famous event in the past two years would be the incompetent interview with Modi on the bus floor. Modi even, deliberately or inadvertently, called him “Sar-ka-dard-esai”. Under RS the IBN group has hit rock bottom with many employees being sacked and the channel hitting new lows in TRP. Quite unfortunate considering CNN-IBN does have some of the best journalists on TV. Rajdeep’s judgement and prudence can be measured by the fact that most of his IOTY nominees have ended up as disasters. If the “top” is bad then no number of good journalists can shore up a failing channel.
KT: So in other words you buckled under media pressure?
JJ: No, not at all. It was misunderstood by many people. It was not an anti-conversion law, it was an anti forcible conversion law.
KT: But it was misunderstood for almost two years. You could have repealed it earlier, you didn’t. You only repealed it after you failed to win seats.
JJ: It has nothing to do with that. If you insist on giving this interpretation I can’t help it.
KT: What about the…
JJ: (Intervenes) As to why the media is biased, that is because I am a self-made woman. Politics has for long been a male bastion. Mrs. Indira Gandhi changed all that, but still you must remember that Mrs. Indira Gandhi had all the inbuilt advantages. She had the advantage of being born in the…
KT: (Intervenes) You’re saying that media picks on you?
JJ: I do think so.
KT: Because you are a woman?
JJ: You are not allowing me to finish anything I want to say.
Investigative Journalism has its limits, Media Must realize.
Story:
The BBC risked the lives of students by using them as a ‘human shield’ for a controversial Panorama journalist and his film crew, it was claimed yesterday.
The undercover team travelled with ten students from the London School of Economics to North Korea last month. Had the journalists been discovered, the whole group would have faced arrest, interrogation and possible detention.
Parents and university officials claim the students – the youngest of whom was only 18 – were ‘deliberately misled’ by the BBC and have called on the broadcaster to apologise and drop the Panorama documentary, due to be aired tonight.
The students were invited on the trip via an LSE club, only to learn much later it had been organised by Panorama as a cover for its investigation.
Journalist John Sweeney insisted the students had all agreed to enter the rogue Communist state with him, but admitted he withheld some details of the trip on the advice of BBC risk assessors.
The LSE said its students were not given enough information to give their consent and accused the BBC of taking unacceptable risks at a time when sabre-rattling by North Korea had already raised tensions with the West.
Alex Peters-Day, general secretary of LSE Students’ Union said students and the university had been ‘manipulated’.
‘I think the trip was organised by the BBC as a ruse to get into North Korea and that’s disgraceful,’ she said. ‘They have used students essentially as a human shield in this situation.’
Three of the students have complained, the university says. One said they were not told about key details of the subterfuge until en route for Pyongyang.
Students have since received ‘threatening’ letters from North Korean authorities and one parent has complained in writing to new BBC director-general Lord Hall that their child was put in danger.
The parent wrote: ‘The methods adopted potentially endangered a number of students who believed they were participating in an organised student tour. I am outraged that in this case the BBC, without obtaining “informed consent”… deceived, used and endangered these students to obtain a story from North Korea.’
The row could prove embarrassing for Lord Hall, appointed after his predecessor George Entwistle quit in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal and the botched Newsnight report which led to Lord McAlpine being wrongly identified as a paedophile.
A producer for Panorama resigned earlier this month over claims the programme tried to bribe a security consultant to reveal information about a property developer.
The LSE said it was not given any warning about the BBC’s plans until last week, after the group returned. It said the deception had put the students in danger and had jeopardised the safety of its academics working in other high-risk countries.
The students volunteered for the trip through the Grimshaw Club, a student society linked to the LSE’s department of international relations. Sweeney’s wife Tomiko Newson, an LSE graduate, had organised a group tour of North Korea with the club in 2012 and students were told she was organising this year’s trip.
A senior BBC executive said that it was worth risking students’ lives by sending an undercover reporter with them on a trip to North Korea for a controversial documentary.
Ceri Thomas, the corporation’s head of news planning, said the decision to go ahead with the airing of tonight’s programme went ‘right to the top’ as he rejected claims that students from the London School of Economics had been forced in to taking unacceptable risks during the investigation.
Yesterday it was claimed that the corporation used the students as a ‘human shield’ for a Panorama journalist and his film crew.
Wiki leaks may,nay,has embarrassed the Governments the world over,yet the fact remains that it has exposed the hypocrisy and double-dealing diplomatic non-sense.
The muted reactions from the Governments speaks for itself for the skullduggery being practiced by all.
Internet and Wiki leaks have proved one thing ,that the world is really one and people need to be told how they are being manipulated by their own.
Wiki leaks is really the Fourth Estate in its real sense
Story:
WikiLeaks is a not-for-profit media organisation. Our goal is to bring important news and information to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to our journalists (our electronic drop box). One of our most important activities is to publish original source material alongside our news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth. We are a young organisation that has grown very quickly, relying on a network of dedicated volunteers around the globe. Since 2007, when the organisation was officially launched, WikiLeaks has worked to report on and publish important information. We also develop and adapt technologies to support these activities.
WikiLeaks has sustained and triumphed against legal and political attacks designed to silence our publishing organisation, our journalists and our anonymous sources. The broader principles on which our work is based are the defence of freedom of speech and media publishing, the improvement of our common historical record and the support of the rights of all people to create new history. We derive these principles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In particular, Article 19 inspires the work of our journalists and other volunteers. It states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. We agree, and we seek to uphold this and the other Articles of the Declaration.
1.2 How WikiLeaks works
WikiLeaks has combined high-end security technologies with journalism and ethical principles. Like other media outlets conducting investigative journalism, we accept (but do not solicit) anonymous sources of information. Unlike other outlets, we provide a high security anonymous drop box fortified by cutting-edge cryptographic information technologies. This provides maximum protection to our sources. We are fearless in our efforts to get the unvarnished truth out to the public. When information comes in, our journalists analyse the material, verify it and write a news piece about it describing its significance to society. We then publish both the news story and the original material in order to enable readers to analyse the story in the context of the original source material themselves. Our news stories are in the comfortable presentation style of Wikipedia, although the two organisations are not otherwise related. Unlike Wikipedia, random readers can not edit our source documents.
As the media organisation has grown and developed, WikiLeaks been developing and improving a harm minimisation procedure. We do not censor our news, but from time to time we may remove or significantly delay the publication of some identifying details from original documents to protect life and limb of innocent people.
We accept leaked material in person and via postal drops as alternative methods, although we recommend the anonymous electronic drop box as the preferred method of submitting any material. We do not ask for material, but we make sure that if material is going to be submitted it is done securely and that the source is well protected. Because we receive so much information, and we have limited resources, it may take time to review a source’s submission.
We also have a network of talented lawyers around the globe who are personally committed to the principles that WikiLeaks is based on, and who defend our media organisation.
1.3 Why the media (and particularly Wiki leaks) is important
Publishing improves transparency, and this transparency creates a better society for all people. Better scrutiny leads to reduced corruption and stronger democracies in all society’s institutions, including government, corporations and other organisations. A healthy, vibrant and inquisitive journalistic media plays a vital role in achieving these goals. We are part of that media.
Scrutiny requires information. Historically, information has been costly in terms of human life, human rights and economics. As a result of technical advances particularly the internet and cryptography – the risks of conveying important information can be lowered. In its landmark ruling on the Pentagon Papers, the US Supreme Court ruled that “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.” We agree.
We believe that it is not only the people of one country that keep their own government honest, but also the people of other countries who are watching that government through the media.
In the years leading up to the founding of WikiLeaks, we observed the world’s publishing media becoming less independent and far less willing to ask the hard questions of government, corporations and other institutions. We believed this needed to change.
WikiLeaks has provided a new model of journalism. Because we are not motivated by making a profit, we work cooperatively with other publishing and media organisations around the globe, instead of following the traditional model of competing with other media. We don’t hoard our information; we make the original documents available with our news stories. Readers can verify the truth of what we have reported themselves. Like a wire service, WikiLeaks reports stories that are often picked up by other media outlets. We encourage this. We believe the world’s media should work together as much as possible to bring stories to a broad international readership.
1.4 How WikiLeaks verifies its news stories
We assess all news stories and test their veracity. We send a submitted document through a very detailed examination a procedure. Is it real? What elements prove it is real? Who would have the motive to fake such a document and why? We use traditional investigative journalism techniques as well as more modern rtechnology-based methods. Typically we will do a forensic analysis of the document, determine the cost of forgery, means, motive, opportunity, the claims of the apparent authoring organisation, and answer a set of other detailed questions about the document. We may also seek external verification of the document For example, for our release of the Collateral Murder video, we sent a team of journalists to Iraq to interview the victims and observers of the helicopter attack. The team obtained copies of hospital records, death certificates, eye witness statements and other corroborating evidence supporting the truth of the story. Our verification process does not mean we will never make a mistake, but so far our method has meant that WikiLeaks has correctly identified the veracity of every document it has published.
Publishing the original source material behind each of our stories is the way in which we show the public that our story is authentic. Readers don’t have to take our word for it; they can see for themselves. In this way, we also support the work of other journalism organisations, for they can view and use the original documents freely as well. Other journalists may well see an angle or detail in the document that we were not aware of in the first instance. By making the documents freely available, we hope to expand analysis and comment by all the media. Most of all, we want readers know the truth so they can make up their own minds.
1.5 The people behind WikiLeaks
WikiLeaks is a project of the Sunshine Press. It’s probably pretty clear by now that WikiLeaks is not a front for any intelligence agency or government despite a rumour to that effect. This rumour was started early in WikiLeaks’ existence, possibly by the intelligence agencies themselves. WikiLeaks is an independent global group of people with a long standing dedication to the idea of a free press and the improved transparency in society that comes from this. The group includes accredited journalists, software programmers, network engineers, mathematicians and others.
To determine the truth of our statements on this, simply look at the evidence. By definition, intelligence agencies want to hoard information. By contrast, WikiLeaks has shown that it wants to do just the opposite. Our track record shows we go to great lengths to bring the truth to the world without fear or favour.
The great American president Thomas Jefferson once observed that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. We believe the journalistic media plays a key role in this vigilance.
You must be logged in to post a comment.