COMMENTS

Isn;t this one of those general non-specific posts that we keep reading?  Moderator/admin - time to take this off.

Srivathsa

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

The way out is to vote with your feet, or rather your eyes. Stop watching news on television, stop reading the so called "news"papers and save yourself some precious time every day. And log on to Praja where you can have more interactive and intelligent discussions and spend that time usefully instead :)

If enough of us start doing it, the system will eventually clean itself. You definitely dont need them in ANY way, they however need you to exist.

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

Oh yes, forgot to mention that the original post here is not using the right words - there is nobody to be "tamed" here. Knowing Mayank's own biased opinions etc (from past and moderated posts here), he is thinking curtailed freedom and regulations. Imposing regulations usually means running with an ideologists rule-book.

You and me are on this tangent of making media do more to play the part that is missing in our public space - true public auditing and accounting with broad coverage on the ground.

If someone can write a better worded, and example filled lead post, we can try to restart this discussion.

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

...will not succomb to the 'call of the commerce' at any time in future.

I would prefer a convergence where a newspaper owned Praja as an extension, or the other way around(if SB is rich or has VC friends). There has to be synergies between the two though. Just thinking aloud.

The newspaper media is plain stupid and live in the dark ages. They dont know how to come out of their limitations and the most they do is put their papers up online and a ton of ads in between. This is reactive thinking. They dont understand how to leverage convergence. 

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

idontspam, will try answer you first, will jump to the last question, which is what you wanted to get at I think.

1) Why do you assume that they all have to carry the same story? Right now, I would say that there are a lot of uncovered stories out there, so many that there needn't be this race to cover the same story in in "my different way". The assumption you want to attack is that most media thinks that only certain types of stories can "sell". Everyday stories, daily hassles, local stuff, whats happening around the street - not that all this type of stuff is not covered. But perhaps the best brains are put to analyzing global warming, sub-prime mortgage, obama's policies etc, while the stuff you and me deal with everyday is left to the freshies out of mass communications and NMIMS like colleges.

Wonder if it has become like a funny circle where people who have the power to shape the trends are in the business of following the trends.

2) Lets say above is not true, and that there are more media houses than stories out there. So, there is a need to provide different "perspectives". Even then, the job I would expect the media to do is to report on various "perspectives" out there in the society, and not supply new ones of their own. There is a slight difference.

However, yes, when you are in the business of selling anything, market forces certain things on you. And media can certainly hide behind that excuse.

Suhas - you do need them. The best ecosystem perhaps is the one where big media houses are feeding on hundreds of Praja like entities around the country. Big papers = car makers, and Praja type things = supplier of parts, the ancilliary industry. Such a system could ensure better "connection", coverage, access to more . This could also be cost effective for the big media houses as some basic "bubbling up" would already have happened before things reach them.

But, media houses first have to realize that this thing is complimentry and not competitive. Just last month, a senior journalists from Indian Express was making fun of "citizen journalists" (he spoke at graduation ceremony or similar at NMIMS Kengeri). His point was (quoting from DH) - "show me citizen docotrs, citizen engineers ... there are no such people". So, naturally, there can be no citizen journalists, this was his line of thinking. How dumb and ill designed a logic, hah.

When people can get to connect directly with the sources, journalists may start getting regarded as unwanted middlemen. I am being more harsh than I should be there, but the point is that Internet (people to people connectivity) would bring this pressure to add more value besides simple conveying or fudging the messages and information. Media needs to be ready.

And they have about 7-8 years, not more :)

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments