When talk shows spit bigotry and journalism is a chatter shop

*Click the Title above to view complete article on https://www.nation.com.pk/.

As a nation we are moving towards reading the headline and bashing the other who supports the same headline in a different way, not because we are opinionated, but because we are uninformed

2017-07-03T22:12:23+05:00 Remshay Ahmed

Being an aspiring journalist I didn’t want to restrict myself to only writing.Like many non-camera shy people, I also wanted to be on the television interviewing some very important people. However, to my dismay I soon realised that the television talk shows are probably one of the worst sources of getting news. This is because they are mere chatter shops where people come to exhibit what bigotry is and the magnitude of information exploitation that is humanly possible.

This information exploitation comprises of the need to twist and turn truth into a rather fanciful representation that the masses can actually pay to buy. Our talk shows have hence become nothing short of sensational soap operas where the ‘actors’ do everything in their might to not talk about the thing that is being asked. Like these soap operas these talk shows have elaborate characters that are carefully chalked out; their particular way of conversing, dressing up and stressing particular points (read all points) is nothing short of exuberant. From hair gelled back and sprayed, to back combing and curls, the little nude pink and bright red lips, the talk show host/ess are elaborate and detailed. But not too detailed when news is being discussed. Nobody talks about the matter for which the show has been scheduled, rather to point out the fallacies of one another and to use all agencies necessary to divert attention away from the matter.This is because as a nation we have grown to rebut what the other is saying. These talk show hosts are a true representation of what we are as a nation; people not listening to reflect but listening to respond.

Had our 24/7 news talk shops decided to actually converse and discuss on pressing matters then the situation would have been very different. Our people who turn on the news for entertainment would probably not have done so, various news channels would have stopped operating, we would have gone back to the time when there was only one channel, PTV, which had only a handful of news reporters who were eloquent and profound in their knowledge of the matter. Perhaps the situation would not have been so dire. With the increase in Information Technology and the rise of social media where the e-newspaper is more widely read and people have an ever increased access to news stories; the quality of news stories being produced is suffering. Newspapers/news channels have to produce a set number of stories per hour, irrespective of the same news stories being produced and published by various other news channels as well. Our journalism is expanding and suffering. Albeit these news stories aren’t as sensational as they are found in their counterparts on news channels, they are short of information and perspective that they are set to provide.

As a nation we are moving towards reading the headline and bashing the other who supports the same headline in a different way, not because we are opinionated, but because we are uninformed. Barely ever have I seen anyone anywhere detailing how the Annual Budget Report is to be read and understood but people somehow always end up discussing how the tax reforms are inefficient, development funds inadequate, and military expenditure alarmingly high. The adjectives, inefficient, inadequate and alarmingly high are placed differently by different groups depending on who they heard (read which channel they heard).

It took me four years of Bachelors in Economics to familiarise myself with what this budget was about and how to understand each of the economic determinants. The time and effort by my various instructors and professors is nowhere to be found in the news mediums that are all the rage nowadays. With the widespread use of news mediums, we are learning more ways to rebut what the other is saying rather than providing a factual account of how the other could be right.

I have spent a great many times listening to discussions on politics, political reform, political agenda; everything political at various weddings, eid parties, milads and even funerals to understand that people are opinionated and yet uninformed. Their particular news channel/newspaper/ news source is a mighty god that is only directing them towards a particular direction without instilling in them the drive to discuss. In my four years as a student of both Economics and Political Science I met various people who were always prepared to carry out a discourse on matters of both Eco-Pol magnitude. In my four years, most of these students were eager to put forward their opinion with a fanciful might and listen to the opinions of others with the same level of dedication. Not because of the elite education that was being imparted to us but because the first thing knowledge of discourse teaches us is to listen intently to reflect.

We were mostly louder than the talk shops but we were also more insightful than the gell-haired news anchorpersons/political analysts. Of course I am not bragging about my elite education and neither am I comparing a mere classroom of amateurs to politically motivated individuals, I am merely describing the possibilities to which we all can aspire to. To learn and reflect, to not become a nation that needs a background music to decipher what is going on and not to rely on different agents of sensationalism as an added bonus to learning.

As a well-informed nation who have endless access to various forms of news sources, our aim should be to listen and reflect. Our news channels/newspapers/news anchors/news analysts should be sacred and respected and that is only possible after sensationalism is dropped and our resources are utilised for reflection.

View More News