“Paid News” : How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy :
: The Background:
News reports that are printed in publications or broadcast on television channels are meant to provide information that is not only of interest to the public at large but information that is supposed to be truthful or factually correct and at the same time, balanced, objective, fair and neutral. This is what clearly sets apart such information described as news from either opinions expressed in editorial articles or, more importantly, advertisements or commercials that are paid for by corporate entities, governments, organizations or individuals. When the distinction between news and advertisements start blurring, when advertisements double up as news that have been paid for, or when “news” is published or broadcast in favour of a particular politician or a political party by selling editorial space, the reader or the viewer is misled or duped into believing that an advertisement or sponsored feature is a “news” story that is truthful, fair and objective.
This report on “paid news” prepared by a Sub-Committee of two members of the Press Council of India tracks the blurring boundaries between news and advertisements or “advertorials” and highlights the efforts made by certain individuals and representatives of organizations who have painstakingly chronicled the selling of editorial space for money, especially during the April-May 2009 general elections in the country and also during the September-October 2009 elections to the state assemblies of Maharashtra and Haryana.
This report also documents the denials that have been issued by representatives of media organizations and political personalities against whom specific allegations of corruption and malpractice have been levelled and against whom a considerable volume of circumstantial evidence has been acquired, collated, documented and presented before the Press Council of India. Moreover, this report summarizes the depositions that were made by over 50 individuals and representatives of various organizations (including media organizations, journalists’ unions and political parties) before the members of the Press Council in New Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad and through written letters and representations and also through electronic mail.
The media industry in India and elsewhere has become increasingly difficult to regulate due to several reasons: technological developments, the globalisation of media conglomerates and the trend of certain suppliers and creators of news (public relations practitioners, advertisers and interest groups) getting closely involved with the working of media organisations. The dynamics of the media industry aside, the sheer extent of influence exercised by the media over the public at large is reason enough for subjecting the ethical practices and business activities of media organisations to critical scrutiny.
The concepts of democracy and of the market are both built on the principle of individual choice, but there is a danger that those who have accumulated wealth in the market will use it to exert influence over decisions that should be governed by democratic principles. Media institutions face particular dilemmas because these organisations represent a key element of an effective democracy while being, for the most part, commercial entities seeking success in the market by maximising profits. The commercial activities and market interests of media institutions might distort the role they play in the formation of public opinion and consequently in upholding principles and norms of democracy. Favourable coverage for those in positions of power and authority by the media, for commercial reasons, might influence the decisions made by these people.
A widespread problem is the attempt to influence public debate through the purchase of advertising space and the purchase of favourable editorial comment. Although some owners and editors of media companies try to erect a firewall – or a “Chinese Wall” – between journalists or content creators/producers, on the one hand, and buyers and sellers of advertising space, on the other, in some newspapers, magazines and television channels, this wall has too many convenient access doors. Most journalists are employees, increasingly, of large companies or organisations whose primary aim is to maximise profits and returns to shareholders. Insofar as journalists’ duties are in part defined by their role in corporate organisations, most of the ethical dilemmas they face begin with the inherent conflict between the individual’s role as a journalist providing independent information to the public and his or her employer’s quest for profit.
Corruption in the mass media in India and in other countries of the world is as old as the media itself. If there is corruption in society, it would be unrealistic to expect the media to be free of corruption. India is the world’s largest democracy. A vibrant and diverse mass media is an important pillar of democracy in this country. The independence of the media facilitates adherence to democratic norms. Article 19 of the Constitution of India confers the right to freedom of speech and expression to all citizens of the country and to the media as well. In recent years, corruption in the Indian media has gone way beyond the corruption of individual journalists and media organizations: from “planting” information and views in lieu of favours received in cash or kind, to more institutionalized and organized forms of corruption wherein publishers of newspapers and owners of television channels receive funds for publishing or broadcasting information in favour of particular individuals or corporate entities that is disguised as “news”.
What follows is first, an outline, and then, detailed accounts of such corrupt practices in sections of the media in India.












vivek
July 15, 2010 at 9:41 pm
जागरण के मालिकों-मैनेजरों शर्म से डूब मरो…. पढ़ लो क्या लिखा है इस रिपोर्ट में…. निशिकांत ठाकुर ने तो नाक कटा दी है. ये हिस्सा जरूर पढ़ें- ”In a formal letter handed over to the Press Council of India on January 10, 2010, Shri Nishikant Thakur, Chief General Manager, Jagran Prakashan Ltd., claimed that the controversy relating to “paid news” was “nothing but rumours spread by lost candidates in frustration”. Describing the allegations as “frivolous” and “factually” incorrect, Shri Thakur claimed that he “could say with certainty that no editor of a reputed newspaper in the country is distorting news for money”. He added that amount spent on “publicity material” in newspapers is “marginal” in comparison to the total expenses incurred by candidates standing for elections.
Shri Thakur claimed that the ceilings of expenditure laid down by the Election Commission of India were “unrealistic” and “out of tune with reality”. Further, he claimed that attempts by candidates to influence individual reports “in the rush” of election coverage could go “undetected by the editorial board” of the concerned newspaper. He suggests that there should be “state funding” of elections, that the Election Commission of India should “implement appropriate measures” to verify expenses incurred by candidates and also that there should be “inner party democracy” in political parties.
Shri Thakur argues that the right of the citizen to get “un-polluted information” needs to be balanced by “the rights of the media to conduct its business in an economically viable manner which is also guaranteed by the Constitution of India subject to permissible legal restrictions”. He adds that the press has the right to “project (the) good achievements of (a) particular candidate” and concludes with the assertion that what is required are electoral reforms, systemic correction and not merely “limb operation”. ”
Dilip Dugar
July 16, 2010 at 6:52 am
This is a wonderful report by press council.Bhadas has also done great job by publishing this report.
Anuj
July 16, 2010 at 7:47 am
Yashwant jee, Prabhash jee ke nam se bani website http://www.prabhashjoshi.in par kal ye report sarwajanik hui hai, kam se kam iska ullekh to kar dete.
anshu
July 16, 2010 at 7:53 am
पैसे के बदले खबर पर जोशी की मुहिम का नतीजा रहा कि प्रेस काउंसिल की ओर से गठित टीम ने 72 पेज की रपट दी है. जो देश भर की हालत उजागर करती है. लेकिन बड़े मीडिया घरानों के दबाव में दूसरी 12 सदस्यीय टीम बनी जिसने महज आठ पेज में रपट दी है
RAKESH SHARMA, KURUKSHETRA
July 17, 2010 at 9:22 am
YASHWANT JI JHOOTH BOLNE KI BHI EK HADH HOTI HAI. DAINIK JAGRAN NE TO YEH HADH TOD DI HAI. JO LOG NETAON PER ILZAAM LAGA RAHEN HAI WAHI LOG VASOOLI ABHIYAAN KE MUKHIYA THE. COMPANY PER PAID NEWS KA ILZAAM IS LIYE NAHI LAG SAKTA KYOKIN COMPANY KE ACCOUNT MAIN PAISE JAMAA KARANE KI BAJAAY MAALIK CHUPCHAP SAARA MAAL APNE GHAR UDAA LE GAYE. IS VASOOLI KE HUM MAADHYAM RAHEN HAIN, ISLIYE CHORI OR SEENAZORI KI ISS ADAA KO DEKH AB CHUP RAHNA MUSHKIL HAI. AAJ SHAAM TAK IS JHUTH SE PARDAA UDTHANE KE LIYE AAPKE PASS PUKHTA PAMAAN HONGE. LOKSABHA CHUNAAV MAIN FARIDABAD (HARYANA) SE 13 LAKH OR VIDHANSABHA CHUNAAV MAIN 37.75 LAKH RUPYEE PAID NEWS KE TOUR PER VASOOLE GAYE THE. COMPANY KE AACOUNT MAIN YEH PAISE JAMAA NAHIN HAIN.
RAKESH SHARMA, KURUKSHETRA
94677-66607
[email protected]