It’s time for reflection\, not prediction

FROM THE READERS’ EDITOR | Readers' Editor

It’s time for reflection, not prediction

more-in

Journalists must think about their role in the normalisation of extremist behaviour rather than focusing on exit polls

It is important for the readers, who are now being subjected to an avalanche of exit polls, to look at the outcome of the Australian elections and take these numbers with a pinch of salt. Contrary to the predictions of multiple exit polls suggesting a narrow Labour win for the first time in six years, the ruling conservative coalition led by Prime Minister Scott Morrison has managed to retain power in Australia.

Why do I prefer in-depth reportage to pre-poll and post-poll surveys? A good field reporter bears witness to developments and records facts and diverse opinions. The reports that stay with us are not those that are centred around a single source, but those that painstakingly bring together facts culled from multiple sources. In the case of poll surveys, there seems to be no consensus as yet on the methodology, the ideal sample size, the right mix of qualitative and quantitative analysis, and the formula for converting the vote share to the number of seats in the first-past-the-post system. In 2003, the Brookings Institution carried an insightful piece, “Polling & Public Opinion: The good, the bad, and the ugly”, which listed out the limitations in poll surveys in homogenous societies like the U.S. These factors get further complicated in India’s heterogeneous polity.

A descriptive report may not give a precise idea of the final electoral outcome, but it does provide an insight into the issues that affect the people and helps to contextualise the campaign. If the act of verification differentiates journalism from other forms of communication, it is the ability to enforce accountability that distinguishes journalism from stenography or propaganda. According to the Lettre Ulysses Award for the Art of Reportage, “good journalism interprets events by contextualising elements such as historical background and causality, presenting readers with material for a more enlightened interpretation of world affairs”.

In the run-up to the 2014 Lok Sabha election, I wrote two columns, “Not being prescriptive” (April 7, 2014) and “Election coverage: Going beyond passions” (April 14, 2014). In those, I celebrated the Indian media, unlike the Western media, for not endorsing particular political parties, and suggested a form of journalism which is layered and nuanced, and which tries to capture complex Indian realities in their totality.

Whatever be the final composition of the 17th Lok Sabha, there are some disturbing questions that journalists must ask of their profession. Has the media created space for the furthering of hate speech? Has journalism done enough to arrest the spread of misinformation? What has been the role of the media in the normalisation of extremist behaviour by fringe groups? In the U.S., there is an intense debate about the role of the media. Lois Beckett, who covers gun policy, criminal justice and the far-right in the U.S. for The Guardian, came up with a searing piece titled, “How leftwing media focus on far-right groups is helping to normalise hate”. She says that the endless debates on how to cover the “alt right”, a fractured far-right movement of racists, misogynists and anti-Semites that greeted U.S. President Donald Trump’s victory with euphoria, without “normalising” the true extremism of Mr. Trump and his allies have had the opposite outcome.

Questions that will haunt the media

Since 2014, the normalisation of extremism in India has been on the rise. I would like to know what went on in the minds of journalists who reported the nomination of Pragya Singh Thakur as the BJP’s Bhopal candidate and her subsequent remarks on Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin Nathuram Godse. What was the pushback when the Minister of State for External Affairs, General (retired) V.K. Singh, called journalists “presstitutes”? Margaret Sullivan, the media columnist for The Washington Post, said that “Trump won’t stop coining nasty nicknames for his foes — but the media must stop amplifying them”. What has been the Indian response to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s mocking reference to the “Khan Market Gang” in his interview to The Indian Express?

These are questions that will haunt the Indian media in the long run, and not the variable numbers thrown up by the exit polls.

readerseditor@thehindu.co.in

Next Story