By Fuad Omar
Journalist - Someone who writes for journals, magazines, newspapers.
Newspapers - Journals which contain news.
As a now-seasoned journalist, I started writing in September 1994
summarising a year of the Indian film industry which ended with a phenomenon
called Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, my aim is to end the
constant onslaught of unintelligent remarks, comments and gossip carried by
these so-called filmi journals and provide the public with an alternative to
the decomposing pieces of rubbish they are currently having the misfortune
of digesting.
I began with articles which provoked thought and opposed what
was being written by every other journal in the name of journalism. These
were merely exercises in gossip and personal vendettas. I thought I could
take on the journalism world and make a difference. That I could end this
tyrant ruling which states that to sell a few copies of a magazine one
should do whatever they can - even sell their soul, destroy someone's
career or create a news story based on an overactive imagination.
My first major foray against the norm was an article entitled 'The Forgotten Hero', written for and about Sanjay Dutt who was at the time in jail, and
this seemed the only way I could as a novice remind people of this gentle
giant who was experiencing tumult and how irrespective of the press' stance
and two faced attitude, he would not be erased from memory. I clearly
remember the impact the article had and the rally of support it conjured up
which favoured gossip-free and serious journalism, which remained true to
the profession and its original aim.
The rest as they say is history. Six years later, there are journalists who
wish to write for the common and intellectual man, offering an alternative
to the trashy tabloid fire which engulfed an industry with no remorse.
Today I was saddened to once again witness what I can only describe as the
death of journalism, pushing the writing industry back three steps, allowing
the journey to come full circle and a new battle to begin.
The latest issue of Movie magazine, which with a title like 'Movie' would be
expected to carry exclusive offerings regarding the film world, reviews and
interviews as well as 'on set' reports, is far from worthy of its title and
more at home in the heap of rubbish which resides thanks to the foul stench
looming throughout of yellow journalism. The cover of the latest issue of
Stardust confidently displays photos of the stars who appear in their gossip
columns but none of their main interviewed actors and actresses. Is the
criteria to appear on a cover now based on how prominently you figure in a
rumour?
How ironic that the very medium which claims to be able to make and break a
star, has in one clear swoop tarnished its own reputation as a purveyor of
serious journalism. Of the many articles contained therein, I am referring
to such insensitive atrocities such as the one which graces the magazine's
cover as well as all the stories in the 'HOT' section. The publication has
finally ended up as nothing more than a gossip-fest based on hearsay,
concocted rumours and marketing ideas which aim to salvage a fledgling sales
history, while holding no regard for anyone's reputation (including their
own) or the damage they could do to decent people whose career's pay their
wages.
Another case in question is responsibility. We have over recent months
constantly read reports of the Salman-Aishwarya affair and heard almost
every fabricated rumour about the couple possible. And that too in the
dailies in Mumbai. News-Paper or Gossip-Paper, you decide. The bottom line
is that two individuals who share any relationship or indeed any single
individual should not be subjected to such slander and deconstruction of
character. Would anyone want to read of their every move in a newspaper? One
of the industry's leading actresses has taken legal action against one of
the print world's most vindictive gossip-glossies for maligning her image
over a period of months. Thankfully the case continues and I hope this
action serves as a reminder to journalists everywhere of the responsibility
that comes with what they write.
Someone once told me that the Indian film press relies on the star's sins to
get their daily bread. Through questioning and faulting others they fill
their pockets, happy knowing this is their idea of 'good, hard work'. If
these so-called journalists only delved deep into the roots of their
profession they would find they are not only destroying a once-reputable and
skilled art, but are also themselves contributing to what can be seen as a chain
which begins with rumour and gossip and ends with ruin. The Ouroborous which
resembles a snake eating its own tail comes to mind as chaos and disorder
seems to prevail when we turn on our fellow people for the sake of a story.
It is a wonder that morals exist at all in such a society which is built on
false stories and absurd fantasies, which rely so heavily on damning someone
whose only crime is to be part of the entertainment field and a public
figure.
While studying media I was taught about media power and how with all power comes responsibility, and how the media can tell its audience what to think about, while not what to think. There seems no responsibility evident in the above named publication nor in any other journals who are following similar fates. The public have clearly made clear their intent by shunning the latest issue which does not even entice the casual reader as it creates an image of itself as writing based on marketing strategies to sell more magazines with no real care for any falsehoods
created in the process, labelling them as an occupational hazard of being is in the limelight.
Today the industry comes full circle with the return of the filth being
written by so called journalists, who betray their very title with writing void of any truth and merely presenting fantasies conceived in their minds, only emerging as evidence-free fairy tales, which pen their own epitaph announcing the death of journalism.
|
