Media's hidden skeletons

Charges of sexual assault against Tarun Tejpal bring to light how such cases are not isolated in nature

The brutal rape and murder of Jyoti Singh, the Delhi gang rape victim, has changed something within us women forever. It’s difficult to put a finger on it (pun not intended), but the shift is evident. The episode has stirred something very deep, pushing many of us to come out and narrate personal stories of abuse, assault and violation. From Mumbai to New York, women in media and outside have come out and written about their humiliating experiences. Remaining silent comes at a price. All the women who have remained silent about abuse will unfortunately relive their experiences each time such a new episode is reported.

But the good news is that episodes like the Delhi rape case and the latest one involving Tehelka's Tarun Tejpal are giving a lot more women courage to come out and speak of their experiences without fearing consequences. These men out there have to be named and shamed in the worst possible way because they have gotten away with it for too long. The more these cases become public, chances are that some of the men out there of Mr Tejpal’s ilk will hopefully think twice before taking their chances with other women because someone else may have the courage to do what this young girl has done. 

 

 

The Tarun Tejpal episode has brought back a raft of unpleasant memories for me too. Despite the years going by, it’s impossible to forget the violation of personal dignity and the feel of unwanted hands. Media is full of such sordid episodes. The bigger the organisation, the greater the clout of such individuals, and the brazenness with which they operate is shocking. Several years ago (yes, I am deliberately being obtuse here), I remember reporting one such “Molester” to the Editor. The first reaction I got was cold rage. I was made to feel like the offender who was cooking up a story to implicate the “boss”. I was asked if I could prove that I was actually being molested each time I went into the cabin late at night to get news pages cleared. This incidentally should have been proof enough because resident editors didn't wait for the edition to close late into the night. I was asked whether I was the only one or there were others who were being harassed too. When I said that I wasn’t sure, I was asked why was I the only one to face such groping. At this point I had to say that I wasn't the only one but I was not sure if others would have the courage to speak out. I was asked to give phone numbers of other women who could possibly corroborate my charges. I wonder what would have happened if another senior lady colleague had not spoken out against the Molester. 

 

The Molester would ask this senior lady colleague who had a toddler, if she was breast-feeding her baby and how that thought really turned him on. Had it not been for my colleague's testimony, my career as a journalist would have ended before it even began because I would never have been able to produce proof, as CCTV cameras were not commonplace in those days nor were camera phones or spy cameras. In the end, the Molester was told to "BACK OFF" as the Editor would not be able to save him the next time, if another case was ever reported to the owners. 

 

The Molester continues with his not-so charming ways even today, and his actions aren't considered inappropriate enough for sterner action. The fact that I complained turned into corridor gossip and I was often asked what exactly did he do. I have all the regard for the Editor in question, but he failed the women in that organisation by letting him continue.  

 

After  the Tejpal episode, a lot of men have come up to me and said that to say such cases are rampant in media is to generalise isolated incidents and not all men or organisations are like that. No doubt, there is merit in this statement. But I would like to share two other instances. I once reported a situation where a female colleague was acting "fresh" with another female colleague on email and SMS. There was plenty of evidence in this case. The perpetrator in question was related to the higher-ups within the organisation, so I was told nothing would ever be done. I was advised to let the complainant go, if the situation persisted. And if that was not enough, I was told that I would have to go too if I persisted with the matter. In the second instance, a male colleague, also a good friend, was subjected to serious harassment by a woman boss. While the higher-ups were in the know of the situation, they didn't think it merited any intervention.

 

Not all episodes are as brazen as the above cases. There are the uncouth ones and then there are the sophisticated ones. There are some who often say that "love and lust can happen to anyone at any point of time". Sometimes just hotel room numbers are messaged in case the lady in question picks up the cue and obliges. Promises of a mutually beneficial relationship are made. From confessions of "love, lust and longing" to cold-blooded business deals, I have seen many propositions being made over the years.

 

In many instances, there may be no direct wrongdoing but they are transgressions nonetheless. Lady candidates are often called to hotel rooms for job interviews and those who protest rarely get the job. One young girl had called me once before she was scheduled to meet the editor for a final round of interview at a five-star hotel in the city, where the boss was staying. She was told to go up to a room. She called me to ask if she should go, I told her not to. When the editor was informed that the candidate was not willing to go to his room, the editor in question interviewed her in a coffee shop after expressing his displeasure. He never hired her though.

 

On another ocassion, a male colleague showered a lady colleague with currency notes, as done in dance bars when she refused to dance with him. Nobody's sensibilities were shocked and nobody thought much of it the next day. The men in office made light of it, while the girls stayed away. Are these cases of sexual harassment or abuse or naked misuse of power by people sitting in important positions? On most occasions, these episodes don’t even reach anywhere near a sexual harassment committee. But they are transgressions and reflect an easy-going attitude to women and their sensibilities. I am not surprised that Tejpal has called it 'drunken banter' as such incidents are nothing more than that for people like him.

 

In contrast, large conglomerates and corporates are relatively intolerant of such conduct. I recall an episode of a male boss at a  large Indian conglomerate forcing a young girl to dance with him in his drunken stupor. The man was sacked the next day despite a written apology, because the promoter-chairman had a direct say in the matter. No committee was appointed as the  entire office had seen what had happened. Another young and very respected promoter of a large conglomerate, which has a presence in commodity and new age businesses, has zero tolerance for such behaviour. Women are free to write to him directly and never are these women hunted or shunted out for reporting such cases. It all stems from the top. 

 

When companies and their top management overlook episodes of gross moral turpitude, they end up endorsing such behaviour. Former iGate CEO Phaneesh Murthy is a classic example of this, as his employer didn't pay heed to his earlier transgression at Infosys. Men like Phaneesh Murthy and Tarun Tejpal are secure in the knowledge that just because so many other women either remained silent or gave in to their “charms” or “drunken banter,” otherwise known as groping, they can get away with it time and again. Mr Tejpal clearly believes that public memory is short, and in six months, everything will be forgotten and possibly even forgiven.

 

Media is unfortunately littered with cases where men have gotten away with abuse, sometimes verbal and other times physical. To all the people who stand up and defend media by saying it is not rampant, I would like to ask them to point out cases where offenders holding senior positions have been sacked or suitably penalised, as sexual harassment is about abuse of power. There are plenty of examples in corporate India but not a single reported case in media. Isn't that strange? Very senior editors, known for their notorious behaviour, continue to run amok.

 

In one television channel, a male reporter was suspended for a couple of weeks for sexually harassing a female colleague. The Editor-in-Chief, a man yet again, who argues passionately for women's rights on his news channel and on various public forums, decided the episode wasn’t serious enough to let go of a “good reporter”. Whistle-blowers of any shape and size are not welcome because they are considered to be rabble-rousers who like creating trouble. This may change now but this would be only a part of the battle won because trial by media is not the best way to combat such brazen men, who believe that their position and clout will save them in the end. Also, a media slugfest is the last thing that any victim should be subjected to.
So long as the person heading the organisation does not have a zero tolerance policy towards such behaviour, a lot of men will continue to push their luck. 

 

The bigger issue is that men who are very often recipients of such complaints fail to react, as they don’t think it’s a big issue over which a person needs to be sacked. The law may say one thing but nothing will change till the mindset changes and men stop treating women as possessions and their libido as God’s gift to womenkind. One only needs to refer to CBI Chief Ranjit Sinha's insensitive remark made a few days back on “rape and enjoyment”.

That statement is a reflection of how we think as a society. No amount of social media outrage and candlelight vigils can change that.