It is heartening for this newspaper to see all major political parties lend their support to the campaign against paid news launched by the Editors’ Guild of India. Paid news is a phenomenon that attracted public attention last year during the elections when it came to light that some political parties and candidates had paid news organisations not for advertising time or space but for news time or space, and got published or aired news favourable to them. While it is true that there are many among both political parties and the media guilty of encouraging this unwholesome phenomenon of paid news, the fact also is that there is a sizeable section of upright opinion both among politicians and journalists who resent and abhor this practice. Hence, increasing the circle of dissenters is important to outlawing the practice. At a recent meeting of representatives of the media and political parties, it was suggested that the law should be amended to make the phenomenon of paid news an electoral malpractice attracting the severest punishment of the guilty being debarred from holding public office. Equally, the guilty media organisation should also receive an equally onerous punishment. While such penal actions may become necessary to reverse this phenomenon, it can also be arrested with the help of public opinion. The very fact that paid news has become a subject of widespread discussion and general condemnation is good in itself. This will, without doubt, discourage borderline cases from committing the crime, even if diehard sinners are unlikely to be deterred by it. In ensuring that the media upholds the highest principles of honesty, integrity and transparency, social boycott can be as effective as governmental fiat. In fact, any legal bar can easily encourage corruption of other sorts, offering rental incomes to an assortment of door-keepers and law-makers.
Some years ago, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) proposed a code of conduct for business journalists. Representatives of the media resisted such “external” interference in the media and claimed that news organisations have adequate internal checks and balances and self-imposed codes of conduct that would punish, if not prevent, such misuse of freedom of the press. Experience shows that all media organisations do not enforce such codes of conduct with equal gusto. The laggards get away with murder. Even so, the best guarantee against misuse of media freedom is professional transparency, organisational accountability and strict implementation of consensually arrived at professional codes of conduct. Once a governmental organisation is given the freedom to impose such a code on the media, it is not difficult to imagine how politicians in power can misuse authority. The phenomenon of paid news should perhaps be made an electoral offence. But long before the government acts on that suggestion, professional media organisations can do more by shaming in public known offenders — both politicians and mediapersons who actively encourage such unprofessional conduct.
