The book Media Discourse in Contemporary India: A Study of Television News by Sudeshna Devi (published by Routledge in 2022) is an extensive look at the ecosystem of Indian news media and its rapid transformation in terms of its content, the technologies associated, and the practices involved in it. It also focuses on the changing modes of consumption of news in the public sphere. Transforming from a unilinear mode of mass communication in the form of print and radio news of the yesteryears, to a more dialogue-based dissemination of information through television, the world of news media has undergone a radical transformation. The book dives into the discursive world of news media in contemporary India by critically analysing two production houses turned private news channels at the national forum, namely- NDTV 24×7 and Aaj Tak. The author analyses the production and representation of the various public narratives and the nature of consumption that consequently describes the role of media in a democracy such as ours. This ethnographic study was conducted between 2016 and 2017 in the national capital of India, Delhi, and its noisy neighbour Noida, which is a part of the National Capital Region (NCR). They have been widely considered to be the hub of the national bureau of major television news channels.

The media’s role in a liberal democracy demands the formation of a platform for rationalised debates within a public that is well-versed in the socio-political nature of their lifeworld. The first chapter, delineating the conceptual framework of liberal theory explains the role of media in forming public discourses in India. Historically, communications within and outside of media as an institution have been always manipulated by the dominant ideological orientations. Devi notes that the Indian media ecosystem is not immune to such influential forces, which in turn informs the public discourses. Leaning on Jurgen Habermas’s notion of the ‘public sphere’ (1989), the author explains how the public spaces of debates transformed with the advancement of capitalism. ‘Print media’ mediated between the state and the citizens, enabling rationalised interactions in the public sphere. However, with the reduction of newspapers to mere mediums of advertisement and the expansion of mass media into new forms (television, radio etc.), actions and interactions within the public spaces have ceased to be communicative and rational. Commercial media have become ‘inimical’ to the public sphere (p. 12). However, on the other side of this notion lies a different set of surveys of literature that shows that with the advent of digital mass media, new public spaces have sprung up for political interventions. In the labyrinth of the World Wide Web lie the voices of various interests and representations that were previously unaccounted for. Internet has pluralised an online public sphere thus offering space and access to different views and orientations. The vernacular press has offered a similar pluralism expanding the scope and nature of the communicative spaces. Hindi newspapers rendered localised production, and dissemination of information making democracy relatively more participatory.

India embraces television

Television, on the other hand, has propelled Indian media to a new dimension. With the Indianisation, localisation and hybridisation of news content, the domain has been revolutionised, further enabling our ability to make sense of our everyday issues or even lack of it. Television news media has also invigorated various reactions from the public. While for some they are stimulating, others, the author notes, may feel that the content has created a set of biased perspectives. Nonetheless, it has provided a platform to voice opinion and delusively participate in the democratic decision-making process. It has been successful in establishing a firm relationship between the citizens and the fourth pillar of democracy.

The second chapter elaborates on how India post-independence had a significant relationship with news media in the nation-building process. The state used the press to politically Indianise, economically strengthen and socially ‘sterilise’ as well as nurture the infant nation. Furthermore, as they encountered the market forces, and witnessed a growing association between broadcasting and the advertising sector, they realised the potential of private advertisements in economy building. Television broadcasting, then, remodelled itself into a tool for both education and entertainment. Parallelly, there were changes in the domain of news media as the news-making process accelerated.

The state-sponsored and controlled television channel Doordarshan had to fight its battles on two fronts – one for the agency to scrutinize and critique the state powers, and on the other front, against the losing popularity due to its lack of linguistic diversity. The project of creating ‘oneness’ through Hindi faltered as a great deal of non-Hindi speakers were now disenchanted with its programs. It is this gradual demise that witnessed the dawn of private news channels. The two channels in question, New Delhi Television Network (NDTV) and Aaj Tak capitalised on the changing technology, content framing and market demands to usher themselves into the national scene; albeit in different languages. News channels such as these started to surface as satellite television ramped up the yearning for televised content.

With many channels mushrooming at regional and national levels, questions are asked in the third chapter as to what is stoking up such growth. From a liberalised stance of the state on broadcasting that invited private players, to associate with those private players to further their political propaganda, it would be safe to say that the state has overtly or spuriously been one of the major contributors of media’s growth. Across the nation, there was a growing ownership of media by political or politically affluent elites.

With such a change, content policies changed. There was an emergence of programs around current affairs which form the major crux of the discourse around the contemporary media. These contents were relatable, localised, and potent with high television ratings. The author reasons the demand around such content in three different ways – low production cost as compared to investigative journalism, distinctive character as they invited a dialogue-based content rather than a unilinear broadcast of information, and finally the ability to quench the near-insatiable thirst for TV ratings that translated into revenue. The debates on current events that previously served as a ‘side dish’ have gradually become the ‘main course’ for the audience to feast upon. As the boundaries between news and opinions blurred, reporters and journalists became news presenters. Added to it the intense, megaphonic and theatrical anchors that started to dominate the informational space in forming and moving public discourses. They are highly competent in sensationalising social events, enabling viewer’s participation as well. In this complex sphere of interactive processes, information gets reduced to ‘messaging’, thus raising concerns about the credibility of media as an institution.

The author also extensively speaks about the role of social media and the rise of digital journalism in India. Internet is a virtual and reverse panopticon (Martin 2013), where everyone’s lives are positioned in a metaphorical glass tower, with many inspectors around to scrutinise each other – whether it is lifestyle, culture, personal taste, or politics. Consequently, such an inspection creates another dynamic when it comes to the dissemination of news. Every word is subjected to scrutiny. While social media facilitates faster and wider reach with hashtag journalism, it also weakens journalistic values. Information sourcing, verification, and rationalised dissemination as news is reduced and massified to any hand that has a camera and a social media account.

Media houses have also started to produce content that drives or is driven by online opinions and ideologues. This has raised issues of authenticity and integrity as many social practices have been the subsequent results of such content. From the chaotic events that unfolded in, around and after the release of the doctored video in JNU to the very recent ongoing pandemonium in Manipur, fake news content has grappled the media sphere, distorting truth, and reality. The author further delineates the rising association between data and online metrics in the media sphere and its impact on the nature of journalism and news broadcasts. Online news journals and tabloids have become essential in the formation and dissemination of information, that run parallelly or conjointly with traditional media houses. Therein, we see ‘content’ inching towards synonymity with what is supposed to be news.

The two elephants in the room

By investigating the two national media houses, the author lays out a comparative thick description of NDTV and Aaj Tak in chapters four and five, wherein we can see how the two channels had a similar yet different trajectory of existence and growth. NDTV was incepted in the late 1980s as an independent production house that provided fodder for Doordarshan by covering significant global events. On the other hand, Aaj Tak, a round-the-clock Hindi news network had its beginnings at a popular news magazine called ‘Newstrack’. Both the news networks that emerged out of media entrepreneurship eventually outpaced the previous pallbearers, with the nature of the content and their growing socioeconomic potency.  The model of journalism by NDTV was, as the author states “niche and sophisticated” (p.107), whereas Aaj Tak focused on mass-appealing content and lingo, using local language, phonetics, and provincial proverbs to attract the audience. While both the giants had a history of having journalistic training from foreign broadcasters (NDTV having engaged with Star whereas the Aaj Tak with CNN), their audience pools have been more distinct than amorphous.

Here, language does gain centrality in how both the media houses position themselves in and among the social. Aaj Tak was a common man’s channel with everyday stories and prerogatives. It could tap into the Indic heartland due to its vernacular stronghold. While, NDTV (even though they had their own Hindi channel in NDTV India), had their primary foothold among a niche audience through its English channel, NDTV 24×7. In terms of the journalistic model, Aaj Tak focused on the saleability of the news content produced and has categorically designed content that would thrive on the scope of conflict. Their contents are programmed around mythology and religion as well, which their News Director and Anchor, Rahul Kanwal have been quoted as saying to be – “different dishes on a thali” (p.115). On the other hand, NDTV has been persistent on credible, verified news instead of sensationalism. Believing in the conversation of ideas, NDTV network’s journalistic model had shades of phenomenology, emphasizing on diversity of perspectives. Their range of content included in-depth documentary-styled shows on particular social issues, investigative shows on socioeconomic, political, and cultural issues and debate programs. It has had an exploratory approach towards critical social concepts like gender and caste. As opposed to that, Aaj Tak’s content selection has been marinated with spice that at times leads to scenes on the screen akin to a caged wrestling match. While NDTV has an extensive research wing for their guests and audiences pertaining to different shows, Aaj Tak has been documented by the author to have restricted their research to secondary sources from the Internet. In terms of selecting guests, NDTV primarily looks for people of intellect, with contributions to and involvement with the issues at hand. They tend to avoid intense argumentative personnel, whereas, it is this very particular quality that Aaj Tak has sought; as they would boost the viewership and consequently the ratings. The guests in NDTV are graded in terms of their expertise and presentation, whereas their contemporary Hindi counterparts have been documented to be interested in feature stories and personnel that could entertain chaos as entertaining.

Finally, writing about the relationship with the state, especially the current regime, Sudeshna Devi notes that NDTV has had a turbulent equation with the state. So much so that their hard-hitting journalism that seeks to hold the state accountable has been stretched to be labelled as ‘anti-national’. Interestingly, Devi notes that their ex-employees have been expressive about a biased ‘anti-state’ character as well. On the other hand, the author notes that Aaj Tak’s relationship with the government has been that of a “bonhomie” (p.123). However, the sociological lens allows us to see the nature of content to be a subtle propagation of the state’s narratives. This has been negated though, by the respondents of the Hindi news network, as they believe there has been a mixed public opinion about their standpoint in the democratic fabric; where it oscillated between a ‘pro’ and ‘anti’ stance viz a viz the current government.

Conditioning narratives and consuming them

The author in her sixth chapter notes how media can structure, package and repackage information to provide various public narratives. The selection of topics and personnel as well as the larger organisational forces define the social facts and currents that are manufactured and conditioned in the public (Noam Chomsky, anyone?). In this chapter, a textual analysis of the content programmed in both channels is done. The author goes on to compare the themes selected by these channels ranging from the Indian Army, the farmers’ protests, disputes and debates around Ayodhya, Ram Mandir and Babri Masjid to various caste-based politics, gender, and governance.

Both the channels centre-staged the contemporary issues and relied on extensive usage of videos and graphical representations. However, the usage of language that framed the discourse differed. NDTV 24×7 has been primarily seen to have a liberalist stance in orienting news. The base of their pie has been to scrutinize the governance and ideological motivations of the current regime in India. This has consequently had repercussions on the channel as well; in terms of its image and operations. On the other hand, the author notes that “the editorial policy of Aaj Tak has always been to provide news with mass appeal…which promotes majoritarian agenda with a concoction of entertainment” (p. 168). Harnessing the power of the Hindi language, especially in ‘Bollywood style’ has been one of its major tenets. The chapter sums up by delineating how the broad categories of cultural nationalism and misgovernance have been the common areas of operation for the channels. While both the channels had divergent views about the former, issues of misgovernance have brought them on the same page; framing a similar narrative of the state’s incompetency (intentional or otherwise).

The final chapter analyses the consumption of current affairs at the organisational and audience level. It has been documented that the content policy of NDTV 24×7 has been designed to cater to a niche audience, programmed around cultural, economic, and sociopolitical issues with objective and unbiased reporting. Aaj Tak’s motivational orientation circles around popular discourses. It believes the entre should come with the necessary amount of spices. It aims to “strike a chord with a vast section of the audience” (p. 207). From the audience’s perspective, both channels are positioned at opposite ends of the spectrum. While NDTV 24×7 is perceived to have a liberal editorial policy, accommodating diverse views, Aaj Tak is believed to be leaning more towards populism.

The book provides an extensive insight into the world of Indian media in contemporary times and could be considered as an ideal type to scientifically analyse other active media houses. The book is an interlinkage of various facets of Indian news media, on various levels (production, representation and consumption) that unfolds the way television news networks structure themselves and operate within a sociopolitical, economic and cultural flux. With a well-laid-out and researched analysis, this work could be positioned as a necessary tool for social scientists intrigued with news media in contemporary India.

References:

Martin, C.D. (2013). The Internet as a Reverse Panopticon. acm Inroads. 4(1): 8-9.

***

Aashirwad Chakravarty is a PhD Research Scholar at Cotton University and a Guest lecturer at the Department of Sociology, Gauhati University. His academic interests lie in Sociological theories, Sociology of Food, Sociology of Numbers and Popular culture.

By Jitu

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments