Business of Ratings

0
149
  • The priority is, to put it simply, create drama

“Quantity. This is the real drama that afflicts information: there’s too much of it. When a newspaper is forced to print 120 pages, it can’t do otherwise but inflate the news, continually seeking out the scoop, trying to turn peripheral news into major issues and events… That is why we participate in this frenzied need for mishaps, controversy and confrontations… That information becomes a reality show.” – Umberto Eco (2008 – addressing the inadequacies of modern mass media)

The power of mass media in Pakistan is undeniable. The 24hour news cycle has effectively changed our perception of what used to be just, the news. There is a constant influx of information, commentaries, opinions all bound together by a steady stream of advertisements. You might be the finance minister, chief minister or even the prime minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a commercial break waits for no one. There are morning shows, late night shows, talk shows, live sting operations, etc, mostly political in nature. Each news channel has its own bevy of television journalists and political pundits at its disposal prepared, not only to state the news of the day but to also dissect and feed it to the audience in accordance to their own commercial interests and political leanings. Each and every new item is laced with whatever policy a particular channel may follow. Nothing is left untainted; from the exceeding price of local produce, to the meteoric rise of the dollar.

Objectivity has generally taken a back seat. Ten to fifteen minutes of a news bulletin are now followed by hours of politically charged discussions with moderators that moderate less and ignite the conversation more. The priority is, to put it simply, create drama. It is a race for ratings. Channels will fight each other to break news, often forgetting or simply, not bothering to check facts. The most obvious case in point: a few weeks after the Aasia Bibi verdict and the ensuing havoc wrecked by the Tehreek e Labbaik hooligans, the government reached a tenuous and controversial stalemate. Some sections of the media began reporting that Aasia Bibi had left the country on a private plane. An hour or so after this piece of news began to circulate, TLP workers began their grumbling again, threatening further violence if this were to be true.

The reports were soon rebuked and discredited by the Minister for Information Fawad Choudhry. In a rush to be the first ones to run the ‘breaking news’ headline, no fact checking exercise seemed to have been carried out. This is the case with most developing stories. Speculation is often times broadcast without distinction. Ratings are one of the major motivations for most news channels, often at the cost of neutrality. The public thrives on entertainment and drama, there is much to have of these on private news channels. PEMRA, the constitutionally established regulatory authority that deals with the electronic media tends to overlook a lot of issues that plague news channels. Whilst watching talk shows that claim to discuss and comment on the news bringing forth members of the government, opposition, experts, etc, to weigh in on the problems of the day, what is meant to be a healthy discussion focusing on solutions, ends up becoming a shouting match where the individuals on the show lose their patience and eventually start getting offensive and personal.

They do not focus on solutions, rather, on their own personal affiliations to political parties and party leaders. It is less about the country’s problems and more about party politics. Eventually the argument gets so heated that it begins running in a circular direction. Naeem ul Haque slapping Daniyal Aziz on a live television show is one such example. It was shocking to see two grown men squabble and resort to physical abuse. These were ‘seasoned’ politicians, yielding a certain amount of power, in charge of lending a voice and effecting some sort of change. It was sickening to see that in truth, both had exposed themselves as egotistical, inept and immature individuals who have low tolerance for criticism.

This incident also highlighted the fact that the TV anchor lacked the ability to moderate a show. It was a hit for the news channel, obviously due to the sensational nature of the action. A reporting coup. And while he pretended to be aghast by this behavior, there was no action taken to reprimand the behavior of two grown men by the television network or PEMRA. Then there was the time when Khadim Hussain Rizvi was interviewed (pre Aasia Bibi verdict) by a top TV ‘journalist’ who made a program on how the former spends his day. Carrying out light hearted discussions on his beliefs and strategy for the future. All this while fully aware of his brazen anti-state, violent and abusive rhetoric. The danger with this approach is that with coverage like this, the media subtly contributes towards potential acceptance to such anti state sentiment. Again, the purpose behind the said interview was to gain ratings without any regard for journalistic responsibility.

To be fair, private news channels are private businesses as well. They do need to make money and for that they need respectable ratings. But it is possible to achieve those ratings without going in to sensationalist, headline grabbing, tabloid-like territory

What the media does not realise is that when they give a mouth piece or any other sort of coverage to people with questionable intent, be they the likes of Rizvi or earlier on Nehal Hashmi who publicly threatened the Supreme Court Judges or for that matter Naeem ul Haque who continues getting invitations for talk shows even after his deplorable behaviour on live TV, they make it OK for the public to accept this sort of behavior. The explanation that they seem to give the viewer that this is all kosher, and that it happens. This approach comes with a lot of peril. Ignoring national interests and policies for the sake of ratings is a precarious position to be in. The media is thought to be the fifth pillar of democracy. At times it needs to take a unanimous approach towards certain issues. Particularly, issues such as extremism, corruption, contempt of court and the likes. The media carries a burden of responsibility towards the public. It needs to report reliably, to give the true picture of whatever event there is, without turning itself in to a sensation.

To be fair, private news channels are private businesses as well. They do need to make money and for that they need respectable ratings. But it is possible to achieve those ratings without going in to sensationalist, headline grabbing, tabloid-like territory. It is possible to increase viewership by fulfilling journalistic duties, by holding politicians responsible for their words. As members of the public it is our right and the electronic media’s duty to expose corrupt practices. Politicians must be held accountable for their words. It is the media that holds the power for such accountability. This can be done by taking relentless support from facts, that speak for themselves. Objectivity need not become collateral damage in the fight for ratings. Electronic media is an immensely powerful entity, it can make or break politicians, heads of state, powerful businessmen, etc. It has the power to set the narrative for an entire country. It is about time that the electronic media in Pakistan realises this and works not only to fulfill its corporate objectives but also its journalistic objectives.