Home ›› 08 Nov 2021 ›› Editorial
Although censorship is always detrimental to the dissemination of news and information, there is a very thin line between responsibility and freedom.
While the freedom of expression is a coveted idea in the current age, what one does to achieve the end depends on their sensible thinking. Whether one would spread violence as they have access to a particular violent incident or keep a lid on the spread of brutal information and footages begs the practice of restraint and sensible judgement.
Most adults in Bangladesh would remember the frenzy that broke out in several districts across the country in 2013 over the conviction of war criminal and top-tier Jamaat leader Delwar Hossain Sayedee by the International Crimes Tribunal for the war crimes he had committed during the Liberation War in 1971.
On March 4 of that year, a section of his followers had spread rumours that Sayedee’s face appeared on the moon and urged people to take to the streets. On that particular instance, miscreants took resort to physical means as well as social media to spread fake news that resulted in the loss of valuable lives.
Gate keeping-- no matter if one likes it or not-- is a necessary media ethics, which is absent in most social media contents and constitutes the gulf of difference that lies between the mainstream media content and those of social media in terms of credibility.
The mainstream media, no matter if it is print, television, radio or the online version, will continue to sway its supremacy over the social media until unless the latter comes under an editorial guideline or a proper gate keeping.
Although the social media platforms uphold the idea that they serve people with happenings ‘as they are,’ the New Zealand incident has taken to a new height the debate whether the freedom of expression without responsibility is acceptable. After the Christchurch incident, may be its time to think about reforms and objective scrutiny.
While publishing or airing any news item, the newspapers or the TV channels always keep in mind the reach, importance, outcome or impact of the news story and make their respective editorial judgement accordingly, which is completely absent in social media contents. Fact checking will always be a major responsibility for the traditional media outlets and by doing so, they ensure that no untoward situation is being incited by a news items they are going to publish or air. However, this necessary trend is by and large absent in social media contents.
This, however, impedes the idea of freedom of speech for people who can articulate themselves unhindered through social media, whereas their voice is more likely to be lost in case of the mainstream media.
In this connection, another interesting point can shape a discussion--- what if the same person is a part of both the social media and the mainstream media?
Any journalist working in mainstream media is likely to be acting as a gatekeeper whenever releasing a news item. Arrays of issues such objectivity, trends, financial or political interests will lead the journalist’s hands in shaping a particular news item. But, when that same person takes to social media and starts writing on that very topic, the writing may seem unhindered as there is no question of censorship or gate keeping.
That same person can get a lead for a story from social media contents and may end up in running a major news item for the mainstream media. In such cases, the spread of social media can be high, but the impact of mainstream media on the same topic is likely to be higher.
In mainstream media, alongside ensuring objectivity, a journalist is also tasked to prove any claim made while publishing or airing any news item, whereas all sorts of contents is being used in social media for making personal attacks or to demean an institution.
If the idea of accountability was not there, the mainstream media would have turned into a hub for circulating gossips and rumours which would certainly result in the loss of credibility.
Here, professional solidarity plays a vital role to make sure that an item passes the ethical standards, which is always one of the basis values of the established news media.
In this context, echoing with noted media ombudsman A.S. Panneerselvan, it is safe to say that journalists should practice caution while writing about social media to make sure that their professional credibility is not being harmed.
Alongside streaming individual remarks and contents, the social media are also spreading news items sourced from reliable outlets, but it must be noted that this is not a prominent feature as the feeds are mostly sourced from established media outlets.
Another difference between the social and mainstream media lies in the use of photographs and footage of any personal or restricted event. Journalists have moral obligations to not deteriorate any issue or trespass anyone’s personal space. As a result a journalist will abstain from using any content pertaining to any individual for a news item, but in case of social media there is no such bar and people are usually sharing content without any restraints.
People across the globe are falling victims to fake news, mostly spread using social media. A section of people, with political or business motivations, dedicated their hard-earned expertise to flood the cyber space with propaganda.
Many Bangladeshis, emotional as they are rather than being judicial, unknowingly fall victims of fake news or misinformation that ultimately results in swollen pockets of others. These fake news items or misinformation, mostly come in the forms of false contents in entirety-- tailor-made contents generated for a certain group of target people and items created by individuals which may or may not be aimed at creating public panic.
In a recent example, the country watched in awe the spread of fake information centring the road safety movement that led to chaos in the capital and in some other places across the country. Life in the capital was almost paralysed and the social media was to be blamed for a significant part.
The mainstream media, however, picks news items based on social media trends sometimes. Every now and then, news stories are published on topics widely trending in social media. The established media even runs opinion polls to involve or encourage netizens leading to increased number of hits on their respective sites. Things must not be confused in this case to the effect of which one is better. Here, social media plays a significant role to augment the reach and impact of the mainstream media, but when it comes to the question of credibility, there should not be any confusion that the weight tilts to the side of established standards.
A debate is rife in recent times whether the traditional broadsheet will survive or go extinct with the advent of social media.
An interview of industry experts in India, one of the biggest democracies across the globe, opined that the new media will become stronger with time but the appeal of newspapers will remain. While praising the reach and advantages of the new media, the experts said the print will always exist and that the new media will act as an additional medium that would support the print and is unlikely to replace the traditional media.
Whereas the TV channels, radios or newspapers maintain standards of verification, most social media contents remain one-sided without the versions of the accused or the affected. Although, in some cases, mainstream media can also be accused of bias thanks to political or financial benefits or because of the personal stand of the respective owners. Still, the idea of check and balance can be ensued in mainstream media while social media contents have all the chances of going overboard which can always impact the society negatively in our country.
Again, if one considers the idea of speed in circulating news, the social media outclass the traditional news establishment. And to avail this benefit, almost all the mainstream media outlets across the world as well as in Bangladesh are taking help from the social media, but as discussed previously, the standard of authenticity remains intact in such cases.
The mainstream media is also utilising the New Media to make sure their subscribers get the latest news at the earliest. However, it must be accepted that social media remains quicker than the mainstream media in breaking any news.
Although the social media has flourished to a be a decisive factor over the past decade, mainstream media still remains the source for the majority items that trends on social media and for this reason, the mainstream media’s tilt towards the social sites in quite predictable.
Utilising the benefits of social media to reach among the mass, most established media outlets have entered the cyberspace to announce their presence and in terms of content reliability, no matter what they share, people still continue to be highly biased to dependability than to credulity.
However, the fact that social media has brought about revolutionary changes is evident in news outlets’ incorporation of platforms like Facebook, Twitter or YouTube. If the idea of competition can be kept away, social media will obviously complement as well as strengthen the impact of traditional establishments in news media.
Media, being a pillar of democracy, has its responsibility to stick to certain prescribed ethics. Doing so forces the mainstream media to lag behind in some cases in comparison to the social media. Rather than being fearful, if the mainstream media embraces the incredible reach of the social media, the former will certainly be able to reach newer avenues.
While it is up to both the streams of media to keep reaching people with the latest information, the duty of judging is better be left to the consumers to decide which one is better and which one is dependable.
The writer is Senior Assistnt Editor at the Business Post
