How media theatrics, political name-calling, and judicial overreach are eroding civility in public life.
IT IS A MATTER of great concern that, despite the spread of literacy and improved economic conditions in the country, the level of public discourse and tolerance towards contrarian views has been nose-diving. This is true for individuals as well as for institutions such as the executive, legislature, judiciary, and the media.
Being a part of the media, let me first turn the searchlight on the media itself. While the print media continues to be largely responsible and restrained, and digital media is still evolving and remains a mixed bag, it is the electronic media—more specifically, TV news channels—that are crossing all lines of decency and responsible public debate.
The shouting and screaming anchors—most of whom do not hesitate to display their political affiliations—and the aggressive spokespersons of various political parties together make a spectacle of themselves.
Perhaps with an eye on TRPs, they believe that using crude and abusive language and making personal attacks against each other will make them “popular.” Alternatively, they might be doing it to please their political masters.
Unfortunately, these TV “news channels” have become the face of the media, mainly because visual media has more retention value in the public mind. Most people attack or express disdain for the media largely because of what they see on these channels.
No wonder there has been a steep decline in the number of viewers who watch them. Nevertheless, they retain a presence in public consciousness because of the visual advantage.
Yet no one in their right senses—particularly from the old school of journalism—can justify or defend the outrageous “public debates” carried out by these channels, barring a couple of honourable exceptions.
The political class, which includes parties of all hues, also deserves criticism for plunging to new depths of irresponsible and derogatory comments against political opponents. Gone are the days when even the sharpest critics of each other’s politics would desist from using unparliamentary language and remain good friends outside the political arena.
Today, the use of harsh and uncouth words leaves little room for them to even look each other in the eye.
Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi recently made statements that do not befit his position, particularly where national interests are involved.
His single-minded demand to know the number of jets downed during the recent clash with Pakistan, and his claim that the Prime Minister’s hands were tied in dealing with Trump because of Adani’s interests, should have been tempered.
His earlier comments—such as Chowkidar chor hai, which had few takers—and his recent denigration of the defence forces with expressions like *pit rahe the*, show a lack of maturity and finesse expected of a top political leader.
Similarly, the Prime Minister’s labelling him “Pappu” and claiming that the largest opposition party in the country was “anti-national” or “in league with Pakistan” would be taken with a huge pinch of salt by all except his ardent supporters. The BJP has even described Rahul Gandhi as the “Poster Boy of Pakistan.”
This general trend of irresponsible and baseless comments not only percolates down to the common man but also, at times, influences the judiciary to overstep its mandate.
During the recent hearing of a defamation case involving Rahul Gandhi, a two-judge bench remarked that a “true Indian” would not make the remarks he allegedly made in connection with the Galwan clashes. This would imply that Rahul Gandhi was not a “true Indian” if he had indeed made those remarks.
There is no doubt that his choice of words was in bad taste and that he deserved to be pulled up, but declaring him “not a true Indian” was beyond the court’s mandate. The judiciary is there to protect rights, not to preach or label individuals.
Recently, the Bombay High Court made a similar remark, questioning the patriotism of Left parties that had challenged a police order denying them permission to protest at Azad Maidan in support of Gaza.
We need to hit the pause button and reflect on where we are headed. It is high time for everyone to do some introspection. 
_________
Also Read:
Sindoor Scattered: Rahul’s Raga of Resistance
Vipin Pubby
The author, a freelance journalist, is a former Resident Editor of Indian Express, Chandigarh, and reported on the political developments in Jammu and Kashmir, North-Eastern India, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana and Punjab in his long, illustrious career.
Disclaimer : PunjabTodayNews.com and other platforms of the Punjab Today group strive to include views and opinions from across the entire spectrum, but by no means do we agree with everything we publish. Our efforts and editorial choices consistently underscore our authors’ right to the freedom of speech. However, it should be clear to all readers that individual authors are responsible for the information, ideas or opinions in their articles, and very often, these do not reflect the views of PunjabTodayNews.com or other platforms of the group. Punjab Today does not assume any responsibility or liability for the views of authors whose work appears here.
Punjab Today believes in serious, engaging, narrative journalism at a time when mainstream media houses seem to have given up on long-form writing and news television has blurred or altogether erased the lines between news and slapstick entertainment. We at Punjab Today believe that readers such as yourself appreciate cerebral journalism, and would like you to hold us against the best international industry standards. Brickbats are welcome even more than bouquets, though an occasional pat on the back is always encouraging. Good journalism can be a lifeline in these uncertain times worldwide. You can support us in myriad ways. To begin with, by spreading word about us and forwarding this reportage. Stay engaged.
— Team PT