On 25-Nov-10 8:44 AM, Shoba Narayan wrote: > Salil Tripathi has written a lovely piece in today's Mint about the > 'thin red line' that journalists should not cross. Reactions? > > http://www.livemint.com/2010/11/24211300/Over-the-thin-red-line.html?h=D
I find this bit interesting: <quote> They become participants in a game they’re meant to observe, and some among them believe that they matter in their own right, and not because of the credibility of their profession. </quote> A couple of thoughts come to mind: 1. The function of journalism is hold a mirror up to society, but it should be noted that journalists are part of society 2. I think that being a participant-observer is a necessary part of the process of journalism, and it is not possible to eliminate the participant component. I'd be very interested in comments from the anthropologists here on this duality. The above are thoughts about the notion of journalism itself, and can be construed as 'design' comments. In terms of 'implementation' comments (i.e, in this particular case) I think that nobody has covered themselves with glory, but, as Salil seems to imply, the bigger actors here are the politicians and their corporate backers. Of particular interest is exactly who was *surprised* by this whole contretemps, which merely seems to reflect Indian society's current mad infatuation with Mammon. To translate it into a more Indian metaphor, the journalists involved apparently decided that it made more sense to go with Lakshmi than Saraswati. Which may not be particularly noble, in this context, but neither is it hard to understand. Thoughts? Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
