[Assam] The Ian Mayes Lecture 'The news ombudsman' - The Hindu

[Ram Sarangapani]

KC

I agree to some extent.

>1) If they become participants, they might be missing
>a moment which they should have captured

The journalist could have done both - captured the moment and also helped
the child later.

I agree, that there are situations when a story is moving too fast, the
fleeting moments are of the essence.

>Bias (percieved or otherwsie) in journalism is a different issue though

I agree, that the media is ultimately biased in today's world. But the media
is a part of the community where its readership exists.

Just some questions:
How would a media exist if it were to always have an anti-community slant?
Should the media also act as the community's conscience?

And going back to that lecture by Mayes,
Does the media uphold the values it preaches?

I don't know the answers to these.

That is why, I think an obudsman as advocated by Mayes may actually go a
long way. It helps both the media and the community.

-Ram da

On 12/4/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty <krish_gau at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> As a matter of fact, there are many debates on whether
> journalists should remain as  "observers"  or become a
> "participant"
>
> I think that they should remain as observers.  There
> are two reasons why I think so ---
>
> 1) If they become participants, they might be missing
> a moment which they should have captured
>
> 2) If they become participant, in some cases they
> might get biased. This point might not be true in all
> cases though.
>
> The example of WW II is a good one.  But for example,
> in the battlefield if a German see an American injured
> and then he see another couple of American advancing
> toward a bridge/building which he is supposed to
> protect,  what he should do ?
> It is difficult to draw a balance.
> I would say it is probably a very grey area.
>
> Bias (percieved or otherwsie) in journalism is a
> different issue though .... In an utopian world,
> every journalist should have zero bias towards any
> political party, region, language, caste etc.  But
> then again,  it is not utopian world.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Ram Sarangapani <assamrs at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks KC for forwarding those links. I have seen
> > the photo of the vulture
> > and the child before- possibily in these columns.
> > Great stuff, I agree.
> >
> > Yes, there is a lot of controversy about how the
> > media acts one way today
> > and another tomorrow. We are also conflicted when we
> > perceive bias or
> > hostility from certain newspapers/reporters.
> >
> > And quite often these perceptions are hardened when
> > people believe there is
> > track record.
> >
> > Now, one may be logically correct in assuming that
> > the media's role is to
> > just report what they see - come what may, and that
> > they are NOT responsible
> > to make things better (as in this child's case -help
> > it, or in the case of
> > the young woman - to clothe her).
> >
> > As logical as this may be, I think, sometimes, there
> > is a bigger calling
> > ...that of humanity and that of sensitivity. Things
> > oughtn't be so cut &
> > dried.  After all, the media exists because of their
> > readership. And when we
> > are able to help (despite our professions), we ought
> > to.
> >
> > To not do so would tantamount to missing the forest
> > for the trees.
> >
> > To cite as an example there are so many cases of
> > German & American soldiers
> > in WW II where they have helped out each other. They
> > acted upon this (as my
> > Christian friends would tell me - its the Christian
> > thing to do:))
> > inspite of their professions as soldiers, or strict
> > guidelines against
> > aiding/abetting the enemy.
> >
> > BUT....we have to be careful in our analyses:
> > For the media, they ought to take a lot of care in
> > making sure that they
> > don't wade into sensationalism at the expense of
> > truth.
> >
> > And.... we as readers ought to expect this of the
> > media - that they may not
> > report only things we like.
> >
> > Well! I may be wrong.. but thats my 2 poisa
> >
> > --Ram da
> >
> > >Ram-da,  photojournalism have always been in the
> > realm
> > >of controversy.  There are tonns of information in
> > the
> > >net on this.
> > >I just picked up one such case.
> > >This (Vulture and Child) is one such photo which
> > also
> > >won a pulitzer prize.  The second link gives the
> > >details of controversy.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5241442
> >
> >
> http://gec.tamucc.edu/article.pl?sid=07/02/07/194207&mode=nocomment
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/4/07, Ram Sarangapani <assamrs at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The last few weeks, many of us have been
> > contemplating the role that the
> > > news media ought to have. Many have felt that news
> > organizations have not
> > > lived up their mark and have been irresponsible in
> > their reporting.
> > >
> > > Well, those interested might be interested in this
> > lecture by Mayes. Mayes
> > > makes some very valid points, and this idea of a
> > news ombudsman is quite
> > > intriguing.
> > >
> > > --Ram
> > >
> > > http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/nic/indialecture.htm
> > >
> > >  Lecture presented by The Hindu in New Delhi and
> > Chennai, January 2006
> > >
> > > "The news ombudsman – a visible presence, an
> > independent voice"
> > >
> > >  Ian Mayes
> > >
> > > Readers' Editor,
> > >
> > > *The Guardian* & President, Organisation of News
> > Ombudsmen (ONO)
> > >
> > >
> > > The ombudsman works independently within news
> > organisations at the
> > > interface between readers, listeners and viewers
> > on the one hand, and
> > > journalists and editors on the other. I sometimes
> > compare the position to
> > > that of a referee in a football game, one that can
> > get pretty rough at
> > > times. He or she – the ombudsman, that is –
> > represents a form of
> > > self-regulation that differs in one important
> > respect from all others
> > > relevant to the media, such as the Press
> > Complaints Commission in the United
> > > Kingdom, which apply across a whole industry. It
> > is the only kind of
> > > self-regulation that has the effect of building
> > trust between a specific
> > > news organisation and its readership or audience,
> > through the systematic,
> > > impartial and public handling of complaints, and
> > through the open discussion
> > > of issues raised by readers concerning its
> > journalism. I would put it a
> > > little stronger than that and say that for any
> > news organisation that
> > > recognises a responsibility to the society it
> > serves, it offers a real
> > > chance to build a new, more open and responsive
> > relationship with its
> > > readership or audience. It is also, incidentally,
> > something which readers
> > > are increasingly demanding in the new electronic
> > environment in which email
> > > and quick and easy access and response are
> > expected.
> > >
> > > That the presence of an ombudsman fosters this
> > relationship with positive
> > > benefit to the employer as well as to society at
> > large seems to be supported
> > > both anecdotally by ombudsmen who believe that
> > their activities strengthen
> > > trust and loyalty, and by more formal tests. In a
> > recent survey of *
> > > Guardian* readers, for example, 75 per cent said
> > they believed that the
> > > existence of an ombudsman made the paper more
> > responsive to their complaints
> > > and queries.
> > >
> > > The appointment of an ombudsman is a unilateral
> > act by the newspaper or
> > > broadcast outlet that sends a strong signal to
> > readers, listeners or
> > > viewers. It represents a positive answer to this
> > question: Why should a
> > > newspaper or news programme that by its nature is
> > constantly calling on
> > > others to be accountable for their actions not be
> > accountable for its own
> > > actions? I shall say more in a moment about the
> > benefits, the side effects
> > > if you like, that may flow from the appointment of
> > an ombudsman but I want
> > > to emphasise here that – in my opinion and
> > experience – any benefits depend
> > > on the altruism of the initial motivation. You
> > appoint an ombudsman because
> > > you want your news organisation to be an honest
> > self-correcting institution
> > > with dedication to getting it right and no
> > interest in getting it wrong. To
> > > put it a little higher, you want to feed into the
> > arena of public debate
> > > accurate information upon which the citizen can
> > rely when he or she is
> > > forming an opinion on the affairs of the day. The
> > questions for an editor or
> > > individual journalist are: Would I say this if I
> > was talking directly to an
> > > individual reader or, say, to a respected friend,
> > rather than communicating
> > > through the medium of a newspaper or broadcast
> > programme? If I slipped into
> > > error wouldn't I naturally correct it?
> > >
> > > Just before we come back down to the realities and
> > pressures of day-to-day
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>