A pseudo journalist's right to be assaulted

For a generation of journalists the late Pothan Joseph was the profession's presiding deity. During his long and chequered career, he edited The Indian Express, The Hindustan Times, The Dawn, The Deccan Herald and (Rajaji's) Swarajya.

Pothan Joseph never wrote a book on journalism or any book for that matter. He excelled in leader-writing and signed columns. The later-day great editors like S.Mulgaonkar and N.S.Jagannathan followed the same principles.

Sachin Chaudhary, another great editor, foresaw the coming of the "jute press" in India even before the dawn of independence. And he founded Economic Weekly first, and then the Economic and Political Weekly. Flying high the flag of the independent journalism.

Pothan Joseph also did not make out a list of do's and don'ts for journalists and newspapers. But his casual remarks (often coming as post-mortem jottings) had the force of the scriptures.

On reporting. A reporter's duty (did he use the word dharma?) is to follow events. Collect all facts and figures. Understand them. Then put the digest across to the readers. In readable prose. Giving due weight to pros and cons. No room for personal prejudices. Party papers may be different.

On editorial and signed columns. They are not the space for the "nudist dance". By which he meant the vulgar display of knowledge. And going didactic. There again the function is simple. To arrange the facts and figures in such a manner as to make the readers think. Judgement should be left to them. His hero was also Polonious (Hamlet). For he saw wisdom in brevity. And news sources are inviolate.

Enter Arun Shourie. A self-styled fugitive from the emergency period. What role he played during the emergency, however, is not known. A label he flaunted was that he was a member of the drafting committee of the Janata Party manifesto. However, he managed access to Ramnath Goenka of Indian Express who suffered perhaps more than most at the hands of Indira Gandhi and son Sanjay during emergency.

Shourie could be seen strutting about the management cubicles of Express Towers where normally reporters and journalists do not go.

The first reference to Shourie came in the wake of an article or the first instalment there of. The Akali Movement was only gathering momentum. But the issue at that point of time was the Nirenkari challenge. At this distance of time it is difficult to re-catch the details of the article. But all remember that the telephone at the editorial desk of Chandigarh Express rang one afternoon. The Chandigarh desk was manned then by people from all parts of the country. Most did not know Punjabi. The caller spoke in Punjabi. The tone was sharp and menacing. So Gobind Thukral (currently News co-ordinator with the cross-town publication, The Tribune) was summoned to attend to the telephone. Thukral was making a vain effort to explain but the voice at the other end was uncompromising and unsanitary. When he finished, Thukral said, "the call was from Amritsar where people felt outraged by Shourie's article. They threatened to come down to Chandigarh and burn up the newspaper. Kill all of you if the second installment came".

Kuldip Nayar (now MP) was in charge of the Chandigarh edition. The information was transmitted to him. It is difficult to remember whether the second installment appeared or not. But the next morning edition certainly carried an apology and an explanation by the Editor.

When the controversy arose, many journalists felt tempted to read the pieces, which normally they would have ignored. All that can be said about it now is that it was a violent assault on English language.

This is not to say that newspapers and newspapermen shall ignore contentious issues. Before and after independence there were agitations galore. And newspapers were carrying editorials and despatches. But there was uniformity in their approach. It was a balanced view always. In Shourie's case it was tilted in favour of his whimsical ideas.

After consolidating his back-door entry into journalism (in Indian Express) Shourie began chipping away at its traditional values. His contempt for "sources" was ill concealed. A major asset of Indian journalism is the unwritten rule that no one in the newspaper office should ask a journalist about his source. A tradition which the Goenka family has followed with scrupulous care to this day. It is a different thing that a journalist took his friends (and management) into confidence depending on the nature of the story. More so for the sake of cross checking the facts. And formulate its development.

Shourie went to the other extreme. He wanted all sources revealed. To him. And had the audacity to contact the sources directly. Just to make sure that the boys came with the correct version.

As a rule, a journalist would sacrifice his job (or forgo a story) if the sources had to be disclosed. Private contacts are the bedrock of reporter's way of working. Facts gathered in camera may not be of immediate use. But it certainly helps the reporter to follow the trends and predict the final outcome. Journalists thrive on their sources. Especially those with no deep pockets. And it was this basic newspaper culture that Shourie wanted to destroy from the day one in Indian Express.

Yes. Possibly proof may be asked for. But Shourie himself had made the task easy. Exhibit no 1. His interview with Ramakrishna Hegde. At a breakfast in Bangalore, Hegde took Shourie into confidence. As any number of journalists he had met. Being private (and off the record) Hegde had gone out of the way with his prejudices and predilections. Never in his life would he have imagined that a journalist would go to print with the stuff he blurted out. Shourie did just that and brought insult to the profession.

It was on a similar exercise involving the former Haryana chief minister Devi Lal, that Shourie was given marching orders on the spot by Ramnathji.

In a way Shourie brought relief to the Indian Express staff. By offering to fill its columns on his own. He also spared the news desk hands of the headache of processing his awful copy. If they were asked to do a real work it would have been a horrifying experience. It was a jumble that came out of his room. Each article was lengthy which could have been dismissed in one-tenth space. Shourie wanted to be read only by the proof-readers and no one else - inside or outside the office.

It is another example of Shourie's pseudo journalism. Greater journalists like Mulgaonkar, N.S. Jagannathan, Kuldip Nayar, N.J. Nanporia and Frank Moraes always insisted that their copies should be read by a senior hand. For the simple reason that they could go wrong at times. That is professional honesty. Kuldip Nayar for instance. As editor of Express News Service, he used to instruct X,Y or Z to go through his despatches before being filed to other centres. Shourie thought it was all non-sensical and below his standard to let small fries pry into his copy.

It was in A.R.Anthulay case Arun Shourie attracted most attention. Anthulay eventually won the case. His political reputation and future were, however damaged. That is beside the point. From the journalists' point of view, the whole input for Shourie's lengthy perambulations came from the Mumbai News Bureau of Indian Express. Led by the redoubtable Manu Desai. All that Arun Shourie did was to lend his name to the stories. Giving everyone the feeling that it was all his smart work. Professional etiquette was given a go by.

It is not being argued that good writing is the monopoly of trained journalists. In India there were (are) outstanding writers. Though formally not trained as journalists. The late M.N.Roy to begin with. No one would dare to call Roy a journalist. Though the volume of his outpourings was much more than that of a prolific journalist. And it is a fact few journalists can measure upto him in his mastery of English prose. The only point being made here is that Shourie is neither a writer (let alone good) or a journalist.

Let us take a recent example. Time was when V.P.Singh stirred the hornet's nest with his Mandal decision. Arun Shourie and his ilk were baying for Singh's blood. Shouting from the roofs top that the government decision was putting the developmental clock back by several years. An untimely decision, Shourie roared in a TV interview. "As India had to compete with Japan".

There was a deluge of materials and many journalists were at a loss in getting a clear picture. Where it all began? How they shaped up? There were of course excellent analyses by sociologists and lawyers. Kanshi Ram was also articulate and helpful in his interviews. But something was amiss. As there was no successful attempt to put the whole issue in the correct focus.

Then came an article in Indian Express. By Ram Jethmalani. The eminent jurist. Now in the thick of a controversy over his ministerial effervescence. In just 1500 words or less, he told his readers what it was all about. In fact it was a gold mine. He traced the evolution of the society the legislative efforts, earlier court battles, and the logic of the new law. Pouring concrete into the concise analytical structure were a few tell-tale passages from Justice O Chinnappa Reddy's judgement at the apex court. In a nutshell, a journalist had all he wanted in his palm. Friends recommended the article to each other. And even, in light vein, suggested the jurist should have been paid a million dollars for that single piece.

In sharp contrast, Arun Shourie would have reeled out hundreds of columns. Confusing everyone. Without making the point. His permanent hostility to brevity and simplicity is inexplicable.

The newspaper readers across the country always equated the chief editor's post at Indian Express with that of the prime minister. Not that he could appoint governors, ambassadors and high profile secretaries. The aura coming with the tradition of the newspaper - as a disrespector of the establishment. It was unthinkable that editors like Mulgonkar, N.S.Jagannathan or Frank Moraes would have accepted even a cabinet minister's post. Only public school padushas would sink to the level of scrubbing floors and washing the linen as a junior minister of state. After heading the newspaper group. That speaks for his mind-set. The BJP is going to pay heavy price by keeping in its fold a life-time liability. Already its position in Maharashtra is shaky. It will be shakier with Shourie making more trips even with more police protection. His counterfeit journalism is exposed. As also his claims as an intellectual.

Shourie used to complain that reporters were not taking obvious risks. But it is not known how many riot stricken areas he had visited. As a reporter. While in Indian Express he was particular about his seating in the Indian Airlines aircraft. And also about the room number of the hotels he stayed. With or without Shourie journalists were, and continue to be, risking their lives. Pradeep Bhatia, the photo-journalist of Hindustan Times, being the latest example. As Shekhar Gupta (the present Chief Editor of Indian Express) painfully pointed out that the young journalists were ready to cover Kargil without insurance cover. The insurance companies having refused to insure them. No journalist would have to take lessons from Arun Shourie - on taking risks.

What happened after he was manhandled in Mumbai? According to reports, he continued with his peroration. To a standing ovation. All the same, he was referring to inadequate police bandobust. Implicit was a frantic call for police reinforcements. So that he could get back home in single piece. He said it (the assault on him) was not in keeping with the Mumbai culture. Mumbai does not need any certificate from Shourie. It has been the incubator for many a revolutionary event in the country's history.

Risk is a professional hazard for journalists. Especially those put on crime and ruling parties beat. While militancy was ruling in Punjab, journalists across the country were worried about the safety of their counterparts in the strife-torn state. Also their families.

Earlier too, Punjab was not a safe place. Gobind Thukral, for instance, returned home every night (for about a month) taking different routes and mode of transport. Simply because a report of his caused some commotion. And provoked retaliation. But, he, unlike Shourie, never asked for police escort.

Mumbai has put on notice frauds donning the fourth estate garb that criticism could come in kind. Given Shourie's arrogance and claim as a intellectual (which he is not) there will be repeat performances. Better luck for him again.

Top