The Mirror Cracked

Image Courtesy: www.thedelhiwala.com

1999, Kargil. With a microphone in her hand and grit in her spirit, a spunky young Barkha Dutt was a bit of an enigma. She was different. Different from carefully coiffed DD news readers like Rini Simon, Salma Sultan, Komal GB Singh and Minu Talwar. Said to be our own blend of Oprah Winfrey and Christiane Amanpour, Barkha was perhaps the first Indian woman war reporter who brought a live war in our living rooms. At a time when I was fighting my own demons, Barkha’s refusal to stick to the gender stereotypes, her disregard for good looks and her compelling narration taught me a thing or two.

Thereafter, I read all about her early days, her journalist mother, her numerous awards and her interviews. While her achievements were an inspiration, her personal life was of little interest to me. I didn’t care why she married or didn’t, frankly, I have no clue. But I remember her saying, "News was as intrinsic to our formative years as the mandatory daily portion of green vegetables or the evening reward of milk and cookies. As a child of five I remember being asked to identify obscure world leaders from the covers of Time magazine..” 
 
Today, as I read Barkha's interview in HT on the eve of her book launch, ‘This Unquiet Land’, I wonder why she faces sustained on-line ire and why she isn’t my Christiane Amanpour anymore.

As it happened, almost a decade after the Kargil war, private news channels cropped up like mushrooms in monsoons. By then, news anchors had climbed up the power pedestal to perch alongside politicians. That is when a reputed magazine alleged cozy collaboration between journalists, corporate houses and politicians by releasing several audio tapes. My muse had fallen from the heights of Kargil to the depths of Radia. Rather ironically, her colleague Rajdeep said, “The robust tradition of unbiased journalism has been mortgaged at the altar of cozy networks.”
Power is a potent aphrodisiac. It can, after all, result in an error of judgment. But when you hobnob with political friends, play power games like appointing ministries, and then judge others, all the while claiming that no law was broken, the ethical halo gets diminished. Perhaps, no law was broken. Perhaps it was an error of judgment. Perhaps. Ms Dutt refuted allegations, the tapes dumped in the dustbin of history and nothing was proven. But the cracks in the veneer of ethical journalism ensured that my admiration for the lady ebbed with every passing controversy. Because by then, my muse was on a slippery slope of a series of judgment errors including the sensational Mumbai attack coverage. 

In her recent interview to HT, Barkha says, “We are journalists; we are not here to take sides.” So, why is it difficult to digest? Frankly, I don’t grudge political affiliations. Most journalists lean a certain way despite professing allegiance to a bipartisan centrist position. Which is fine, in fact, it is human nature. Those who admit it openly command more respect than those who toe a certain line, and yet, fake fairness. 
Given that social media is laced with hyperbole, and the fact that same people who hate her today, applauded her for defending India at an international forum, one can disregard the laceration as fickle. Moreover, most angry voices on social media belong to right wing supporters who feel that some members of the mainstream media club present one-sided stories by ignoring divergent views.While abuse is unjustified, social media ire is perhaps an expression to question the monopoly of a privileged few who write columns, conduct debates and tell us how to think.

Television is a transparent medium. For any discerning viewer, the attempt to shove words, harp on a controversy more than necessary, or  tilt the perception scales allows the viewer to see through the mask. Why, even at her recent book launch, the panel discussion was mostly about discussing fault lines, vendetta and intolerance. A cursive glance at her select audience said more than words could.Above all, it is difficult to convince viewers about your unbiased streak when your media house has umbilical links with a particular mother. 
Regardless, no one can take away Barkha's articulate eloquence, her indomitable spirit, her intellectual sharpness or her journalistic precision. Her interviews with world leaders including Hillary Clinton are a notch above the rest. Her shows are different from noisy slanging matches on rival news channels. But. But as I order her first book, I don’t feel the adrenaline rush of a smitten fan. She is no longer my Christiane Amanpour. Or Oprah Winfrey. And it is not a comforting thought at all. If at all, it is a sad commentary on how role models slip on the staircase of power and pelf.