The moderator of the discussion was Mr Mohan Savanna, Editor, Reader’s Digest.
Mr Sivanand started the proceedings by asking Mr Chandavarkar to define sensationalization. Mr Chandavarkar responded by saying that sensationalization was a subjective term, since the perspective of one medium may be different from that of another. Speaking as a TV journalist, he emphasized that each channel had styled itself along certain lines, that is – it might be a purely entertainment, lifestyle channel or a hard-hitting news channel. Any content that was considered important would be presented in a fashion that tied in with the image of the channel.
“Sometimes, it might be necessary to put a Mallika Sherawat on the cover to increase our sales. After all, serious reporting also needs revenue and as an editor I have to keep my magazine’s circulation’s buoyant,” added Mr Menon, Chief of Bureau, The Week.
Mr Joshi, Bureau Chief, Aaj Tak, explained that all TV channels watched their competition’s TRP ratings. It gave them indication of the kind of content viewers fancied. And then each channel fashioned content accordingly to increase its viewer ship. Thus if sensational news drew more eyeballs, it is expected that any channel would present its content in ways that lured more viewers to its channel. He suggested that sensationalization was essentially a feedback loop with the viewers being the source and the various media at the receiving end.
In the light of sensational accident reporting, the discussion went on to ponder over the reportage and intervention by media at the site of the mishap. Citing the example of the self-immolation of a man protesting the lack of increase in his wages, the panel spoke of the split-second decisions that reporters and camerapersons had to take.
“One moment the story is in front of him, the next it is over. The reporter needs to decide if he wants to save the man-on-fire, or come under fire himself if he doesn’t capture the news,” said Mr Joshi. Also as, Mr Menon and Mr Chandavarkar pointed out; it might compromise the channel or paper’s objectivity while covering such issues if there was personal involvement.
In the subsequent session, the audience put forth a range of questions varying from the role of media as the fourth pillar, freedom of expression and perception and lastly media’s sustenance drawn from sensational reporting.
As Krishna, a second year management student said, “The session was a great value-add for us because it gave us insight into the management of information from the providers themselves.”
“The business of media is an industry in itself. For students like us, whose focus is trained to limited sectors, this offbeat event has triggered new perspectives,” said Vivek Srinivasan, a first year management student.