This is the most tragic time of Indian media. The flame of hope is still flickering in the face of wear and tear. It is expected that the Indian media will once again add that relationship to its umbilical cord hidden in the freedom movement and it will be the answer to the voices that want it in the name of presstitute, sometimes paid news or sometimes dock media.
Those who do not have any credit in society today are demanding the accounts of the media. People who are immersed in untimely corruption, symbols of distrust from speech and work are also demanding purity from the media.
If seen, it is not wrong either. My being wrong does not give you the freedom to be wrong. As a reader and a viewer, we want the best, no adulteration. Be it adulterated news or ideas. But what is the expectation of such precision in today's times? Shouldn't adulteration be regarded as a duodenum in the changing times?
After all, what is the way in front of the media? With which measures and ways can he maintain his purity, purity, credibility and authenticity, this question is churning to everyone today. Those inside the media, those outside.
The biggest challenge is the adulteration of news. How to present the news with precision, how to write, without leaning, how to communicate the truth to your readers. Can a journalist write such clean news with an ideology? Such questions are before us. The answers are also clear, yes there can be. An important journalist and editor of our time, Mr. Prabhash Joshi has gone by telling us. He used to say 'Journalists should have a political line but he should not have party line'.
The question is also how can a thoughtful journalist and editor be absolutist? He may have ideology, values and deep ideological influence on his life and mind. In such a situation, how will he avoid writing his ideological urges? If not, what will happen to the credibility and authenticity of the media?
Production factories have departments of 'quality control'. Who will do this work in the media other than the editor and reportor? The struggle of fact and truth also comes up here. Many times there is a facility of fabricating facts and truth is left on edge.
The journalist can adulterate the news by doing so. He can choose facts from convenience, serve at convenience. Amidst all this, the basis of presenting the news has been given, they are academic as well as theoretical.
We can be justified in giving news. Can talk about faith. There are many test criteria. There have been tight reports on him and will continue to be done. Along with ideology, deep democratization is also necessary in which you give space to disagreements and lonely voices, they welcome them. In the time of agenda journalism it seems difficult but not difficult.
There are allegations on Hindi journalism that she is disconnected from the questions of her time. Far from sparking intellectual discussion on them, she has failed to put the real picture of those issues in an informative manner, so the question has also arisen as to why this is so.
''The Sudarshan Kalevar'' of newspapers, his stunning printing, and presentation have changed a lot in the post-1990 liberalization years. They are now read and made worth seeing. But what is the reason that their readability is getting affected?
They are now going more in reverse than being read. Pathak has started calling newspapers in homes due to a status symbol, but he is not giving time on these newspapers. What is the reason that all the work of intellectuals and discussions on burning questions has now been relied on by the English newspapers?
The Hindi writers who are translating and publishing in Hindi newspapers are also more celebrities, less people in the intellectual world. Why such a big world of Hindi does not even have a newspaper like 'The Hindu' or 'Indian Express' is worrying.
Fewer readers, instead of limited acceptance, English newspapers have time to talk about our arts, books, films and movements of the rest of the world, so why are Hindi newspapers stealing them.
Ashok Vajpayee, a leading Hindi writer, says that - 'In journalism, thought incapacity is increasing, whereas it should be naturally there. This erosion in Hindi can be seen at every level.
The language perception of most Hindi newspapers and newspapers has become very relaxed and irresponsible. In those mediums who are not conscious of the authenticity of their language, etc., deep thought is not possible. Most of our journalism, whose coverage has become unprecedented, has forgotten that it is not possible to have clean thinking without clean language.”
Hindi readers, writers, editors, and newspaper operators should jointly talk about their language and the crises facing their journalism. It is interesting to see that the economic crisis in Hindi journalism is not the same as the linguistic or intellectual crisis.
If our newspapers fail to express the ongoing movements, movements and disturbances in the society and they are not even allowing the discussions in the intellectual world to fall on their readers, then we have to think that we have a big responsibility to our readers. Interest has also been sophistication. At the same time, our job is to build a relationship of our reader with his language and society.