TELEPROMPT
A delight to watch
Mannika Chopra

Mannika Chopra

Has anybody noticed there is a change taking place in the nature of TV news? Though the final phase of the Bihar assembly elections has been taking place this week, the routine analysis of the voter turnout, possible electoral outcomes, vox pop interactions with the man on the street or at the tried and trusted chai shop have been subsumed by news channels, barring none, going hammer and tongs, taking on the establishment on the issue of corruption. The C-word is everywhere; it is omnipresent.

A few weeks ago it was the Commonwealth scam, followed last fortnight by the Adarsh Housing Society malpractice, and this week it is the turn of the spectrum saga. It is as if suddenly the watchdog media has woken up, discovered corruption and is gripping it firmly between its jaws, unwilling to let it go. Corruption has become the focal talking point on news bulletins, panel discussions and chat shows.

Don’t get me wrong. This is a welcome change. Everyone knows that corruption thrives when watchdogs sleep. But why have channels suddenly reacted? How come networks, always loathe to state the obvious, not equipped to handle the strain of politics and politicians, are now uprooting scandals, left right and centre, becoming friends of the little guy?

Aung Sang Suu Kyi shines as an international symbol of peace. Photo: AP/PTI

For one, whether TV’s eminence grises like to admit it or not, the networks tend to follow what the national dailies are playing up. After a long gap, the print media is going back to its investigative roots. It is sniffing out the hidden stories and rediscovering accountable journalism. So it is with the Adarsh expose.

In what is probably a first, CNN-IBN’s Rajdeep Sardesai acknowledged as much on air. On primetime news he headlined that while it was The Times of India that broke the Adarsh story first in print, it was CNN-IBN that had scooped it on TV.

Maybe the acknowledgement was to set the record straight, or maybe it was to deflect counter-claims. Rival channel Times Now was running a continuous ticker on how it was responsible for exposing "Kargilgate."

Secondly, perhaps TV’s current enthusiasm for unearthing corruption could be the result of lower tolerance levels among the public. Corruption is endemic in India; like the viral fever, it is mutating in so many forms and has been doing so for decades.

Third, there is no doubt the recent resignations of Ashok Chavan, Suresh Kalmadhi and A.Raja have achieved a level of satisfaction for the media. Critics might carp that the really guilty will get away, leaving the scapegoats behind, and that any meaningful punishment is not assured, but if the media continues to unravel case after case of corruption, the ruling elite cannot but respond. With an unrelenting 24/7 coverage (some may call it overblown), TV might just become an agent for change. One can only hope.

On to more sunny stories, like the release of Aung Sang Suu Kyi from decades of house arrest. November must be the sweetest month for the followers of the Burmese leader, who has been under house arrest intermittently for nearly 20 years.

Indian networks, though they covered the release, didn’t highlight the event. The BBC gave the most intense coverage to the long overdue and ground- breaking event; not surprising, given that the channel’s support of the leader has been no secret. Initial reportage was limited to Aung Sang meeting her frenzied followers at her gate but later in a special report, the network documented the growth of the leader, her transformation into a national icon from a student interested in only pursuing academics. For some reason the channel kept saying that the leader has been under house arrest for the "most part of 20 years", instead of citing an actual figure. Sounded a little confusing.

However, easily the most riveting segment was a one-on-one interview the BBC’s World Affairs Editor Jon Simpson had with Aung Sang. I tried to track it down on the BBC but could not do so. I actually caught the net version. What a treat it was.

Looking completely cool and inspirational in the sweltering heat, this international symbol of peace was an interviewer’s delight.

But 15 years is a long time to be away from family and changes. So it was, she said, a little strange speaking to her sons, who live in England, on a mobile. The 65-year-old leader didn’t know where the mouthpiece or the earpiece to that small phone was.