A reporter receives information about an arson attack by the rioters. Reaching upon the site he sees the police station and a bike set ablaze. He takes out his phone and begins making a video when four rioters charge at him and assault him physically while insisting “he is from the media, which belongs to Modi. It doesn’t talk about us”. They hit him repeatedly on the head with an iron rod and brick. Somehow, the reporter manages to escape from them.

This incident took place in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh on December 20. The journalist so assaulted was ETV India’s reporter Khurshid Ahmed. This is not the first incidence where a reporter was assaulted or mistreated. Prior to this too, several such incidents have taken place, but recently such treatment has become rather commonplace for media workers, especially the field reporters. At some places, reporters are elbowed with ‘go back’ slogans while at others they even have to field ambush.

As per a report, during the past five years (2014-2019) there have been more than 200 serious assaults on reporters in India. The report ‘Getting Away with Murder’ mentions that during the said period, 40 reporters lost their lives, out of which 21 deaths occurred due to journalism. To understand this rising trend, Rural Connection spoke with some senior journalists and field reporters from various media houses and editors. Read on to know their views.

Due to the studio talks, reporters becoming the soft targets: Rajdeep Sardesai

Senior journalist and consulting editor of India Today Group, Rajdeep Sardesai said: “It is not that it is happening for the first time — whenever there is violence, reporters are targeted. Mob also attacks media because it feels that media reports one-sidedly. Irrespective of what a reporter may say, he still becomes a soft target due to what is being spoken in the studio, especially on TV. Mob believes that attacking the reporters will garner more publicity, so its ire is directed towards the reporter.”

Media’s nationalism gave rise to problems: Ajit Anjum

Senior journalist Ajit Anjum shows yet another aspect of the assault on reporters. He believes that recently, media has taken to working in bias rather than remaining neutral due to which the field reporters suffer. He said: “I firmly believe that a reporter shouldn’t be attacked as he is performing his duty and carrying out the responsibility entrusted upon him by the channel. Someone’s contempt with the channel must not be directed towards the reporter.

This is deeply disturbing. However, there one more aspect to it which is the way media has allegedly turned nationalistic in recent times. The person, who had been to jail and was openly blackmailing people — something which was absolutely inappropriate, unethical and incorrect from journalistic view point — is today the biggest nationalist of them all.

This person also takes upon himself to speak against all those people who disagree with the government, calling them separatist gangs. So, if the media is biased and the voice of dissent and discontent is attributed to so called separatist gangs, it agitates the public because they feel they are not being heard.”

He added: “It is true that the police were attacked with arson and stones — we have seen the violent pictures from Seelampur to Kanpur and Lucknow. But equally true was the police violence in Muzaffarnagar, Bijnor and Kanpur, which did not feature in the nationalistic media. It focuses entirely on stone-pelting by the anti-social elements by blocking out police violence. It is actually the broken faith of public in media which erupts at times. However, it is not right if reporters are targeted for this, any such act must be punished legally.”

So, far as deaths of the journalists go, as per the records of the Committee to Protect Journalists, during the period 1992-2019, 1,363 journalists and media-people had lost their lives across the world. In 2019, 50 journalists and media people got killed across the world. Out of these, one journalist got murdered in India. Katha Sathyanarayan was a local reporter of Telugu regional daily Andhra Jyoti and was slain on October 15, 2019. He was assailed while returning home in Andhra Pradesh’s East Godavari District.

Media divided on ideology which is detrimental to field reporters: Nupur Sharma

While, on one hand, Ajit Anjum talks of the media becoming the voice of nationalism in recent times; Op India’s editor Nupur Sharma, on the other hand, believes that the media always stood divided on ideology which has come to play in recent times, directly affecting the field reporters. She said: “The stringer reporting from the field is the backbone of media. He brings us the news. I believe that 95% stringers perform their job with sincere honesty. They are, in fact, true journalists.

A TV anchor is the one who contorts the information furnished by the reporter. A stringer risks his life and sends a real story which is totally altered on TV, which may affect the morale of the stringer adversely. Nonetheless, the story is altered as the anchor wishes to maintain a secular image and doesn’t want to show that the Muslim mob has done a riot. Today, a stringer has done his work sincerely, but his story is tampered with and trashed as it doesn’t find favour with the anchor, it doesn’t comply with his ideology.”

 “Secondly, if we remain true to ourselves, we’d have to realize that the media was politically divided since the beginning. Due to the popularity of the social media and increased awareness of the public such issues have come to the fore. Besides, there is always the ideological divide. In today’s scenario, I refuse to believe that any anchor, media house or website is totally unbiased. Some would lean towards the left, some others towards right. Now, if in a specific protest, only right-wing members are being targeted, it shows that the protest is initiated by leftists. If a left-wing journalist is attacked, it would mean that the protest is powered by the right wing,” said Nupur Sharma.

She added, “Today Ravish Kumar’s credibility for me is in negative as I am not his viewer, but those who watch him hail him as 100% credible even if he is correct. Arnav Goswami’s credibility maybe 100% for his audience, but it is negative for the leftists. It is unfortunate that the media faces divide on both political and ideological front and the credibility of a journalist is in the hand of his audience. If in Jamia, only Zee News and Republic TV are challenged, this is a broad indicator of whose thrust is behind such matter. However, the biggest loss remains that of the stringer who covers the story from ground zero.”

Reporters are being targeted with the intent to harm the channels: Nivedita Shandilya

It is clear from the opinions of Ajit Anjum and Nupur Sharma that the media is divide between polarities directly affecting the reporter working on field. Similar incident took place during the JNU protests where many reporters were mistreated. ABP News’ reporter Nivedita Shandilya, who covered the JNU protests informed, “JNU has been my worst experience by far. When I reached there, I heard cries ‘ Zee News wali has come’ and suddenly few students started towards me. However, many JNU students know me so they shooed them away. I did see them behave quite agressively with a girl from Aaj Tak and holding another channel’s reporter by the shoulder, they were shouting slogan’go back, go back’. They were also pushing away news cameras. I had told that day that I am not shooting.”

Telling the reason behind these incidents Nivedita said: “What happens is that we represent our respective channels on ground, so they think harming us would bring harm to the channel but this isn’t true. There is yet another trend — if a protest is unable to draw attention, people resort to acting inappropriately with the reporters to come to limelight. This is highly inappropriate.”

Media losing its credibility: Neelesh Misra

Deeply concerned with the incidents of misbehaviour and ambush against the reporter, Neelesh Misra, founder, Gaon Connection said: “Previously, in violence-torn areas, there used to be set rules of engagement. If one is a journalist, one was not touched by either the security forces or the protestors, so somewhere one considered oneself safe. Being on duty as a reporter had held great merit. But since past few years, those lines have been violated and ignored. So now one can be thrashed by the police, one’s camera can be destroyed. Previously putting on the camera used to create an invisible circle of dignity which was seldom breached.”

He added: “Presently, whether a violent mob or the police, anyone can target the reporters deeming them to be a proponent of some agenda. This shows two things. First and foremost, it is the fall in the credibility of media as the average media person is harbouring some agenda or the other. Secondly, the mob is gaining confidence, the very mob which may lynch at its will, can now target almost anyone. One more thing is that the media houses must think for their reporters’ safety when the latter step out to report such incidents.”

Exact same breach of conduct was rampant during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act where not only were the reporters thrashed by the mob but also were harassed by the security forces. Especially in Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh, several reporters covering such protests were taken in the police custody. Among these reporters was Omar Rashid of The Hindu, who was arrested in Lucknow and was released after a two-hour-long interrogation.

Such incidents of assaults on the reporters have also been condemned by the Editors’ Guild of India. The guild had on its statement issued on December 23 mentioned: “The Editors Guild of India condemns the various acts of violence and brutality committed by police forces, in particular, those in Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh, against media persons in different parts of the country in the last one week. The Guild reminds the police forces across the country that journalists are present at different venues, where protests are taking place, as part of their Constitutionally guaranteed duties of gathering information and disseminating it among the people through their respective media platforms. Using force or physical violence against journalists on duty throttles the very voice of democracy and media freedom.”

Another reason behind the assaults on the reporters is that the public’s faith in media has waned in recent times. This has been felt by many field reporters. The Wire’s reporter Avichal Dubey said: “People have lost faith in the media. Previously, people used to wait for the story to be published, now they need to look at it before publishing to ensure it isn’t incorrect.”

Avichal informed: “Recently I was covering the violence in western Uttar Pradesh where the doubt on media was clearly evident. Most of the people asked me to share with them my report and video upon completion and to publish them only when they’d okay it. How is that for a filter? Previously we showed our story to the editor, now the public demands to be shown the story first before even publishing it. This emphasis shows the waning of faith.”

‘‘Secondly, these are the times of media shaming. Not a reporter in particular, but the media houses are, in general, are disparaged by not any race or segment in particular. Sometimes it could be someone against whom the media house has been reporting for a period of time. No one goes against the media just like that. The things have built up slowly over a period of time and what media faces today is its own karma,” said Avichal Dubey.

Talking about these incidents, Scroll’s editor, Naresh Fernandez, said: “There always have been cases of assault on reporters during violent situations. I feel that much depends upon a mob’s reaction. If the crowd has assailants, they wouldn’t want reporters around. However, there is another aspect to it, during the Mumbai riots of 1992, our office phones used to be abuzz with calls, some of which would plead us to do something for there would be the mob approaching and police unwilling to act. So, these are the two aspects — on one hand, a reporter is detested whereas he is much desired on the other.”