At a recent event commemorating the life and work of Jewish-American journalist Daniel Pearl, experts from Israel, India and the US debated on how digital media has brought about a change in reportage. Shrabasti Mallik reports
When the world was still recovering from the attack at the World Trade Centre, one journalist Daniel Pearl went in search of the real picture behind the attack. Such was his determination to reach the roots, that he ended up paying with his life for it. They say that journalism is fearless and that passion can drive you to lengths to get the real picture. But Danny, as his family and colleagues at the Wall Street Journal called him, was just not digging for information — it was necessary for him to find out why terrorists did what they did, through a direct confrontation.
The news of his death in 2002 came as a waking call for all those reporters and journalists deployed at areas of unrest. Since Danny, journalism has undergone a sea change, especially in the way in which news is disseminated. The world had already witnessed the advent of computers and Internet by the time he started working on his project.
At a recent discussion organised by the Israel Embassy and the American Embassy at the University of Chicago Centre in Delhi, eminent journalists discussed about the changes that journalism has gone through and digital media.
A lot has changed in the digital age. “The reality of a journalist’s life is to grapple with the truth. When Daniel was working, digital media was in its nascent stage, it had barely started. Medium for sharing information was also limited to them. One had to be there and see it for oneself,” said Gorgon Fairclough, South Asia bureau, Wall Street Journal.
According to another panelist and National award winner Ramesh Sharma, freedom of speech is an oxymoron. “Things have changed after and since Daniel Pearl’s time. Earlier, terror used to strike on people or places but with the advent of digitalisation, it has spread on social media too. Today, digital media is probably the fastest way to disseminate information,” he said.
With digital media at hand, there is also a rising number of citizen journalists. “You can’t whisk them away,” Sharma pointed out. But is a citizen journalist, who may or may not have any training, entitled to the same kind of protection as a regular journalistIJ Sharma debated on the point with Yaav Korni, journalist and columnist, Globes, Israel.
“I believe in the maxim that news is something which someone is trying to hide. A journalist needs courage and conviction, which Daniel had plenty. We have to come face to face even with people of dubious potential,” said the director of the documentary movie The Journalist & The Jihadi: The Murder of Daniel Pearl.
The discussion then steered towards, how safe it is for reporters to be going about doing their jobs in Naxalite and terrorist areasIJ Korni drew the fine line between a naxalite and a terrorist. “Naxalites are interested in exploiting a journalist to gain information whereas the intention of a terrorist is slaughter. There is no similarity whatsoever. It is the responsibility of the editors to prevent their reporters to go to such areas. And reporters should not do such stories regardless of the risks involved.”
He added that newspapers all over the world are almost dying out, conceptually, and that there is a proliferation of freelance journalism all over. “Daniel was an established journalist who was beheaded but there are so many who are unknown,” Korni pointed out.
In fact, technology in today’s world is changing the security situations, too. Now everything is out on social media sites and journalists play the role of an intermediary. “It has transformed the way we cover things and it has led to an increase in impatience,” said Fairclough.
Shashidhar Nanjndaiah, dean of a reputed media institute, said that what goes into the protection of a journalist changes from platform to platform. “Apart from the challenges that a reporter has to face other than technology, are all the same across. The rules of the game are changing and journalism is becoming dangerous because threats come from all sources now,” he said.
Sharma took up the issue of the numerous freelance journalists and pointed out that they are at more risk of being in harm’s way. “They turn up without support and back up. They also lack any institutional support and are unaware of the new economics of journalism. Moreover, there is fierce competition between them because they are not very well trained and at the end, they forget the aim of their job - they opinionate rather than disseminate,”he shared.
Having closely worked with Daniel who was relentless in his quest for truths and fact for his stories, Fairclough recalled how Daniel would spend days and weeks on the field trying to tack people down and meet them face to face. “Today, the internet has become the primary source of information but I don’t see that as a replacement to talking face to face,” he said.