An om-what-man?
Not an hour ago, The Hindu announced its appointment of an ombudsman - a reader's editor who will act as a sort of liaison between the public and the newspaper, explaining the newspaper's practices and codes to its readers and taking up cudgels on the part of the readers if needed.
Of course, it wasn't quite as simple as that; it rarely is these days. In quite a hoopla, The Hindu flew down The Guardian's Alan Rusbridger, editor, and Ian Mayes, reader's editor, and asked them to speak before the announcement. And they did that quite engagingly if at length; Rusbridger was far more concise but, especially to affirmed Internet junkies like myself, he didn't say much that was new. Mayes pointed out a couple of interesting real-life ethical dilemmas faced by newspapers in Britain and spoke about his own role at The Guardian.
What did come out of both speeches, however, was the importance of the independence of the ombudsman - that he not be afraid or lackadaisical about pointing out flaws in the newspaper, whether factual errors or the relatively more serious ethical issues. The position of the ombudsman is not as well known in India as yet, but the Organization of News Ombudsmen (abbreviated as, Mayes pointed out, ONO!) has almost 100 members worldwide, and certainly the leading publications in the West all have one on their staff.
After all this, then, it came as a bit of an anticlimax when N Ram announced The Hindu's own appointee to the post. It wasn't an outsider, for a start; The Times of India had named Justice Bhagwati in its own short-lived experiment in ombudsmanship, which made a lot more sense as far as objectivity was concerned. It also wasn't, contrary to what rumour had it, somebody who was young, active and under 35. Quite the opposite of both; K Narayanan joined The Hindu in 1955, and as a friend at The Hindu puts it, he's "a really inside insider", having "grown up on Hindu air" so to speak. He retired in 1996 but was retained as editorial consultant to Frontline and The Hindu.
How non-partisan such a gentleman can be, whatever his other fine qualities, and how a member of that generation will handle the rather modern issues that Rusbridger pointed out - competition from the Internet, to name one - will be interesting to watch. Personally, though, after so much had been made of the appointment of Indian journalism's "first internal independent ombudsman" - at times, it almost seemed as if Ram was going to rip open an envelope and announce the Best Actor Oscar - the choice was a thorough disappointment.
Tailpiece When the floor was thrown open to questions, a decrepit old man rose, took the mike in his hand, and asked: "Both The Guardian and The Hindu use many words that are not found in standard dictionaries. Like foreign words. I want to know if anything is going to be done about that." I may have snorted rather loudly in laughter, and the panel moved hastily on to the next question - this time, to be certain, from a well established, articulate pillar of Tamil Nadu politics.
posted by Samanth | Friday, January 13, 2006
21 Comments:
The Oscars are a disappointment anyway. :p
Hmm..interesting concept. Considering how badly the cricket team reacted to some 'straight talk' from GC, hope the ombudsman has better luck within the journo circle.
Too bad that the best articles in The Hindu are the ones reprinted from The Guardian or The New York Times.
karthik
At least a step in the right direction. Guardian, in my opinion, is the best in the business.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hi Samanth, nice piece. My views, for what it is worth.
He is an insider: True, an outsider would have been more objective. [During the function last evening, when N Ram asked K Narayanan to take his seat next to Mayes, a friend joked that KN should have refused, just to assert his independence ;-)]
He is old: I have met so many old men, who are intellectually sharp, morally strong and physically active. So, I am not really let down by his age. Even Mayes looked old.
He might be out of touch with modern issues: You say, "How a member of that generation will handle the rather modern issues that Rusbridger pointed out - competition from the Internet, to name one - - will be interesting to watch." He need not. That's the problem of managing editors and publishers. The old issues of journalism - sloppy reporting, plagiarism, inaccuracies and stuff like that should keep him busy.
Great piece, Dude... Point taken... the role itself is unclear.. What would do a ombubsman do if the paper actually does factually incorrect reporting or if there is a case of libel.. What would the role of the Press Council be ? Looks like just another gimmick in view of impending competition... And the choice of course, proves the whole point...Jobs for the old boys, eh?--dp
Karthik: The Hindu, in my opinion, actually does a good job of balancing NYT/Guardian articles with its own coverage. Some days, it's true, the opinion page looks like it's been lifted straight from The Guardian. But overall, the balance is decent. It's another matter whether The Hindu's own articles measure up to NYT/Guardian standards or not.
Arjun: Yeah, The Guardian is pretty much considered the gold standard now, although like The Hindu, it is perceptibly left-leaning in its editorialising. But then again, somebody once told me that for a journalist to say he writes with NO bias would mean that he's a liar. :-)
Ramnath: I have nothing against Mr Narayanan's age, but there are issues that will crop up purely because of technology, ethical issues that wouldn't even have been so prevalent in 1996, when he retired. To name one - Mayes' own example of how The Guardian recently Photoshopped a photograph. But it's a good point that the sloppy reporting etc. will keep him busy - I guess I was a bit more disappointed than most because I'd heard the rumours earlier, that the ombudsman would be a younger person.
The primary disappointment was the fact that it turned out to be somebody who is so likely - at least to an outsider, and certainly a few Hindu people have voiced that opinion to me since last evening - to toe the Big Boss' official line.
DP: Your first comment here! I'm honoured! :-) The ombudsman's role itself is pretty clear - if a newspaper reports facts incorrectly, it is his job to issue corrections in print, and to take it up with the editor if such inaccuracy becomes a habit. And as Mayes said, there are three stages to reader complains in Britain now - first the ombudsman, then the Press Council (or the PCC there) and finally the law. In all his years of ombudsmanning, he says, only three or four people have ever needed to go through all three levels.
So as far as the role and the concept goes, I'm for it. It's just the choice of person I'm disappointed in.
The Hindu's editorial today suggested that the post of the Reader's Editor could be subject to review every two years. It seems to me then that this ombudsman thing's probably just a convenient way of getting rid of tired old warhorses that're beginning to get in the way. The poor buggers get to field a few uncomplementary emails, sit in on a few meetings, and when their two relatively chilled-out years are up, the Board of Directors send them a gentle bye-bye note. It'd be fantastic if they had a similar system in place for pain-in-the-ass captains of the Indian cricket team...
Samanth(you probably might not even respond to this:)) : Dont you think the Indian Express would sell so much more if they put in more care in bringing out the newspaper ? I mean ,there are articles on the front page which end halfway with no continuation in the later pages. The cricket reports are frequently taken from the PTI or some other agency rather than having a seperate writer.
Their editorials and the articles accompanying them are arguably the best I have read ( nothwithstanding the odd Gurumurthy rant)but they dont seem to devote too much attention to the packaging and related issues .
What is your take on this?
karthik
Karthik: Valid enough points, but the New Indian Express is operating under quite a few financial constraints. With more money would come better paper and photos, better sub editors and designers, more chances to send cricket correspondents on tours, etc. I think that's probably the issue behind all your questions.
Very diplomatic Samanth but its pointless isnt it ? How are they going to make more money without the aforementioned additions ? Its just that the editorials stands apart but the rest of the paper dosesnt measure up to it.
karthik
The problem, Samanth, with the New Indian Express is, it is no different from the old Indian Express. If you don't pay your staff or don't pay them at the end of each month, how do you expect to retain them. They've constantly over the years regressed from being the Mclaren (after Hindu the Ferrari) of Chennai (2nd best) to Minardi - breeding and training ground for freshers who end up in The Hindu! With the monetary muscle to flex, the bosses surely could put in more here and cut down on those crap kins such as movie magazines. The newsprint quality at least could be improved. Inspite of some excellent edits and at times inspiring (am not mentioning Samanth's writings alone!) Sunday articles, it feels like grabbing a copy of kaavi colour government textbook publications! The money is there... but not for investing in NIE prolly? Ain't too diplomatic, is it? HELLO ANYONE FROM THE NIE READING THIS... SAMANTH IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS COMMENT!
And lest you delete that... HELLO ANYONE FROM THE NIE READING THIS... SAMANTH IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREVIOUS COMMENT! Btw... one can console saying NIE is way ahead of someone who sells 42 pakka notebook for Re. 1/- only.
Hi Samanth,
I recently saw Matchstick Men, and - Wow! They really had me fooled, though I did think that something was amiss shortly before the plot was revealed. I didn't understand how Chuck (or the prey) turned up at Roy's house with Frank (Roy's accomplice). He said that he found out where Roy lived because he tracked down Angela, but that doesn't explain the presence of a beaten-up Frank.
Otherwise, a brilliant movie.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Unrest Cure: I wouldn't have called "Matchstick Men" brilliant - I thought the climax was way too short and brief. But it had its moments. And Antickpix: What's the deal with removing your comment?! :-) I'd read it before you removed it, and it seemed fine to me!
Well, I skimmed thro' Unrest Cure's comment, and thought he was asking a question. A closer inspection revealed that wasn't the case. :)
Actually, going through it again now..seems like a question again.
Crap, I need sleep.
Ombundsman. That's one of those words I think it would be difficult to say out loud with a straight face. Makes you sound like you've a mouthful of marbles. (...snide thought censored....)Another weird word is 'Chaplaincy'. There was a building named that where I used to study and every day as I walked past it for atleast a week and a half, I would say out loud: Chaplaincy! and spend the next ten minutes guffawing uncontrollably.
Post a Comment