This "Mint" leaves a bad taste in your mouth

Whether you are writing a small column in a daily tabloid or you are the host of a much watched financial advise channel- as a journalist you have a responsibility to be unbiased and objective. I am not saying that everything printed or broadcast has to be so, but then it should be labeled as advertising, infomercial, non-editorial.

So when I see a newspaper like "Mint" blatantly use headlines to promote one political party over another, it makes me wonder if there is really any objective journalism left. The newspaper has been running a series of reports about the success and failures of the UPA government in the past five years. Of course this is a much needed exercises leading up to the General Elections next month. And when an article in this morning's edition stares back at me with the title "Verdict: the voter is worse of after 5 years"- I sit back and take notice. But a look between the lines reveals a story that is quite different. The very first piece of statistic says that 38% people feel that they are better off after 5 years of UPA rule, 18% feel they are worse off and 44% feel they are at the same level. What is more, even if we look at more pie-charts the highest number of people who feel they are worse off after 5 years is 20% in constituencies held by the Congress. But if you look at the UPA ruled states almost 50% of the people feel that they are better off. So why this incongruency between the content and the label on the package? So how, I ask, is the headline justifying the content?

I am not denying that with so much noise, a newspaper too must compete for the attention of its readers. But this kind of a headline is not clever it is just inaccurate and leaves the fleeting reader with a completely incorrect picture. It is designed to create a bias.

And what is more I am beginning to feel that this manipulation of statistics and headlines is not just tied to sensationalism and is not a one time thing. It has to do with the fact that the "Mint", in this race up to the elections, has picked the side it is on- the BJP. In the past one month alone the newspaper has extensively covered the BJP's online advertising campaign. But surprisingly enough, in all this coverage there is no comparison to what other political parties are doing or what the international trends on the same subject are. Something that would make these articles much more relevant. You can get a glimpse of their agenda to push the BJP in another article in today's paper. The online advertising story in today's campaign section, a piece about how the online media houses are growing, starts with a mention (yet again) about the BJP's online campaign.

My anger is the same as that of John Stewart of the "Daily Show". He is daring to point out that if Jim Cramer was recommending Bear Sterns stock just 7 weeks before the complete collapse of the bank, he can not be allowed to continue as a financial expert in the public space. He can continue to be so in his private sphere, but if he chooses to enjoy high ratings and all the adoration and wealth that comes as a result of his perceived expertise, he must also admit that he made a horrendous mistake and is not all as good as he made himself out to be.