Serious journalism: in the ICU, on a ventilator

If it bleeds, it leads, a diktat common to newspapers.Some papers, in gusts of piety started ‘good news’ columns and like wilted plants, they died of neglect

If it bleeds it leads. In 45 years of journalism that was the diktat common to every paper I worked on or ran. The worse the news, the more the sales. Scandal, death, blood and gore wrapped in cynicism sold. We always convinced ourselves that was what the reader wanted — print and be damned. The stronger the negative, the better. Good news sucked. Nobody wanted it. The news editor would walk in and say okay, there has been an accident, how many casualties, where are the pictures. Disasters brought a hum to the newsroom.

Not our problem. That was the market, and we had to cater to it.

Which is why, it is so heartening to read about the one agency that has managed to survive since 2000 by sending out only positive reports. The Good News Agency functions globally and has done so for years but never really hit the big top because no one wants to read about the good guys. I don’t think I ever subscribed to it or even advocated it. What would we do with good news, where would we put it? Many people tried, then exploded into failure. Good news is boring.

Some papers, in gusts of piety started ‘good news’ columns and like wilted plants, they died of neglect.

So, when I read a message from the Good News Agency after a long time and read that it was selling well, I thought, wow, maybe things have changed. Maybe people are tired of hate and violence and war and death and the killing fields are fallow. Maybe people want ‘feel good’ stuff and need to know there is a lot of good out there.

Then the cynic took over. Nah, nothing changes that much. Over the years the media has trained its readers too well... it is a Faustian pact... you will learn to love hate or there won’t be any bonus for the Press.

Fortunately, my cynicism was tempered by a certain pacific element in my nature. I am a ‘peace at all costs’ sort of guy who is ready to take up cudgels and go to war if the occasion desires but is happiest trying to broker smiles and handshakes. I like people to be happy and laidback. So, even though bad news sold faster and the seamless circle of vendor and buyer escalated the negatives, when I look back I think we were a lot more circumspect than we give ourselves credit for. Truth be told, we held back on the gory and the grim and visually we censored our pages on our own, spiking what we thought would be offensive. A lot of it was barred because it wasn’t done. It just wasn’t done.

And the reader was involved. If we did push the button a bit too much, next day there would be public outrage. The public does not even bother any more.

On this backdrop, I had an interesting conversation with a fairly learned man who said that journalism had changed dramatically from our times at the helm and was now totally different in texture. I beg to differ. Journalism cannot change. It is still dedicated to finding the truth for the greater good and doing its job of striving and seeking and trying not to yield to any pressure.