What should an editor do when something he has published displeases the Government or is held to violate some law but is none-the-less true? Should he apologize? We should say, certainly not. True, he is not bound to publish in such matter, but once it has been published, the editor ought to accept responsibility for it. ”
– Mahatma Gandhi, Indian Opinion (Gujarati edition),
April 23, 1919
Two news stories pertaining to freedom of press created ripples about the restrictions and responsibilities of the media. One was by a Chandigarh-based daily exposing the data breach of AADHAR Cards of the region by a racket operating through anonymous WhatsApp groups. The other one, more alarming where a news portal did a story claiming that Kulbhushan Jadhav, who is in Pakistani jail, was the spy of Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), which was later retracted. Both the stories can claim ‘freedom of press’ but need not necessarily pass the test of responsibility that adjuncts with the freedom.
The breach of Aadhar Card data is a serious revelation and should be thoroughly investigated. The FIR in this case was inevitable as there are criminals involved in the racket. Whether the journalist and the publication involved in the operation should be named in FIR is the point of contention and that has been there since the series of sting operations in late 1990s. There is no doubt that freedom of press is paramount in democracy and restrictions should be as per the Constitutional provisions, besides the self-regulation.
It is beyond doubt that questions of privacy of data and digital security pertaining to Aadhar Cards are crucial and many private players and agencies would try to grab this data for vested interests. The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) should come out clean on this predicament that is haunting common Bharatiyas since the idea was introduced in the UPA regime. Adding up of a 16 digit virtual ID is a welcome step and a direct impact of the story.
The AADHAR has certainly helped in checking leakages in the Government subsidies and identifying fake individuals who were plundering national resources with fake identities. Therefore, political parties instead of doing petty politics over this critical national issue should be more pragmatic about this inevitable integration process. Media and technology people can play a supportive role in making the system foolproof.
When it comes to the Kulbhushan Jadhav lie that was spread by a news portal, it was a clear violation of journalistic ethics and Constitutional provisions. The matter directly related to national interest and a life of a person in enemy custody, and therefore falls in the category of irresponsible journalism. Just filing a story by a Pakistani journalist targeting ‘the unethical way Pakistan treated Jadhav”s family’ for Bharatiya news channel had led to his harassment. This clearly indicates the sensitivity of the matter and how Pakistan is playing up the propaganda. Therefore, the reporters, especially active on news portals and social media platforms will have to be careful and follow certain restraint on the matters of national security.
Organiser was the first publication that faced the brunt of censorship in 1950, immediately after the Constitution was adopted and fought tooth and nail to restore the ‘freedom of press’. Then also while delivering the landmark judgement Justice Patanjali Shastri had noticeably stated that “criticism of Government, exciting disaffection or bad feeling towards it, is not to be regarded as a justifying ground for restricting the freedom of expression and of the press, unless it such as to undermine the security of the State”. This cardinal principle is missed by many while arguing for unrestrained ‘freedom’. In the spirit of this Constitutional value, the nation should stand for investigative journalism in the national interest while opposing the speculative and biased journalism on the same ground.
