.jpg)
I spent much of Wednesday watching the second US Presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.
Till recently, the conventional wisdom had it that debates don’t really change anything. People watch them and then go off and vote as they would have anyway. But that view changed after the first debate when Romney trounced Obama.
Till that point, the challenger had been trailing in the polls. But after the debate, he drew level with the President and even came out ahead of him according to some polls.
It is too early to say who won the second debate or what effect it will have on the Presidential race. My view is that Obama did better than Romney. But then, I am not an American and I do not share the same concerns as the US electorate.
Each time there is a US Presidential debate, all of us in the Indian media make the same point. Look at America, we say. The candidates are willing to face each other in public and to debate the issues. In India, however, we complain, our leaders remain inaccessible and unwilling to engage with the media.
It is a fair point but I think it has less to do with the need for politicians to debate each other than our own need as journalists to get the politicians to answer our questions. When we complain about the way in which politics is conducted in India, we are not really disputing that politicians address hundreds of rallies during election campaigns and speak directly to lakhs of voters. We are just upset that they do this without our intervention and bypass the media entirely. Why can’t they reach their voters through us, the TV channels and newspapers, is what we are really asking.
I wondered about this when I watched the second Obama-Romney debate. What was most note-worthy about the exchanges was that they focused on the issues. What was America’s policy towards China? What employment generation plan did each candidate prefer? Was America doing enough to fight terror? What was the best way to revive the economy? And so on.
| "Let’s have debates, by all means. But let’s also make sure that their content approaches the standard of the US Presidential debates." |
On Wednesday evening, as the pundits on international news channels discussed the outcome of the debate and replayed clips of the sharp exchanges between the two men, I turned to our own news channels. What do you suppose we were discussing?
I’ll tell you. It was: Is Nitin Gadkari a crook? Has Arvind Kejriwal gone too far? How does Gadkari’s land deal compare with Robert Vadra’s? And so on.
It is not my case that these are unimportant issues or that we should not discuss political corruption. My point is different: when was the last time you saw a discussion on Indian television that dealt intelligently with the kinds of issues that Obama and Romney were debating?
Nobody who watches much Indian news TV can dispute that we prefer to focus on personalities and issues relating to individuals. We do not have much time for the sorts of issues that were debated by Obama and Romney. The Indian economy may be going to the toilet but you would never guess that from most of the debates you see on news channels.
So, here’s my position: of course politicians should be more accessible to the media. Of course they should be willing to appear on television and answer tough questions. And of course the media should continue to expose corruption.
But isn’t it time for us in the media to look inwards and re-examine our own priorities? Are we not guilty of missing the big issues that will determine the future of this country and focussing excessively on personality-based issues that make for more exciting television?
Let’s have debates, by all means. But let’s also make sure that their content approaches the standard of the US Presidential debates.
Name:
Please enter name
E-mail:
Your email id will not be published.
Please enter email
Please enter a valid email address eg. xyz@abc.com !
Friend's Name:
Please enter friend name
Friend's E-mail:
Your email id will not be published.
Please enter friend email
Please enter a valid email address eg. xyz@abc.com !
Additional Text:
Security code:
Other Articles
-
It is not only the right thing to do on an intuitive level but also entirely in accordance with the principles on which this nation was founded.
-
My point is that in a country as large as ours, a numbers game makes no sense unless you look at the larger picture.
-
It is tempting to see the revolt as a failure because Pawar got nothing of consequence in Delhi. But it would be a mistake to do so.
-
This was an unnecessary reshuffle, forced on the nation by Manmohan Singh’s unwillingness to hold on to the finance portfolio.
-
And the end has an emotional power that is unusual for comic book pictures. What a pity it is the last movie in this trilogy!
See All