Individual Rights, Cultural Terrorism And Media Ethics - The Mangalore Question

India with its ‘post-colonial’ tag and the baggage that comes along with it has never had it easy. As a country, we have had to fight the moral dilemma of choosing between an indigenous culture that embodies multiple facets and a remnant western culture still being infused through what is called ‘cultural imperialism.’ We never got rid of the obsession with anything remotely connected with the West; not once during the sixty two years of independence. At the same time, we cannot let go what we boast about as Indian culture. It is a funny case of confusion and identity crisis.

This dichotomy often manifests in many forms in our day-to-day life which we hardly notice. But when some events are re-presented as larger than life through our mainstream media, they generate discussion and debate.

The whole of India watched in horror when news channels across the country (English and regional) aired the scenes of violence from a pub in Mangalore. Young men and women who came to chill out were being beaten up by the activists of an outfit called Sri Rama Sena for contaminating the Indian culture by drinking and smoking. The incident attracted supreme media attention and the focus was women’s rights to socialise freely. Women’s organisations across the country took up the issue and condemned it on the same grounds. One lady formed ‘a consortium of liberal, pub-going women’ on the Internet inviting women to join her cause to send ‘pink chaddies’ to the Sri Rama Sena head Pramod Muthalik on Valentines’ Day and protest against the Mangalore incident.

The politics of power

It is impossible to miss where this drama was staged – in Karnataka, a BJP ruled state. The BJP, ever torn between its love for Hindu culture and its desire for a modern image, was embarrassed. With the BJP in power in Karnataka, Muthalik knew the publicity value of his show. Had he enacted his theatre elsewhere, like the Shiv Sena which raided pubs years ago in Mumbai and Pune under the ‘secular’ Congress rule, it would have been far less noisy.

With just one mad act, Muthalik turned many, including a minister at the Centre, into full-scale lunatics. It would be irrelevant to ask if Renuka Chowdhury would have supported a ‘pub bharo andolan’ to take on Muthalik, had this happened in a Congress ruled state. The Union Minister for Women and Child Development, who has never ever uttered a word on the continuing rapes and paedophile crimes in UPA -ruled states, has got agitated and warned the Karnataka government.

The rights of individuals

The most important outcry post-Mangalore is against ‘moral policing.’ Young men and women do not want anybody to dictate to them what they should do and what they should not. Forget young men and women, no adult with a thinking mind would want ultimatums on what he/she should do for the weekend. This right to freedom of thought and expression is a constitutional right. Some people say that society is more important than an individual. Well, easier said than done because society comprises of individuals. No society constituting repressed individuals has ever had ‘order’ that these people envisage.

However, it is necessary that we look at the other side of the coin as well. There is an observation that connects individual right claim and the present economic crisis. It says that the current Indian discourse on individual and human rights apes the West, and many in the West now seem to realise that continuously undermining the moral and social order has led to the present economic crisis.

In the United States, the contract-based model undermined families and led to low or no household savings, high personal debt, credit card based living, outsourcing of household functions, and the like. The erosion in relation-based lifestyle soon imposed a huge social security burden on the state because the family mechanism that supported the unemployed, infirm and the aged became dysfunctional forcing the state to step in to aid them.

Apparently, all individual- centric economies are deep in debt; but family-oriented nations like Japan, China, India and generally Asian nations, account for over three-fourths of global savings. This idea that unbridled human rights and unrestrained personal freedom have led to social and cultural degeneration, and that it is possibly the cause of the present economic crisis is extremely interesting.

Terrorism in the name of culture

Most hooligans, who justify the violation of human right of freedom of choice, do so, on the basis of culture. It is depressing that these ruffians operate in the name of Rama and Shiva causing disrepute to genuine Hindu organisations and more importantly, Hinduism.

Here are some arguments that appeared in reports related to the incident:

‘To drink alcohol or indulge in carnal pleasure is not sin, but its abstinence bring great rewards says our Dharmasastras. [Manu Smriti 5.56]’

‘Renunciation is the national ideal of India, ratified Swami Vivekananda.’

The custodians of the so-called Indian culture have taken it upon themselves to uphold these thoughts and indulge in violence to avoid cultural erosion. Whether Indian culture tells one to kill lives and break bones is doubtful. It is also strange how other factors that go into this ‘erosion’ are not ever considered. India, as an economy, liberalised itself in the last decade of the twentieth century opening floodgates of opportunities for the West and their culture to pour in. McDonaldisation, Cocacolanisation or whatever ‘isations’ followed. All of these were acceptable because there was huge money involved. Many cultural custodians benefited from them. When there is no shame in accepting an English education system and multinational corporations, why ridicule the individual choices which form just a subset of many governmental choices and have been deemed legitimate by the existing legal system?

Also, in the Indian tradition, women have been overwhelmingly burdened with the duty of being the embodiment of culture that needs to be preserved. It is extremely anachronistic in this age of equal opportunities.

The question of media ethics

The argument about media’s irresponsibility in dealing with this issue stems mainly from the fact that this was a staged act. Media personnel were at the venue, much before the unfortunate incident happened. It was almost a ‘Lights, camera, action’ episode. It is disturbing that not one of them chose to inform the Police about this grave law and order situation. Had they done that, the chaos that occurred could have been averted, of course at the cost of ‘a colourful scoop of violence against youth.’

Another aspect worth noticing is that the attack that happened against a group of young women and men swiftly transformed into one against women only in the subsequent media reports. Everybody took up the cause of women’s rights raising questions about their individual right to freedom. It is dubious how the men in the picture faded away. Was it done because talking about violence against women is fashionable; or because that is what the violent outfit targeted anyway – just that men came in the way?

If the latter option is the answer, we have a serious problem at hand. Even while condemning what happened, media is abetting such insane organisations’ cause of propagating the argument that the baggage of morality has to be borne only by women. The men of our country have been visiting bars regularly all through the history of our country. That never has been a problem. However, when women started going to places of socialisation openly, probably in the last two decades, there is hue and cry over it. Some say that ‘women have the additionally responsibility endowed by nature to usher in new life into this world. Drinking and smoking are unhealthy habits for women as they would not be able to perform this task ably without a healthy body.’ It sounds as if healthy men are not required for reproduction. The institutionalisation of such biased ideologies will lead to permanent damages from which recuperation might not be possible. Media should be the last agency to let that happen, let alone be a part in the heinous process.

Next is the classic debate of the urban versus the rural; the elite versus the marginalised. Why is it that the urban elites get a lion’s share in airtime as well as newsprint? The Mangalore incident was of importance, and had to be reported. Nobody disagrees with that. But the amount of coverage it got was beyond proportion of its news value. What is news value anyway? Whose value for news are we talking about? There are thousands of women who fight a battle everyday for a dignified living. Who will tell their stories? Who has the time to report and to read these subaltern stories? These are pertinent questions that are lingering around media ethics, unanswered.

Discussions and debates go on. But the reality remains. The Mangalore incident can happen again in our country; probably in another location, to different people. But it can happen. Our mainstream media will still act like hawks hovering for a piece of meat. Let us try and remember that a lesson not learnt in time, is a lesson lost forever. Before it is too late, we should realise our strengths and weaknesses as a culture and reach a consensus on what is the right path for us. Otherwise, the identity of a confused caricature will get jinxed and get stuck to us.