The Joys Of Journalism

The Joys Of Journalism

Oriana Fallaci, the late and legendary Italian journalist who died in 2006, was a role model to others who followed her. She likened journalism to history- saying that it was history being written, simultaneously, to events as they unfolded. She didn’t seem to need the perspective of time and reflection. She turned out a huge body of work over decades, travelling the world doing it, generating controversies with some of her views, writing books too, all with signature passion and flair.

Of course, she had the privilege to interview a galaxy of heads of state, policy makers, big wheels of government, between and betwixt lesser folk.  Fallaci did not take herself very seriously. She didn’t think that journalists were great influencers much as they might like to be. She likened their efforts to barking dogs that nobody took any real notice of.  

Fallaci said this in a TV interview to Michael Wallace, a pioneer in opinionated TV journalism. Wallace was most famous for anchoring CBS’ 60 Minutes, being its first and most celebrated anchor. The programme was so successful as “magazine news”, under him; that as many as six other networks put in me-too shows, to compete, till there was a surfeit and glut.

Wallace himself was an irreverent departure from the magisterial news-style of a Walter Cronkite, also on CBS, who along with other senior TV News presenters of the time, thought of 60 Minutes as “Show Business”. That Wallace did commercials for many products in between his newsman stints, made the orthodox regard him as a mere “pitch-man”.

But handsome, Bogartian Mike Wallace, with his cigarette, smoke rising in the air, in those early black and white broadcasts, his sharp questioning, was, by today’s standards, almost donnish.

Now it is routine to shout and pillory, most famously on Fox News, a Rupert Murdoch owned US Channel,that came later. But Fox News, much more extreme, had Wallace call it op-ed on air. He said this to the Fox   anchor he was interviewing, registering eyebrow raised surprise. But then, Fox News only appeared after a straight run of a couple of decades of 60 Minutes - with Mike Wallace.

Both Fallaci and Wallace, the early birds, were no great fans of objective reporting. Instead, they thought the best way to uncover the truth, such as it is, was by asking pointed questions to their interviewees and slanting the narrative.

Fallaci, appearing mostly in print, usually proceeded to play both judge and jury in her articles.  Henry Kissinger, whose interview with Fallaci appeared in Playboy Magazine, thought the exchange was a disaster for him. He was quoted as seeing himself as the lone advance-riding cowboy leading the wagon train of governance. It is anybody’s guess what President Richard Nixon thought of this analogy from the mouth of his Secretary of State.

Today, not only the TV anchors, but many of their regular panellists on TV news shows around the world, fancy themselves as cheer-leaders and crusaders after the truth as they see it.

There is a strenuous and blatant effort to influence the audience with opinion and rhetoric rather than the more prosaic facts. But then, from the very early days of the 1950s, TV News, with its ability to come into the living and bedrooms of the viewers, evolved quickly into a dose of drama and stimulation. There were the day-time soap operas to compete with.

Print struggles to remain current even in the dailies today let alone weeklies  and magazines  with longer timelines. It has been joined, like a swarm of bees, by digital websites with the ability to quickly upload their articles.

And the digital websites and broadcast TV, in turn, find themselves competing with both the written and visual social media working alongside, with little or no censorship.

Even if a video is proscribed by the government, it has often gone viral and has been absorbed by thousands, by the time the action to take it down has been completed.

News is indeed instant history as Fallaci had it, beyond the reach of the lobbies for or against it to block it out. Today it floats around forever in cyberspace for anyone to look at for as long as the sphere lasts. This even if the originator attempts to delete any pictures or views no longer thought of as kosher.

But there is an awful lot of it. And so, the only differentiator left to the media practitioner today is skill. TV news commentary is only as snappy and compelling as the news editors behind the scenes can make it.

Except for those anchors who write their own script, most junior presenters read what is prepared for them off a teleprompter. Of course, in certain formats such as rapid news, presenters can, and do bring a good deal of style and cadence to the delivery.

Their guests, as panellists on TV debates too, are furnished by the guest relations teams of the network. Anchors, except for the top ones, have little influence here. But on their part, if the guests are articulate, and can think fast “on their feet”, they start to distinguish themselves in this Live medium. And over time, they find themselves in demand as reliable sounding boards for various channels.

Expertise alone however, does not hack it. There are seasoned diplomats that cannot explain foreign policy on TV in a ten to thirty second soundbyte. They are probably perfectly good at writing reports and books, and giving learned lectures.

It is an old truism that most print journalists are uncomfortable, rambling and not very personable on TV. Of course, this works the other way around too. TV journalists with considerable presence,  are often not very good op-ed writers. Nor are they exactly scintillating on social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook.  That seems to take a different kind of connect.

The “truth” however, is out there for the taking for the ambidextrous one. He or she can traverse galaxies explored and unexplored and plant personal flags across media landscapes.

But the neanderthals stand out too. It is most glaring when a person is an official spokesperson for a political party, but cannot make a good case for it. And there do seem to be a lot of such untrained and ineffective spokies out on the rounds. One wonders what process of proximity to whom got them their mischance to represent their Party?  

Very few programmes can be pre-recorded for broadcast later, given the pace of the unfolding news and the competition. This is true of all except the special interviews. But when even these are broadcast Live in the 60Minutes fashion, they attract much higher TRPs.

This is understandably difficult to do with current heads of state, who like to vet the questions in advance. But it works well enough with ministers, other politicians, CEOs, spokespersons, celebrities, who are glad enough to be featured.

Why does anyone work in journalism? Is it about uncovering the truth? Wallace said he wouldn’t know what to do with himself if he wasn’t working. And because he needed pills for his clinical depression. 

But most journalists, even the disgraced ones, don’t quit because they don’t know how to write their own obituaries.

(1,192 words)

April 26^th, 2020

Gautam Mukherjee

The Stone Age Did Not End For Lack Of Stones

The Stone Age Did Not End For A Lack Of Stones

The Stone Age came to an end not for lack of stones, and the oil  age will end,   but not for a lack of oil-Ahmed Zaki Yamani- Saudi Minister of Oil (1962-1986)

The story of El Dorado in the 20^th century wasn’t really about Gold, despite various 19^th Century gold rushes that paved the cult of the Yellow Brick Road. 

It was about the new fangled Black Gold instead. It fuelled most of the second half after the early discoveries in America and the Middle East. On a rising graph of both price and consumption it dominated the economics of the First World let alone every other country, before the wobbles in pricing set in.

And then the very powerful Organisation of Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC), almost all its members being from West Asia, was no longer the only oil depot on the globe. But it is true Saudi Arabia, now trying to sell a stake in its mammoth oil company Aramco, has played a leading role in the annals of oil politics. Sheikh Yamani, its legendary oil minister through the heyday of OPEC, thought demand for oil would be replaced by Hydrogen or other forms of energy when he foresaw the end of the oil age.

But what is happening instead is its continuance, because the laws of demand and supply have dramatically tilted in favour of the consumer.  Petroleum may be consumed for quite a few decades more, even as electricity, other forms of power that do not involve fossil fuel, and nuclear power too, may get longer to refine their game and affordability.  

But today, that day has conclusively dawned, when Oil has become a mere commodity, both in glut and spate. All the world’s storage vats and caverns are nearly full. But there’s ever more “on the water”, or in pipelines, headed towards the refineries around the globe. Beggar-thy-neighbour in the game of production increases and cuts, gone too vicious thrust and parry of late, has taken the entire industry to rock-bottom.

Oil is no longer a potent bargaining chip in the hands of opulent energy moghuls. Of course, it will not trade at minus numbers in the futures market for long, even if it has done in just one such trade. Or at under $5 a barrel in spot. It is already quoted in other futures contracts at over $20 a barrel.

But neither will oil soar into a three digit pricing again. Not unless, demand outstrips the considerable supply. But what would that take? America, once a buyer of 50% of the worlds output, now has enough for its needs from its own sources. Shale Oil, which accounts for part of it, has become too expensive to produce now, but it is there, if push comes to shove in strategic terms.

Russia, Britain, Norway, Venezuela, Nigeria, The Gulf, Iran, Libya, Iraq, other states from the erstwhile USSR, all have oil to sell, but little control or leverage. There are two bulk buyers- China and India, and of course parts of EU aggregated. It is these countries and unions that now have the major say, along with America. The US might have to buy in the quantities that Shale Oil represented in better priced times.

Nobody can cut production to the extent required to take oil upwards of $ 60 a barrel and survive today. Already, the big oil producers of West Asia are battling significant financial deficits over servicing their quasi-welfare states. 

Their sovereign reserves were traditionally invested in the US and Europe, as are those of China, and are unlikely to turn out handsome dividends for a long time to come. Their real estate holdings likewise, will struggle to realise even what they paid for it in good times.

None of these countries invested in India, because they did not realise the dynamism of its domestic market and 1.3 billion population, till very lately. This new realisation accounts for at least some of the diplomatic warmth shown to India over the last six years. Other reasons include its potential to act as a buffer to a predatory China, and the personal vision of its charismatic prime minister.

Now China wanted to invest, but on its own one-sided terms, that it has got away with in many other poor countries. It wanted to do so while opposing India in international fora, and via its support for Pakistan. But now that window of possibility is not what it used to be, post the Wuhan Virus. It is certainly advantage India now, but we have to see how it plays its hand going forward.

The most recent dive in oil prices is occasioned by China shifting to natural gas. But then, gas is selling even cheaper than oil in long term contracts, from countries such as Qatar. America, meanwhile has put in an order for 75 million barrels to top up its strategic reserve. India too has done so, and expects to have filled up its own reserves of crude oil by some time in May 2020. 

Unfortunately, we need to store three times what we are able to at present, but have not yet built the storage capacity for 45 days or more of oil use.

The Chinese Virus induced recession could turn into a world-wide Great Depression lasting a decade. And this time it will embrace almost every country in the world dependent on international trade, including China. Particularly China.

In fact, the world is in a mood to punish China for the origination, concealment and spread of the Wuhan Virus, and the death and disease it has caused. At least a proportion of the manufacturing concentrated in China is sure to move away in the near term to other countries including India. Over-dependence on China will not be countenanced by any other country  in future.

And there may well be demands for compensation running into trillions of dollars, including the freezing of China’s overseas assets and investments. Germany has submitted a bill for $130 billion. India has closed the door to automatic investment via the FDI route to all countries that share a border with India. NATO has   warned its member states to watch out for opportunistic Chinese buying of beaten down blue chip stocks. Deals will be abrogated. Some African countries have already begun to do so. The Belt and Road initiative including the China  Pakistan Economic Corridor( CPEC), is likely to falter.

India however, always powered by its domestic market, could see an early recovery on the back of low fuel prices and increased bargaining power for most of its importation needs. The IMF sees a possible bounce back to over 7% GDP growth in fiscal 2021, after the severe crunch in 2020. 

 Can India grow apace without significant exports? It has done in over two decades. Indian exports are mostly composed of commodities and raw materials such as iron ore. Finished goods are really a matter of international companies exporting their merchandise using India as a manufacturing base and some quantity of automobile and aircraft components. Finished goods  include our textiles, handicrafts, cars, cellphones.  Alll in all, our share of international trade, both in and out, is  still miniscule.

Any hope of significant exports to fuel India’s growth into a $ 5 trillion economy by 2024 can only come from the high unit value armament manufacture and its export. We have made a beginning already but there is immense potential. The import substitution it will engender is also most significant. DRDO and HAL are playing their part in this endeavour, along with other private players such as Mahindra, TATA and L&T. The Defence Manufacturing corridor launched in Uttar Pradesh is a very important part of this future thrust as well.

If India continues to buy oil for the rest of this government’s term at low prices of under $ 60 a barrel, and does not reduce rates very much at the retail pumps, it will garner a huge amount in taxes. These can be used to propel the revival of the economy. It can therefore be seen as something of a God-send, to follow on from the tribulations of the Wuhan Virus.

If India is able to combine the savings on oil imports, along with an acceleration of defence related manufacture, and the diplomatic good will earned by its recent pharmaceutical exports, it can indeed go far.

The second stage major reforms of labour and land laws, pending since 1991, will help immensely if brought about. This, given that the government is already pushing ahead with infrastructure modernisation at a good pace.

Is there a silver lining to the Wuhan Virus and its depredations for India? There could be. There could well be, provided the government shows the dynamism the opportunities call for.  Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath of Uttar Pradesh has shown keen interest in attracting manufacturing interest into his state already. There will surely be others, but it will fall to the Centre to make the legislative changes that make coming to India an attractive business decision. Manufacturing many new items in addition to defence equipment could be the result.

For: Sirfnews

(1,513 words)

April 21^st , 2020

Gautam Mukherjee

  

Winning The Peace: India Shows Economic Commonsense

Winning The Peace: India Shows Economic Commonsense

The world has admired the Modi government’s handling of the Wuhan Virus threat. A near prompt national lockdown of over three weeks has limited the number of those infected to a few thousand, and those killed by the virus to under 300 at this point. Had we not done this, a recent statistical analysis by the Union Health Ministry states that we may have had 8.2 lakh infected by April 15^th , with a proportionately high death count.

The war against the Wuhan Virus is far from over even now, and it will be, perhaps only by the end of 2020, that we will gain perspective on how well we eventually did.

India seems to have made a terrific, unmatched start,however, given our gargantuan population of over 1.3 billion. But as the saying goes- it is equally important to win the peace. And preparations for doing so cannot wait till the end of the war.

Estimates from various international rating agencies have indicated the GDP  will plummet to as low as 1.6% as a consequence of this three week plus lockdown. In November 2019, nobody though India would turn in less than 5.5% despite various economic headwinds.

Had this lockdown gone forward without dilution, the moot point is how many multiples in casualties would the economic consequences have produced in the bargain? Fortunately, the Prime Minister, after widespread consultations with chief ministers of the various states, opposition leaders, doctors, economists, administrators, NGOs and so on, has decided to change course post April 14^th .That is when this momentous exercise ends in its present form. His revised mantra now, just revealed yesterday,  is Jaan Bhi, Jahan Bhi, which means equal emphasis on Life as well as Livelihood.

The union council of ministers have been asked to operate from their offices from the 13th of April, and no longer from their residences. Other measures are about to be announced in the next couple of days.

Hereafter, the hotspots, sometimes small areas, and otherwise entire districts, will be tightly regulated. Simultaneously, the work to revive the economy will commence in other parts, throughout the country. If new hotspots erupt, they too will be strictly quarantined. But the rest of the country will be allowed to take up where it left off gradually, with a set of social distancing precautions and compulsory use of face masks. Frequent hand-washing, sanitising of work places,  testing, and other prophylactic measures will be diligently followed. National transportation and movement guidelines are also expected to be announced shortly.

In terms of fixing global responsibility for the situation, which is much worse in Europe and America, Communist China and a collaborative WHO under its present Director General, are being squarely blamed.  It is negligence, deliberate suppression of information, and misguidance on their part, in the early stages, that ended up infecting so many around the world.

China knew about the virulent outbreak in Wuhan and its easy contagion as early as October 2019, perhaps even earlier. There is some question on whether it was caused by exotic animals being sold at Wet Markets, or that it was leaked, either inadvertently or deliberately, from a bio-warfare laboratory in Wuhan.

The hypothesis that it was a laboratory developed virus deliberately leaked, gains traction because the Chinese outside Wuhan were, and are, not at all affected. Perhaps the Chinese themselves, particularly its unaffected leadership, have an antidote or vaccine too which might be revealed at a time that suits it.

But, in the secretive early days of  the Wuhan Virus proliferation, China placed no restrictions on lakhs of  its people travelling internationally, right up to beyond the Chinese new year, which fell this year at the end of January 2020.

China signed a trade agreement with the US in January 2020 after negotiating it through December 2019, before the news on the Wuhan Virus was made public. And there is speculation that this may have been a key reason to postpone the announcements, on its existence and infectiousness.

The subsequent plight of the world and its sufferings owe much to being quite unprepared or forewarned. This is all the more galling because China is back to business as usual now, even as all of Europe, America, much of South America, West Asia, the Subcontinent, Japan and the Asia-Pacific, are still reeling from its effects.

The consequences to the economies around the world have been no less than catastrophic , ravaging entire regions; but again the Chinese economy is almost untouched except for lack of demand both at home and abroad.

While the world will be struggling to find ways and means to punish China once it finds its feet; Japan has already determined to move some of its manufacturing out of China. It has allocated $2.2 billion to help in this endeavour.

But, before India assumes it will be the automatic benefactor of companies, including American companies, moving manufacturing operations out of China, it has to show a modicum of economic commonsense. Having done that, it must make itself attractive enough.

The easing of the lockdown is a first and essential step in this direction, even as matching Chinese terms of business will not be easy. People and companies may still move out of China because of strategic reasons, but they could as well go to a more malleable Vietnam. This even though it is placed dangerously close to the South China Sea, the dragon’s own backyard.

The easing of the lockdown before the Indian economy is completely ruined and an ILO estimated 400 million of its workers from the unorganised sector are driven into penury, has come not a moment too soon. But this is just a first step. On the back of an expected shallow recovery, India may have to bite the bullet on stalled major economic reforms, what have often been called Stage II Reforms, involving contentious labour and land laws, to make itself an attractive investment destination. One that can finally be compared with China, if developed infrastructure is added to the mix.

Meanwhile, China is not only on a powerful PR offensive, it will fight to keep its business intact and has huge resources to deploy. China flatly refuses to accept any responsibility or liability for the devastation caused by the Wuhan Virus. It even casts doubt as to its origins, blaming American soldiers who visited Wuhan.

Meanwhile, if India did not decide to get back in the reckoning by over-focussing on the Yuhan Virus at the expense of all else, there would be little left to discuss.

The famous Chinese treatise The Art of War states that the best victory is when it is achieved without having to go to actual battle. Why use arms, China might be saying to itself, when a convenient laboratory/wet market developed virus does just as well?

The world has been infected by frequent  zoonotic infections from China over the last few years, including Bird Flu, SARS, Swine Flu, and now  the Yuhan Virus. Earlier, there was the Asian Flu of 1957 and the Hong Kong Flu of 1968.

There is every reason to assume that the world may have entered the era of bio and cyber warfare on the one hand, where arsenals in the hands of the Western powers too are nothing to sniff at. And these zoonotic epidemics that occur innocently enough from Chinese food habits, and the density of its  1.4 billion rural and urban population.

We can therefore expect many more pandemics and cyber-hackings in future. China  also stands accused of snooping on the world’s sensitive information via its cyber-hacking experts for more than a decade already. It is said to have the capacity to alter or immobilise the electronic controls of the world’s armaments, nuclear weapons and civil transport. The implications of this is horrifying, and much work is being done to negate  such possibilities.

Will India have vaccines and medicines for  all future pandemics at a minimum? It is comforting to learn that India does manufacture a large number of the world’s vaccines and life saving drugs, including the much in demand HCQ.  So we might indeed be able to fight new scourges as they come, despite low spends on healthcare, but is seems unlikely that we will be ready for them all.

So, just as in conventional warfare, we will have to survive for another day economically, while fighting the threat of the day simultaneously. The advantages of a large and young population must be leveraged.

It may be too much to expect unity amongst all those countries affected, though some degree of cooperation cannot be ruled out. But, in the end, India may have to go it alone, more often than not, and develop the capacity to do so as and when necessary.

This more so at a time when many are wondering about the pros and cons of a globalised economy, versus the sovereignty and greater certainty of individual nations.

(1,487 words)

April 12, 2020

For: WIONEWS

Gautam Mukherjee