by
Girish Nikam
�
‘Whether sting operations are in public interest or to make money have to be examined one day,’ ‘sting operations are generally outsourced…Very often these tapes are sold for lakhs of rupees by those who do the string operation.’— Chief Justice Y.K.Sabharwal
�
The draft bill includes 16 do’s and don’ts for TV news channels, including a provision that any media group which carries out a sting operation should be able to justify its undercover operation as being “warranted” by public interest. �Union Information Minister Priyaranjan Dasmunshi.
�
It was coming for some time now. And now it is almost upon them. Them as in the TV news channels. The warning signals have been beeping for long enough for them to have taken note of. It is not that there have not been debates and discussions about it in the media circles. But that nothing concrete has emerged in the form of a self-imposed code of conduct has lead to the present situation.
�
The political parties have been up in arms against the sting operations for quite some time. Ever since the Tehelka operations in 2000, the political class has been weary of these new operators who are out to expose their deeds and misdeeds. The last year operations against the MPs in the interestingly named, “Operation Duryodhan”, which exposed Parliament members taking bribes for asking questions and later for sharing the MPLAD funds, has made the political class jittery.

�
What has however gone in their favour while trying to muzzle future sting operators, are the way in which some of the news channels have been abusing this new form of journalism. In fact some of the operations have nothing to do with good, time-tested rules of journalism. For instance how could anyone justify stinging a few politicians, by luring them into bed with a woman, and claiming how “immoral” they are! In fact, if ever the editors and owners of these channels are ever lured the way those old fogies were lured by such young attractive women, most would have found themselves in the same situation.
�
Stinging film stars by enticing them with never-say-die young women, journalists or otherwise, and later claiming that “casting couch” exists is almost juvenile, and has no place in journalism. The recent remarks by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, cited above, has only given fillip to the political class bent upon gagging the media. Though some of the Congress leaders, including Ministers like Jaipal Reddy, Kapil Sibal to name a few, have come out in favour of sting operations, there are many who do not favour it. In the last few years, obviously the BJP has been the most vocal about bringing laws to curb sting journalism, understandably so as they have been “stung” more often than anyone.
�
No wonder, in the last session of the Parliament, L.K.Advani had sprung up with alacrity from his seat, soon after an audio “sting operation” against Union Minister of State for Home, Manik Rao Gavit was proved to be a hoax. He argued passionately for a comprehensive bill to curb sting journalism.
�
Now how have the news channels reacted to it? It has essentially hummed and hawed, with some channels like the redoubtable Prannoy Roy’s, even hosting a round table with editors and senior journalists, about the pros and cons of sting operations. There have been quite a few discussions and debates in the media circles too. The general feeling among media persons is that sting operations are now a modern and necessary tool to expose corruption, wrongdoing and misdemeanors of those in authority. No two opinion about it, as long as it is public interest.
�
The problem crops up when “public interest”, the most crucial aspect of good journalism starts being defined loosely or worse with a biased motive.

�

Another problem which has lead to the present situation, where the news channels are facing possible gagging, is when the cut-throat competition of TRPs leads to even mature and independent journalists falling a victim.
�
In fact nowadays most of the TV channels and even media production houses, have set up special teams for “sting operations”. For these teams consisting of enthusiastic but in-experienced youngsters, with pressure building on them to prove their worth, even a cop on the road taking a “hafta” becomes a target for such operations. While there is no doubt that a hafta-demanding cop is certainly a public nuisance, 90 percent of the road-using public, would gladly pay their way out of a petty traffic crime. So the focus on the cop and not on the corrupting public becomes flawed.
�
In fact such sting operations have become so commonplace on every other TV news channel, except for some honourable exceptions like NDTV, that the more serious ones, where real “public interest” is the issue, is being bracketed with the dubious ones. Even the Supreme Court got caught in this trap the other day, when the Chief Justice made the above remarks, while dealing with a case concerning the CNN-IBN, which had exposed the corrupt Uttar Pradesh MLAs with dubious and criminal links.
�
Though, CNN-IBN’s Chief, Rajdeep Sardesai who had gone to the Supreme Court seeking a stay on his arrest by the UP Cops to be produced before the State Assembly, had indeed blundered by ignoring the Speaker’s summons to appear before the House. Sardesai need not bother being taken into custody, as he has not done anything wrong by exposing those who deserved to be exposed. But sadly, the remarks of the Supreme Court Chief Justice has turned the entire debate into TV news channels Vs the society battle, which it should not be. The remarks about people making money out of these operations would become irrelevant as long as journalists with credibility conduct it in public interest.
�
Therefore it is imperative that these news channels perk up at least now, and come together to draw up a code of conduct on the sting operations, so that they need not later regret. Every journalist, print or broadcast, knows the impact of such curbs on the freedom, and how the ruling class can misuse it at will, once the law is in place.
�
In United States of America already a code has been drawn up, which can be the referral point to draw one up here.
�
The American code says:
�
�**Sting operations could be mounted only against persons against whom some evidence of criminality already exists and a sting operation is considered necessary for getting conclusive evidence.(This means no fishing expedition)
�
** Permission for sting operations must be obtained from appropriate courts or the Attorney General.� This safeguard has been laid down since those who mount a sting operation themselves commit the offences of impersonation, criminal trespass under false pretences and making a person commit an offence.(In India this responsibility can be placed on a group of public-spirited eminent people, instead of judiciary)
�
�**There must be a concurrent record in writing of the various stages of the sting operation.(This record could be handed over to the Group of Eminent People)
�
**While the transcript of the recordings can be edited, the films and the tapes themselves should not be edited.�� Where there is evidence of editing, there is an automatic presumption that the recording is probably not authentic.
�
The sooner the Indian news channels get on with this job, better it is for them as well as the Indian society and the Indian democracy at large.

23-10-2006