“Freedom of the press is not merely the freedom to publish; it is the responsibility to inform, educate, question and inspire society with truth.”
Aubaid Ahmad Akhoon
In any democratic setup, criticism is vital for governance, accountability as well as transparency. Recently, in the name of criticism, especially with the advent of digital media, rising TV ratings and social media’s propagation of ‘virals’, a thin line between criticism is getting blurred and is becoming more of a tool to troll, outrage and polarize society.
Criticism is always healthy when it highlights the flaws, policies, mistakes and loopholes, while constructive criticism is when along with the flaws and mistakes, suggestions and remedies are also provided. Trolling is more of deriding, ridiculing, defaming and sensationalizing without any valid reasons. It is high time that we should stand up to this new form of censorship and save our democratic values, public discourse and sanity.
This trolling wave has engulfed our social media sites and some of our TV channels also, where instead of having informed and intelligent discussions on matters of fact which affect millions of people, we are witnessing the most sensationalized ad-hoc debates where even the basic decorum of discussion is lacking. The most ridiculous thing about this whole scenario is that people are associating this trolling with freedom of speech. It is not freedom of speech, which is being exercised here, but rather license. License to outrage, license to hate, license to abuse, license to deride, license to defame and license to mislead.
Freedom of Speech was never meant to be used as a tool for spreading poison, lies, hatred and malice. The credibility of our public discourse is at stake here when even the most basic facts are being questioned. Journalism’s main motto should not be to become just another political weapon by sensationalizing the situations when the very basics of democracy require it to question the very system, institutions and machinery.
A great Nigerian Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka rightly said, “The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism”. However, absence of appropriate criticism, criticism without credibility is also dangerous, which actually is propaganda in disguise. Praise without credibility is public relations, while criticism without credibility is propaganda. This difference between praise and criticism has been discussed in the realms of poetry and literature too. Tanqeed in the Urdu literature is not always censure. It actually means to criticize, discuss, appreciate, evaluate and review a subject matter with an unbiased and unprejudiced outlook. However, Tanqeed does not support suppression. It tries to uplift and improve things by providing a healthy constructive critique. This way Tanqeed is different from criticism or censure.
“As public discourse swaps hard facts for opinion, truth loses its credibility—fueling a wave of polarization and mistrust that actively erodes democracy. For modern journalism, the ultimate challenge is no longer just reporting the news, but rescuing the shared reality that keeps a free society alive.”
A good Tanqeed evaluates both the positives and negatives so that the readers can also form an opinion about the subject matter themselves. The whole concept of Tanqeed is similar to the role of journalism today, where a journalist should not become a booster or a basher but an honest intermediary who deals in facts, opinions, thoughts, analysis and everything else that constitutes public discourse. A great Urdu scholar Altaf Hussain Hali’s Tanqeed on Urdu ghazal (a poetic genre) is an eye opener. At the time when almost everyone was criticizing Urdu ghazal and dismissing it as obsolete, Altaf Hussain Hali did not resort to outright dismissal. He appreciated the efforts of the ghazal writers while also discussing their weaknesses in his book ‘Muqaddama-e-Sher-o-Shairi’. He actually laid down the foundation for reforming the Urdu ghazal which eventually bore fruits in later years. Today, Altaf Hussain Hali is respected by one and all for his honest and unbiased Tanqeed.
Another great Urdu critic Prof. Ale Ahmad Suroor also believed that criticism is among the most solemn duties of a writer. He further said that a critic should aim at building standards, not lowering them when discussing any subject. Similarly, we believe that a critic (or a journalist) should aim at becoming a truth seeker and a democratizer of human thought, and not resort to sensationalism and mudslinging when discussing the very serious matters which require a level head to analyze and present facts in an honest manner.
Today in this competitive world of media, the biggest threat to healthy criticism is social media’s promotion of outrageous content as it helps the channel or the page to go viral. Similarly, in order to get TRPs, TV channels air more of sensational debates where two sides of a single coin fight each other. In such scenarios, trolling has become more of a virtue and sensationalism has become the new facts.
Actually, the whole debate around the credibility of the facts is the most important aspect because when the public discourse starts becoming more of opinion-based, the facts themselves become questionable. In such a scenario, the democratic setup will only suffer because ultimately it is the common man who is the most affected by all this chaos, confusion, polarization and mistrust. This is one of the biggest challenges journalism is facing today in the 21st century.
(The author an educator by profession is a leading coaching consultant in valley. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
