Now the only brush that I have had with the mainstream media was when I was featured recently in an article about Mr. Anant Pai a.k.a. Uncle Pai the man behind “Amar Chitra Katha” and “Tinkle” comics. (I work for Mr. Pai in his new venture that is focused on creating animation and live television software for children.)
In fact the article begins with me. The scenario is Uncle Pai calling me up and talking about narrating all tales in rhyme format for our forthcoming publication. And when I look at my watch it reads 5.30 am.
However 6.15 a.m. and preparations for a promotional campaign were not deemed interesting enough and the time shifted to 5.30 am. and the discussion shifted to rhymes and stories.
But it led me thinking about how much of media reporting, in general, is a 100% accurate and how much is because the author decides to sex things up a bit. Nothing malicious mind you, just to make things a bit more interesting and dramatic.
And how much of the reporting is based on the author’s own judgement, background and point of view? Does this mean that any given story can be viewed differently by different journalists depending not on facts but on their affiliations? Or the Network they belong to? And if the answer is yes, then what about that boring, pesky little thing called Truth?
Interesting questions don't you think? Will ferret around for answers; meanwhile do let me know if you have any opinion on this.