 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today, we are going to discuss about this entire fake news phenomena. To discuss the issue we have with us, Paranjay Guha Thakurtha, a well-known journalist and also editor of EPW. Welcome to NewsClick, Paranjay. We are glad to have you after this interview. Thank you. Thank you, Panjali. So, how do you see this entire phenomena of fake news? Because, I mean, if you look at social media, recently we have an example where a Bhojpuri film photograph was used as a photograph of the Bengal violence and spread on social media and it has got like thousands of shares on it. So, how do you see it? The first point that you should note is that this new phenomenon of fake news is not confined to India. It's an international phenomenon. It's happening in different parts of the world. And in fact, the current president of the United States of America, he is one person who keeps going after the media for putting out what he thinks is fake news. The spread of the internet and the spread of the social media has resulted in a whole lot of consequences which many of us could not have anticipated. The fact is, out of 7 billion people who live on planet Earth, more than half the population of the planet has used the internet at any one particular point of time. You can say there's still a huge proportion of the population that hasn't used the net. But this proportion is growing and will continue to grow. And with it has come the domination of a few corporations. And we can call them Agfa because it used to be a whole company that used to make photographic films which are no longer being used. And that is Apple, Google, Facebook and Amazon. Now, with the domination of a few corporations over social media and the internet, you are having a situation which many of us could have imagined even a few years ago. Today in any given 24 hour cycle, over a billion messages which include photographs and videos are being exchanged on WhatsApp. Now, in this kind of a scenario what has become very, very important is the spread of disinformation. Now, you have to learn to distinguish between what is called misinformation. Misinformation, you can be genuinely misinformed. Somebody could say that, you know, I don't know and I'm saying something or I put something out without knowing that it is factually incorrect. But disinformation and that to me is the most dangerous part of fake news is when you know that the information is false, is incorrect. That is being deliberately disseminated for some purpose. It could be a political purpose, it could be an ideological purpose and often a commercial purpose to earn money. And the consequences of that can be devastating. You mentioned the case of one video. Now, we've seen in India in the recent past, whenever there's been tension, especially communal tension, whether it be Bengal or in Kashmir or in Madhya Pradesh, the first thing the authorities do is just stop access to the internet. Now, you can argue that this is like a knee jerk reaction, but why is that so? Because people fear that fake videos. You know, something that has happened in Pakistan and you want to pass it off as something that's happened in Mozaffar Nagar, in Uttar Pradesh. Something that's happened in Myanmar, you want to show that it's happening here. This kind of phenomenon that we see is fraught with very, very dangerous consequences and we are seeing it's happening. Fraudulent pictures, fraudulent videos, information which is completely false is being used, deliberately being used to create tension among communities, among religious communities, among different social groups. And I think this is something that we have to be very, very concerned about. You know, you can't shut down the internet. You can say that because business on the internet is pornography, but what about all the other things that you're doing? What about not just the information that you're providing people? What about the various kinds of utilities? Yeah, Puranje, but also if you look at the mainstream media today, various channels, one should not name them, but have been using these news as basis of covering the prime time news. I mean, I have no hesitation in naming them, whether it's republic, whether it's times now. They use information which, without verifying whether it's correct or not, and then they build up a lot of drama. They seek to influence opinion. They like to believe that they are more nationalist than everybody. They want to divide society along these lines. That if you don't agree with them, you're anti-national. Yes, please. Yes, so I mean, if even the mainstream media starts doing that and following the same fake news, what impact is it going to have on the fourth pillar? Regretfully, what you say is correct that the so-called mainstream media or the media, the so-called mainstream media, whether it be print, radio, television, the internet, they've unfortunately been influenced by the social media. And then let's look at one other aspect of this. And this is again happening over a period of time. And this is particularly these trends are getting exacerbated, getting intensified over the internet, the division between fact and opinion. You know, it's one thing to say this is factually correct. It's another thing to say, I don't like this or I want this or this is good or this is bad. Now, what has happened and this is a trend which we see in the media, which has certainly become stronger because of the internet and in particular the social media, the use of Facebook, Twitter, using a medium of communication or what they call the OTT, the over-the-top services like WhatsApp, you're seeing more of opinion being put out. And very often, this opinion masquerades this fact, but it's not so. When people use these fake videos, fake photographs, there's a clear motive behind it. And as you pointed out, to divide people, to divide religious minorities, religious communities. And also, I mean, in terms of regional locations as well, like we saw in the case of Tamil Nadu and the entire Jallikattu movement, how do we fight it? Because obviously, we cannot curb the internet space and we cannot put a ban on these things. But what's the counter to these things? See, there are two aspects to it. One is creating greater awareness. I mean, there can be no substitute towards empowering ordinary human beings by educating them, by making them aware, by providing them information which is factually correct, by providing them quality information which has gone through a certain process of fact-checking, of gatekeeping, that kind of information that you provide, not just informs people but educates people and also empowers them. That's one way forward. So if people become more aware, that is one way they can distinguish in that which is fake and that which is genuine. There is another aspect and that's what you've rightly pointed out. There are websites like Altnews and others who are trying to use that same technology to fight against the fake news. So whenever something which is fake is pointed out, you have these people and I'm very happy that there are more and more public-spirited people and we need to strengthen their hands. We need to empower them. We need to support them because what are they doing? They're pointing out where fake news is used to divide, to create chaos in society, to create violence in society, to harm people. It's often not just community, even individuals. Their lives can be devastated. Their privacy can be completely shattered. Having said that, it's also true that this whole business of fact-checking. I mean, look at the difference between the mainstream media in certain parts of the world and look at India. I'll compare it with the United States of America. We know the so-called mainstream media, whether it be New York Times, Washington Post or CNN, they were all opposed to Trump. But after Trump came to power, they haven't relented. They continue to examine each statement of his. They examine which statement of his is factually correct or wrong. Whether it be pictures, whether it be videos, whether it be statements made by the President of the US, regretfully in India, we find a substantial section of the so-called mainstream media and who have been greatly influenced by the social media, in my opinion, have forgotten their responsibilities. You talked about the fourth pillar of democracy. I mean, if a journalist is going to say, he said, she said, then are you different from a stenographer? If a media person cannot hold truth to power, if a media person cannot play the role of an antagonist, not necessarily an adversary, but somebody who questions those who are in positions of power and authority, tries to hold them accountable, tries to ensure greater transparency in society, then the media or the so-called fourth state is not fulfilling its role. Regretfully, this section of the media has become even more subservient than ever before. I'm tempted to quote the very famous statement that was made by the angry old man of the Bharatiya Janta Party, Sri L.K. Adwani, Sri Lal Krishnan Adwani. When he was information and broadcasting Minister in 1977 in Murajidev's government, he was once asked about during the emergency that had been imposed during Indira Gandhi's time, why there were so many editors who were so subservient, who were so spineless, who were so supine. And he said, when they were asked to bend, they crawled. Regretfully, a large section of the media in India, including the so-called mainstream media, they have not even been asked to bend, but they are still crawling. Why do you think so? That's the case because mainstream media has a strong presence still in the country, be it print or TV. Don't you think this corporate influence over the media has resulted in it and those corporate influencers who own the media have also supported the current regime? Absolutely. There's absolutely no doubt about the way you are looking at the new phenomenon. Yes, in the run-up to the 2014 general elections, the 16th Lok Sabha elections in India, I think a very substantial section of the corporate sector in India was supporting Mr. Narendra Modi's candidature. And the fact is even this section are also the biggest owners of the media today. The fact is the corporate sector always had a lot of power and influence directly or indirectly over the mainstream media. But this section or this, the corporate sector, its influence has become even stronger in recent years. Some of the richest men in India happen to be heading organizations or are in key positions in organizations through virtue of their ownership of major media organizations. In the same two individuals, one is Mr. Mukesh Ambani, the other is Mr. Kumar Mangalam Bidla. They have substantial sections in the media and the interesting part of that is they also have substantial sections, substantial interests in what used to be called telecommunications or the internet. Today, in this day and age of technological convergence, what used to be earlier called telecommunications and what was called broadcasting has completely merged. There's no difference. Together with the fact that we see corporate control, we also see political parties and politicians or individuals with political preferences, also their control over the media has become stronger. And look at the way they influence the media. I'll give you one example, just one to prove a point. During the 10 years that the Shromani Akali Dalwazid Par in Punjab, they were controlling the cable television and they wouldn't allow channels like Day and Night, which were critical of the, I say, D and the Badal family to put out the information. They did everything to stop them from broadcasting the information they had. The other point, and this is quite important to note, it's just related. One of the reasons why the so-called mainstream media in India and across the world have perhaps become more vulnerable and subservient to whoever's in power and authority is because their revenue models, their funding has been badly affected. Why? Especially after 2008, the Great Recession expenditure on advertising as either the growth has slowed down, decelerated, or it's remained more or less stagnant or often come down. And that has had a direct impact on the revenue models of these mainstream media organizations. So also they're dependent on government advertising has gone up relatively. And the second phenomenon related to this is the growth of the internet and the growth of the social media. Everybody wants everything free. So who pays the person who writes, who pays the person who takes photographs, who pays the person who shoots videos? So at the end of the day, we are going through a period of intense churn in the media across the world and also in India. Who funds research? Who funds investigations? I mean, it's the only way forward is to have, say, non-government organizations, civil society organizations, foundations, philanthropic trusts to fund investigations in the same way, say, the Panama Papers investigation was funded. It was an international network that was set up by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, which in turn was funded by a Washington based philanthropic organization called the Center for Public Integrity. The question is, if this is indeed going to be the way forward, then are mainstream media organizations going to become relatively more marginalized? Are they going to become more vulnerable? So this is a period of intense churn, intense turmoil. And I think it's going to continue for some more years to come. Thanks a lot, Parvinder, for giving us your time. And I'm sure these things will proceed forward. And as they proceed, we'll be coming back to you on Sunday. Thank you so much. That's all the time we have for today. Thank you for watching NewsClick.