The recent murder of a Bangladeshi MP in Kolkata in quite a gory and gruesome manner has shocked most people. The stories are all circulating on media and everyone has joined the crowd hungry for this kind of news. This is like a happy holiday season for the media and all those who like such news. The meaning and implication of such a murder is largely lost amidst the forest of voices in the media trying to outrun each other in providing as much sensational and gruesome details as possible. Such an item has become the current "savior" of the media in Bangladesh. It has something to report on.

How far can one go?

A murder scene description and a garden party report will certainly sound different but how our media has been sounding since the murder occurred is quite a full steam engine ahead.

As with such stories, the audience looks for gore and the media supplies and adds extra sauce and the audience is more excited and wants more and the match goes on and on, from innings to innings in an eternal play game. It seems our media has finally met its mentor which is murder and gore and what basically goes on the name of "sensationalism". Now this is the new normal.

At the same time questions need to be asked as to how far this can go on. What are the limits of reporting on sensationalism which can break down the norms on reporting as applicable to the media anywhere in the world?

One reason why this is happening is the source and the nature of the news. The details and the descriptions appearing in Bangladesh media is being given by no less a source than the police who are holding regular press conferences to discuss the latest on the crime.

A safe crime?

The police want as much publicity as possible because the murder is "safe" and there is no negative fallout on this. They want as much to be reported as possible in the media because there is no stigma attached to the ruling regime. The killed is a ruling party MP so it's safe from accusations.

He has not killed anyone but has been killed so the victim identification is easy and no one can blame the MP in the matter. By extension the ruling party is also safe.

The murder occurred in Kolkata that is India city so BD police can't be accused of being lax let alone complicity. So there is nothing to be lost in providing publicity that can't hurt them. Hence what we have is a murder worth in gold for the powers that be. And the media is lapping it up.

Which is fine one supposes but the point is how far one can go in reporting the nature and descriptions of the crime is a question worth asking. The current vividness in discussing the chopped bits of the body and their comparisons to various meat types are seriously pushing the limits of any mainstream media reporting ethics. But then does a Code of Conduct exist for the media? And more importantly, can a Code and the Bangladesh media coexist?

So what is up for concern?

Basically nothing. Our media is the least bit bothered by the quality of reporting and issues around its maturity. Since few media outlets are market forces driven and all are part of some other branches of our connection socio-economics the main issue is not bread and butter but the jam on the top. Each outlet is trying to outdo each other and that is how the scene is moving on.

Having stated that, concerns do exist but it also happens that they don't bother us. What is basically happening here is aural media rather than news production. The police are organizing various briefings, saying what is going on and the media is hurrying back to report on what is going on, basically saying what has been told to them. The Police have done their job but when is the media going to do theirs is a question.

The trend of reporting by the ear began when corona struck and the media kept picking up the most sensational voices of the lot. Naturally, most were wrong and this led to a situation where the media became the reflection of news provided rather than a professional provider of info. It was repeated during the initial days of the economic crisis when every economist became the primary source of info rather than an opinion provider.

This happens because our media is not professional and human resources in our media are not properly trained. There is no investment in capacity training and as a as a result, the intake quality is weak and they have no option except to depend on the opinion of others rather than their own skills to generate media copy.

Till the media capacity goes high, news quality will remain the kind we have now.