What Do You Think Is The Most Critical Reform Journalism Needs To Undertake?
Viewers have indeed become either desensitised to the chaos or, in some cases, complicit in demanding sensationalism, creating a self-reinforcing cycle. What should ideally be a platform for educating and informing the public has, in many cases, turned into a theatrical spectacle or a comic show, as you aptly described.
Why Are Viewers Desensitised?
Overexposure to Sensationalism: Constant exposure to shouting matches and drama has normalised this behavior, making civil debates seem “boring” in comparison. Viewers often stop questioning the credibility or quality of the content and instead consume it as entertainment.
Erosion of Expectations: Many viewers no longer expect depth or decorum from televised debates. When a channel occasionally airs a serious, issue-based discussion, it’s often viewed as an anomaly.
Confirmation Bias: Audiences tend to watch channels that align with their biases, which reinforces their worldview instead of challenging it. Sensationalism feeds into emotional gratification, making people crave content that reaffirms their beliefs, even at the cost of factual accuracy or decorum.
Are Viewers Complicit?
Demand for Entertainment Over Information: Many viewers tune in not to be informed, but to be entertained. Theatrics, fiery arguments, and dramatic confrontations grab more eyeballs than measured, fact-based discussions.
Social Media Amplification: Clips of dramatic moments from debates often go viral, leading channels to double down on such content to maintain relevance in the digital age. Viewers who share or comment on these clips, even critically, contribute to their popularity.
Tribalism and Partisanship: The “us vs. them” narrative in politics has fueled audience participation in these debates, not as passive viewers but as supporters of one “side.” This makes sensationalism lucrative, as it inflames emotions and keeps people engaged.
Comic Show or Journalism?
Describing these debates as comic shows is, unfortunately, an accurate reflection of their current state:
Over-the-Top Arguments: Debates often resemble improvised drama, with participants shouting over each other like characters in a soap opera.
Anchors as Performers: Some anchors act more like ringmasters than moderators, orchestrating verbal brawls for maximum entertainment.
Mockery of Public Issues: Serious topics are reduced to farcical exchanges, where rhetoric and spectacle take precedence over solutions or insights.
Why Is This Dangerous?
Misinformation: The chaotic nature of these debates makes it easy for misinformation to slip through, unchecked by fact-based counters. Viewers are left more confused than informed.
Public Cynicism: Treating serious issues like entertainment erodes public trust in journalism and democratic processes. Citizens disengage from substantive conversations, assuming they’re all theater.
Polarisation: These debates amplify division rather than fostering understanding, making it harder for people to find common ground on important issues.
How to Break the Cycle?
Educate Viewers: Media literacy programs can help audiences discern between quality journalism and sensationalism, creating demand for substantive content.
Promote Alternative Formats: Channels should experiment with calmer, more informative formats like interviews, documentaries, or town halls, making them as engaging as the chaotic formats.
Anchor Accountability: Anchors must be trained to prioritise moderation and enforce rules of civility, even at the cost of a slight dip in TRPs. Credibility and respect will pay off in the long run.
Platform Regulation: Broadcast standards authorities must enforce stricter rules for decorum in televised debates, penalizing repeated offenders.
The reduction of televised debates to “comic shows” reflects not only the failure of journalism but also the complicity of viewers and the profit-driven motives of broadcasters. However, it’s not irreversible. Both media houses and audiences need to prioritise meaningful discourse over cheap thrills to restore the dignity of journalism.