The print media has come to occupy an essential place in the Naga society today. With no dedicated local TV channel, the newspaper is the only medium for the public to get informed about the latest happening around them. Today we see local papers becoming an essential platform for airing out one’s view and opinions to the public.
However, more often than not, we see a lot of rejoinders and counter-rejoinders from different individuals and groups in the newspaper about an article or news item. The paper-war goes on until the public are no longer interested in the topic and the writers also tire out eventually, never knowing what they have achieved through their daily charade in the papers.
The fact that there are bound to be errors in the articles featured in a newspaper is quite understandable, and we read the clarifications and corrigendum by the concerned author or groups when an error is detected. However, it is quite amusing to see harshly worded ‘rejoinders and counter-rejoinders’ to some articles published in the papers, some even going to the extent of attacking a writer personally.
It is well accepted that there will always be differences of views and opinions when it comes to debate on sensitive issues such as political or, in our society, tribal issues; but sometimes ordinary readers who have nothing to do with the issue, are left to wonder whether these individuals or groups are taking a ‘paper war’ a bit too seriously.
Any newspaper Editor, I surmise, is directly responsible to the public only, and the newspaper caters to the interest of that public only. The readership of any professional newspaper, except for some tabloids or political mouthpieces, is diverse since the public is made up of different sections of the people. Therefore, it is wondered what the group or individual aim to achieve by exchanging a war of words in the print media. Of course, newspapers remain a powerful instrument in molding public opinion and ushering in changes in the society, but sometimes the exchange of thoughts and opinions, if observed carefully in the rejoinders and counter-rejoinders, are nothing but just a plain assertion of ‘I am right and you are wrong’ attitude. Sometimes, it is not even a debate also, because the writers do not ‘agree to disagree’ but continue with their tirade of words.
It is understood that any given article featured in the newspaper will have some effect to some people as it concerns people and issues. But, it becomes one sided and readers simply cannot help but think whether these two opposing parties are simply responding to each other as if they are having a private correspondence while forgetting that there is a larger audience, the readers, who are either bemused or irritated with the ‘paper-war’.
In the light of these, I feel it is high time that it would do well if we can utilize the spaces in the newspapers for information and sharing of constructive ideas. Besides, it will be a fallacy to think that we can use the newspapers for our self-interests to propagate something because diverse as the public is, the readers belong to diverse section of the society and the opinions we propagate will have different effects on the society, some will be good while some will be bad. Moreover, with daily newspapers having a shelf life of a day or more only, the views and opinions remain in public mind only for that period until they are completely drowned in the daily sea of information.
A few days ago, I read this book ‘Has Christianity failed you’ by the renowned Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias. In that book, Zacharias dedicated an entire chapter to intellectually attack the content of another book ‘The Reason-Driven Life’ by Professor Robert M. Price. I am putting this instance because while going through the book by Ravi Zacharias, the author subtly puts his contrary views of Prof Price in a very matured and intellectual manner. I cannot help but admire the way the author put forth his viewpoints. I began to think that Prof Price might be flattered that a person like Ravi Zacharias has read his book and is giving critical comments, and Zacharias might also feel happy that Prof Price and his proponents will surely read his book. Therefore, I began to wonder whether the Nagas can also emulate the western way of debate and sharing of thoughts and opinions through publication of books. And I get a sad picture, because we have a very wrong approach to books.
I have read in papers about condemnation of books and also censure of certain chapters contained in a book but tribal hohos or village councils saying that the contents are ‘false and without any basis’. I have also heard the story of a certain intellectual (unfortunately he has passed away) in our society who was fined several pigs for writing a certain book. Such is the condition of the book publishing industry in our society and authors are deterred to write books lest they be attacked by some section of the society. In other societies, when an author publishes a book regarding a certain topic, his/her critics will write another book challenging the facts contained in the book. Thus in the end, the authors leave a treasure throve of written documents for the future generation to continue the debate and take out research after studying the contradictory views contained in the different views. But here in our society, even a book is sometimes killed before its publication, and even if it is published, many authors brace for a long battle where critics censure the book harshly and demand an apology or exact a fine or even threaten to take life. At the end, we leave nothing to the future generation to study, just some oral narrations which get more muddled as the generations passes.
Therefore, it would be good if the Naga readers can learn from what Adolf Hitler has to say about reading habit, he says in his book Mein Kampf , “The art of reading as of learning is this: to retain the essential to forget the non-essential.” We have to sieve out the good things which are applicable to us and utilize it while we can discard the non-essential thoughts with an open mind. And if we have to respond, at least we should know how to counter the views intellectually and systematically, so that the readers are not bored and so that it will not elicit another emotionally charged counter-rejoinder from the other party. We still have a long way to go, but thanks to newspapers, we are slowly mastering the art of communicating views and opinions across the table; we just have to ensure that it is done diplomatically. After all, I am sure that no writer writes an article for the creating disharmony or disturbance in the society but for the general good of the public; therefore knowing how to express surely would go a long way. And if in the future, a Naga researcher plans to do a research on Naga way of criticism, he/she would proudly say that we, the Nagas have come a long way from brazen ‘paper-wars’ to healthy and mature exchange of ideas through newspaper articles and books. Surely such a day will come.
Along Longchar
Mokokchung
