How mass media has impacted literature

Many journalists, Hindi and local languages in particular,  seem to believe that anyone who can write is a man of letters. A large number of journalists are poets and authors. They have illusions about being "sahityakaars."

But in the past two decades, after the IT revolution began, journalism and literature have become two diverse streams with a remote possibility of their  converging at some point.

Literature is universal, eternal, most often imaginary with lots of masala and flavour for effect and generally a means for self-expression and satisfaction. While literature has an enduring or lasting quality, the appeal of journalism is temporary or superficial. A literary work may or may not have been targeted for a particular section of readers but a journalistic  piece is always produced keeping in view the tastes and limitations  imposed by the owners and the markets.

Literature too often is the product of a spontaneous overflow of powerful emotions, but journalism is said to be a prosaic, rational, laboured and too technical an exercise. However,  at times a reporter essaying a human interest story may play up on the emotions of readers  going lyrical with lurid details of an event as in a fashion parade or while describing the first monsoon showers. Some of the humourous pieces, or the "middles" in dailies are such creative efforts  that they may shame a modern-day Charles Lamb or AG Gardiner.

But journalism is tied to the market with a defined audience and target group, its geographical limits are identifiable and its life is short. Imagination has no place in journalism. However these days there are quite a few speculative stories, doctored reports, "rumourous news."

Often journalism has been defined as literature written in a hurry. The dividing line is thin as the two share a number of common features. In the 19th and the first half of the 20th century, journalism and literature overlapped and crossed each other's frontiers, despite differences in respect of content and style.

Although journalism appears to have degenerated into a crass pen-pushing profession from the starry heights of the pre-independence era when it was considered a mission, there is little doubt that  over the years literature  has grown the richer with inputs and insights gained from the mass media.

Some of the best literary talents have at some time or the other been associated with newspapers which serve not only  as organs for projection of politico-economic postulations but also help build up esthetic sensibilities and refine tastes of the readers. Some of the novels of Charles Dickens were serialised in newspapers.

Regular publication of reviews, essays, poems and stories of dare-devilry, romance and adventure have helped bridge the gap between the writer and his readers. Today mass literature, a byproduct of assembly-line type of literary output, is heavily dependent on journalism. All that is enlightening to read, written for the man on the street either to inform him or brain-wash him forms part of our popular literary heritage.

The difference between literature and journalism is so marginal that in days to come it would become difficult to distinguish the two. Moreso, as journalism is becoming a routine technical exercise devoid of passion and literature fast losing its romantic flavour, the revolutionary fervour and in an effort to take on a realistic hue, is getting bogged down  with mundanities. The focus today is on grassroots journalism and realistic literature.

Journalism is essentially a vehicle of mass communication for diffusion of messages at a breakneck speed, resulting in the evolution of a mass society, mass culture and a "mass man," in the emerging globalised context. A message once catapulted into mass orbit through technological intervention becomes free of the sender. It no longer needs a support system to sustain it, requiring proximity of the sender and the  receiver. The original message could undergo fundamental restructuring and acquire new dimensions and hues in a record time.

But unlike a journalist a creative writer may often not have the opportunity to gauge the feedback instantly from his readers. This gap can infuse a sense of detachment and aloofness in him. A media-man on the other hand has to be always conscious  of the likely repercussions of his writing and therefore can not claim the same degree of freedom of thought of expression that a literary person enjoys.

The invention of the Guttenberg printing press  in the 15th century was a revolutionary event in the history of lieterature. From class the focus now shifted to the mass. It at once signalled a change in style, format and content. The creative writer could now make money and reach out to a bigger audience. Millions of copies of literary works are now published in addition to internet editions. Mass global readership of books has changed the literary scenario in a fundamental way.

Literature today has come out of the closet of the  elite, the almirrahs of the libraries and has acquired a pop diemension thanks to pocket book or paper back editions which have put the printed word in the easy reach of the masses.

It is through the columns of a newspaper that a common man is first introduced to a book or a writer. The interviews and reviews bring mass recognition to new authors. The monopoly of a few has been demolished and we hardly hear of any major literary movement these days, as we did before independence. In Hindi, for instance, the era of movements came to an end with Ageyey who too in his last years joined journalism becoming editor of Everyman's weekly of the Express group. Great poets like great authors have been lured by the film media, as happened in the case of Gopal Das Neeraj whose "Karvan gujar gaya gubaar dekhte rahe," brought him instant recognition. Poets like Gulzar or Javed Akhtar have penned numerous lyrics that are imbued with pure literary nuances. The latest literary persona to make it big in the film medium is Chetan Bhagat.  

If literary appears losing its quality-sheen and the old world elan, it is largely because of the negative influences of the mass media. The process of independent thinking, analysis and opinion formation has been dented by the media which dishes out ready made opinions and pressures the audience into accepting a certain way of thinking. Consumerism has impacted human relations reducing humans into use and throw items.  Often a literary critic of a newspaper can make or unmake the literary career of a budding writer. The inputs the media provides can distort free inquiry and evolution of tastes.

Having said that, let us accept that the single most permanent influence of journalism on literature has been its democratisation which many critics call vulgarisation of tastes. If literature is becoming so popular as evidenced in the frequency with which literature festivals are now being held in all parts of the country, it is because of journalism which allows free scope for experimenting with new ideas, forms and styles. We today see distinct categories of middle class or working class literature, thanks to journalism.

Journalism today is a technical art with huge scope for experimentation. Literature however continues to be inspired by human values of a universal nature, with poetic fancy, imagination and fictional elements continuing to dominate its processing. Thanks to internet and the social media sites, we now have instant literature occupying space and attracting notice through the evolving variants called Twitterature and Faciterature.

A few centuries ago in the west, journalism was looked down upon. In fact a newspaper writer was addressed as a "liar." Literary personalities kept a distance from hack writers and pen pushers. But today journalists are high profile,  much in demand, and a respectable breed. From its complementary nature a century ago, media has a become a parallel vocation, serving very often as a stepping stone to aspiring authors and poets.  Journalism in our country has given a stream of distinguished writers and also politicians.

"Good journalism," wrote Bernard Shaw, "is much rarer and more important than good literature."