At the outset, let me make it clear that I’m making a distinction between what is being labeled as “trolling” and criminal online behavior such as cyber-bullying and hate-mongering. However, this distinction is NOT made by a league of critics (most of them journalists) who are on a mission to purge the social media by launching a War On Trolling, much like Junior Bush launched War On Terror and declared that “if you are not with us, you are with the terrorists”.
In that case, I’m with the trolls (as defined by them).
For them, a troll is anyone who is not following the rules and decorum of a civilized communication, and who argues without showing much respect to logic.
(Please note that I’m giving them the benefit of doubt and not claiming that they consider anyone in disagreement with their views as a troll, which is truly the case with many such critics)
Now going by that definition, a troll sounds like a silly and avoidable person. But is he (or she, lest some troll calls me a misogynist) so despicable and monstrous?
No, except the cyber-bullies and hate-mongers (different from ‘haters’), most trolls are fun (not for the sensitive and politically correct types).
In fact, trolling is an art. You need to indulge in lateral thinking to become a “successful” troll. It’s a well-known fact that creativity is often hindered by “rules” and “decorum”, and sometimes even by accepted “logic”.
So perhaps the first step towards being creative is to become a troll!
In India, Deepak Chopra and Chetan Bhagat are among those who are most trolled on Twitter. Those keeping a track would know that sometimes the trolls make more sense! Ditto about some celeb journalists, whom I won’t name as I could be accused of vanity.
At this point of time, some of the top journalists leading the crusade against trolls would claim that their objection is only to the abusive and hateful trolls. I have reasons to believe that this is just an excuse.
The verdict
In the last couple of days, an article has been widely shared on Twitter that lists 5 types of trolls, rather “monsters” (see pic). It doesn’t list cyber-bullies or hate-mongers, the true monsters. In essence, it’s a condescending list of people, who, according to the writer, follow no rules, logic, or decorum while communicating.
The thought process (no lateral thinking involved here) behind creating such a list is rooted in a journalist’s arrogated right to frame rules and decorum for a public debate.
Twitter is neither a TV studio for a controlled panel discussion nor the “letters to the editor” section where you pick and choose what to print.
Also, when a journalist joins twitter, it’s like getting into a government college after being the teachers’ favorite student in the private school. No teachers to protect you from the “bad boys” here. No extra marks for beautiful handwriting (grammatically correct and “intellectual” tweets). And of course, no rulebook to follow (except Twitter’s terms and conditions and laws of the land).
However, more than the anarchic nature of Twitter (and much of the virtual world) and a public display of love towards civilized discourse, a journalist’s problem with Twitter arises from the fact that traditional journalism is ill-conceived to allow and incorporate feedback and criticism.
In a newspaper, the “Letters to the Editor” column is the only place for feedback. But we know what kind of stuff goes there; mostly praise for the newspaper articles or complaint about government authorities. In schools, we were supposed to write such letters to the editor (as a language composition exercise) not as a ‘feedback’ to journalistic activity, but as a citizen journalism piece (Sir, the lamp post in my area is not working, I want to draw attention of the authorities through your esteemed newspaper).
Even in television, we are supposed to send SMS’s and answer loaded questions as feedback. Public views are edited (sometimes even faked) and ‘raw’ feedback is never entertained.
A few years back I met editorial head of a national news channel who earlier headed top editorial posts in many newspapers. He rued how internet was full of RSS sympathizers and went on to claim that RSS had a special cell that sends “letters to the editors” objecting to views expressed in various newspapers. He proudly claimed that he used to throw away such letters in the dustbin.
Twitter has no such dustbin, and many miss this luxury.
Maybe the views expressed in those letters were not deemed fit for publication by the editor, but they were fundamentally ‘feedback’ and ‘criticism’. You don’t throw them into dustbin just because you “suspect” that they were sent by an organized group.
One can mock that such views deserve nothing but the dustbin, but when have we seen the mainstream media allowing and incorporating feedback and criticism?
I’ve been a (television) journalist myself (in pre-Facebook and pre-Twitter era) and don’t remember a single editorial meeting that was called in to discuss feedback. In fact, there was no mechanism to collect public feedback at all.
The only ‘feedback’ that we were responding to was weekly TRPs. There were weekly meetings to analyze what type of program gathered the highest TRP and how to repeat the “success”. And I guess things haven’t changed much since then.
Most of what is being dismissed as trolling by journalists (not all of them, I must admit; many of them are doing really good on Twitter) are actually instant and angry feedback by their ‘consumers’.
Imagine AirTel or Vodafone dismissing all criticism and feedback as trolling. To be fair, they deal with many angry, abusive, and even dumb customers on a daily basis. God forbid if a journalist becomes their customer care head!
Traditional journalism, as an institution, has always seen itself as ‘giving feedback’ to the society and hasn’t thought it necessary to ‘take feedback’.
I remember Indian Express editor Shekhar Gupta’s interview with Star News (now ABP News) after the coup-story controversy where he claimed that a member of Team Anna (most probably Arvind Kejriwal) had asked him whether Indian Express took feedback from the readers on what it publishes (Express had published a string of stories ‘exposing’ Team Anna before).
Shekhar Gupta thought that the suggestion (about taking feedback) was irrelevant as it was his duty, as a journalist, to show “mirror to the society” (his words) and not let anyone show him the mirror (my words).
After all that’s why he sued fellow journalists when they tried to show him the mirror.
A bulk of the problems of journalists with Twitter is rooted in this nature of journalism, where feedback is not deemed necessary, in fact, it’s seen as an unpleasant development, something they happily dismiss as trolling.
And yeah, if you disagree with what I’ve written above, you are a troll as per the picture above – the see-no-evil monkey (Replace Indian Society with Indian Journalism).
This is perfect. This is also criticism of Journalists. Which makes this trolling.
You have chosen a very apt point to write a blog entry after a gap of 17-18 months. Very well written blog and I agree with your point of view. I think the ‘top’ (?) journalists are unable to understand/digest the fact that someone can diagree with them in a span of few seconds on a media which makes the journos so ordinary, equal to every other netizen.
Top journalists are mostly from the Print side. Therefore they are oldies and have legacy issues. They are out of touch with todays realities like our old and retired (retarded?) politicians. These journos will have to be mostly ignored.
Bravo! Didn’t think any journalist would have the gumption to write what many of us feel, but no traditional media portal will carry. But to be fair, you don’t count as a traditional journalist any more
.
Increasingly, I see media houses as new age imperial powers. The practice of suing their critics into silence by celeb reporters (Barkha, Shekhar etal) is equivalent to imperial warships throwing their weight around to encourage opposing states to submit to their agenda. While those powers fought for land and resources amongst each other in the days gone by, now the media moguls fight to grab eyeballs and mindshare. The parallels one can draw from history lessons is enough to give you goosebumps.
The only way to keep these powers in check is by being aware of the motivations that drive them. It seems culling the ‘objectivity’ out of a news piece or even a tweet has become the responsibility of the audience, rather than the prerogative of the reporting journalist. Not an ideal state of affairs, but for now it is the sensible thing to do when forming an opinion.
The only thing that matters in the media industry is TRPs. Why waste time gathering ‘feedback’ when you could spend it on TV showing the same news in different words throughout the day ?
A very well written article. The world is moving away from fakeness and it would be more ”On Your Face”. People should forget that they are the authorities, and understand their ‘responsibilities’ towards the people. We the people are not ignorant fools, and we the people know and understand much more than what you (#PaidMedia) think. The age of brain wash is over and the truth flows without any control on Internet. This is why the #PaidMedia (and some really egoistic Journalists, who might not be sold out) is reacting so aggressively. I am sure I would be called a troll, but what I am saying is just the echo of the sentiments of Indians.
Gasp! How can you write articles like this that make so much sense. No screaming and shouting. Plain English and no intellectual nonsense. No stern voice and constipated faces either!! Why Mr Patrakar? Who gave you the right to right such articles that get the point across so cleanly. The nation is demanding answers Mr Patrakar. You will soon be labelled anti national and there will be a John Doe order banning your site
.
You have given expression to the feelings of many. Nicely written in a perfectly paliamentary language and still retaining the intensity of argument.
They want to follow a protectionist policy in a Laissez Faire world.
Kudos to you also for analysing the issue threadbare from a behavioural perspective( creativity and blocks ).
The example of Govt college is excellent. One has to accept the data surfacing Here and Now”.
now, i want the whole media to be faked on the lines of social media. The organisation of current media is like a dumb beast.
@namitabhandare has become a troll magnet
This is trolling and you are internet hindu. Only Modi can be abused on twitter.
Perfect Reply. Can’t be better than that… The same journalist who wrote the famous troll essay is calling people Asshole in response to criticisms after her article
I thought about the same thing last night.
We pay to read newspaper and to watch tv. In other words we are their consumers. If they don’t want to accept our feedback then I don’t want to be their customer. Calling someone, who criticizes you, as a troll does make your ego grow bigger but in the process you are hurting your own ambitions and yes profits.
This is such a fantastic piece.
Honest.
Superbly argued and not a single exclamation mark was used. How awesome an arguer are you?!
Pingback: Indian Media: Why journalists hate trolls | media laundry- @Dhobitalao
Very well written article! Why don’t you Mr. Rahul Roushan publicise this article in DNA ? It will be a good read for the people who do not get to read your blog.
Interesting conversation topic, this. In my view, a lot of the dismissing of views that may counter one’s own views, comes from inherent insecurities in the thought processes and the opinions derived from them. If I were to spend a lot of time understanding a subject, to the limits of my intellect and comprehension, and felt confident talking about it, and if someone comes along presents a whole different view on the subject, and if I dismiss them as a troll, it is my loss, not theirs. Another thing to consider: A discussion that respectfully disagrees with the other person’s view is totally fine. You can disagree without being disagreeable. When someone challenges my opinion on a topic, they are questioning my logic and reasoning in having arrived at the conclusion that I have, and NOT my character. That’s a significant distinction any opinion maker/giver has to be cognizant of. If they don’t, any challenge to the thinking is seen as a personal affront, and they adopt a defensive posture, which is to dismiss the other person(s) as troll.
Also, there is a saying in Tamil “Kattradhu kai alavu, kallaladhu ulagalavu” which roughly translates to, What you know is only a handful, what you do not know is basically everything outside it. So, even though one may be an “expert” on a topic, there is no way they can know everything about it and thus, there are going to be people who are going to have views that may be/are more correct or provide input that you haven’t thought of. You operate from this construct, it is easy not to feel dissed when someone raises a valid point, and you don’t have to label them as a troll.
“A bulk of the problems of journalists with Twitter is rooted in this nature of journalism, where feedback is not deemed necessary, in fact, it’s seen as an unpleasant development, something they happily dismiss as trolling.”
Word. No one wants someone pointing out their fallacies, lies, and biases.
U nailed it RR without any intellectual shit,reminds me of that old piece of yours in which u discussed the history,structure,role and the economics of the media and was he rajdeep?:)
OMG this is serious stuff! Why did u put it on faking news? The journalists u spoke abt would dismiss this as jst another satire!
Sensible. Original. Precise. And drives home the point.
Pingback: Sorry, I can’t relate to your ‘issues’ « Slow & Unsteady
Is English the language of choice online in India now?
First of all, I would like to say that “trolling” per se (genuine trolls who anonymously enjoy abusing others while hiding behind a keyboard) is indeed a serious matter on the internet.
But, our wonderful friends in the media are completely intolerant to any kind of criticism from any quarters, and even the slightest bit of (constructive) criticism is classified as ‘trolling’ (as per their definition). According to them, so-called “freedom of speech” exists only for journalists, and NOT for anybody else. That is why they hold ‘special’ conferences to justify their stand when people like Justice Katju express their outspoken views about the media.
This article would be classified and dismissed as ‘trolling’ of the highest order by the mainstream media. And, this article definitely deserves to be published in a national newspaper, to be perfectly honest.