The media landscape has changed significantly in the past years, with channels competing for TRPs and who can have the loudest, most aggressive primetime debates. Some would argue that in a lot of the mainstream media, the focus has shifted from journalism and newsgathering to grabbing eyeballs. However, what often gets lost in this cacophony is how the functioning as well as the language used in the media propagates toxic masculinity, and how harmful that is.
A panel discussion on the same was organised as a part of ‘M3: Man, Male, Masculinity’, a two-day conference on masculinity, by Goethe-Instituts in India and Bangladesh. In collaboration with the Network of Women in Media (NWMI), this panel had speakers from various media fields, who spoke not only about sexism and sidelining of women in newsrooms, but also how the flashy and aggressive language used in the media represents the toxic masculinity that has gained more legitimacy under the current political regime.
Sanya Farooqui, a Delhi-based journalist and filmmaker, who hosts The Sanya Farooqui Show, pointed out how women who speak their mind and raise questions in newsrooms often pay a heavy price for it. She noted that in her own experience, she had been sidelined in the past for questioning editorial decisions, and labelled as ‘aggressive’. “The reason behind toxic masculinity is power – and those in power wanting to keep it,” she said.
Alka Dhupkar, a multilingual journalist based out of Mumbai, shed light on how patriarchy and gender-based discrimination are perpetuated, and even justified in newsrooms. In the changing media industry, where TRPs, and “annual targets” often displace news as primary drivers, editors are often required to be in the good books of politicians and businessmen to secure revenue. “Women cannot attend the night parties and alcohol parties organised by these people. So, every time male editors are selected, because the notion is that men will bring more business,” she said. She added that though there are many women in newsrooms, they are not in positions of power, and are not involved in decision-making.
The problem is exacerbated if women are from minority communities. Sanya shared the experience of interviewing the Muslim women whose names, photos and other personal information were put up on the ‘Sulli deals’ website. Such aggressions against women are done to put them in place, to ask, “how dare you, a woman from a minority community, raise questions?” Sanya said. “Many of them are journalists, and have been harassed for a year. Despite this, they have faced challenges for months to get an FIR registered.”
It is not just news media that legitimises toxic masculinity – it comes from films and television as well. Nadika Nadja, a Bengaluru-based writer and researcher with interests in history, archaeology, gender, technology and the internet, remembers growing up watching serials where certain kinds of behaviours were more acceptable as masculine. “There was this serial where a man who remarried would be mean and cruel to his second wife because he thought his son and mother would judge him if he was affectionate towards her. However, the son and the grandmother had warmed up to the woman already. It showed that there were certain kinds of behaviour that men could get away with,” Nadika said.
Alka added that because of the way media is being run, with a focus on business rather than news, news outlets want to show negative news because it gets them higher TRPs. And this ‘negative’ news takes the form of rape, crimes against women and children. “So, women and children’s issues become synonymous with negative news. Meanwhile, masculinity has replaced positivity in the media,” she said.
Veteran journalist and Senior Executive Editor at NDTV, Ravish Kumar, who was also on the panel, spoke about how several mainstream media channels have now started speaking in a language that is synonymous with that of those in authority, and portrays itself as “the men of those in authority”. “The language used to deliver these messages is masculine. An anchor chases, threatens the panellist who questions those in power,” he said. In the name of being ‘energetic’, news anchors of the media – both men and women – that are biased towards the government in power, use tactics and language that is aggressive. “They use words like slam, thrash, bulldoze,” said Ravish, adding that masculinity has come to be associated with curbing dissent in the current political climate.
The panellists also pointed out in the public domain, politicians – including the prime minister – have been known to reinforce toxic masculinity. The usage of phrases like ‘56-inch chest’ and ’50-crore-rupee-girlfriend’ by those in power has given legitimacy to news channels as well as others in the general public, who now believe that not only can they get away with such things, but also that it is legitimate and masculine.
Ravish referred to Modi’s call to Mamata Banerjee as “Didi… O didi…” in one of his rally speeches, which drew flak at the time as well, with many saying that it was a catcall. Ravish said that in this instance, Modi was not calling out to ‘didi’ (mamata) as a ‘dada’ (Bengali word for elder brother) but as a ‘dada’ (bully) of the locality.
“The language used to communicate that ‘our culture’ and ‘our caste’ is superior to others or the rest of the world is also masculine,” added Ravish. In contrast, he noted that feminism makes space to exchange ideas without intimidation and raised voices, to foster equality. “But the language used in TV has become the opposite. It amplifies and presents masculine hegemony,” he argued.
He and Sanya also spoke about dealing with online abuse, and how that language is also full of toxic masculinity. “Now I have learnt to deal with it, but initially, it was very alienating. Because they are emboldened to use that language by those in power,” Ravish said. Talking about her own struggles with accessing and using social media, Sanya said that because of the keywords she uses being seen as “harmful” by social media companies, she is not able to share and boost her stories as much as she would have liked to. On what led her to start her own YouTube show, she said, “I realised that I had spent so much time fighting the system than doing actual journalism.”
The panellists stressed on the need to continue dissenting and being assertive in newsrooms, while acknowledging that it comes with its costs, such as denial of opportunity, harassment and sidelining. They also emphasised the need for diversity. “The term inclusivity itself implies gatekeeping, because it assumes that there is power that you have to include or exclude someone. Instead, we can practice non-exclusion – recognise that your behaviour has been exclusionary instead of saying you will be inclusive,” Nadika said.