ACJ Convocation: Norman Pearlstine says journalism will evolve in ways unclear but need for factual info will endure
'This information assists people in leading better lives through reporting that exposes wrongdoing and offers utility, guiding them toward success and happiness,' Mr. Pearlstine said, delivering the Lawrence Dana Pinkham Memorial Lecture 2025 at the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ).
Governments in both India and the U.S. – two of the world's largest democracies – were becoming increasingly authoritarian and have sought to restrict press freedom; their attacks on journalists, along with unfounded claims of 'fake news', this has contributed to the decline of trust in the media, he emphasised, speaking at the convocation of the batch of 2024 of ACJ. 'Democracy and press freedom are inextricably linked, and the struggle to preserve both in the face of government antipathy toward journalists and journalism is a greater problem today than at any time I can remember,' Mr. Pearlstine maintained.
Both governments, he said, pursued authoritarian control over the media and the actions of the leaders of both nations –– were being mirrored by supporters across the countries.
In 2024, Reporters Without Frontiers ranked India 151 out of 180 countries in the Press Freedom Index while the U.S. stood at 55, he said. While the U.S. was ranked better than India, it lagged behind several countries known for corruption and the ranking could fall further if President Trump continued to attack and demonise the press.
Touching upon the disruption caused by technology, Mr. Pearlstine said new technologies that have broadened the range of voices disseminating news have also resulted in greater fragmentation, increased misinformation, a decline in trust in government and journalism and a heightened inability to reach consensus on politics and policies. AI, he said, could assist publishers in saving money with streamlining of copy desks and quicker and more efficient fact checking.
N. Murali, Trustee, Media Development Foundation (MDF) and Director, The Hindu Group of Publications, said digital media has overtaken legacy media as a source for news. In this chaotic media scene, journalism did not represent diversity, pluralism and independence since media ownership is concentrated in the hands of a few business houses.
Sashi Kumar, Chairman, MDF and ACJ, said while the media has been facing external threats from increasingly authoritarian states, the business side, too, is at a crossroads since traditional revenue models were gradually running dry. Responding to the changing scenario and the advent of new technology, the ACJ, he said, has moved away from silos of print, broadcast and new media to an integrated media journalism curriculum, that is platform-neutral.
Manoj Kumar Sonthalia, Chairman and Managing Director, The New Indian Express Group, launched the ACJ Alumni Association's website.
Nalini Rajan, Dean of Studies, ACJ, and Khushboo Narayan, Dean, ACJ-Bloomberg Programme, spoke.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
8 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Nate Raymond Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order -U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Mint
8 minutes ago
- Mint
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trumps birthright citizenship order
Boston-based federal appeals court skeptical of Trump's order One appeals court has already ruled order is unconstitutional U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
Ramtek MP Barve raises Pench man-animal conflict issue in Lok Sabha
1 2 Nagpur: The growing threat of man-animal conflict in the Pench Tiger Reserve region found a voice in Parliament on Tuesday, when Ramtek MP Shyam Barve urged the Centre to take urgent steps to protect tribals while ensuring their livelihoods remain intact. Speaking in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday, Barve said that tribals in villages on the fringes of forests have long been suffering due to restrictions imposed after the reserve was declared a national park. "Their farms are located adjoining the forest. Yet, ever since Pench was declared a national park, tribals are stopped from moving freely. The animals have no such restrictions, leading to frequent tiger attacks. In my constituency alone, 11 people have lost their lives in the past three years," Barve said. Citing official data, the MP said over 700 people have died across the country in man-animal conflicts over the past four years, including more than 200 in Maharashtra. He accused the government of failing to provide alternative means of livelihood for tribals, despite their role in protecting the forest. "The government has not made a single corridor for cattle rearing, nor has it implemented any scheme to support their livelihood," he said, urging the Centre to prepare schemes that balance conservation with human survival. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo He added, "I urge the government to make provisions that can protect their lives and to prepare schemes that will allow them to farm and establish small industries. This government has been in power for 11 years, but it has not paid attention to the tribals. I would like to remind the government through this House that tribals too are citizens of this country." Barve's remarks came just days after his wife, former Nagpur Zilla Parishad president Rashmi, slammed the state government and forest department for their inability to track down the Parseoni man-eater, which claimed its latest human victim on Sunday. "There is panic among villagers due to this man-eater. Many of our villagers have to venture into the fields because it is sowing season. But there is a constant fear as a man-eater is still roaming around," she had told TOI earlier, warning that the death toll will keep rising unless decisive action is taken. Parseoni is also part of Barve's Ramtek constituency.
