Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
No one loves the messenger who brings unpleasant tidings. An analogy of the phrase can come from the breaching of an unwritten code of conduct in war or diplomacy, in which the opposing side was expected to receive and send back emissaries or diplomatic envoys sent by the enemy unharmed. Recall Krishna going to the court of the Kauravas as an emissary of the Pandavas for negotiations to avert war. During the early warring states period of China, the concept of chivalry and virtue prevented the executions of messengers sent by opposing sides.The sentiment that one should not kill the messenger was expressed by Shakespeare in Henry IV, Part 2 (1598) and in Anthony and Cleopatra, Cleopatra threatens to treat the messenger’s eyes as balls when told Antony has married another, eliciting the response “Gracious madam, I that do bring the news made not the match”
A modern version of “shooting the messenger” can be perceived in the world of social media more than anywhere else where the discussions take an ugly turn to condemn the messenger rather than dwelling on the message. The admins of WhatsApp are worst hit. He is like the then town crier of yore, an officer of the court who made public pronouncements in the name of the ruling monarch, and often including bad news. Harming a town crier was considered treason. But not in our social media in modern times. A totally retrograde phenomenon.
There is a trend to blame the media for presenting bad news about a favored cause, person, organization, etc. Getting rid of the messenger may be a tactical move and time-honored emotional response to unwanted news, but it is not a very effective method of remaining well-informed.
The forced nondisclosure may result in either hostile responses or negative feedback from only others as the own side will studiously avoid giving any negative feedback; thus the ‘Emperor’ continues with the self-delusion. Obviously, this is not a recipe for success. This will lead to whistleblowing creating Wikileaks like situations leading to calls for not shooting the messenger. The relevance or the irrelevance of the message is consequential than the messenger.
The news on Television or the print media which continuously day after day gives you some particularly “bad“news? Maybe it wasn’t even their fault – all they did is tell you about it, but had nothing to do with the news themselves. Maybe they highlight them for TRP. Still, you couldn’t help but hate them for it, even if you logically knew it wasn’t right. Well, it turns out you are not alone in this feeling – wanting to “shoot the messenger” is a widespread psychological reality for many humans. It’s just how some of us are wired
Ina family, workplace and society, at some point everybody has to deliver some bad news—whether it be a minor revelation such as a recruiter telling a prospective employee that there’s no wiggle-room in salary, or something major, like when a manager must fire an employee. We dread such discussions even when the revelations aren’t at all our fault. It turns out that our aversion is for good reason. Our research shows that people are prone to derogating those who tell them things they don’t want to hear—we shoot the messenger. A despicable act by all standards.
At a time when journalists have never been more needed to explain the complexities of an increasingly integrated world, they have never been more under threat: jailed in increasing numbers by some of the more authoritarian administrations, threatened with prosecution in the countries which have democratic governments.
The digital world plays out differently. There is a real possibility that the overreach of national security laws in the will damage the very commodity that heightened internet usage supposedly designed to increase convenience.The ultimate absurdity is that the most extraordinarily liberating communications system invented since the printing press could bring the societies down by being turned into a tool of intimidation and random shootings. The indiscriminate and immature use of these digital (social) media is witnessing shooting from the hip rivalling the wild west, where the message is ignored to get at the messenger.
The phenomenon of shooting the messenger is all too evident in the high decibel rhetoric during the current campaigning for the 18th general elections. Each bloc I.N.D.I alliance and the NDA are both these days shooting the messenger and avoids discussing the message. This is the remark of the very senior leader from congress on comments by NDA on the election manifesto of the INC – “Modi should get a Nobel if he proves Congress manifesto is inspired by Muslim League” . Such “shootings” are not confined to just one party or bloc; all political parties mostly shoot the messenger rather than discuss the message.
Some shoot more some less.
Col KL Viswanathan.
(The author is an Indian Army veteran and a contemporary affairs commentator. The views are personal.)
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint