In May, this year, Ram Dayal Verma (31) travelled all the way from his village in Madhya Pradesh to New Delhi to commit suicide near Parliament. He did not want to die in obscurity. By killing himself outside Parliament, he hoped to draw the attention of the Delhi-based national media to illegal betting that had landed him in crores of debt.

The suicide played on national television news for about half a day and Verma was forgotten. But his story is a reminder of how much faith people still put in news media and its power to change status quo. How much of that did we live up to in 2016, the year journalists turned mobsters, passed off doctored footage as news and war mongering as reporting? Trends that we saw emerge in news media early this year – with the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) row over sedition – came full circle towards the end with “surgical strikes” and demonetization. Too many journalists decided the government, the army and the Prime Minister were above questioning. Fortunately, there remained some who stood up for press freedom and made the powerful uncomfortable with the questions.

At a time when there’s so much interest in ‘consuming’ journalism and an equal level of cynicism about the ethics of those in the industry, it seemed like a good idea to do a bit of introspection. We reached out to a few journalists and asked them these three questions:

1. What, according to you, was the lowest point for Indian journalism in 2016?
2. What, according to you, was the highest point for Indian journalism in 2016?
3. What would you hope Indian journalism gets right in 2017?

Not everyone we contacted was game – some begged off by saying they didn’t feel qualified to comment – while a few of those who did respond, dwelled only on the lows. Some focused on their hopes for 2017.

Aditya Sinha, journalist and author

The high point for 2016, relatively speaking, was the ground reporting during the demonetisation exercise. Though even many business journalists were caught napping by the Prime Minister’s surprise move, and even 10 days into the currency exchange, were at pains to discuss the fall-out (or even the gains), there was enough reporting of incidents from across the country, and reporting from the financial sector that was informative and educational to the public. Perhaps because it was something that hit everyone where it hurts, journalists were forced to focus their skill and energies on this story. 

Of course there are people who say there weren’t enough stories on demonetisation; and there are those who say the reporting did not compare to high points of reporting in other years. Yet even if it is a relative high point, you must look at the context — a retreating Indian media, bullied by an authoritarian government and an aggressive middle-class readership, as exemplified by the low point of journalism detailed below.

The low points was a part of the media going after anyone who questioned the “surgical strike” in September. The phrase “anti-national” was bandied about for citizens who merely inquired as to the extent of the cross-LoC action; its immediate consequences, and its fulfillment of stated strategic objectives. The pro-government media which sought to paint critics as traitors would have done Goebbels proud.

In a milieu where newspapers, magazines and TV channels have been put on the defensive (some due to tax inquiries, others due to access only through favoured journalists — and the owners getting behind-the-scenes pressure from key persons in government), it is difficult to see anyone doing a story that results in the resignation of a cabinet minister. That would require a lot of legwork and real ferreting out of information — not the usual plant by a cabinet rival or a business interest. Also, a lot of institutional resistance and the fear of revenge from a ferociously vindictive government. If someone can bring down the high and mighty, that would be a return for Indian journalism getting it right.

Bahar Dutt, consulting editor, CNN News18

In the new year, I would like to see more news channels doing investigative stories in the environment space. We seem to forget the ecology is the economy it’s all linked…So don’t give me environment stories as an aside. Show me good, hard-hitting stories on air pollution, habitat loss, deforestation and the mafia responsible for this loss.

Chitra Subramaniam, journalist and co-founder, Newsminute

In 2017, I hope Indian journalism reclaims space that some have lost by omission or commission to vested interests. I hope we can build solidarity and stand together however divergent our views maybe.

Josy Joseph, National Security Editor, The Hindu

There were far too many embarrassing episodes to point out one of them as the lowest. I hope 2016 will remain the lowest point for Indian journalism, and will only improve from here. In 2016, proclaimed anti-establishment TV reporters completed their metamorphosis into obedient lapdogs of the ruling front, famed TV anchors held forth on GPS chips in currency notes, and various forms of censorship became far more palpable than ever in recent memory.

I hope mainstream media gets more aggressive in holding the government accountable, so that autocratic and foolish decisions are not thrust upon ordinary people. And, of course, more new media houses rooted in strong value systems should emerge.

Manu Joseph, journalist and author

Without torturing metaphors too much, let’s say it is not exactly the lowest point, but it is a low place and we have been there for some time. The opinion coverage of demonetisation has further shown the phenomenon for what it is – that the liberals may talk about objectivity, but they are not capable of it. They are as hopelessly trapped in their delusions as the other side and what they often excel in, like the other camp, is defaming ideas and people that make them uncomfortable. Liberal columnists and other forms of opinion writers are unable to see beyond what their ideologies, moral posturing and peer pressure would show them. The common reader is unable to take most of them seriously. The readers may not be objective, they do not want to be objective, that’s the fun of being regular people, but they do expect mainstream columnists to possess clarity and a sense of uncompromising fairness but that seems to have become a rare quality.

I feel very bad for the young journalists who are caught in this time – between a banal miserly mainstream and a banal broke fringe. I hope they are at least getting a lot of sex. There has be some perk to being young.

The other low place is in Tamil Nadu journalism. It is disgraceful and a matter of shame for every political journalist in Tamil Nadu that the cause for Jayalalithaa’s hospitalisation is still a mystery.

Naresh Fernandes, Editor, Scroll.in

The manner in which certain TV stations wilfully misreported the meeting at Jawaharlal Nehru University that eventually led to sedition charges against Kanhaiya Kumar and his companions was the lowest point for Indian journalism. There were several instances this year of the media, especially TV, acting as a propaganda arm of the state and ruling party, but this was perhaps the most egregious.

Among the highest points was the vigorous reporting in Chhattisgarh that forced the authorities to disband the Samajik Ekta Manch, the so-called citizens anti-Maoist group that had hounded journalists and lawyers out of the state for questioning the government line on casualties in the fight against Naxalites. The focussed scrutiny on the group by several media houses was proof that the power of the press isn’t a cliche.

Rahul Pandita, Journalist

There are too many low points in Indian journalism in 2016, but I’d say that a few reports that bragged about non-existent, high-tech qualities of the elusive Rs 2000 note take the cake. 

I cannot think of any high point in Indian journalism after a young ANI reporter questioned Robert Vadra in 2014, prompting him to flare his nostrils and say, are you serious! 

Honestly, I have no expectations. But I pray that we find a few vertebrae in our spine and that some editors would stop saying: “Yes sir; Yes ma’am; absolutely sir; absolutely ma’am; thank you sir; thank you ma’am.”

Saikat Dutta, Journalist

To my mind, this has generally been a bad year for journalists. But two of them stand out. The first was the coverage of the JNU episode. Blatant untruths and doctored videos were passed off as facts. The reportage was shoddy, criminally short on the truth and driven by political agendas. Even basic facts such as who shouted the slogans were misreported due to malicious intent. That this was co-opted and support by political party activists made it worse.

The second really low point was the hounding out of journalists from Bastar, Chattisgarh. This ensures that a police state can function with complete impunity.

The weren’t too many high points, but some sharp reporting by some publications – Business Standard in particular, and some by Indian Express, The Times of India, Scroll, and Catch News; India Spend was very heartening to read. The spoofs and analysis on Newslaundry were sterling.

In 2017, first and foremost, the quality of leadership in newsrooms needs to be drastically improved. That is the single, most urgent reform that the Indian media needs if it wants to survive. Second, it is hoped that a revenue model evolves where readers pay for quality content.

Subir Ghosh, journalist and author

The lows in journalism were:

(i) Fake news items about the new currency notes that were concocted by TV news channels: I still don’t understand how and why they have been able to get away with it. That was not bad journalism; in fact, it was not journalism by any yardstick

(ii) Being obsessed with secularism: Secularism was the red herring; the real news was always environment and corporate corruption. It’s not that news about atrocities and rights abuses are not important; but to do that at the cost of environment and corporate corruption was like falling into a well-laid trap.

Journalists are either sold out, or running scared. Or, there is simply no budget for news-gathering anywhere. Then there’s paid news and corporate control over media (all well documented and debated in the past). It’s not difficult to understand why good journalism is so much a rarity these days. Reportage (from the field) itself has become so rare that any mundane ground story comes across as a high.

The publication that has consistently been doing good work is Caravan, and the only reporter who has been at it from the beginning (of this regime) has been Nitin Sethi of Business Standard. You hardly get to see good stories in the media anymore(mainstream or otherwise). I wish I had 20 highs to choose from.

Journalism ought to be about people, and that’s what we need to get right, and we need to get it right every single time. Journalism needs to earn its credibility back. Today, the agenda-setting is done by the government and corporates, and the news media will-nilly falls into that trap. What you get to read is opinions of politicians and corporates (occasionally celebs); there’s too much of views, and too little of news. And when I say news, I mostly mean reportage. Minus the work being relentlessly done by a handful, I hope Indian journalism first gets the news in 2017; after that we can talk about getting it right.