By: Nikhil Kanekal | livemint.com
New Delhi — New Supreme Court reporting norms, if enforced, will result in 80% of the journalists who have been covering proceedings being disqualified. The Supreme Court can bar any correspondent from coverage without offering any reasons under the new rules.
Issued by the court on Saturday, the norms require that permanent and temporary accredited print journalists have a professional law degree and at least seven years of experience. Electronic media reporters need, apart from the law degree, at least three-and-a-half-years of experience.
s murari
Retrograde step. Next Medical Council may say those reporting on health issue should have a medical degree. Mass media deconstruct legalese for the masses. It is enough if they have a nodding acquaintance with law. In any case, they get summaries of judgments. By experience, they know what to omit and what to report.I am a law graduate and I have retired from a senior position in a newspaper. I did only general reporting, covering only important cases like clemency for Rajiv killers. Curiously, even journalists regularly doing court cases, tend to take a law degree for better understanding. Some have even donned the black gown. Instead of prescribing a qualification like this, the SC can pull up, correct media which misreport on important cases. I know why judges do not like press. Those who tend to shoot off their mouth, find their off-the-cuff remarks in cold print and find it discomfiting.
Journalists should have law degree to report on SC
8/30/2011
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here