The art of balanced journalism in a polarised world

You, the reader, are our raison d'être, and we endeavour to meet your expectations.

Not many days go by at the Khaleej Times newsroom when friends or fans of different political parties in India or Pakistan or the UK or the US or one of the several other nationalities that live and work here in the UAE don't write in (or call) to share their perspective with us. They usually correspond to commend us or criticise us for either publishing or not publishing a certain news story, feature or opinion. Some go substantially deeper than mere superficial observations, and raise issues with a certain angle, slant or leaning with which a piece was written or something that it may have omitted.
The other day, for instance, someone wrote to us with an exact measurement of the column centimetre space dedicated to the leader of one Indian political party versus the other in the same edition of KT. While an unbiased observer may be able to corroborate that the decision of the sub-editor concerned was based on the relative value of the stories for our audience, we do take every single bit of feedback, comment and observation from our readers with much humility and gratitude. You, the reader, are our raison d'être, and we endeavour to meet your expectations, demands, needs, and wants as sincerely as possible, keeping in mind the core principles of ethical journalism, viz. truth and accuracy, independence, fairness and impartiality, humanity, and accountability.
It isn't easy, though. Maintaining a balance in the content we publish, making sense of news and politics in a polarised world, presenting all sides - including rhetoric or what we believe to be rhetoric - in a fair and equitable manner is a challenge. For, vested interests, or the so-called political, civic and commercial ideologies, in countries far and wide have deepened the dredges that divide the people. From white supremacy to Brexiteering to Islamophobia to patriarchal and communitarian political culture to excessive chauvinism to majoritarian democracy, the polarisation is extensive, exhaustive and expansive. And that makes our role - that of the media - more critical than ever. Whether or not we agree with it, we need to highlight the contrarian viewpoint with the same intent and earnestness as we'd feature the one we personally believe in. Anything less and we'd have failed in our duty as media.