Jackie Chan, latest media victim?

Media reports that he brought his own mineral water and refused to eat Indian food on a flying visit to Chennai had the kung fu star fulminating

There's this story taught in journalism classes, which goes something like this:

On landing in an US airport, the Pope was surrounded by reporters and he was asked this question: “What is your opinion about night clubs here?”

The Pope paused for a while, as he was well aware that these street-smart scribes are adept at the art of making news out of thin air. He knew whatever he’d say could be twisted and polished as a news item. So he threw back a question in the most innocuous way possible: “Oh are there are night clubs here?”

Next day newspaper reports on Pope’s visit were something like this: “On landing the airport, the first thing the Pope asked was whether there are any night clubs…”

I am reminded of this story - often repeated to talk about journalists’ quest for sensationalism - on reading a posting by action hero Jackie Chan on his website dated April 27.

His lengthy posting was meant to clear up a controversy caused by media reports that he refused to eat Indian food and that he declined to talk to anyone and dismissed Indian stars during his recent visit to Chennai for an audio release of Kamal Haasan-starrer Tamil movie Dasavatharam.

“One article accused me of ridiculous things like refusing to drink India’s bottled water – they said I brought my own imported mineral water - and of traveling with my own personal chefs because I refuse to eat Indian food,” he wrote.

Terming all the reports “complete nonsense”, he said that he had nothing but respect for Indian culture and Indian cinema. “And saying that I won’t eat Indian food! Nothing could be further from the truth; I adore Indian food, and in fact had two excellent meals on this trip and was so full I could barely leave my seat!,” he said in the website.

The actor has challenged the reporters to prove that he actually brought his own water and asked them to check up with the housekeepers at the hotel whether he did such a thing.

“What brand did I bring? You say I refused to eat Indian food. Do your research and talk to the three butlers the hotel assigned to my room and ask them what I ate! You say I holed up in my air-conditioned hotel room, ignoring my hosts. Why would I travel all the way to India and refuse to leave my hotel room?”

He said that he had put up with a lot of ridiculous things written about him as he had been in the public eye for many years and that he seldom attacked anyone. But, it seems that he couldn’t hold it anymore. He said that few “irresponsible reporters” had spoiled the memory of his trip to India. “I am so afraid that when my gracious and wonderful hosts read the lies, they may get the complete wrong impression of me and my feelings about them and about the event. Therefore, I am posting this message on my website immediately to set the record straight.”

So this is not the end of it all. He also narrates one more instance of how journalists’ innate penchant for sensationalism can be damaging.

When some reporters asked him about his participation in the Olympic torch run, he jokingly answered that “no one had better try to come near me while I’m carrying the torch.” “I said it as a joke, and believe me, I made it quite clear that I was fooling around,” he wrote on his website.

But his comments were more than enough fodder for the media as the next day, news reports poured in with headlines like “Jackie Chan Threatens Olympic Protestors” and “Kung Fu Star Will Chop Down Protestors.”

This is a classic case of how media’s senseless actions can vitiate things; in this case adding fuel to the Tibetan cauldron, (His participation in the torch run had grabbed media headlines worldwide on account of his pro-Chinese stand.)

I don’t think even the most cynical would completely disbelieve in Jackie Chan’s version, at least his argument with regard to the Olympic torch run.
This is just another case of media indulging in the obnoxious practice of sensationalism.

Should there be an authority to rein in such practices that run contrary to journalist ethics?

(Appeared in Hoot)