Innocent until proven guilty?

Better to let 100 guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man, Innocent until proven guilty. These principles epitomize Indian democracy. The freedom that all of us enjoy, the sense of security that we feel, is because of this principle. Unfortunately today, I feel that some parts of the media have made a complete mockery of this. I do agree that all news channels to certain extend support the alleged victims to a certain extend, but certain other channels find it their duty to play the role of judiciary. I don’t watch all the news channels in India, but from the few I watch I found that, the news channel "Times Now"" is ridiculously amateur, completely unethical and out right stupid. Most of the murder cases that get covered by the media, they decided to come to a judgment just on the basis of what the alleged victim says.  

Recently a goa minister’s son was accused of committing a rape of a German minor girl. The son might very well have done it. From him looks and his fathers track record its very likely that the son was guilty. An average person on the street can come to such a conclusion and may be tell every one but news channels need to be more responsible. Media has a huge impact on the public. It shapes their views. To blindly come to a judgment is ridiculous. To move ahead without even considering the fact that the allegation could be false is utterly dumb. It could well be a political propaganda.  

I have a problem with this news channel. My parents seem to love it. They say they get politically unbiased views from this channel. They might get a politically unbiased view, but the views that they get are utterly stupid. Its one thing to have your own opinion on issues, but to spread ridiculously stupid views to the entire country and there by misleading the entire nation is unacceptable. Watching this channel made me realize what the term "evils of the media" really meant. They blow things completely out of proportion. Sensationalize things to the core. Take what people said completely out of context and put the worst possible meaning into it. There have been instances where their reports have been found to be false. They like to play with the emotions of the public.  

I do agree that we got a few good news channels here and if this channel follows the same path with its amateur reporters they would go bankrupt. I can understand spicing up the news but taking the soul out of the news, i.e. the truth, is showing disrespect to their profession. Don’t get me started with the way in which their editor talks. He takes ages to come to the point, stutters like anything and his questions are so dumb.  

Any way coming back to the topic, the role of the judiciary should be left to the judiciary. The medias role is to ensure that justice is done and not to give out judgments. They should look into the hindrances in the justice system and not play the role of a judge. They should always respect the fact that there could be a 1% chance that the accused could be innocent and keeping that in mind should refrain from defaming the person. I believe the role of the media is to report objectively. They can show passion in their reporting but should have a sense of reality with that. News channels influence a lot of people and they should always keep that in mind