Jimmy Kimmel to Kunal Kamra: Trump’s US follows a familiar playbook from Modi’s India

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on September 25, 2025

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2025/09/25/jimmy-kimmel-to-kunal-kamra-trumps-us-follows-a-familiar-playbook-from-modis-india

What do the current government of the United States, headed by Donald Trump, and the government in India, led by Narendra Modi, have in common?

I would suggest at least three aspects, although there are many more. One, an inability to tolerate criticism from the media, even as they declare that they head democracies, and second, a very thin skin that cannot tolerate humour.

The third, and in many ways far more insidious, is the attempt to control, regulate and even capture the media without making any changes in the Constitutional provisions that underwrite media freedom.

How do we define what has happened to India’s mainstream media, especially in the last decade? There have been various discussions whether we are living through an “undeclared emergency”, referring to the emergency declared by Indira Gandhi in 1975. Such a comparison serves no purpose in trying to understand the process that has resulted in a flattened mediascape, where even the normal questioning that is integral to journalism in a democracy, is virtually absent in mainstream media. 

I think the term “media capture” explains best the situation of the media in India. This is a term that is being used by media scholars to explain recent events in the US under the Trump regime where we have witnessed a combination of defamation suits and pressure on media owners to fall in line.  

The most recent incident was the decision of the ABC television channel to suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s popular late-night show. Although within a week, Kimmel has been reinstated, the very fact that the channel felt compelled to take this step led to much discussion about what this represents in terms of the future of the freedom of the press in the US. 

In an article in the Columbia Journalism Review, under the headline “Is the US media captured?” Joel Simon quotes several media scholars who have used the term to explain the state of the media in authoritarian regimes such as in Hungary, Turkey, or Mexico. It entails “government strategies ranging from manipulation of advertising to economic and regulatory pressure to the exploitation of informal relationships with media owners”, he writes. 

The article discusses whether such an eventuality of “media capture” is a possibility under the Trump regime, if it hasn’t already happened to some extent. Simon paraphrases a media scholar thus: “What’s unprecedented in the US … is the willingness of media companies to so transparently put their business interests ahead of their public interest obligations. When one corporation does it, another might pull back on critical coverage to avoid regulatory pressure—a kind of anticipatory obedience or capture in advance.”

Senator Bernie Sanders provides us with a useful illustration of what is meant by the term “media capture” in the context of the US.

In a post on X, he writes: “This is what American media looks like today: The wealthiest person in the world, Elon Musk, owns X. The second-wealthiest person in the world, Larry Ellison, owns Paramount, including CBS, and will possibly now be taking over TikTok and CNN. Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post and Twitch. Mark Zuckerberg owns both Facebook and Instagram. In fact, the five richest men in the world are ALL media owners or executives. When we talk about oligarchy in America, it’s not only income and wealth inequality. It’s control over the media and what the American people are able to see, hear and read.”

In India, the richest man owns NDTV, the second richest owns Network 18 Group, and the dominant media houses are all owned by businesses that must remain on the right side of the government, a “kind of anticipatory obedience” as mentioned by Simon in the article quoted above. The dividing line between editorial and management was erased well before this last decade but the results of that erasure are more evident today in India’s mediascape than earlier.

Just look at the print media on September 17, when the prime minister turned 75. Newspapers were replete with page after page of advertisements and signed articles praising Modi. As if this was not enough, a few days later, the government’s decision to lower GST rates, after the country had lived through eight years of much higher rates brought in by the same government, was also greeted with page after page of ads by businesses and corporate houses thanking Modi for taking this step. Such a display of obsequiousness to “the leader” would be considered an embarrassment in any country that claims it is a democracy and has a free press.  

In India, we’ve also had our Jimmy Kimmel equivalents. They do not appear on mainstream television but have a notable following. For instance, the stand-up comic Kunal Kamra has had multiple cases filed against him because someone, somewhere, was offended by his jokes. Or Munawar Faruqui, who was hauled off to jail during a performance in Madhya Pradesh in 2021 and finally acquitted after spending 37 days in jail.

In addition to all this, in my view, the central government’s September 16 order asking 12 independent journalists and news platforms to take down allegedly defamatory content, which included 138 YouTube links and 83 Instagram posts, on Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) removes even the chimera of pretence that it has any respect for the concept of freedom of the press. This order followed the September 6 ruling by a Delhi court, in response to a defamation suit by AEL against several journalists, asking them to take down content on AEL. The line between the government, and India’s richest man and a close ally of the prime minister, was erased by that one action.  

Although the matter continues to be heard in another court, the very fact that the government intervened on behalf of a private business, without allowing the matter to be assessed by a court of law, illustrates vividly the extent to which even the pretence of media freedom has been abandoned by this government. 

This has happened gradually over the last decade in a way that people have become used to a media that generally echoes the government’s line, questions only mildly, and stays away from any issue that could result in censure or loss of revenue.

The trajectory is now familiar. Get friendly industrial houses to buy media conglomerates. Then apply formal and informal pressure on those media houses that are still being critical. In time, mainstream media will be tamed.  

As for the pinpricks that constitute independent media, those not dependent on government advertising, or big business, you first ignore them because you think they don’t matter. Then you wake up to the fact that they do. You realise that technology has enhanced their reach. And the dwindling credibility of mainstream has further given the combined strength of many small platforms a reach that should not be ignored.

That is when you move against them. First, by protecting your main supporters, big business openly aligned with you. Then, by encouraging your loyal supporters spread across India to file cases against individual journalists or independent platforms under existing laws. These cases are filed in states where the party in power is the BJP. Hence, the police do not wait to even consider whether the complaint has any validity before they move. 

And all the while you keep assuring the rest of the world, and your followers in India, that this country is indeed the “mother of democracy” and that you are deeply committed to the Constitution and all the freedoms guaranteed in it.

The Modi government has provided a blueprint to other countries claiming to be democracies on how they can manage and capture the media.

Media spotlights leaders, but misses stories of those affected by their decisions

Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on September 11, 2025

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2025/09/11/media-spotlights-leaders-but-misses-stories-of-those-affected-by-their-decisions

 

While Trump and tariffs continue to dominate our headlines, there is an important difference between why he is in the news, and why our leader, Narendra Modi, also continues to dominate the news. 

That the actions of the US President are headline news, not just in the US, but around the world is partly because of his open desire to be the centre of attention. He lets the media watch cabinet meetings, interactions with international leaders, and even going out to a seafood restaurant in Washington DC. As a result, he ensures that he is always in the news. You could argue that this demonstrates his commitment to transparency and democracy. Or that he is simply narcissistic and wants to stay in the limelight. Either way, no news organisation can avoid reporting on Trump. 

In India, in contrast, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has successfully avoided any unscripted interaction with mainstream media after 11 years in office. Yet, he dominates the news in India, much like Trump. Every action, every reaction, every statement, all of them carefully scripted, are faithfully reported prominently by mainstream media. 

What’s more, op-ed articles, quite obviously written by his chosen speech writers, are sent out to all publications. Yet despite them being no more than press releases, several newspapers give these perorations pride of place on their edit pages, a space meant for exclusive contributions that are not offered elsewhere. This has become so routine that it fails to draw any comment. It is what it is, we are told. No point getting worked up.

But moving away from these attention-seeking political personas, the media can, and must, make space for the less prominent, the almost invisible, whose lives are being permanently affected by the policies propounded by the powerful.

Take the controversy surrounding the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on Indian exports to the US. The news has dominated our front pages. Economists and experts have analysed the fallout. There are explainers with charts and figures spelling out the impact. 

Yet, the price for these policies is being paid not by those who find space in our media, but the voiceless, the millions of workers in the industries that have been hit by these policies.  The women who shell prawns for export, the women who work in the garment industry, the men who polish diamonds in Surat, the smaller home-based workers who do a part of the finished products. 

There have been some detailed reports in the English language media such as this one in The Hindu on the garment industry in Tamil Nadu. Many such articles focus on the owners of these industries without enough on the impact on workers, often women as in the case of the garment industry.

International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera and DW have also carried detailed reports on export industries such as the diamond cutters in Surat. This detailed report in an independent digital platform, Behanbox, is one of the few that has focused on the impact of these tariffs on women workers. The reporter points out: “In the frozen shrimp industry, women constitute over 70% of the 8 million workforce, and they perform low-end processing jobs such as deheading, peeling and sorting shrimp in cold processing plants. In apparel and textiles, they make up almost 70% of the 45 million workers, while the electronics industry is known to largely hire young women because electronics manufacturing needs ‘small and soft hands for small pieces’.” 

But by and large, such reports are few and far in between in Indian mainstream media. As a result, the majority of readers of print media probably have not understood this human angle to the tariff controversy. 

An explanation for the paucity of such reporting is the perennial challenge facing the media: even as you cover an event, how do you also ensure that you report the process that resulted in the event. The former has immediacy, is often dramatic, and draws attention. The latter requires an understanding of history, politics, and society to ensure that there is context in the reportage. It can be done. It has been done. Yet, we see little space devoted to such reporting in mainstream media today.

Another example of the importance of understanding process even as you report an event is the coverage of the horrific death of a young woman in Greater Noida on August 21. Nikki Bhati was allegedly set ablaze in her kitchen, in the presence of her three-year-old son, because she failed to meet demands for more dowry in her marital home. Her death would have been one more statistic had it not occurred in a place within easy reach of so-called “national” media and that it was also spread via social media platforms. 

But what above all her tragic death illustrated was how even the most effective laws are ineffective in changing societal mindsets. Dowry was banned by law in 1961. The law was further amended, following widespread protests and demands by women’s rights groups across India, in 1984. Yet today, in 2025, the reported deaths of young women linked with the amount of dowry they did or did not bring into their marital homes is still shockingly high.  

Remember, that for everyone reported death, there are many more that go by unreported. And as this worrying piece in Hindustan Times points out: “Dowry is perhaps India’s most normalised illegal activity, going by anecdotal evidence, but credible data on the prevalence of this menace is hard to come by. Yet there is enough evidence to flag this as a major problem.”

It is the “process” story leading to these deaths of young women that needs telling not just when there is a dramatic incident that draws media attention, but at all times. Why, when there have been decades of programmes by the government and by non-profits, to “empower” women and the “girl-child” are we still at a place where women can be murdered with impunity even in our major cities for dowry demands? Why is it that even today, parents who know their daughters are victims of extreme violence in their marital homes, still send them back and ask them to “adjust”? 

At the height of the protests by women’s groups demanding changes in the dowry law in the 1980s, the print media – and at that time there was only print – did respond by conducting its own investigations. For instance, in 1983, Indian Express carried a front-page series by two senior reporters under the banner “Why women burn” where they followed up on the so-called accidental deaths of young newly married women in Delhi.  

Although the death of Nikki Bhati did provoke some media houses to do follow-up reports such as these in The Hindu, Times of India, and Mid-day, we are now back to reading what we used to call “crime briefs”, small items spread across a newspaper reporting horrific incidents of violence against women.  

Yet, as the article in Hindustan Times quoted above points out, dowry is perhaps the most “normalised illegal activity” in India today. It calls for more focus and more investigation, to remind Indian citizens that behind the bombast about how this country is progressing, the fact that women can still be killed for dowry is a necessary reality check. This is the story behind the headline that the media needs to pursue.

Bihar’s silenced voters, India’s gagged press: The twin threats to Indian democracy

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on August 28, 2025

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2025/08/28/bihars-silenced-voters-indias-gagged-press-the-twin-threats-to-indian-democracy

The Chief Election Commissioner, Gyanesh Kumar, probably expected that his August 18 press conference would settle the controversy surrounding the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar and Rahul Gandhi’s “vote chori” charge. He was wrong. This is a story that has refused to die, notwithstanding Trump’s tariffs, or even the tragic floods in parts of India.  

In fact, it should not die as it is, by a long measure, one of the most important stories that any self-respecting media organisation needs to investigate. For it is more than evident now that the state of our electoral rolls, as exposed by the SIR in Bihar and subsequent media exposes, raises many important questions about our electoral system and our democracy.  

So far, only one mainstream newspaper, The Indian Express, has put its heft behind investigating the many lacunae in the SIR process in Bihar. More granular details have emerged from the stories done by independent platforms and journalists. 

Here are links to several important investigations carried by independent platforms, with several of them collaborating and pooling their resources. 

Journalist Ajit Anjum has assiduously followed up on people declared as dead in the list of 65 lakh people who have been struck off the electoral rolls. So has Saurabh Shukla of The Red Mike. 

The women and men declared dead are very much alive, as you will see in these reports. The common thread that runs through them is that these are poor people who are not even aware that the one right they have, to vote, has been denied to them because some official has decided they are dead. 

Others who have pursued this story include independent news platforms like Reporters’ Collective.   

While Reporters’ Collective found that an incredible 80,000 voters had been clustered together at addresses where 20 or more of them were supposed to be living in just three constituencies that they investigated, the latest report in Newslaundry goes further to show that even in places where people live separately according to their caste or religion, over 100 voters belonging to different castes and religions are shown as living in the same house.

For readers who would have missed much of the action because of the neglect of this story by mainstream media, it is worth taking the time to read these detailed reports and watch the videos. They tell us not only about the way this particular exercise is being conducted in Bihar but the reality of India, where despite boasts of “digital India” and elimination of poverty, millions of poor people do not have the proof that is demanded of them to establish that they exist.  

Interestingly, the latest story in the series in The Indian Express on SIR in Bihar tells us that out of 36 assembly constituencies in three districts, in 25 of them, the number of voters whose names have been deleted exceeds the margin by which the candidate elected won. Of these 25 seats, the governing alliance of the BJP and JD(U) won 18 seats. The story also shows through its data that women have been particularly disadvantaged. 

These stories graphically illustrate a very real problem we are facing, one that cannot be obfuscated the way the CEC attempted to do in his press conference. And as I have argued earlier, it is a legitimate story that the media, in a democracy, must pursue. 

Another development that has drawn attention to the importance of independent media is the series of cases filed against three prominent independent journalists, Siddharth Varadarajan of The Wire, Karan Thapar, whose weekly interview programme is widely watched, and Abhisar Sarma, a former mainstream TV anchor who now runs his own YouTube news channel. 

All three have had cases filed against them in Assam, a state governed by the BJP. And at least two of the people filing these cases are affiliated to the BJP or ABVP (read here).

This development tells us two things. One, that even if the government might dismiss these independent news platforms as being limited in their reach, it apparently is concerned about their reporting. Otherwise why bother to charge them. 

The second point this development illustrates is the strategy this government is following with impunity: label journalists who question as “anti-national”, or “urban Naxals” or “terrorists sympathiser” and then file cases against them, or even jail them as in Kashmir. 

Incidentally, Israel follows a part of the same strategy. It also labels Palestinian journalists as Hamas operatives. It’s another thing that it even proceeds to eliminate them in targeted attacks. Most recently, five Palestinian journalists were killed even as they were reporting. 

There will be long-term consequences for freedom of speech, and the media, in India if this strategy being used by the government is not challenged and checked. The most persuasive argument on this has been made by retired Supreme Court judge, Justice Madan Lokur in an op-ed in The Hindu.

Justice Lokur points out that this government has weaponised a provision in the law that was supposed to have replaced the previous colonial sedition law. He suggests that Section 152 in the BNS is nothing more than sedition in “sheep’s clothing”, and that while the earlier law had a chilling effect on freedom of speech, the new provision has a “freezing effect”. 

Going further, he spells out what the deliberate misuse of this provision means for the future of freedom of speech in India: 

“Try and imagine any journalist or anybody in a panel discussion on television or otherwise having the courage to be critical of anything to do with any policy of the Government of India. Somebody can misinterpret it and bring national security into play, and the police can take cognisance and summon the alleged offender. Freedom of speech can be bulldozed or demolished because one individual out of a billion anywhere in the country believes (without evidence) that national security is in danger or that the armed forces are demoralised or that dissent is ‘strategic subversion’ undermining the sovereignty and the integrity of India.” (Emphasis added)

This then is the future we are looking at in India as far as freedom of the press is concerned. 

In media reports on a wall collapse in Mumbai, evidence that the lives of the poor don’t matter

 

If a poor person dies during what is deemed a natural disaster, they become a statistic, nothing more.

Published in Scroll.in on August 22, 2025

Link: https://scroll.in/article/1085767/in-media-reports-on-a-wall-collapse-in-mumbai-evidence-that-the-lives-of-the-poor-dont-matter

Every monsoon, India’s richest city has its tales of horror: of submerged railway tracks, of flooded roads, of open manholes into which people fall, of trees that collapse, often on passersby, and of hillsides that give way.

This year has been no different. People living in Mumbai are more than familiar with the images we see in newspapers and on television.

But the story that mostly escapes attention is the impact this has on the poor, those who must work rain or shine, with no means to protect themselves or their temporary dwellings from being submerged or even washed away.

And when some of them die, when a wall collapses or they fall into an open drain, they appear the next day as a statistic in the media: 9 dead, two from tree fall; 6 dead including one in an open drain, etc.

Sometimes the dead have names. But just that. Names. We do not know anything more about them. Were they migrants? Did they have families in Mumbai? And who will be held responsible for what are routinely registered by the police as “accidental deaths”.

Worse still, even in death, there is no dignity of those mentioning their names bothering either to get the names right or their ages right.

A loud sound

Take for instance Satish Tirkey. This 35-year-old from Chhattisgarh worked as a watchman in Godrej Baug on Malabar Hill, one of Mumbai’s wealthiest localities. He lived with his wife in Simla Nagar, a large settlement next door that is home to drivers and domestic staff who work in the homes of the well-heeled residents of the locality.

Also living in Simla Nagar are taxi drivers, delivery workers, construction workers and others with jobs across Mumbai.

Tirkey’s job included stepping out of the complex to find taxis for its residents. On August 18, despite the heavy rain, he set out to do that. As he walked down the road, sheltering under a large umbrella, the wall on the side of that road collapsed right on top of him.

Residents of the building facing the wall heard the loud sound and rushed out to their balconies to see what had happened. But they did not realise at first that someone had been crushed by the debris. They watched in horror as stones, mud and water cascaded down as if a dam had broken, filled the road, and flooded their building.

Even before the fire brigade arrived, they saw a man dressed in a yellow raincoat being carried out by three young men. These were the first responders. They were residents of Simla Nagar who saw the wall crumbling, rushed to pull Tirkey out and take him to the nearest hospital. They said he was still breathing when they carried him out despite the barbed wire from the wall having penetrated his body. But by the time they got to the hospital, Tirkey had died.

A cascade of water

Meantime, the cascade of water that had shattered the wall continued unabated. It took the fire brigade and the municipality hours to clean up the road, remove the rocks, clear the stormwater drain and cut a tree that was precariously poised on the broken wall. All this in pouring rain.

The next day, some newspapers reported Tirkey’s death. In some, he was mentioned as a watchman. A few articles gave his name. In practically all his age was wrong – it ranged from 55 to 75.

Most reports repeated what the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation must have told the journalists, that the man died due to a tree fall. A couple mentioned that he was crushed by the wall. What no one wondered was who had built that wall and who was responsible for the flood of water that led to the wall collapsing.

If the person injured or dead in such circumstances had been one of the residents of the buildings of Malabar Hill, how would the media have reacted? Would they not have made sure to get at least the basic details such as name and age and cause of death accurately? Would they not have gone further to investigate why the wall collapsed? Was it just the rain or something more? Who built the wall?

The fact they did not is because Tirkey was a poor man, a migrant worker, one of the millions of such workers who literally hold up a city like Mumbai. These are the men and women who cook, clean, deliver, build and repair. They are mostly invisible. Even when they die, they are noticed in passing, but just as a statistic – a victim who succumbed in an “accidental death”.

In this case, I know that this was an accident waiting to happen because I live in the building that was flooded after the wall collapsed.

Raised wall

The wall in question skirts a garden meant exclusively for senior government officers who live in Hyderabad Estate, which once belonged to the Nizam of Hyderabad. The gates to this large park are kept locked in a city that is starved of open space.

At some point, the height of the wall was increased. The residents of the area and those who regularly use the road would probably not have noticed this.

The original wall was thick, low and made of stone. The extension made it several feet higher, not as thick but with a heavy iron frame and barbed wire on top. Why this was needed to protect the garden is unknown.

What was also not noticed by residents of this neighbourhood is that alongside the wall, a water body with concrete sides had been built. What purpose it served is also not known.

What residents discovered, through their own effort to trace the source of the unending flow of water from the broken wall, was that this pool was overflowing and did not appear to have a drainage system to deal with excess water.

Furthermore, the builders of the wall had left holes in it from where the excess water could drain –onto a road used by thousands of people every day. An old cobbler who conducted his business next to the wall had complained about the outflow of water from these holes. But who listens to what old cobblers say?

A routine event

Two days before the disaster, residents of my building noticed that water was gushing out of several holes in the wall, flooding the road and subsequently our compound. This ought to have been a warning signal. But as this happened on the first day of the deluge that drowned the city, it passed as something that happens when it rains.

Except that this time, after the collapse and the subsequent flood, the water did not stop flowing, even when rain stopped. The municipal corporation would not answer the queries of residents. No one representing Hyderabad Estate was visible during or after the catastrophe.

I narrate all this to emphasise several points.

One, as I mentioned earlier, if a poor person dies during what is deemed a natural disaster, they become a statistic, nothing more.

Second, because it is a poor person who has been killed, there is practically nothing by way of follow-up to fix culpability. The authorities – in this case the municipal corporation and the Central Public Works Department, which is responsible for the garden and the wall – simply throw up their hands or pass the buck. When the rain stops, everything is back to normal.

Independence Day is a reminder to ask the questions EC isn’t answering

Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on August 13, 2025

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2025/08/13/independence-day-a-reminder-to-ask-the-questions-ec-isnt-answering

As the week leading up to India’s 79th Independence Day dawned, the condition of stray dogs in the country’s national capital made the top headlines following a ruling by the Supreme Court. While the fact of the highest court in the land addressing this issue is certainly unusual, one can question whether the story merited the page one lead in some English language newspapers.

Also, was it more important than the growing clamour by Opposition parties about discrepancies in voters’ lists? All Opposition members in Parliament staged a protest on August 11 as they marched to the office of the Election Commission but were stopped from proceeding by the Delhi police. Surely, in the context of India’s democracy and on the eve of its Independence Day, this merited more attention.

In many ways, this juxtaposition of two stories, one relating to the future of stray dogs in New Delhi, and the other relating to the future of electoral democracy in India, reflects media priorities in India of 2025.  The former will appeal to the “market” to which the media caters. The latter, if pursued and highlighted by mainstream media is likely to draw the ire of the party in power and be viewed as being pro-Opposition. 

 The issue of discrepancies in voters’ list became a topic for discussion after the Leader of the Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, held a press conference on August 7 presenting a detailed survey of one parliamentary constituency, Mahadevapura in Bengaluru. 

Since Rahul Gandhi’s press conference, several independent platforms and a couple of mainstream channels have followed up. But overall, national newspapers have stuck to reporting the “claims” made by Rahul Gandhi and the various protests but not done their own follow-up investigations.

The investigation by a team in the Congress suggested, based on the official data of the Election Commission, that in that one constituency questions could be raised about over 1 lakh registered voters. The voters list of Mahadevapura included duplicate votes, that is one person with more than one voter ID, unverifiable addresses, many voters registered at a single address (such as a brewery), voter IDs without photos, and voters registered as new voters who were older than the norm for such registrations.

Some newspapers took the investigation seriously enough to make an editorial comment.  The most nuanced of these was in The Hindu. Even as it acknowledged the importance of Rahul Gandhi’s presentation, it cautioned against drawing conclusions about electoral outcomes from these revelations without sufficient proof. At the same time, it emphasised that the Election Commission needed to respond to the revelations rather than casting aspersions on the motives of the person, or the party, that had done this. The editorial concluded:

“The ECI must embrace the principle that democratic institutions grow stronger through scrutiny. The alternative — continued erosion of confidence in electoral processes — poses far greater risks to democratic governance than any specific allegation of malpractice.”

The Indian Express, on the other hand, a newspaper that had done an excellent investigation into the way the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was being conducted in Bihar, chose to focus on Rahul Gandhi, calling the campaign of “Vote Chori” (vote theft) “self-serving and fraught”. Only in the last paragraph did it mildly criticise the EC for its “peeved responses”. 

Since Rahul Gandhi’s press conference, several independent platforms and a couple of mainstream channels have followed up. But overall, national newspapers have stuck to reporting the “claims” made by Rahul Gandhi and the various protests but not done their own follow-up investigations.

Meanwhile, even without the resources available to the big media houses, independent media journalists have been working and digging out information that suggests that the problem exposed in Mahadevapura is far more widespread. It calls for serious questioning of how an independent, constitutional body like the Election Commission updates voters’ lists.

On this issue, one of the first to raise the alarm was The News Minute which reported as far back as November 2022 how a non-governmental organisation called Chilume Educational Cultural and Rural Development Institute claimed it had authorisation to collect information from voters to update voters’ lists in Bengaluru.

The story is worth revisiting now in the light of the discussion on voters’ lists as it suggests that there could have been other such interventions that were not detected or challenged and therefore not reported.

Also, in this last week, while little appeared in national newspapers, AltNews was already putting out information that mirrored some of what the Congress’s investigation revealed. For instance, it found from the official EC data that six duplicate voter ID cards were issued to the same person, Sushama Gupta from the same constituency, Palghar in Maharashtra.

A Newslaundry investigation of three Lok Sabha seats earlier this year had pointed to gaps in the way revisions were made and verified. In Bihar, a report on Kaupa village in Bihar’s Rohtas constituency revealed that several voters, listed as living in the same house, aged between 26 and 28 years, had either their own name, or the name of their father or husband as just a full stop. How has this happened when the state is going through an intensive revision of electoral rolls, and this information was gathered from the draft revised list published by the EC?

Also read this detailed investigation by the Reporters’ Collective. It found that more than 1,000 new voters registered in Valmikinagar in Bihar following the revision of electoral votes were also registered as voters in Uttar Pradesh. According to the report: “For more than 1,000 cases, we found perfect matches: Names of the voter, their ages and their listed relatives (a mandatory field in the ECI database) were exactly the same across the databases of the two states. Only, their addresses were different.”

Apart from the discrepancies in voters’ lists, in the last few years, attention has been drawn to a mismatch between votes polled and votes counted after an election. One of the first to expose this was independent journalist Poonam Agarwal, who noticed this in a constituency in Madhya Pradesh in 2018. Since then, she has persisted with the story, right up to the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. 

In an interview to Article-14, she describes the hurdles she has faced to expose the discrepancies between the votes polled and the votes counted after an election. She says:

“When I first started working on stories about a mismatch between votes polled and votes counted, I asked the EC questions about this mismatch. Rather than answering my questions, they removed the data from their website. I found the EC’s response very odd—not normal at all. Earlier, politicians across party lines had a sense of trust in the Election Commission and believed that whatever it did, it did with full transparency. But since 2019, and especially after the 2024 Lok Sabha polls, there has been growing distrust of the EC among both politicians and the public.”

It is evident from the reports that have already appeared, that the expose by the Congress, irrespective of its claims that this represents stolen votes, is a big story, one that is worth pursuing by the media.

If the EC had addressed these queries and discrepancies, it is possible that the story would have died down. But when an independent body like the Election Commission stonewalls, or prevents data from being accessed, or refuses to publish data (such as the list of the 65 lakh voters who have been held ineligible in Bihar following the SIR), we must ask why? Did it not know that there were such discrepancies? If not, why not? Did it know but chose to ignore them? If so, why? Or is there another reason?

These are perfectly legitimate questions that voters, and the media, should ask of the EC and what better time than when we are celebrating and talking about freedom and independence. 

 

2006 Mumbai blasts are a stark reminder of glaring gaps in terror reportage

Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on July 22, 2025

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2025/07/22/2006-mumbai-blasts-are-a-stark-reminder-of-glaring-gaps-in-terror-reportage

 

The acquittal by the Bombay High Court of 12 men accused of being responsible for the 2006 serial bomb blasts on Mumbai’s suburban trains has triggered a much-needed discussion on our criminal justice system, on the police and the investigative agencies, and the absence of closure in so many such cases.

On the evening of July 11, on a typically rainy monsoon day, millions of Mumbaikars made their way to take a train back to their homes. The suburban train system in Mumbai has often been referred to as a “lifeline”. However, on this particular evening, it turned out to be a “death line”. The seven blasts that occurred as the trains pulled into different stations along the route, all in the First-Class compartments, killed 189 people and injured 827.

Even as reporters scrambled to reach the stations, speculation about this being a “terror attack” had started. The front pages of newspapers a couple of days after the blasts carried stories of not just of how Mumbai, a city that apparently never sleeps, leapt back to normal the day after, but reports about how Pakistan was the main suspect behind the blasts. Within a day, a special anti-terror squad, led by senior police officer K P Raghuvanshi, was handed the responsibility to investigate the case. 

Within three months, this anti-terror squad claimed that the case had been solved. It picked up suspects not just in Mumbai but from other cities including Secunderabad. All the suspects were Muslim men. Thirteen of them were charged. 

The case was heard in a trial court which finally gave its ruling in 2015, nine years after the arrests. One man was acquitted, five were awarded death sentences and seven life sentences. Of these, one died in jail before the recent ruling acquitting all.  

Apart from what this case tells us about the criminal justice system and the glacial pace at which it works, there is another question: are there lessons that the media can draw from the coverage of such cases? 

While this case is high-profile and is based in a metropolitan centre like Mumbai, every now and then there are reports about cases of people who have spent long years in jail only to be acquitted of all charges. There are few if any follow-up stories on their families, how they survived, and how the released adjusted back to their lives after release. It’s almost as if such acquittals are so routine that they don’t merit any media attention. 

After the recent Bombay High Court ruling, the founding editor of Maktoob Media, Aslah Kayyalakkath posted this on X which ought to give us in the media a reason to pause and think:

“Since 2020, I have been collecting screenshots of news stories about Muslim men jailed in terror cases. Almost every single one-barring one or two-described these men as ‘terrorists,’ ‘bombmakers,’ ‘fugitives,’ or ‘commanders.’ There were so-called ‘explainers,’ ‘long forms,’ and ‘investigations’ about the ‘crime they committed.’ But remember, these were not stories about convicted men. These were about Muslim men who were accused or suspects. Legally, they were not proven guilty, but not a single media house chose to call them that. Some of them were acquitted because not a single piece of evidence stood against them. These news websites, without any shame or accountability, will publish a small story about the acquittal. They won’t feel regret for being complicit in the vendetta, just like the State doesn’t.”

You can agree or disagree with his point that some news websites are “complicit” but even a cursory glance at news coverage suggests that there is an absence of scepticism and a willing acceptance of the official version of such incidents. 

Going by the reporting in the newspapers on the morning after the Bombay High Court judgment, the coverage has followed a predictable pattern. There are detailed stories on the judgment and explanations about it, there are stories on the anguish felt by survivors of the blast who feel there is no closure, there are detailed sketches of the men released with their photographs (almost identical in each paper as the matter has obviously been supplied by the police), and an occasional piece on how the lawyers of the accused fought the case (including this interesting piece in Indian Express on how RTI was used to access information that blew apart the prosecution’s case). 

Yet, so far, there is little about the families of the accused and what they feel except this article by Tabassum Barnagarwala in Scroll. It is possible that in the days to come, some mainstream newspapers will make the effort to reach out to these families to give their side of the story too. 

Where mainstream media does need to introspect, perhaps an unrealistic expectation, is to look at how such cases are routinely reported from the time the incidents, like these serial train blasts, occur, to when the investigative agencies announce a breakthrough, to the case as it makes its slow way through courts.  

The norm has been to give the official version and leave it at that. The names and faces of the suspects are reported without clarifying that these people are “accused” and not convicted as pointed out by Aslah. That under the justice system, they deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt.  

The men acquitted by the Bombay High Court were not given the benefit of doubt. They were convicted by a court and that was that. Yet this ruling tells us that the story never ends with the first conviction. More so, the judgment itself should instruct us in the media why we need to be sceptical when confessions are readily provided by investigative agencies.

The judgment addresses the use of torture to extract confessions in this case and has termed it “barbaric and inhuman”. It has also questioned the confessions because it found them to be “incomplete and not truthful as some parts are a copy-paste of each other”.

For more details on the kind of torture used on the accused to extract confessions, this is a good time to read Josy Joseph’s book “The Silent Coup: A short history of India’s deep state”.  Published in 2021, Joseph looks at several such “terror” attacks in different parts of the country and raises legitimate questions.

He has a chapter on the 2006 Mumbai blasts in which he interviews the one man who was acquitted in 2015, Wahid Sheikh. In graphic detail, Sheikh describes the torture he went through and how he was framed. Incidentally, since his release in 2015, Sheikh has been part of the team that assembled invaluable evidence that contributed to the ultimate discharge of the accused in this case.

Mainstream media remains in thrall of official versions when it comes to a suspected terror attack. It is as if raising questions on these versions or even trying to unearth some other aspect of the story is “anti-national”.  

From my own experience, I can recall being told by one of my editors that we cannot question an official version as the media does not have the ability to independently verify what happened. This was after I raised questions, as did some others in the media about the daylight encounter killing of three men and one woman by the Gujarat police on June 15, 2004. The media was told that this was a terrorist module on its way to assassinate the then Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi. The woman shot dead was 19-year-old  Ishrat Jahan, from Mumbra just outside Mumbai. Till today, we do not know the truth as the suspects are dead.  We are left only with what the police want to tell us.