Inside Indian polls: Modi’s lies, fake news and media that does not question

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on April 18, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/04/18/inside-indian-polls-modis-lies-fake-news-and-media-that-does-not-question

As the subcontinent heats up, literally, the attitude of the average voter towards the election process that has begun appears relatively cool. From the reports that have emerged so far, there seems to be a singular lack of excitement, even among first-time voters. There is no “hawa” yet of the kind Indian electors are familiar with, at least not so far.

Given the rising temperature across the country, only committed party supporters and those lured by a free meal or some other enticement are likely to brave the heat to attend election meetings. 

 

So how are voters, especially those not certain who they will support, getting information that will help them decide? Are the reports in mainstream media – mostly political speeches by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other prominent members of his cabinet and party, Rahul Gandhi and others in the opposition alliance, and the occasional ground report – enough to convince the undecided?  

As I mentioned in my last column, the media today is not just mainstream TV news channels and newspapers. We now live in a world where people get their information from multiple sources, including social media. Whether mainstream media takes the trouble to report diverse voices and opinions or not, these are out there on social media. 

We have many independent digital news platforms and channels, although if you are a person who principally gets news from mainstream media, when you listen and read what they report, you might think they are reporting from a parallel universe. 

The other alternate universe is of fake and misleading news, of hate speech, of the deliberate twisting of facts to push forward a particular narrative. 

 

An important new documentary on fake news in India is worth a watch. Titled “India’s war on fake news: How disinformation became India’s #1 threat”, the documentary asks: “Why has fake news transformed into an industry in India?” And to answer that question, it meets internet trolls, “to understand the financial and ideological motives that compel them into becoming agents of misinformation.” The documentary also features fact-checkers who are trying to counter this growing menace of fake news. 

While this surfeit of information and opinion is swirling around on social media, what are we seeing on mainstream media?

Mainstream media reports but does not question. For instance, why are we not asking the BJP, with its slogan “Abki baar 400 paar”, where the additional seats are coming from? Or, for that matter, question Rahul Gandhi, who claims the BJP will only get 150 seats. Between these two inflated claims lies the reality that the media ought to be prodding and probing to unearth and report.  

Instead, we are being treated to “exclusive” interviews with the prime minister, which are nothing more than a public relations exercise. I am referring here to the hour-long interview that the prime minister granted to Smita Prakash, editor-in-chief of ANI. Given that Modi has been notoriously reticent about speaking directly to the press in the 10 years that he has been the prime minister, why is he speaking now?

When you watch the interview, you know why. Prakash asks questions and waits patiently while the long answers from Modi are recorded. There are no interruptions, follow-ups, or counter-questions, even when Modi is straying far from the truth. Many people would have seen the interview, as it was relayed on all channels and reported in print.  

The most obvious question, that was screaming to be asked, was on electoral bonds. The prime minister claimed, as he has been doing recently, that the entire scheme was his idea, and was a success. That it brought transparency to election finance. And that unfortunately now, we would be back to the bad old days of black money.

The word “Supreme Court” did not emerge from either the lips of the interviewer or the interviewee. Extraordinary, given the apex court declared the entire scheme “unconstitutional”. And in a process akin to extracting teeth, had to compel the State Bank of India to reveal all the data on who purchased the bonds and which political party encashed them. Independent digital platforms like the Reporters’ Collective and the Electoral Bond Project, run jointly by The News Minute, Newslaundry, Scroll and independent journalists, were central to analysing the data and revealing the clear quid pro quo.

Instead of questioning Modi, this was brushed over. And the prime minister also got away with stating “facts” that can only be called fiction. He said 16 companies that bought electoral bonds were raided by the Enforcement Directorate, and 67 percent of their donations went to opposition parties. Which companies were these? Prakash should have asked. And what about the many more companies whose donations went to the BJP following raids on them?

Perhaps it is pointless to labour these points, as one could not have expected any such interview to be permitted if difficult follow-up questions were going to be asked. ANI provided Modi with a perfect election platform just days before the first round of voting. Everyone was happy. The agency got its “exclusive”, and Modi said what he wanted to say without interruption.

What is more puzzling, though, is how an apparently reputed international journal, Newsweek, could run an “exclusive” with Modi that reads like a series of press releases strung together. It is an “interview” without any questions. And it is the cover story that has Modi’s face and, in capital letters, the word “Unstoppable”.  

Here are just two examples from this “interview” that illustrate the point I am making:

     On religious minorities who complain of discrimination

     These are usual tropes of some people who don't bother to meet people           outside their bubbles. Even India's minorities don't buy this narrative anymore. Minorities from all religions, be it Muslim, Christians, Buddhist, Sikh, Jain or even a micro-minority like Parsis are living happily and thriving in India.

     On democracy and a free press

     We are a democracy, not only because our Constitution says so, but also  because it is in our genes.

      There are a few people in India and in the West who have lost [connection with] the people of India—their thought processes, feelings and aspirations. These people also tend to live in their own echo chamber of alternate realities. They conflate their own dissonance with the people with dubious claims of diminishing media freedom.

“Dubious claims of diminishing media freedom”? That demands a counter question. But then, there were no questions even though three people, including the CEO of Newsweek, met the prime minister. 

 

In the annals of international journalism, this interview will surely be remembered for some time.  

There is, however, a way around the insistence by the Prime Minister’s Office for questions in advance that are vetted before an interview is granted.

The Financial Times, headquartered in London, interviewed Modi before the general elections were announced and shortly after the state assembly elections, where the BJP did well. Written up as a report rather than in a question-and-answer format, it’s worth reading. Clearly, some tricky questions were asked, and Modi’s responses to them demonstrate his ability to deflect and detract from uncomfortable issues.

For instance, FT asked about the future of the Muslim minority in India, a question that any interviewer, Indian or foreign, would ask. I quote from the article:

      "When asked what future the Muslim minority has in India, Modi points instead to the economic success of India’s Parsees, who he describes as a 'religious micro-minority residing in India'.

      'Despite facing persecution elsewhere in the world, they have found a safe haven in India, living happily and prospering,' Modi says, in a response that makes no direct reference to the country’s roughly 200 mn Muslims. 'That shows that the Indian society itself has no feeling of discrimination towards any religious minority.'"

The most charitable response to such an answer is: Disingenuous and inventive.

Coming back to the ANI interview, the problem with this type of journalism, which fails to probe and provoke, is that it allows a politician to get away too easily. Furthermore, given the way people in India tend to believe anything said by a person in authority, what Modi says, when it is not countered, becomes the truth for most people. After all, the prime minister of India has said this, as an ordinary person would think. Surely, he will not lie.

But he does, as the inimitable The Deshbhakt Akash Banerjee calls out in this video.

When politicians change sides: Welcome to India, land of political acrobatics

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on April 5, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/04/05/when-politicians-change-sides-welcome-to-india-land-of-political-acrobatics

Some newspapers have named this pre-election period the “dance of democracy”. But skim the headlines and you’ll wonder whether we’re witnessing the “farce of democracy” instead.

Every day at dizzying speed, some politician associated with a party for many years – known well by their constituents as a member of that party which has a particular profile – suddenly switches sides, that too just before the election.

Changing parties is an Indian political game for which we could probably claim copyright. But the speed and pace at which it is being played out in this election season surpasses anything we have seen in the past.

As a result, election-related news reports – and here I am referring to the mainstream print media – would be of passing interest to the average reader who is not steeped in the minutiae of the political merry-go-round. What many readers may well ask is whether the party system, or even elections, have any meaning if this special type of political acrobatics takes place just before we go out and vote. 

Today, there is no way to ensure that the person we vote for continues to represent the ideology of a party they belonged to when they contested, even if some people do vote for an individual irrespective of the party to which they belong. But if the cynicism that underlines the party-switching game gets across to voters, one wonders if more people will hold back and choose not to vote at all. 

As a young man who seemed interested in politics, especially of his home state of Bihar, told me recently, “Even though I was eligible to vote when I turned 18, I have never voted. And I’m not sure I will this time either.”

We know now, of course, why the big political players switched sides. In an excellent piece of reporting, Deeptiman Tiwary of Indian Express put together information that gives us a graphic view of not just who changed parties, but why. For instance, cases against two top NCP leaders – Ajit Pawar, currently deputy chief minister of Maharashtra, and Praful Patel, former aviation minister – were closed shortly after they joined the BJP. Tiwary documents that of the 25 opposition leaders who joined the BJP since 2014, 23 have had cases against them dropped or put in cold storage. The pattern for lesser-known politicians who have had a sudden change of heart and sought space in the BJP is likely to be the same. 

While this current political circus has established that the BJP is not “the party with a difference” as it once wanted people to believe, welcoming as it is of politicians with serious corruption charges against them, this also speaks to the quality of people entering the political arena. The decline has been evident for some time but now it has crossed new summits.

Which brings us back to the meaning of an electoral democracy with a party system.

The rest of the world is watching this election as well, given the sheer numbers involved, with almost a billion people voting in an election spread over 44 days. There is no other election of this size anywhere in the world. But already questions about the elections and Indian democracy are being raised.

The Financial Times, a well-respected international business newspaper, wrote a critical editorial last week headlined “The mother of democracy is not in good shape”. The paper’s particular concern was the way law enforcement agencies have been used against opposition leaders culminating in the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. It quotes Rahul Gandhi’s accusation that the BJP was resorting to “match fixing” in this election and says it is puzzled that the governing party should even feel the need to “squeeze the opposition”.

Of course, critical comments such as this in the Western media are most often dismissed by the BJP, which accuses these media groups of having an agenda. Yet, despite this public stance, it is not able to ignore such criticism entirely. We cannot forget that it was the Modi government that banned a BBC documentaryin January 2023 even though it was not going to be televised in this country. 

But apart from these passing pinpricks from foreign shores, there is little that the party need worry about with the Indian media. We will have to wait and watch the quality and the slants in the election coverage, but it would be fair to guess that there would be precious little that’s critical of Narendra Modi or the BJP in mainstream media.

Since the 2019 election, the changed reality as far as the media is concerned is the noticeable growth of small, independent media houses that have used social media effectively to put across a different narrative. We saw this most vividly, as I mentioned in my last column, in the coverage of the electoral bond scam. It was Project Electoral Bond, a joint effort by The News Minute, Newslaundry, Scroll and independent journalists, as well as the investigative work of the Reporters’ Collective since 2019 that finally told us the real story of who paid which party and what they got in return. R Rajagopal of The Telegraph has rightly acknowledged their work in his article “Keyboard guerrillas”. Those stories are still tumbling out (read here).

Also, YouTube hosts numerous news-based programmes by former mainstream TV journalists, apart from Ravish Kumar, in Indian languages that are watched by millions. In cities, your local vegetable vendor, carpenter, plumber, painter, or taxi or auto driver does not have the time to sit in front of a television and watch the news. All of them catch it on the run, usually on their phones. And the channels they watch are not just the mainstream channels that can also be found on YouTube but these independent channels that have a greater connect. 

On the other side is the BJP’s IT cell that’s excelled in using all forms of social media. It is already on overdrive. And assisting it are dozens of YouTube channels, also apparently independent, that daily spread not just disinformation, but also direct propaganda that will help the BJP. Kunal Purohit writes in this piece in Al Jazeera that media studies have established that Indians “place greater trust in news they view on YouTube and WhatsApp, over the news delivered by mainstream media outlets”. The days when we asked someone where they got their information, and the reply would be, “Akhbar mein padha” (read it in the newspaper), are well and truly in the past.

We will have to wait and watch which form of media succeeds in changing people’s minds, or confirming their biases, and whether any of this will have an impact on voter choice.