In ‘robust vs rowdy opposition’ binary, Big Media blanks out parliamentary traditions

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on July 11, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/07/11/in-robust-vs-rowdy-opposition-binary-big-media-blanks-out-parliamentary-traditions

Who would have thought that a session of the Lok Sabha would draw eyeballs the way the first session of the 18th Lok Sabha has?

Since it adjourned, it has been discussed and analysed in a way we haven’t seen in any other session of parliament in recent times. The reason is obvious. There are other voices that are heard, not just those of people on the Treasury benches. And some of these, especially the first-timers, are making a mark.

For the media – which is used to turning everything into the equivalent of the Big Fight, such as the programme that was once aired on NDTV – the focus has largely been on what the newly-minted Leader of the Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, said in his 100-minute speech that was marked by many interruptions. And Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s two-hour-long speech, which was not interrupted although opposition members shouted slogans such as “Justice for Manipur” while he spoke.  In those two hours, Modi did not mention Manipur even once.

The media sat in judgement to decide who did better, Rahul Gandhi or Narendra Modi, as if that was the burning issue of the day. Also discussed was whether it was appropriate for the opposition to shout slogans when the PM was speaking or stage a walkout as it did in the Rajya Sabha during his address. The fact that this has been done before, including by the BJP when it was in opposition, was not emphasised.

Rononjoy Sen, a former journalist who is with the National University of Singapore, reminds us in an op-ed in the Hindustan Times that the BJP had disrupted parliament using precisely these tactics in 2010-11 during the 2G scam row. In fact, Sen quotes Atal Bihar Vajpayee as saying that the “most effective way to oppose someone is a walkout” and that, in his view, this ought to be seen as the “highest form of opposition or antagonism”. 

Sen concludes: “A popular news channel recently made a distinction between a robust and a rowdy opposition. That’s a false dichotomy. The opposition can be both as long as it does not stall parliament. In a noisy and cacophonous democracy, such as India, it is unrealistic to expect otherwise.”

The day before Modi spoke, Manipur was mentioned, not just by Rahul Gandhi but more eloquently by the MP from Inner Manipur, professor Bimol Akoijam, a first-timer. Speaking close to midnight to an almost empty House, Akoijam’s words need to be heeded. I doubt if too many people were still watching the live telecast on Sansad TV when he spoke, but what he said was noted by several newspapers, and his entire speech was widely-circulated on social media.

According to The Hindu, Akoijam said, “The hurt, the anger has thrown a nobody like me to be part of this temple of democracy, beating the BJP cabinet minister. Think about the pain. I will keep quiet the moment the Prime Minister opens his mouth, and the nationalist party says that Manipur is a part of India and we care for the people of that state.”

While I doubt that the Prime Minister heard Akoijam, the next day in the Rajya Sabha, he did mention Manipur. In another long speech, he devoted five minutes to Manipur. Yes, five minutes after maintaining silence for almost 15 months.

This momentary mention made front-page news in most national newspapers the next day. But there was little by way of a critique of what he said in those five minutes, most of which was devoted, as usual, to criticising the Congress and placing the blame for what has happened in Manipur on the past. There was not a hint of acknowledgement that perhaps his government at the centre, and his party’s government in the state had fallen short. 

Only The Hindu, in a strong editorial, called him out and pointed out that “Manipur, unlike what Mr Modi asserts, is not any close to normalcy.”  It emphasised that “bluster and mere acknowledgment of the crisis will not solve the problems in Manipur and Mr Modi has to become proactive in leading changes that will lead to peace and reconciliation.”

As for others, the Indian Express waited until Rahul Gandhi visited Manipur on July 8 and met the displaced from both sides of the divide to comment. Compared to the editorial in The Hindu, the Indian Express editorial was muted in its criticism of Modi’s government. Instead of pointing out the centre’s role in allowing the situation in Manipur to deteriorate as it has, the paper praised Modi and wrote: “In his RS speech, the PM rightly spoke of the necessity to ‘go beyond politics and bring peace and stability’ to the state.” It is inexplicable that the media cannot see the politics that the BJP, at the centre and in the state, has played in allowing the crisis to fester.

The Manipur story doesn’t begin and end with statements made in parliament or slogans shouted by the opposition.  As Akoijam eloquently stated, “The silence on the Manipur tragedy is not unique, it reflects this general continuity of colonialism. A national party like BJP will be comfortable with the silence on Manipur... If you hear the anxiety and pain in my voice, please go back and see the 60,000 people languishing in relief camps, don’t talk about Partition Remembrance Day till then.” He was reflecting on the reality of his state, which is now divided to the point where it appears inconceivable that it can be put together again.

The other story that could be drowned out, literally, by all the shenanigans that we have yet to see in the forthcoming budget session of parliament is the appalling state of India’s infrastructure.

In the state of Bihar, more than a dozen bridges collapsed within a fortnight. How could this happen? Will anyone be held accountable? 

Hindustan Times followed up with this story that tells us about the pathetic situation in the state, where a maintenance policy is formulated after a bridge collapse rather than after it is built.

 

Apart from the bridges in Bihar, in the last month, there have been multiple reports about airports where roofs have collapsed or where there are serious leaks. In Delhi, the national capital, Terminal 1 had to be shut down because the roof over the driveway collapsed, killing a taxi driver and injuring others. The same thing happened at a new airport in Rajkot. And Lucknow, Guwahati, and the north Goa airport also reported leakages. Why is this happening, especially in newly-built or refurbished airports? Who is responsible?

I am waiting to be proved wrong, but I doubt if this story will be pursued as assiduously as the one of the collapsing bridges in Bihar. Many airports are run by Adani companies. Who will dare to bell that cat?

From health emergency to parliament, little changes for the media under new govt

Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on June 27, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/06/27/from-health-emergency-to-parliament-little-changes-for-the-media-under-new-govt

The death of a poor person is rarely front-page news, especially in this post-election season when the daily drama of the 18th Lok Sabha is understandably drawing attention. But even as we watch this session of the Lok Sabha and note the changes and the repetitions from the past, it is important to remember that in the last month, hundreds of Indians have been killed, not due to the spread of a disease but because of extreme heat.

But first, coverage of the Lok Sabha session. Thanks to Sansad TV, the live telecast is available for anyone interested in knowing who says what on the floor of the House. This also facilitates the sharing of video clips on social media. So, even if television channels and newspapers pick and choose what they report, much more is circulating by way of social media. 

Take, for instance, the statement by first-time MP Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi from Kashmir.  When he got up to speak, he reminded the newly elected Speaker, Om Birla, of what had occurred when he occupied the same chair in the previous Lok Sabha. He mentioned how a Muslim MP had been called a terrorist, and also spoke about how little time had been allotted to debate the reading down of Article 370. 

Reminiscent of his actions in the previous Lok Sabha, Birla interrupted the MP and asked him to stop and sit down. The next day, this exchange did not make it to any of the prominent English language national newspapers. It had, however, already been circulated on social media platforms.

Then take the invocation of the Emergency by both the Speaker and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Solemn sentiments were expressed about democracy and the dangers of dictatorship. The reason for this, one assumes, was that the session was held on the anniversary of the declaration of Emergency by Indira Gandhi in 1975. However, the motive behind bringing this up was obvious. The government, and the Speaker, who is supposed to be non-partisan, used the occasion to hit at the largest party in the opposition, the Congress.

The next day, only one paper, The Hindu, called out the blatant hypocrisy. The Congress Party was in power when Indira Gandhi declared the Emergency. And it was a dark period, as anyone – including this writer – who lived through it will confirm. For journalists, it was particularly dire, with direct censorship and the threat of imprisonment hanging over your head if you dared to publish the truth.

Yet today, 49 years later (not 50 as Modi and others insist it is), where do we stand regarding freedom and fundamental rights? Has there been any indication so far that the coalition government headed by Narendra Modi will backtrack on some of the laws and regulations that are on the anvil to curb freedom of expression and restrict the media? That it will reverse its actions that are reminiscent of the Emergency? 

As The Hindu points out in its editorial:

“If the government of the day is truly committed to undo the damages of the Emergency and not repeat its grave errors, it would have not taken recourse to the same measures in the recent past, seen in the attack on the free press, the use of enforcement and investigative agencies to selectively target Opposition representatives, and draconian preventive detention laws to keep political prisoners, activists and journalists in jail without trial, including by the foisting of charges against them.” 

By attacking the Congress on its record on fundamental rights, the government is clearly trying to deflect any attempt by the united opposition to raise questions around fundamental rights and freedom.  We will have to wait to see if any of the parties in the opposition decide to call out the government on this issue. 

Even as we wait for that, we will probably have to wait even longer for our elected representatives on either side of the political divide to wake up to the ugly reality of climate change and its devastating impact on the poorest and the most vulnerable in this country.

The whole of northern India, and in fact the subcontinent, has been reeling under high temperatures accompanied by high humidity. The combination is a killer. And those dying, literally collapsing on the streets, are poor people who have no choice but to continue doing back-breaking manual labour in this heat.  An estimated 300 million of India’s adult workforce is engaged in this kind of manual labour.

Yet, it is difficult to come across any reporting on this health emergency in our major newspapers. Fortunately, independent news platforms are reporting on this unfolding tragedy that has been invisibilised by an indifferent media.

Take this excellent story by Anumeha Yadav in the Migration Story. She visited one hospital in Delhi to track the impact of the heat wave. In Delhi in May, temperatures exceeded 45 degrees Celsius for 16 days. She describes the condition of a migrant worker, identified simply as Rohit, who lay unconscious with a body temperature of 40.5 degrees Celsius.

Rohit is typical of the men who work as manual labourers, pushing handcarts, working as construction workers, or as cooks in hot kitchens with little ventilation, or as delivery workers. They get no respite even when they return to their rooms in poor settlements where there is practically no ventilation, and the tin roofs make them like ovens. No human, even a perfectly healthy person, can survive in these conditions.

The heat crisis might not be like a pandemic, but it is a silent killer of the poorest and the most vulnerable. The minority, people who earn enough to afford coolers and air-conditioners and who need not step out in the heat, are also affected but have ways to survive. Not the poor. And it is their story that we in the media must tell because ultimately the crisis the world faces with a rapidly warming planet will affect everyone. 

Will mainstream media, obsessed as it is with the rich and the powerful, turn its gaze towards such a story? Again, like this government’s past record on human rights, it is unlikely that the media will suddenly change. 

In the meantime, we must appreciate that some determined journalists are stepping out and reporting. This video by the team at Newslaundry is another example of such reporting as is this article in Migration Story on the specific impact of the excessive heat on women workers.

An added complication is the fact that medically, it is challenging to certify a death as that caused by heat, as this story in Scroll explains. Furthermore, we do not get accurate mortality figures because there is no clear system of certification. The only way, as several experts have emphasised is to look at normal mortality figures and check if these are noticeably higher. Such an exercise was done during the Covid pandemic to give us a more accurate count of deaths due to the virus at a time when the government was attempting to downplay the real mortality numbers.

Dealing with the impact of climate change in a poor country like India calls for policy interventions by the government. The people most affected, the poor, cannot push for this. The responsibility lies with the media to put pressure on policy makers by reporting on the current heat crisis that is daily killing hundreds of Indians. 

Ownership, money, Modi 3.0 uncertainty: A sobering reality check for election cheer

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on June 13, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/06/13/ownership-money-modi-30-uncertainty-a-sobering-reality-check-for-election-cheer

The Lok Sabha elections will continue to be analysed threadbare for some time to come. They were unexpected, revelatory about the Indian electorate and uplifting, even if momentarily, because they suggested that democracy is still alive in India.

The celebrations, however, by those who believe that the election results, and a governing party with a diminished mandate, will lead to substantial change need to be tempered with a reality check.

Let’s just look at the media, especially television news – call it “mainstream”, “Big Media” or “godi media”. There is little to debate now that in the last decade under Narendra Modi’s government, it has been a supplicant, rather than acting as the Fourth Estate in a democracy.

The clips of the dozens of interviews Modi gave to these friendly channels during the elections are proof enough, if that was needed. News anchors, who on any given day, are in scream mode, were listening and smiling attentively even as Modi proceeded to lecture and even insult the media.

After a decade of bending over backwards to please the ruling party, to amplify its poisonous and hate-filled narrative, especially against Muslims, and to save its aggression for the opposition, can one really expect a change just because the governing party’s numbers in this Lok Sabha are fewer than the last time?

I think not, and this is why.

First, even if the BJP is now more dependent on its coalition partners in the NDA today than it was yesterday, is there any proof that these partners are committed to freedom of expression and freedom of the press? Would they really object if this government – which the media has rightly called “Modi 3.0” rather than the “NDA government” because Modi will continue to dominate – continues to find ways to curb dissent and critical voices in the media? 

As a former chair of Prasar Bharati, Jawhar Sircar points out in this article in The Wire, “The godi media is likely to be a little less virulent against the opposition, as one never knows who may come in next. But the screaming television prosecutors, including a few rotund well-dressed creatures who revel in tormenting anyone who dares to question Modi, would hardly change — as they earn unimaginable amounts of crores.”

Which brings us to the second point, that the owners of these television channels dictate the line they take. And that ownership pattern is not changing.  As long as it is evident that Modi and the BJP are in full control of the government even if technically, they are part of a coalition, the topics discussed might change a little, but the approach will remain the same. There is no cost attached to attacking the opposition, but criticism of this government will still have repercussions.

Media analyst Vanita Kohli-Khandekar, who writes a column in Business Standard, makes some additional and interesting observations about Big Media. She points out that while the Election Commission figures reveal that 642 million people voted in these elections, and of these, roughly 235 million or 36.6 percent voted for the BJP, if you watch any of the roughly 400 news channels, you will think that the news on it is directed only at these 235 million who support the BJP. What about the remaining 407 million news consumers, she asks. 

This gap has been filled to some extent by independent news channels on YouTube and for those who read news, the digital news platforms that are not dependent on big business. Their numbers might not exceed those who watch or read news provided by these mainstream channels and newspapers, but there is little doubt that they have played an important role in the last five years, in filling the void left by mainstream media. They have been the source of nuanced and in-depth reporting, of critical comment, of interviews that inform and educate. 

Their ability to continue and remain independent in the future, however, is uncertain. This Modi 3.0 government might wait a while before it proceeds with the agenda it outlined in its previous avatar but there is little doubt that at some stage it will find ways to curb independent media. 

For instance, even before the first sitting of the new Lok Sabha, Mohammed Zubair of AltNews has been informed that the Delhi Police has asked that his account on X be taken down because it violates the Information Technology Act.  The social media platform has not complied with the request but the very fact this has happened within days of the formation of the new government provides a necessary reality check on its approach towards a free and independent media.  

We must remember that there are two interventions that will adversely impact independent media that are still on the anvil. One is the setting up of a “fact-checking unit” that will determine what is false or misleading and insist it be taken down by social media platforms. And the other is to bring all news-related YouTube channels under the Broadcasting Services Act which will give the government the power to curtail their content.

Journalist Charmy Harikrishnan sums up the last decade under Modi well when she writes:

“This was a lost decade of journalism. A generation of journalists has come of age with the bitter knowledge that the only news that is fit to print is positive news or spin. It is time we looked at ourselves in the mirror and flinched. It is time we wrote an editorial to ourselves. It is time we rediscovered the 5 Ws and put them to every announcement the government makes instead of responding with 1 Yes. It is time we redeemed ourselves.”  

Until this Modi 3.0 government settles back into its bad old ways with respect to independent media, there has been a welcome breathing space. This has permitted some interesting comment and analysis as well as much-needed humour and parody of India’s most powerful man.

The best is the cover of the latest issue of Frontline magazine, with a cartoon by Satish Acharya. It says all that needs to be said.

Also, much of the debate on TV, especially after the exit polls of June 1 that were way off the mark, took away from a more nuanced understanding of what had happened on the ground in these elections.

For those who wanted to know, The Hindu ran the post-poll survey by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) over several days. Equally useful and interesting is the interview by Manisha Pande of Newslaundry with Sanjay Kumar, the director of CSDS. The interview is worth watching because it answers so many questions that people must have to understand what has changed in India to throw up these results.

And finally, let me end by mentioning what I consider one of the most heart-warming articles to appear post-results even though I am not as optimistic about the future. Written by well-known cultural activist and literary critic G N Devy in The Telegraph, it is addressed to the Indian voter:

“Political analysts may lose sight of the fact that Indians are heaving sighs of relief not because their respective parties have won or lost but because they know that democracy has recovered from a spell of authoritarianism and the cult of personality… Leaders drunk on power, reeking of arrogance, need to know that as they were giving their lectures, thumping their chests, abusing their adversaries, pandering lies and posturing as superhuman, Indians were watching them without giving even the slightest clue as to which way their thoughts were going.”

The clues were there, given by independent media, but these leaders were not watching.

Battle of media tactics: Modi’s media blitzkrieg vs Congress’s snub

Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on May 30, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/05/30/battle-of-media-tactics-modis-media-blitzkrieg-vs-congresss-snub

The “breaking news” from the last gasp of this prolonged, hot, and heated election season is surely this quote from Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In an interview with ABP News, he said: “In the last 75 years, was it not our responsibility to let the whole world know of Mahatma Gandhi? I am sorry, nobody knew about him. It was only after the film Gandhi that the world became curious about him.” He was referring to the 1982 film Gandhi by Richard Attenborough.

While the expressions on the faces of the interviewers – three of them, not just one – were worth watching, their response to this extraordinary statement was a stoic silence.  

Not so on social media. Predictably, it exploded with memes, fact-checks, and caustic comments.

According to Money Control, Modi has given more than 80 interviews in the last two months, a record for a man who kept away from the media for most of his two terms in office. The recent ones have been sprinkled with bizarre comments, such as the one quoted above, apart from several inaccuracies. 

And none of them have been challenged by those interviewing him.

The objective of this media blitzkrieg, across print and television, was obvious, as I had argued in an earlier column: it was to ensure that Modi remained right, left, and centre during this election period. He was the centrepiece of the BJP’s election campaign, and the party wanted to ensure that he occupied the maximum media space. It succeeded in doing just that.

Modi’s avalanche of interviews and some others with politicians and psephologists predicting numbers have also shown us the many ways interviews are conducted. 

The styles ranged from simpering, to combative, to friendly. The first, simpering, would describe all the interviews with Modi, which were obviously scripted and did not permit any counter questions. 

The combative style was exemplified by well-known journalists like Karan Thapar. His interview with Prashant Kishor, who has predicted a sweep for the BJP, is a classic example. Neither was willing to back away. Even if entertaining, whether the viewer was any wiser after watching the interview is a moot question. 

The third style was friendly and combative. This was the style of the two interviews given by Priyanka Gandhi. She spoke to Sreenivasan Jain for his series “Claim vs Reality” for Newslaundry and The News Minute. The interview was on the run, with Gandhi and Jain standing outside next to her car before she sets off on the next leg of her campaign in Rae Bareili.  

The only sit-down interview by Priyanka Gandhi with a mainstream television channel was with Rajdeep Sardesai of India Today. While Sardesai was combative, he was not offensive. And Priyanka Gandhi was at ease, parrying with him, turning some questions around, and generally managing to get her say. It was also quite obviously unscripted, a marked contrast to the Modi interviews. She was able to put across not only her own position on why she is involved in the election campaign but also why she is not contesting, a question Sardesai kept asking throughout the interview.  

After watching these two interviews, a question that comes to mind is whether the Congress party ought to have tried harder to reach out to voters through mainstream media. Why, for instance, did it not use someone like Priyanka Gandhi more strategically given her connect with people and her ease with media make her a good selling point for the party?

Some journalists who cover politics suggest that she agreed to these two interviews because Priyanka Gandhi  knew the two journalists and that they were part of the same strata of society that is often dismissed as “Lutyens’ Delhi”. Apparently, a few  journalists did reach out to her but did not get a positive response. She limited her media interaction to the reporters who covered her election campaigns. 

Since the Bharat Jodo Yatra, it is evident that the Congress party, and especially Rahul Gandhi, have made it clear that they did not want to speak to mainstream media as they felt that there was bias in its coverage. Instead, they chose to speak to popular YouTubers and social media influencers.  

While it is true that in the last five years since the last elections, the reach of social media has grown phenomenally, especially amongst the young, is it enough to get across to voters while ignoring mainstream media? We will know the answer to this question after the results, when surveys on voter choices and what influenced them will be available..  

Yet, politics is also a game of perception. And the more articulate politicians determine how their parties are viewed by voters. The BJP and Modi have used all media to maximise their presence in the minds of the public. Whether this converts into votes and support is a separate matter. But the sense of almost omnipresence – and perhaps also inevitability – has been attained.

The Congress party, on the other hand, has left it to reaching out to people through rallies and electioneering as it believes that mainstream media does not provide a level playing field. While that is true of most mainstream television channels, where there is no pretence about which side they support, print media has tried to cover all sides, as have independent digital news platforms.  

What we can conclude after two months is that unlike the mood in April, before the first phase of elections, when the media spoke of this election as a foregone conclusion, a “done deal”, 2024 has turned out to be more of a contest than was predicted or expected. For journalists covering elections, that has been a boon.

 

Modi’s ‘Hindu-Muslim’ assertion amplified unchecked. Thanks to a media in coma

Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on May 16, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/05/16/modis-hindu-muslim-assertion-amplified-unchecked-thanks-to-a-media-in-coma

One must acknowledge that, as media strategists, the Bharatiya Janata Party and Narendra Modi are streets ahead of their opponents. It helps, of course, that they have a pliant mainstream media that is ever-ready to play along.

In this last fortnight, yet again, we have witnessed this play out. On April 21, Narendra Modi made a communally loaded speech while campaigning at Banswara in Rajasthan, where, among other things, he called Indian Muslims “infiltrators”. His speech was reported, but there was barely a murmur in mainstream media about it violating the Model Code of Conduct or even that it was not befitting the prime minister of a country to use such coarse and hate-filled language.  

Since then, mainstream media seems to have become almost comatose, sitting back and merely reporting such speeches and their disturbing contents. Apart from Narendra Modi, his lieutenants like Home Minister Amit Shah, have also not held back with openly communal language used to attack opponents, as this report in The Telegraph illustrates. The objective of this line of campaigning is evident; it is to polarise the voting population along communal lines.

Also clear is the BJP’s determination to keep Modi the focal point of its campaign. To do this, not only is the Prime Minister rushing around the country speaking at meetings and doing road shows, all of which are prominently covered by most media, but for a man who has shunned the media since he was elected in 2014, he has gone on overdrive to grant “exclusive” interviews to newspapers and television channels. Like the interview he gave last month to Smita Prakash, editor-in-chief of the news agency ANI, these interviews are clearly scripted, with little scope for follow-up questions. 

According to senior journalist Krishna Prasad, who posts on X under the handle Churumuri, in 30 days, Modi gave 26 interviews. He writes: 

“@narendramodi has given at least 26 ‘interviews’ in the last 30 days to newspapers, news channels and news agencies, revealing a staggering asymmetry of media coverage in favour of the BJP in the general elections. Timed to coincide with states going to the polls in various phases, the ‘interviews’ – undisguised plugs for the BJP, really – have received hours and hours of coverage that no opposition leader has enjoyed. ‘Interviews’ with newspaper groups have fetched the maximum returns: 6 pages in the @lokmat group; 4 pages in the @HindustanTimes group. Ditto TV networks, which broadcast in multiple languages on loop, and then get still more coverage on social media through the PM’s handles and handlers. In most languages, only one or two media outlets are chosen by @PMOIndia for the ‘interview’, but as befits a provincial #GujaratFirst mind, 5 Gujarati newspapers get the honour, including one that does not publish an e-paper.”

This media bombardment of “exclusives” does not suggest that Narendra Modi and his team have woken up to the fact that the media is an important institution in a democracy. Rather, it is part of a cleverly planned strategy to ensure that the face of the man who is the main selling point of the BJP continues to be prominent in all media. And the strategy has worked.

It is possible that the Prime Minister’s “resolve” that “I will not do Hindu-Muslim” is also a part of that strategy. On May 14, in an interview to the television channel News18 in Varanasi, Modi said: “The day I do Hindu-Muslim, I will be unworthy of public life.” 

The next day, Indian Express ran this as its page one lead, while others reported it without giving it that much prominence. While the headline of the Indian Express story repeated Modi’s statement, the text of the story did mention his statement in the Banswara rally three weeks earlier that was clearly “Hindu-Muslim”.  But most newspapers, barring the Telegraph, did not remind readers that Modi had in fact been playing the “Hindu-Muslim” card in multiple election speeches. 

A detailed record of PM Modi's speech in The Telegraph.

The hesitation by most mainstream media to give the other side of the story when it involves the Prime Minister is now a given. Hindustan Times did comment on the statement in its editorial on May 16. But instead of reminding readers that what Modi said was not supported by his most recent election speeches, it suggested that his comment should “guide the election campaign”. 

While reports on speeches by star campaigners form the bulk of election coverage, with headlines either highlighting statements made by these politicians or predictions by them about how many seats they will win or how badly their opponents will fare, some stories stand out as different. They tell us about the India that continues to be invisiblised by much of the media. They convey voices that are rarely heard, not even during elections.

Take this story in The Hindu by Purnima Sah. She reports on Adivasis living in the Satpura range in Maharashtra’s Jalgaon district who still have no running water or pucca houses. They tell her that they know it is their duty to cast their vote, but they do not know whether that will make a difference to their lives. Most of them have not heard of the Modi government’s schemes promising them houses and water supply. One of them tells the reporter, “We are surprised to hear that there are government schemes where people get water and a pucca house.” The other reason they say they will vote is because they are afraid that if they do not, the forest department might force them to move from the land on which they have lived for generations.

The experience of Adivasis living just 46-km from Nashik is almost identical. No running water or electricity. And like their counterparts in Jalgaon district in the story mentioned above, a daily wage labourer tells the reporter from The Hinduthat he is afraid that if he does not vote, he will be declared dead: “We are scared that if we do not vote, the government will strike off our names from their documents and declare us dead. If that happens, then our existence will be in danger. What will happen to our family then?”

These stories remind us why the vote is so important to the poorest, who otherwise do not feel they count, even as every political party makes promises to look after their interests. They also tell us how, more than 76 years after India became independent, these black holes of misery persist. 

They remain invisible because we in the media do not make that additional effort to reach out and uncover this India, one that is more real than the glitter and power displays that dominate the media scene.

 

Manipur, misinformation, Revanna: Three issues ignored by Big Media this election season

 Broken News

Published in Newslaundry on May 2, 2024

Link: https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/05/02/manipur-misinformation-revanna-three-issues-ignored-by-big-media-this-election-season

The absence of something in the media is often not noted, especially in election season. But this morning, some readers of English newspapers in Mumbai, the city where I live, might have noticed the absence of Narendra Modi on their front pages. Barring The Indian Express, which had a front-page advertisement by a TV channel about an “exclusive” interview with the prime minister, a story on increased GST collections literally trumped anything Modi might have said the day before.

He still features in all newspapers because he has not ceased making controversial, and therefore newsworthy, declarations. 

In this last fortnight, since my previous column, Modi’s speeches have dominated the news cycle. Beginning with his provocative, inaccurate and hate-filled speech in Banswara, Rajasthan on April 21, where he called Indian Muslims “infiltrators” and declared that the Congress planned to give away the ordinary person’s hard-earned money to those “who have many children”, Modi has continued daily to make statements that have featured prominently in the media.

The front page of The Indian Express a day after Modi spoke in Banswara.

 This is probably a well-calibrated media strategy by the BJP to ensure that the dominant narrative in these elections remains focused on what Modi says. It also ensures that the Congress party, the focus of Modi’s attacks, must constantly counter everything he says. Its response, however, rarely gets the same prominence as Modi’s statements. 

Given the extent of the prime minister’s half-truths and outright lies in the last fortnight, it is incumbent on the media to fact-check. This has not been a norm in mainstream media and in the last decade, since the BJP and Modi came to power, such fact-checking is notable for its absence. 

However, in recent days, at least some in mainstream media are doing what ought to be routine. Perhaps this is happening because it is election season, and even though the outcome seems predetermined according to political pundits, there is always a sliver of uncertainty. 

 

Some newspapers, like The Hindu, ran a fact-check after Modi’s Banswara speech, especially on what he claimed was in the Congress party’s election manifesto. Scroll called out Modi’s lies in a clear and incisive article headlined: “Fact-checking five days of Narendra Modi’s speeches: A catalogue of lies”. And even a mainstream TV channel like Aaj Tak, not known for being even slightly critical of Modi in the last decade, ventured to point out rather gently that what he had stated in Banswara was not based on facts. 

Ironically, Modi’s statements turned into a bonus for the Congress as journalists and ordinary voters began downloading its manifesto and reading it. Election manifestos are rarely the subject of any prolonged discussion in the media. 

Apart from these fact-checks, there were also a couple of strong editorials, such as this one in The Hindu.  Yet, despite the reporting and comment on Modi’s speeches, and complaints by the Congress and concerned citizens, the Election Commission of India took its time to decide whether what he said violated the Model Code of Conduct. As has been extensively reported, instead of sending Modi a notice in response to the complaints, the EC chose to skirt around the issue by sending a notice to BJP chief JP Nadda. 

Simultaneously, and perhaps attempting to appear even-handed, it also sent a notice to the president of the Congress, Mallikarjun Kharge, in response to speeches by Rahul Gandhi and Kharge during the campaign. At the time of writing, there have been no further developments on these notices.

Moving away from Modi and his election speeches, the other major story this last fortnight was the sex abuse controversy involving Prajwal Revanna, the MP from Hassan who belongs to the Janata Dal (Secular), founded by former prime minister HD Deva Gowda, who also happens to be Revanna’s grandfather. He is the JDS candidate again for the same seat.

Mainstream media’s response to this terrible scandal, where literally hundreds of women appear on recordings where they are being sexually abused by Revanna, needs to be noted. While the media has focused on the tapes, their provenance, how they were made public, the motives of the people who did this, and the impact of this on the BJP which has partnered with the JDS in Karnataka, little attention has been paid to the women who were at the receiving end.

The story that must be investigated is not just why Revanna recorded these abuses, or how those tapes got out, but the system that allows these powerful men to exploit powerless women. It is precisely this imbalance in the power structure that led to global focus on sexual harassment at work in 2018, including in India, following the exposé by the Washington Post and the New Yorker about Hollywood producer and serial abuser Harvey Weinstein. The outrage then led to many more exposés. It also resulted in demands for change in the system that permitted this type of exploitation to continue unchecked. 

The Revanna scandal, and earlier Sandeshkhali in Bengal, tell us that not enough is known yet about the extent of sexual exploitation within the political system. Even if it is known, it has not been exposed. Incidentally, while many mainstream television channels focused on the Sandeshkhali scandal, where women had allegedly been sexually abused by politicians belonging to the governing Trinamool Congress in the state, they have barely touched the Revanna scandal. The JDS is an ally of the BJP in Karnataka whereas the TMC is fighting the BJP in Bengal. 

This seamy side of Indian politics and political parties is a story that has barely been told. There are a few instances that pop up now and then. But the message from the Revanna episode is that in a situation where the power equation is so grossly skewed as in India, women without power are silently bearing the worst kind of sexual exploitation. It is a terrible indictment of our system and needs to be thoroughly exposed.

Let me end with the other absence that mainstream media has yet to fully rectify, its reporting on Manipur. May 3 marks one year since the beginning of the ethnic strike that has divided the state, where thousands have been displaced, and several hundred killed. The violence has not abated and continues almost every day.  

It is a time for us in the media to introspect. To what extent has our sporadic coverage of the troubles in this north-eastern state over this year, contributed to the union government’s callous indifference to Manipur? 

There have been spurts of media focus on Manipur, such as in June last year, when the May 3 incident of two Kuki women being paraded naked and thereafter raped by a mob of Meitei men became public with the release of a tape of this incident. Or more recently, because of the violence that occurred during the elections. But regular reporting in mainstream media on the horrific levels of daily violence and difficulties that ordinary people on both sides of the divide encounter has been largely missing. 

In fact, the complete story of what happened on May 3 is only just beginning to emerge. The Indian Express in a front-page story on April 30 – headlined, “Manipur chargesheet: Women paraded naked made it to police Gypsy but told no key, left to the mob” – tells us the extent to which the local police were complicit. The story is based on a chargesheet filed by the CBI, which is investigating the incident, last October in the Gauhati High Court. 

A more detailed piece by Makepeace Sitlhou in Article 14 tells us what the survivors of this assault are going through. Together, these articles remind us that the price of the media ignoring the tragedy that has unfolded in Manipur is being paid every day by the people in the state who have survived the violence.