One very common allegation I’ve heard these days is that the Indian media isn’t honest. There are those who try and sensibly analyze the issue, and those whose vitriolic comments are quite honestly an embarrassment to sensible bloggers in India. But to sum up, here are the main allegations:
- The Indian media is anti Hindu
- Big media houses are “pro minority”
- Political parties (especially the Congress) fund the media for favorable coverage
Now my personal opinion is that these are false. Of course, since I don’t have all the information, it may not count for much. But my reasons for disbelieving them are:
- It will have to be a massive conspiracy on an impressive scale covering all the big media houses
- It has to be so well concealed that no one gets any proof whatsoever
- I find it impossible to believe that other well funded parties like the BJP would not have exposed such a conspiracy by now if there was any truth in it
- It means that all editors, associated bloggers and correspondents are involved. Meaning that every single reporter and writer is dishonest
Such considerations to my mind, are too great a barrier to overcome. However, I could always be wrong and so I withheld my opinions on this until I was able to grab some reliable information instead of shooting off my mouth and making an idiot of myself.
One of my college mates from Stephen’s has been working for the TOI for quite a while now. Like all corporate employees, he has a good deal of disillusionment with work life in general and with his own company specifically. Without intending to flatter him, he’s one of the most well informed guys I know. Unlike many others in our college who studied day and night for the IAS mugging up facts from books, this guy seemed to know everything without even trying. Combine this with his somewhat impressive academic achievements, and we have a dude who’s opinion I trust – especially when he’s in a position to know the facts.
So I decided to ask him about the perceived media biases.I reproduce the chat I had with him verbatim:
Bhagwad Park 14:20
Oh MM – now that you’re here let me ask you something I can’t ask anyone elseMM 14:21
sure..Bhagwad Park 14:22
See – there’s a lot of debate on whether the India media is biased against the BJP, sympathetic to muslims, the congress party and the Gandhi-Nehru family specificallyMM 14:22
media like everything else is dividedMM 14:22
There are even more who speculate that major national media like the TOI even receive funding
from these sources 14:22MM 14:22
haha
categorically, no 14:22
for toi i can tell yu 14:22
and u know i have problems with this place, so i aint singing for my supper 14:23
no organisational tilt at all 14:23
its a liberal paper 14:23
will tilt a bit here and there based on issues 14:23others r different 14:24
rediff.com for eg., clearly goes right 14:24
online 14:24in print HT is a congress aligned paper, its owner is a Cong MP 14:24
but no it dont get any money from Cong either 14:25Hindu is a liberal paper too, but its current editor is a commie 14:25
but the paper remains fairly liberal and left of centre, nothing more 14:25Indian Express doesnt matter to readers, its liberal too 14:25
but will be anti-gov of any party in power 14:26DNA is also similar – largely liberal but its ed and owners are a little righty 14:26
so thats where the right -wing in india has a prob 14:26
they see the english media as biased 14:27
i see it as sensible 14:27language media is a whole diff ballgame 14:27
diff alignments and biases 14:27
vary by region 14:27
and also have issues of parties funding some of the smaller outfits – but thats a big ‘maybe’ 14:28
but those alignments r very clear 14:28
for people in the know 14:28
so not much of a problem 14:28big media houses like Times dont need money from parties 14:28
and would in fact run away from any such offers 14:28
for the strings that would come attached 14:28english Tv media is also largely liberal on the communal front 14:29
can be left-right/soft-hard on other issues 14:29Bhagwad Park 14:29
This also goes for television houses like NDTV etc?MM 14:29
thats abt it
yes 14:29Bhagwad Park 14:29
Ok…but people present statistics showing that Hindu deaths for example go unreported and that Muslim deaths are presented in all fanfareBhagwad Park 14:30
Coincidence, incompetence
or what? 14:30MM 14:30
rubbishMM 14:30
communal deaths are communal
besides india is founded on a very clear ideal 14:30
u must remember that 14:30
and was split very painfully on an opposing ideal 14:31
one major reason for the ‘majority’ to be accomodative of the ‘minorities’ 14:31Bhagwad Park 14:31
See this one small quote from a blogger for example:Bhagwad Park 14:32
“The Indian media needs to project riots between Hindus and some other community to be selective persecution of the ‘minority’. This impression can again be only created by largely omitting the violence committed against the Hindus. This, I believe, is the reason that the deaths of around 200 Hindus that had occurred in post-Godhra riots in Gujarat are hardly given any coverage. ”
Now I don’t know the details 14:32Bhagwad Park 14:32
So what response would you give to something like that?MM 14:32
over 2000 muslimes diedMM 14:32
in a near-genocide
where they were targeted 14:32
so thats the answer 14:33
200 vs 2000 14:33Bhagwad Park 14:33
HmmMM 14:33
provocation was limted
and result was a planned pogrom 14:33
where everyone co-operated 14:33
its was like nazi germany 14:33MM 14:33
the police watched
on orders to do so 14:33MM 14:34
CM presided over the carnage
so now, you tell me, whats scarier? 14:34MM 14:34
in streets where some muslims had houses and shops
only those were targeted – based on electoral rolls supplied by the admin – this has been proven in courts 14:34
so thats no riot. 14:35
A riot is spontaneous and uncontrolled, total chaos 14:35
this is targeted slaughter 14:35
I agree radical islam is a problem 14:35
many muslims do not ‘integrate’ into the larger mainstream across the world 14:35
even in India 14:36
and India must be considered a secular nation of clearly hindu-majority character 14:36
just as say Europe or the US are secular but shaped by their christian ethos and history 14:37
…but thats no reason for the majority not to safeguard its minoritiesMM 14:38
thats the compact we made at independence
to prove to a country like Paksitan, thats we’re NOT them 14:38
we’re not founded on an exclusivist principle 14:38
we’re inclusive and open to all 14:38MM 14:39
hindu fundamentalists are idiots who dont realise that want they want is a Hindu version of PakistanBhagwad Park 14:39
Yes, I know the ideals
Odd MM – I didnt’ know you had the “Mera bharat mahan” spirit :D 14:39Bhagwad Park 14:39
Nice going.MM 14:39
the idea of india is a beautiful one , my friendBhagwad Park 14:39
TrueMM 14:40
considering where it came from and how it came into being too
quite extraordinary 14:40
any historian will tell you that 14:40
India is still like Europe 14:40
but happens to be one nation 14:40
some sort of miracle really 14:40
only part of kashmir and the NE today question the conept of indianess 14:41
no one else does 14:41MM 14:41
thats a remarkable achievement in nation buildingBhagwad Park 14:41
Tis tis
Thanks for the feedback 14:41MM 14:42
ok, thats it for today
true blood and sleep beckon 14:42Bhagwad Park 14:42
I’ll send you a link…
14:42
ciao 14
I had to do a little bit of cut and paste to compensate for the synchronization problems usually found on Internet chat, but it’s otherwise “as is.” Since his views on the Godhra violence weren’t directly related to the question on media bias, I thought of leaving them out but decided to keep them in the end cause he brought out some good points.
We have to know which sources to trust. Those alleging a national media bias don’t have any evidence. Of course, this doesn’t automatically mean they’re wrong. But when I do have opinions from people I trust who are in a position to know, I choose to believe them.
Update: I had missed this great link which gives the official position of the Times of India on its role in the political spectrum. It terms itself as a classically liberal newspaper and illustrates how it handles various issues including the right to freedom of expression.
Good post Bhagwad. The accusations against Indian media range from conspiracy theories to downright dumb vitriol. The funny thing is that these same news media are used by the right-wing nutters as references whenever they suit them.
Fools galore!
My recent post The difference between India and Pakistan- through two songs!
In reply to Ashish Deodhar
Ashish,
Personally, I have never stated that all that the media conveys is false. I have simply maintained that to manipulate the opinion drastically, it is only subtle omissions and inventions of truth that are required.
You point out that the same media's news is used to make a point. The reason for that is: hardly anyone of us takes personal testimony seriously. If I tell you that what some newspaper said was false as I had witnessed things to be different, would you believe me? You will ask me for 'reliable' source. And what would be that reliable source? Of course, the very same media that we expect and suppose to be reliable. So, what other avenue are available to those who are skeptical of media's reliability to convey their skepticism? The internal inconsistencies in what media reports and in turn how something that they report is inconsistent with simple logic. That would quite simply require media to be quoted.
This is a well planned campaign,its larger than the media,which is part of it as also is the Hindi film industry.This campaign appears to be in the crucial stages.The final aim is to wipe out the Hindu identity.
My recent post Commonwealth Games 2010 Looters
In reply to prophet666
Who's conducting this campaign to wipe out the Hindu identity?
The Media is the focus in Outlook this time. It is the 15 year anniversary celebration. Do check it out – it’s a great set of people who are pointing the torch inwards and taking on issues like paid news, bias, et al.
In reply to Sangitha
Thanks for the tip!
Hi Bhagwad, Ketan,
Pls read the Open Magazine site openthemagazine.com They have some exposes up there against A-listers in the Indian media. Is relevant to your discussion on media bias. If true it indicates that powerful “opinion-makers” in the media acted as deal brokers for a particular party or coalition. Its not nearly close to Ketan’s position that the media are in the pocket of the NG family, but it strengthens his argument.
I’m not looking for a rematch :-) you have both spoken at (great) lengths. I’d really like to know your take on this. Some of the stuff in the transcripts seem to be a regular newshound’s job nosing around to get scoops, but some of it comes across as very deal-brokerish!
thx,
Jai
In reply to Jai_C
I saw those tapes too. Here’s an excellent write up about them from the wall street journal.
I don’t quite know what to make of them – tried to understand what’s going on (here are the transcripts) but am not politically savvy enough to figure out the context.
In any case, here are a few points I want to make:
1. I’ve repeatedly said that large conspiracies cannot be kept secret for long. The more people involved, the greater the scope and the longer it goes, the chances of it leaking out increase exponentially in these days of wire taps, twitter, wikileaks, so many media outlets etc.
These sort of recording prove my point. If something so small and involving just a few people can leak out, imagine what it would take to conceal a conspiracy involving lakhs of journalists, hundreds of crores of rupees going on for many decades…it can’t be done.
2. Though I’m not really sure what’s going on, it’s clear it’s not as simple as the media receiving money from the congress to favor them. Is the media corrupt? Well this is India – of course they are! My only contention in all this is that we must know the extent of the corruption accurately without assuming the worst.
Hi Bhagwad,
Your point 1 would be more valid if the media had done the digging and exposed these tapes. AFAIK somebody cold dropped these at several media orgs. It is increasingly clear that they sat on it for quite a while. Its still not made it to print newspapers here in India, at least to my knowledge. The underwhelming response looks like it is headed for a burial. I hope not, but its not clear its “blown up” yet.
the reasons for the diffidence could be as simple as “everybody has some skeletons in their closet” so they all co-operatively try to “manage” this credibility crisis.
The “massive organized multi-decade payoff driven by one family” scenario may not have been propounded in exactly those terms by Ketan P (I am not sure) unless he wished to sink his own case!
What stands out from this expose, if authenticated, is that a couple of leading and trusted news personalities actively lobbied or brokered for a particular party in a particular alliance. We’re not talking nameless stringers. We’re talking about ppl who personify their organizations.
I’m pretty sure that the other, earlier alliance had other intermediaries who negotiated deals for them when they were in power. but I’m almost sure they, whoever they are, dont have the branding or reputation for neutrality, or acceptance that these big names have… if and when they are exposed, they will be some 3rd rate journos or media ppl already known to align with them ideologically. worst case some industrialists could be exposed. We dont look up to those guys for delivering *balanced news* or even as models of probity.
I dont think any laws have been broken, or any rights have been violated except those of the parties tapped (however pls read Dilip D he suggests something in the conv abt Shiv Sena). I’m talking about trust here.
thanks,
Jai
In reply to Jai_C
Questions about these journos neutrality certainly have to be raised…like I said, I couldn’t really understand what was going on. All the news articles I’ve read about it don’t clearly say what was happening. Perhaps it’s open to interpretation. Perhaps we need a little more time.
Viz a viz Ketan, we were quite specific in our argument. To quote the issue as he put it in an earlier comment:
Moreover, I have been very specific in my conspiracy theory that the media works for the Nehru-Gandhi family, and not other politicians of the UPA/Congress.
Two more points. First, it’s actually a relief to me that even though the main stream media didn’t bring this out (yet), other channels did. My contention is that in today’s world we don’t need the media to expose things. Whoever sent those tapes to the editors would have found hundreds of other ways to expose it.
Second, it can’t be as open and shut a case as some people make it out to be. If it was, there’s no way the media can just hush it up. Suppose for example, a tape was revealed where Barkha is demanding payment for not publishing a certain story in clear terms, it would be too big a matter to simply ignore. In today’s world, we can make an impact in other ways and sooner or later, newspapers would be forced to pick it up regardless of what they wanted to do.
The fact that it hasn’t made a big splash makes me wonder what exactly the interpretation of the tapes are. I read the transcripts, but it’s too confusing for me to catch it…
Sure Bhagwad. I posted this comment more since its topical to “bias in Indian media”. BTW I would like to get your friend’s insider input too if possible. I’m mostly focused on the tapes pertaining to the 2 media figures and have left out the industrialists and others in this disc.
At no point in my comments have I raised a possibility of bribe or cash demand.
The *credibility* of these newspeople, their claim to *fairness or balance or neutrality* must necessarily be compromised as a consequence of the authentication of these tapes if that is obtained …unless info is made available that they also provide these brokerage services for other parties and alliances as well in which case a different sort of neutrality is established :-)
Do you agree on point above?
I have one alternative construct that allows the newsie in question a better profile than deal-broker: per this theory he/she poses and pretends to have lots of clout and connection. He/she uses this pretend position to pump sources for info that he/she can use in news scoops. But actually has no such connect and will sidle out of it later after giving only the most generic info out from their side.
This ‘better’ position is one of a pretentious almost-liar (in my book it would be straight lying) but this person would still have more integrity IMO than a person who has started doing deals for political parties in secret while holding a responsible newsjob.
thx,
Jai
PS: have posted the first comment at Ketan’s blog also.
In reply to Jai_C
The next time I see my friend online, I’ll ask him. The idea about lying to pump a source is interesting. Not being a journo, I have no clue how prevalent this really is.
And yes – I agree that brokerage (if that’s the right word to use) for all parties equally establishes another sort of equality :)
Sorry for a double comment: this thing is apparently more happening on twitter and i’m not into it.
but here from the horse’s mouth a tweet:
“…I think there is nothing wrong in stringing along a source for info. Gnite…”
so that is the defence.
-Jai
In reply to Jai_C
Here’s a good follow up piece on the wsj with an analysis of what’s being said.
Hi bhagwad,
thanks. the counter point is essentially the same thing i had boiled it down to.
Its a weak defence for somebody i had high expectations for and set to higher standards, to me these lines:
” tell me what shd I tell them ”
” as soon as I get out of RCR ” (PM residence)
” I’ve conveyed, had a long chat, Azad will speak to her” (come on man one has to wilfully ignore the obvious here)
and several others are straight deals or outright lies. She has gone for the *relatively better* position of “stringing along” the gullible source. If she is a self confessed stringer that has given this person a fast line, what confidence do you have that she isnt trying another line now?
The buck may not have stopped there but it definitely took a nice goodish break with this person. OTOH I seem to be the only person in my known blogworld that is even halfway concerned abt this :-) I’m winding down now. Thanks for the interaction.
bye,
Jai
In reply to Jai_C
What I would like is each person defending their statements sentence by sentence. It’s possible (and indeed I hope) that there’s a rationale behind all this. Of course, no legal consequences can accrue and I myself reserve judgment until I see a “smoking gun”, but for all the others, it would be nice to see a statement by statement defense by either party.
Finally, one has to ask the question – if she’s indeed behaving inappropriately, what’s the payoff? What does she have to gain?
In reply to bhagwad
Hi Bhagwad,
To return to this evergreen topic of yours, w.r.t the coverage on Anna Hazare’s arest by the Delhi police, please please compare NDTV with say TimesNow and other channels.
NDTV website is coming across pretty neutral, but the TV new presenters are so gloomy and presenting the news with significant slant against Anna that is surprising in that its so noticeable. They use words like “detained”, “picked up”,” a couple of hours in jail”. You would think the cops took Anna for a date or something :-)
Their mode seems to have shifted after shock and anger in the morning. Right now their focus is on Anna’s adamance and unreasonableness in not acceding to Govt’s conditions of 3 day fast or return to his hometown. Their theme now seems to me to be “containment”. They dont forget to put in a pitch for Rahul Gandhi by reporting that he asked for Anna’s release.
Some over-mindreading at this point :-) The gloom on their faces seems to me to convey their internal displeasure at having to do some pro-UPA spin (when perhaps they dont really want to in their individual capacities) and some genuine feeling of being let down by “their side”.
OTOH you have Arnab Goswami on TimesNow breathing fire, a very different mood, quite aggressive and attacking. His anti-UPA stance is quite evident.
Neither of these channels is reporting news anything close to objectively. the interesting thing for me is that until the Radia tapes broke out with Barkha entangled, I wasnt really noticing the NDTV slant.
thanks
Jai
In reply to Jai_C
In a month’s time, this post will complete its first anniversary! :D
In reply to Jai_C
You really notice way more than I do :)
In reply to Jai_C
Jai,
I don’t know to what you attribute the NDTV journos not wanting to do a pro-UPA spin in their personal capacity. You attribute it to their conscience or the simple fact that defending UPA might seem more and more illogical in times to come?
Anyway, there are other things also not being reported with the vigor that some of them might call for (at least in my opinion). More specifically, I’m talking of links with Nabi Fai of members of ‘civil society’. Of course, one can come up with great many allowances, but ideally allowance-making should happen after such news is well publicized, which in my observation, it was not, by almost any of the major news channels. Contrast this with Nithyananda becoming a “Modi man” for few media houses just by virtue of Modi having shared stage with him and praised him, if I’m not wrong, once. And what is interesting to note in this almost cover up of sorts of the Fai episode is that all the news channels seem to be behaving quite similarly. Imagine the explosive sensational manner in which such news could have been ‘broken’ – “Desh ke gaddaron ke sar par hai ISI ka haath” if these news channesl actually primarily care about TRPs, but no, I guess the news channels maintained their discretionary restraint? :)
[My conspiracy theory on this? The Family is employing reverse psychology. Anna is their man; and e.g., Ramdev is not. They, along with the media, want to convince the common people that the NAC/The Family does not want the JLP Bill passed, so that people would automatically start supporting passage of such a bill presuming it to be against the interests of the ‘frightened’ politicians. Eventually, NAC/The Family, with the support of the Parliament (by that time who would want to appear like a baby-killer opposing teh Jan Lokapal Bill?), would indeed pass such a bill. The JLP will be filled with persons of distinguished character and integrity of nature that would be ‘unquestionable’. And of course, such distinguished persons would be apolitical. :) Because they would be ‘independent’ of the government, just like how our Media is. Anyway, just like my all past speculations, this would sound as much weird, which I don’t mind, and would make me appear further foolish if it turns out incorrect, which I *would* mind, but then with Rahul G jumping in as the savior of Anna, I’m seeing my conspiracy theory as getting somewhat validated. :D A reminder of vital point in all of my conspiracy theories: Media is tilted towards The Family, and not necessarily towards the UPA/cabinet/PM; embarrassment to the UPA/cabinet/PM is *not* the same as embarrassment to the The Family. In fact, embarrassment to other political entities in the UPA/Congress helps The Family in remaining strongest and serves as a reminder to the others as to how fragile their political career is, and thus not to get too ambitious (politically). And if it might interest, my conspiracy theory has been exactly this since I heard about Anna “taking on” the UPA. :) ].
In reply to Ketan
I don’t believe anyone is intelligent enough to craft such a well thought out conspiracy theory where nothing can go wrong :)
In general, plots have to simple. Otherwise they fail.
In reply to bhagwad
guys,
I am not getting the drift of Ketan’s mega-conspiracy theories but that is usual :-)
All that happens with Rahul-as-saviour is simple strategy, as old as the hills. Is it a Panchatantra story? The wise advisor tells the newly crowned young king to get his finance minister to announce an increase in taxes. When people rise up in protest, he gets the king not the finance min. to announce a slight rollback.
Here RG is the crown prince and needs to maintain his “youth-connect” which is seriously under threat since it seems to be mostly urban youth (at least on TV) leading the Anna protests. So obviously RG needs the insulating distance and story here.
And I pull back slightly from my earlier stance re. NDTV. Barkha today was snorting at the congress suggestions that this is a foreign hand destabilization effort. She was effectively advising MMS to apologize for the arrest. One can still see that she is a well-wisher of this govt unlike Arnab G who is in attack mode. They are reducing the spin-quotient and criticizing and offering friendly advice. Fair enough I guess.
The surprising thing about TimesNow coverage is its getting kudos from both N.Ram (Hindu) and Swapan Dasgupta! An unlikely circumstance of events has put this channel in this weird (for it) position.
I confess to being slightly angry at the govt for putting the channels in such a position that TNow gets higher ratings across spectrum than probably NDTV.
thanks
Jai
In reply to Jai_C
Bhagwad,
I never felt above plot was too complicated. But anyway, that’s subjective, I guess. Of course, there’s a risk of the plot failing for The Family, but that’s a mere theoretical risk for someone as powerful as the ones we are talking of.
But let’s see how this all pans out. Let’s see whether eventually the JLP Bill gets passed or not, and then let’s further see, if the said Jan Lok Pal and its state-‘branches’ start targeting powerful politicians (with The Family members as noted exception).
Jai,
I’m surprised you take various gestures and mannerisms of these journos seriously. :) They’re quite adept actors, IMO. In fact, that (confidence to feign feelings) is one of the prerequisites to be successful before the camera. :)
In view of the recent exposes of Barkha Dutt, would you care to revise your views?
In reply to Abhishek
As discussed in the last two comments, I’ve never said that the media cannot be corrupt. Only that it’s even handed towards all parties not just the congress. I don’t believe that the congress pays the media for favorable coverage. It has neither enough money, nor the expertise to pull something like that off.
200 vs 2000 doesnot make 200 insignificant. those killed in godhra carnage are not even talked about. here the chat about the people killed ( they have name, age, families; they were humans) are talked about in terms of 2000 muslims is greater than 200 hindus so only what happened with the numerically greater is inhumane. the chat doesnot go on to form opinion on the basis of who were the first perpetrators of the killing, but just on the basis of numbers. the self characters which has been attempted to be projected in this chat whould have been supported onlyif the comments had been objective and considered the people killed as walking talking humans. this, alas, doesnot happen here.
as about the main theme, the use of the words “hindu terrorists”, “hindu bigots”,”communal hindus” and not use of this same terminology with respect to terrorists of other religious backgrounds shows the bias. congress party’s political alliance with religion bases parites doesnot make it communal in ” libral/secular” media but a BJP/RSS/SHIV SENA is given a communal tag.
I donot find a media which is “LIBRAL” in dictionary-meaning sense. a media which can say group A killed one person of group B and it resulted in the retaliation by group B resulting in 100 killed from group A, and though both are to be punished for the crime but group A is the perpetrator of the events so has to be punished more severely. The day we see media of such type we will have a fourth pillar of democracy which can make india a democracy of the people, for the people and by the people.
In reply to vishal
Thank for your post Vishal. I’d like to make a few points. “Hindus” and “Muslims” are not a monolithic body. The people who burnt the train happened to be Muslims. Even if people want revenge, that doesn’t mean that any Muslim is a valid target. You have to find the people who actually committed the crime and do what you want with them. Targeting all “Muslims” is not just wrong, it’s stupid.
Second, two wrongs do not make a right. You can’t go around killing Muslims just because Hindus were killed.
Finally, of course people are killed on both sides. In any battle, people are killed on both sides – even when one side is the blatant aggressor. I’m sure lots of Nazis were killed in their invasions. What does that prove?