Sack Sagarika

Dan Rather, an internationally acclaimed journalist, was the first to break the assassination of John F Kennedy. He also covered Watergate and many wars. In 2004 he ran a report about military records of George W Bush using documents which later turned out to be forged. Rather did the morally right thing, he quit CBS in 2006. His only fault was that he hadn’t fact-checked the story and the documents, although there is still no concrete evidence that the documents were unreliable. That was probably a rare mistake from Rather in career spanning over five decades. What does it say about journalists in India who continue to not only hold on to their jobs but continue to sermonise the nation as if their character were soaked in the purest of waters?

We first had Barkha Dutt, the Radiagate hero, stringing along a lobbyist and indulging in power-brokering who continues to moralise the nation. We now have Vir Sanghvi, another Radiagate hero, who now claims the tapes were doctored and he is innocent. This is the same brazenness with which politicians hang on to office despite being tainted with acts of corruption. If I have consistently maintained that a corrupt media is more dangerous to democracy than corrupt politicians then the media doesn’t stop providing more evidence to that belief.

Most Indian businesses are family-run and owned. But it is a common practice among many corporate entities to not employ two or more members from the same family, at least not in the same department. There is no particular reason behind this practice except for the belief that all the acts of the members may not be free from prejudice if they were from the same family. And what if your spouse also happens to be your boss in a news media enterprise? It then makes it all the more likely that sometimes even trash can be passed off as journalism. In all the posts on this site I have never once referred to Sagarika Ghose as the wife of Rajdeep Sardesai. I have always referred to her as the deputy editor. However, now I do believe the deputy editor must go. That any other Managing Editor in the seat of Rajdeep Sardesai would not tolerate the outright rubbish that Sagarika churns out so frequently. The latest one really has to be the last straw. That Rajdeep himself has a lot to answer for is another story.

Media is not a private body as the Editors Guild would have the Standing committee on Lokpal believe. The power to influence people, opinions and even elections is not in the private domain. There is a strange streak in Sagarika Ghose that leads her to believe that people are idiots and can be fooled all the time. That there are ordinary people and there are elites and she stands independently as an observer. Her boss should have repeatedly told her that she was part of the elite. On 9^th November on her programme ‘Face the nation’ Sagarika ran the debate “Sri Sri on 4 day yatra in UP: should spiritual leaders take part in anti-corruption campaigns? FTN 10pm”. There were a few usual panellists along with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar. Except, SriSri wasn’t there!

First of all, the clear answer to SG’s question is anybody in this country is free to run a campaign against corruption at any place and at any time of his or her choice. Sagarika doesn’t have any moral business to question the rights of SriSri. This country’s values have been built on the spiritual cleanliness which outsiders find easier to recognise than people like Sagarika. The right question would now be: Does Sagarika have any moral right to continue as a journalist?

Sagarika Ghose conducted the debate as if SriSri were live on the programme and was responding to the comments made by other panellists. That wasn’t all, when panellists made a comment she even turned to SriSri to seek his response. What was being used was footage from a previously recorded interview with SriSri and suitably edited to make it appear as if he was responding live. This is nothing short of blatant mischief and fraud on the viewers. This is something CNN-IBN’s Cyrus Broacha does on his comedy show where the viewers are aware of the interviews being fake.

Some days back SG ran a debate on whether Justice Katju, the new PCI chairman, should apologise for calling journalists “uneducated”. I hope she now realises what exactly Katju was referring to. Not done with that, she frequently passes judgements on judges of High courts and Supreme Court some of which may actually be an act of contempt. In a recent article, ‘The Elite’s on trial’, here is what she wrote:

“The 2G trial too is one of India’s “million mutinies”. The overthrow of bail jurisprudence, the CBI’s failure to provide comprehensive evidence so far, the many weaknesses of the case beyond its rhetoric, have been highlighted by several legal experts. It is no longer even clear how much “loss” there was to the exchequer, with the CAG’s R1.76 lakh crore figure now being systematically questioned. Yet the 2G accused, before the trial, before proof of the money trail, appear to already have been declared guilty”. This not only reflects her terrible lack of understanding of the law but it also appears the article was written without a thorough scrutiny of the judgement by Judge O.P.Saini which denied bail to Kanimozhi and others. She probably implies that Indians simply want to hang the rich regardless of evidence or sense of justice.

I have said often that it’s not possible to hide in the tech-age. Faster than she could say SriSri people on Twitter quickly pointed out the recorded interview of SriSri being misused by Sagarika on her programme. She later tweeted that it was a bug and that FTN will carry a full apology to the viewers and to SriSri. I believe one can apologise for a mistake or an error. This was neither a mistake nor an error but wilful deception. The apology can pass but if Rajdeep Sardesai has any moral decency left in him he has to let his deputy editor go. Willingly perpetrating a fraud on the viewers is not a mistake that can be covered up by an apology. It is far too serious a crime. It is time for Rajdeep, the Managing Editor, to sack Sagarika. 

PS: Those who missed the episode on CNN-IBN can watch it here on YOUTUBE

Vir Sanghvi - In Defense Of The Corrupt

By Ram Valmiki

It’s very important to know the personal opinions of journalists as that is what influences how they report events or news.  There are many in Indian MSM who are incapable of reporting without their personal biases. Vir Sanghvi is just one of them. It is not a big secret, at least among netizens or as they put it “Internet Hindus” that VS is biased towards Congress and Government. In his recent posts on his blog titled “Don’t blame media, Mr. Kejriwal” and “How the govt lost its way, and its face” he so openly defends the corrupt government and tries to peddle the lie that it’s actually the government that brought out the scams into public. The title chosen for his second post is very misleading.

“I am prepared to agree with Kejriwal when he says that the Shanti Bhushan CD was part of a conspiracy. We know now that the CD was faked and the refusal of the Delhi Police to recognise that it was a cut-and-paste job suggests a certain level of official complicity even if the CD itself was made by non-governmental sources”

Yes Mr VS, it does suggest government conspiracy but how many from your MSM has really taken on government about this issue. The very idea that there exists possibility that a government can conspire against the citizens is disturbing. VS and MSM should have concentrated on this area rather than going behind the Team Anna. Just because CD was made by non-governmental sources does not in any way lessen the sin if those sources were prompted to do so by government?

“ Unless Arvind Kejriwal can somehow convince us that the government hypnotised Kiran Bedi into filing fake reimbursement claims, it is hard to see how this is part of an official conspiracy. The most he can suggest is that official agencies helped in unearthing the evidence. But if this is proof of a government conspiracy then surely he is also a co-conspirator with the government when he makes statements based on reports issued by such government bodies as the CAG. Just because the government digs up accurate information – as the CAG did in the telecom scam – and this information is used by the media and concerned citizens it does not follow that there is any conspiracy”

I could have never imagined an experienced editor and journalist would be able to dole out crap logic ever if I had not come across these posts. It’s really amazing that though “official agencies helped in unearthing the evidence”, what is more surprising is these “official agencies”  one fine day had a dream and then went on to dig stuff of selected people who happen to be criticizing the government.  I am not aware of any complaint against Bedi that led to “official agencies” to investigate and dig up the mess of Bedi. If VS is aware of any such complaint, I would like to know because it’s really frightening to know that “official agencies” can unearth evidences just to please the political masters.  In lay man’s language that would be termed “witch hunting”.

CAG providing his report is NOT similar to “official agencies unearthing evidence” in case of Bedi. It’s the duty of the CAG to audit and provide report of government expenditure. CAG did his routine job and fortunately for India, CAG is a very honest and upright gentleman unlike MMS. Comparing CAG’s job with “official agencies” is totally out of context. As per the law “official agencies” require governmental permission or formal complaint or court order to “unearth evidences”. In Bedi’s case media has not reported any complaint or court order that prompted “unearthing” exercise and hence we have no choice but to believe the government conspired.  CAG does not take orders from executive branch of the government (ministers) where as “official agencies” do.

VS continues his new found CAG argument in his next post as well. We will look into that but before that, let’s just LOL at the statement by him: “On the other hand, you could argue that in the UPA’s second term, the scandals that have emerged have all been uncovered only as a result of the government’s own efforts.” Either VS thinks all his readers have no IQ or VS thinks by vomiting such crap will make him an intellectual journalist.  I mean, how in the holy god of secularism’s name he concludes that a government involved in scandals will uncover its own corruption. On second thoughts, has govt promised him Padma Bhushan next year?

“Let’s take 2G. The scandal only broke as a result of a report by the CAG. You may or may not agree with the CAG’s computation of the loss caused to the exchequer (and it is now clear that even within the CAG’s office, there were disagreements), but you cannot dispute that if there had been no CAG report, there would be no 2G scandal.” This is such a blatant lie that VS is trying to sell here. The scandal was in public even before the CAG report. PILs were filed and Subramanian Swamy moved SC long before the CAG report was tabled. If anything, the CAG report only confirmed the monstrous size of the scandal.  Here is the list of events and timeline as per Wikipedia. Yes Wikipedia is authentic reference, as it constructs the time line based on media reports.

…May 4, 2009: An NGO Telecom Watchdog files complaint to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) on the illegalities in the spectrum allocation to Loop Telecom.

….May 19, 2009: Another complaint was filed to the CVC by Arun Agarwal, highlighting grant of spectrum to Swan Telecom at throwaway prices.

….May, 2010: NGO Centre for Public Interest litigation moves the Delhi High Court seeking investigation into the scam by SIT or CBI.

….Sept 13, 2010: SC asks government, Raja to reply within 10 days to three petitions filed by CPIL and others alleging there was a Rs 70,000 crore scam in the grant of telecom licences in 2008

….Sept 24, 2010: Swamy moves SC seeking direction to the PM to sanction prosecution of Raja.

The SC has numerous times pulled up CBI for shoddy investigation. If not for active role of SC and petitioners like Swamy, the scandal would have been easily buried by the government. Saying government uncovered the scandals is nothing but a joke. “The current CAG, an honest and upright bureaucrat called Vinod Rai, got the job because the UPA Cabinet chose him. His candidacy was strongly pushed by the former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram who knew Rai from his career in the finance ministry.” Justice Santosh Hegde was appointed by the government headed by Yedurappa. This is similar to Vinod Rai being appointed by the UPA government. Fortunately both of them have done justice to their assigned duties. This in no means absolves the governments of their sins. How would have VS responded if BJP claimed that it was their government that uncovered mining scam? It cannot get funnier than that. “So it is with the arrests. Who would have thought it possible that Spectrum King A. Raja would spend so many months in jail. Who would have imagined that the CBI would have the guts to arrest the daughter of M. Karunanidhi, an important Congress ally at a time when the government depended on the DMK’s support for its survival?”

CBI had no choice after being pulled up by SC. With various petitions that Swamy filed with documents he possessed, CBI had to act. Let us ask counter question. If Swamy did not really have possession of documents he claims he has, is he insane to move SC to seek permission to prosecute Chidambaram and also showing intention of even inducting MMS? “In the end, all of the uncovering of the scandal, all of the investigating and all of the arresting has been done by branches of the government. And yet, nobody believes that this government has any interest in uncovering the truth or in fighting corruption. The credit is given to the courts (who can only act once the CBI brings cases to them), to the media and to the opposition. The government itself gets no credit at all.” I don’t understand why VS is so hell bent on using illogical arguments in proving government is anti-corrupt. Is not this the most corrupt government yet? A government that indulges in corruption can no way uncover its own corruption. VS is either acting innocent or its time he took sanyas. I would prefer second option for him for his own good as well as the country.

 “So here’s what the truth is. No, this is not the most corrupt government is history. It is headed by a decent and honest man. And his government has uncovered most of the corruption cases we read about. But this is a government without a visible leader. The Prime Minister has made the mistake of sitting back and watching while his allies have made money. And now, while he should be associating himself with the clean-up, he cowers silently at Race Course Road.”

Well yeah you are right VS. Seriously, if PM was silent when his allies made money, he is as much responsible. That only means for him more than national interests, saving government was important. It’s not surprising though. We are already aware that to save itself, congress can indulge in horse trading. It is an art it has mastered. Cash for votes scam is another hot topic now.

With the title of his second post he misleads the reader to believe he is criticizing the government whereas all he does is mindlessly defend the government. Then he ends with questioning leadership of the government. It is clear where he is heading with his arguments. With Clown Prince rumoured to be made party president and Diggy already announcing in public that it’s high time sycophants like him are ruled by Clown Prince, it’s an attempt to create grounds for MMS to exit and Clown to claim Gaddi. After all, it’s not surprising if Congress realizes that they may not return to power in 2014 and Clown prince would have to wait god knows how many more years to sit on gaddi.

Defamation: ITC V Suhel Seth

Defamation, Slander, Libel are serious issues. However, most cases that are filed in courts are the frivolous ones while the really serious instances of wilful defamation and slander are ignored. Usually, politicians and tall celebrities ignore slander and defamation for the simple reason that the public doesn’t believe what is being said about them. That really is the key to defamation: People must generally believe what is said, it must affect someone’s reputation negatively, it must result in some kind of verifiable damage or loss. That is usually not the case when people or entities are sued.

Some recent instances one can cite is the frequency with which Digvijay Singh has called Baba Ramdev a ‘thug’ alleging the Yoga guru sells spurious medicines. That is a clear case of slander which Ramdev has not acted upon. The most vicious case of slander and defamation in recent times has to be Vir Sanghvi calling Narendra Modi a “mass murderer”. This was repeated by Rajdeep Sardesai in an HT summit in 2007. Both could have been in very serious trouble had Modi chosen to sue but he let it pass. In yet another instance, tainted cop Sanjiv Bhatt slandered Modi by calling him a “common criminal” on TV. This again is a case of slander. And yet again, Modi has chosen to let it pass. But the extraordinary case of defamation filed by ITC against marketing and advertising guru Suhel Seth surely falls into the category of absurd. Read the full report in the Economic Times titled  “ITC sues Suhel Seth for Rs 200 crore overTweets”. Yes, tweets are also a form of publishing and subject to the same defamation laws applicable to any other media. We’ll come to this case in a while. But before that let’s look at the most bizarre case of defamation – one that concerns Larry Flynt, founder of the porn magazine Hustler and religious leader Jerry Falwell. In a parody of Campari ads about the “…first time”, Hustler carried a parody about Falwell.

While Hustler magazine has always been known for its explicit pictures of nude women and for what many consider crude humour, the Protestant minister Jerry Falwell objected to the parody ad the magazine printed in 1983 targeted at him, in which Falwell related having an incestuous encounter….. The real ads were tongue-in-cheek interviews with celebrities talking about their "first time". The ads, which played off the double entendre in the headline (“X talks about his first time”), initially appeared to discuss the star’s first sexual experience before revealing that the discussion actually concerned the subject's first time drinking Campari. Falwell sued Hustler and Larry Flynt but the US Supreme court finally dismissed the case under First Amendment rights and the fact that the public would have known it’s a parody and wouldn’t have believed the satire was true and therefore Falwell didn’t really suffer any damage. It’s true the US free speech law is more or less absolute unlike Indian laws.

So how exactly has Suhel defamed ITC? Here are some tweets that the news report states ITC has claimed as defamatory:

"YC Deveshwar of ITC has had a sterling track-record of avoiding retirement at all costs...he could also be offered to the Maosits (sic) but then...." Okay, so that is a snide remark by an ex-Advertising consultant to ITC, which Suhel Seth is. Is Deveshwar avoiding retirement? In the opinion of Suhel probably and that’s his opinion. “He could also be offered to the Maoists…” Really? Now what sane person would mistake this sarcastic remark as being one that is really intended and meant by Suhel? Would people seriously believe that is what Suhel desires? Hardly so!

"YC Deveshwar of ITC has just been nominated CHAIRMAN ETERNUS (sic)...forget Emeritus..." Hahahha! I hadn’t read this before because I don’t follow Suhel Seth on twitter, but I do find it humourous. Eternus? And that is defamatory? The report says Suhel has even deleted some of his tweets but I can’t see how this play of words is defamatory. Suhel has also stated that his account was hacked but that is a defence that is unlikely to be accepted by courts. However, I don’t believe that argument is even needed.

'Yogi Devesh will teach the insider trading course at Tihar School of Business'. LOL! As Suhel mentions this particular tweet neither mentions Deveshwar (ITC chairman) nor has any reference to ITC. So the mere self-righteous assumption that this tweet refers to the petitioner is a long shot. Even if it did, Tihar is now so much in the news for all the wrong reasons that there is hardly regular user of twitter who hasn’t cracked a joke or two about it.

It is quite possible that Suhel Seth is quite peeved as a businessman in losing the large account of a company like ITC and maybe making some statements in anger. However, I feel ITC should have just sent him a polite letter to refrain rather than filing a suit straightaway. If this were to be the practice all cartoonists and satirists would be facing defamatory cases almost everyday.

The most important thing in defamation is the question whether people or public would believe the statements being made against a person to be real. Have people stopped associating with Deveshwar or ITC because of Suhel's tweets? Have the share prices of ITC dropped because of these tweets? In this case it doesn’t appear to be so and one hopes the case will be mutually settled instead of a court trial. What ITC must also realise is that by filing the suit they have made even more people aware of the tweets of Suhel, which is far worse because many, including me, hadn’t heard about these before the legal action came about.  

A previous case of Barkha Dutt legally handling an unknown blogger made him and his post all the more famous and widely read. Criticism, mild insults, ridicule and sarcasm should be taken in one’s stride or at best responded to in kind. Why bring courts into it… especially for a whopping amount of 200 Crores? Where’s our sense of humour? Locked up in Tihar?

The Rating Game

Another weekend and we have another Friday blogbuster from RajdeepSardesai. This time it’s about the plight of Irom Sharmila and her 11-year old fast against the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). This time, his lament is why Anna Hazare got all the attention and Sharmila didn’t. I usually help Rajdeep rehash his articles, because he's a favourite of mine, but this time I will let it pass. Though there are many holes in his latest article I am for anything that can help Sharmila end her fast and fight for her cause in a different manner. Right now, it’s the battle of TRPs that the media is engaged in with advertisers that is not on front pages or on our screens.

Okay, this was a headline on a news channel today morning (either Headlines Today or CNN-IBN) ‘Kareena Kapoor with all three Khans in a row’. Would any bright intellectual ever explain to me what exactly that is supposed to mean? Why in heavens are news channels more and more like ZoomTV or ImagineTV? It appears the only thing that drives news channels is a terror strike, an Anna type movement or fierce political battles. Their main programming is made up of cricket, Bollywood, cheap thrills, cars and gadgets, Hindu-bashing and if after all that, they find some time, there is news. And they'd even like to think they are the ones mostly making it. On most channels there are no serious documentaries or any serious investigations. The now extinct ‘News of the world’ and that dead dodo ‘Illustrated Weekly’ would be proud of our news channels any day. Kushwant Singh would applaud what our news channels have become. Mindless banter by the fair and lovely manly crowd of Kanwal, Rajdeep, Arnab and the extinct Prannoy! Oh, that includes the ladies too! This is where Rajdeep Sardesai came in lately. TRPs!

Television Audience Measurement (TAM) releases TRPs every week. Now, Rajdeep leads the chorus that wants them to release the ratings monthly and not weekly while advertisers want it weekly, as it currently is. Wait, advertisers even ask: why not every day? The ratings for TV channels are given in time bands from morning till prime time. In case you haven’t looked at the ratings, I recommend you just take a casual look. Mind you, the TAM ratings aren’t released publicly but only to members, who in turn use it to claim superiority in one segment or the other. You might get to see those TRPs as they get slightly dated and not before. As ordinary viewers you and I are not normally concerned about these ratings but for TV channels and advertisers these are their Bibles and Korans. They swear, live and die by it, after they have paid for it.

The recent Anna Hazare movement had TimesNow taking up the cause against govt so strongly that it had other channels playing catch-up. TimesNow took pole position like Demi Moore in Striptease, sort of! Now, Rajdeep and others contend that the weekly ratings negatively affect content on TV. Oh yeah? So if your news content is bad you throw up a Kareena Kapoor and a Khan because the ratings are bad? Yes, indeed! That is pretty much the strategy of all news channels. Saas Bahu, Bhoot Pret, Cuckoo on the couch, Flashback Bollywood, Total Recall – all these are supposed to be worthy of news channels?

“Have you noticed how news channels are getting more and more breathless in their coverage of the news? How anchors tend to shout rather than speak? How every bit of news, no matter how mundane, is deemed worthy of a Breaking News headline? And how sensation is increasingly replacing the sort of thing that used to be regarded as news?” That’s not me. That is one time Radiagate hero Vir Sanghvi writing on his website Counterpoint. I am tempted to ask Vir Sanghvi what he did when he used to be on TV. At best I could call his shows gentle massaging while you snoozed. And I am being kind really. But let it be!

Let’s hear some more from Vir Sanghvi: Currently, the news channels and the advertising industry are locked in a fierce battle over ratings. The news channels say that the current system in which ratings are declared every week is bad. It should be replaced by a system where such ratings are announced only once a month. Nonsense, say advertisers. We are in the business of spending the money our clients give us wisely. We need information that is accurate and up-to-date. In an ideal world, we would like ratings that are instantaneous. At the very least we would prefer the current system of weekly ratings that allows us to judge how well a show is doing. Why should we have to wait a month to find this out?

Let me not bore you with Vir Sanghvi. The larger principle is pretty clear. In the recent discussions about a CAG report damning Air India, every channel had conducted an inquisition on Praful Patel with severe questioning. Not one, I repeat not one channel dared mention the other report on the Reliancescam relating to the KG Basin scam. Why would they? Just as ordinary citizens that they accuse of politician-bashing,  the news channels derive the same TRPs by politician-bashing. After all why would they bite the hand that feeds them? Right? And then, would an interview or screwing some lame executive from Reliance get them the same TRP? In both cases, Praful Patel and Reliance, the end result would have been denial, denial, denial! Given that end result in mind who would the channels pimp with? That’s simply a business decision and not a ‘news’ decision’! That’s the rating game.

Reliance, of course, is a stake holder in some of the news channels. Reliance is also a major advertiser on all the channels in India. So the crimes of Reliance can pass, but Praful Patel, like other politicians, is fair game for our news channels. Anna Hazare knew that pretty well. So, when Rajdeep Sardesai wonders why Irom Sharmila doesn’t get the same media attention he makes the same mistake most journalistic cub idiots make. Corruption is more identifiable with politicians than with the army. That is why the rating game prevents news channels from the issues of Irom Sharmila. The news channels are as corrupt as the political class. Try and figure this – IndiaTV for all the ridicule that is heaped on it for its ‘Bhooth preth, Karma, Punar Jamn’ stories could still be business-wise the most profitable one. If your game is getting eyeballs, real news and truth is not about catching the criminals by their balls. I doubt anyone would pay to see Rajdeep Sardesai in the nude on TV, but hey, make no mistake, if Poonam Pandey makes that announcement - that would break a lot of eyeballs wouldn't it?

So it’s neither about truth nor about news, it is just about the rating game. Our news channels just want to ensure that they remain sexy and attractive for their paymasters. Where do we, the viewers, come in? Go figure!

Living Next Door To Alice

“A shoe-thrower; a swami who wants to raise a private army; a national debate over whether dancing is decorous and a government that went from supplication to abrupt scepticism all in the span of a week…… Oh yes, the circus has come to town. It has plenty of clowns, acrobatics, tight-rope walking, the juggling of balls, fire-eaters and indeed a few lions too. But what it's sorely missing is a Ring Master. It's stuff made for satire. Remember Alice's conversation with the Cheshire Cat? Lewis Caroll wrote in 19th century England, but in the Blunder-land that is today's India, his words would be just as apt. "What sort of people live about here?" Alice had asked the Cat. "In that direction," the Cat said, waving its right paw round, "lives a Hatter: and in that direction," waving the other paw, "lives a March Hare. Visit either you like: they're both mad…..but I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked. Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat:  "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."

If you think I wrote all that, I’d be flattered. But I do not possess such writing flair. Do I even sound like a sweet-smelling, flowery-language, literary type to you? No, I didn’t write that. That was Barkha Dutt in her article  ‘The circus must end’.

Well if I were to write such crap the only Alice that would come to my mind would be from a song. But here is a line I would have used:  “We are all innocent in here…” from The Shawshank Redemption. Over the next few years you are likely to hear that line frequently from members inside the Tihar jail.

And then Barkha goes on to define civil society in LSE terms and even adds “And it has long been pointed out that it was the Congress that set the precedent of giving sweeping powers to voices outside of Parliament, with the creation of the National Advisory Council”. Oh yeah? I would like to know who pointed that out. I cannot recall one media shopkeeper even remotely discussing the NAC or pointing out that it consisted of ‘civil society’, and even some members of dubious background. The NAC coterie didn’t come up for discussion till the ‘civil society’ discussions started. And it’s not the regular media but stray bloggers, like yours truly, who raised the issue of the NAC. Some members from the NAC coterie have frequently appeared on EnditTV but no one has ever asked them about their legitimacy. Well, that is just some trivial detail that I wanted to point out to Barka Dutt.

Here is a quote from an article by M.V. Kamath (former chairman Prasar Bharati and ex-Journalist with the Times group) from March 2003. This is titled Prostitution of Journalism in India:

"The truly insidious thing about accepting bribes to carry news stories is that the reader doesn't know that he's being taken advantage of. When he reads that a newspaper regards a new car as being the best in its range, he has no reason to suspect that the paper has accepted money to make this judgement…….Proprietors who don't tell their readers that they take bribes to manufacture news stories are like thieves who pick your pocket...”

Send in the clowns!

Guess who said that! Well let me help you out. That was the famous Vir Sanghvi being quoted. I wonder where he is now. His statement is quite reflective of the double standard that pervades current journalistic practices. So when an ‘eminent’ media celebrity talks about ‘circus’, ‘ringmasters’ and even ‘lions’ all I can think of is “Send in the clowns” from the media. More than anyone else it is the media that has turned this into a circus by clowning around. For a start Barkha should understand that civil movements, public mobilisation and agitations are bound to be chaotic, disorganised and sometimes even unruly. They are not as well an organised force like the state machinery. One has to carefully read the words of some media celebrities these days (no, I wouldn’t dare call them journalists). Sanghvi’s statement I quoted is a classic example of sweet-smelling double-talk.

So where exactly did the media fail? The media failed in bringing out the truth and the underlying currents behind these agitations and movements. They failed in exposing the insincerity of the government in tackling corruption and black money. Time and time again when issues of corruption are discussed on TV channels the media has basically acted as a platform for the government defence. The fourth estate is supposed to be on the side of the people but instead they have delivered platforms for people like Digvijay Singh to spew venom on people and organisations.

In management there is a principle that is often accepted as a starting point to analyse failure: “The bottleneck is always at the top”. Yes indeed, figuratively and literally. Extraordinary levels of corruption do not come to pass without the participation of top management. Remember Satyam? Remember Enron? Remember Bear Stearns? Remember AIG? Well, it is no different in the government too. That is where the media has been an absolute failure. Failure apart, their silence has been very much like that of a co-conspirator.

The top management in the UPA has to be undoubtedly Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh. There are many allegations against her of having stashed away black money in Switzerland. There are allegations of Quattrochi (of Bofors) being let off. Subramanian Swamy has sought sanction to prosecute Sonia Gandhi. Do you find any of this in our mass media? Like Barkha Dutt all the journalists do is to wax eloquently using Lewis Caroll language to talk about imaginary circuses and issues. Sonia Gandhi is a person who has not responded to any allegations and never spoken to the nation about these issues. She speaks to rural electorate seeking votes. She speaks in places where no questions will be asked. That doesn’t mean the media cannot or should not ask those questions. Zero tolerance for corruption is as sweet as Indira Gandhi’s Garibi Hatao slogan. That zero-tolerance is probably for not tolerating those who run a crusade against corruption and black money and beat them up in the middle of the night. And all Barkha manages to do in her article is to swing from one swinging bar to another like a well-dressed up acrobat. Do you feel entertained?

I guarantee you. The day the media honestly raises questions about Sonia Gandhi, the UPA will have to bow down to demands on action against the corrupt and all the skeletons will start tumbling down. Barkha talks about the blunder-land that is India. Well, she lives close to the epicentre of that blunder-land and given that she lives next door to Alice, she might want to start doing some real journalistic work for a change and start asking real questions to and about the people at the top. Till then “we are all innocent in here…”!