Politics and political speeches are made and covered and 'uncovered'.
But what about Journalism of that era and who made working atmosphere Toxic ?
PM Narendra Modi visits Shri Ram College of Commerce (SRCC) in Delhi and made an impressive speech recalling 2013 venture.
"Especially people are remembering my 2013 address (at the same venue). People have listened to it again, read it again. It is possible that the new generation has also revisited it. That speech, I can say, became a wave, a movement. And even today, 13–14 years later, the impact of that gathering, that address, remains," the Prime Minister said.
But as a blogger in this piece; I seek to recall and debate the 'beginning of a decay process' in Indian journalism. Modi had come to Delhi shortly after his third time election win in Gujarat - December 2012. He was just a chief minister of Gujarat and the debate persisted whether BJP should make him PM-candidate for the 2014 polls.
Within BJP, L K Advani and his coterie including Late Sushma Swaraj were against any such move. Nitish Kumar was a powerful NDA leader and despite efforts made by Arun Jaitley to convince him to back Modi; the Bihar chief minister had red-flagged the move.
Modi's speech had an epoch-making impact within hours. The next day 'The Hindu' newspaper did not cover Modi's speech with the importance it deserved. The newspaper had focused only on some Lathi charge and scuffle between pro-Left students who had come near the college campus and clashed with police. They were raising slogans against Modi.
Here comes the interesting (or rather Toxic) part of Indian journalism -- reportedly the then editor of 'The Hindu' said -- there was no need to cover the speech because 'chief ministers keep visiting Delhi and there was no big deal about Gujarat chief minister making any speech to college students in the capital'.
The decision to omit the speech from 'Page 1' sparked public discussion at the time. Then-editor Siddharth Varadarajan defended the choice on social media, stating that the paper refused to follow the media herd and considered other front-page news stories more newsworthy than a state Chief Minister's address at a college.
“We refuse to be part of the herd. Every story on our p1 was far more newsworthy than a speech by a CM to a Delhi college" -- was 'The Hindu' argument.
'The Hindu' (for practical purpose the group is most anti-Hindu and made headlines again during coverage of Rafale purchase row) ... felt there were more important items than Modi’s speech.
The lead story in the paper was P Chidambaram’s comment on the army and AFSPA, the second was a story on the Sebi-Sahara imbroglio and the third was on the violence in a dalit hostel in Patna.
Mumbai's popular tabloid 'Mid-Day' was another paper which ignored Modi.
Not just on the front page, but completely.
“Publishing a Narendra Modi news item - especially Wednesday's speech in New Delhi - on Page 1 is based upon two assumptions: one, that Mr Modi will be the Prime Ministerial candidate for the NDA; and two, that he will indeed become PM after the next general election. Both are, well, assumptions,” Sachin Kalbag, editor, Mid-Day, said to Firstpost.
 |
| 2013 - Gesture said it all |
“We did not have Mr Modi on Page 1 because chief ministers make speeches all the time. It is part of their job. I don't remember taking a Maharashtra CM's speech ever on our Page 1, even though we are a city newspaper," Mid Day editor further stated.
I have my personal take too. I was with 'The Statesman' those days. By afternoon after the speech was over, I rushed to the city office (Barakhamba Road, The Statesman building) and punched the story.
I do not remember exactly the context. But in the copy I also mentioned Dr Murli Manohor Joshi. In some paras down the page - I just typed Joshi.
When the copy reached our Resident Editor Usha Mahadevan's desk -- she was furious. She called me and almost shouted asking - "Which Joshi you mean; now I have to call you and ask these. You should read the copy again". I was surprised. Normally she used to be one of the fine female colleagues I have worked with.
But I also told my self - lately she has started coming under the influence of a huge (joker/donkey) in the crowd (office colleagues).
That fellow was a die-hard 'chamcha of Janardhan Dwivedi' and of course a Congress loyalist.
In a fixed presser; he got the opportunity to ask a question to Sonia on the line Dwivedi had wanted.
Some of his copies - if not most - reflected loyalties of Mukul Wasnik variety and would even put Congress magazine 'Sandesh' into shame.
When Ram Vilas Paswan in 2009 flayed Ahmed Patel over alliance setback between LJP and the Congress; the story filed by me was killed.
Smriti Irani's criticism of Rahul Gandhi was repeatedly killed too. That, however, did not save Rahul being defeated at Amethi in 2019 elections.
Thus, the influence on madam Usha was understood. It was powerful. One colleague (now in Himachal) asked me -- "why do you look so angry".
Probably, my face spoke it all. I said - "Modi's speech is a winner. He has certainly displeased this Sickularism gang and probably the huge D. has spoiled madam's mood but influenced her thought".
I also added: "I may predict; if Modi becomes Prime Minister; I will have to quit The Statesman".
Believe me. It was a prophetic statement from me.
November last week 2015, I was almost compelled to put in papers.
'Toxic' thing used to reach its peak. The Saturday meetings turned mini war rooms. And top of that many of us could not tolerate a D trying to educate ethics when he himself every day and with every copy displayed his disapproval of Narendra Modi as the Prime Minister.
Slowly, many of us quit the paper.
When it comes to jobs and joblessness in India; people often say - Indians are jobless by choice. At least in my case - I am freelancer/blogger by choice. On the other hand, those who try to project that the Narendra Modi rule has 'destroyed' media are somehow surviving despite their die-hard and even blind loyalty towards Sonia Gandhi-Rahul duo or the Sickular ecosystem.
'Mamata aapa' was one favourite of this anti-Modi club. Most of them saw a potential Prime Minister in her.
May 3, 2026 election vote-count 'ousted' her from Kolkata's seat of power and in Delhi and elsewhere many such journos lost appetite for days.
It was a case of huge setback for 'Fish fry' Journalism.
I am not defending Modi Bhakts especially in TV channels.
But it was also rumoured that a popular news anchor asked to step down was 'ensured' the job again in the same channel after Mamata Banerjee (then West Bengal CM) did her part.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh also has a set of admirers among Delhi journalists due to his benevolent nature. I covered him for long when he was Rural Development Minister but could never become his 'friend'.
One 'Rural Development' correspondent got badly identified and his beat was later changed. Jairam holds a typical record. In his own words -- as he told us - his mother had disapproved his comments that Toilets are cleaner than Hindu temples.
Some of us had protested over his remarks. He asked me : "You must be a Brahmin or an upper caste".
Did Oscar Wilde say: "Journalism is unreadable, and literature is not read."
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment