It appears that the UPA Government has not yet recovered from the jolts it has received from the Team Anna.  It is a case of self-inflicted wounds and the same is happening again. It has, through its two prominent ministers, raised questions about what has truly been a pro-people legislation namely RTI. Again, while it is struggling against the near universal condemnation, whether deserved or not, from the main opposition party and the Team Anna whose real agenda is still shrouded in mystery, it has invited criticism by trying to formulate fresh guidelines for the TV Channels. As expected, the Broadcast Editors` Association and the NBA have lost no time in condemning the changes contemplated. These august bodies have never bothered to assess the damage media is doing through its aggressive middle-class evangelism in respect of uncritical and maximalist support to the “civil society”. The media itself has become a player instead of a messenger. It has all but converted truth-telling into profitable market forces and the competition amongst the inter media units is so compelling that it is difficult to tell one from another.  If the Government has lost much of its sheen, the media and particularly the News TV which was once put on a pedestal as a strong bulwark for democracy, too has been reduced to a “hollow” fourth pillar driven more by its own venality and hidden or not so hidden agendas.

The predicament and almost total paralysis of the government may be a delectable situation for the anchors to indulge in their insidious bedlam but it is a betrayal of their profession and disservice to the viewers. The anchors are quick to cross examine the politicians and bureaucrats about their but when it comes to questioning the basis and the veracity of their allegations, the response is not only perfunctory but crass and dismissive. The recourse is to perception or dubious or non-existent sources forgetting the cardinal principle of journalism of investigating and questioning their own or claims or those of the interested parties so that the treatment of both sides is not only equal but fair also. But does it happen?

The New York Times has claimed that Anna Hazare admitted during the interview with their correspondents Lydia Polgreen and Hari Kumar that there has been disunity amongst the senior persons of Anna Team and that he (Anna) has not been getting the proper feedback and that he will soon set the things right. However, Hazare has since denied that he ever made any such comments. The media not only downplayed the NYT interview but has also failed to check with NYT or ask the interviewers about the authenticity of their claims.  Would the media accept such a denial from a politician or a bureaucrat without verification?  No Sir, there would have been crass and puerile discussions in studios with retired worthies and their views suitably tailored to the predetermined stand of the anchors.

Again, the media instead of highlighting chose to downplay the information gleaned through RTI about the enormous difference between the estimates of loss in 2G scam of the Director General of Audit R.P.Singh and the CAG, Vinod Rai. Again there has been no discussion in the studios about the development which may have a direct bearing on the cases under trial and no attempt has been made at all to verify further and build on the information discovered. Is it because the whole campaign against the Government has been built on the alleged mind-boggling loss to the exchequer of Rs.176000 crores? What a contrast from the treatment given by the same media to the CAG report and even the Press Conference of the CAG which caused prime time sensational. Even the disturbing notings on the files of CAG have been given the similar perfunctory, dismissive treatment.

There has been persistent speculation about the nature of support which Team Anna garnered during the 12 day fast of Anna Hazare. The suspicion that the RSS and its many wings had been supporting and even sustaining the movement by organizing free kitchens and providing many other services at Ram Lila ground has been confirmed to some extent by no less than Mohan Bhagwat, the Sar Sangh Chalak of RSS.  The denials by the Team Anna may be taken at face value but must be verified.  It is in the knowledge of the media that the crowd management, their food etc had been taken care of by the RSS volunteers and that the Team Anna was well aware of the situation. They have no choice but to insist on being apolitical and above electoral politics to maintain their synthetic saintly aura. Yet, the likes of Rajdeep Sardesais and Arnab Goswamis ask for proof for the claims made by Digvijay Singh but are selective in using the same bench-mark for Team Anna. It is apparent now that in thanks giving, the Team Anna is making sure that BJP does benefit electorally by their campaign against Congress in Hisar bye-election, notwithstanding their dubious and too clever statements about being focused only on the Jan Lokpal Bill. It will not be wrong to speculate that the Team Anna, in tandem with the BJP, keeps shifting the goal posts since their aim is to influence the outcome of the next General Election and not really the JLP. Their affinity with the Rightist forces is the natural by-product of their belief in meritocracy, the inadequacy of the Constitutional Institutions and the oligarchic governance.

Aravind Kejriwal has made almost “oracular” claim in an interview with Karan Thapar that Anna Hazare is above the Parliament and so is Kejriwal or Thapar or you and me. Even Kiran Bedi has claimed that Anna is India and India is Anna. This is a dangerous proposition.  WE THE PEOPLE, as a collective and not as a person or an individual however eminent or “saintly” are sovereign.  Individuals must bow to the primacy of the Constitution. Our representative democracy can deliver goods only through the collective will of “we the people” ascertained through elections of 543 members of Parliament and that ascertained will is the sovereign will. Advocacy of any deviation from this will not only play havoc with the governance of the country but is an open invitation to the anarchy. However, the anchors do not find such topics worthy of discussions for it may and does not fit in with the portrayal of their “icons” of Civil Society.

It will be undesirable if the Government persists in its knee-jerk reactions and in its present almost dysfunctional state to muzzle the freedom of speech. Admittedly our media has lost its professional ethics.  It has become increasingly irresponsible (admittedly it is a generalization for there are even now some exceptions which are true to the profession) and its quest for trps and eye-balls has created a stink and miasma which the country does not deserve. Yet, it must be asked to do the course correction only through persuasion, coaxing, discussions and consensual approach. The media with muzzled freedom is much more dangerous than a free and irresponsible media.

PS : It may not be out of place to add that over the last two days, the fervour of some of the media houses in support of Team Anna has moderated a little. It is noticeable.  Also, the word “presumptive” in respect of the alleged loss in 2G scam is back in discourse.

(Pramod Kumar retired from Glaxo and now lives in Goa from where he keeps an eagle eye on Media and can be reached at kumar.pramod1939@rediffmail.com)

The pervasive cynicism, despondency and disenchantment  amongst the people already existed  in some measure on account of general corruption but these have now been amplified manifold by the way the CAG report on 2G spectrum allotment has put the loss at an unimaginably high figure. CAG Vinod Rai has qualified the loss with the word “presumptive” but it did not affect the opposition or the media. They simply dismissed the qualification. It is perhaps one of the reasons for the traction Team Anna got in its agitation against corruption.

The CAG report on 2G spectrum allotment has come under scrutiny after Siddharth Zorabi of CNBC/TV18 channel revealed, through RTI, intriguing and surprisingly huge variations in the estimated losses. The Director General of Audit R.P. Singh, who actually conducted the audit, put the loss as Rs. 2645 crores whereas CAG Vinod Rai in his final report put the “presumptive” loss as 176000 crores, a figure shockingly enormous. It was further implied but never claimed at high profile press conferences held by the CAG that someone has derived huge pecuniary benefits from this loss to the exchequer. This perverted the whole discussion about the 2G spectrum allotment and for the media it was manna from the heaven. But this shook the nation and all but paralyzed the government.

The subject of discussion held on 4.10.11 in the programme INDIA TONIGHT at CNBC/TV18 was these, yet to be fully explained, revelations. The participants were Sidharth Zorabi, a spokesperson each from BJP and Congress and the ubiquitous in studios, the retired Cabinet Secretary T.S.R. Subramaniam. The spokespersons stuck to their brief and did not deviate from their set pieces. However, Subramanian was more than his usual strident self and did surprise by his vigorous defense of CAG by claiming that being a Constitutional Authority, he is beyond scrutiny just like a Supreme Court Judge.  He even called for, with raised decibels, that the report is akin to a Supreme Court verdict, and should be respected thus.  He even demanded that CAG should be given the powers of holding people to contempt, if necessary. If so, then what is the role of PAC or even a JPC? The former Cabinet Secretary making such a demand is indeed disturbing.

Zorabi further revealed during the discussion some as yet unexplained notings on the file. These related to the apparent dissatisfaction and regret about Singh having approached Department of Telecommunications about some matters. Rai`s noting “I wish we had not written to the Dot” and Rekha Gupta`s (the Deputy CAG) noting “please convey CAG`s observations to DG (Singh). Also please reiterate that he is not to write to Secretary, Dot, on this or any other matter”.   The real ramifications of these notings are yet to emerge but Subramaniam had nothing to say about these. Yet he berated the present bureaucracy as bootlickers which kowtow to the political bosses for personal advancement. He claimed that the bureaucrats now reach the top not by being upright or moved by public service but by being on the right side of the powers that be. It is however moot as to how the lot now rubbishing the present bureaucracy reached the top in their era?

Subramanian also referred to the good that former Chief Election Commissioner, T.N.Seshan had done to the electoral process by his upright/authoritarian methods. Such results always earn plaudits but these are short-lived because of the means adopted to achieve the objective. Remember, during the Emergency in mid- seventies, people were very happy with trains being on time and the govt. offices working to the satisfaction of the people. But how long did that admiration last. Similarly in case of Seshan too, his powers had to be curbed by raising the number of Election Commissioners to three.

The other astounding observation Subramaniam made was that the revelation through RTI are only to besmirch the reputation of CAG just like the government has attempted to do in case of Baba Ram Dev and Anna Hazare. He forgot that the government has had no role to play in this matter and the person who exposed these things was sitting beside him in the studio. Astonishingly, Karan Thapar did not challenge Subramanian`s observation.  The channel cannot be in cahoots with the executive.  Perhaps, the channels allow the retired bureaucrats to have their say since the agenda is common? Have these worthies become complicit in the channels` pursuit of their venal or other interests?

It is pertinent to mention here that there are bureaucrats and bureaucrats. Earlier also there have been CAGs like T.C. Chaturvedi,  (remember BOFORs controversy) who was first made a member of the Rajya Sabha and then elevated to the post of Governor of Karnataka by NDA Government. Strange things keep happening in the polity and frustrated bureaucrats have found a haven in the studios where they fume, fret and ridicule the government of the day and perhaps get paid for their performance. The channels, epitomes of negativity, welcome them with open arms. Yet there are persons like Harsh Mander, Aruna Roy, Jai Prakash Narain (and many more who believe in making their contribution to the well-being of the people quietly) who resigned from the IAS for they found it difficult to compromise their ideas of social commitment and public service. They too criticize the government of the day and even suggest ways to solve the myriad problems India faces. Yet their tone is never denunciatory nor do they seek prime time sensationalism.

(Pramod Kumar retired from Glaxo and now lives in Goa from where he keeps an eagle eye on Media and can be reached at kumar.pramod1939@rediffmail.com)

The belief is that the information not only empowers citizens but also leads to greater transparency and efficiency in the working of various institutions in a functioning democracy. The media and the recently enacted Right to Information (RTI) are two very good sources for empowerment of common people. The RTI is still in a nascent stage and has been successful, to some extent, in meeting common grievances of ordinary people, but it may be premature to evaluate its full impact on the democratic institutions.

However, it is  evident that the changes taking place in the media are not all that wholesome. Apart from the slow “tabloidization” of news channels and hawking of the first page for lucre  even by print media, the professional standards have degenerated somewhat during and after the Anna Hazare-led anti-corruption agitation. The other reason is perhaps the intense competition among the media organisations, both print and electronic.  Then there are the competing interests/affiliations of different media groups.

File photo of coverage of Mumbai terror attack

However, the media`s uncritical support to the crusade against corruption and the abject attempts of the establishment to curb it instead of admitting the legitimacy of Anna`s cause, if not the manner of combating it and the success of the media in magnifying manifold its impact of, has generated some dangerous and unseemly ideas and tendencies among the controllers of the media. In keeping with the prevalent social and political milieu, one should not be oblivious to the fact that the media too  is being afflicted with corruption and becoming a seeker and dispenser of favours.

In a democracy, the fourth pillar enjoys the right to free press and freedom of expression. As with any right, there are corresponding obligations and responsibilities too.  The attempts to limit or curtail the free press have, no doubt, been made in the past but have failed because of the unstinting support of the ordinary people.  The media has discarded the cardinal principle of the journalism that it should  only be a critical, investigative, questioning, impartial observer and not a partisan in the political, social and economic activities.  It is only a messenger and not a player. The anchors’ incessant badgering, hectoring of the politicians and the confused and ill-prepared presentation of facts and news muddy the situation further. Yet, the anchors and editors have become not only arrogant but, perhaps being keenly aware of the power they now wield,  have also sought to play a bigger role in fashioning the future of the country without being accountable to the people.  The tools they employ to achieve their objectives also are questionable. Apart from the usual tricks of trade like pulling and pushing a particular person/news, edited bytes and even the suppression of news, the two most abused words in this respect are “perception” and the “sources”.  The freedom of expression, if not used judiciously, has the  built  in danger of leading to chaos and confusion.

The beleaguered Congress party-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) has itself contributed a great deal to the problems it is now facing through self-inflicted wounds. It has been less than cohesive in explaining and then defending the telecom policy it has followed till 2008. It should have explained forcefully in the public debate that the policy issue and the irregularities in its implementation are two separate things. It should have demanded that the case is in the courts and the law should be allowed to settle it.  Its decision with regard to the appointment of the chief vigilance commissioner (CVC) and the  methods it employed to deal with agitations have revealed astounding ineptness and have earned it  just opprobrium.  The indications of two ministers squabbling too did not help the UPA.

Our anchors are not given to working or researching a subject well and are prone to push it on the basis of superficial knowledge or understanding by using the “perception” or “source” to hide their inadequacy.  They had already polluted the public debate about the 2G scam by dropping the word “presumptive” from the alleged loss of revenue as calculated by the CAG. It did not seem that they were aware of or willing to understand the difference between a telecom policy formulated for achieving increased telephonic density and not for revenue.

The News TV allowed itself to be mesmerized by the figure of loss of Rs 1.76 lac crores to the exchequer. It clubbed together the policy and the implementation of the policy and created an atmosphere where such nuances were lost and kept on stoking the cynicism about the politics, politicians and even democratic functioning.

The News TV has done the same thing about the note, which was placed in the Supreme Court indicating that the then finance minister could have stalled the execution of the telecom policy if he had put his foot down. Since the note was prepared by the Finance Ministry and seen by the incumbent finance minister, the media jumped to the conclusion that the UPA is a riven entity and lacks cohesion.

In a democracy, the dissensions and difference of opinion are a given. It will be a misfortune if our functional democracy becomes regimented. The media too joined the bandwagon of opposition parties, which not only questioned the policy but also the integrity of the then finance minister. There is no way of confirming such impressions, but these impressions get amplified if the channels keep at it 24X7. The anchors kept on rubbishing any claims of there being no rift. They excelled not in appreciating nuances but also in asking loaded questions. Any answer was the grist to their mill for denouncing the polity, governance and painting a sorry picture of the country. In situations like these, the lynch-mob mentality is hard to miss.

The daily trials of the government in studios where a phalanx of retired bureaucrats and experts who have failed to get or have lost the sinecures they cornered after retirement (do they get appropriate honorarium for their efforts?) is always willing to supplement the efforts of the anchors to tear the three pillars of the democracy apart. No one is spared, be it politicians or the bureaucrat.  The ambience has become so miasmic that those who are supposed to take decisions are afraid of taking them leading to a sort of paralysis of governance. Unfortunately, we are living in an era of leaks and negative constructs where not only the efficiency but the integrity is questionable scrutiny.

In such situations the very stability of a nation is at stake. Notwithstanding the many faux pas of the UPA, has the media even tried to explore the likelihood of forces like the corporate (unhappy with NAC) and the Rightists having become hyper-active under the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) coming together to derail it.

The media’s such actions are a great disservice to the country at a time when the economic situation worldwide is in doldrums and the nations must be ready to take swift action to meet the unforeseen challenges. Our anchors/editors should be less partisan, less sensational, not so full of their own importance and be more appreciative of the nuances, subtleties and responsibilities of decision making in a democracy. Ruling a country with its myriad problems is not easy, and it should be realized by all, including the media, political parties, crusaders and general people.

(Pramod Kumar retired from Glaxo and now lives in Goa from where he keeps an eagle eye on Media and can be reached at kumar.pramod1939@rediffmail.com)

Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s three day fast was nothing short of spectacle. Keeping with the megalomania of Modi our 24X7 news channels lost no time in jumping to grab an opportunity for their TRPs and give the spectacular jamboree full coverage.

Full page advertisements in all leading newspapers to propagating his ‘cause’ was clearly a PR exercise aimed at image makeover. The Govt. also took recourse to technology to appeal to the general public to watch its webcast and to give missed calls (toll free) to join the gala event.

It is perhaps for the first time, in our history, that a ruler has gone on fast to promote harmony, unity, brotherhood and peace which got disrupted primarily because of action or inaction of his government.

Media allowed itself to be overwhelmed by the arrangements and is, in turn, doing exactly the same to its viewers. It has resorted to every conceivable trick to emphasize the support for Modi, in all sections of society, including Muslims who were at the receiving end of the ‘anger’ of the Hindus after the Godhra carnage.

Cameras thus  lingered on the skull-cap wearing men and burqa –clad women who had been brought to the site of the fast by different agencies of the government from different parts of the state so that any doubt about Mr. Modi`s acceptability to the victim community of 2002 carnage is laid to rest. There were religious leaders of Hindus, Christians with their crosses prominently displayed, Muslims, Sikhs present on the stage to bless Modi and to help him not develop or retain any ‘ill-feeling or bitterness towards those who defamed Gujarat or Modi by making false allegations’.  The missing supporters at the jamboree were the corporates but it was apparent that they had allowed the news TV to do their bidding in support of Modi.

It is apparent that the build-up, from the various interviews which Narendra Modi granted to the luck few, was no better than PR.  Obsequious ’senior’ journalists were in competition with each other to show deference to and win approbation of the Hindu Hriday Samrat, who was trying to hoodwink the people of the country to believe that his saintly persona got besmirched by only  those who flourish on divisive, anti-national and vote-bank politics.

In this connection, Rahul Kanwal of Headlines Today outdid almost everyone else. He interviewed apparent prime ministerial candidate in Hindi so that he could ‘address a larger section of the people’. The tone and tenor of Kanwal`s questioning was so much at variance with what he normally does when he is interviewing others,  was something hard to miss. His brazenness for pleasing the interviewee was blatant and outrageous.

Narendra Modi claimed in the interviews that he had commiserated with the victims even in 2002 but the media did not give it proper coverage. There was no interjection, which the arrogant anchors/editors are prone to do frequently whether his references to “Hum Panch Hamare Pachhis” amounted to sharing the pain of victims? Whether his calling a Muslim dominated ghetto Juhupura “a mini Pakistan” was to strengthen the harmony, unity and brotherhood? If the theory that “every action has an equal and opposite reaction theory” is symbolic of a just and fair administration?

None of the TV reporters/editors even asked why was it necessary to bring out the religion of the Chief Election Commissioner, by laying stress on his full name James Michael Lyngdoh during the elections which followed?

Modi has claimed, in a speech he made at the beginning of the fast, that he had feels the pain then and now also it is being felt by him. But he has been vilified and abused for over nine years. He picked up the stones that were thrown at him and used these to build a staircase to the current prosperity of the people of Gujarat. This may well be true but the stones on which the prosperity has been built were not those which were thrown at him for the victims have been too frightened, too petrified by what they have gone through, to lift even a finger. Stones came from the ruined houses, destroyed lives, criminal discrimination and thwarted dreams/aspirations of “equal in all respects as per our Constitution” citizens of Gujarat.

Even earlier, the media had given enough prominence to the US Congress Research Service report which referred to Gujarat as “perhaps India`s best example of effective governance and impressive development is found in Gujarat where controversial Mr. Modi has streamlined economic processes, removing red tape and curtailing corruption in ways that have made the state a key driver of national economic growth”. The media had blurred the distinction between US Congressional Report and report by a research service aimed at briefing Congressmen and senators about issues. It also ignored the clarification given by the CSR that their observations were based on secondary sources and not primary sources. Only The Hindu newspaper, to its credit, had pointed this important aspect.

The incessant propaganda about the good governance has been punctured many times by the Supreme Court by transferring cases outside the state and constituting various Special Investigation Teams.

The media of course did indulge in its favourite pass time by speculating half-heartedly about the real purpose of the Fast. The speculation was limited to the re-invention of Modi persona, his prime ministerial ambitions, his position in the BJP and the likely effect of all these on the national polity

It is certainly to the credit of media that Modi today is mascot of Gujarati asmita (honour) and ‘fast’ tracking to take centre stage in national politics as well.

The media in general and News TV in particular have been rightly critical of the maladroit handling by the UPA Government of the Team Anna. The government has not only been inept but has been purblind too to the increasing misgivings and frustrations of the general public about the scale and extent of the corruption, both big ticket and at ground level.

However, news TV`s coverage of the Anna Hazare saga`s heady mix of money, hyper-nationalism and religion, a lofty cause, constant invocation of Gandhian piety and, essentially middle class frenzy has been not only uncritical, unbalanced, biased but has distorted the political discourse too. The uneasy feeling that the attitude and language of the Team Anna is becoming more and more authoritarian and strident is reinforced by the kinds of threats that are being held out to the politicians and many unseemly assertions and dubious claims being made almost every day.

While the government has been hauled over the burning coals mercilessly by the media, the treatment given to the Team Anna is inexplicably and strangely the exact opposite. The government has been taken to task for its flip-flops, for appearing somewhat lukewarm about the menace of corruption, arresting Anna Hazare and then releasing him, labeling Hazare as corrupt and then extolling his saintly qualities. But for Team Anna, it has been a coverage which has simply overlooked what is wrong with their campaign and instead they have been built up as saviours who will eradicate the corruption.  No attention has been paid to the imperious dictates issued by them almost daily. The Team Anna`s claim that “we have a democratic right to protest and place our views in public” is a proposition no one can have any problem with and has been upheld vociferously by the media also. But their demand “Anna will remain on fast until his bill (jan lokpal bill) is adopted within the time frame set up by him or amended only with his permission” reveals an anti-democratic and a frightening mindset. But media has no time to pay attention to this aspect.

Ms. Arundhati Roy has pointed out in her article “I`d rather not be Anna” in The Hindu  that for completely different reasons and in completely different ways, one could say that the Maoists and the Team Anna through their bill have one thing in common – they seek the overthrow of the Indian state. In the case of Team Anna, it may be and it does appear to be an exaggeration. But the methods they have devised to achieve their objective do have the latent and sinister potential for destroying our howsoever flawed democracy and destabilizing the state. The Team Anna has an agenda, unclear so far, since it is natural to presume that they do have their plans beyond this bill. Has our media indulged in any speculation in this regard as they regularly do with the politicians? Have they tried to investigate and analyze this aspect of their movement?

About the unseemly assertions and threats being made from the Ramlila ground and being purveyed to  the viewers non-stop, the reference is to the assertions made on the morning of 25/8/11 by Kiran Bedi, one of the triumvirate, that there is no longer any government in control of the country. The Team does not know who to negotiate with regard to their demands. This was a preposterous statement since only a day earlier the Team Anna had held discussions with the Leader of the Loksabha, Mr. Pranab Mukherjee. While the government, after the meeting, claimed that the discussions will continue, the Team Anna put paid to any such prospects by making extremely critical statements and claims. It was even asserted that Mr. Mukherjee was unconcerned about Mr. Hazare`s health and dismissed it with the remark that it was Team Anna`s concern and not his. The veracity of the claims made by the Team Anna was challenged by no less than Mr. Mukherjee himself. It appeared to be the repetition of what used to happen after every meeting of the drafting committee. But it does lead to a suspicion that at least this triumvirate was less than enthusiastic about the discussions.

On 26/8/11 in the early evening,  on the main platform at the Ramlila ground Ms Bedi was exhorting the supporters not to do anything on Saturday, the day fixed for the debate on the Lokpal Bill in Parliament, but watch the proceedings of Lok Sabha on TV and take note of who is against the Team`s bill and who is supporting it. If you are away from home ask your family to take careful notes on who betrayed you or fulfilled your mandate. She kept on repeating it again and again. The implicit threat was quite obvious and our news TV relayed live all this tirade of Ms Bedi against the members of Parliamanet. One cannot be sure if it is a breach of privilege of the members but the implied threat is not democratic. It is a dangerous trend and must be nipped in the bud otherwise every future demagogue will try this tactic to stifle independent thinking. And later in the evening Ms. Bedi again indulged in cheap theatrics and in ridiculing and lampooning the politicians in crudest possible language.

The news TV, particularly the TIMES NOW has been steadily lowering the standards of professional journalism. It has not been an advocate for the Team Anna`s cause but an accomplice now. That incessant running of the video footage of a weak, sickly, supine Mr Hazare is used to stoke the emotions and anger amongst his supporters is utterly distasteful if not ghoulish. The discussions in the studios have remained shallow and one sided thanks to the anchors. The dissent is openly discouraged. CNN-IBN and NDTV have allowed, although hesitantly, some dissenting voices to share the talk time but Times Now and NewsX, it appears, are following what Mr. Rupert Murdoch does with his media empire in USA and UK. The concern being expressed by the scholars like Kancha Ilaiah and Chander Bhan is not being conveyed to the viewers is again a betrayal of professional journalism.

Another disquieting fact of this movement is the apparent lack of tolerance of dissent and the autocratic approach.. Even Mr. Hazare himself has said that “selection is better than election” in a video clip called “I am Anna” shown on NDTV only for a short while last week. It is unforgivable for NDTV to have pulled it off from their screen so quickly and one wonders at whose behest? We should have no hesitation in welcoming the participation of middle class in political process if the urge is genuine and if it remains within the framework of representative democracy. It is in media`s interest also to preserve the sovereignty of our Parliament and the supremacy of our Constitution.

I went to bed in a terrible world and awoke inside a worse one. At the time of writing, details of the Norwegian atrocity are still emerging, although the identity of the perpetrator has now been confirmed and his motivation seems increasingly clear: a far-right anti-Muslim extremist who despised the ruling party.

Presumably he wanted to make a name for himself, which is why I won’t identify him. His name deserves to be forgotten. Discarded. Deleted. Labels like “madman”, “monster”, or “maniac” won’t do, either. There’s a perverse glorification in terms like that. If the media’s going to call him anything, it should call him pathetic; a nothing.

On Friday night’s news, they were calling him something else. He was a suspected terror cell with probable links to al-Qaida. Countless security experts queued up to tell me so. This has all the hallmarks of an al-Qaida attack, they said. Watching at home, my gut feeling was that that didn’t add up. Why Norway? And why was it aimed so specifically at one political party? But hey, they’re the experts. They’re sitting there behind a caption with the word “EXPERT” on it. Every few minutes the anchor would ask, “What kind of picture is emerging?” or “What sense are you getting of who might be responsible?” and every few minutes they explained this was “almost certainly” the work of a highly-organised Islamist cell.

In the aftermath of the initial bombing, they proceeded to wrestle with the one key question: why do Muslims hate Norway? Luckily, the experts were on hand to expertly share their expert solutions to plug this apparent plot hole in the ongoing news narrative.

Why do Muslims hate Norway? There had to be a reason.

Norway was targeted because of its role in Afghanistan. Norway was targeted because Norwegian authorities had recently charged an extremist Muslim cleric. Norway was targeted because one of its newspapers had reprinted the controversial Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

Norway was targeted because, compared to the US and UK, it is a “soft target” – in other words, they targeted it because no one expected them to.

When it became apparent that a shooting was under way on Utoya island, the security experts upgraded their appraisal. This was no longer a Bali-style al-Qaida bombing, but a Mumbai-style al-Qaida massacre. On and on went the conjecture, on television, and in online newspapers, including this one. Meanwhile, on Twitter, word was quickly spreading that, according to eyewitnesses, the shooter on the island was a blond man who spoke Norwegian. At this point I decided my initial gut reservations about al-Qaida had probably been well founded. But who was I to contradict the security experts? A blond Norwegian gunman doesn’t fit the traditional profile, they said, so maybe we’ll need to reassess . . . but let’s not forget that al-Qaida have been making efforts to actively recruit “native” extremists: white folk who don’t arouse suspicion. So it’s probably still the Muslims.

Soon, the front page of Saturday’s Sun was rolling off the presses. ”Al-Qaeda” Massacre: NORWAY’S 9/11 – the weasel quotes around the phrase “Al Qaeda” deemed sufficient to protect the paper from charges of jumping to conclusions.

By the time I went to bed, it had become clear to anyone within glancing distance of the internet that this had more in common with the 1995 Oklahoma bombing or the 1999 London nail-bombing campaign than the more recent horrors of al-Qaida.

While I slept, the bodycount continued to rise, reaching catastrophic proportions by the morning. The next morning I switched on the news and the al-Qaida talk had been largely dispensed with, and the pundits were now experts on far-right extremism, as though they’d been on a course and qualified for a diploma overnight.

Some remained scarily defiant in the face of the new unfolding reality. On Saturday morning I saw a Fox News anchor tell former US diplomat John Bolton that Norwegian police were saying this appeared to be an Oklahoma-style attack, then ask him how that squared with his earlier assessment that al-Qaida were involved. He was sceptical. It was still too early to leap to conclusions, he said. We should wait for all the facts before rushing to judgment. In other words: assume it’s the Muslims until it starts to look like it isn’t – at which point, continue to assume it’s them anyway.

If anyone reading this runs a news channel, please, don’t clog the airwaves with fact-free conjecture unless you’re going to replace the word “expert” with “guesser” and the word “speculate” with “guess”, so it’ll be absolutely clear that when the anchor asks the expert to speculate, they’re actually just asking a guesser to guess. Also, choose better guessers. Your guessers were terrible, like toddlers hypothesising how a helicopter works. I don’t know anything about international terrorism, but even I outguessed them.

As more information regarding the identity of the terrorist responsible for the massacre comes to light, articles attempting to explain his motives are starting to appear online. And beneath them are comments from readers, largely expressing outrage and horror. But there are a disturbing number that start, “What this lunatic did was awful, but . . .”

These “but” commenters then go on to discuss immigration, often with reference to a shaky Muslim-baiting story they’ve half-remembered from the press. So despite this being a story about an anti-Muslim extremist killing Norwegians who weren’t Muslim, they’ve managed to find a way to keep the finger of blame pointing at the Muslims, thereby following a narrative lead they’ve been fed for years, from the overall depiction of terrorism as an almost exclusively Islamic pursuit, outlined by “security experts” quick to see al-Qaida tentacles everywhere, to the fabricated tabloid fairytales about “Muslim-only loos” or local councils “banning Christmas”.

We’re in a frightening place. Guesswork won’t lead us to safety.

BH inputs: Indian national daily Indian Express too in its lead story had attributed it to the global jihad, but when things got clear later, although published the story did not retract its earlier version.

Source: The Guardian