Category: COLUMNS

By Ranjona Banerji

Sexual harassment of young females by senior male editors is one of the Indian media’s worst-kept secrets. Everybody knows several stories of young women being propositioned, coerced and threatened by men in positions of power far above them in the pecking order. And everyone also knows that those that complain usually lose their jobs. And yet, for all its moral posturing about problems elsewhere, the Indian media has been satisfied with doing little but some private outraging.

Will the Tehelka story change all that? At first glance, it seems that Tehelka tried to follow the old path of cover up and forget about it, after a young female reporter accused the magazine’s editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal of sexually assaulting her. The responses from managing editor Shoma Chaudhury suggest that the top management decided to close ranks with their boss. Tejpal himself “recused” himself from the magazine in an extremely ill-judged letter in florid prose full of Biblical and religious overtones. He talked of atonement, penance and laceration all of which would be significantly poetic if it wasn’t so vomit-inducing.

The story broke through the social media after news emerged that Tejpal had stepped down for six months. But it was soon clear that this stepping down or atonement was nothing but smoke and mirrors. Tejpal’s letter talked of misreading a situation and taking responsibility for an unfortunate incident. Had he looked leeringly at a young girl and asked her to come up and look at his etchings, “misreading” might perhaps apply. But what Tejpal did – according the young woman’s complaints doing the rounds on the Internet – was sexual assault and could be construed as rape.

This makes Chaudhury’s responses to the media even more inexplicable if not inexcusable. What happened is not an “internal” matter and a questioning media cannot be dismissed as being more upset than the “aggrieved party”. Indeed, Chaudhury’s statement that the “aggrieved party” is satisfied was countered by the complainant telling news channels that she was far from satisfied and she was angry that her complaint had not been circulated internally the way Tejpal’s was.

There has been some discussion that Chaudhury being female should have stood by her staffer and understood her pain. However history demonstrates that the sisterhood has not really stood up for itself within media organisations. The Network of Women in Media has become stronger over the years but it is an outside organisation. Loyalties within are another matter. Having said all this, it is still astounding that Chaudhury was not moved by the young woman’s complaint which talks of a very grievous assault and then an appalling attempt at flirtation which turned into threats.

Instead, Chaudhury wrote an email to the staff, filled with the most sanctimonious hifalutin nonsense: “We have also believed that when there is a mistake or lapse of any kind, one can only respond with right thought and action. In keeping with this stated principle, and the collective values we live by, Tarun will be stepping down for the period mentioned”.

What is “right thought and action” and what are these “collective values” one may well ask.

However, without getting as sanctimonious and self-righteous and morally reprobate as Tehelka, the outraged media must turn now that spotlight on itself. NDTV’s Nidhi Razdan said on TV that her channel has followed the Vishaka guidelines of the Supreme Court on sexual harassment. Sachin Kalbag, editor of Mid-Day, also said that Mid-Day is Vishaka compliant in a tweet. What is the story with other media organisations? How do they handle complaints of sexual harassment? How have perpetrators been punished? What sort of a future can the complainant look forward to in the organisation? It must be mentioned that the victims need not only be women and that the perpetrators need not always be men. But even while being politically correct and upholding gender equality, the sad truth is that it is women who usually bear the brunt.

That the entire media has come out in support of the victim is heartening and might even suggest that a few small changes may happen… Poor Rahul Singh who tried to defend Tehelka’s track record as an investigative magazine got short shrift on Times Now. As several participants pointed out, it was Tehelka’s founder Tejpal who had damaged his own magazine’s reputation. In a side note, because politicians were not invited to primetime news debates on the subject, discussions on the Tehelka issue were conducted with some decorum and minus the high-decibel pyrotechnics viewers are normally subjected to.

The correct thing would be for both Tarun Tejpal and Shoma Chaudhury to quit Tehelka. Neither can inspire confidence, either as leaders of an organisation or from an editorial perspective. If Tehelka is to maintain its motto of being fearless, frank and so on then it needs new management.

Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator based in Mumbai. She is also Contributing Editor, MxMIndia. She can be reached via Twitter at @ranjona. The views here are her own

By Ranjona Banerji

Was the biggest story of last week Sachin Tendulkar’s retirement from cricket? Possibly yes. Was it the only story of the week? Definitely not. But for television channels ducking out of covering the expose on snooping charges against the Gujarat government this was the explanation: “Saturday was Sachin’s day”. But these are 24 hour news channels. To fill up 24 hours only with Sachin Tendulkar is not just impossible, it is downright foolish.

The immediate allegations on social media were that the news channels were too frightened of Narendra Modi to cover the Cobrapost.com and Gulail story. (Incidentally, news channels are usually called “paid Congress agents”, an accusation which shows how divided social media is politically.) It certainly was curious that this story was ignored. After all, what Cobrapost.com and Gulail had exposed was that Amit Shah, then home minister of Gujarat, had asked the Gujarat police to tail and record all the activities of a young woman on the instructions of “Saheb”. That “Saheb” was Narendra Modi was confirmed by the woman’s father and BJP president Rajnath Singh. The taped conversations were part of the evidence provided by IPS officer GL Singhal to the CBI, as part of his own defence after being arrested in the Ishrat Jehan case, alleged to have been killed in a controversial “fake” encounter. Cobrapost.com and Gulail said that they could not verify the authenticity of the tapes.

Even so, it makes for a story and every newspaper in the country thought as much. TV woke up a day late – after the story had front-paged practically every newspaper in the country. And of course, they jumped straight into “debate” mode which saves them the cost of newsgathering, once the bulwark on which journalism rested. I have to confess that I did not watch any of these “debates” but I have heard that Anniruddha Bahal of Cobrapost.com did not get a chance to speak in between all the yelling and screaming of the representatives of political parties.

While BJP followers have long claimed that the entire English media is on the payroll of the Congress party, is there now a good case to made that the entire English television media is on the payroll of Narendra Modi and the BJP? While Cobrapost.com and Gulail were announcing their story at a press conference, news channels were showing the world one more speech by Narendra Modi, Gujarat chief minister and prime ministerial hopeful.

**

Dare one suggest that this primetime screaming contest that we have all got used to in India, looks very unseemly in an international context? The Australian Broadcasting Corporation brought its lively Q&A programme to India this week (I get ABC from my cable operator but this episode was also shown on DD). Panellists included Karan Thapar, Shashi Tharoor, Swapan Dasgupta and Shoma Choudhury. The idea was to increase India-Australia communication and attack stereotypes. Half the panellists demonstrated just how irritatingly self-righteously smug we are in India.

But most unedifying of all were the spats that Swapan Dasgupta got into with panellists over Narendra Modi (sigh, him again). Karan Thapar dealt with him with that razor-sharp firmness he uses on The Last Word. But Shoma Choudhury succumbed and the two, seating next to each other, proceeded to have wonderfully absurd verbal pyrotechnics. Do these people ever watch themselves on reruns? Do they know how awful they look and sound?

**

After the revelations of Cobrapost.com and Gulail story, many pro-Modi fans brought up the case of Rahul Gandhi being accused of kidnapping and raping a woman called Sukanya Devi as defence of the Gujarat chief minister. As it happens, the case against Rahul Gandhi was first thrown out by the Allahabad High Court as being “malicious” and later by the Supreme Court as well.  But an internet search on the matter leads to the Firstpost.com website which carried a video with the headline: “Rahul Gandhi raped Sukanya Devi”. I do not quite understand the technicalities of the internet, but Firstpost.com perhaps need to look into being associated to this piece of slander.

Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator based in Mumbai. She is also Contributing Editor, MxMIndia. She can be reached via Twitter at @ranjona. The views here are her own

By Ranjona Banerji

One more shake-up at The Hindu has the media a bit, well, shook up. Overturning what was a controversial decision two years ago, the Hindu board has now removed Siddharth Varadarajan as editor of the paper and Arun Anant as CEO. Interestingly, it was N Ram who fought with his brothers and sisters and the board and bulldozed his way to make sure Varadarajan got the job and The Hindu its first professional (non-family) editor in 50 years. And now it is N Ram who has sacked Varadarajan, a very well-respected journalist.

The allegations against Varadarajan tilt on the bizarre side: that he had diverged from the “core values” of the paper, that there was “editorialisation in the guise of news and manipulation of news coverage.” Anant has been accused of ruining industrial relations and of having a “communal” approach at times. There are hints that a PIL filed by Subramaniam Swamy over Varadarajan’s US citizenship may have had some role to play here – it comes up for hearing this week.

Also strange is the fact the six board members have opposed this move by N Ram to remove Varadarajan. When Varadarajan was appointed in 2011, the board had been against all the moves by Ram to professionalise the editorship of The Hindu. Ram had referenced other family-owned groups like The Times of India at the time, where family members do not hold controlling editorial posts.

In many ways, this new flip-flop takes The Hindu back in time. For what it’s worth, The Hindu has been a very respected newspaper in India and the world and is looked by many to be a sort of gold standard for its fair investigations and its Constitutional stance and the fact that it did not appear to bow down to corporate interests. But the family saga which keeps playing out in the background means that every professional journalist and potential CEO will be even more wary about taking up an offer from The Hindu.

Varadarajan, rather than accepting being kept on as a contributing editor and “senior columnist” resigned immediately, making the announcement on twitter – as seems to be the norm these days. His tweet which was put up at 5.28 pm on October 21 says, “With The Hindu’s owners deciding to revert to being a family run and edited newspaper, I am resigning from The Hindu with immediate effect.”

All those who resigned when Varadarajan was appointed in 2011 are now back – N Ravi, Malini Parthasarathy and Nirmala Lakshman – at the top as is N Ram.

The obvious implication is that the family could not bear to be away from the editorial decisions of their newspaper and have therefore buried their differences – however bitter they may have been. It also may mean that the somewhat more contemporary feel of The Hindu will now revert to its early fuddy-duddy days.

Anant, the former CEO, has been accused of forcing permanent employees towards the contract system and this could well have been a major thorn for the board. The Hindu is well known for allowing people to stay in positions until eternity regardless of ability – a strategy most other newspapers have long since abandoned. Although heartening for employees ensured of permanent employment disconnected with their output and a welcome change from the new hire and fire policies rampant elsewhere, it is also true that running a professional newspaper with excessive deadwood can be counterproductive if not impossible.

Whatever the reasons for these changes, both journalism and professionalism undoubtedly take a bit of a beating when a much-admired newspaper like The Hindu falls back in time.

Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator based in Mumbai. She is also Contributing Editor, MxMIndia. She can be reached via Twitter at @ranjona. The views here are her own

By Ranjona Banerji

The Supreme Court has taken the media back to one of its most shameful episodes: the exposures against senior journalists in the Niira Radia tapes. For those who have been living on Mars since 2010, here goes. The transcripts of the conversations between corporate lobbyist and various people including several journalists were leaked by Outlook and Open magazines. Radia’s phones had been tapped by the Income Tax department after allegations of financial irregularities by a former associate. But the tapping led to enormous breakthroughs in the 2G spectrum scam case.

Radia, employed by the Ambanis, the Tatas and Mittals, was heard talking to various journalists asking them to help ensure that A Raja became telecom minister in the 2009 UPA Cabinet. She said she was speaking on behalf of Kanimozhi of the DMK. Of the journalists she spoke to, Barkha Dutt of NDTV sounded the most helpful as also did Vir Sanghvi, then editorial director and columnist with Hindustan Times. Sanghvi and Radia also discussed how Sanghvi’s columns could be used to project Mukesh Ambani’s point of view as far as the KG Basin gas project was concerned.

There was an understandable uproar after the tapes were made public and Sanghvi lost his once very well-respected column but that was about it. Dutt remained defiant, putting down her comments as regular journalistic practices. In an incredible TV show, she told several senior journalists who questioned her that they knew little about how journalism in New Delhi functioned and moreover that she didn’t think there was anything remarkable in a corporate lobbyist who represented people with telecom interests calling journalists to influence Cabinet selections.

Indeed, if that is what passes for standard practice for journalists in Delhi, it is tragic as far as Indian journalism is concerned. This new Supreme Court directive will lead to the tapes being examined again and perhaps Indian journalists and media houses will be under the scanner again for several nefarious practices. Too much has been allowed already in the name of making money. Nothing wrong with profit at all: we all know it is vital for survival of our system. But for people who spend all day pointing fingers at other people to bend the rules when it comes to themselves is unacceptable.

There is a tangential discussion possible here on the inroads which the public relations industry has made into journalism but that is for another day. The onus here is on the journalists – all very senior and powerful – that Radia spoke to. Interestingly, not one thought that there was a story in the fact that the Tatas and the Mittals wanted Raja to be telecom minister and not Dayanidhi Maran or that the DMK insisted on retaining telecom or indeed on the divisions within Karunanidhi’s family made apparent by Radia’s requests. At face value, this looked like a great story to the rest of us.

**

If journalistic integrity needs to be examined again, so does the problem of paid news and corporate interests in the media. The big story for the last couple of days for almost every newspaper, journal and news channel has been the FIR lodged by the CBI against Kumar Mangalam Birla for his company’s involvement in the coal allocation scam. However, there are allegations and insinuations that the story has either not been covered or has been downplayed by Hindustan Times and by Headlines Today. The Hindustan Times is a Birla company owned by Kumar Mangalam’s cousin Shobhana Bhartia and Kumar Mangalam Birla has invested heavily in the India Today group.

From what I have checked, Hindustan Times on October 16 of its Mumbai edition did not carry the story as lead, unlike every other paper. The story appeared on page 10, a nation page, below the fold. I cannot confirm the Headlines Today accusation because I did not track the channel after the story broke.

However, there can be little doubt that this is how corporate investment is a potential danger for even a semblance of free and fair journalism: conflict of interest. Is it possible to keep burying such a story? Conversely, how would it look if these journals or news channels tried to support KM Birla? Indrajit Hazra, a columnist with Hindustan Times, has written this rather scathing piece for newslaundry.com on this “lapse”: http://www.newslaundry.com/2013/10/canaries-in-the-mine-shaft/

R Sukumar, editor of Mint, also from the Hindustan Times group, has this perspective to offer in Mint: http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/F7R4IYn8nJp2Kj5C5RwtaN/Edspace–The-Kumarmangalam-Birla-story.html

It’s a slippery slope and we’re all falling down it as far as I can see…

Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator based in Mumbai. She is also Contributing Editor, MxMIndia. She can be reached via Twitter at @ranjona. The views here are her own

By Ranjona Banerji

Caravan magazine’s long and detailed story into the running of Network18 had remarkable similarities with the various stories doing the rounds of Tehelka. Raghav Bahl of Network18 and Tarun Tejpal of Tehelka have been portrayed as very ambitious journalists with grand ideas, some enormous success but both seem to carry the taint of questionable financial sources and dodgy financial practices when it came to their empires.

There are differences too. Tehelka is much smaller than Network18 for one. And, as has been suggested by Caravan and in these columns earlier, Bahl has tilted to the political right while Tehelka and Tejpal are often accused by the BJP’s sympathisers as being Congress stooges.

But this is not about politics. It is about what happens when journalists become media barons. Network18 has been in the news for cutting down on its staff with over 300 people losing their jobs. Media gossip says that these terminations were not done in a humane way – much of it was last-minute and many were not given enough of a safety net in terms of severance pay. An employee with another TV channel, which also cut back on staff but not to this extent, told me that his company made sure that people got at least a year’s pay in severance money, not just one month’s notice.

Only a year before these terminations, Network18 was on a hiring spree and employees were told that the company was doing well. This turned out to be false and the company had to sell stake to Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries to survive. After the terminations, senior management went off to Macau for meeting with each other or whatever they call that corporate rubbish which sounds like a junket. A bit reminiscent of the behaviour of US bankers after they caused the global financial crash of 2008 or is that an unfair comparison?

Tehelka’s finances were also a mess. Allegations have surfaced that while the Tejpal family were enjoying a holiday in London which included a fund-raising art auction, salary cheques bounced back in India. Also, the share ownership pattern of Tehelka appears to have been a merry tangle. Yet those who know Tejpal also say that he was exceedingly generous to his staff and his friends, often from his own pocket. Long before this scandal broke, a close associate had told me that Tejpal lived big when he had money, sharing it with friends and staff.

Many journalists tired of the corporate or “malik” (owner) strangleholds on their profession dream of starting something by themselves so that they can pursue the stories they want and uphold the ideals that brought them here. Is there a morality tale in these two examples? From personal experience, I can safely say that most journalists I know are absolutely useless with money. Present company not excepted.

**

Tarun Tejpal and Tehelka have received any amount of flak from fellow journalists and other commentators. Veteran journalist BG Verghese has written this finely nuanced piece in The Indian Express on where the media went too far and how introspection is needed: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/a-gotcha-trial-by-media/1202488/

**

Calls to control the media or for the media to control itself continue unabated, especially the Talwar murder case. Somewhere hidden in Tuesday’s newspapers is the story of the Supreme Court issuing a notice to all states about media restraint and how an investigating officer should brief the media.

Sometimes popular opinion also echoes this point of view. However while there is no doubt that sometimes the media can go too far or some within the media go too far, government intervention is not and cannot ever be the answer. Self-regulation for the media is the only way forward in a democracy.

As for the Talwar case, I am intrigued by articles in the media saying that the media skewed public opinion against the Talwars, now held guilty by a special CBI court in the murders of their daughter Aarushi and domestic help, Hemraj. I can myself only remember scores of articles and columns insisting that the Talwars are innocent. Thus, perhaps it all evens out in the end.

The media, in case it needs reminding, is not one cohesive body. It is a disparate collection of competing journals, channels and now websites.

Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator based in Mumbai. She is also Contributing Editor, MxMIndia. She can be reached via Twitter at @ranjona. The views here are her own

By Ranjona Banerji

The death of Nelson Mandela, the most recognised icon of freedom and equality in the second half of the 20^th century, not unnaturally consumed news television on Friday morning. The anti-apartheid fighter-politician, who led South Africa to freedom from racist rule, was perhaps the most famous follower of Mahatma Gandhi in today’s world.

Al Jazeera ran a very moving short film on Mandela’s life, CNN played US president Barack Obama’s reaction. The BBC showed live scenes in South Africa, where people celebrated “Madiba’s” life. Indeed most news channels concentrated on Mandela on Friday morning, with the best Mandela coverage from Headlines Today. The other Indian news channels (English) interspersed stories about Mandela’s death with other news of the day.

**

Every journalist and every newsroom yearns for a juicy story, something that you can really get your teeth into. But Indian news television often behaves like a pack of wild hunting dogs (or hyenas?) sensing their prey is getting away and going into frenzied attack mode. Watching the exit poll results being played out on TV seemed like that anyway. Not that the guests behaved any differently. There were charges and counter charges made at full volume – and not even from the much-blamed uncontrollable spokespersons for political parties. These were journalists, commentators, academics slugging it out.

Times Now led the pack and as is now well-known amongst TV news watchers, no one can beat Arnab Goswami in full flow. He has effectively defeated all his rivals and is India’s prime anchor by a long shot. On Tuesday, he scampered and thundered all over his studio as the exit poll results were discussed, diagnosed and dissected down to the nth degree but of course as shallowly as possible, keeping the limits of TV in mind.

Arnab-watching is now a separate spectator sport. Having returned to this arena after a six month hiatus (barring a few relapses here and there), it is evident that Goswami has only grown. Now, it is almost impossible for anyone on his guest list to have an opinion that is not the same as his. This is a crime almost punishable in the court of popular opinion if not under the Indian Penal Code.

If this was the level of high-pitched excitement on the day of the exit polls, one can only imagine what is going to happen on Sunday, December 8 when the actual results are revealed. I think that it is time that jugglers, clowns and fireworks are made part of TV news discussions because they will add wonderfully to the carnival atmosphere. Indian news television has scaled new heights which even the most prescient and incisive 1975 film Network could not have foreseen.

I cannot forecast whether the exit polls are right or wrong or somewhere in the middle or who’s winning and who’s losing but I can tell you that we’re in for a real tamasha treat on Sunday. Cancel those plans to hit the malls guys!

For those who want some clarity into the exit polls before all is revealed on Sundays, these two opinion pieces may be of some help. Dileep Padgaonkar points to the “winds of change” blowing through the nation on The Times of India’e edit page http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/talking- terms/entry/congress_battered_bjp_upbeat_but_regional_ parties_will_be_game_changers_in_the_general_elections.

And Seema Chishti provides an analytical breakdown of the significance of these elections in The Indian Express: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/signs-and-wonders/1203806/.

**

Clarification: Since there has been a tiny bit of confusion here, I would like to make it clear that this is an opinion piece and has been an opinion piece since I started writing it for mxmindia.com more than two years ago. Just thought I’d put that down in case anyone doesn’t get it.

Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator based in Mumbai. She is also Contributing Editor, MxMIndia. She can be reached via Twitter at @ranjona. The views here are her own