MxMIndia

Tag: David Cameron

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare in the morning papers and the nightly news. And sometimes the afternooners, the newsmags and all that's on the Web

    Ranjona Banerji: Is the media fickle, or just having fun

    Ranjona Banerji

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Television is, of course, very worried about the next President of India, but newspapers have given it the treatment it deserved – reporting on the news rather than trying to create it.

     

    Which means that Friday morning saw the straining of the ties between the UPA and Trinamool Congress get full play in the papers, although Mamata Banerjee’s mocking of the prime minister seems to have got a muted response.

     

    There has been a distinct movement to belittle Manmohan Singh and the media now appears to have been taken along for the ride. It seems a bit odd that rather take a non-partisan stand, the media has been party to this campaign. Or maybe it is not odd and I am not surprised.

     

    The downside for Team Anna is that Mamata Banerjee has stolen their limelight. Of particular interest is her declaration in today’s Times of India that she is a “simple man”. Indeed.

     

    * * *

     

    Mumbai’s newspapers have focused this week on the extraordinary behaviour of the Mumbai police, with its raids on bars and restaurants and treatment of customers. On Thursday, The Times of India, Mid-Day and Hindustan Times dedicated pages to the police’s highhanded methods and its reliance on archaic laws to harass people. Vasant Dhoble, the assistant commissioner of police who conducted most of the raids, was also targeted. Pritish Nandy has written an impassioned article on the destruction of civil liberties in Mumbai over the years in TOI.

     

    Some of this concerted media focus has prodded the minister of state for home to ask the police to exercise some restraint. There has also been some discussion to re-look at all these old and pointless laws.

     

    Friday’s Mid-Day has a story on how the protests against Dhoble and the police which started on cyber space are now entering real life as well. And, according to the paper the city’s “young leaders” like Milind Deora and Poonam Mahajan have also asked the police not to harass the innocent.

     

    * * *

     

    The unfortunate ego battle between Indian tennis stars Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi has now got full media attention, especially as it affects India’s Olympic media chances. Here too, the media is divided between the two and as Bhupathi is better at building media relations, his case is being viewed with more sympathy. This is, in spite, of the fact that Bhupathi is the one putting up terms and conditions and refusing to play with Paes and also that Paes has bigger dibs on the Indian Olympic team because of his higher ranking.

     

    * * *

     

    The News Corp noose around British prime minister David Cameron gets closer and closer. Testifying in front of the Brian Leveson Inquiry into media ethics, Cameron tried to stand his ground that he had done no wrong but was hard-pressed to explain a text message from former News Corp CEP Rebekkah Brooks which said “we’re definitely in this together” just before the general election which the Conservative Party and Cameron won.

     

    The nexus between Britain’s political classes and the Murdoch organisation is no secret but its tentacles appear to have poisoned British polity, the establishment and the media itself.

     

    * * *

     

    Interesting to see after all the hoopla over former army chief VK Singh and all that bombastic media support, suddenly the media focus seems to have shifted to his detractors!

     

    Fickle or just having fun?

     

  • At a time when the Indian media is grappling with all sorts of issues and allegations, the Murdoch saga presents an interesting contrast

    [MJR] Pity the Poor Politician!

    Ranjona Banerji

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    This week’s candidate for Noosemaker is our favourite whipping boy – the politician, both in India and abroad.

     

    This poor soul puts every bit of work he or she can into working for the people, but the people are ungrateful sods and show little appreciation. Take for instance, the politicians’ campaign to save the “father of the Indian Constitution” – Dr BR Ambedkar from a cartoonist. Instead of applauding politicians for this act of bravery – in the pursuit of which they even showed the courage to go against the freedom of expression which Ambedkar enshrined in the Constitution – our politicians had to face ridicule.

     

    Instead of congratulating them, people started pulling out facts about Ambedkar’s life, sense of humour, the importance of not disrupting Parliament, the Constitution and irrelevant stuff like that. What on earth, said these beleaguered politicians, have facts got to do with anything. We are saving Dr Ambedkar from a cartoon by Shankar which is part of a textbook. We don’t care if Ambedkar himself saw the cartoon when it first appeared in 1949 or not. We don’t care if Shankar was a famous cartoonist. We are only bothered that Ambedkar’s reputation has been damaged and for that, we’re willing to damage anything and anybody. Including, of course, the offices of one of the academics who decided to include the cartoon in the textbook.

     

    Meanwhile, other politicians got so bothered by the ruckus that the government just banned the textbook. This is probably a wise move as Class XI students will now have no political science textbooks, so if any of those students want to enter politics, they will be suitably ignorant about Ambedkar, the Constitution and so on. This is a necessary prerequisite for politicians.

     

    I would also advise young people to think carefully about becoming cartoonists. Dead or alive, cartoonists are public enemy number one for politicians, a dangerous breed giving to fostering humour, laughter and other subversive tendencies.

     

    * * *

     

    The other politicians in the spotlight are in the UK. They must now be careful when they send text messages to editors of newspaper. Because if those editors get involved in phone-hacking scandals and then get questioned by a media ethics inquiry, they can reveal damaging stuff. Now we know, for instance, that British prime minister David Cameron of the Conservative Party did not know the meaning of the short form “LOL”. He kept sending it to Rebekkah Brookes, former editor of The Sun and News of the World and boss of News Corp and now just a formidable person, thinking it meant “Lots of love”. She had to point out to him that it meant “Laugh Out Loud.”

     

    This has almost completely destroyed Cameron’s street cred and it is possible that because of his good friend and neighbour Brookes, he may lose his premiership.

    The Labour Party, by the way, cannot send anyone messages saying “ROFL” because they were well known for cosying up to News Corp as well.

     

  • In Freaking News, which will now appear every Tuesday and Friday, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare in the morning papers and the nightly news. And sometimes the afternooners, the newsmags and all that's on the Web

    Murdoch inquiry: the murky side of media highlighted

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The questioning of Rupert and James Murdoch in the Leveson inquiry into media ethics in the UK was undoubtedly the highlight of this news week. Both the BBC and CNN showed major portions of the inquiry live and it was fascinating to watch these two very powerful men being closely questioned on their closeness to British politicians as well as on the way they ran their business.

     

    James Murdoch followed the line he had had at the earlier Parliamentary inquiry after the phone-hacking scandal broke which led to the closure of The News of The World: he remembered nothing. This is, even though he had been the recipient of a chain of emails which explained what was going on. Murdoch the younger claimed he had not read any of the emails.

     

    Two days were devoted to Rupert Murdoch who seemed far sharper than he had been during the Parliamentary inquiry. However, he also claimed to remember nothing, in spite of there being sufficient documentary evidence to prove his various meetings with various British prime ministers. Murdoch claimed that politicians always wanted to meet editors and proprietors but that did not mean that he wielded any influence.

     

    However, by the end of the second day of questioning, Murdoch admitted that there had been a cover-up of the practice of phone-hacking in his newspapers, which went at least up to the editor and beyond. He apologised and called it a failure.

     

    The venerable and respected Harold Evans, the one editor of the Times who Murdoch sacked, was scathing in his criticism of Murdoch’s testimony and his supposed inability to remember anything significant at all, in his piece in the Guardian on Thursday.

     

    In the backdrop of this questioning were the revelations that a close aide of British culture secretary Jeremy Hunt had been leaking secret information to the Murdoch organisations about the BSkyB deal, which has since been scuttled. But with both sides of the political spectrum in Britain being in the pockets of the Murdochs, finger-pointing is going to be a little difficult. In Prime Minister David Cameron’s favour is the fact that he commissioned this judicial inquiry.

     

    The parallels with India are fascinating, if at the least because media tycoons here remain shady figures, lurking in the background, pulling strings and manipulating policies. Also, despicable as phone-hacking was, it is hard to remember the last time any newspaper really spent any effort on news-gathering. We, in India, follow the other Murdoch model – use PR agencies to get everything done.

     

    Needless to say, Indian TV was not much taken with the Murdoch case, although newspapers gave it the mandatory space on their international pages.

     

    * * *

     

    The one story which got almost no space in the Indian media, in spite of the verdict being shown live on the BBC and CNN on Thursday, competing with Murdoch, was the trial of Charles Taylor. The former Liberian president was charged with war crimes for his role in the brutal and bloody war for power in the neighbouring Sierra Leone. Although the film Blood Diamonds got considerable media attention in India, the man who was part of that horror story, was obviously not worthy of too much space. For example, The Times of India had nothing, the Hindustan Times, a brief and The Indian Express a story on the international pages.

     

    * * *

     

    Instead the Indian media had absolute hysterics about Sachin Tendulkar accepting a nomination to the Rajya Sabha. One would imagine this was the first time anyone had ever accepted a Rajya Sabha nomination (12 distinguished persons are appointed every term) for all the hot air expended on TV. Newspapers also saw this as headline news.

     

    So far of course no one knows whether Tendulkar will be a good, bad or indifferent Parliamentarian. Therefore, tedious before-the-fact discussions and camera-inspired rage are pointless. Much time was spent on why Tendulkar was joining politics. It occurred to no one that being nominated to the Rajya Sabha is not “joining politics”. That would be when Tendulkar fights an election. Many nominated members gone back to their distinguished lives after their terms finished.

     

    The only benefit of such discussions is that you see just how stupid some people are.

     

    * * *

    Sometimes I find myself in full agreement with Press Council chairman Markandey Katju that 90 per cent of Indians are fools. And most of those fools find their way to TV studios.