MxMIndia

Tag: Priya Ramani

  • For decades there had been whispers about his behaviour. So even though there was no punishment for the misconduct, there was a sense of huge justice, writes Ranjona Banerji

    V for Vindication, Victory

     

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Why were women in the media so overjoyed with the acquittal of journalist Priya Ramani in the case for criminal defamation filed by MJ Akbar, journalist turned politician? As many somewhat bemused people outside the media had asked, Ramani was the victim here, how was she acquitted? And what about the culprit? What was the punishment for him?

    And that’s the crux of this case. It wasn’t about punishment. It was about vindication. A famous, very famous journalist, much respected and admired as an editor for some ground-breaking work. But for decades there had been whispers about his behaviour with female colleagues, especially young female colleagues. Many of these went on to become stars in their own right. Priya Ramani is one of them.

    When she tweeted in 2018, then the man she had referred to in an article about sexual misconduct she had faced in 2017 was MJ Akbar, the famous man was furious. Within a few days, he filed a case of criminal defamation against her, claiming his reputation had been damaged.

    So in a neat twist of sexist history, the victim had to be acquitted and the culprit lost his case. But as the judge in the case, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ravindra Kumar Pandey of Rouse Avenue Court, ruled, the right of reputation cannot be protected at the cost of the right of life and dignity of a woman. “The woman cannot be punished for raising voice against sexual abuse on the pretext of criminal complaint of defamation,” the judgment read. Further, that a woman has the right to put up her grievance after decades on the platform of her choice. “Time has come for our society to understand that sometimes a victim may for years not speak up due to the mental trauma”: the judgment said.

    Here, laid in clear terms, is the reason for the celebration. The ploy used by Akbar was wrong in intention and in result. The judgment answers all those questions people had raised in defence of Akbar (and of many men in similar circumstances): why after so long, why in an article and on a social media platform and so on.

    https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/delhi-court-acquits-priya-ramani-in-mj-akbars-criminal-defamation-case-169993

     

    https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/priya-ramani-mj-akbar-case-rupan-deol-bajaj-me-too-movement-7194794/

     

    A potted history:

    What were we looking at here? The Me Too movement swept across the world in 2017. It started with allegations of sexual assault and abuse by a number of actresses against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. It then moved to academia. And in India, allegations of workplace sexual abuse exploded in the worlds of glamour and the media. As far as the venerable media was concerned, this was an eyeopener for many, sadly for insiders as well as those without.

    Sexual abuse had been ignored for generations in the mainstream media, as women who had broken the glass ceilings, felt it was wiser to shut up and put up with whatever was dished out in order to stay in line with the men. That this should be the norm within the media, where people were lectured, informed, advised day and night on what to do when faced with sexual harassment and abuse. That this should be the norm in spite of the Vishakha judgment of1997, which set out the fundamental rights of working women.

    In 2013, we had been “shocked” by the assault allegations against Tarun Tejpal by Neha Dixit and the evident pain and trauma of the victim and the sheer brazen attitude of the perpetrator. In that case, lest we forget, Tejpal had in a long-winded letter admitted to the assault. Later he changed his story and the harassment of his victim began. He has his lawyers have used every legal trick to prolong the case.

    The celebration:

    The Me Too movement much as it brought many woman together also created many divisions. Many feminists felt that younger women were being unfair and had exacting standards from their male colleagues. Many were horrified that they had done nothing. Others felt that their colleagues and friends were being unfairly targeted.

    This one judgment however tells us that if we work together, we have a better chance of justice. Lawyer Rebecca John and her team worked hard with Ramani. But it was Ramani herself, her steadfast courage in the face of the wrath of a powerful man, that inspires us. Ramani’s colleagues, Ghazala Wahab and Niloufer Venkatraman who were witnesses and spoke of their own trauma and those who were ready to be witnesses, can also claim victory.

    “I feel vindicated to have my truth accepted in a court of law,” said Ramani after the acquittal.

    Akbar, say reports, left in a huff.

    Sometimes though huffing and puffing is just bravado gone wrong.

    Congratulations to everyone and to all the women who spoke out, who have suffered. Sometimes, there is huge justice even in an acquittal.

     

    Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator. She is also Consulting Editor, MxMIndia. Her views here are personal

  • The past is erupting around us and we have to ensure that it does not corrupt the future, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Unacceptable: Laxness & Laziness of the past

     

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The MeToo movement shows no sign of stopping although it is slowing down in terms of revelations and accusations as far as the media is concerned. That should give us a chance to take a breath and assess where we are. We have learnt of horrors we had not known of. We have seen exposed all the horrors which we did know of. The first of the last two statements sounds ridiculous and that is because it is. Sexual harassment exists everywhere: why would media organisations be different? Because we are full of self-righteous outrage when we report on how the rest of the world behaves?

    It took the advent of social media for media organisations and journalists to be forced to assess the way they work, present news and hide or display their biases. All the ivory towers of the past, of untouchable editors standing high above, arrogant newsrooms barely noticing readers as they crept by full of awe – all those images have been smashed to dust. And so it should be.

    Sexual harassment is one more unspoken pillar which has fallen, and it must remain fallen and trampled forever. No more excuses about talent or alcohol or families or need to be made for bad and illegal behaviour. The criminal defamation case filed by MJ Akbar against Priya Ramani is a prime example of the entitlement and arrogance which the powerful have been allowed to get away with. It should be a textbook example of how editors must not, cannot behave.

    But now what? The past is erupting around us and we have to use to that to ensure that it does not corrupt the future. We need to educate ourselves all over again, we have to insist that the Vishakha guidelines as well as the Internal Complaints Committees under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act are followed conscientiously. The laxness and laziness of the past is unacceptable – look at the misery and suffering which has been uncovered so far.

    The very fact that we have senior women journalists almost condoning the behaviour of editors like Akbar, pooh-poohing the complaints of women who have been mauled and worse, just shows how internalised harassment had become. Some women argue that life is tough and women must just suck it up. It sounds like it makes sense until you realise that it is unjust, and in a profession where we claim to fight for justice for others, is it not ironical that we do not fight for justice for ourselves? The world has changed. Racism is no longer a fun game for supremacists to play. Well, so also sexism.

    Getting off the soapbox now, to practical issues. Together with the Mumbai Press Club, the Network of Women in India is holding a conversation with senior editors on “how to change the culture in our newsrooms”, on Wednesday, October 24. Such conversations, within the sorority (and let’s use that word the same way fraternity is used these days) across India are vital.

    I might add here that, taking the Tech Mahindra case where a female boss harangued a gay employee, who was only emboldened to come forward after Section 377 was decriminalised, we need to expand our vision to all forms of harassment in the workplace.

    As journalists, we also need to rid ourselves of old practices. Why should a headline read: “Seven people, including women and children, were killed”? Why the “including”? And so on. There are innumerable examples of such inherent sexism in the language we use.

    I might share a story here of my own shortcomings. I was present at one of the meetings, at the Mumbai Press Club, when the Network of Women in Media was being created. The discussion was on the coverage of the Gujarat riots of 2002, since I worked with the Times of India in Ahmedabad then. Someone asked me how many special stories we had done on women and how they had suffered. So proud that I was of our fearless coverage until then, I was stumped. I had to shamefacedly admit we had not done such stories and then get the newsroom to start doing them once I went back to Ahmedabad.

    It’s the mindset. And it is so encouraging that today’s young journalists are challenging it.

     

    Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator. She is also Consulting Editor, MxMIndia. The views here are personal

     

  • Ranjona Banerji on MJ Akbar's counter-attack and response of CP Surendran to charges made against him

    Honourable route would’ve been to apologise, right?

     

    By Ranjona Banerji

    Phew!!

    The #MeToo movement in the media is now heading into several different directions. We have had stories of repeated bad sexual behaviour between colleagues, we have seen allegations against editors, both dead and alive, we have seen some media houses taking instant action and some taking slow action. We have seen some media houses promising that they will take action, if the allegations are found to be true pending investigation.

    Most of all, we have seen an enormous outpouring of pent-up anger and pain by generations of women in the workplace. Thanks to Tanushree Dutta’s complaint against Nana Patekar, the floodgates have opened across several industries. Big names, big transgressions of trust, as well some allegations which many, including women, find to be in the grey area between consent and anger. We have had a few fake allegations as well, unfortunately trying to use a very important movement to settle personal agendas. Human nature, after all. It was journalist Sandhya Menon who bravely broached the media citadel and several walls which protected male privilege have since fallen.

    And now, the backlash. Although many men apologised, some with disingenuous hurt innocence, some with jobs and reputations lost. Others have fought back, most notably, the most infamous alleged sexual predator of all, one of India’s most famous journalists and currently minister of state for external affairs, MJ Akbar. At last count 14 women have come out with their stories about their experiences with Akbar, when he was their editor. The pattern is remarkably the same, a massive difference of age and power: a senior powerful and legendary male editor and a young impressionable female journalist. The first was Priya Ramani. The most damning was that of Ghazala Wahab. All the women who have spoken out are now senior and respectable journalists.

    Akbar has sued only Priya Ramani for criminal defamation so far. He is fighting for his lost reputation. The Narendra Modi-led BJP government, full of cultivated sanctimony about the empowerment of women, stands with Akbar. There is not even a hint of him standing down until enquiries are complete. Both Ramani and Wahab remain steadfast and so do several women who know what has gone on in newsrooms for years.

    Let us remember that although the Supreme Court laid out the Vishakha guidelines for sexual harassment in the workplace in 1997, almost no media house even bothered. It was only in the late 2000s that conversations about Vishakha began. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act was passed in 2013. Under this, each organisation has to have an Internal Complaints Committee. One can only hope that those organisations who have even bothered to set these up will now take them seriously. And others will also follow.

    There are some senior women journalists who find themselves caught up in the bind of patriarchy and have to defend the men accused. Some have tried to deflect attention from workplace harassment and slam a society which allows the rape of babies. The trouble is that by doing this, they are endorsing workplace harassment and sexual abuse. The law, when it is applicable, has different punishments for degrees of crime. Does not mean that a “lesser” crime must be ignored because larger crimes also take place.

    In any case, it is unlikely that any of the journalists who have come forward are looking for criminal punishment, legal reparation or monetary compensation from these men. They want acknowledgement and they want workplaces are cleaned up. As we saw with the Tech Mahindra case, where a young man spoke about being harassed by a female senior boss – he only found the courage after Section 377 was decriminalised. Workplaces have to be sensitised to harassment and bullying and bosses and colleagues must know that violation of personal space is unacceptable.

    The other major defence has been made by journalist and poet CP Surendran. Eleven women have come forward with stories of sexual harassment by Surendran, some when he was editor of DNA. His response is truly extraordinary and frankly unacceptable. Complaints were made at the time, other staff and the HR department were made aware. Surendran has this to say:

    “I may have made what some people consider to be sexist comments. I believe sexism is an intellectual and physical reality. I choose not to think in given categories. This may be construed as arrogance…

    “I have no gender or political loyalties. I have paid a price for this all my life. I often rub people of both genders the wrong way with my often ill-considered views…

    “The Me Too movement needs victims to feed and fatten itself. I won’t be the last.”

    What does all this even mean? The last line is straight from the Trump-Kavanaugh playbook, where the perpetrator conveniently plays the victim. The first two statements are remarkable logical flights of fancy. To say that sexism is “an intellectual and physical reality” is stating the obvious and conveniently ignoring the fact that sexism is no longer acceptable, and it is horrific that it ever was. I am not sure what high intellectual quality there is in supporting millennia of gender discrimination. The excuse of having no gender or political loyalties is convenient bunkum and means nothing.

    Many media houses have come out strongly in favour of ending workplace harassment in their editorials. One can only hope that this is reflected in their own workplaces.

    Allegations have been made about two senior editors at The Wire. Two are throwaway lines from dubious Twitter handles, neither of which have gone further than talking about Sidharth Bhatia’s lip quivering and some salacious comment about a woman colleague he is said to have made in my presence. I heard no such comment and no complaint was ever made to me about quivering lips. The handles did not reply to my questions about when they worked in DNA with me and have now moved on to targeting journalists within The Times of India.

    The other accusation is from a film-maker, against Vinod Dua, when she was starting out in her career and contains details of place and conversation in a Facebook post. The Wire has taken note of for both allegations and stated that their Internal Complaints Committee is deliberating the matter.

    Regardless of those accused of harassment fighting back – and no one denies them the right to do that – but when the anecdotal evidence is overwhelming, a more honourable route would perhaps have been to apologise. So far, women and men who find inappropriate workplace behaviour and sexual harassment unacceptable show purpose to keep fighting the good fight. The intent is to clean up the work environment, not destroy reputations. If we work together on this, it can only get better.

     

    Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator. She is also Consulting Editor, MxMIndia. The views here are personal