MxMIndia

Tag: Rajdeep Sardesai

  • Ranjona Banerji and Pradyuman Maheshwari write on the boycott and News Broadcasters’ association statement

    Two views on the I.N.D.I.A. boycott of 14 news anchors

     

     

     

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Ranjona BanerjiThe decision not to speak to certain TV anchors by the opposition coalition, I.N.D.I.A., is not an easy one to parse. On the one hand, you might think it’s a good comeuppance for these anchors. In their less offensive – relatively speaking – avatars, these anchors have been propaganda voices for the BJP and for Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In their more sinister personas, they have actively created social divisions and fanned the flames of hatred against Muslims, other religious minorities and Dalits.

    In between they have consistently flayed the Opposition as one entity as well as their individual party components. While giving the BJP-led Government at the Centre, various BJP state governments and the BJP, the RSS and all its attendant organisations a free pass, the opposition has always been placed on the “losing” side of these so-called “debates”. They are not time to put forward their case, BJP spokespersons are allowed to speak over them and so on.

    Several fans and followers of opposition parties have begged them not to appear on these channels, where night after night they are humiliated, their voices cut off and they are put under greater and nastier scrutiny than BJP participants.

    It has taken more than nine years for the Opposition to become a cohesive coalition, and then to make this decision and make it public. According to their statement, they will not attend shows held by 14 anchors. They have not however refused to appear on the channels where these anchors work. So it is not a boycott of television so much as avoidance of certain people.

    Should they have then made this list public?

    They could have done the same thing behind the scenes. Refused to appear on X’s show but agreed to appear on Y’s and so on. Possibly they want to make a point.

    Within the journalists’ communities, opinions are varied and contradictory. When I use the word journalists here, I mean journalists. Not TV anchors who are hate-mongers and BJP propagandists. Many of us – myself included – believe that these TV anchors have long surrendered the right to be called journalists. They do not even qualify as the worst of the ambulance-chasing bottom feeders our profession has specialised in. And any person has the right to decide who they want to speak to.

    Other journalists take the high ground and feel that one should give everyone a fair chance. A boycott does nothing for democracy and the future of a free press. This is an honourable position, and one to be admired. Even if it does ignore the sort of nonsense that goes on in Indian television.

    But most importantly, it ignores the massive elephant in the room when it comes to politicians and the Indian media. The refusal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to take questions from the media.

    The Indian PM does not interact with the Indian media. He does not take questions. He tries to avoid the media when he travels abroad. And at the recently concluded G20 Summit in New Delhi, he did not allow US President Joe Biden to address a press conference either.

    In functioning democracies, press conferences are part of the process. As is media scrutiny of government actions and decisions. India is a rare democracy where all the questions are asked of opposition politicians but few, if any, of the party in power. You might consider than under such circumstances, India is not a democracy at all in the traditional sense.

    In the light of Modi’s refusal to be held accountable for the actions of his government and his party, and his own actions as well, in the light of the sustained harassment of journalists and media houses who show truth to power, what is the weight exactly of a list of 14 anchors who have no connection to journalism?

    Further, we have the defence of Modi’s position by these anchors and propagandists masquerading as journalists. The hypocrisy is stark: when Modi does it, we’re happy. If anyone else does it, how dare!!

    In the end, here’s a “both sides” story, that bad journalists confuse with objectivity, to keep “both sides” happy. At the height of his career as “the angry young man” of Indian cinema, superstar Amitabh Bachchan boycotted the gossipy, spicy film media. It made no difference to his career, which reached amazing heights of stardom never seen until then. It made no difference to film magazines who wrote what they wanted anyway.

    Make of that what you want!

     

    Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator. She writes on MxMIndia on Tuesdays and Fridays. Her views here are personal.

     

    		  

    By Pradyuman Maheshwari

     

    Pradyuman MaheshwariAt the outset, we must admit that we are appalled that the I.N.D.I.A. alliance of Opposition political parties has decided to boycott shows and events hosted by certain journalists and anchors on Indian news television. Even though they may have enough reason to be peeved about the way they conduct themselves on television.

    For a political grouping that aspires to be forming the next central government, this is unfortunate. There are ways and means to counter journalists who are biased, and we are certain that the various political parties have enough veterans in their fold who can take on even the most biased and toxic of anchors.

    I am sure a Sanjay Raut of the Uddhav Thackeray wing of the Shiv Sena or Mani Shankar Aiyer can take on the mightiest. Or the DMK former finance, now IT minister. Or a variety of other Congresspersons. Or Derek O’brien or Mahua Moitra. Why not field them?

    There’s also the judiciary, and the Supreme Court under Chief Justice DY Chandrachud can be trusted to be, well, provide justice.

    Also to be noted is that the ban is only on anchors and editors, and not the entire channel or network. Obviously it would’ve been a bit much to ban an entire channel, but why isn’t I.N.D.I.A. doing that? For, the fact is that if Channel X accords a primetime/prominent slot to a Anchor Y, then it is equally responsible for the views that are aired. Unless of course it has an equally unbiased show or anchor leaning against the other side just before or after the journalist who the Opposition considers biased..

    But let’s leave the argument of questioning the I.N.D.I.A. alliance’s decision for now. The vote-casting masses are not as uninformed as some people may think. Else, the people of Karnataka and West Bengal wouldn’t have voted for Congress and TMC respectively. The anchors named by the I.N.D.I.A. alliance (and their ways) existed even when these states went to the polls.

    What has triggered this comment from me, and pulled Mediaah! out of its slumber is the statement issued by the News Broadcasters & Digital Association (NBDA).

    Let’s read the statement first:

    “News Broadcasters & Digital Association (NBDA) is deeply anguished and concerned by the decision taken by the I.N.D.I.A. Media Committee not to send their representatives on the shows and events hosted by certain journalists/anchors. The decision taken by the I.N.D.I.A. Media Committee sets a dangerous precedent.

    “The ban on representatives of the opposition alliance from participating in TV news shows anchored by some of India’s top TV news personalities goes against the ethos of democracy. It betokens intolerance and imperils press freedom. The opposition alliance claims to be the champion of pluralism and a free press, but its decision betrays callous disregard for democracy’s most fundamental tenet – the inalienable right to openly express ideas and opinions.

    “The boycott of certain journalists/anchors takes the nation back to the Emergency era, when the press was gagged, and independent opinions and voices were crushed. NBDA urges the opposition alliance to withdraw its decision of boycotting certain journalists and anchors as such a decision would amount to browbeating journalists and stifling freedom of speech and expression of the media.”

    I am not sure that the comment “The boycott of certain journalists/anchors takes the nation back to the Emergency era, when the press was gagged, and independent opinions and voices were crushed” is correct. The I~~ alliance isn’t doing that. There is no censorship being imposed here.

    My issue with the NBDA is that why doesn’t it issue similar statements against biases that exist in some of the news channels. Why doesn’t it call out the toxicity amongst its member channels. Why doesn’t it damn the fake news dished out?

    Also, why doesn’t it make a statement on the reluctance of the Prime Minister to address a press conference, as most Prime Ministers have done in the past.

    Why is the NBDA shying away from all of this?

    Some of the ‘banned’ anchors listed are leading lights of the NBDA member channels. Am sure they will not be impacted with this boycott. They may even put an empty chair there for effect, as has been done in the past by one or more channels.

    But there is a larger problem which the channels could face. There is a fresh move to  campaign against toxicity of news channels, and this may find a shrill in states ruled by I.N.D.I.A.-affiliated parties.

    I must also add here that the ruling BJP too has a reluctance of some of its top leaders being interviewed by senior editors like Rajdeep Sardesai. It may not be a boycott, but when was the last time you saw Sardesai interviewing the two Big Boys, one-on-one for television or for the various India Today/Aaj Tak conclaves? It’s not a ban for sure, but there is a clear hesitation to be subjected to an interaction.

    While I am glad that the NBDA has issued a statement on the I.N.D.I.A. boycott, it must also look at issues on bias, toxicity and the like with enough speed, even if it is nothing new and needs to done retrospectively.

    Pradyuman Maheshwari is Editor-in-Chief, MxMIndia. His views here are personal.

     
  • He may have jumped the gun to be first with the news, but was it right for India Today to reprimand its star news anchor Rajdeep Sardesai, asks Ranjona Banerji

    Unfair to Take Rajdeep Off Air?

     

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The drama over TV anchor Rajdeep Sardesai has got sections of the media and social media all roiled, and on all sides of the political spectrum.

    Sardesai had tweeted and stated on-air that farmer Navreet Singh had been shot by the Delhi Police on January 26, during the turmoil of the tractor parade held by India’s protesting farmers. For these two actions, Sardesai was taken off air by his employer India Today and his salary docked for a month.

    https://thewire.in/media/india-today-rajdeep-sardesai-farmer-death

    Glee and consternation were the dominant emotions by the public and the media.

    However. How could there not be a “however”? First Sardesai. At face value, without imputing motives, he may have jumped the gun in order to be first with the news. This is not new to Sardesai or to TV “journalism”, where carrying uncorroborated news as fact is extremely common. Also, Sardesai later retracted his comment and deleted his tweet.

    Then, the death of Navreet Singh himself. His family and farmers present still contest the Delhi Police’s version that the young farmer from Australia died when his tractor overturned. They insist that he died from a bullet wound. Various media outlets have carried the contrasting versions of his death from family members, eyewitnesses and the police. Sardesai was not alone here.

    Times of India report on dead farmer's autopsy reportThis is a link to a Times of India story, datelined Rampur:

    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bareilly/kin-say-he-was-shot-autopsy-finds-no-bullet-wound/articleshow/80485330.cms

    I quote from the first paragraph: “A day after the young farmer from UP’s Rampur died during the Republic Day farmers protests in Delhi, his family said they saw a gunshot wound – in hole in his jaw and one just above his ear close to the skull”.

    The article goes on to say that the autopsy report says there was no bullet wound with a quote from the ADG of Bareilly zone, Avinash Chandra.

    This is not the first time that autopsy reports have been contested or overturned. Or have been spectacularly wrong.

    But Sardesai sits in the peculiar position of being both a well-known TV anchor and one who sometimes likes to do ground reports. He is also reviled by BJP supporters for being a “liberal” and by liberals for not being outspoken enough against bigotry. I myself have called him out for his fence-sitting.

    The problem with doing ground reports when you are a prominent studio personality is that you do not any more have sufficient ground contacts, and because you can get easily carried away by your own fame and experience, mistakes are easily made. Also, the more famous you are, the more people are out to get you.

    The question arises though: who was out to get Sardesai?

    In my few years of experience, the journal usually takes the flak for mistakes made by employees. Far worse errors have been made. But no media house behaved like this. You stand by your staff in public. If you feel the journalist has erred, you issue a retraction or an apology. If you think not, you issue a statement saying you stand by the contested report. If you are feeling contentious, you wait for some legal situation to arise before you decide. In this case then, the pressure came from somewhere and we all know where that could be.

    Never have I seen a media house where I have worked throw an employee under the bus for an error of this sort. Suppose it was later proved in another autopsy that Navreet Singh was indeed shot? What would India Today do then? The mysterious death of Justice Loya comes to mind, where questions are raised all the time in different sections of the media. Not very loudly, but they are.

    TV of course operates on its own rules, most of which are inexplicable to me. And yet, TV itself is notorious for pushing fake news, for inciting religion-inspired division and violence and a constant travesty of the core of journalism.

    Media watchdog Newslaundry.com (there is an inside irony here) has compiled this excellent list of gross errors by India Today anchors, for which there was no public punishment:

    https://www.newslaundry.com/2021/01/28/rajdeep-penalised-how-come-these-india-today-anchors-are-still-on-air

    You have here mixed messages from the India Today management to their staff. Although this is not the first time that India Today has done this. The case of Angshukanta Chakraborty being sacked from DailyO is top of the mind:

    https://scroll.in/article/868531/india-today-fires-journalist-over-tweet-criticising-fake-news-peddling-tv-anchors

    The latent intent in the action against Sardesai is clear: do not expect any support from us. The result will be that no one will make any effort – if indeed they do – to work on anything that might upset the Modi government for fear of losing their reputations, jobs and money. We will see more from their star anchors to push the government agenda and hide the truth of India their viewers.

    A sad comedown from India Today’s self-proclaimed “gold standard of journalism”.

    Underlying all this is the veritable collapse of Indian journalism under BJP and government pressure. Sedition cases filed against journalists of National Herald and The Caravan over the farmers protests bring that home.

    https://www.thequint.com/news/india/tharoor-sardesai-and-5-others-filed-for-sedition-by-up-police#read-more

    The Editors Guild of India has also issued a strong statement on this (See here)

    The farmers protests, especially by television, have been portrayed largely from the government’s perspective. The damage done to all journalism is incalculable. And it is only going to get worse.

     

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

     

     

  • Television let’s say is a gone case, but what about print, asks Ranjona Banerji. Plus a look at Page 1s of a cross-section of news dailies

    Did the Indian media pass the journalism test with the Ayodhya verdict coverage? (+NewsStand)

     

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    A senior journalist called on Sunday, shocked that the Indian media was so triumphalist about the Supreme Court decision on Ayodhya. He expected both restraint and objectivity from a profession he had spent his life in. Although he is well aware of the direction the Indian media has taken since 2011, he still expected more from journalism. He discussed the post-Babri Masjid demolition riots in Bombay, in 1992 and 1993 and the impact it made on the city, the nation, our lives.

    Television let’s say is a gone case. They have increasingly over the past six years pushed an aggressive Hindu line, have attacked Muslims, Dalits and other religious and social minorities for demanding rights given to us all in the Constitution, some anchors have actively gone out of their way to engender hatred and social division. So who really had expectations from the TV media who toe and encourage the Modi government, BJP and Sangh Parivar lines?

    That Rajdeep Sardesai would be “objective” on India Today so that Rahul Kanwal and Gaurav Sawant could carry on with their majoritarian, state-sponsored agenda? That NDTV would try its hardest to be fair without aggravating the vindictive government into attacking it with more cases? I don’t have to name all the channels. You know what they do. May be that’s why you watch them. May be you have no option but to work for them because you have to make a living.

    And then, our newspapers. Most of them, especially the language papers, presented front pages that looked like tacky calendar art that made a mockery of Amar Chitra Katha illustrations, like the worst that Ramanand Sagar gave us in his serialisation of the Ramayana. Others carried agency photos of some unkempt men in apparently celebration mode. The Hindus had won was the sentiment and the Muslims better suck it up. Am I being crude? Remember there is a criminal case still ongoing about the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Who are the accused? But of course, it is more than likely that all those VHP, BJP, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena worthies will now be acquitted even though we all saw what happened that day in Ayodhya in 1992. And no doubt our TV patriots will rejoice.

    The inherent contradictions in the Supreme Court judgment are beyond my understanding of the law. I have searched for explanations and analyses of the judgment and while several outline these contradictions, so far I have not come across a cogent explanation for this judgment. And this is the Indian media’s other failure. Many journalists in their personal capacity have said things like: This chapter has now been closed, so now we can get on with it”. But get on with what? As journalists with even a slight knowledge of history, we should know that “closure” is not as easy as a Hollywood romcom’s tips on how to get over a cheating boyfriend. There are consequences and an aware media would tackle them. The very fact that we have an overwhelming number of newspapers sticking paintings of Lord Ram on their front pages is evidence of media failure when India most needs them.

    Even the venerable Hindu has an editorial about the importance of “closure” and that the Supreme Court chose peace over justice.

    If this is the argument that even intelligent people accept then what they are saying is that the fear of a backlash from Hindu forces was so strong that the esteemed judges decided to dump principles of justice. What that says about the future of our democracy, the already fragmented social fabric of India and the power of the Constitution is too scary to even think about.

    The court had its own reasons. But the Indian media has once against failed a basic journalism test.

     

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

     

     
  • Sahitya Aaj Tak- The biggest Indian Literature festival is back with its 4th edition, on 1st, 2nd and 3rd Nov at IGNCA

    New Delhi to witness Aaj Tak litfest next month

    By A Correspondent

     

    New Delhi will witness the fourth edition of ‘Sahitya Aaj Tak,’ the literature festival emphasising on the importance of literature and art in today’s times.

     

    Notes a communique: “For the first time, the event will have a separate stage for English authors from India and South East Asia. Author Ruskin bond will talk about the thoughts behind his works and authors Anita Nair, Megha Pant and K.R. Meera will express their views on feminism.  Journalist Rajdeep Sardesai will talk about the politics of writing and Chetan Bhagat will engage with the audience while in conversation with renowned quiz master Siddhartha Basu. Many more such interesting sessions will be organized on the English stage.”

     

    Over a hundred sessions have been scheduled as part of the Sahitya Aaj Tak art and literature festival.

     

     

  • On air, Gupta thanked the India Today group for standing by his predictions

    Axis My India scores again with India Today exit poll

    By A Correspondent

     

    In May this year, after the Lok Sabha results came in, ace pollster Pradeep Gupta cried. Yesterday, he was visibly moved, his eyes having welled up in the presence of Rajdeep Sardesai and Rahul Kanwal and the studio guests.

     

    The Axis My India Chairman and Managing Director and his team had predicted it right yet again with the Maharashtra and Haryana polls. While other media outlets may have got it wrong, the India Today-Axis My India exit poll delivered the most accurate picture of around 11 crore voters in the two states.

     

    Said Kalli Purie, Vice Chairperson, India Today Group: “I think getting the exit poll right again, especially against popular belief, separates news channels from propaganda channels. It’s our approach on ground reporting and non-alignment that we were able to read data with a level of understanding. And doing it in Haryana elections, where the margin on so many seats was so slim, is a validation of the scientific and thorough approach of Axis.”

     

    Added Gupta, crediting the accuracy to team work and scientific monitoring of voter behaviour. “We follow international best practices. Our methodology is highly refined that helps us eliminate margins of error. Our sampling is the most demographically representative in any given election. We closely, and continuously, monitor voter mood and intent.” On air, Gupta thanked the India Today group for standing by his predictions.

     

  • The annual award, which carries a prize of Rs 2 lakh, was established in the memory of veteran journalist Prem Bhatia, who was well-known for his political reporting and far sightedness.

    Rajdeep Sardesai presented Prem Bhatia Award for political reporting

    By A Correspondent

     

    Senior journalist and India Today TV Consulting Editor Rajdeep Sardesai has been awarded the 2019 Prem Bhatia Award for Outstanding Political Reporting, in an event held in New Delhi on Sunday, August 11.

     

    The annual award, which carries a prize of Rs 2 lakh, was established in the memory of veteran journalist Prem Bhatia, who was well-known for his political reporting and far sightedness. Every year, two awards are given to distinguished journalists in the fields of political and environmental reporting.

     

    Sardesai has been the recipient of many awards in the past, including the Padma Shri (2008), the Ramnath Goenka award for Journalist of the Year (2007) and the International Broadcasters’ Award for his coverage of the 2002 Gujarat riots and many more.

     

    On winning the award, Sardesai said: “I am delighted to receive an award which is for, of, and by journalists and is widely regarded as one of the most credible awards in Indian journalism. The award is a recognition of not just an individual but of a wonderful team at India Today which worked tirelessly while offering the best election coverage of the 2019 general elections”.

     

     

     

  • The show will hosted by leading anchors and editors Rajdeep Sardesai and Rahul Kanwal

    In run-up to 2019, India Today TV launches Political Stock Exchange

    By A Correspondent

     

    With 2019 general elections looming, India Today TV has launched Political Stock Exchange, a show hosted by its leading anchors and editors Rajdeep Sardesai and Rahul Kanwal. Notes a communique: “The show is a next generation innovation that will revolutionise election analysis,” adding: “Political Stock Exchange will air every week, with Rajdeep and Rahul cracking the political divide, tracking the political worth of each party and evaluating their leadership.”

     

     

  • What Goswami did is not excusable, writes Ranjona Banerji. He stole an experience to make himself look bigger and braver. All it has done is make him look smaller and sillier

    Arnab Goswami – A Legend in His Own Mind?

     

    B​y Ranjona Banerji

    What an incredible kerfuffle! In a speech he made a couple of years ago, TV anchor Arnab Goswami told a moving story about how he was attacked by riotous mobs carrying trishuls, close to the chief minister’s residence, while covering the Gujarat riots in 2002. Great story​,​ ​but one slight issue with it. The incident did happen. But it did not happen to Goswami. It happened to Rajdeep Sardesai and other colleagues at NDTV.

    Sardesai put the video of Goswami’s speech up on Twitter, expressing surprise at Goswami’s story. The video was taken down and then put up again. Inevitably, minor spats broke out all over Twitter. An employee of Republic TV standing up for her boss, Goswami, posted a photograph where Goswami was part of the group covering the riots. This claim was quickly demolished by Goswami’s former colleagues – he was sent to Gujarat yes but to Kheda and a week after Sardesai’s car was attacked by a mob. The photo was taken later. Several colleagues from NDTV corroborated Sardesai’s assertion that Goswami was lying. Goswami was also defended, or rather Sardesai was attacked, by actor Anupam Kher who occasionally functions as a spokesperson for the government and now also apparently for Goswami.

    What makes someone lie like this? In an article for DailyO, journalist Swati Chaturvedi called Goswami a “fantasist”. On an India Today TV show on the issue, lawyer Sanjay Hegde pointed out, tongue firmly in cheek, that everyone is entitled to be a “legend in their own minds”.

    But what it comes to down to plain and simple is plagiarism. Writers steal words. Those who do not write, steal experiences. Goswami’s story had many personal touches which add verisimilitude – the fear of the driver who had no ID, Goswami’s preference to sit in the front of a car, the sound of the mob. This was a story he must have internalised until it became his own. Perhaps he really believes it happened to him. Maybe he wished it happened to him. Goswami is a studio creation. He was forgettable in his earlier jobs, whatever he did there. He came into his own thundering behind a desk at Times Now.

    Perhaps however he still carries a torch for his non-existent days as an intrepid reporter, covering perilous ground and breaking earth-shattering stories. Since he does not have enough fireside chat experiences of his own, he has no option but to steal the experiences of others. Or maybe he was just borrowing this one: he was going to return it but he forgot: “I covered the riots but not this part that I wanted to cover. So I thought I’d just try your part for a bit to see what it felt like.”

    Of all the roles that journalism offers you, reporting is only one of them. It is not too late for Goswami to become a reporter. He may find it suits him. But he must be more courageous than he has been in the past. Even recently, during one of Mumbai’s super-rainy days, he did not venture very far from his office and stood under a flyover on Tulsi Pipe Road with an umbrella. That is not proper reporting. Nor is going to Milan ​Subway in Santa Cruz.

    He can instead prowl the countryside of Raigad to find any more clues in Sheena Bora’s murder. It may be more dramatic to go at night. And not wear a suit while he does it, although that can be his signature move. He might also lurk around the Leela Palace hotel in Delhi and solve the Sunanda Pushkar case all by himself.

    But let us get down to brasstacks. What Goswami did is not excusable. He stole an experience to make himself look bigger and braver. All it has done is make him look smaller and sillier.

    It has been a while since Goswami stopped practising any type or form of journalism. If he wants to make a comeback, I am not sure that stealing someone else’s experience is the right way to go about it.

    But who knows. This is the “new India”. Anything is possible.

    **

    Meanwhile, it is terrible that one more journalist was brutally killed, this time in the line of duty. Santanu Bhowmick was covering a protest in Tripura when he was abducted and hacked to death by political elements at the rally. This has sadly become all too common – to kill journalists in an attempt to silence the media. Appalling, unacceptable.

     

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

     

  • I am not sure how legally tenable the complaint is, but in my limited view, it was unethical, writes Pradyuman Maheshwari

    Mediaah!: Is BCCL right in registering a copyright infringement complaint against Arnab Goswami?

    By Pradyuman Maheshwari

     

    Is Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited (BCCL) right in registering a copyright infringement complaint against Arnab Goswami? Yes, it is. I am not sure how legally tenable the complaint is, but in my limited view, it was unethical. When the story was first aired on Republic TV on May 8, one couldn’t help sitting up and take notice. But then along with the various questions that Goswami raised in his ‘super exclusive’, there were some questions that I had.

     

    The Economic Times report (Page 3, May 17, Mumbai edition)

    See report in Economic Times on the complaint: link

    In fact, I tweeted about it (see link).

    The fact that it was only retweeted twice indicates that copyright and editorial ethics aren’t considered very critical and holy to many (or most?) in India. Copyright, it’s often joked, is the right to copy!

    But this isn’t about copyright. That’s something for Times Network owners to take up with the Courts.

    It’s an issue of ethics.

    The recordings of the conversation between Prema Sridevi, the reporter and Shashi Tharoor or Sunanda Pushkar’s Man Friday was done when the reporter reportedly worked with Times Now. Unless her terms expressly stated it, or she was just a freelancer with the channel, the recordings belong to work done when the reporter was an employee.I am not sure what is the legal view on it, but it’s not ethical.

    I am not even raising issues of why Goswami and Sridevi, now Editor-News at Repulic,  didn’t air the recording when they were in Times Now, but that’s not really my concern though it’s a question that must be answered.

    The Nation wants to know…

     

    **

     

    All eyes are now on the BARC India numbers that will be out tomorrow (Thursday, May 18). Given all the promotions and distribution via multiple frequencies, it’s quite likely that Republic will be #1, but the question is that it’s not a play over one week. Republic can’t be spending so much monies on distribution as it’s today, so the real story will emerge after a few weeks when it opts of taking multiple frequencies.

    To Goswami’s credit, his equity with viewers is huger than all the other anchors. The MxMIndia-MRSSINDIA poll earlier this week indicated that Rajdeep Sardesai is a close second and not a distant one in the trust factor, but it’s for India Today to use this to their advantage. Possibly promote Sardesai a little more.

    We’re going to see some interesting times over the next few weeks or months. And we aren’t complaining

     

    Pradyuman Maheshwari is Editor-in-Chief and founder, MxMIndia. The views expressed here are his own.

     

  • Even as the numbers from BARC are awaited, our study throws up some interesting findings… read on

    The MxMIndia-MRSSINDIA Poll on English News Channels

     

    By  A Correspondent

     

    India has seen launches of several media entities. But in recent years, the launch of Republic TV has been the most high profile. This could be possibly because of the entities involved: Arnab Goswami, decidedly the most well-known journalists across genres, and Times Now, which is part of one of India’s largest, richest and most powerful media conglomerates.

     

    While Republic TV launched on May 6, and there have been some numbers from OTT platform Hotstar and digital media that have come in, the numbers of consequence – from BARC India – will be out only on Thursday, May 18.

     

    MxMIndia commissioned leading marketing and opinion research firm MRSS India (www.mrssindia.com) to conduct a small study to find the mood of the masses, especially in urban India.

     

    Here’s the summary of the findings:

    :: Majority of English news channel viewers mentioned they are aware of ‘Republic TV’ English news channel and most of them (41%) perceive it to be ‘Better than Others’.

    :: Centre wise, Mumbai (41%) perceive it as ‘More Credible’, Delhi (39%) find it ‘Old Wine …’, Bengaluru, Chennai, Kolkata and Ahmedabad English news channel viewers find Republic TV ‘Better than others’.

    :: Aggressive approach is found more appropriate for Debates, Breaking news and Analysis & interpretations. whereas, softer approach is found more appropriate for News deliver, soft news, sports and business news.

    :: Most viewers look at News channels to be opinionated but there is also a strong sense of believe that news channels should also play a vital role in bringing about political or social changes.

    :: Overall, print is a more trusted source (51%), closely followed by News channels, currently online (websites) are not considered a trust worthy source. News paper is more trusted by viewers in New Delhi, Bengaluru, Kolkata and Chennai. News Channels are considered better trusted source by viewers in Mumbai and Ahmedabad.

    :: When it is need to verify news, the first source is News Television (54%). This is more in Chennai (54%), Kolkata (68%) and Ahmedabad (67%).

    :: Arnab Goswami and Rajdeep Sardesai are considered the most trusted news anchor by close to 1/3rd of the viewers. Barkha Dutt comes at third place. While Goswami leads comfortably in Bengaluru and Kolkata. Sardesai has higher trust value in New Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai. Dutt is relatively strong in Ahmedabad and Chennai.

    :: Among the English news channels visited in last 1 week, Republic TV was 41%, Times Now is 35%, followed by NDTV 24×7 is 32%.

  • A freewheeling chat Pradyuman Maheshwari had with the founder and chief promoter of Republic TV

    Up, close with Arnab Goswami

     [updated, some typos removed and edited for clarity- Ed]

    It’s not easy to do a soft interview with Arnab Goswami. And the problem is that if you do a hard interview, ask him some probing questions including a few on others in the media, it’s possible you’lol be served a legal notice. Which is also fine… if you’re in the kitchen, you must be ready to face the heat. So after some back-and-forth, this interview was fixed for Monday, April 24. It was 10am, we reached a few minutes late, and were called to the editorial conference room. There was much action in the newsroom, some screaming and shouting and laughing and, no, no howling, but it was nice to see a busy newsroom on a Monday morning. Arnab came in within a few minutes, we apologised for the delay and he did the same, and said he’ll come back as his laptop was missing.

    There were some five people in his office who checked his bag, and we thought we had a nice story on our hands: Arnab’s laptop lost. Now could it be that someone from a competitor may have done that. After all its not unusual for confidential data and info leaking out. The first para of a news report was already in our heads. So were the words for a 120-character tweet. The laptop had all his plans, the Excel sheets, the numbers, the projections… everything. After five minutes, Arnab walked in. Smiling. The laptop was found. It was in a bag inside a big. A few minutes later, the laptop came. Steel grey Macbook Air.

    Arnab in person is dramatically different from what you see him on television. Very gentle, very softspoken. And, most importantly, he listens to you. All ears. He doesn’t interject. He doesn’t shake his head while you are taking. Body language isn’t combative. He is like the Raymond’s man. Complete. Well, so are some big-name anchors, but it’s always a delight to meet Arnab, even if you disagree with his brand of journalism. Though there is no questioning his love for the country. And his commitment to credible journalism. He is one of the few journalists in the country who doesn’t mind asking the tough questions, on camera.

    This is one of the reasons why it will be interesting to see if he can do it all over again with Republic TV. What’s also going to be worth tracking is how his channel fares vis-à-vis competition. And whether competition allows him to prosper. But more about that in another story, on another day.

    Excerpts from a freewheeling 35-minute conversation MxMIndia editor-in-chief Pradyuman Maheshwari had with Republic TV founder and chief promoter Arnab Goswami. Enjoy.

     

    Arnab Goswami: First of all, thanks for doing this.

    Pradyuman Maheshwari: I’m very worried about this interview because one shouldn’t be taken to court. For, even though your answers in some interviews have been politically correct, the questions did name organisations and individuals…

    If it carries on like this then all journalists of India will be marching to court all day instead of newsrooms(laughs).

    So the question which, let me ask with a non-trademarked statement: India wants to know when is the launch?

    Very soon, it’s a matter of days now. You’ve seen my newsroom, it’s buzzing with energy, I’m trying to get the product as close to being perfect as possible. There’s nothing like an absolutely perfect launch though. But having said that, we’re trying to sort of stitch things together… bring all parts of the piece together, get the team to integrate, believe in themselves, believe in the product, believe in the news they putout… get very, very familiar with the technology they are using because some of the technology you’re using here is…

    Different?

    Completely, completely new age. And so I want that familiarisation process to carry on so I’m not setting a hard date for launch yet, though if you ask me can I launch? I can launch right now.

    So no Akshay Trittiya launch, April 28th?

    No, no-no.

    May 1, Maharashtra Day, Gujarat Day…

    No, I don’t believe in these any commemorative events or dates. I believe every day is good for news… we should just have a good run, go with the flow.

    But surely you need to inform the distribution folks?

    The distribution guys are more or less informed. I think most of the people are aware of our channel being launched. In fact, we’re getting a push from the distribution guys to launch early. Some places have already started putting up promos on air in anticipation of our launch; our media campaign should be starting soon. So we are almost there.

    The question is that, the last mile, 4-5 days here or there should be a discretion of the producers of the channel. So whenever the producer of the channel says we’re okay to go, I’ll go.

    So, plus or minus the 4-5 days, May 10, May 1?

    Yes. I would say, yes, pretty much around that.

    May 1 and 10 are too far apart?

    Yes that’s what, I don’t know, I frankly don’t know because that’s not a decision I have. I have a very delegated organisation. So when the editor and the editors and the producers come together and say we’re good to go I’ll go. That’s what we’ve told them. That you keep practising till you’re good to go but I’ve also told that  there’s nothing like getting things perfect.

    Right.

    No, you don’t get things perfect even after running a channel for 10 years and I would come back to my previous channel and find things completely messed up every morning… it was like starting every day as if you’re launching a new channel. So it’s not as if 10 years of familiarisation of running a workfloor makes it perfect, because eventually people are people. But we’ll try and get it as good as possible. I’m very confident of our product and I’m supremely confident about our look-and-feel, our stories, our journalism…

    You mentioned that you’re a well-delegated organisation but surely it’s an Arnab Goswami operation.

    Well, I mean, it, it is not, because  we have delegated responsibility to the youngest and most empowered bunch of editors in any channel. We have empowered our production team to a point where the president of the content of the channel is our Chief Executive Producer. They take decisions completely independently, graphics producers, non-linear editing producers, even news editors don’t ask me. My interaction is with the journalists on the stories. That’s my limited interaction. I can’t stop doing that because that’s my bread-and-butter but beyond that I feel that we have created a system where everybody fits in very well into each other like a jigsaw puzzle which comes together every morning and that’s actually what I enjoy doing. The reason I launched Republic is to make sure that people who are 10 to 15 years younger than me are able to do the news faster than I would have. And it’s a joy to see them working together. What I have done is put together my digital output, input, production, graphics and elite teams, all together in one gigantic newsroom which you are seeing here. You wouldn’t see a newsroom like this where everybody is working together and talking and familiarising and there’s no email conversation, generally people are sort of shouting instructions at each other, so its very well-delegated in that sense…

    And what about you?

    They don’t need me to come in.

    You are now more than just a journalist, you are an entrepreneur. You need to look at how the channel will make the monies. How will you ensure that the great work you are doing on Day 1 also happens on Day 365?

    Yes, yes

    How much of that do you think is going to influence your journalism?

    I think you set the basics right and then you say that these are the five things that we’ve got to do. I bring things down to basics, so I say let’s get the basics right. Let’s do these five things right today and then let’s find a way that these five things will be right regardless of who is sitting on the hot seat, so it’s fine. As far as making money is concerned, see, if you’re popular and you’re watched, and you have impact, people advertise on news channels. And then,  I don’t run an extra-lavish operation, neither is it a barebones operation. But if you are watched and have impact, and you have popularity and you have credibility most of all, then people advertise on English news channels. And I’m 100% confident that with the kind of response I’ve already got from the market, before launch, people believe in our product. I mean the best of the advertisers have lined up and are advertising with us from Day 1.

    And the reason they are doing this is because they believe in the product that people put out, eventually it’s about the content. Eventually it is not about anything that you may do, eventually you may have all the money in the world tomorrow, to hire the most expensive lawyers and threaten to sue every competitor, but you will still lose if your content is not up to the mark… that’s it!

    Distribution is also critical, right? You may have the best of content, but if you don’t spend the money on carriage fees and ensure that various DTH operators carry it, you lose viewership. And that’s a lot of money, it’s a guzzler.

    Ah, well, I’m not negative about it.The fact is that we are already quite disruptive in that model. We are India’s first non-encrypted free-to-air English news channel. There’s no other channel in that space. People love us. Wherever I have gone and travelled across the country from Chennai to Kolkata, people have opened their arms.

    You’ll hence not earn revenues from subscription.

    Doesn’t matter. This is a labour of love. I want to make sure that this channel is watched everywhere in India.

    And let me share something very personal with you. I’ve been to people, I’ve met distributors who come and say that one nervous competitor comes and tells them here is six months of money, extra upfront, can you block ‘Republic’ for two weeks? And yet those people say no. Because they know that when ‘Republic’ launches, everybody will want to watch it. People will want to watch my debate. Those attempts have now become what I call antediluvian.

    Hmmm.

    Right, it’s as antediluvian as a crocodile’s skin. You cannot go ahead anymore and say that I will pay you extra money, almost like ransom money, to try and ensure that another competitor doesn’t enter the market.

    But dirty tricks is a common thing in many businesses. A ’90s cola ad screamed “ye cola hai ya gulab jamun’ when a competing brand launched. It happens with various domains… they ensure shopshelves don’t stock the new product.

    Media is different. In media who is the original, who is the copy, is well-known to people, Also,  you’re actually bringing down whatever is left of the quality of your brand by resorting to  desperate dirty tricks measures… because the moment you do it, behind your back people are laughing at you. Behind the backs of people who are trying to pay six months extra upfront money and say don’t meet Arnab, don’t put out ‘Republic’ for two weeks. They’re even desperately saying if you can block ‘Republic’ for 10 days at the launch, we’ll be happy. Behind the backs of these people everybody laughs at them, so they become the laughing stock of the industry. What am I doing? I’m saying to people, I’m a free non-encrypted channel, I will promise you good journalism, I have good reporters, I have good producers, I’ll present a good product. And the entire distribution fraternity has welcomed me with love and open arms.

    You’ve got someone like Sameer Manchanda of Den on your board, you’ve got Asianet which is a huge plus because we do know that English channels are very widely watched in the South. So you have all the big brains backing you…

    Sameer is actually not on the Board, that’s mistaken, Sameer has invested in my holding company along with 13-14 other people. I never mortgage my personal friendships for business convenience.  I have a very professional equation with Den, and will continue to have a professional equation with Den, having Sameer as one of my investors does not influence at all my relationships with them.

    Two charges have raised against you by an industry which is fairly positive towards you. One is about Rajeev Chandrasekhar being one of your primary investors…

    Yes

    That he has strong links to the NDA… That that given Rajeev Chandrasekhar’s association, will ‘Republic’ really be independent as Arnab claims it will be?

    I’m very proud of the investment from Asianet Online Private Limited and why shouldn’t I be? It is the oldest media entity in India. As Asianet was started way back before any news channel including NDTV started. So there’s a history to the organisation, it has another couple of channels with it and I’m very happy to be associated with Asianet. And I hope that I will also be able to contribute to Asianet in my personal and professional capacity in the future, to its growth. And as far as Rajeev is concerned, he has been a media investor for over a decade now, and he’s invested in several other organisations as well and I am very glad that he through Asianet Online Private Limited has an investment here. I’m very proud of the association. Eventually, everyone who is an investor in this company is also a believer in my journalism.

    Hypothetically, and given the way you do your journalism, if you get belligerent on something that could impact Rajeev’s investments.

    It’s a completely hypothetical and ridiculous question. I’ll tell you why. You should check out: Asianet is the most critical of the BJP in Kerala as well. So when all of us who are in the media business, we work on the news that we carry, I don’t need lectures in balance from the Lutyens’ media, who have sold their souls for the longest time; these are the people who left me to dry when I did CWG, when I did Lalit Gate, these same Lutyens’ media was quiet about it, nervously sitting in one corner, not sure how to respond to it when I was taking on the BJP. I was boycotted by the BJP for a month-and-a-half. People who therefore are invested in me know my journalism. I’ll take on everyone and anyone. I’m only going to be on the side of the people.

    Ah!

    So, these are little straws in the wind. These arguments didn’t even fly.

    The other charge…

    And, and, and, and the point is, who is making these charges. Some person, some individual, who after remaining in India, working in India as a journalist for the longest time, still clings on to his American passport and then questions why people like me are nationalistic? I’m very clear about one thing: each one of the investors in ‘Republic’ believes in nationalism.

    And it is time for people in India to come together and put their straight thoughts on how this country can be made great once again. That’s our common belief. That’s not a right wing belief, it’s a nationalistic belief.

    The reason for my question was what we’ve seen in the case of Raghav Bahl and Network18. The channels were doing well but he had to sell out as went through a bad patch. In politics too we’ve had cases parties puling out of backing a minority government because of a fall-out. Is that a possible worry… just in case something goes wrong?

    I don’t worry about anything because I’m so sure of my product. I don’t worry about anything, I’m a content creator. The only thing I worry about is my TV channel. How is the TV channel going to look? What kind of stories am I going to do? What pictures will run? What the graphics will be? I have never looked ahead at all or looked behind. I look at the next thing to do. The next thing to do at this stage of my professional career is to launch an English news channel called ‘Republic’. Then the next thing to do is to expand my digital presence, through Republic World. I will have a next thing to do after that within three or four months. You know me, I’ll keep shifting my goalpost in terms of my next target, every three to six months, but I’ll move wherever the news can go. See I have respect for Raghav, for Prannoy [Roy], for Karan Thapar, for Rajdeep Sardesai, all these people who are much older to me, they have a right to do things their way, they’ve done things their way, why should I comment on them? But this is 2017. I’m doing things my way.

    It’s interesting that you say you have respect for Rajdeep, I thought you’ll were at loggerheads…

    No, I, why should I be at loggerheads? See, Rajdeep comes from a generation of seniors who have done their bit at that particular point of time and it’s good for him. I wish him luck in whatever he does.

    Tell me, how is Republic going to be different from what you did before, is there going to be…

    I don’t even feel the need for it to be different. I was away from TV for a while and I’m back, and what I do now will be watched for what people like it for. I don’t want to try and do anything in life with this forced pressure on me to be different. I don’t want to be different. I just want to be myself and I think that’s good enough if I can break the news that I like in the way that I want to, good shows that I like and integrate good technology. But one thing is there: that if in the process of doing so, I can marry technology with the intellectual prowess of people who are in their 20s and early 30sand  really understand how to funnel TV and digital together, that’ll be some, small contribution I can make…

    This is also the most fickle generation. As in the loyalty doesn’t exist to any specific show… is that a worry?

    No I’m not worried because while it’s a fickle generation I think today you can create new brands very quickly.

    True.

    With good content. I am actually very happy about the fact that today the media is fragmentable and fragmented. It keeps us on our toes. We are not here to build organisations that say that nobody will compete with us and we will try and build moats around ourselves to ensure that our dominance is forever. I can’t do it. Tomorrow somebody can launch another organisation and challenge me. I would be very willing and open to that challenge. It’s fine. No problem.

    In the past, we seen ratings drop whenever you would go on leave.

    Yes

    And, there there was no second line. A few people who could have been second in line moved out. Now that you are doing a business and you are responsible for people’s jobs and people’s livelihood. Will there be a second line?

    Yes, there is a second line

    On Day 1?

    There is going to be a second line on Day 1. Both in terms of anchors and editorial talent, so what I’ve done is that along with our executive editors and editors, there are about seven people in the second line editorially. And there are at least about six people in the second line in terms of anchoring talent. Besides which I have a very very strong and independent production team, which is now being made completely independent, which runs the entire organisation. I have bequeathed the responsibility of running the organisation on editorial on a day-to-day basis to this group, and they are able to manage it.

    You have done that?

    Yes, I have already done that…

    Seriously?

    While I’m managing it of course, I’ve got to be looking at everything in terms of quality control. But if you ask me in terms of day-to-day, minute-to-minute operations, I intend to create a system where the wheels of the organisation run even without me for a few days.

    And this is very important for me to do because then I can strategically look at other ways in which I can improve the quality of the news, improve the quality of the shows which I do. It will give me more time to think and plan. Having said that, even in my previous organisation, I’d already done it. Now what has happened that after I’ve gone, I’m not responsible for, but while I was there, I had run that kind of a system.

    But…

    Since I’m anchoring a critical slot which is doing well, it gives a perception that everything centres around this individual. The viewer associates the organisation with me. But as an organisation, I’ll take you around our studios and our PCR  and you’ll feel it’s not really [a one-person show].

    But you deserve a holiday, you may get busy with other things. So on those days, ratings shouldn’t fall, right?

    No ratings will not fall, don’t worry. We’re going to be up there on the ratings charts.

    Yes, but there should be a clear second line.

    There is a very strong second line. We have Sheetal Rajput who is India’s original war correspondent, she’s is with us as a senior news editor and anchor. Parikshit Luthra, who would do 9pm on CNN-IBN, has joined us. He’s the news editor in Delhi. We have Hariharan who is a very famous anchor from Tamil Nadu, from Thanthi TV. He has also joined us, he’s a fantastic anchor. Niranjan Narayanswamy, who used to be anchoring on Times Now, is also editor and is anchoring on the channel… I have a very, very strong base of anchors on the channel.

    So just in case you’re not on air on a day, who’ll be the anchor?

    We’ll be firing all cylinders, don’t worry. It’s unlikely that I won’t be there because I have this habit of anchoring from all remote locations at any point of time, I carry a camera with me and nowadays, technology is so brilliant, I can anchor with a phone. I have got a software which if I put it on my Samsung phone or any phone, I mic myself up, and I can broadcast from any place in the world. So I’ve got that technology and I’m working a lot on mobile devices for uplinking, and have been experimenting with stuff that is not been done before for uplinking.

    Two other charges… one of which has been also used by other channels that your brand of journalism is more noise and less of news.

    Yes.

    Are you going to be the same and are happy with that charge?

    I mean I’m thankful to all those people who have carried these campaigns.They can keep carrying the campaigns and I am grateful to them. In fact I would request all of them to carry a few more negative campaigns. They help me. In the year before last, India Today did an entire campaign around this ‘more news, more noise’ kind of thing. Even now NDTV did this whole campaign on more news… why don’t they care about what’s going on in their own organisations rather than talk about me? Let them all fend for themselves, I’ll fend for myself. I have a clear philosophy: in this country, you have to shout to be heard. When we say shout, we mean it in a metaphorical way. You have to assert yourself. You have to raise the right issue. And also sometimes raise it to the right amplitude for it to get attention. You cannot be coy about things and expect the world to change.

    What about the charge that in the latter half of your stint in your previous channel, the orientation was more towards the right. Nationalism got translated often to you being pro-BJP, pro the philosophy of BJP and the philosophy of RSS.You were soft towards Narendra Modi…

    It’s a ridiculous charge. We did LalitGate, was it pro-BJP? For a month-and-a-half we did LalitGate…  We got boycotted by the BJP, was it because we were pro-BJP? We got boycotted by the Aam Aadmi Party, was it because we were pro-AAP? We got boycotted by the Congress, was it because we were pro-Congress? Name one organisation which was boycotted by all three major political parties for stories it did. It was us, and I’m so proud about it! See, some people are touchy for long, some people are touchy for shorter period of time. It doesn’t really matter. As far as my views on the country are concerned, they’ve been consistent even during the Congress government. Tou would remember that after 26/11, I hammered the foreign policy of the Congress government. I questioned it. Anand Sharma and Pranab Mukherjee were incharge at that point of time in South Block, I took on both of them. I questioned them, so my stance on issues of corruption and nationalism has been consistent through the Congress period and the BJP.

    Just because the BJP is in power right now and my position on issues of the nation and nationalism seems to be closer to their perspective, doesn’t make me pro-BJP at all. I disagreed with the Aman ki Asha… why should I agree with the Aman ki Asha approach? This candyfloss daffodil diplomacy that is being encouraged by some media groups is their business. They should introspect. If you see me, while I was in The Times of India, I didn’t ever follow the Aman ki Asha approach. I refused to because I don’t agree with it. Editorially, conceptually, as an Indian, I don’t agree with it and I will not do.

    So suppose…

    So, so the Congress was in power at that time, was I tuning what I did on air to suit a Salman Khurshid’s line on foreign policy? I didn’t. My line is my line and it comes from the heart and my team believes in it and even if they don’t.

    Supposing someone from your team does an Arnab Goswami to you… that he or she may have his own line of thinking which may not agree with yours. What happens then?

    It’s good, it’s okay. We won’t send them a legal notice.

    But you or your associates sent a legal notice to the Wire?

    Who?

    The Wire was sent a legal notice.

    I don’t want to comment on insignificant groups like the Wire. They should really introspect on what journalism they do. If they need me to sell their digital site, I’m sorry for them. It seems to me that they are obsessed with me because there’s no other way they are going to get a few hits. I hope they got a few hits as a result of whatever they put. I spoke to that reporter only because I know him for a long time in NDTV. And I told him when I was speaking to him that I know you are going to do a hit job on me but I’m still speaking to you out of our old association. And he he was laughing away and he knew that I had seen through his game. Sometimes I respect old friendships, so I spoke to him. As far as the Wire is concerned I really hope that they get a few hits because from what I’m seeing from the statistics, nobody seems to be following them.

    You would have Siddharth Varadarajan on your panel, in fact after the Rahul Gandhi interview, you had review the interview.

    Siddharth should introspect on what he’s doing. He is another older generation person. I don’t quarrel with people who are older to me, he should generally introspect now. Think about whether it is time for him to do some journalism rather than commentary.

    Let’s move on…

    No, no, no, let me tell you that.

    Yes?

    It’s very important for people who are doing these digital sites to stop pontificating about others in the media all the time and start doing some stories of their own. It would be really nice. Let them actually roll up their sleeves, go out there, do a few interviews, meet a few people, get out of their Lutyens’ zones, transport themselves outside the ephemeral reality of their air-conditioned chambers in Lutyens’ Delhi, see the real country, watch what’s happening out there, and stop becoming preachy. People in this country are tired of preachers in journalism.

    Hmmm.

    So, therefore, not just to Siddharth, but to a lot of people I would say: start doing some news rather than commenting on the people who are doing news. But I really hope that the Wire gets a few hits because I think they need a few. (Laughs)

    You’ve spoken about Lutyens’ Delhi etc in the past and you’ve been in Mumbai for a while. Didn’t you think of having your headquarters elsewhere…  say, in Bengaluru?

    No, headquarters can be anywhere. It can be in Bengaluru, it can be in Kerala, it can be in Guwahati, it can be in Kolkata, it can be in Srinagar also, but it should not be in Delhi.

    You’re not worried about the film stars who lobby stuff in Mumbai?

    Doesn’t matter so much.

    Or the business guys.

    Film stars and business guys never influence me, I’ve taken on a lot of them whenever I did 2G, CWG, Aircel, Maxus, I’ve seen them through and through at that point of time. As far as film stars are concerned I’m not running award shows where I need film stars to jump around.  So I don’t need to oblige them.

    You will never ever do award shows as part of Republic?

    I’m running a news channel, I don’t have time to organise award shows.

    Person of the Year etc?

    I don’t know, right now I’m only focused on the news.

    So tell me once again

    No, you asked me about film stars, award shows, my answer to you was I don’t need film stars to jump around in award shows that I’m doing. So I’m not necessarily in a position where any film director or film stars need to be on good terms with me and even if they don’t choose to be, it’s fine with me. Some people may need that. Some people might need film stars to oblige them to be photographed with them.

    I’m going to get a legal notice now (laughs).

    No, no, I’m making a general observation that there may be some people who constantly need to be photographed with film stars, directors, to dance around, be photographed with, to feel good about. I don’t need that kind of gratification because I’m a journalist.

    Tell me something: we are 10 days away from launch. In fact, we at MxM wrote that some people feel that you are overdoing your promotion. Your ‘love letters’ and the way you reacted to the legal notice which was a standard statutory notice… Do you think you’re overdoing it?

    I didn’t respond to the legal notice, in fact I’ll tell you one thing, I’ve under-responded to the legal notice. Let them take me on. Let them take me on. I would request the group that has sent me a legal notice to publish in the front page of their newspaper whether they have a right to claim that they crafted the words ‘nation wants to know’ and the sole right to use it. I want the results of that poll to be published, across eight column on the front page of the same newspaper…

    So why did you want to trademark it?

    I’m doing a show. If I’m doing a show called ‘Nation wants to know’ I’ll put out a trademark application but have I said that I will arrest everybody who uses the name? I don’t. I walked down Palladium and I see T-shirts being sold with ‘Nation wants to know’. Now, am I going to arrest the person who sells the T-shirts with ‘Nation wants to know’.  And I think every Indian has a right to use that name, every Indian should use that name. And it is more an assertion, of the questioning spirit of the average Indian citizen. Nobody can appropriate it for themselves and, by the way, I also said in my letter that way. I said quite clearly. And this I’m making a general observation: if any media group makes it its central mission to harass journalists who quit, then it should reassess its own style of operations. If any media group says that if you quit, I will deny you our provident fund, your gratuity… I will hound you, I will send letters to you saying you’ll face untoward action, which are like open threats, right? It is certainly not the kind of practice which should be allowed in the media fraternity. I genuinely believe today if somebody quits my organisation, I’m not going to hound them. I’m not going to make life terrible for them. But I have also seen some young people in my organisation who have been hounded, who have been followed, who have been harassed, who have been denied their dues, denied their monthly payments, right? All of us have stood together for each other. This group of people you see working here (pointing to the newsroom) are people who’ve stood for each other and said we will not be cowed down.

    Are you….

    And therefore, as a general observation, I’m repeating once again my advice is to all media groups to stop using these tactics of legal intimidation versus each other because it doesn’t fetch any returns in the long term.

    But you were part of large organisations too…

    I’m making a general observation. My general, unsolicited gratuitous advice to people who are doing that is they shouldn’t…

    Moving on, tell me, will you do paid content to earn revenues?

    I never sell news.

    AFPs etc.?

    I never sell news. Advertorials are different, but I never sell news and I would not allow it on Republic. It’s my clear and straightforward statement to you.

    Last question: To the person who’s not too much into the news business and not bothered about the battles in the media, what is Republic going to offer?

    Republic is independent, straightforward, hits at everybody equally. It covers the news life from all places, is far more funneled between digital and television, far more technologically savvy. And truly an organisation in which all reporters have the free spirit to go out and report on what they want. In that sense, it’s a revolution. It’s also classically a generational shift in the Indian media. It’s an assertion by content professionals that they can run large mainstream news organisations on their own. It is also a breakaway from unfortunate systems of dynasty which have pervaded in Indian media, where people have only inherited organisations and not built them. This organisation is built brick by brick. It is an assertion to all legacy media groups as a warning to those individuals that do not believe today, that you can, in today’s day of digital and television which continue to have monopolies. Monopolies are about to fall. All these actions that you are seeing, the nervous capers, the dirty tricks of all these people who are trying to  thwart the launch of Republic, are actually an acknowledgement that when Republic launches, their countdown will start from that moment. It is therefore a conflict between new media and legacy media. Republic is new media. I know I’m up against legacy media, I know I’m up against Lutyens’ media, I want legacy media and Lutyens’ media to come together and try and outthink me. Because I said it very clearly, this is a David versus Goliath fight. You’re a journalist, at the end of the day you do know, you will watch a channel, if you believe in the story.

    They have the marketing muscle… they will take away all the hoardings and all the space in the newspapers

    Let them take… let anybody take away all the hoardings, all the space in the newspapers, everything. Let them strip all their physical assets away and say we will deny Arnab all of it, it doesn’t matter.

    So, May 10?

    Somewhere around. It seems you also can’t wait (Laughs). Pradyuman, I have a question for you.

    Yes, ask.

    At the end of the day, will you watch Republic on air?

    Of course I will.

    That’s my straight question.

    Of course I will watch.

    I’m very happy for you.

     

  • The confirmation of the resignation leaves more questions than answers

    It’s final. We won’t see Arnab on Times Now wef next month

    The Amul topical ad released last week on Arnab Goswami going off Times Now

     

    By A Correspondent

     

    For almost a week, Times Network, the television broadcast arm of Bennett Coleman & Company Limited (better known as The Times of India group) chose to stay mum on the resignation of its editor-in-chief and president-news Arnab Goswami. Given that he’s larger than life, and decidedly the most influential face on news television – across languages, India indeed wanted to know about what was up at the Times Now HQ.

     

    But that’s a question only Goswami is allowed to ask. No one –  never ever – can ask this of the channel that puts people in the dock and if they choose not to accept the invite to be on the nightly inquisition, an empty chair is put on camera. Get humiliated if you are on air, and face the same barrage of insults even if you choose to stay away.

     

    All that was fine when Arnab Goswami when the channel grew into its own in early 2008. He had started asking the tough questions then, and the November 26 terror siege ensured that he never looked back. He marshaled his team from the newsroom, and did it so very well. News was not just about reportage, he proved. It was also about studio discussions and debates. Make a spectacle of the 9pm news, if you want to fight the viewership pull of general entertainment channels.

     

    While Times Now is where Goswami concentrated his energies, he has also been incharge of ET Now and Magicbricks Now. According to a communiqué, he will stay on with Times Network till the latter half of this month (Nov 2016) and will continue anchoring the flagship show Newshour till then.

     

    The parting appears to be amicable.

     

    Sample this: M K Anand, MD & CEO, Times Network: “Times Network cherishes the decade long association it had with Arnab. We are sure he will do well in his next endeavor and our good wishes are with him.”

     

    Arnab Goswami: “It’s been an exciting ride at Times Network. We have changed the way news is done and I have worked with fantastic professionals in this journey. To these professionals, I dedicate the success of the last decade as I look forward now to the future”

     

    But not everyone is sure. Senior journalist and MxMIndia columnist Ranjona Banerji writes on MxMIndia today: There is bombastic power on camera and there is velvet-glove-iron-fist power off camera.

     

    Could there have been differences between Goswami and Vineet Jain, Managing Director of BCCL that led to the star editor’s exit? Even if he wasn’t asked to go, did the climate get as difficult to breathe in as Delhi is today?

     

    We won’t know the real reason in a hurry. But, the question that’s now being asked by many is: Where will Arnab go? Who are his mystery backers? Will he (and his new home base) be able to gain the same ratings as Times Now?

     

    And then: will Times Now be able to retain supremacy sans Arnab Goswami? Will it pull in a Rajdeep Sardesai or Barkha Dutt to take charge of its primetime or will it, like CNN-IBN has done with some success, put up lesser knowns on air and grow them. After all, Arnab Goswami wasn’t among the Top 3 English general news anchors until a decade back. That slot was occupied by Rajdeep, Barkha and Prannoy Roy. Arnab belonged to the next line with Vikram Chandra and Sonia Singh Verma.

     

    What will also be important to see is whether Times Now continues with the same brand of news presentation. Ask the tough questions, take sides and almost always damn all those who don’t agree with its views.

     

    Arnab Goswami will be off air from some time in the latter half of this month. Time will tell what happens next. For now, he will continue to be on Times Now.

     

    Clearly, the confirmation of the resignation, has left us with more questions than answers.