Helping The Hindu in investigating charges of bias

The following article was written for MyInd Makers. Reposting it here for reference.

“Investigating the charges of bias” – screamed the op-ed page headline of The Hindu on March 7th. Just for the impact, look at the picture shown above of the newspaper that day.

The Readers Editor (RE) of The Hindu started a 3-series article on “Investigating the charges of Bias” on The Hindu. The RE is a concept unique only to The Hindu. The office of the RE publishes a “corrections and clarifications” column for 5 days of the week, in which significant errors are rectified. For this, the paper deserves kudos. But this article is not about the functioning of the RE (if you are still keen on that, here are a couple of earlier articles and discussions I had with N.Ram on this).

In this first of the three part series of “investigations”, the RE has taken the side of the newspaper, by citing isolated examples of a few cartoons on all Prime Ministers. The RE tells us that, amongst other queries, he has “…also received letters that said that the cartoons are mostly against Prime Minister Narendra Modi, revealing the ideological slant of the newspaper.” So in order to try to prove this wrong, the Readers Editor has chosen to take solace in the fact that The Hindu did publish cartoon against every Prime Minister.

And here is where, the RE has got the gist of the feedback, fundamentally wrong. I say fundamentally wrong, because it is not a daily occurrence that long time readers of the paper write in expressing their anguish. Fundamentally wrong because, by trying to focus on isolated articles on various governments, the RE (and The Hindu) is trying to duck the charge of being supremely biased against *this* Prime Minister.

Therefore dear RE sir, please allow me to make an attempt to help you in these “investigations”.

First, let us not dig way back into the past. Let’s just focus on the last one month. And allow me to borrow this from a disgruntled reader – “I do not have memories of reading anything other than The Hindu. Of late, in the wake of the JNU debate, I’ve found almost all the guest columns on the editorial/perspective pages to be biased. It is tiring to read about articles…”

The JNU coverage in your paper started on February 13th with the following front page article.

I highlighted the byline – “Arrest follows pro-Afzal slogans on campus”. This is simply not true – in other words, the paper is not giving out the actual slogans that were raised on the campus that day.

Slogans like “Bharat ki barbadi tak jung rahegi”, “Bharat ke tukde tukde karenge”, “Tum kitne Afzal maroge, ghar ghar se Afzal niklega”, “Afzal hum sharminda hai, tere khatil zinda hai” – And no, the last two slogans are not “pro-Afzal” – they are a direct threat to breed more terrorists. So instead of presenting the readers with the true picture, the paper began their campaign in earnest. And the deluge that followed for the next 20 days is what made readers feel “tiring”.

Dear Sir, the charge of bias is because of the following statistics. Almost every single day from Feb 15th, there was at least one article in the op-ed page that repeated only one argument ad-nauseum. Don’t trust me? I am linking them all here for your reference.

• Feb. 15th - 1, 2, 3 (this is not even an op-ed piece. This opinion was published in the “news” section)
• Feb 16th – 1, 2, 3 (again, not an op-ed piece. Opinionated headline published in the “news” section)
• Feb 17th – 1, 2 3 (letter by “eminent professors”)
• Feb 18th – A break from long op-eds. But a cartoon, and a long list of letters (almost all supporting The Hindu) made up for these!
• Feb. 19th – 1, 2, 3 (Interview with Umar Khalid’s sister)
• Feb. 20th – 1, 2 (Cartoon)  
• Feb. 21st – Sunday’s are holiday for opinion pages. Thank God for small mercies!
• Feb. 22nd - 1
• Feb. 23rd - 1
• Feb. 25th - 1, 2
• Feb 27th - 1
• Feb 28th – No mercy on a Sunday. 1
• And it went on and on
• March 2nd - 1
• March 5th - 1
• March 9th – 1

And these are just articles from the op-ed pages. Remember, the op-ed page articles are long reads, and getting space on them is very difficult. And yet, the paper dedicated space almost every single day to present one-sided views of the issue engulfing the media. Almost every single day, half page of the “news” section, after the op-ed page, had coverage about this JNU incident. Almost every single day. And this is exactly why readers write in saying – “I have been a reader for the last 30 years and this newspaper has stood out for its reporting. But I have seen this trend change and it is not subtle...”

There is not a single article that counters these labored arguments. Not a single article that presents the other side of the story – a side widely accepted in the country. Not a single article that mentions the actual slogans they shouted.

You may retort saying that this is a temporary phenomenon. You may feel that perhaps the newspaper editorial team got carried away by what was happening. But then you also know that these kind of articles are not new – sample this article on Feb 2nd while talking about Rohith Vemula’s suicide. Remember the coverage over Rohith, sir? I remember. And I do not recollect the newspaper mentioning and discussing Rohith’s comments on the chicanery of Sitaram Yechury. In fact, the editorial even told us that we should not take his suicide letter at face value. Or perhaps you should read this long article that analyses his suicide note, without even once mentioning ASA or SFI. And I keep wondering why? Why? Perhaps because of bias? There, I said it – the charge of bias! It is this coverage that is being questioned sir. It is because of this coverage that readers write in saying “…but it does convey the impression of being against Mr. Modi.”

Alright, let’s wean away from these stale topics of intolerance, anti-nationalism etc. Let’s discuss about policy coverage. At this point, I would like to shamelessly plug two of my articles written in MyInd Makers.

1. A counter point to an op-ed article on Food Security act, and
2. A factual correction for a grossly mis-leading piece on the National Education Policy.

In fact, I have submitted in writing to you an abridged version of the second article, and you have also forwarded to me the author’s response (which is also put up on his blog) – but I still keep wondering – why was the clarification not published in the newspaper? And while I am wondering, all I can hear is one word – bias.

Perhaps I am boring you with too much of Narendra Modi and the BJP. So let’s move to a lighter topic – Rahul Gandhi! Time for another shameless replug – an article written by me in Niti Central. In this, I try to discuss in detail how The Hindu employs lovey-dovey language to cover the speeches of Rahul Gandhi. This is from July last year, and not something this year. Just so that readers don’t have to click on multiple links, I will paste a collage of various reports, and a few snippets of The Hindu while writing “news”.

1. “Championing middle class concerns a significant shift for Rahul”.
2. “Rahul Gandhi could not have done better in selecting the two issues that had a direct bearing on the State’s economy.” (Remember, this is in a state where his party is in power)
3. “A more focused Rahul unsettles BJP”

Do you see the pattern now, sir? Not only does the paper spend reams and reams to write against the NDA government, it also dedicates significant space and efforts to prop up the opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi. Do you hear the scream of “bias” now?

And then there are the small things – on how Kejriwal gets prominent space in the Hyderabad edition; how Kejriwal’s title gains precedence over Arun Jaitley’s; on how Yechury’s rhetoric gets published in the op-ed page, but Arun Jaitley’s response doesn’t; on how the paper tries to tie itself in knots; on how P. Chidambaram’s response gains front page coverage; or when you choose to highlight madrassas over vedic schools.  I can go on and on about these small things, but I think (or I hope) that you get my point about why there is a charge of bias against the paper. And given my hope, I will also not talk about the pre-election coverage of Mr. Modi.

Sir, in your very first article, you have given us a glimpse of what to expect in your next two series, by saying this – “Given the limitations of space, I am restricting my analysis of the cartoons, the editorials, the reportage, and the investigative reports from the days of Indira Gandhi’s prime ministership.”

I’d doubt if anyone is accusing the Hindu of not writing a single article against any other Prime Minister. The charge of bias is because of the consistent negative coverage of *this* government – any small thing that might show *this* government in bad light is prominently highlighted. What else explains the front paging of a report like this?

So for you to pull out a few excerpts from old articles/editorials/investigations related to earlier Prime Ministers will not assuage the feelings of long time readers. There are a couple of articles in the paper that praise Modi too. Just last week, a full page analysis of his foreign policy was published. You know what sir, I almost didn’t read it, thinking it was another tirade!

Please don’t get me wrong sir – because there is nothing wrong in being biased. Being biased essentially means one has made a choice, and can be bold enough to accept the choice. But to claim to be neutral when a barrage of evidence exists against that claim, will only invite a response like this – “The laboured attempt by The Hindu to explain its impartiality is like someone taking a selfie.”

I am an avid reader of the newspaper for more than 20 years now. I recommend the newspaper for students for the science coverage; for the language. And I want to help remove this charge. I hope my references and analysis have helped you a bit in your investigations. I hope your investigations will help this senior citizen change this view of his - “Being an octogenarian reading the paper for decades I have no doubt that The Hindu has veered steadily away from the ideal of fair reporting and contracting views. The anti-Modi stance is glaringly evident…”

Before I sign off, one last thing Sir – I have even written to you multiple times asking for a clarification on an important topic, which is summarized in the graphic below. If any small run BJP leader would have written something like this, I am sure the paper would have been on the forefront demanding explanations from the Prime Minister. Is it possible to get a response on this please?

- See more at: https://www.myind.net/investigating-charges-bias#.dpuf

The Hindu's inexplicable obsession with Hindutva!

The following article was written for MyInd Makers. Reposting it here, for reference. 

A news item in The Hindu today needs to be included as a case study in Journalism schools. The topic under which it should be included is this - “What to write if you don’t have enough news for the day?”

The article titled “How Twitter helped created Brand Modi” would be so iconic, if it weren’t so comic! First, let’s take a look at this graph above.

The orange symbolizes “Hindutva”. Typically, newspapers like The Hindu use “Hindutva” as a derogatory term; they use it to symbolize the violent elements of the followers of Hinduism. What does the “research group” define Hindutva as? It defines thus:

“Hinduism theme — referring to “Hindutva” or Hindu greetings, practices, festival and gods — was dominant in the first two phases but drops off significantly leading to 2014 general elections.”

If you are still not able to believe what you just read, feel free to read it again. “Hindu greetings, practices, festival and gods” is now Hindutva. I am at a loss of words to challenge this logic. Quite obviously, India celebrates a lot of lot of Hindu festivals, so tweets wishing Indians on festivals would be quite high! To classify his greetings to fellow citizens on festivals they celebrate under the garb of religion is chicanery at its best.

Not just this, the chart gives the vaguest possible definition of each of the other bars. What does “youth” mean? If Modi wished that the youth of India follow the path of Swami Vivekananda, does it fall under “Hindutva” or does it fall under “youth”? This must rank as one of the worst kind of “research” on a politician’s tweets.

And then 2 full paragraphs are dedicated to tell us how many retweets and favorites happen with Modi’s tweets. I mean – is this what serious researchers actually do? I am sure better research happens in the arts department of JNU!

To me, the most important message from this “research” is this – “It was found that the largest category (of people that Modi follows) belonged to laypersons, which constituted 41 per cent of the accounts. Such a behavior is an exception to the rule…”

It is this “exception to the rule” that makes Modi special. It is indeed remarkable that Modi chose to follow “laypersons” (including this author); and it is because of this “exception to the rule” that the sections of the Lutyens Delhi hates him! 

Some thoughts on Parliament coverage

The following article was written for MyInd Makers. Pasting it here for reference. 

Narendra Modi’s speeches in Parliament come in a loaded package – content related to various facets of governance, statistics, ideas, wit & humour. His recent reply to the debate in Lok Sabha is no different. Whilst the English media stuck to his comments on the Congress party, other significant points of his speech were conveniently left out.

He suggested that for one week in a session per year, only the first time members should speak and debate. The agenda of the Parliament will not be altered, but we will just have the first time members speak. In any field, ‘freshers’ bring with them, well, freshness! Freshness of thoughts, ideas, and action plans – all of these help in evolving a better system.  Thar is exactly what the Prime Minister was referring to – let’s listen to fresh ideas, and not embroil in the same old “tu-tu, main-main” slanging matches. This is a superb idea, and I really hope this translates into reality and we get to hear the new members.

Another crucial point that the Prime Minister made - an appeal to let the Parliament function – because ultimately the nation loses when the parliament does not function. Most of the work gets stopped in Rajya Sabha because of the likes of Sitaram Yechury. Rahul Gandhi’s party too, plays a very important role in obstructing the progress of the country, in the Rajya Sabha. Infact, this Lok Sabha has a very impressive working record. During the last session, this graphic was doing rounds on the social media.

The political messaging of this graphic aside, have a look at the numbers for the Lok Sabha! Astounding productivity. However, it is a real pity that we don’t get to hear or read more details on the kind of legislation that has transpired in the Lok Sabha, in our main stream media.

For example, did you know what the Modi government is bringing in a law to repeal more than a thousand  old and outdated laws? Did you know that they have already repealed more than 200 such laws? Did you know that 758 such laws have been repealed by the Lok Sabha and are pending in the Rajya Sabha? Haven’t you heard of politicians and journalists asking why we need old laws? But have you heard the same journalists asking why such a simple legislation is being held to ransom by the opposition?

Another example, the PM has told us that even the National Waterways bill is pending. What possible politics could want you to stop this bill? The list of pending bills is long, and the variety of topics these bills cover is a fascinating read. The only website, outside of government websites, that gives us these details is PRS. And it does a phenomenal job at it.

A few years back, I was often questioning the main stream media journalists on twitter, as to why they don’t cover any news when Parliament functions. They are out by the dozen when it came to criticizing the BJP for obstructing Parliament (Note how they don’t blame the Congress now, but that’s not what we want to focus). I wrote an e-mail to a prominent editor-in-chief then, suggesting the following:

“I know Parliament these days isn't functioning much. But on days that it functions, there is sparse coverage in the media. For example - Question Hour. There are days when Question Hour happens without any interruptions. On such days, I suggest that you scroll on your channel, the question being asked and the questioner (just like LS TV does it). You can also do the same for topics raised in Zero Hour. And in your prime time bulletins, you can maybe devote a minute quickly reading all the topics that were discussed in Lok Sabha/Rajya Sabha on that particular day.”

The response was: “there is a thought here. However, LS TV is best equipped in this regard, We will aim to focus on important issues in parliament.” I am yet to see a 30 minute show on English Language TV channel that discusses the various legislations being debated or passed by the Lok Sabha. Actual important issues in parliament need to be discussed threadbare, and maybe it is time for Social Media to take the lead here too. Perhaps, we can bring in a whiff of fresh air to these debates!