Money, political power in media not new in India
There have been occasions in journalism when political forces or corporate houses forced the dismissal of editors.
The last few weeks’ news headlines have featured consistent news of the take-over of NDTV by the Adani Group. Are big business houses and political power more influential to the media? The new generation must be having such a perception. But if one goes through history, Dalmia, Birla, Goenka, Tatas, and Ambanis also played a major role in the media business in the last 75 years. The Tatas had a major share in the leading daily The Statesman, but after heavy pressure from the Congress government, pulled out from the company. One should also accept that political parties and rulers also tried to influence media houses, companies, editors and journalists.
However, the degree changes from time to time.
In an interview with the Financial Times, Chairman of the Adani Group, Gautam Adani, stated that the takeover of NDTV is not a business opportunity but rather a “responsibility”. “(Media) independence means if the government has done something wrong, you say it’s wrong. But at the same time, you should have courage when the government is doing the right thing every day. You have to also say that,” Adani said.
Out of the 880 satellite TV channels, more than 380 are news channels, several among them relaying current affairs 24x7. Before the Adani Group, Reliance Industries Ltd., through Network18 Media and Investments Ltd., owns TV18 Broadcast, Web18 Software Services, Network18 Publishing and Capital18.
An ideal tradition of journalism has been not succumbing to the pressures of politicians and financial bosses. Shared ideals and mutual understanding of boundaries have been helping the organizations move ahead and grow. But there have also been occasions in journalism when the rage of political forces or corporate houses forced the dismissal of editors. Sometimes, such pressures resulted in the closure of newspapers, magazines or TV channels. After independence, many editors of the Times and the Express groups had to leave the organization due to the displeasure of the owners. Not only in North India, in South and Eastern Indian regional newspapers, but many editors were also removed under external or internal pressures. Bizarre is the case of South’s main newspaper “Mathrubhumi”, where a scion of the owners had to withdraw from the editorial post due to political pressure. There is the B.G. Verghese case of being handed over the dismissal letter in the staircase. The Hindustan Times had attracted the ire of the government due to hard anti-government editorial lines and the management decided to axe him. But there had been another incident of similar nature at the Nav Bharat Times in the 1960s where the management handed over the letter of dismissal to the editor at the office gate. Ramnath Goenka’s displeasure too caused many editors to leave the Express group.
Normally, political leaders use journalists for their own political interests and sometimes journalists also have “confusion” that they are powerful with a favourable ruling party. But experience has proved that very few leaders help in the crisis of journalists. Even editors known for their closeness to the Congress never received any help to get jobs or recommended any business house to support some new ventures. In Manmohan Singh’s Congress rule period, Nai Dunia Delhi edition and regional weekly editions suddenly sold out and more than 300 staffers were thrown out, but not a single leader helped any journalist. Even old staffers of the National Herald of 1980s-90s suffered years in Lucknow and Delhi to fight for their dues in courts.
Nowadays, people are talking about the political pressure of the Narendra Modiled government and his party. But Editors like me feel that if you are not campaigning or have no personal agenda, you can do professional journalism and even criticise certain government policies or misdeeds of any leader or serious problems.
A few years back, speaking at a media event (organized by Newslaundry) in Delhi, Anant Goenka, Executive Director of the Indian Express, and Aroon Purie, Chairman and Editor-in-chief, India Today Group, rejected conspiracy theories that the Narendra Modi government is pressuring media houses and arm-twisting them into following a narrative. When commenting on the recent exit of journalists from a media house, where a journalist had reportedly indulged in peddling fake news to build a narrative, Goenka said that if at a “phone call” (from the government to arm-twist the management) managements came through, it would have happened in case of either of the governments. He said that it is up to the proprietor (Ananda Bazar Patrika group based in Kolkata) how they tackle such a “phone call”. Purie, too, agreed with Goenka and said, “It is the proprietor’s call, it is up to him.” Asked whether they have been asked to let go of journalists from their team because of their supposedly anti-government stories, both Purie and Goenka replied in the negative. Purie said that the Modi government lets you (proprietors) know that they are unhappy, unlike the previous governments, who “would do sneaky things and otherwise try and make life difficult for you”. But this government (Modi-led NDA government) says “okay, you’ve done this story, you haven’t done this and that, but it is up to you to decide how much you want to yield or not yield.”
Speaking of cutting off access to journalists, Purie narrated how at one of their events during the UPA, they had invited Salman Rushdie, when he was banned to come to the Jaipur Lit Fest, back in 2012. Many UPA ministers pulled out of the event and even the President of India, who had already accepted the invite, pulled out of the event. Without naming the media house, Purie said that the UPA ministers had pulled out of another media event as well. Purie recalled the time when former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was upset with India Today for having covered the Nellie massacre in Assam in 1983 when an event showcasing her was taking place around that time. According to Purie, she was embarrassed by the coverage of the massacre. When an India Today reporter asked her a question in a press conference in Kolkata, she came down heavily on him and called the reporter “anti-national” and a “traitor”. When Purie was asked which government has been the most controlling in trying to get into the narrative, he dismissed it by saying that it depends on how much one lets the government get into the narrative. He said that the current government is the one which watches them closely and reacts to things which they find are wrong and the publisher needs to be able to defend themselves. Beyond that, Purie said, they (all governments) are the same. Agreeing to what Purie said, Goenka said, ‘I feel there is a lot of talk about how intolerant this government is or how thin-skinned they can be to the press… but it is not new, it has always happened. We have had our editors in jail. It has also got to do with the strength of the government.” The current NDA government in power is the first party with majority power in recent years. Puri reiterated that the pressure from the government is as much as one lets the government pressurize them.
Opposition leaders, activists and a few journalists, while trying to raise the bogey of “undeclared emergency” or while commenting on CBI raids on some media business houses, have tried to insinuate that the Narendra Modi government was trying to muzzle voices in media by putting pressure. The media is like a double-edged sword. It has been instrumental in increasing the strength of socio-political organizations, while at the same time, it has been destroying the fortresses of those deemed to be highly powerful. During the Nehrushastri era, India’s media was largely appreciative or critical on the basis of its mission orientation and ideological grounds. But with increasing political bickering during Indira Gandhi’s regime, the temperament of the media became sharper but divided. Nowadays, media looks fully divided into left or right and some still try to be neutralliberal. In a democracy, everyone is trying to use media power. Pressure, resistance and debate will go on.