Media and National Integration

Excerpts of speech at Seminar on "Media and National Integration" organised by the Department of Communication and Journalism, Osmania University on 30th Jan, 2009

It is not just the Indian polity that has become fragmented. The fragmentation is not limited to just poltics. The Indian political system alone, unfortunately, is the system that is exposed of fragmentation. Today, we can see fragmentation in Executive and fragmentation in Media too, but this is least exposed, because it is they who speak about it. Politicians and political parties come out openly when they speak about caste, community, region, sub-region, language, and the list goes on.

Take for example the Executive, is it not the fact that, in bureaucracy various caste, linguistic, regional and sub-regional groups exist. Is it not the fact that in bureaucracy too, and even lower levels of administration the linguistic groups, the regional groups and the community groups exist. There are instances where the political administrators had to take a cautious approach while taking decisions on appointments of Advocate General, Director General of Police, Chief Secretary and various other crucial positions.

Is media not fragmented? Don’t we have newspapers that have caste, community and regional favorites? You have News television channels that, though do not come out publicly but vouch for a particular community, not to serve immediate interests but to serve the larger political interests. You have newspapers that claim to don the role of vanguard and trumpet to be independent yet pursue the agenda discreetly.

The fragmentation of media has become so serious that there are very few visible options left to conclude that a particular media house, newspaper or television is independent. Even if somebody is genuinely independent, it has become very difficult to prove its independence.

Amid all this comes the news value. Commitment towards to the society, …commitment towards the Nation, and finally, commitment towards the National integration. Today every literate home needs a newspaper, when it comes to television set literacy does not matter. Circulation figures and television ratings apart, no media in this country wants to compromises on National Integration. Unity in diversity is the most popular phrase among the netas or neta-turned editor / owners of television channels or newspapers.

Nobody wants to compromise on the Unity of the Nation. Like philosophers say, religions are the path to reach the God, they can be many but the God is one. Media philosophers say agenda (of media) may be any but India is one. Here comes the conflict. How can you have an agenda that is divisive and yet say I am for unity? And nobody is prepared to accept that the agenda they are pursuing is divisive. Nobody is prepared to accept that the agenda they are pursuing disrupts the national integration.

So what do we do? Do we live with it? Certainly not. We cannot afford to accept divisive politics, it can be by anybody, media, executive or the legislature. A cautious editorial approach, that identifies the agenda of those pursuing divisive politics, is the way out. It is only possible when you have qualified independent editors (which again is a point for big debate). Independent editors who ensure that it is always Nation first.

Why ban opinion polls when you cant ban opinions

Presented to the Parliament Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances and Law and Justice on the Representation of the people (second Amendment) Bill, 2008
By R Shailesh Reddy, Channel Head, Zee 24 Gantalu – Zee News Limited on 24th January, 2009.


After going through the background note on the Representation of the people (Second Amendment) Bill, 2008, it is understood that the Election Commission proposes “restriction on publishing the results of poll surveys” which includes Opinion poll and Exit Polls.

Opinion polls and Exit polls published by the newspapers and telecast by the News Channels are often done by reputed professional agencies. The period of publishing and telecast of Opinion polls begins well before the publication of notification by the Election Commission and the close of the last phase of the elections.

The primary objection of the EC appears to be that the Opinion polls are “motivated and are not impartial”. I the days of multiple manufactured public opinion, there is little scope to influence the voting population. Multiple manufactured public opinion, because there are eight Telugu daily newspapers with a combined circulation of more than 20 lacs ( the actual figure could be more considering the claims of various publication houses) and close to 10 telugu news channels with over 80 percent penetration to the C&S homes. Every newspaper publishes the Opinion polls and News Channels telecast them. The EC rightly pointed out “the results of elections have been vastly different from the result predicted”. Vast majority of the voting population is exposed to more than one Newspaper and News Channel, thereby leaving little scope for the voter to get influenced. In a way, multiple opinions will help the voter take unbiased and independent decision.

Restricting the publication or telecast of Opinion polls infringes upon the right of freedom of speech and expression guranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Leaders of political parties often claim during media conferences and ‘near advertorial’ live shows on television about the possible outcome of elections. There is no bar on claims of the leaders which is likely to have equal quantum of influence on electorate as like the opinion polls. While this right of freedom of speech has been freely exercised by the leaders of political parties it is not justifiable to restrict the media, which often disseminates the opinion emanating out of a scientific methodology followed in conducting and analyzing the results of the Opinion polls.

Strong democratic practices should often be strengthened and not barred for questionable credibility and imaginary influences. Opinion polls, I believe, are part an parcel of the strong democratic practices.

The EC should instead issue regulatory guidelines to streamline the publication and telecast of Opinion polls.

To dispel the apprehensions that Opinion polls are “motivated and not impartial” publication / telecast of any such opinion poll should be mandatorily followed by a claimer. For example, A box on Page 1 with specific font size, the details the agency employed to conduct the survey, sample size vis-à-vis actual size, methodology adopted, period of survey, etc,. would enable the reader / viewer judge the credibility of the publication / TV station and the Opinion poll published / telecast.






The Election commission should look at certifying / registering the agencies involved in conducting Opinion Polls. This would avoid fictious and fly-by-night agencies conducting surveys for the specific purpose of the media houses that are suspected to be taking biased stance.

Finally, media houses survive on credibility. Any loss of credibility would seriously affect its businesses. No business house would risk its business and credibility by manufacturing a public opinion which is far from the opinion in reality.

Can this man change the world?

Can this man change the world? This is the question many people ask, expecting an optimistic answer, while discussing the history Barack Obama would be creating on 20th January, 2009. The words "Yes! We can" became more popular than "either with us or with them". The words of Barack Obama became more popular than the words of George Bush Jr. The Americans heard the words of Bush Jr in the year 2001 biting their nails and fuming with anger and gave a mandate for its president to launch and attack on Afghanistan which the White House called "attack on terrorism". The Americans in the year 2008 too heard the words of Barack Obama with tension on their faces and concern in their hearts when he said "yes! we can".

But can this man really change the world. Can this man really change the way the Americans see the world. What Obama needs to do to change the world and can he really do it? What does change mean to the Americans and the rest of the world. Here are few changes and I believe that without bringing in change in these preceptions the change is incomplete.

Can America stop thinking that they can invade and attack anyone in the world they feel like? American thinks so because nobody can confront it in the battlefield . Millitary expenditures of the USA is more than that of the combined world. Therefore, no affected country would like to confront the mighty US in the battle field and would like to attack in a manner, America calls "terrorist".
America now faces the threat of a 'nuclear terror' and 'bio terror'. The nuclear and bio-terror threat is primarily from the lumpen elements of the countries that are fighting US agression, the countries that developed nuclear weapons as deterrent to possible attack from the American and the Western nations. Can Obama change the way countries like Iran, Afghanistan, Libiya and Iraq look at the United States?

After the Russians pulled out from Afghanistan terrorism stopped in the former Communist Republic. Can Obama pull out its forces from Afghanistan and Iraq and send a message across the globe that he is serious in ending terrorism?

This is the change that one who is affected by terrorism expects from a country that claims itself to 'end terror'. I quote Noam Chomsky from the book 'Perilous Power', " ... under Reagan administration pressure, the United Nations passed resolutions on terrorism; the first major one was in December 1987, a resolution condemning the crime of terrorism in the strongest terms, calling on all the states to work together to eradicate the plague and so on - a long, detailed resolution. It passed, but not unanimously. It passed 153 to 2 with one abstention, Honduras abstained. The two who voted against it were usual two, the United States and Israel".

All the best Mr President. All the best Barack Obama.

Who took law into their hands? Police or Criminals?

Encounter! It is a familiar word for the people of Telangana and more familiar for the people of Warangal district. The word is so familiar that the irate girls in Warangal screamed that the accused who attacked two young girls, Swapnika and Praneeta by acid and greviously injured, be killed in an ‘encounter’.

Instant justice is what the people were demanding. Instant justice because the people think, would act as deterrent. A similar ‘encounter’ in the month of December last year is still fresh in the memory of the people of Warangal and widely talked about those who were afraid that their young ones might be kidnapped for ransom.

People hailed the actions of the police when they killed three persons accused of kidnapping and killing 11 year old Manisha on Dec 26th last year. The kidnapping spree continued till the Warangal police acted and mowed down the kidnappers. To remind you, there was no single case of kidnapping of children reported after the Warangal encounter. Before Warangal, a five year old boy was kidnapped and killed in Tirupati. Another five year old boy from Hyderabad was kidnapped and abandoned in Khammam district.

I am not surprised at the way people reacted when the accused in the ‘acid attack’ case are killed. I am not surprised at the way Varavara Rao and his fellow human rights activists reacted. But one question that remains difficult to be answered is…Who took law into their hands? Police or Criminals?

When Srilakshmi was killed in Vijayawada, the general opinion expressed was that the culprit Manohar was not sentenced ‘appropriately’ and therefore Lakshmi Sujatha, Ayesha and others. The law could not end the kidnaps. The responsibility was on the civil society to react to the crime of the criminals. The civil society failed. The civil society failed to mount pressure on the governments for proper law’s. The civil society failed to sensitize the politicians and the bureaucrats on the need for a law that protects college going girls and un-married women.

It time to act. Its time enact and Act. Enact and Act that does not give scope for the police to take law into their hands. Enact and Act that instills confidence among the police and the girls that the punishment under its provisions will be deterrent. The Act should send chill down the spine of the criminals that punishment under the law is worse than getting killed in an encounter.

Lets act. Lets stop ‘fake encounters’. Lets stop fake encounters that, by default, get sanction from the public. Lets act for an Act. Andhra Pradesh single women (security and protection) Act, 2009. This is not impossible.

Votes not SMSes can end terror

Funny messages started landing in my mobile and mail inboxs. Funny! Really funny. It looked as if the techno savvy patriots have vowed weed out scrupulous politicians and that it is just an SMS / Mail away.
One text message that I received on 27th evening says "Do not worry about those who have come thru boats... Our forces can easily defeat them. WORRY about those who have come thru votes.... Those are our REAL ENEMIES..." Votes! Whose votes? For me in the first instance it looks like a message sent by a terrorist again. While the forces from across the border were successful in attacking Mumbai, the forces, immediately after the attack have unleashed an attack on the democracy in India through 'text messages'. Pakistan that does not believe in democracy (several coups stand testimony to the fact) wants to create unrest in India and thus harm the strong democratic set up that India has, and therefore the message.

"....those who have come through votes", well, whose votes. Do they mean to say that those all who have participated in the electoral process are terrorists or those supporting the terrorists. Every citizen of India who is above 18 years of age and in mentally sound is eligible to vote. And those who have come through votes should be considered as those elected by the citizens who are mentally sound. We should not be worried about those who come either by boats or votes. Whom we should be really worried is about those who do not vote. It is they who are sending 'incompetent' leaders to the Parliament and the Assemblies. Their absence from voting ensures the victory of bootleggers, smugglers, land mafia, coal mafia, communal and anti-nationals, scrupulous businessmen, tax evaders... and the list goes on.

Telecom companies estimated, a week later that the text message revenue after the attack on Mumbai has fetched them the revenue of more than Rs 2o million. Conservative estimate after converting Rs 20 million into number of text messages puts the number of those who have either sent of forwarded the messages at 40 million (considering the fact that most of the mobile phone operators offer 150-200 free SMs per month and the avg tariff of a text message at 50 paise). Well, how many among these 40 million have voted. I claim, hardly half a million.

It is easy to send or forward a text message. It is easy to send or forward a mail. You can do it at the comfort of an air-conditioned office. You can do it at the push of a button. But it is 'painful' to vote. It is 'painful' because you have to register as a voter. It is 'painful' because you have to stand in a que, often in scorching summers and chilling winters. Its 'painful' because it spoils your 'holiday'. (The same applies to celebrating Independence day and Republic Day)

Why take some much pain. Why think so much and waste time when you can claim yourself to be patriotic and that too just by forwarding a text message or a mail. My dear techno savvy patriots this is not democracy. A strong democracy (like the America... most of them believe) cannot be built by exhibiting your creativity in writing text messages and mails. A strong democracy cannot be possible if you think its painful to vote. A strong democracy can be built only when you think voting is as simple as a Text message. A strong democracy is possible only when you think voting is pleasure.

Dont worry about those who have come through votes... WORRY ABOUT THOSE WHO HAVE NOT COME TO VOTE. They could be helping terrorists. They could be helping Pakistan.

Why blame politicians!

The democracy in India has never been under so much criticism (I call it attack) as it was post 26/11. The democracy is under attack not from the Junta as it was, very frequently, in the neighboring Pakistan. The democracy in India is under attack from its ‘stake holders’, the citizens of the country that boasts of being the world’s largest democracy.

The vanguards of democracy, particularly politicians, are embarrassed by the ‘lipstick sporting’ women as was criticized by senior BJP leader Mukthar Abbas Naquvi. Versace sporting Congress MP Milind Deora says, “I am ashamed to be a politician”. Equally ashamed is another politician and BJP leader Shaina NC, a fashion designer and well known P3 woman.

Why blame politicians? There is every reason for the stake holders to blame politicians. There is every reason to blame politicians for repeatedly jeopardizing the interests of the stake holders and hold the ‘democracy’ to ransom and again all in the name of democracy. Why will citizens not blame politicians, when they are so foolish to stage a rasta roko to protest terrorist attack on Mumbai. Why will the citizens not blame politicians when they take along film makers to the Taj.

But why blame politicians alone? Are they not the breed that take birth with your help? Are they entering the portals of power, the Lok Sabha and the Vidhan Sabhas without your consent. Then why blame politicians!

Why blame politicians when those who blame them do not know what it takes to be a politician. Why blame politicians when the ‘Genext’ thinks the Republic Day and Independence Day mean a holiday and good time to spend in the expensive of the pubs that has bartenders dressed up in khadi sporting Gandhi topi. Why blame politicians when national song for those blaming them reminds of AR Rehman and Subha Mudgal.

Does those blaming the politicians know that holiday on the election day means taking ‘pain’ of going to the police station and voting. Does those blaming the politicians know that they are resorting to an act dangerous than terrorism when they think that its painful to vote.

It is not the time to blame politicians. It is time to change the way you see politicians. It is time the change the way democracy functions. It is time change your mindset. Don’t blame politicians. Try to be responsible, if you think politicians are irresponsible. Try to be democratic if you think politicians are demons.

Jai Hind!

Intelligence failure? Whose

Terrorists struck Mumbai. The financial capital, the Indian Hollywood’s night life came to a stand still. The attack left the Mumbaikars shocked and the trauma the rest of India suffered is nothing less. As usual, after every strike, one single question that a typical journalists shoots. Is it the failure of the ‘intelligence’, popularly called in journalistic jargon as ‘intelligence failure’. It can hardly be judged whether the state and the central Intelligence sleuths failed to collect information about such attacks. The intelligence inputs, like weather inputs are universally applicable. I remember during the floods of 2000 in Hyderabad when the weather-men predicted ‘thunder and lightning followed by moderate to heavy rains’. And this was a routine announcement, twelve hours later it was chaos in Hyderabad.

Failure of Intelligence, yes! The INTELLIGENCE has failed. Not the intelligence of the cops who took the bullets of the terrorists on the chest. Not that of the innocent citizens, of various domicile who, before they knew that a bullet from the burst of AK 47 hit them had died. The citizens lost their intelligence. The citizens lost the intelligence to send a message across the border that they are united.

Why will an enemy wait for long and to strike through conventional war to destabilize the country? Why will he wait till the Thackarey’s and sainiks of self proclaimed Senas get into action to do what they want to do? For the Sena’s can anytime be silenced by the democratic process. The intelligence of our leaders has failed. They cannot acknowledge the sacrifices of the men in uniform, without bringing politics into it.

Media calls it Bharat par humla, attack on India, 9/11 of India, 11/26 and the list ends with the number of television channels as every channel wanted to give and ‘Exclusive’ name to the biggest terrorist act in Independent India. Very intelligent?

It time to show how intelligent we are. Its time to show how united we are. Its time to resolve that we will not keep our men in uniform busy ‘arresting’ those questioning / claiming the propriety of Mumbai. Its time to resolve that India is not the fabric made of just the Amar Singh’s, Mulayam’s or the Thackarey’s. Its time to resolve that todays India is the blood, sweat and dream of those who laid down their lives fighting the enemy.

Salutes to the Martyrs. Writing this piece with the confidence that I am safe because You (men in uniform) are there.