Extracts from the paid news report

The paid news report which was hitherto kept hidden was made public after direction from Central Information commission without much publicity. It is available here. The report is 71 pages long. Below, I am listing out few extracts from the report.

In the 1980s, after Sameer Jain became the executive head of Bennett, Coleman

Company Limited (BCCL), publishers of the Times of India (TOI) group of publications, the rules of the Indian media game began to change. Besides initiating cut-throat cover-price competition, marketing was used creatively to make BCCL one of the most profitable media conglomerates in the country.

The media phenomenon that has caused considerable outrage of late has been BCCL’s

2003 decision to start a paid content service called Medianet, which, for a price, openly offers to send journalists to cover product launches or personality-related events. When competing newspapers pointed out the blatant violation of journalistic ethics implicit in such a practice, BCCL’s bosses argued that such advertorials were not appearing in newspapers like the TOI itself, but only in the city-specific colour supplements that highlight society trivia rather than hard news. There was another, more blatant justification of this practice not just by BCCL but other media companies that emulated such a practice after BCCL started it. If public relations (PR) firms are already bribing journalists to ensure that coverage of their clients is carried, what was wrong then with eliminating the intermediary, in this instance, the PR agency – it was argued.

Besides Medianet, BCCL devised another innovative marketing and PR strategy. In 2005, ten companies, including Videocon India and Kinetic Motors, allotted unknown amounts of equity shares to BCCL as part of a deal to enable these firms to receive advertising space in BCCL owned media ventures. The success of the scheme turned BCCL into one of the largest private equity investors in India. At the end of 2007, the media company boasted of investments in 140 companies in aviation, media, retail and entertainment, among other sectors, valued at an estimated Rs 1,500 crore.

Even as the private treaties scheme was apparently aimed at undermining competition to

the TOI, a number of the newspaper's competitors as well as television channels started similar schemes. The private treaties scheme pioneered in the Indian media by BCCL involves giving advertising space to private corporate entities/advertisers in exchange for equity investment- the company officially denies that it also provides favorable editorial coverage to its private treaty clients and/or blacks out adverse comment against its clients.

Examples of “paid news” from the press:

In one particular case, the commission observed certain press advertisements appearing in a leading national daily, which did not disclose the name of the publisher of that advertisement. The commission considered it to be a violation of the said Section 127(A). When asked by the commission to give the details as required under Section 127 (A), the newspaper refused to part with that information on the plea that the said Section 127 (A) did not apply to newspapers.  When the Press Council of India contacted Shri S.K. Mehndiratta, Legal Adviser to the Election Commission of India, he stated that the newspaper being referred to by the Commission in this context was the Times of India and that the letter had been issued by the Commission to the newspaper before the 2004 general elections.

A news item headlined, “Young, dynamic leadership”, eulogizing the Maharashtra Chief Minister Shri Ashok Chavan appeared using exactly similar words from beginning to end in three competing Marathi newspapers – Lokmat, Pudhari and Maharashtra Times. If a question were posed to these three newspapers as to how the exactly same articles appeared in their pages, their reply would be customized. They would say that accidentally one of the press releases of the Congress party went directly to the press without passing through the copy desk and therefore the same news appeared in a similar manner in all three newspapers. But, had it been a press release, it should have been circulated to all newspapers and not just three. The question, therefore, arises as to how the press release found its way only to three newspapers. The news was published by Pudhari on October 7, 2009, whereas, the other two newspapers had carried it on October 10. Is there a practice among these newspapers to carry three-day-old press releases?

The election expenditure statement submitted to the Election Commission, Maharashtra Chief Minister Shri Ashok Chavan, disclosed that he had spent less than Rs 7 lakh on his election campaign. The expenditure limit in terms of election campaign that is imposed on a candidate by the Election Commission of India is Rs 10 lakhs. Of the Rs 7 lakh, Shri Chavan stated that he had spent a mere Rs 5,379 on newspaper advertisements and another Rs 6,000 on advertisements that were on cable television networks. These figures, according to Shri Sainath, are clearly at odds with the unprecedented media coverage the Chief Minister got during the election campaign. “I have with me 89 full pages of news which are devoted just to Shri Ashok Chavan. Most of these news items are printed in colour. A substantial number of these pages have been culled out from those editions of the big Marathi daily newspaper Lokmat, which is the fourth most widely circulated daily in the country according to the National Readership Survey of 2006” said Shri Sainath.

English dailies like the Vidarbha Plus (a supplement of the Times of India) published advertisements for candidates in the form of news. The Vidarbha Plus carried an advertisement disguised as news on the Congress candidate from Amravati assembly constituency, Shri Raosaheb Shekhawat, son of the President of India Smt Pratibha Devisingh Patil. The report carried a headline “Motorbike rally marks conclusions of electoral campaign”. The contents of the news item, that comprised endless praises for Shri Shekhawat, make for interesting reading. No regular reporter would ever use the language of this news item which says, for example, that “Shekhawat epitomizes politeness, potential and promise” and that “he is blessed with extremely charming personality and a charisma (that) attracted huge crowds throughout his campaign”. This news item was published on the very day of polling in the assembly elections.

Yet another Hindi language newspaper, Hindustan, published by HT Media, had prominently carried advertisements of a politician, without identifying him as such, in its Varanasi edition – the text size and the font were designed to give it the look of a news item. On April 30, 2009, the day when elections took place, the Varanasi edition of Hindustan carried an item that deceptively looked like a news story on top of its front page with a headline that suggested that there was a “wave in favour of the Congress”. The following day, the newspaper later apologized to its readers for the mistake and said that it made a distinction between news and advertisements. The representatives of Hindustan told the Press Council of India that when they realised their mistake they were quick to point this out to readers.

On April 13, 2009, the Ranchi edition of Dainik Jagran published two news items on page 7, both relating to the Chatra Lok Sabha constituency. The first item was in favour of the RJD candidate Shri Nagmani with the headline stating: “Nagmani is getting support from every class and section” virtually declaring that he would become the undisputed winner. The same page had another news item claiming that Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, a candidate belonging to JDU, who contested from the same constituency, would emerge a clear winner.

On April 16, the Patna edition of Hindustan published a banner headline stating that the Congress is ready to create history in Bihar but curiously, there was no news item related to this headline.

The Rohtak edition of Haribhoomi published a news item on October 8, 2009 in favour of Congress candidate Shri Birendra Singh. Shri Singh was contesting assembly elections from Uchana constituency. However, this news item carried no byline. This news item claimed that Shri Singh had been getting support from all and sundry in society. Detailed descriptions of the plans of his election campaign were also mentioned. Using the same format, Haribhoomi published a news item in favour of BJP candidate Shri Meva Singh the following day, that is, on October 9, 2009. 

The elephant needs shock therapy

Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. India adopted representative democracy because of its size; people elect their representatives to power on a periodic basis. India is referred to as an elephant (in contrast to Asian tigers) because it is very big in size (population wise) and it moves very slowly (decisions, reforms and growth wise).

During the early years after independence our leaders nurtured democracy, made people centric decisions, and were honest and not motivated by personal gains. Lal Bahadur Shastri resigned accepting moral and constitutional responsibility for a railway accident at Ariyalur in Tamil Nadu that resulted in 144 deaths. While speaking in Parliament on the incident, Nehru stated that he was accepting the resignation because it would set an example in constitutional propriety and not because Shastri was in any way responsible for the accident. There were other examples too. The standards today have stooped so low that the corrupt are rewarded leave alone ethics.

If India could not achieve rapid growth and development until mid 1960s it was because of the excessive socialistic and idealistic orientation of our policies rather than the intent. After Nehru, there was widespread realization that our policies have failed. A crisis situation emerged when USA stopped food aid temporarily. Lal Bahadur Shastri as the PM undertook bold measures and green revolution was the result of such an effort; however more reforms could not be initiated because of his untimely death.

The unsaintly politics and power struggle that followed cripples Indian democracy till today. Criminalization of politics, corruption, dynastic politics, nepotism, cronyism, misuse and abuse of power and bureaucracy, sectionalism, caste politics, politics of divide and rule, politics of fear, politics of religion and a false sense of nationalism etc have become synonymous with Indian democracy. There are numerous examples of the above and hence I will leave it to that.

Reforms to treat these ills have been few and far between: toothless anti-corruption agencies like CBI, CVC and Lokayuktas (in some states) were created. Rajiv Gandhi undertook certain measures to reform and modernize the government but it was not until the 1991 balance of payment crisis (another crisis) that we were to have serious reforms (and these were not enough). There was no intent this time from our politicians, they had to reform because they did not have any choice.

Early 1990s also saw the fall of communism; reforms in many other developing countries; liberalization; globalization and proliferation of information technology. Information began to flow at an unprecedented rate, a vigilant media and civil society emerged. Civil Society pressure has led to some major reforms like Right to Information (NCPRI and others); Code of conduct during elections; Right to know candidate’s criminal background before elections (ADR); Police reforms etc. It has been clear however that there has been no serious initiative from the ruling class towards reforms. Criminalization of politics, corruption, dynastic politics, nepotism, cronyism, misuse and abuse of power and bureaucracy, sectionalism, caste politics, politics of divide and rule, politics of fear and politics of religion and a false sense of nationalism etc have become like multi-drug resistant diseases. At the same time, following the Darwin’s law of evolution corruption has stepped up from license raj to resource raj (read 2G and Coal gate).

The vigilant civil society of India is growing increasingly restive partially due to its successes too. However the political class has adopted an increasingly arrogant stance. Activists and common people are mocked, called guttersnipes, threatened openly and killed. Criticism from our PM of RTI (yes, he speaks sometimes) shows that they created a Frankenstein. There has also been criticism of well functioning constitutional bodies like CAG and Supreme Court. Multiple cross cutting nexuses have emerged: Politics-Criminals, Politics-Bureaucracy, Politics-Businesses, Politics-Media (paid news), Politics-Civil Society and even between rival political parties. Again there are numerous examples of the above.

Why isn’t our democracy able to evolve and reform itself on a continual basis? Why is a crisis like situation always needed? Why does the elephant always need shock therapy? There have been calls for right to recall, right to reject, Lokpal etc but will these reforms be enough? Even if we assume that these are enough, why will the ruling class dig their own grave? Can the citizens of India vote out the corrupt political class for a non-corrupt one? Who is non-corrupt by the way? How can we usher in a mental revolution of oneness in a diverse India and recognize the politics of divide and rule and sectionalism? If education was the answer to all these questions, why has the increasing literacy rate failed to achieve greater democratic reforms?

The answers to these difficult questions require inputs and analyses from multiple fields and themes. Intellectuals, editorials etc continue to suggest and debate various measures to specific and cross cutting issues. I would try to dwell on the solutions in different posts however there is one data that is worth mentioning here. The voter turnout in elections in India is so less that even an insignificant group (number wise) becomes significant in deciding the outcome. Majority of those elected receive less than even 20% of the votes (casted and non-casted). If people start voting in numbers, the dynamics of politics can start changing in India and for good.

The Unusual suspects: Presidential race or Prime Ministerial race ?

The elections for selecting the 13th President of India would take place on 19 July 2012. News sources have kept us updated of every minute backroom political arithmetics. There have been political gives from the Congress in the hope of gets, most notably the recent financial aid to West Bengal and the election of Dimple Yadav uncontested to a Lok Sabha seat. What is Congress expecting now - support from Mulayam and Didi for their presidential candidate - Pranab Mukherjee. 

Why Pranab Mukherjee? Has his political career come to an end? Is he of no political value to congress anymore? If the reason was to handpick a candidate whose heart and soul would be with congress even after election as President, why not anyone else ? The reason is to get Pranab Mukherjee out of the frame for 2014.

In 2014, the general elections to Lok Sabha will take place. Lets see who could be the Prime Ministerial choice in the event of congress coming to power again. 

Sonia Gandhi - no, she likes authority without responsibility.

MMS - nah, surely not again.

P.Chi - are you kidding me ?

Kap.Si. - bad joke, isn't it ?

So only Pranab Mukherjee and Rahul Gandhi left. While the achievements of Rahul Gandhi are being the scion and keeping himself free of controversy by keeping his opinion to himself; Pranab Mukherjee is probably the only leader of note Congress is left with now. With long political career, huge experience and a sound image (and there are a lot more qualities) he would be an ideal candidate for the post of PM. 

Problem: Right then, the thorn to the throne is Pranab. Lets get him out of the way.

Solution: Make him the president. Saap bhi mar jayega aur lathi bhi nahi tutegi.

Freedom of choice without options

India is the largest democracy in the world. We elect our representatives through voting as democracy gives us freedom to choose. But freedom of choice is meaningful only when we have options to choose from. In theory Indian democracy seems perfect but its actual functioning has left much to be desired for.

Various candidates mostly belonging to different political parties contest elections and get elected. As representatives of their area they are voices of people. But the truth is they tow their party line. In India political parties are undemocratic and opaque where dynastic politics and despotism is rampant. There is even a constitutional law popularly known as anti-defection law (inserted through 52^nd amendment in 1985) that kills the democratic spirit.

The provision of this law states: “A member would incur a disqualification under paragraph 2 (1) (a) when he “voluntarily gives up his membership of a party” and under 2 (1) (b) when he/she votes (or abstains from voting) contrary to the directive issued by the party.”

As the name suggests the law is supposed to deter defections by elected representatives (MPs and MLAs) who had earlier given their support to form the government. This is to maintain stability in the government. But the law has put the power in hands of party hierarchy. Provision 2(1)(b) stated above is applicable not only to confidence vote but also to any other decision/law/debate matter.

Do we vote for individuals as our representatives or a political party? Even if we do vote for a political party, is the political party system in India democratic? NO! The political party system in completely opaque, power is concentrated in the hands of few elites who run the show. This breeds dynastic politics and despotism leaving Indian democracy without substance.

Major electoral reforms have long been pending now. There has been talk of bringing right to recall. Right to recall gives the power in the hands of people whereby they can remove their elected representative before the term has ended. This would be an extreme measure and cost of re-elections would be huge. And even if we bring this reform, whom would we re-elect? Does, undemocratic anti-defection law leave us any choice? Yes we do have freedom of choice. Alas, no options to choose from.