They have clearly gone beyond journalism.” “Journalists should not be advising corporates.” “Is the job of the journalist to connect two political parties?” “Clearly went beyond the 'lakshman rekha ' of journalism.” “This is going beyond the call of journalistic duty and is clearly unethical.”
These are just some of the reactions to the Niira Radia Tapes of conversations with senior journalists, which emerged from obscurity last week in the Supreme Court. What makes it particularly interesting, is that these expressions of outrage come from within the tribe, from senior reporters and editors who went public with the tapes and transcripts, which feature some of the country’s iconic journalists.
Now, reporters are cautioned very early in their careers, that they should report the news, never be the news. But some of the biggest names in the profession evidently forgot this simple rule. Today, they are at the centre of other peoples’ stories about their shenanigans. This too, is a fallout of the 2G spectrum scam.
It is not only about some politicians, bureaucrats and corporates colluding to loot the national exchequer as never before. It is also about journalism losing some of its sheen. True, the veracity of the tapes of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia’s conversations with eminent journalists has not been established by a credible agency, but if they are true, the thin line separating reporters from the power centre has got thinner.
Income tax sleuths on Radia’s trail tapped her telephone last year and in the process stumbled upon a wealth of data on her contacts with top journalists. Her conversations with some journalists on big developments of the time give the impression that the stakes were much higher than a good story.
Radia was in constant touch with journalists capable of influencing editorial policy through their prominent positions in their respective organisations. They also offered their proximity to those in government for manipulations that go beyond journalism.
Among those recorded are NDTV’s star anchor Barkha Dutt, Hindustan Times columnist and editorial advisor Vir Sanghvi, India Today’s Prabhu Chawla, Financial Express editor MK Venu, former India Today journalist Shankar Iyer, and some others.
Both Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi defended their role in this, the biggest controversy to hit the media after the paid news business came to light, as
legitimate journalism, but there are plenty of sceptics.
“Anybody who has read Open Magazine’s cover story would figure out that Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi have not convincingly explained themselves. They say it was part of a ‘journalistic process’. But journalistic process must result in journalism,” says Open editor Manu Joseph.
“As iconic journalists, they have giant reputations to protect and I will be the happiest person on earth if they could fully explain the journalism that followed their conversations with Niira Radia,” he said.
News X political editor Seema Mustafa was equally forthright. “The time has come for editors to declare their assets,” she said. She believes the contents of the Radia tapes are simply not journalism and wants an investigation into them.
“They have clearly gone beyond journalism. They should have turned around and reported how a powerful corporate lobbyist was influencing cabinet berths,” she said. Fixing cabinet berths was not part of journalism.
Mail Today editor Bharat Bhushan also wants editors to declare their assets. “It is sad that people join this profession as idealists seeking to change society and expose corruption but by the time they become editors the message is lost somewhere.”
The tapes clearly revealed that what they were doing went far beyond journalistic ethics. “Journalists should not be advising corporates.” This was not the way they got their stories.
But he finds comfort in the fact that the whistle was blown by journalists themselves. Several publications, including Open, Outlook, Mail Today, The New Indian Express and Deccan Herald carried the stories. Bharat Bhushan says a code of ethics should be signed before taking up a job.
“We already do it in Mail Today ,” he added.
His point that the entire profession is not tainted is proved by the fact that the spectrum scandal was exposed by J Gopikrishnan of The Pioneer . Despite the high stakes, he did not succumb to temptation and carried on with his job that finally led to the ouster of A Raja from the Union cabinet. Though he said he had views on the Radia tapes, he refused to comment.
There is an argument that the journalists who have figured in the tapes earned their reputation over years of hard labour, and should not be discredited without evidence. But evidence can be found only after a thorough investigation.
Journalists hobnobbing with influential persons is not new. Some crossed the line and joined politics through the back door. Others have been rewarded with seats in Parliament. A number of them still live in government accommodation.
The tapes have simply added a new dimension to lobbying in New Delhi, which has always been full of “fixers”. It appears that the tribe is only growing.
Sociologist Shiv Viswanathan said he looked at the episode from a slightly different perspective, without the names attached to it. He said the general trend is that different categories of public relations, journalists, fixers and pimps have merged. “The news is suppressed in Delhi,” he said, adding that journalism was about truth to power but now this has been reversed.
TJS George, editorial advisor of TNIE, said: “I think these tapes reveal that a lot of journalists are involved in a lot of corrupt practices. This is going beyond the call of journalistic duty and is clearly unethical. In no way is this legitimate journalism.”
The practice of bribing journalists had begun first with the financial papers. George said the initial culprits were PR firms. “That culture continues today, only more sophisticated and on a slightly larger scale. The tapes don’t say what
it was, but there was obviously a quid pro quo. That’s what makes this so sickening.”
Investigative journalist Aniruddha Bahal, who has broken big stories like match-fixing in cricket to defence scandals and MPs seeking cash to ask questions, said he could not find any evidence of legitimate journalism in the tapes. “But it isn’t criminal behaviour either,” said the editor of Cobrapost.com.
“Lobbyists by definition are agenda-driven on behalf of their clients. So while they may occasionally be a good starting point on some stories they can never be the middle and end as well. Journalists depending only on them end up carrying plants,” said Bahal, who pioneered sting operations in the country.
Commenting on the tapes, he said: “It sounded too much like journalists were carrying errands for the lobbyist in question. And is the job of the journalist to connect two political parties? In the conversation, the lobbyist is very clear about her agenda.
“She wants to thwart one particular politician from coming into the cabinet. Now, knowing that, is it fair for journalists to further that agenda in whichever way? Absolutely not!” he said.
It’s a view echoed by independent journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta who was on the press council’s sub-committee on paid news.
“In the case of Vir Sanghvi, the tapes give the impression that he was influenced by Radia who was working for her client Mukesh Ambani and it was reflected in one of his articles. He had taken the other view also but it appeared his article was tilted in favour of Mukesh Ambani,” he said.
“Similarly, Barkha Dutt saying that she will speak to so and so in the Congress on the cabinet formation implies that they were helping Radia’s lobbying effort, which clearly went beyond the lakshman rekha of journalism.”
Not everyone was so forthcoming. The usually outspoken editor of Tamil weekly Tughlak , Cho Ramaswamy, said, “One would need more details to ascertain what exactly was going on.”
T N Gopakumar, editor-in-chief of Asianet News , was not very surprised. “This kind of lobbying is not uncommon in places like Delhi. In fact, it keeps happening. The more senior and better known you are as a journalist, the more careful you have to be to ensure that lobbyists don’t use you — either knowingly or inadvertently,” he said.
On their defences, Gopakumar said they may be true — but “are they so careless as to indulge in conversations of this nature?” That said, however, “The evidence of these conversations alone cannot put them in the dock.”
On the image of the Indian media Gopakumar said, “This has definitely hurt the media. It serves to underline that journalists need to be very careful when having conversations with people like (Niira Radia). Some conversations even point to a larger relationship among the people involved.”
This is one of the few occasions when politicians get a chance to rub media noses into the mud, and BJP’s Sushma Swaraj minces no words when she says: “Corporates are deciding which portfolio goes to which party and which particular individual in the party. All the pillars of democracy — Executive,
Judiciary, Legislature, Media — are thus under a cloud.”
This once at least, she seems to have hit the nail on the head.
‘I’m not going to give you another letter’
An excerpt from the tapes show the strength
of the hold Niira Radia had on key journalists.
A conversation between Radia and Ganapathy Subramaniam (ETNow, July 7, 2009)
Niira Radia: What happened to the GVK letter?
Ganapathy: That is separately done no, that is a separate story. So we have said that it should be given much more prominence. But there is a hell of a lot of push and pull. Major fight is going on.
Radia: How can there be a fight when there’s a GVK letter and everything’s on record and all that? How they can try and block it, they can’t block it.
Ganapathy: Yeah but can’t you see the obvious design in the way R&RL is going about projecting its case, how they want to sell gas and all that, blah, blah.
Radia: Yeah yeah absolutely, they’re never going to get that, there’ll be a hue and cry in the country if they do that. But the GVK story, did it come out well?
Ganapathy: Yeah, yeah, we’ve made it much more better.
Radia: Uh-huh, and this got carried what... 8, 9, 10 O’ clock, is it? I was told that it was a lead story, is that true?
Ganapathy: No, not in the paper.
Radia: Why?
Ganapathy: Because they’ re carrying a lot of other things there.
R: So what you’re saying is the GVK story is not the front page story tomorrow?
G: No. We’re trying but it’s not the main story.
R: You know I told her (reporter called Rohini) very clearly and she said she had a word with both Andy and Rahul. And... with you as well and you decided that that would be the front page story. And I told her you do that or I’m not going to give you another letter. Might as well give it to HT then na? Who are willing to give me a front page. I mean, Nayantara was after me on CNBC big time saying give it to me, Mint will carry it on the front page. And Sukumar himself called me and said give it to me, I’ll do it.
blackout seemed concerted
There may have been a virtual media blackout on the coverage of the Niira Radia tapes, but this hasn’t stopped online forums including Twitter and Facebook from going all out to lambast the journalists involved.
On Twitter, the revelations have been called #barkhagate — a reference to the infamous
Watergate scandal in the US in the 1970s.
One of the many tweets on this subject
on November 22: “It’s going to be 5 days since the #barkhagate issue popped up. Let’s face
it, Indian media lacks balls to report against their own.”
Barkha Dutt herself tweeted, saying that every journalist had the right to engage a source and this was no crime.
But the online critics have been relentless. “There has been orchestrated, well-planned media blackout of #barkhagate. Our Democratic Republic is in danger. The 4th Pillar is compromised,” said another tweet.
The Washington Post, in an article on November 22, mentioned that filling in the gap of the “seemingly orchestrated blackout”, was the
social media. “Twitter has played an important role in launching what has become an international conversation on the issue, with the Indian diaspora weighing in,” the article said.
‘I’m not going to give you another letter’
An excerpt from the tapes show the strength of the hold Niira Radia had on key journalists.
A conversation between Radia and Ganapathy Subramaniam ( ETNow , July 7, 2009)
Niira Radia: What happened to the GVK letter?
Ganapathy: That is separately done no, that is a separate story. So we have said that it should be given much more prominence. But there is a hell of a lot of push and pull. Major fight is going on.
Radia: How can there be a fight when there’s a GVK letter and everything’s on record and all that? How they can try and block it, they can’t block it.
Ganapathy: Yeah but can’t you see the obvious design in the way R&RL is going about projecting its case, how they want to sell gas and all that, blah, blah.
Radia: Yeah yeah absolutely, they’re never going to get that, there’ll be a hue and cry in the country if they do that. But the GVK story, did it come out well?
Ganapathy: Yeah, yeah, we’ve made it much more better.
Radia: Uh-huh, and this got carried what... 8, 9, 10 O’ clock, is it? I was told that it was a lead story, is that true?
Ganapathy: No, not in the paper.
Radia: Why?
Ganapathy: Because they’ re carrying a lot of other things there.
R: So what you’re saying is the GVK story is not the front page story tomorrow?
G: No. We’re trying but it’s not the main story.
R: You know I told her (reporter called Rohini) very clearly and she said she had a word with both Andy and Rahul. And... with you as well and you decided that that would be the front page story. And I told her you do that or I’m not going to give you another letter. Might as well give it to HT then na? Who are willing to give me a front page. I mean, Nayantara was after me on CNBC big time saying give it to me, Mint will carry it on the front page. And Sukumar himself called me and said give it to me, I’ll do it.
‘Nobody thought this was a story’
From shock to indifference, the involvement of senior journalists in the Niira Radia tapes have evoked a range of reactions from members of the public who watch and follow the news.
But for a large number of people the tapes came as no surprise.
“This may have just come to light now, but I’m sure it’s been going on behind the scenes for a long time.
Being in the media gives journalists access to avenues of interaction on the highest levels, and so they exploit their position. All these revelations have done is to solidify my already eroding faith in the media,” said Gautham Ram Pingali, a business development consultant in Hyderabad.
On Barkha Dutt, he said “It’s quite shameful for a journalist in her position. I did not expect it of her and can’t understand why she did it. With all those lengthy debates on television, she and other senior journalists give themselves these holier-than-thou images. In that way, it is a good thing these tapes have been revealed. At least now the public will know what they are really like.”
Technology lawyer Vinay Aravind, too, was unsurprised. “I’ve had no trust in the media to begin with and these tapes have not really shocked me. The bigger and more sensational the media has become, the less faith the public have in what they have to say. What seems to have shocked people more than the actual transcripts of the tapes, is the media blackout — the next to no coverage of the story.
In an article written on November 23, ‘Oh what a lovely backout’, columnist with media watchdog The Hoot, Sevanti Ninan said: “The tapes surfaced on the Open and Outlook websites on Thursday-Friday... but no news agency put it out. No newspaper had it Friday morning... Sunday came and went with fat weekend editions, special weekend shows, and guess what, nobody thought this was a story.”
Rohit Koshy, assistant general manager, L & T, reiterated this: “We’ve been reading about the 2G spectrum scandal for days now, but as for these tapes, virtually no paper has covered the scam. Most papers have not even carried the conversations.”
“It has not even featured on Google news. So what exactly does this say about the media?” asked Amrutash Misra, CEO of Life Online, an IT company. “I’m not very surprised that journalists have been implicated in the lobbying. What is surprising is the lack of coverage,” he added.
Sandeep Makam, managing partner of Be positive 24, an advertising agency, on the other hand, was shocked. “The image of the media has definitely taken a beating. In the Indian context, the media is generally held in the highest respect by the public. But now, I think anybody would think twice before accepting what they read or watch on television as the truth. They will wonder if the journalist concerned has a cut.”
Some others, though, don’t want to be too quick to judge the journalists involved. “I think the evidence needs to be examined completely,” said Aarthi S Anand, a lawyer. “Historically, we have always had a deep respect for the media and count on them to form our opinions. From the tapes, it appears as if the journalists were trying to influence governance. This constitutes a misuse of public trust. This exposure is a good time to look at media ethics — especially in the light of the paid news syndrome, politicans owning media houses etc.”
But the majority seemed to feel that this was just one other institution that had lost its credibility. Their views echo an increasingly eroding faith in the media’s ability to report the truth, a fact established by the Edelman Trust Barometer 2010. The report states, “Over the last three years, trust in media has fallen from 48 to 45 per cent among older informed publics. With the dispersion of traditional media’s authority and the rise of opinion journalism, trust in the institution as a whole has waned.”
— datt.gautam@gmail.com
(Inputs from Zubeda Hamid)