Prime Minister Narendra Modi has had the best of relations with Western leaders in his twin terms so far. Not so with the Western media, who have an assortment of descriptors for him ranging from strongman to autocrat. His government's response to the carefully orchestrated verbal assault has been a disdainful scorn for traditional media, masked in a new aura of confidence in national supremacy and a refusal to be the Western media's favourite whipping boy. This was demonstrated yet again when Rahul Gandhi's Indian American advisor inherited from his late father, Sam Pitroda, weaponised recent Western media headlines in an attack on Modi. In an age of WhatsApp forwards and meme fests, news has become content to be embellished with bells and whistles. And what should be highlighted and headlined is usually the responsibility of a select few gatekeepers, not all of them in the media.
As India moves ahead to elect its 18th Lok Sabha since independence, headlines and selective statements culled from newspaper interviews and TV debates have become news. So it was no surprise when Pitroda posted a compilation of over 50 headlines on India carried by various media outlets from all over the world. These headlines, chosen from various publications from Washington to Wellington, reflected, according to the BJP, hatred for Modi and contempt for Indian institutions. The maximum number of headlines from the past few months were chosen from The New York Times, The Guardian, The Economist, Financial Times, LA Times, Reuters, Le Monde, Time magazine and Bloomberg, among others. The message from all was similar, as if it was either dictated by the same thought process. Pitroda’s social media blitz was deliberately launched to influence voters. Within a couple of days, his X post was viewed by over half a million Xians. Not only was it amplified by pro-Congress enthusiasts but also by the Sangh parivar, with the aim of demolishing the credibility of global news organisations.
Some of the headlines chosen by Pitroda:
‘Modification of India is almost complete,’ Time magazine
‘India’s election: fixing a win by outlawing dissent damages democracy,’ The Guardian
‘Progressive South is rejecting Modi,’ Bloomberg
‘The mother of democracy is not in good shape,’ Financial Times
‘Modi’s temple of lies,’ The New York Times
‘India a democracy in name only,’ Le Monde
‘Narendra Modi’s illiberalism may imperil India’s economic progress,’ The Economist
‘Democratic backsliding in India could prompt the West to review its cooperation with Delhi,’ Chatham House
‘Why is Biden silent on Modi and India’s slide toward autocracy?’ LA Times
‘Authoritarian drift in the world’s largest democracy,’ The Informant, New Zealand
When almost all the major international publications were carrying an acerbic diatribe against India, foreign correspondents based in New Delhi also joined what the BJP claimed was a ‘defame and demolish Modi operation’.
Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s South Asia bureau chief Avani Dias left India claiming she wasn’t given a visa and was denied an opportunity to cover the elections. The government dismissed her claims as motivated. But that didn’t deter 30 foreign journalists from issuing a statement saying: “Foreign journalists in India have grappled with increased restrictions on visas and journalism permits for those holding the status of Overseas Citizen of India. The circumstances of Ms Dias’s departure are further cause for concern. We call on the Indian government to facilitate the vital work of a free press in line with India’s democratic traditions.”
Earlier, French journalist Vanessa Dougnac had also accused the government of unilaterally revoking her OCI card for controversial reporting. The government is clearly uncomfortable with the reporting by foreign media, especially given the stark contrast with a considerably more pliable media at home. The government is convinced that these reports are not based on facts and provide distorted views rather than factual news.
Excessive interest from the Western media in Indian elections has always been perceived as interference in domestic affairs. Even Indira Gandhi was targeted by the American media when she refused to buckle under their negative projection. When India conducted nuclear tests during Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s tenure, Western news organisations painted India as the villain of the peace. It blamed India for spending on nuclear weapons rather than the far more urgent need to alleviate poverty.
Barring a few exceptions, self-proclaimed foreign clairvoyants have been predicting doom for India in spite of its record GDP growth. While they may have some justification for their critical reporting, the same Western news conglomerates have been ignoring attacks on freedom of expression in many other countries including China and Russia. As one of the senior BJP leaders put it: “They draw the conclusions first and find the facts later which they get right.” Even External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, who has been cultivating American media his entire career, found faults. He has said the foreign media attacks India “not because they lack information, but because they think they are also political players in our elections”.
He has a point. The tenor of reportage does reflect intentions. Of late, the media has been taking sides based on ideological predilections. Even in the US, the media is divided between those who adore Trump and those who abhor him. A similar situation prevails in India as Modi considers himself the worst victim of a motivated media. Modi loyalists charge that the elitist and illiberal foreign media haven’t been able to digest the rise of a ‘chaiwala’ as the prime minister of the largest democracy.
While it ignores the vicious attacks on the Jewish community in the West, it indulges in Modi-bashing while reporting from India. The PM likes attention, but only on his own terms. Like Indira Gandhi, he too patronises selective media. His visible hostility to the media stems for his experience as Gujarat chief minister. Modi was humiliated by the Western media, which ensured that he was denied a US visa.
As PM, he has kept both the Indian and the foreign press at an arm’s length. He has become the first PM not to address a single press conference in a decade. He has stopped taking the press corps with him on his domestic or foreign visits. And as he seeks a third consecutive mandate, the battle lines have been sharply drawn. Every powerful leader would like to manipulate and manage the media. Dissemination of irresponsible and inaccurate news makes his or her job much easier. That is precisely what the foreign media is doing in many countries including India, with all the news that is not fit to print, leave alone trusted.
PRABHU CHAWLA
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com
Follow him on X @PrabhuChawla