The Insider Reports: For Anna or against him? Do I have a choice?

Should the media always take a stand on every issue? At the end of my first journalism class one message was drilled into my head - "Journalists report. They do not give opinion." While I have considered this sacrosanct and tried to support views with facts for every story I have written, most of the media fraternity today seems to think it is their birth right to voice their views.

Media reporting of the Anna Hazare campaign is testimony to that. My piece in the Hoot attempts to highlight this new trend. The piece can be read at http://www.thehoot.org/web/home/story.php?storyid=5458&mod=1&pg=1&sectionId=1&valid=true.

Those who are unable to read it, please find the complete version below:

The Indian English media (mainly TV), perhaps influenced by the American media, seems to want to take sides on every issue worthy of public consumption. Covering the Anna Hazare campaign has been no different. Every prominent English news channel has resorted to taking sides on the issue to such an extent that journalists are falling short of putting words in the mouths of the guests they interview. The frenzy on news shows could rival the emotions on display at the Ram Lila grounds.

A glance at the reportage of the last 10 days indicates that most news organisations felt compelled to take a stand on the issue, perhaps without adequate thought over whether this was sustainable.

CNN IBN's Karan Thapar in his last interview with Digvijaya Singh on the JanLokPal Bill in April, conducted a fact based interview that was surprisingly devoid of any frenzy. Perhaps Mr. Thapar for once did not want to take sides? Or was he going gentle on Singh because he, like Singh, believed that the Anti-Corruption movement would not reach the proportions as it has today?

Then Thapar hosted a show on Aug 19^th to analyze the media reporting of the Anna Hazare Campaign. Perhaps taking a cue from the discussion there, which indicated that the media had made Anna Hazare an icon without attempting to delve deeper into the issue that he was standing for, Thapar launched an Anti-Anna tirade in his show Devil's Advocate on August 21st. He attacked (which is now considered his style) Arvind Kejriwal and Prashant Bhushan with questions whose answers were available in the Indian constitution and in the beginnings of the Anna Hazare movement in December last year.

 To make up for the lack of thought-provoking questions, Thapar kept interrupting Kejriwal and Bhushan while they tried to respond to him. From taking a neutral (almost disinterested stand) in April to going anti-Anna now, I am not sure if taking sides was necessary.

NDTV's Barkha Dutt on her program We The People on Aug 21^st attempted to re-establish that the Anna Hazare campaign was a largely middle class driven movement. How this piece of information would help or disrupt the protests is unknown. However, instead of spending one hour debating on the issue, taking a look at the way the campaign has progressed would have yielded results. The movement encompasses the middle class and grass root society (those taking to protests on road, fasting and galvanizing others) as well as the upper middle class and elite (showing support via social media such as Twitter, Blogs and Face Book). Strangely, in April this year Dutt aired a two hour special show where through a Vox Populi she established that the LokPal Bill would change the lives of middle class Indians.

Had the Jan LokPal Bill progressed beyond the stage of protests, say for enactment or dismissal, Dutt's stand on Aug 21^st, in retrospect, would have been fruitful in determining how public sentiment (or social strata specific behavior and attitudes) can mobilise a cause. That in turn, could provide some insights into consumer behavior for entities (media houses, government, corporates etc) to improve their relationship with the consumers. An example of this is the Enron scam in the United States that was extensively reported and garnered public sentiment for 'zero tolerance to fraud'. Post Enron, the US has seen good models of corporate governance emerge and increased conviction of cases involving white collar crime.

Times NOW took a clear pro-Anna stand with Arnab Goswami not taking kindly to any comments against the Anna Hazare campaign. His discussion with Abhishek Manu Singhvi basely accused the government of procrastination. Further on a debate titled 'Pro and Anti-Anna", when all panelists on the show agreed that perhaps galvanized by raw emotion people were failing to focus on the larger implication of what the Bill would achieve, Goswami accused them of being unable to empathise with middle class sentiments and hence the Anna Hazare campaign as since they were not from that strata of society. A news channel taking such an objection to individual (or perhaps collective) opinion is in bad taste.

Leading English language newspapers too have taken sides in the Anna Hazare campaign, albeit in a more dignified manner (perhaps the lack of a camera and a collar mike does make a difference).

On Anna's arrests, the New Indian Express said that democracy was defiled and covertly indicated that the government would have to pass the Jan LokPal Bill, in order to reverse the damage of reputation.

The Times of India was more restrained while the Hindu indicated that the UPA government was on its way out. The Statesman likened Anna Hazare's arrest to the government's cowardice and pronounced the Government's version of the LokPal Bill to be ineffective and one that would not deliver the results sought by the people.

Subsequent editorials have focused on the need for the government to get its act together and focus on dialogue with Team Anna.

What has this tangled mass of reportage resulted in? A friend recently told me his driver was wearing a 'support Anna' T-shirt. On being asked what he felt about the Jan LokPal Bill, the man answered, "That I don't know. But I know Anna is against corruption and so am I".

While the media reportage has largely focused on the Anna-Government stand-off and the manner of protests, it has not shown as much enthusiasm to peruse the nitty-gritty of the Bill itself. Aside from the points of discontent (such as the inclusion of the Prime Minister and the Judiciary), there has been little else highlighted.

Is this is the only Bill of its kind? What will be the real implications of this Bill from a law and order point of view? Would the scope of this Bill include NGOs, corporate and other entities? Will the enactment of this Bill negate the reasons for us to look at other existing legislation such as the Prevention of Corruption Act or the Prevention of Money Laundering Act? Aside from the Anna version and the Government version, could there be a third, more amenable and still as effective version of the Bill that can be enacted? Will India have the manpower to deal with cases brought to notice through such a Bill? What additional resources would we need to fulfill any gaps?

Such questions have largely gone un-debated. Perhaps a look at similar Ombudsmen provisions across the globe and their effectiveness would have helped develop a more holistic perspective. After all, many developed nations such as the Scandinavian countries, Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong have an Ombudsman with varying degrees of power. The effectiveness of such Ombudsmen is also well documented through annual reports at the respective websites.

The role of the media in a democratic nation is to make people more cognizant of issues, focus on facts and provide a variety of perspectives, irrespective of whether or not they agree with those perspectives. By focusing on only the means adopted for the protest, many senior commentators  such as Arundhati Roy seem to indicate that they have no opinion (and perhaps little knowledge) whatsoever on the contents of the Bill, leaving it for the likes of lawyers to comment upon.

It is the responsibility of news editors to pick and publish (or air) perspectives that are holistic and balanced. For every article that criticizes the way the protests are being conducted, there could be another that lauds that same. If someone supports one of the provisions of the bill, a report objecting to the same should also be voiced so that users are left to shape their opinions while being aware of both sides to an issue.

Earful! : The runaway Baba – Learning for those planning a political marathon

It is not often that scandals of substance come by. My last post in the Earful! series was on IPL gate. Since then, there has not been a single scandal worth digging the nose into. Until now.

Baba Ramdev's actions in recent times have definitely left even the believers dumbstruck. Baba meant good, yet his "camp"aign earned only lathi charges, tears and borrowed clothes. Where did he go wrong? (Aspiring campaigners, this one is for you).

1. There are Babas aplenty but there can only be one Anna:     Get a cool name that is easy to pronounce and understand across India. Ram is sensitive in Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh political circles. Dev becomes Deb in the Odisha-West Bengal belt and "Dave" in the North East… Anna on the other hand is tamper-proof (even using software). Its 4 letters and a palindrome.
2. White is timeless, Saffron is seasonal:     Aspiring news makers need to keep track of fashion but blindly copying it will see you experience several baba moments.  Baba gathered intel on color trends this spring and seemed happy that Orange was in. (So is white incidentally). What he forgot to note was that saffron needs to be offset with accessories of a different color.  And that is precisely where Anna got the better of him. By topping the clean cut white outfit with a humble white Topi, he reinstated the timelessness and relevance of white and earned many cheers.
3. You can no longer be taken seriously if you are half clothed:     This is why one must peer at the fine print in every fashion photo. Flowing and fluid outfits are in. The modified underwear that covers more than you butt is OUT. Also, if you decide to strip, do so only if you have a movie star body and a full body wax. There are enough of us worrying about our pudginess and hair to take note of your nasties.
4. Desi is cool but Phoren maal is a necessity:     Classic case of misplaced priorities. While the fight was against corruption, why do a recap of the Swadeshi movement?  If we banned all phoren maal, our manufacturing units would shut down. We would neither have a charkha nor cotton to spin our own orange robes… And no TV to watch Baba either. On another note try making a 5 year old put on a robe. He'd rather go nude than be caught wearing that.
5. Empty your pockets before passing the blame:     In the fight against phoren corrupting influences, did Baba check his bank balance? What proportion of it was greenbacks and other phoren paisa? Was it all white money? – this was the reporter fraternity tearing baba to bits.  Anna on the other hand declared publicly before his fast began that he owned nothing and lived on the charity extended by his fellow villagers.  Looks like Baba missed a technicality there.
6. You are what you project:     Anna looked calm and acted calm. He dressed for the part with old fashioned cheap glasses, the white ensemble and chappals.  He could have been anyone's grandfather. Endearingly he refused to budge from his stand and won over the government. Baba on the other hand was dressed to kill – hair and make-up included. Instead what he did was flee and that too by attempting to change character by doing a Birdcage. Looks like baba's role model was Riteish Deshmukh.
7. Fasting and feasting don't go together:     Ever seen rich people fasting? They end the 4 hour fast with Gatorade, laddu and some home cooked French fries. Intelligently they don't like to test their limits. Baba is a man of affluence and should have tested his fasting abilities in his Scottish island villa. Perhaps he did not get time away from all the phoren maal and good quality dairy products. The result - Not only did his followers outfast him, they are now trying to figure out if the marble at the Haridwar ashram is of Italian origin.
8. Don't race if you are not confident of winning:     Baba's campaign started after Anna's was over. He assumed he would be running a solo race and emerge winner irrespective of time and other brouhaha.  He should have instead spent time in studying the geography and short cut exit routes from the Ram Lila Maidan. That way he could have looked smart even with a duppatta flying behind him.

Hmm..what can baba do now you ask? Take the first flight out of India and do a world tour propagating yoga and slipping in his corruption agenda every now and then. After all Anna didn't tap our overseas Diaspora for support. It might also be a good idea to shake hands with the Sri Sri Ravishankars and Mata Amritanandamayis of the world.

Office - Office: Out of Office

It is a much frowned upon setting to be used on one’s mail box. To most bosses it is reminder of the pre-liberalization era when offices would run empty at the slightest pretence and enthusiastic young talent (such as them) would be left with a sense of despair. To reportees it symbolizes more work accompanied by a heightened sense of the ‘corporate coolie’ feeling. Little wonder then that corporate India choose to ignore any message containing “Out of Office” as a phrase.


Irrespective of how long or short your Out of Office message is or how precise or convoluted its contents, there will always be some people who would claim ignorance of having seen it. How else do you explain this response: “Someone has accidentally switched on your out of office (setting). Turn it off. Better still call IT Helpdesk and disable that setting permanently.”

Why would “someone” play such a prank? So one replies saying, “It is no accident. I am on leave.” A statement like this will open up a tsunami of responses ranging from the simple “I KNOW” in bold font size 32 all Capitals to the seemingly innocent “Turn it Off. It is flooding my Spam folder,” to the utterly bewildering “How cute! So when are you sending me that completed excel sheet?”. One overzealous boss actually deleted all such messages without even opening them. Her assistant had told her to delete any message that was repetitive and looked phishy.

Having a smart phone only compounds the misery. You end up receiving such rebukes on email and SMS. So how can one tackle these insensitive bombardments?

Next time you set an Out of Office message, change the subject line to “VIRUS ALERT!” and type the following in the body text “This email ID is virus infected. Do not send emails until further notice. Signed – IT Help Desk.” If there is one thing corporate India fears, it is data corruption/ data loss.