Takes Two to Tango: INDIA Bloc's TV News Anchor Boycott Shows Bias Against Bias

It should surprise few, and it certainly does not surprise me, that some anchors have been blacklisted by political parties forming the opposition alliance.

(Photo: Vibhushita Singh/The Quint)

BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani said of India's press during the dark days of Emergency: "You were asked only to bend, but you crawled."

What if we were to paraphrase that for the current times in which fuming, loudmouthed anchors scream in a manner that pleases the ruling establishment much like the 1975-77 period?

Perhaps: "You were asked to stand upright, but you barked."

Growling prime-time anchors, famous more for their noise than their voice, are part of India's current zeitgeist.

They have picked up tricks from American channels like Fox News and added a generous dash of desi masala to make spicy paneer news pizzas.

The result is mouth-watering or stomach-churning, depending on who you are.

Blacklisting of Anchors by 'INDIA': A Voluntary Boycott

If the press was likened once to lap dogs, critics would say that the current lot is like guard dogs. Instead of gently pleasing those in power, this kind loudly barks for them.

Whatever happened to the medium-scale variety, the alert, informed, and precise kind that used to be called the watchdog?

Whatever the detail, you could say tongue firmly in cheek that Indian journalism has certainly gone to the dogs, though you may quibble on which of those tail-wagging species is more dominant.

Twitter-turned-X is abuzz after the INDIA, the heavily acronymed opposition alliance, publicly announced that its spokespersons would not take part in shows hosted by 14 popular TV news anchors.

In the eyes of those who are fond of such high-decibel anchors, or in the eyes of those who somewhat eloquently defend their lot, this only reveals the Emergency mindset linked to the Congress party-led opposition.

But that is ironic, as the Congress party is no longer the ruling party.

Does a voluntary boycott equal a crackdown by the powers that be?

Clearly not, but public life is such that the lines are often blurred between those in power and those who used to be there or want to be there.

It should surprise few, and it certainly does not surprise me, that some anchors have been blacklisted by political parties forming the opposition alliance.

Media Trial? More Like Media Harangue

For about a decade or more, a crop of anchors who can only be described as right-wing interrogators, have raised their pitch against opposition politicians in a manner that keenly resembles the worldview of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party and/or government. Sometimes they have even aired fake news, breaking the most fundamental principles of journalism.

Day after day, night after night, year after year, opposition leaders of varying hues have been subject to accusatory questions aimed at getting simplistic reactions rather than questions aimed at eliciting facts or perspectives.

If you compare the lot with those who were earlier said to be speaking for the Congress party or its worldview, what we see is a contrast in styles as well as the agenda on which news shows are being focused.

The right-wingers are decidedly shrill, loud, and interrogatory in a style that resembles the backroom of a police detention centre than a courtroom of hushed silences in which lawyers, prosecutors, and witnesses speak in measured tones before a learned judge. This is more like a harangue by the media than a trial.

In contrast, the celebrity anchors now past their prime used words and phrases and emphasis on criticism rather than decibel-laden sweeping statements in which verdicts come ahead of examination. They still do.

That apart, there are issues on which right-wing anchors lay emphasis with a tone that suggests not much room for alternate ideologies as you would expect in a multi-cultural, multi-lingual, multi-party parliamentary system.

National security, terrorism, religious sentiments, corruption, and dynastic rule are the pet themes that are distinct from the old celebrity shows that often stress economic issues like jobs and inflation, governance, secularism, and social harmony.

It is legitimate for the media to emphasise issues it prefers as part of editorial policy or regional focus, but where the shoe pinches for the INDIA grouping is the haranguing style and statements in which the viewers may well left behind with impressions created by the anchors than expressions generated by the spokespersons.

Also, the agenda is set almost always in a manner that puts the opposition on the defensive on some issues when it wants to be on the offensive on other issues.

No wonder, the opposition is not amused.

Self-flagellation and masochistic tendencies are not common among politicians, and certainly not among those who want to win general elections next year.

Congress and BJP, in Power, Are Not Too Different

Now, let us shift the focus to the ruling BJP and its spokespersons, some of whom are able to match the controversial anchors in their shrillness. It seems to suit their style.

Opposition leaders are picking up the tricks but their performing room is limited. With barely any TV channel left in the media landscape that could be described as neutral or anti-government, the opposition's agenda is aired more by websites or YouTube channels.

Is the BJP equally accessible to all? A hard look would say not. Prime Minister Modi is famous for a video in which he ends the interview halfway, unable to accept the interrogatory style of anchor Karan Thapar. Arnab Goswami rose to fame as a dubious role model for right-leaning models much later.

The Prime Minister has not held any news conference during his decade in office and avoids interviews as well unless you count brief interactions that emphasise the softer side of his personality or agenda items close to his heart. His weekly radio broadcasts and a welter of apps and websites promoting his views are one-way streets.

It must be equally remembered that the Nehru-Gandhi family that leads the main opposition Congress party is not famous for giving interviews either. It used to prefer the overseas media in their good old days.

Indira Gandhi famously snubbed a Hindustan Times journalist whose exit from his job was linked to a question he threw at her in a rare press conference.

Rajiv Gandhi unceremoniously announced the firing of his foreign secretary in response to a Pakistani journalist's question at a press conference. More recently, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi preferred to speak to an Instagram influencer than be interviewed during his Bharat Jodo Yatra by a mainstream anchor.

What we need to remember in all this is that public figures are under no obligation to speak to the media, though democratic conventions would expect them to. They have a voluntary right to refuse access, much like any citizen. Earlier this week, I agreed to appear in a TV news channel on condition that I would not be shouted down -- and in turn, agreed not to criticise the channel itself.

Mutual accommodation works better than trust deficit if one believes in truly unbiased debates. The space for unbiased news coverage and prime-time shows aimed at eliciting facts and perspectives rather than cowering or towering reactions has decidedly shrunk in size.

Yatha Audience, Thatha Anchors

Equally, it seems neither political leaders nor audiences seem to miss old-school news media.

Some newspapers and websites are doing excellent work in digging up the context and the background for some of the controversial themes like the Sanatana Dharma controversy or the Kashmir problem.

But who really cares?

In Sanskrit, the preferred classical language of the BJP, the proverb goes Yatha Raja, thatha praja (As the king, so the subjects). In a democracy, the saying gets inverted: As the citizens, so the rulers. We may adapt this saying, much like we did Advani's quote, for the shrill, biased news media: Yatha audience, thatha anchors.

Market research on news in the US has shown that right-wing minds want affirmation while liberal ones like to expand their knowledge.

Maybe the fault is not in our anchors but in our audiences.

The INDIA bloc has shown that a bias against bias may be a good dose of bitter medicine.

Hopefully, its boycott will serve as a wake-up call to restore old-fashioned mainstream journalism to its glory - where issues are broader, the tone is not shrill, where news organisations provide context and perspective, and not just conduct tu-tu, mai-mai slanging matches in the name of debates.

That almost sounds like Tagore's famous lines from his famous poem, Where The Mind Is Without Fear.