On November 3, the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) received two favourable orders by the News Broadcasting and Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA) on their complaints against two separate shows aired by the Times Now Navbharat (TNN). In both the complaints, the NBDSA has asked the broadcaster to order the remove the videos of the shows and, follow the existing Codes of Ethics and guidelines set.
In both the complaints, CJP had highlighted the partisan tenor used by the hosts to spread hatred for a particular religious minority. In one show, the protesting Muslims were deemed to be part of a “Jihadi Gang” conspiring to commit “Zameen Jihad”, while in the other show that host had unfoundedly accused the Muslims of instigating the community to destroy Ram Mandir.
First complaint- Eviction in Uttarakhand
The complaint: On January 30, a complaint had been filed by CJP with the NBDSA against the Times Now Navbharat’s communally divisive show titled “देवभूमि Uttarakhand में ‘जमीन जिहाद’ पर बुलडोजर एक्शन की बारी!” that aired on January 2, 2023. The show was based on the decision given by the Uttarakhand High Court, wherein the court had allowed the use of force to evict 4,000 families living on what the Railways had claimed to be their land.
Through the complaint, CJP had highlighted the polarising remarks that anchor had made with the aim of pushing the far-right propaganda of villianising the Muslim community. The complaint had raised objected to the derogatory and instigating terms used by the anchor, such as “Zameen Jihad”, “Mazhar Jihad”, “Jihaadi Gang” and “bulldozer action of the Dhami government”, to spread stigma and hatred against the Muslim community. The complaint had further argued that the one sided report presented in the show created suspicion in the minds of its viewers and persistently stigmatized the minority community to drive home the point that Muslims are always up to sinister activities by terming everything they into “Jihad” is harmful to the social fabric of this country.
The decision: Based on the submissions of both the parties and the complaint, the NBDSA noted that the broadcaster had given a communal colour to the whole issue of eviction on the orders of the Uttarakhand High Court. The NBDSA held that by portraying the protestors to be a part of a ‘Jihadi Gang’ and terming illegal encroachments as ‘Zameen Jihad’, the broadcaster had “re-iterated the prejudices or stereotypes that are historically used to target, attack and ridicule communities based on their religion.” Furthermore, the NBDSA observed that the word “Jihadi” was used out of context and the tickers in the background also reinforced the narrative of the broadcaster.
Based on the abovementioned, the NBDSA held the channel to be in violation of the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards and the Specific Guidelines covering Reportage on Racial and Religious Harmony. For the violations committed, the NBDSA admonished the broadcaster to not repeat the same in the future.
It was further directed by the statutory authority that the broadcaster was to remove the video of the impugned show from their channel and/or Youtube along with all the hyperlinks, and confirm the same to the NBDSA in writing within 7 days of the order.
The complete order can be read here: (Order 174)
Second complaint- Ram Mandir debate show
The complaint: On January 24, CJP had escalated a complaint to the NBDSA against Times Now Navbharat over their debate show aired on December 30, 2022 titled ‘Rashtravad | 2024 में Ram Mandir का उद्घाटन… अभी हथौड़े’ की बात क्यों?’ The debate topic in the show was an inflammatory comment made by a so-called maulvi Sajid Rashidi who is known to have extremist and unpopular views. By picking his statements as a news point and a point to conduct an hour long debate upon, the complaint urges that the channel gave fire to the discourse that was put to rest with the Supreme Court judgement in the Ayodhya land dispute verdict.
The complaint filed by CJP stated that the channel brazenly picked up a communal statement and made it a point of debate, and further exacerbated the impact of a divisive statement by calling in speakers with radicalized views and allowing them to hurl abuses at each other and also physically assault each other. The complaint further alleged that the intention of the show from the word go was to play with heightened communal sentiments, spread anti-Muslim sentiments and bash the entire Muslim community based on statements made by one Muslim individuals. The complaint also highlighted the problematic tickers that were used by the host, such as “Hindustan me ‘gazwa-e-hind’ ka plan? (Gazwa-i-hind being planned in India?)” and “Ram mandir todne ko uksayenge? (Will he incite them to destroy ram mandir?)”.
The order: The NBDSA took note of the objection raised by the complainant regarding conducting a debate show based on a statement made by Maulana Sajid Rashidi. On this, the NBDSA observed that “while it may have been inappropriate and uncharitable for the broadcaster to conduct a debate on the said topic”, the commission cannot impinge upon the right of the broadcaster to exercise their freedom of speech. Nonetheless, the commission also held that the broadcaster were required to their freedom in accordance with the guidelines, standards, code and advisories of the NBDSA.
Pertaining to this, the NBDSA held that the debate was not in good taste and did not follow the Specific Guidelines for Anchors conducting Programmes including Debates. In view of this, the NBDSA issued a warning to the broadcaster against telecasting such debates as well as be careful in selecting panellists for debates. The NBDSA also advised the broadcaster to strictly adhere to the guidelines set by the Commission. In furtherance to this, the statutory authority also directed the broadcaster to remove the video of the impugned show from their channel and/or Youtube along with all the hyperlinks, and confirm the same to the NBDSA in writing within 7 days of the order.
The complete order can be read here: (Order 173)
In both the cases, CJP was represented by Advocate Aparna Bhatt and Advocate Karishma Maria.
Related:
CJP writes to Times Now Navbharat for giving Israel-Hamas conflict a communal colour
CJP Impact! NBDSA warns News18 India against running communal narrative, fines Rs. 50,000
CJP Impact: NCM’s prompt action against ‘Miya Muslim’ remark; seeks report from Assam DGP