This long analysis by the CJP Hate Watch team examines and analyses this new and disturbing phenomenon.

Also read: Broadcasting Bias: CJP’s fight against hatred in Indian news and CJP’s NBDSA Complaints 2023: A look at the repeated violation of ethics and guidelines by Indian television channels

Through the calculated use of misleading clickbait, visuals, and text, there is a persistent effort to jeopardise the nation’s communal harmony and even directly provoke violence. Channels like Zee News, Times Now Navbharat, Aaj Tak, and News 18 India have come under scrutiny for their reporting practices. Orders passed by the NBDSA in 2022, 2023, 2024 –obtained by CJP–point to this trend.

CJP is dedicated to finding and bringing to light instances of Hate Speech, so that the bigots propagating these venomous ideas can be unmasked and brought to justice. To learn more about our campaign against hate speech, please become a member. To support our initiatives, please donate now!

Now, in what appears to be a careful bid to escape this monitoring –on the basis of guidelines that have evolved to ensure neutrality in portrayal of issues and their analysis/interpretation – channels have shifted tack: several of them are, arguably and disproportionately using images featuring prominent Muslim politicians like Asaduddin Owaisi to visually frame any news related to the Muslim community, regardless of his direct involvement in the same. This visual shorthand, clearly perpetuates a subtle yet insidious stereotype, linking diverse issues to a singular, conservative and aggressive Muslim identity. Whereas our team’s close and analytical look at the entire content in the slow, or the role of the anchor appears ‘neutral’, the trigger lies in the thumbnail, ensuring click-baits.

Another example is the say, the reporting on recent incidents like the recent Murshidabad violence (post the passage of the controversial Waqf Amendment Act of 2025) that raises serious questions about journalistic ethics. The evident overuse of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s image in thumbnails and tickers, often accompanied by trigger-phrases signifying approval, like “Yogi Action” or “Yogi Style Action”– even when the news pertains to events outside his jurisdiction—points to attempts to inject a specific aggressive, bullying narrative. Given Adityanath’s strongman image and association with vituperative Hindu nationalism, this visual framing appears designed to evoke a particular triumphal and negative sentiment and moreover, to cater to a specific viewership.

Further, the alleged use of thumbnails featuring both Yogi Adityanath and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in reports about the Murshidabad violence, alongside reports of “forced Hindu migration” framed as a consequence of Muslim dominance in Bengal, further fuels concerns. Such visual juxtapositions and narratives, when presented in a misleading or exaggerated manner, risk creating a climate of fear and suspicion between communities. The apparent haste and lack of ethical boundaries in the pursuit of viewership, as evidenced by the language and visuals employed, paint a concerning picture of a section of the Indian news media seemingly abandoning its responsibility to report truthfully and fairly.

The coverage of the Waqf Act debates further exemplifies this trend. The consistent pairing of Owaisi’s image and the repeated use of terms like “Maulana, Maulana” in tickers during these discussions seem to reinforce pre-existing stereotypes and potentially demonise religious leaders within the Muslim community. This pattern suggests a deliberate attempt to frame issues through a communal lens, potentially exacerbating existing societal fault lines.

Selective visual communication and its negative impact

As experts on visual communication say, this is an inherently selective process. The negative effects on individuals and society of such persistent use of selective attention is emotionally skewed: such attentional bias is therefore often associated with negative or threat-related stimuli, which can impel us to focus on ‘threatening information’ over more neutral stimuli (information and news) in our environment that, in turn leads us collectively to ruminate on distressing thoughts Research suggests this may be a contributing factor to emotional disorders. None deny that over the past decade and more, Indian society has been subject to, or become a victim of such perniciously crafted negative selectivity geared cynically to ensure the alienation of, discrimination towards particular, politically targeted sections.

As this simple visual explanation on attentional bias from The Digitak Kab tells us there are four types of selective perception.

The four stages of selective perception include:
Selective Exposure, Selective Attention, Selective Comprehension, and Selective Retention

To ensure neutrality in reportage and communication, requires a committed non-partisan approach. In simple language, being open-minded. In fact, being open-minded and empathetic is known to be one of the best ways to avoid perception bias. Societally, especially in an environ that has traditionally thrived on pluralism and diversity, is to ensure constant exposure to a wide range of people, opinions and cultures. The more such depiction is rich and nuanced, the more successful will visual communication be in challenging stereotypical assumption.

CJP’s HW Team studied and analysed electronic media coverage and depiction in past weeks and here is what we found.

Zee News

Zee News, consistently vying for viewership, frequently exhibited hasty and insensitive reporting, often disregarding factual accuracy and context. The channel has faced reprimands, including fines, from the NBDSA for its communal and misleading broadcasts. Its thumbnails and clickbait tactics often amplified stereotypes and sensationalism.

Fiction over fact: Zee News’ race for ratings

In its coverage of the Waqf Act issue, Zee News employed inflammatory Hindi captions such as “Jiska Dar Tha Wahi Hua! Waqf Kanoon Par Tagda Jhatka, Muslimo Main Jashan” (What was feared has happened! Big blow on Waqf law, celebration among Muslims), “Supreme Court Ka Order! Khud He Phas Gaye Musalman” (Supreme Court’s order! Muslims themselves got trapped), and “Supreme Court Se Faisla, 21 Crore Muslimo Main Bhagdadh! Live” (Decision from Supreme Court, stampede among 21 crore Muslims! Live). These phrases aimed to create a sense of dramatic tension and portray the Muslim community in a negative light, suggesting celebration at a setback or mass panic from Supreme Court hearing. (The matter is still pending before the Supreme Court).

Polarising thumbnails: icons of power vs. the ‘other’

Furthermore, thumbnails often juxtaposed images of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, UP CM Yogi Adityanath, and AIMIM Chief Asaduddin Owaisi with text like “Waqf Bill Par Palte 24 Crore Musalmaan, Pure Desh Hadkamp! ‘3000 Crore Ki Property Jabt” (24 crore Muslims turned against the Waqf Bill, nationwide uproar! ‘3000 crore property seized’) and “Modi Ko Aisi Saja Denge! Maulanao Ne De Dali Dhamki, Lakho Muslimo Ne Ghere 6 Sahar” (They will give such a punishment to Modi! Maulanas have given a threat, lakhs of Muslims have surrounded 6 cities). The objective of these combinations was to link the Waqf Bill to a supposed nationwide upheaval by the Muslim community, framing it as a threat and invoking strong reactions against the minority group. The inclusion of Modi and Yogi Adityanath’s images likely aimed to resonate with a specific viewership that favours their political stance.

The channel further utilised aggressive and communal language in its thumbnails, such as “Ab Aar-Paar Ki Jang” (Now, a decisive battle), “Modi Ko Saja Denge” (They will punish Modi), “Waqf Gang Ko Yogi Ka Tagda Ultimatum” (Yogi’s strong ultimatum to the Waqf gang), and the derogatory “Miyan Ji Ka Naya Khoof Aa Raha” (The new fear of ‘Miyan Ji’ is coming – ‘Miyan Ji’ is a term sometimes used pejoratively for Muslim men). Other examples of sensational and stereotype-reinforcing thumbnails included “15 Minute..Musalmano Ko Court Main Devkinandan Ka Khula Challenge, Ucchal Pade Maulana” (15 minutes…Devkinandan’s open challenge to Muslims in court, Maulanas jumped up), “Danga Zone Main Lakho Musalmaan, Waqf Par Naya Plan” (Millions of Muslims in riot zone, new plan on Waqf), and “Azadi.. Karnataka Gherne Nikal Pade Lakho Musalmaan Aur Fhir..” (Freedom… Millions of Muslims set out to surround Karnataka and then…).

These captions collectively painted the Muslim community as reactive, prone to violence, and potentially threatening, thus perpetuating negative stereotypes for sensationalism and viewership. The channel’s consistent use of such language and imagery demonstrated a pattern of prioritising sensationalism and the endorsement of harmful stereotypes over responsible and factual journalism.

Times Now Navbharat

Times Now Navbharat exhibited a pattern of sensationalism and misleading reporting on sensitive topics. A key tactic involved the frequent and seemingly gratuitous use of Yogi Adityanath’s image in thumbnails, irrespective of the news story’s location or direct relevance to Uttar Pradesh. Given Yogi Adityanath’s substantial social media following, this strategy appeared to be a deliberate attempt to inflate viewership through clickbait.

Clickbait for sensation: the strategic use of Yogi Adityanath’s image

For instance, in its coverage of the Murshidabad violence, the channel employed Hindi captions like “CM Yogi Ne Khayi Kasam, Ek-Ek Hindu Ko Bachana Hai” (CM Yogi has taken an pledge, he has to save every single Hindu) and “Laato ke Bhoot, Baato Se: Murshidabad Hinsa Par Mamta Se Kya Bole Yogi” (Those who understand force, not words: What did Yogi say to Mamata on Murshidabad violence). The objective of using such text alongside Yogi Adityanath’s picture was to inject a Hindu nationalist angle into the narrative, capitalising on his image as a strong, decisive leader within that political leaning. This sensational framing aimed to attract viewers by tapping into existing social media trends where his supporters often invoke phrases like “Yogi Adityanath Style Action” in response to incidents of violence.

Waqf Act coverage: communal framing over legal nuance

Similarly, the channel’s reporting on the Waqf Act debates prominently featured Yogi Adityanath, using captions such as “Baba ‘Bulldozer Decision’ Lenge”, SC Se 555 Ka Intjaar,” (Baba will take a ‘Bulldozer Decision’, waiting for 555 from SC) and “Yogi Ki Table Par Waqf Ki 1.25 Lakh Files” (1.25 lakh Waqf files on Yogi’s table). The objective behind this consistent visual and textual association was to communalise the issue. By exclusively highlighting a Chief Minister known for his pro-Hindutva stance, the channel seemingly sought to frame the Waqf Act discussions along Hindu-Muslim lines, catering to a specific viewership segment and sensationalising the topic for increased clicks, rather than providing an objective analysis of the law.

Even when reporting on the legal challenge to the Waqf Act, the thumbnail read, “Owaisi, Sibbal, Singhvi Ka Chehra Utara, Supreme Court Ne Waqf Kanoon Par Modi Ka Kaam Aasan Kar Diya” (Owaisi, Sibbal, Singhvi’s faces fell, Supreme Court made Modi’s work easier on Waqf law). This caption, paired with the news of the legal challenge, aimed to portray it as a setback for Muslim leaders and lawyers representing them.

Engineered conflict: pitting leaders for spectacle

The channel also utilised thumbnails featuring contrasting figures like Asaduddin Owaisi and T. Raja Singh with captions such as “Waqf Bill Ke Virodh Main Owaisi Ki Hunkar, T. Raja Ne Diya Karara Jawab” (Owaisi’s roar in opposition to the Waqf Bill, T. Raja gave a strong reply). This pitting of opposing figures, along with the insensitive and incomplete phrase attributed to T. Raja Singh, “Tumhara Baap Bhi…” (Even your father…), served to create conflict and sensationalism, drawing viewers in with the promise of a heated exchange and appealing to potentially divisive sentiments. This approach prioritised sensationalism and clickbait over providing viewers with a nuanced understanding of the Waqf Act and the related discussions.

Aaj Tak

Similarly, Aaj Tak also appeared to engage in a comparable pattern of sensationalism, albeit to a seemingly lesser degree. Its thumbnails concerning the Waqf Bill, such as “Waqf Ka Waqt Aa Gaya!” (The time for Waqf has come!) and “Waqf Bill Se Musalmano ki Jameene Chinne Wali Hain?” (Will the Waqf Bill snatch away Muslims’ lands?), while perhaps less overtly inflammatory than some other channels, still employed a degree of sensationalism and potentially misleading framing. The phrase “Waqf Ka Waqt Aa Gaya!” (The time for Waqf has come!) Carries a sense of impending and significant change, potentially creating unease or excitement depending on the viewer’s perspective. The question “Waqf Bill Se Musalmano ki Jameene Chinne Wali Hain?” (Will the Waqf Bill snatch away Muslims’ lands?) Directly plays on potential anxieties within the Muslim community, suggesting a threat to their properties without providing factual context.

Even in the form of a question, such a thumbnail can contribute to the spread of misinformation and the amplification of fear for the sake of attracting clicks and viewership. While not resorting to overtly communal language or imagery to the same extent as some other channels, Aaj Tak’s use of these types of thumbnails still indicates a leaning towards sensationalism when covering sensitive religious and legal issues, potentially contributing to a climate of anxiety and suspicion.

India TV

India TV also mirrored this concerning trend in its reporting, employing provocative and misleading language that endorsed harmful stereotypes. During its coverage of the Murshidabad violence, the channel utilised phrases such as “Murshidabad…10 Hajar Dangai Nikle Jumme Ke Baad?” (Murshidabad…Did 10,000 rioters emerge after Friday?), “Owaisi Ka Ailan-e-Jung, Kitne Muslim Sang?” (Owaisi’s declaration of war, how many Muslims are with him?), “Modi vs Muslim Board”, and “Modi vs Maulana.”

Climax-oriented thumbnails: drama over depth

The objective behind these captions was to immediately frame the violence along religious lines, portraying Muslims as aggressors (“10 Hajar Dangai” – 10,000 rioters) and suggesting a confrontation between the Muslim community (represented by Owaisi and the “Muslim Board”) and the Hindu majority (represented by Modi). This sensational framing disregarded the complexities of the situation and aimed to create division

Furthermore, without official confirmation or statements, India TV aired shows with alarmist and unsubstantiated claims like “Murshidabad Se 10000 Hindu Visthapit, Muslim Sthaapit” (10000 Hindus displaced, Muslims settled in Murshidabad) and “Aaj Bengal ke Hindua Ka Kaleja Fhat Gaya” (Today, the hearts of Hindus in Bengal shattered). These emotionally charged and unverified statements served to create fear and resentment within the Hindu community, painting Muslims as displacing Hindus.

The channel’s use of the phrase “Modi Se Nafrat Sakht, Maulana Ka Waqf Waqf!” (Strong hatred for Modi, Maulana’s Waqf Waqf!) Further exemplified this pattern. By specifically highlighting “Maulana” (Islamic cleric) in opposition to the Waqf Act and linking this opposition to “Nafrat” (hatred) towards Prime Minister Modi, the channel aimed to stereotype religious leaders within the Muslim community as being inherently anti-government and harbouring animosity towards the Hindu leader. This deliberate portrayal contributed to the broader trend of media outlets using religious identity to sensationalise news and fuel divisive narratives for viewership.

News 18 India

News 18 India’s coverage of the Waqf issue employed thumbnails and titles that could be seen as sensational and potentially misleading. Phrases like “Waqf Act Ke Bahane Jute Muslim Kya Hain ‘Asli’ Agenda” (What is the ‘real’ agenda of deceitful Muslims under the guise of the Waqf Act?), “Bhu-Mafia Ya Islam, Waqf Aa Raha Kiske Kaam” (Land mafia or Islam, who is the Waqf benefiting?), “Jumme Ki Namaz, Masjid Adda” (Friday prayers, mosque as a hub), “Pradarshan Se Pahle, Delhi Main Muslimo Ka Jamawada” (Muslim gathering in Delhi before the protest), and “Waqf Ke Khilaaf Delhi Main Muslamano Ka Halla Bol” (Muslims’ outcry in Delhi against the Waqf) – these, coupled with images of figures like Owaisi and Maulana Arshad Madni, risk framing a complex matter through a narrow, potentially biased lens. This approach might inadvertently create a singular narrative that overlooks the broader context and possible repercussions of such hasty and attention-grabbing presentations.

Similarly, their reporting on the Murshidabad violence, with headlines such as “Bajrang Dal Ki Entry, Hil Gaya Pura Bengal” (Bajrang Dal’s entry, entire Bengal shaken) and “Didi..Tere Bengal Main Hinduo Ke Jaan Ki Kimat Kaya?” (Didi…what is the value of Hindu lives in your Bengal?), appears to prioritise sensationalism. Highlighting the Bajrang Dal in what seems like a ‘saviour’ role could amplify communal tones.

While the channel seemingly criticises the TMC government for allegedly failing to protect Hindus, it doesn’t appear to broadly question the government’s responsibility in preventing violence across the entire state. This particular style of reporting could unfortunately prioritise high viewership and TRP ratings by potentially communalising the narrative, possibly at the expense of fostering harmony and communal tolerance through the use of climax-oriented thumbnails and click-bait.

NBDSA and monitoring negativity on air

For the past six years or more, robust citizen’s campaigns have sought accountability from several electronic media channels in their portrayal and coverage. CJP’s HateWatch programme (HateHatao initiative) is arguably the most consistent keeping a hawk’s eye on hate violations on air. Through careful and calibrated analysis we have managed to track, complain and ensure that several of the most offending shows (videos) are pulled off air. These include those from among the very channels that have since now resorted to the use of the provocative and incendiary thumbnail and visual.

Increasingly the complaints made by CJP, to NBDSA, have, in a nuanced way been pointing out how often not the whole but a small portion (few minutes even) of a 50 minute show uses problematic language, positioning this in such a way that the entire coverage or its focus gets coloured and littered with manipulative metaphors collectively amounting to prejudice.

Now, we ask, is this the latest move, by these very same offenders to attract venality in viewer response without actually crossing the bar in either the content itself or the role of the anchor?

Narrative over nuance: missing the broader accountability

However, the examples of sensationalist reporting by certain Indian news channels raise serious concerns about the erosion of journalistic ethics and the potential for these practices to exacerbate communal tensions. The deliberate use of misleading visuals, inflammatory language, and clickbait tactics, often targeting religious minorities and framing sensitive issues through a communal lens, appears to prioritise viewership over responsible reporting. Given the pervasive reach of digital media, how can regulatory bodies and journalistic organisations effectively address this trend of irresponsible sensationalism and ensure that the media upholds its crucial role in fostering an informed and harmonious society, rather than contributing to division and discord?

Related:

From ‘Ab Hoga Khel’ to ‘Kuch Bada Hone Wala Hai’: the trap set by thumbnails

CJP urges for removal of contentious Aaj Tak show on Hemant Soren, sends complaint to channel

CJP alerts YouTube of two channels openly selling illegal firearms

The post How Indian commercial media channels are using the provocative thumbnail to boost viewers and worse, provoke vicarious viewer response appeared first on SabrangIndia.

However, says the statement issued by the DUJ, a pattern is clearly visible in this episode. The DUJ, along with other journalists’ bodies, has been demanding that the authorities reinstate the system of journalists’ passes. The Delhi government seems to be copying the increasingly restrictive methods being employed in Parliament to restrict coverage. The DUJ has repeatedly protested the fact that the Parliament Secretariat now issues only temporary/ sessional passes even for veteran journalists as well as those who fall into the long and distinguished journalists category.

The DUJ has also condemned the basis of the central and state accreditation policies that are discriminatory in composition, favour certain journalists, are biased against independent journalists and even target select unions and associations. These policies and practices should be reviewed.

The Delhi Union of Journalists has urged the Delhi Assembly authorities to immediately issue regular passes for all eligible journalists to cover the Assembly proceedings, in the interests of transparency.

After all, the statement adds, “the nation wants to know. “ The statement has been issued by Sujata Madhok, President, SK Pande, Vice President and Am Jigeesh, General Secretary.

Related:

Stop covering up tragedies, say NAJ-DUJ to govt

NAJ, DUJ, APWJF Welcome Bail to Journalists

Hindustan ko bolne do, says DUJ 

The post DUJ condemns denial of media entry into Delhi Assembly by BJP government appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a joint press statement, the National Alliance of Journalists, Delhi Union of Journalists, Press Club of India, Kerala Union of Working Journalists, Press Association, Indian Women’s press Corps, Andhra Pradesh Working Journalists’ Federation and the Brihanmumbai Union of Journalists specifically criticised the deterioration of working conditions, including excessive working hours and inadequate compensation.

Their demands include restoring the Working Journalists’ Act, extending its coverage to digital media, and establishing an independent Media Commission to address journalists’ welfare and harassment.

The organisations also emphasised the crucial social role played by journalism and the need for stronger protections for journalists’ rights.

“The day is an occasion to reflect on the collective achievements of the Indian press, especially that of the working journalists and press workers over the years. Despite epochal developments like the constitution of the first National Press Commission that led to the enactment of the Working Journalists’ Act, 1955 and the Press Council, in recent years, the press as a whole has seen several setbacks in the form of arbitrary lay-offs, unfair labour practices and deteriorating working conditions. Bodies like the Press Council have been rendered redundant over the years. The press, just as it was censored during the British Raj under one pretext or the other, faces similar pressures. Additionally, its corporatization poses a severe threat to the rights of journalists and to the nature of journalism itself,” said the joint statement.

The organisations noted that journalists and press workers today are expected to work beyond the hours specified in the Working Journalists (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Rules.

“Journalists are expected to be on call at all hours of the day and work simultaneously on the print, digital and electronic space – all within the same pay package. Even though the Act excludes editors, reporters, photo journalists and camera persons from ‘shift’ duties, some prominent media groups have introduced the biometric pattern of attendance, making physical presence of correspondents mandatory in office for a specified number of hours”, the statement added.

The journalist organisations also demanded the restoration of the Working Journalists’ Act in its original, and that it be extended to cover electronic and digital media as well.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Indian Newspaper Day: Journalists’ Groups Demand Independent Media Commission appeared first on SabrangIndia.

MP Mondal questioned the Union government that, “whether the Government has issued confidential notices under Section 69A of the IT Act to block independent media platforms like Bolta Hindustan and National Dastak without providing specific reasons or prior warnings thereby undermining transparency and accountability?”

However, MP Pratima Mondal also asked the reasons for which the affected media platforms are denied access to blocking orders or an opportunity for a fair hearing, violating their right to due process and diminishing public trust in democratic governance.

In response, Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting Dr. L. Murugan defended the government’s actions, stated that all procedures comply with the safeguards outlined in the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

The Minister informed that, “the publishers of news and current affairs on digital media including YouTube news channels Bolta Hindustan and National Dastak are covered under the provisions of IT Rules, 2021, Part-III of which provides for issuance of directions for blocking of content covered under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act, 2000).”

Dr. Murugan explained that the government invokes Section 69A to block content in cases of national security, public order, or to prevent incitement to criminal activities. The process includes review by a multi-ministerial committee, which comprises representatives from the Ministries of Law and Justice, Defence, External Affairs, and Women and Child Development, as well as experts from the Press Council of India, FICCI, and CII.

“The concerned content is examined by this Committee, and publishers or intermediaries are given an opportunity to present clarifications,” Murugan stated, adding that procedural safeguards are rigorously followed to ensure fairness and prevent misuse.

“There are sufficient procedural safeguards before exercise of the provision of blocking of content under Section 69A. The concerned content is examined by a committee having representatives from the Ministry of Law and Justice, Ministry of Defence, Ministry of External Affairs, Ministry of Women and Child Development, etc. The Committee also has domain experts from Press Council of India, FICCI, and CII. Further, the rules provide for an opportunity to the publisher or the intermediary concerned to appear and submit their reply and clarifications before the Committee” said Minister.

The Minister reiterated the government’s commitment to maintaining a balance between transparency, accountability, and national interests, especially during sensitive periods such as elections. He said that the rules are designed to safeguard against harmful content while ensuring a diversity of perspectives.

This explanation comes amid criticism from free speech advocates and media organizations, who have raised concerns about the growing use of Section 69A to restrict content critical of government policies.

The response of Ministry dated December 18, 2024 may be read here:

Related:

IT Rules 2023: Union Government can now flag content relating to any of its “businesses” as “misleading”

Can the Union Govt be the sole Gatekeeper of news?

In Garb of Data Protection Bill, Centre Attacking RTI, Allege Information Commissioners

The post Central government defends blocking of Media Platforms appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Former Editor Meets ‘Former Terrorist’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This report by the Free Speech Collective (FSC) examines the current state of freedom of speech and expression in Jammu and Kashmir over the last six years. Drawing from a combination of news reports, government policies, police actions, and anonymous testimonies from journalists and citizens, it highlights the many challenges faced by the press in Kashmir since the 2019 reorganization. From censorship and intimidation to arrests under draconian laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Public Security Act (PSA), journalists have been systematically silenced. The shrinking space for independent media, the erasure of critical newspaper archives, and the heavy reliance on government advertising have further constrained the press.

The report also explores the growing use of self-censorship as a survival strategy among journalists, the repression of free movement through the cancellation of passports, and the chilling effect on investigative journalism. As the territory heads into elections, this report raises critical questions about the state of democracy in Jammu and Kashmir. It asks whether, in the midst of such suppression, the media will be able to function freely, and whether voters will be adequately informed as they go to the polls.

Following is the detailed overview provided in the report that explores how events in Jammu and Kashmir have unfolded since 2019 and how they may influence the upcoming elections:

Brief timeline:

Pre-Abrogation Crackdown on Media (2109): As provided in the report, in the lead-up to the abrogation of Article 370, restrictions on the press began tightening. On July 25, 2019, journalist Qazi Shibli was detained under the Public Safety Act (PSA) for tweeting about troop movements. By August 4, 2019, a total communication blackout was imposed, cutting off all internet and phone services. The very next day, Section 144 was enforced in parts of Srinagar, restricting journalists’ movement and their ability to report freely.

During this period, the report provides that newspapers like The Kashmir Times and Greater Kashmir suspended publication, and when they resumed, self-censorship became the norm. Journalists like Irfan Amin Malik and Peerzada Ashiq were detained and questioned for their reporting, while others such as Gowhar Geelani and Zahid Rafiq were barred from traveling abroad.

Escalating Restrictions from 2020 to 2021: According to the report, in January 2020, the Supreme Court had ruled that indefinite internet suspension was illegal. However, the actual restoration of 4G services in Jammu and Kashmir was delayed until February 2021, more than a year after the ruling. The report depicted how throughout 2020, journalists faced increased harassment. Reporters like Mushtaq Ahmed Ganai were arrested, and Masrat Zahra and Gowhar Geelani were charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for their work.

Notably, the reports also pointed to the introduction of a restrictive media policy in May 2020, which further tightened government control over news. In April 2021, the police banned live coverage of security encounters, further curbing journalistic freedom. High-profile arrests, like those of Manan Dar and Fahad Shah, and raids on journalists’ homes became increasingly common.

Shutdown of the Kashmir Press Club and the Suppression of Dissent (2022-2023): The crackdown reached a new level in January 2022, when the Jammu and Kashmir administration shut down the Kashmir Press Club, a key institution for journalists in the region. The press club was controversially reinstated in 2024, but many saw the move as a tactic to control dissent, especially since it was done with the backing of the administration and lacked transparency.

Meanwhile, the report showed how arrests continued during this period as well. Irfan Mehraj, editor of Wande Magazine, was arrested in March 2023 under the draconian UAPA, even as Khurram Parvez, a prominent human rights activist, remains jailed under terrorism charges.

Intensified Suppression and Legal Battles (Late 2023 and 2024): In the latter part of 2023, freedom of speech and civil liberties remained under threat. On November 19, 2023, seven students were arrested under the UAPA for allegedly celebrating Australia’s cricket victory over India with pro-Pakistan slogans. Although the charges were eventually dropped, it highlighted the severe consequences of dissent in the region. That same day, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh quashed the detention of journalist Sajjad Gul, criticizing the abuse of preventive detention laws by authorities.

The report further provided that in December 2023, the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation of Article 370, a decision that the government framed as a victory for peace and development. However, this was far away from the reality where civil rights advocates remained concerned about the broader implications for democracy and free speech in Jammu and Kashmir. These events provided in the report clearly shows that even as the region moves closer to the 2024 elections, journalists and media personnel continue to face harassment and arrests. On January 30, 2024, the Supreme Court ordered the publication of internet shutdown review orders, a move aimed at increasing transparency. Meanwhile, arrests like that of journalist Aasif Sultan in February 2024 and businessman Tarun Behl in July 2024 underscored the attempts of suppression by an unrelenting union government.

Can the Ballot Promise Press Freedom?

As evidenced by the report, the sustained erosion of media freedom, rampant use of draconian laws, and constant harassment of journalists since 2019 have deeply impacted the political and social landscape of Jammu and Kashmir. As the region approaches the 2024 elections, the suppression of free speech is likely to shape both voter sentiment and political discourse. How these developments will influence the elections remains to be seen, but the government’s continued efforts to control the narrative raise questions about the future of democracy in the region.

The report ends by stating that though political parties have promised to restore press freedom ahead of Jammu and Kashmir’s upcoming elections, real change seems unlikely. The report underscores that the J&K Reorganisation Act of 2019 and subsequent amendments have significantly limited the powers of any elected government. Furthermore, the report highlights how even the past administrations, including those led by the National Conference, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and the Indian National Congress, also had strained relations with the press, imposing censorship and curbing media freedoms during times of unrest.

Based on this, the report states that “In the face of these past examples and given the increasingly repressive atmosphere in which the media operates since the abrogation of Article 370, there is little hope that the new government will offer a space for the media to operate freely.”

The complete report may be read below:

Related:

Manipur plunges into deeper turmoil amid fresh violence and drone attacks since early September

Assembly Polls: SKM to Campaign for BJP’s Defeat in Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir

On Yaum-Al-Quds 2024, Massive Rallies Renew Call For Al-Aqsa Liberation In Kashmir, Kargil

Jammu & Kashmir HC: Being a critic of government no ground to detain a person, detaining authorities apply no mind

Unabated Conversion Of Agricultural Land In Kashmir Threatens Food Security

Meeras Mahal: A Journey Through Kashmir’s Timeless Heritage

The post Vanishing Media Freedom J & K, 2019-2024: Free Speech Collective appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As per the complaint, on August 18, Priyank Kanoongo, Chairman of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), made a series of allegations on ‘X’ (formerly Twitter). He claimed that government-funded madrassas in Bihar are teaching from books like “Talimul Islam” that describe non-Muslims as “Kafir,” or those who do not believe in Allah. Kanoongo further alleged that Hindu children are enrolled in these madrassas, but the Bihar government has not containing books printed in Pakistan, criticizing UNICEF for its involvement and labelling it as “appeasement.” Kanoongo argued that madrassas are unsuitable for basic education and called for their dissolution, suggesting that children should instead attend regular schools.

At the outset, CJP highlighted that in both these shows, the anchors have the framed the narrative in such a skewed manner that the Madrassas across the country have been painted as suspicious places that are attempting to brainwash children and create the image of the Madrassas and respective teacher as enemies of this country.  

CJP mentioned in its complaint that “the language used in these questions is extremely Islamophobic as it perpetuates harmful stereotypes and fosters suspicion towards the Muslim community. The unsubstantial implication that madrassas are involved in conspiracies while questioning the content of their educational materials through unfair portrayal of Islamic schools as breeding grounds for extremism is not just and neutral coverage of an important issue. This generalisation ignores the diversity within Islamic education and promotes a narrative of fear and mistrust. Additionally, the use of terms like “Kafir” in a negative context vilifies Islamic beliefs and suggests an inherent hostility towards other religions, further alienating Muslims. Moreover, this kind of language promotes an “us vs. them” mentality, deepening divisions between Muslims and non-Muslims. By casting suspicion on the Muslim community and misrepresenting their beliefs, the questions contribute to the marginalization and discrimination of Muslims. This Islamophobic rhetoric not only misrepresents the religion but also encourages hostility, making it harmful and divisive in both social and political contexts.”

The report presented by host Rakesh Pandey contained the same statement of NCPCR chairperson Priyank Konoongo wherein he is saying that the syllabus of the Madrasas is such that it is not suitable for Hindu students, and creates an extreme opinion in the mind of the Muslim students regarding non-Muslims. The report also includes statements made by a Madrasa Principal, namely Mashroof Ahmad Qadri Nadvi, wherein he can be seen responding to the Times Now Navbharat reporter by stating that the present controversy is being created without any reason and is a distortion of understanding of the Islamic scriptures. Regarding the meaning of the word ‘Kafir,’ Principal Nadvi explained that it is an Arabic word meaning “denial.” He further clarified that in the Arabic context, a “Kafir” is someone who denies God or other truths.

CJP stated that “the host’s failure to moderate the discussion fairly, allowing derogatory language and accusations to go unchecked, further exacerbates the problem. By not challenging or correcting the inflammatory statements made by participants, the host implicitly endorses a narrative of extremism and radicalism being insubstantially associated with madrasas. This approach undermines the credibility of the debate and encourages a hostile environment where productive dialogue is replaced by sensationalism and divisiveness. Such coverage does a disservice to the audience, as it obscures the real issues at hand and prevents a meaningful exploration of the concerns surrounding religious education, ultimately contributing to a climate of intolerance and misunderstanding”.

In complaint CJP also cited the linguistically meaning of the word “kafir” for the sake of convenience. In which it has been stated that ‘linguistically, the Arabic word “Kafir”1derives from the root “kafara,” which means to cover or conceal. According to classical Islamic sources, “Kafir” literally means someone who covers or hides something. For instance, the night is referred to as “Kafir” because it conceals everything with darkness. Similarly, a farmer is called “Kafir” because he buries seeds in the ground. In Islamic terminology, “Kafir” denotes someone who rejects Islamic teachings and is considered unable to perceive the divine signs and guidance. The term is not intended as an insult to other religions but rather signifies a refusal to accept Islamic faith.”

Based on the extracts of the statements made by the speakers, the complaint states that both shows failed to provide a fair and nuanced exploration of the issue, focusing instead on sensationalism and divisive rhetoric. By presenting madrassas as breeding grounds for radicalism and using biased framing, these broadcasts contributed to the spread of Islamophobic sentiments and distorted the public’s understanding of Islamic education. The portrayal of madrasa education as inherently problematic, without acknowledging the diversity and context of these institutions, underscores the biased and harmful nature of the coverage provided by both shows.

However, the Deputy Director, Bihar State Madrasa Board denied the allegations raised by the NCPCR Chairperson Kanoongo. When TNN reported questioned Deputy Director, Bihar State Madrasa Board, Mr. Abdul Salam Ansari over the allegations of Muslims being imparted radical and divisive education against non-Muslims in the Madrassas of Bihar. Responding to the same, Ansari clarified that “this kind of syllabus is not in my Madrasa board. Whatever syllabus of 1st to 8th class of Bihar Government is approved by SCERT, all the syllabus are valid in my madrassas”. The reporter then referred to the allegations raised by the NCPCR Chairperson Kanoongo, to which Deputy Director Ansari replied by stating that “See, we do not have any information about this, it is not appropriate to comment on it until the official information comes”

The Complaint may be read here:

Related:

Complaint filed against IndiaTV by CJP for stoking fear and spreading anti-Muslim propaganda under the guise of Bangladesh crisis

Human Rights Watch reports that Modi made at least 110 Islamophobic remarks during 2024 election campaign

Bangladesh Situation Tumultuous, But Does Not Signify Islamic Extremist Dominance

The post CJP files complaint against TNN anchors for broadcasting misleading debate show appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The following is a list of stories I missed reading in the nine newspapers I buy and read online, and where I saw them. Others may have carried these stories but the point is I am reacting as a reader or audience as the suits classify us, not as a journalist.

In the latter half, I air my views as a desk hand.

1. The abandonment of Muslims (Saw it in multiple interviews by Karan Thapar and others for The Wire and read about in The New York Times. The photographs in The Times were outstanding, you cannot look at them without (tears) welling up.)
2. The electoral bonds. (The ready-to-report story that the mainstream media dropped like a hot potato. Most of the original stories I read in The News Minute-Newslaundy-Scroll. The Hindu and The Indian Express did carry some original stories but wasted them with the lukewarm display.)
3. The radical transformation of Rahul Gandhi (By Meena Kandasamy in The Wire; by Rahul Bhattacharya in The Economist)
4. The political and economic transformation of the Congress (articulated through its manifesto) (Yet to see a comprehensive copy. Perhaps, the pink press has carried but I don’t read business papers now as I cannot understand most of the jargon they write. I wonder if the reporters and subs also understand.)
5. The tempo-van meltdown. (I badly wanted to read a full-page collection of stories on this. About the van, about robber-barons, about how much cash fits in — with legal as well as demonetised notes. I am not joking. When Harshad Mehta claimed that he gave a crore to Narasimha Rao, a magazine tried to fit Rs 1 crore into a suitcase and found the brand which can. Oh, how green was our newsroom valley then, and now a cracked-earth desert!)
6. The breathtaking role played by civil society in the elections. (The New York Times)
7. The lies of Modi and the inability of most of the paper tigers to call him a liar. Some newspapers exhausted the thesaurus to steer clear of the word “lie”. (Ravish Kumar and Ajit Anjum all the way)
8. The rise of Uddhav Thackeray from an entitled member of a dreaded clan to a leader who has earned respect. (Multiple YouTube channels)
9. The valiant battles fought by Tejashwi Yadav and Akhilesh Yadav. (Social media)
10. The uncompromising ideological armour built by MK Stalin and Udhayanidhi. (Media One TV)

11. Dhruv Rathee, Ravish Kumar, Ajit Anjum, Karan Thapar and countless others who exposed how irrelevant the so-called mainstream media has become.
12. Umar Khalid, Siddique Kappan, Mohammed Zubair and several others who have paid a price for standing up to the regime. (Scroll, The Telegraph)
13. Kani Kusruti and her gesture at Cannes, the “Sudappi from India” post by Shane Nigam. (Malayalam media)
14. Above all, Shikha. Some of you may wonder who Shikha is, which probably means you are a newspaper-reading, English-speaking citizen. A homemaker in Rae Bareli, Shikha has voted for the BJP twice. Now, she is asking questions. Her questions need not reflect any sea change on the ground and Modi can still be re-elected. But the point is she has neither forgotten nor forgone her right to ask questions. (Mahol Kya Hai)

There must be several other stories that were untold. I leave it *to *you to decide what you missed.

Headlines

I will end with a small note on headlines. This may sound *like *nitpicking to laypersons. I request you to indulge me.

1. Which one is the best headline of the 2024 elections so far? My vote is for “The Audacity of Hate”. (The Guardian editorial on Indian elections)
2. Modi was not being “bitter”. We must choose our words with care and precision. Just as the golden hour in a heart attack and in a crime scene investigation, all you get in a headline is a few words. Choose wisely. Venom must be bitter but I don’t know. I have tasted it in only those I have helped. Call venom venom, poison poison, toxic toxic and hate hate. Divisive is not a synonym for raw, unvarnished hate.
3. I see a tendency among subs to abridge words like Opposition to Opp, governor to guv, president to prez. Nothing wrong with them. My son says econ for economics (econ is more apt also, I think, considering the con jobs that are pulled in the name of economics). Some newspapers have already graduated to Maha for Maharashtra and Raj for Rajasthan. I am waiting for Him for Himachal and Ben for Bengal and Shyam for Shyambazar.

As I said, nothing wrong with them if that is your house style. I am guilty of allowing Kejri for Kejriwal. So, I have forfeited my right to lecture.

Still, I will try to briefly explain why acerbic and arrowroot-biscuit-chewing (for ulcers) chief-subs used to dustbin subbed copies that wrote Opp or Oppn. Journalism is the most repetitive creative job in the world. Which makes it vulnerable to cliches, triteness and boredom. So, you need to play around with words to make it original each time you give a headline. The moment you say Opp, it means you are lazy to work on the headline and you go with a cliche. But challenged, you will think of new ways. Then you will think about the kernel of the story, its politics and its hidden nuances. Shortcuts kill the unique features of each story.

A drill you can follow after work so that your deadline is not affected:

1. Be convinced like a fanatic: every copy has a perfect headline. You just need to find it. Nothing can beat the high of a reasonably evocative headline falling into place.
2. Take a headline with Opposition or Guv or Prez.
3. Work on it till you can say the same thing with Opposition or without the word opposition.
4. Draft five headlines for the same copy: single column, double, three columns, 4 columns and eight columns. 5, 6 and 7 columns will fit if any of the five fit.
5. Always work on a sixth headline. Something wacky and wild. It will be your private collection that will make you proud one day.

(The author is a senior journalist; this is from his social media post)

Related:

The handover at Rae Bareli

The post Elections Stories I missed in the newspapers that I buy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to the analysis, fake news spreads misinformation about changing demography by implicitly showing that the Muslim population is fast-rising. The tone of media has been so anti-Muslim that 87 per cent of the fact-checked contents, out of 211 stories, were related to religious groups and it targeted Muslims.

Shockingly, the recent brute military exercise of Israel against the impoverished Palestinians was also used by the Indian media to spread anti-Muslim sentiments. Fake and doctored graphics and videos have been shown by the media to create an impression that Muslims are “violent” and they are a threat to “peace” and “democracy”. In several doctored videos, the beheading of the children and execution of the prisoners have been shown.

In other contexts, the media used videos imported from outside India to depict Indian Muslims. The aim was to malign the image of Muslims and create a ground for anti-Muslim sentiments. They all contributed to keeping the fire of the Islamophobic narrative aflame.

It is feared that India is emerging as one of the centres producing Islamophobic content. Even in some videos, the story of Rohingya Muslims was spread in which it was claimed that these Rohingya Muslims were pretending to be “Hindus”. But the Book Live fact check found the whole story misleading and malicious in its approach.

Those who have so far denied the prevalence of hate news and the rising Islamophobia in India, should seriously read Boom’s report. Not to talk of so-called communal media, even a large number of “reputed” mainstream media with wider reach have been found guilty of spreading hatred and misinformation about Muslims. Apart from these, they were in the habit of publishing content in favour of the establishment.

Even a pure matter of science and technology was used to spread hatred against Muslims. For example, when the Chandrayaan-3 satellite was successfully sent onto the moon, contents targeting Muslims were widely disseminated. Propaganda was made that Muslims were “anti-science”, “religious” and “fanatic” in outlook, which is responsible for their “backwardness”. It was also an occasion to question the “patriotism” of the Indian Muslims. For example, a fact-checked story of the Boom Live shows that fake news was spread in which the media showed Kashmiri students beating other students who were celebrating the success of Chandrayaan-3. However, the true story was that a fight among the students broke out over the issue of violating the queue in the university canteen at Mewar University and not over the satellite.

To sum up, the contents of the news stories analysed by Boom Live have again been found to be spreading misinformation, sensationalism, communalism, and anti-Muslim hatred. Such contents contribute to promoting Islamophobia.

To understand Islamophobic discourse, Jewish-born scholar Edward Said can be a great help. Former professor of Comparative Literature at Columbia University and Palestinian Arab Edward Said wrote the path breaking book “Orientalism” (1978). In his work, he was right to argue that the Western media and knowledge system had been in the habit of misrepresenting Arab Muslims.

According to Said, the Western media distorted the reality of the Arabs. The Arab Muslims were shown to be “the perversion” of the people living in the West. According to the Western binary, Arab Muslims were shown to be “barbaric”, “fanatic”, “religious”, “cowardly”, “anti-modern”, and “anti-secular” while those living in the West were praised as “liberal”, “rational”, “scientific”, “brave”, and “modern”.

During the 1973 Arab-Israel war, Edward Said was shocked to see the way the Western media spread misinformation, sensationalism, and misinformation about Arab Muslims. Since he had a lived experience of growing up in the Arab region, he was not able to accept the images and stereotypes produced by the powerful Western media about Muslim Arabs.

This was the immediate context when Edward Said began seriously engaging with the question of the representation of Arab Muslims and the East in Western media and scholarship. Soon, he was able to give a concept of “Orientalism”, which, according to him, is a systematic way of misrepresenting and violating the reality, image, and whole history of the Occident by Western scholars.

Three years later in 1981, Said wrote another important book “Covering Islam”. The subtitle of the book is self-explanatory: “How the media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world. Following the Iranian Revolution (1979), Said began to look deeply into the way the Western media covered the Arab and Islamic world. Soo Said concluded: “The coverage of Islam by the Western media is misleading and inaccurate, characterized by ethnocentrism, cultural and even racial hatred, deep yet paradoxically free-floating hostility” (ibid, p. li).

The framework that Edward Said gave to study the Arab and Muslim world, can be extended in India to explore how the Muslim minority is being misrepresented by Indian media. While the Orientalist discourse has projected the East as the “another” of the West, similarly the minority community is demonized as “alien” of the mainstream society by the communal media.

There is strong evidence to show that the communal discourse within India heavily borrows Orientalist tools. The communal media, like Orientalist discourse, is in the habit of creating a binary between the majority Hindu community and the minority Muslim community. It ignores history and presents a monolithic picture. It bypasses social and economic conflicts within cultural diversity.

Given the similarity, I would like to place before you the term “internal Orientalism” to explain the phenomenon of the misrepresentation of the minority within a nation-state. The content analysis of Boom Live over the years shows a persistent atmosphere of anti-Muslim discourse created and maintained by the Indian media and state-sponsored scholars.

Like the Orientalist discourse, internal Orientalist discourse creates a similar binary in India in which the majority Hindu community is shown to be “liberal”, “progressive”, “law-abiding”, “nationalist”, and “peace-loving”, while the minority Muslims are demonized as “backward”, “fanatic”, and “anti-national”, “violent”, “cruel”, “anti-women”, “lustful” and “untrustworthy”, who works as a burden for the nation. The concept of “internal Orientalism”, therefore, needs to be explored further to capture the rising anti-minority venom and launch a democratic struggle to counter it.

(The author is a Delhi-based journalist. He has taught political sciences at NCWEB Centres of Delhi University.)

The post The “Internal Orientalism” of Indian Media  appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Anti-Muslim slurs by a BJP MP, Ramesh Bhiduri against a sitting Muslim MP in parliament seem to have been given significantly less media attention on Friday despite the fact that the issue was covered exclusively by international media outlets like Al Jazeera. The incident saw an erasure from the Primetime news segments which reveals a disturbing reality where big media seems to be revolving around the whims of the ruling party rather than on focussing on what the nation actually wants to know.  Few debates on the infamous news hour on Indian channels actually dealt with the rank unparliamentary language unleashed by an elected official that was an ugly first for Indian democracy under the Modi 2.0 regime.

Here’s how the events unfolded.

On Thursday, September 21, during the much-speculated upon “special session” of the Indian Parliament, a BJP MP hurled slurs and abuses at an MP Kunwar Danish Ali as the BSP MP objected against the unparliamentary language Bidhuri used for PM Modi.

The MP in question was BJP Lok Sabha MP Ramesh Bidhuri who represents South Delhi constituency. In a video that has since surfaced, Bidhuri can be heard delivering a highly charged speech with communal undertones while discussing the recent Chandrayaan 3 mission. He goes on to refer to MP Danish Ali as a “terrorist”, and “pimp”, and called for him to be removed from the proceedings, using further offensive slurs. The Lok Sabha speaker Om Birla had to intervene by requesting all MPs to take their seats.

This incident is a disturbing reminder of the growing discrimination, prejudice, and violence Muslims continue to face in India despite constitutional protections in place. The internet has been taken over by a storm after the video went viral. Kunwar Danish Ali has written a complaint against Bidhuri, and BJP has furthermore issued a show cause notice to its MP after the outrage refused to stop. However, as the pressure fomented on social media, we must ask what were viewers inside homes who access news through television sets watching? Did this harrowing incident make the cut? Let’s see how far and wide the coverage took place.

Our survey of the coverage of the event by some of India’s mainstream news channels on Friday proved to yield acutely disappointing results. Aaj Tak reported the incident and conducted a ten minute programme, citing how Bidhuri ruined the efforts for establishing the new parliament by PM Modi. The anchor, Shweta Singh, asked if action taken against the MP could be a “moment for learning” (sic) for everyone.

संसद के असंसदीय शब्द

देखिए @SwetaSinghAT के साथ #10Tak#RameshBidhuri #DanishAli #BSP | #ATVideo pic.twitter.com/Mtobw7Cs8v

— AajTak (@aajtak) September 22, 2023

The segment further discussed how these words were against the tradition and integrity of the parliament, as it played MP Danish Ali’s statement after the incident went viral.

India Today too dealt with the matter in some depth holding a debate anchored by Rajdeep Sardesai with Advocate Sanjay Hegde and and former MP Satya Pal Jain, asking if suspension or anything beyond suspension can be done to implement a precedent to prevent such abuse. The segment also featured Sanjay Hegde stating that ‘enough is enough.’

Similarly, News18 too covered the incident. However, the channel attempted to seemingly engage in diluting the severity of the case by pinpointing the limelight on Danish Ali making out the victim to be worthy of the slur, or almost. . In a news article on their website to portray him in poor light by referring to how he apparently objected to ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ slogans by  BJP MP MLC Hari Singh earlier this year. In another short segment by CNN-News18 on what they call  the ‘controversy’, the reporter, Pallavi Ghosh seems to spend significant air time time highlighting the INDIA alliance is taking this moment in the parliament to sway voters against the BJP in the upcoming general assembly elections.

The INDIA alliance is a name released by opposition leaders for an upcoming alliance for the 2024 general assembly elections. The reporter also asserted that the BJP ‘clearly’ did not waste much time issuing the show-cause notice as it doesnt want the narrative of the BJP being anti-Muslim to takeover, nor does the BJP want the the ‘emotive words used by Danish Ali’ to ‘divert’ from the work it has done. The reporter ends by saying that the ‘Bidhuri vs Danish Ali’ issue has now given an opportunity to Opposition parties to capitalise on for the upcoming elections. News 18 Hindi too did a short section on the issue. And Zee News (Hindi) did an afternoon segment on the issue this Friday, broadcasting Danish Ali’s statement.

Let’s have a look at the minimalist news coverage of the shameful incident in parliament in some of the channels guilty of being repeat hate offenders:

Times Now Navbharat
(No Prime Time)
#BSP सांसद #DanishAli के खिलाफ #BJP सांसद #RameshBidhuri ने की अभद्र टिप्पणी
सब्सक्राइब करें #TimesNowNavbharat
https://youtube.com/c/timesnownavbharat
#TimesNowNavbharatOriginals #TNNOriginals

Republic TV
(No Prime Time)

Aaj Tak
(No Prime Time news segment)
(has done a 10-minute Programme)
संसद के असंसदीय शब्द
देखिए @SwetaSinghAT
के साथ #10Tak
#RameshBidhuri #DanishAli #BSP | #ATVideo
https://twitter.com/aajtak/status/1705280008330133547

India Today
(No Prime time)
Is this a fit case for the suspension of a session or something more can be done? ASG @SatyaPalJain
answer this and more Full show: https://shorturl.at/rtvyY #DanishAli #RameshBidhuri #NewsToday |
@sardesairajdeep
https://twitter.com/IndiaToday/status/1705258645632491799

News18 (English)
(No Prime Time)
Ramesh Bidhuri Today Speech | BJP MP’s Slurs In Sansad: Will ‘Hate Speech’ Be Punished? | News18  (Heading is BJP slur but video is on Women reservation)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYebv_tc3ME

They are trying to do character assassination of Danish Ali
BSP MP #DanishAli grabbed the headlines in August for strongly opposing chanting of ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ by BJP MLC Hari Singh Dillon in his address at #Amroha railway station
By: @Oliver056
https://www.news18.com/politics/when-bsp-mp-danish-ali-opposed-chanting-of-bharat-mata-ki-jai-slogan-bjp-mp-ramesh-bidhuri-controversy-8588069.html

BJP Issues Show Cause Notice To Party MP Ramesh Bidhuri | English News | News18 | BJP News | N18V
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFnaw6Qv_q4

News18 (Hindi)
(No Prime Time)
Only small coverage in afternoon
Danish Ali on Ramesh Bidhuri Remarks: BJP सांसद बिधूड़ी ने BSP सांसद दानिश को गालियां दीं | N18V
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXlUv_2s_HA

Zee News (Hindi)
(No Prime Time)
‘मैं रातभर सो नहीं पाया’ बिधूड़ी पर दानिश अली का बयान | Ramesh Bidhuri | Lok Sabha | BSP Danish Ali
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWE10jMi6fI

What does this exclusion of any discussion on hate speech means?

The message one can take from these is that the abusive words hurled at the BSP MP in parliament are not that severe an issue for commercial news media channels, and that the attention and outrage it has garnered is something that is being dubbed “politically motivated in light of upcoming state and general assembly elections” (by the ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, BJP, the party from whom the hate offender hails).

This seems to be a gross misrepresentation of the situation.

A sitting MP from a minority community has been assaulted with the aggression of anti-Muslim slur, within the portals of the Indian Parliament, is surely a situation that would ideally demand urgent legal attention? An immediate suspension? A party decision not to allow him to contest elections in future?  In places like the USA, or even in India, identity-based slurs for black or Dalit communities are a cause for outrage and, in some cases, incidents that may be subjected to punitive measures by the legal system.

Furthermore, it is crucial to note that this news from the special session of the parliament did not make it to any of the Primetime segments of mainstream media surveyed by the team at Sabrang India. This disturbing outcome comes at a time when freedom of the press is increasing at risk in India, and there has been much discussion about how mainstream media has seen death at the hands of the corporate-BJP nexus.

In sharp contrast the channels responsible for this significant gloss over of such a shameful act in Parliament (News18, TimesNow Bharat, ZeeNews, Times Now, AajTak) have been over the past three years especially, guilty of the worst and most unprofessional newshour debates that further hate-mongering and stigmatising the minorities

Here are some examples

For instance, as recent as May 2023, Aaj Tak was released a one hour  programme which had the title ‘Gaming Jihad’ with Sudhir Choudhary as the anchor. The show was allegedly about a gaming racket busted in Ghaziabad which was engaging in religious conversion of young children. The show’s tagline ended with the sentence ‘Is mobile converting you child’s religion.’

The anchor proceeded to peddle a baseless story about the possibility of four lakh children being converted by these tactics. These claims continue to have no base to back them, however Aaj Tak provided a full one hour coverage to them, which makes it clear that the show was seemingly another attempts at propagating false narratives to spread hatred against Muslims by alleging a conspiracy by religious minorities in India.

In another incident where Citizens for Justice and Peace, filed a complaint was filed against a programme by Times Now Navbharat which used the term ‘Mazaar Jihad’ in a show titled ‘धामी सरकार का ‘ऑपरेशन मजार’, ‘गजवा-ए-हिंद’ की साजिश के किससे जुड़े तार?’ It was broadcast in May earlier this year. The programme once again alleged falsely that the Muslims in India are waging a conspiracy to conquer India. The programme repeatedly used terms like ‘mazaar jihad/ zameen jihad’. This is a repeat offense despite News Broadcasting and Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA) has, time and again, warned new channels to not use such terms.

In another instance, resultant of a complaint filed by CJP, the NBDSA issued a fine on on two separate incidents against News18 in February this year. The NBDSA also ordered the video in question to be removed from the channel. Thus, a concerted efforts at stigmatising minorities has been continuing at the behest of media.

This is corroborated by international media institutions. According to the latest report released in 2023 from the global media watchdog, RSF (Reporters without Borders) India’s standing in the global press freedom rankings has worsened. The report, released on World Press Freedom Day, places India at the 161st position out of 180 countries revealing a concerning decline. However, in comparison India had held the 150th rank in the previous year’s report in 2022.

According to the RSF, several factors have contributed to this decline, one of them being the high-profile raids on the BBC headquarters in India which had drawn widespread international criticism, and raised concerns about the overall environment for a free and fair media within which journalists are operating in India.

In contrast to India’s trip down the rankings, neighbouring South Asian countries have demonstrated improvements in their press freedom rankings. Pakistan had risen to the 150th spot from the 157th position in 2022, while Sri Lanka jumped up to the 135th rank.

The RSF report furthermore points out and stresses on how the corporate ownership of media outlets in India has changed the scenario completely. The report highlights that a majority of mainstream media in India are now owned by corporate companies with close ties to BJP and the PM Modi.  The report states that despite a large number of media outlets, there is a ‘concentration of ownership’, and furthermore stresses that this is an ongoing hit against the declining press freedom situation in India.

Just last year, after great resistance from its founders, the Roy couple, a media broadcasting channel, NDTV, that was touted to be more neutral in its reportage was lost in the fight against corporate media. In August 2022, a new venture by Adani AMG Media Networks announced the indirect acquisition of a 29% stake in the company with plans to acquire an additional 26% as well. Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy had reportedly tried to prevent Adani’s influence for a long time but to no avail and accused him of a takeover without their consent or consultation as they resigned by the board last year. News 18 too saw a similar fate when it was acquired by Mukesh Ambani in 2014.

These developments do not bode well for the country or its press freedom as more and more of the country’s popular television news channels are now placed under the control and mercy of billionaires who have very close ties to the current regime of the BJP.

Related:

The blatant anti-Muslim violence displayed in the parliament is a shame for the country

MP witnesses rising violence against tribals as BJP youth wing leader is caught beating an elderly tribal

FIR against Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma for hate speech

Hate speeches by VHP, BJP leaders continue as India slated to host world leaders

The post No Primetime Segment as anti-Muslim slurs rocked parliament last Thursday appeared first on SabrangIndia.