Author: P. Sainath
Publication: The Hindu
Date: October 10, 2011
URL: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/article2523649.ece
The Delhi High Court's dismissal of Ashok
Chavan's petition and, separately, the Press Council being told to put up
its full report on 'paid news' on its website by today promise many blushes
for Big Media and platinum-tier politicians.
The Delhi High Court has handed both the
political circuit and the media a ticking parcel with its judgment in the
Ashok Chavan case. It shouldn't be long before we learn what's ticking. (What's
not ticking is the media. Subdued quiet seems the norm.) The former Maharashtra
Chief Minister had challenged the power of the Election Commission of India
(ECI) to go into the truth or falsity of his 2009 poll expenses. Those proceedings
in the ECI had gained infamy as the 'paid news' case. A case which embarrassed
major newspapers that had run scores of hagiographic full pages of ' news'
on Mr. Chavan during his poll campaign. Pages without a single advertisement
on them (The Hindu, November 30, 2009). And without so much as a mention of
his rival in Bhokar constituency in Nanded.
Chief Justice Dipak Misra (since elevated
to the Supreme Court) and Justice Sanjiv Khanna of the Delhi High Court dismissed
Chavan's petition as being 'devoid of merit.' In doing so, they upheld the
jurisdiction of the ECI to probe the truth or falseness of poll accounts.
This is crucial for the future (and for Mr. Chavan, right away). It should
really worry the wealthy political elite who spend untold sums to win elections.
No elected legislator or MP has ever been disqualified on grounds of excess
expenditure. If such a precedent does emerge, the next elections could be
riveting for entirely novel reasons. The more so with a galvanised ECI that
won't roll over meekly in deference to power.
It's a double whammy. Not long before this
judgment, the Central Information Commission (CIC) had ordered the Press Council
of India (PCI) to unwrap its own ticking parcel. That is: the PCI's 'paid
news' report which it had suppressed under pressure from media bosses. After
the 'paid news' scandal surfaced, the Press Council under Justice G.N. Ray
rightly set up a subcommittee to inquire into the racket. The committee comprising
Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and Sreenivas Reddy produced an explosive 71-page report
naming names, pointing fingers. Yet, it did this within all the norms and
ethics that such an exercise demands.
The big guns of the media establishment struck
back in a panic. The PCI buckled, burying its own report. It had a larger
committee draft a 12-page version that dropped all references to the offenders.
The final report reduced the original to a single footnote. It did not even
include the real one as an annexure. Nor did it permit the authors to record
a note of dissent. And the PCI never allowed the genuine report to be placed
on its own website, though it paid lip service to the work of its authors.
It stonewalled an RTI application from journalist Manu Moudgil seeking the
full report. It was seeking legal opinion, it pleaded. Now the CIC, acting
on Mr. Moudgil's complaint, has told the Press Council to put the full report
up on its website by October 10.
Together, these two developments promise
many blushes for Big Media. In the Delhi case, of course, Mr. Chavan could
appeal to the Supreme Court on the matter. Unless that happens, the ECI can
proceed with its probe and render a verdict. Others in Mr. Chavan's boat include
former Jharkhand Chief Minister Madhu Koda. His accounts were in question,
too. So we're not talking about just anyone, but two former chief ministers
who won their elections. The platinum-tier political world has worries ahead.
Money can't buy you everything, but it has bought a few elections.
Mr. Chavan's accounts are a delight. A kind
of Gandhian manual on poll austerity. Read them and you know that Bhokar,
Nanded is where you want to settle post-retirement. Things are so cheap. Mr.
Chavan wrapped up his newspaper advertising within a frugal Rs.5,379. His
entire poll campaign cost less than Rs.7 lakh. (The limit for an assembly
constituency in Maharashtra that year was Rs.10 lakh). This included two public
meetings where he brought down Bollywood megastar Salman Khan as the main
attraction, drawing thousands of people. The first meeting cost a piffling
Rs.4, 440 and the second even less, only Rs.4,300. In both cases the main
cost, more than a third of the total, was on the public address system. (But
even Steve Jobs could not have got the audio done in Rs.1,500). The pandal
top cost just Rs.200, hired sofas cost the same and Mr. Chavan spent no more
than Rs.1,000 on setting up the stage.
On December 2, 2009, Dr. Madhav Kinhalkar,
Mr. Chavan's rival in the Bhokar poll, complained to the Election Commission.
That is, two days after The Hindu's story on the amazing press coverage Mr.
Chavan got during the polls. ("Is the Era of Ashok a new era for 'news'?"
November 30, 2009). Dr. Kinhalkar's complaint focused on the latter's poll
expenses and the huge number of full pages (many in colour) eulogising Mr.
Chavan in large and powerful newspapers. Four dailies, asked by the ECI whether
what had appeared on Mr. Chavan was news or paid-for, scorned all notions
of paid news. It was all news, and balanced and fair at that, they said. The
mere suggestion of payment was insulting. Their actions flowed from lofty
journalistic values. Their letters to the ECI are clear and edifying.
Two Marathi papers pleaded proximity to the
Congress. As the daily Pudhari argued in a five-page letter: "….every
newspaper has its inclination towards a political party and Pudhari is no
exception to that." Yet, Pudhari is known not only for "its frank
and candid views." It is also known for "rising above political
affiliation." At election time, the daily stated, newspapers cover all
events and give "due publicity." The "only difference being
the degree and extent of coverage depending on (the) Newspaper's political
inclination as explained above." Such publication "is at the behest
of the readers on their demand to satisfy their curiosity."
Lokmat candidly shared its aim in bringing
out so many pages on Mr. Chavan. This was "to acquaint the people of
Maharashtra about the achievements and developments of the Congress-led government
in Maharashtra during its tenure under the present Chief Minister." (Who
had held that post for all of 11 months at the time). "The other factor
that motivated us… is the alignment of our group's ideology with that
of the Congress Party." Mr. Chavan, for his part, contended that what
had appeared in the press were "mere news items and are not advertisements."
The glowing articles on him were the outcome of the media's own assessments.
He had neither control over, nor any role in that.
The Times Group (for Maharashtra Times) also
trashed any notion of 'paid news.' We are "a balanced and responsible
corporate," their letter asserted. "The said articles are neither
sponsored nor paid articles." They were "not published at the instance
of any political party or advertising agency." And "no monetary
consideration" was involved. It was, then, just good old news all the
way.
The shortest reply is a two-paragraph missive
from the editor of Deshonnati. The key line: "the said publications were
neither sponsored articles nor paid articles. It was a reflection of my individual
perception."
Their individual perceptions are at odds
with the whole media scene portrayed in the suppressed PCI report. The Election
Commission's own experience of poll coverage also seems to have been different.
The Commission saw ' paid news' as a real threat and ordered creation of "district-level
committees for scrutiny of paid news during election periods" after the
2009 polls. It even set up an Expenditure Monitoring Division within the ECI
to deal with the challenge of abuse of money power (including 'paid news')
in elections. The Commission responded to complaints by Dr. Kinhalkar and
others and wrestled with the complex issues thrown up by the paid news syndrome.
In April this year, Mr. Chavan went to the
Delhi High Court, challenging the ECI's jurisdiction. The High Court judgment
dismissing his petition has set the poll cat amongst the political pigeons.
The CIC's order puts major sections of the media in a bind. Earlier, the ECI
had to make do with the truncated 12-page report from the Press Council on
paid news. Now it is entitled to receive the full 71-page version. And also,
quite separately, to carry on from where it was interrupted in its proceedings.
How does that phrase (perhaps wrongly attributed to the Chinese) go? "May
you live in interesting times?" We sure will, fairly soon.
- The Press Council of India (PCI) put up
the full 71-page report on 'Paid News' on its website on Monday.
