Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The Deepavali Special issue of the Organiser is devoted to just one theme 8212; Is the media anti-Hindu? In the opening piece, editor R. Balashankar says, 8220;This question is routinely asked at Hindu gatherings. We are not here to make any judgement. But this widespread Hindu angst needs to be addressed and answered.8221; He goes on cite several examples of the English language media8217;s anti-Hindu and anti-Sangh Parivar bias. His main complaint, echoed by the majority of contributors to the issue, is that 8220;because there is no powerful Hindu lobby in Indian polity, the media gives a left handed treatment to the Hindu sensitivities.8221; Of the 21 contributors, less than a handful disagree with the contention that the media is anti-Hindu. One of them, surprisingly, is Hindutva hardliner Pravin Togadia.
Majority wins8230;
8230;no, minority rules
Togadia cuts a lonely figure. All his other fellow travellers who have written in the issue appear convinced that a deep-rooted conspiracy is at work. Subramaniam Swamy believes it is the handiwork 8220;of a coalition of Communist, Christian missionary, Islamic fanatics and other terrorist interests8221; who seek 8220;to undermine the Hindu identity and warp the Hindu mindset by false and malicious news publications.8221; Dina Nath Mishra accuses the media of fabricating news and distorting facts only in order to attack the Sangh Parivar. N.K. Trikha writes in detail about a conclave of senior journalists after the 2002 Gujarat riots and concludes that a 8220;perfectly networked and well-orchestrated Hindu-baiting8221; informs the English language media. And Swapan Dasgupta blames it on the 8220;warped pseudo-liberalism of the media8221; which 8220;proceeds on the assumption that Hindu equals assertive majoritarianism and by implication a trampling of minority rights.8221; Asserting that 8220;my own experience suggests that breaking the stultifying liberal consensus is a daily exercise in guerilla warfare,8221; Dasgupta concludes: 8220;The moral of the story is simple. Hindu nationalism cannot expect fair treatment from the English language media as it is presently constituted. A shift has to be accompanied by both ideological confrontation and the creation of a parallel media which is not afraid to be either nationalist or Hindu.8221;
Nationalism versus Hindutva
One article that stands out is by the former executive editor of Hindu, Malini Parthasarathy, who confesses to being a 8220;secularist8221; at the outset. Underlining her commitment to the view that India cannot survive as a nation unless it adheres to the secular and civic principles enshrined in the Constitution, Parthasarathy is clear that 8220;the majority of Indians might be Hindus but that does not make India a Hindu nation.8221; Pointing out that the media has been as critical of Islamic fundamentalism as it is of Hindutva, she adds: 8220;To say the media is 8216;anti-Hindu8217; merely because it is resisting the Sangh Parivar8217;s campaign to turn India into a Hindu-oriented nation, is again a complete falsification of fact.8221; She goes to assert that 8220;at this particular political moment in Indian life, the Sangh Parivar8217;s movement to revive 8216;Hindu cultural nationalism8217; represents a serious challenge to the basic tenets of Indian democracy and the Constitution. The media is not doing its duty if it does not remind the country that such majoritarian movements run counter to the spirit of the national framework as conceived of when India was born as an independent nation.8221;
Compiled by Manini Chatterjee
