Sulking 038; bullying

There8217;s three sides to every story 8212; your side, my side and the truth.8221; That old journalistic saw has acquired a whole new meaning in this peculiar confrontation between the BJP and CNN-IBN. The BJP now says that it will boycott appearances on the news network, unless CNN-IBN airs raw footage of the cash-for-votes sting operation that rocked Parliament. It has also magnanimously offered to help the channel resist 8220;government pressure8221; in the higher cause of press freedom. Meanwhile, CNN-IBN argues that its story has too many loose ends and is not ready to be aired.

The party is understandably sore 8212; the scandal that was to topple the government now looks like a lame, amateurish damp squib disowned by those who participated in it. But there is a cardinal question the BJP must answer. What is the party trying to achieve by boycotting the channel8217;s studios, other then proclaiming loudly that it is opting out of the democratic game? This is not about a particular media outlet. The question is more fundamental. For that is what the umbilical connection between political players and the media in a democracy like India entails. To say that you will not go to them but they can come to you 8212; for instance, for party briefings 8212; is self-defeating to begin with. It also raises ethical questions that hark back to the issue of a political party8217;s democratic responsibility. The BJP might just end up as a double loser. The BJP and CNN-IBN 8212; that is, politicians and the media 8212; feed off each other. While the network needs its talking heads to bloviate in its studios, how much will power will the BJP8217;s sound-bite soldiers need to resolutely keep shut, not getting a word in edgeways as national debates are enacted without them?

There8217;s a cautionary tale in the CNN-IBN 8220;sting operation8221;. It8217;s not just about press freedom or responsibility. It is also about politicians8217; democratic duties.