The editorial in Organiser says that in Bharat, even murders and lynchings are termed as “secular” and “communal”. It adds that there is a stark contrast in the media coverage and political responses between the unfortunate killings of Akhlaq of Dadri in Uttar Pradesh and Ramalingam of Thirubuvanam in Tamil Nadu. “What has been popularly discussed as ‘Dadri lynching’ and later popularised as ‘cow lynching’ by the narrative builders and members of the Award Wapasi gang was a ‘communal’ murder. Look at the headlines in some of the reports. ‘Indian man lynched over beef rumours’, ‘Dadri lynching’ and ‘India’s cow vigilantes’. The ‘akhlaq lynching’ is reminded systematically under some or the other pretext (sic). Mind you, this was all happening under the Samajwadi Party regime and not the ‘Yogi Raj’,” the editorial claims. The same narrative was peddled in the Junaid murder case and Pehlu Khan’s killing, the editorial notes. It adds that in the case of Ramalingam’s lynching, the same media houses have gone silent. Ramalingam was a “Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) activist, he was killed in front of his son. The FIR clearly identifies the motive ‘to warn others’ who oppose the religious conversion by extremists and still the secular silence continues. These double standards and selective outrage are the root cause of communal tensions,” the editorial points out. It adds that the killing of Akhlaq was used to create an anti-Bharat narrative while the killing of Ramalingam would strengthen the anti-Bharat forces.
A report in Panchjanya notes that political parties in the state were biased in the Ramalingam case. Initially, only the BJP condemned the incident. DMK chief M K Stalin condemned the killing after two days on Twitter.
An article in Organiser says that sinister attempts are being made to subvert the democratic and political process and create a biased narrative to influence the 2019 elections through popular social media platforms, especially Twitter, which has been hijacked by neo-Left intellectuals, media, pseudo-seculars and jihadis. The article says that free and fair means of communication are sine qua non of democracy and if the means of communication are biased, exclude people on social, religious, political, ideological, or any other ground, democracy gets vitiated. “This is made even worse if the means of communication are owned by a foreign company,” the article contends. It adds that Twitter has a systematic bias against users who are nationalist in their thoughts and action. It notes that the Parliamentary Committee on Information Technology issued summons to Twitter officials on February 5.
An article in Organiser talks of a warning which it wants India to pay heed to. Outside powers could try to change public opinion and generate mistrust among the common people during this year’s general election. The article adds that there are many ways in which nations have accomplished regime changes abroad — bags of cash have been delivered, scandalous stories leaked to foreign newspapers, hundreds of social media accounts supporting radical groups have been created, and millions of social media users have been contacted. While talking about the forthcoming general election, the article says that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has emerged as a powerful world leader. “His unique efforts in outreach to small, medium and powerful nations, including many neighbours, has unsettled many regional and world powers who are having less say in the affairs of such countries. It is due to these powers who don’t like his rise, many security experts have opined that there may be attempts or interventions to stop his electoral prospects in 2019, (sic)” article reads. It contends that five forces could try to sabotage the electoral process: China, Pakistan, the Church,those influencing the Muslim electorate and social media companies.
The editorial in Panchjanya says that the rise of Priyanka Gandhi Vadra in the Congress after the appointment of Rahul Gandhi as the party’s president cannot be called a healthy practice in a democracy. It points out that there is no scope for the youth in the Congress party, which promotes the next generation of a particular family. The editorial points out that the Congress has become a party that breaks the trust of people to benefit one family. “For example, there are allegations against some ex-chief ministers of Congress-ruled states that they ignored the laws and rules to arrange lands for the companies associated with the ‘family’.” It notes that the Congress was in a shock after the road-show of Rahul and Priyanka because the “lucky” bus arranged from Punjab could not create magic for the brother-sister duo. “It was because of the media management of the party that no camera moved from ‘beautiful faces waving hands’ to the roads to tell the real number of people there,” the editorial points out.
Compiled by Lalmani Verma