The Mamankam (Maha Makham) Festival is underway in Kerala and will conclude on 3 February 2026. It has been reported that with each passing day, the crowds have been increasing and is a perfect stepping stone to Hindu awakening in Kerala where Hindus are not the majority.

The numbers seem to have caused certain leftist portals a lot of heartburn and they came up with a shoddy narrative to show the Mamankam in a bad light.

On 31 January 2026, leftist rag The News Minute published yet another pathetic episode of “Let Me Explain”. It took nearly two weeks for The News Minute (TNM) to finally assemble an “explanatory” outrage video on 31 January, packaged as investigative journalism. That delay itself is telling: outrage was manufactured, in the most cringest sense.

What Pooja Prasanna’s Let Me Explain episode actually does is not “contextualise” history but force a predetermined ideological narrative onto a living cultural event, using absolutist claims, selective scholarship, and speculative motives.

As always, in this article, we dismantle down their lies one by one.

“Kumbh Has Nothing to Do With Mamankam”: A False Absolutism

TNM repeatedly insists that Kumbh and Mamankam/Mahamakham are fundamentally unrelated, “nothing to do with each other,” “not an oblation festival at all.” This is historically sloppy.

Yes, Mamankam was deeply political, centred on kingship, succession, and ritualised violence. But to claim it had nothing to do with ritual is simply false. Mamankam did involve:

• Ritual bathing in the Bharathapuzha
• Worship at Thirunavaya temples
• Cyclical gatherings every 12 years
• Large-scale fairs combining religion, politics, trade, and spectacle

Likewise, Kumbh has never been a purely spiritual bathing ritual. It has always combined kingship, political legitimacy, trade networks, monastic power, and mass congregation.

A fair statement would be: Mamankam and Kumbh are not identical, but they share structural similarities, and modern organisers are consciously drawing from the Kumbh template.

TNM instead chooses absolutist language to delegitimise the very idea of regional Hindu adaptation.

“It Had Nothing to Do With Hindu or Muslim”: Historical Erasure Disguised as Pluralism

One of the most misleading claims in the video is that Mamankam had “nothing to do with Hindu or Muslim.” TNM is just stripping the context.  Medieval Kerala was not a religion-neutral vacuum. Mamankam was anchored in:

• Hindu temples and Brahmin settlements
• Saivite and Vaishnavite ritual orders
• Sacred geography centred on Thirunavaya

At the same time, Muslim merchants and warriors played important roles, including ceremonial and military functions. That shows shared participation, not religious irrelevance.

TNM slides from a valid point (“Muslims were part of the structure”) to an absurd conclusion (“therefore it had nothing to do with Hindu or Muslim”). That leap exists only to delegitimise any contemporary Hindu framing.

The “Northern Imposition” Myth: When Adaptation Is Branded as Colonisation

The video claims that river aarti with multi-tiered lamps is “almost unheard of in Kerala” and therefore an “artificial northern imposition.”

This is historically illiterate. Kerala has long traditions of:

• Deepam and vilakku rituals
• Temple lamp festivals
• Deeparadhana
• Processional lighting tied to sacred geography

What is new is the scale and visual idiom, consciously inspired by Varanasi and Haridwar. That is adaptation, not imposition.

Calling it “artificial” denies local agency and assumes that Kerala’s Hindus are incapable of choosing pan-Indian symbols on their own terms. Ironically, this is cultural paternalism masquerading as resistance.

The South Has Mamankam Too

It is also misleading to suggest that large, twelve-year Hindu river gatherings are somehow alien to the South. Mamankam in Kerala and Mahamaham in Tamil Nadu can examples of this. Though they are not identical festivals, they can be compared to some extent. Both are major assemblies held once every twelve years on or around riverbanks, and this shared duodecennial cycle has led several scholars to group Kumbh, Mahamaham and Mamankam as part of a broader family of twelve-year Hindu commemorations. Where they differ is in their core logic.

Mamankam at Tirunavaya on the Bharathapuzha was a medieval politico-ritual assembly, where kingship, martial display, temple worship and trade converged, and authority for the next twelve years was symbolically contested on the nilapaduthara platform. Mahamaham at Kumbakonam, by contrast, is primarily a ritual bathing and merit-seeking festival, centred on the Mahamaham tank, where devotees believe multiple sacred rivers converge, with little or no political function. It occurs once every twelve years in the Tamil month of Masi (February–March) when the Magam (Magha) star is ascendant – the last in February 2016 and the next scheduled for February 2028.

The existence of Mahamaham alone punctures the claim that Kumbh-style or duodecennial river festivals are a purely North Indian phenomenon being “imposed” on the South.

“The Only Reason Is Hindu–Muslim Polarisation”: Speculation Presented as Fact

Perhaps the most revealing line in the video is the claim that the “only reason” for sacralising the Bharathapuzha is to create a Hindu–Muslim divide in Malappuram. This is just narrative setting – they want to put this seed of doubt in the viewer’s head. And they do it without evidence, just words. TNM projects motive and then treats it as settled truth.

The organisers themselves speak of cultural revival, reconnecting with civilisational roots, and pan-Hindu solidarity. This is what irks the left. One may disagree with that ideology, but disagreement is not proof of communal conspiracy. TNM collapses potential social effects into declared intent, a classic activist trick.

Environmental Alarmism With Selective Memory

TNM invokes pollution at North Indian Kumbhs to raise environmental alarms, while carefully avoiding comparisons with:

• Sand mining in Bharathapuzha
• Long-standing encroachments
• Construction along riverbanks
• Secular fairs and commercial exploitation

All done under the Communist & Congress regimes. But TNM will not open their mouths to question all that.

If “any intervention harms rivers,” then ritual gatherings are not uniquely culpable. TNM’s framing exists to reinforce a narrative: Hindu ritual = ecological threat, while secular or commercial damage fades into the background.

The False Binary: “Secular Heritage” vs “Hindu Spectacle”

The video romanticises 1990s “secular” Mamankam commemorations as neutral heritage while portraying the present festival as ideological distortion. They are just being dishonest.

Both are interpretive projects. Earlier festivals downplayed ritual, temples, and sacred meaning. The current one foregrounds them.

One is not inherently more “truthful” than the other. TNM simply treats its preferred framing as default reality and labels the rest as dangerous revisionism.

The Real Story: Panic Over Hindu Re-Assertion

Mahamakham did not erupt overnight. It unfolded peacefully from 18 January 2026, in public view. TNM’s outrage arrived late because it had to be assembled, not observed.

What truly unsettles TNM is not historical distortion, environmental harm, or communal tension, it is the sight of Hindus reclaiming their Dharma and spaces unapologetically, drawing from pan-Indian symbols without asking for elite approval.

Kerala’s history has always been layered – ritual, political, plural, and sacred at once. TNM’s problem is not with distortion, but with the wrong layer gaining confidence.

And that is why this “explain” video is a hurriedly put together last-minute ideological firefight.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Why Kerala’s Mamankam Revival Terrifies The Left appeared first on The Commune.

The News Minute (TNM), the digital mouthpiece of Dravidian politics in Tamil Nadu, has outdone itself.

In a fawning article published on February 13, 2026, TNM went above and beyond to explain why Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin’s decision to transfer Rs 5,000 each to 1.3 crore women in one go is a shining example of women empowerment.

The headline? A straight-faced: “Why TN CM Stalin decided to release Rs 5000 each to 1.3 crore women in one go.”

The explanation? Stalin had to “thwart” the evil BJP’s attempts to “halt the scheme” by hiding behind elections. The move, we’re told, was necessary to ensure women don’t face hardship in meeting expenses for medicines, children’s education, and household needs.

All very noble. All very heartwarming.

Except for one small problem.

The Bihar Template: When Nitish Did It

In October 2025, Bihar CM Nitish Kumar (NDA) transferred Rs 10,000 each to 25 lakh women (totaling 1 crore beneficiaries) under Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana for self-employment startups. Launched pre-elections with PM Modi’s involvement, it offered initial grants plus up to Rs 2 lakh follow-up, positioned as empowerment via Jeevika self-help groups.

The leftist ecosystem that TNM inhabits branded the move as “electoral bribes,” “vote-buying,” and “fiscally irresponsible giveaways.” The headlines didn’t ask “Why Bihar CM decided to release funds to women in one go” with sympathetic explanations. They asked pointed questions about timing, motives, and electoral manipulation.

The double standard is so glaring it’s almost comical.

Same action.

Same timing – both ahead of elections.

Same demographic – women voters.

Same mechanism – direct benefit transfers.

But diametrically opposite coverage.

Why?

Because TNM isn’t a news organization. It’s a propaganda outfit with a simple rule:

• If a non-DMK, non-Dravidian government does it → it’s a bribe.
• If the DMK does it → it’s empowerment.

This time, they use the examples of NDA-led governments in other states – Assam, Maharashtra, Bihar, MP, Haryana to justify DMK’s move to transfer the cash. This creates a normalization effect: If others do DBTs, Tamil Nadu’s move isn’t exceptional.

That indirectly supports Stalin’s justification.

The “Election Code” Dodging: Clever or Corrupt?

TNM’s article proudly explains how Stalin “thwarted” the BJP’s attempts to halt the scheme: “The advance disbursal of funds was therefore seen as a preemptive step to avoid any interruption.”

Translation: We rushed to give money before the election code of conduct kicks in, because once it does, we can’t.

Now imagine if a BJP-led government did this.

Imagine the headlines: “BJP govt in mad rush to distribute funds before code kicks in” — “Election Commission urged to investigate pre-code cash transfers” — “Opposition cries foul over timing of welfare payouts.”

TNM would be leading the charge.

But when the DMK does it? It’s “ensuring women don’t face hardship.”

The mental gymnastics required to maintain this position would win Olympic gold.

The Numbers Game: 1.3 Crore Women

Let’s do the math TNM doesn’t want you to do:

1.3 crore women = 13 million voters (or potential voter influencers in their households)

Rs 5,000 each = Rs 6,500 crore of public money

Disbursed in one go, weeks before elections

Justified as “advance payment” for three months

Now ask yourself: If this were a BJP government in any state, would TNM be writing sympathetic articles explaining why it was necessary to give 1.3 crore women Rs 5,000 each right before elections?

Would the headline be “Why BJP CM decided to release funds to women in one go” with a helpful video message from the CM?

Or would it be “BJP’s pre-election cash splash: Freebie or empowerment?”

We all know the answer.

The “Women Empowerment” Card

TNM’s article leans heavily on the “women empowerment” framing: “Beneficiaries would face hardship in meeting expenses for medicines, children’s education, and household needs if the Rs 1,000 monthly assistance was interrupted.”

This is genuinely touching.

But here’s the problem: This argument applies to every state.

Bihar’s women also have expenses for medicines, children’s education, and household needs. So do Assam’s women. So do Madhya Pradesh’s women. So do Maharashtra’s women.

But when those governments transfer money to women, TNM doesn’t call it “empowerment.” They call it “freebies” or, at best, report it with skepticism.

The “women empowerment” framing is selectively applied based on one criterion alone: which party is in power.

TNM did not bother asking one important question to the DMK. The same portal covered the various protests going on in the state, but they failed to ask why the money was not used to settle those problems rather than “empower women”.

The Assam Irony

TNM’s article mentions Assam’s Orunodoi scheme almost as a throwaway, noting that the Assam government is “looking at an early disbursement” to “circumvent the stay on DBT if the SC orders so in March.”

The tone? Disapproving. Skeptical. It’s presented as evidence of BJP “double-speak.”

But this is exactly what the DMK just did.

The Assam government is considering early disbursement to protect beneficiaries from potential interruption.

The DMK just did early disbursement to protect beneficiaries from potential interruption.

Same logic. Same mechanism. Same timing concerns.

But TNM reports one with skepticism and the other with sympathy.

The hypocrisy isn’t even subtle anymore.

The Credibility Question

Welfare transfers are legitimate policy tools.

They can empower.
They can relieve hardship.
They can stimulate local economies.

But they can also be electorally timed instruments.

Which interpretation prevails should depend on fiscal data, timing, and policy design, not party affiliation.

Consistency is the foundation of journalistic credibility.

When identical policy instruments receive opposite moral framing based solely on who implements them, the reporting platform transforms into a mouthpiece. And that is what TNM has become – The New Murasoli.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post TNM Once Again Proves It Is The New Murasoli, Buttresses DMK’s Cash Splurge Ahead Of Tamil Nadu Elections appeared first on The Commune.

The conviction of self-styled “independent investigative journalist” Ravi Nair in a criminal defamation case has triggered predictable outrage from India’s entrenched left-liberal media ecosystem. Leading that chorus is The News Minute and its editor Dhanya Rajendran, who have rushed to frame the judgment as an assault on press freedom rather than what it legally is – a conviction delivered by a court of law after due process.

A magistrate court in Mansa, Gandhinagar, convicted Ravi Nair under criminal defamation provisions and sentenced him to one year of imprisonment along with a monetary fine. The conviction stemmed from a series of tweets and publications targeting Adani Enterprises Limited, where the court found a pattern in what Ravi Nair, the Soros lackey did – alleging illegality, manipulation of policy, and impropriety without substantiated proof meeting legal thresholds.

Yet, in TNM’s telling, this was not adjudication but victimhood.

What makes Dhanya Rajendran’s indignation ring hollow is not merely its defence of Nair – it is its deafening silence elsewhere.

Where was this moral urgency when commentators and YouTubers in Tamil Nadu faced arrest under the DMK regime? There were so many YouTubers, so many political commentators, portals like The Commune – every single one who was against the DMK ecosystem faced arrests and cases after cases piled up against them. Where was Dhanya when Maridhas was arrested, when Kishore K Swamy was detained, when Felix was arrested, when police hounded Savukku Shankar and his family over and over again. Where was Dhanya when a 70+ year old YouTuber Varadharajan was arrested and remained in prison even during Deepavali, away from his family – where were you Dhanya? Was your mouth plastered or had you swallowed Fevicol?

The list of people facing police action, the people against the DMK ecosystem, is long, very long, and conspicuously under-reported by the same platforms now sermonising about democratic freedoms. This is the ‘raththam, thakkali chutney’ logic. It hurts only when it happens to them, while they cheer and laugh when it happens to someone on the other side – this was the same crowd that cheered when Arnab Goswami was arrested.

What Ravi Nair is facing is hardly anything. Here’s what Savukku Shankar and his family faced – case after case for exposing the DMK government, arrest under Goondas Act for alleged finding of ganja in his home, and here’s the worst – In March 2025, a group of unidentified individuals posing as sanitation workers allegedly broke into Savukku Shankar’s residence, vandalised the property, terrorised his mother, and dumped filth inside the house. Shankar said stones were thrown at his vehicle before the intrusion and that the attackers used his mother’s phone to video call him. He linked the attack to his corruption allegations he made against TNCC President Selvaperunthagai over sanitation vehicle contracts.

TNM’s framing of the Ravi Nair case foregrounds selective tweets while downplaying others central to the defamation findings – particularly posts courts considered imputational rather than analytical.

This is how leftist ecosystem makes their followers fool. @dhanyarajendran while reporting the case delibrately replaced the main tweet posted on 20 oct 2020 with other two irrelevant tweets to make Nair’s case relevant. https://t.co/U2zlhU154U pic.twitter.com/BYYDapFPdu

— kanhabansri (@kanhabansri) February 11, 2026

This is classic narrative management that the Left has mastered – Humanise the accused, politicise the prosecution, internationalise the outrage, omit inconvenient parallels – basically, flash the victim card over and over again.

If Dhanya Rajendran and TNM wish to be taken seriously as defenders of free speech, their outrage must be consistent, not curated.

Press freedom cannot be loud in one state, silent in Tamil Nadu, fierce for Nair, muted for regional dissenters, global when convenient, local when risky.

The post For Me Blood, For You Tomato Ketchup: Dhanya Rajendran Cries “Press Freedom” For Soros Lackey Ravi Nair Conviction, Stays Silent On DMK Govt Arresting Netizens & YouTubers appeared first on The Commune.

Chitra Subramaniam, co-founder of The News Minute—often dubbed “TN Murasoli” for functioning as the DMK’s unofficial mouthpiece—stepping in to buttress DMK spokesperson ‘Melting Point’ Saravanan is a textbook case of how a self‑styled guardian of ethics can weaponise “media critique” selectively to shield her favourite political camp while ignoring far more serious abuses closer home.

What happened On TV

A live national television debate on Times Now descended into farce after DMK spokesperson ‘Melting Point’ Saravanan responded to a pointed political question not with facts or argument, but with an extended burst of loud, weird ghostly laughter that stunned fellow panelists and left the studio momentarily frozen.

The exchange occurred during a discussion on language politics and alleged “Hindi imposition.” As BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla pressed Saravanan on the ideological roots of the DMK’s cultural rhetoric, specifically the political context of Parasakthi, who was in power during the alleged imposition period, and why the DMK is today allied with the Congress, Saravanan offered no answer.

Instead, he abruptly broke into a prolonged, high decibel laugh, repeating it for several seconds, visibly rattled. Other panellists looked on in disbelief as the moderator failed to regain control of the discussion, amplifying the surreal nature of the moment.

Nothing more satisfying than seeing @arivalayam spokesperson getting roasted and exposed on national media by @Shehzad_Ind ! Do watch pic.twitter.com/NBelyWtpds

— Vinoj P Selvam (@VinojBJP) February 1, 2026

Earlier in the debate, Saravanan had complained that he was “upset” about being invited to an English-language discussion where Hindi was spoken, calling it an “everyday nuisance.” Notably, the theatrical laughter erupted precisely when he was confronted with a direct contradiction involving the DMK’s alliance politics.

The clip quickly went viral, with viewers describing the episode as an on-air meltdown rather than debate – an attempt to drown out an inconvenient line of questioning through sheer noise.

What Did Saravanan Share?

He shared a 3-minute clipping of the same debate minus the noisy laughter episode and wrote, “Goel or Goebbels! If there’s a competition between them, we will not be able to predict the winner. Nepo Kid @PiyushGoyal who has ground our manufacturing is speaking about the competence of our DMK govt. Skill India program is tangled in 10,000 crore scam but gives us gyaan about corruption. BJP thy name hypocrisy.”

Goel or Goebbels!

If there’s a competition between them, we will not be able to predict the winner.

Nepo Kid @PiyushGoyal who has ground our manufacturing is speaking about the competence of our DMK govt.

Skill India program is tangled in 10,000 crore scam but gives us… pic.twitter.com/6V9pu6qrNI

— Saravanan Annadurai (@saravofcl) February 1, 2026

Chitra Subramaniam Rushes to Defend, Selectively

Enter Chitra Subramaniam, co-founder of the Leftist-Dravidianist rag The News Minute, who rushed to defend Saravanan by attacking the television channel instead.

Sharing Saravanan’s post, she wrote, “Here’s an example of how arrogant our English networks are… Your mediocrity stands exposed. Try and get your basics right. Journalism is a public good.”

On cue, she jumps in, not to ask why a major regional party’s spokesperson can’t handle a basic question, but to lecture Times Now on “arrogant English networks” and praise Saravanan.

For someone who claims to be a free speech advocate, what was conspicuously absent was any criticism of Saravanan’s conduct -no concern about evading questions, no comment on replacing debate with theatrics, and no discomfort with a spokesperson turning a national platform into a spectacle.

Chitra Subramaniam’s sudden discovery of journalistic ethics appears to activate only when the DMK or its spokespersons are embarrassed.

Her record remains silent when BJP Youth Wing Tamil Nadu State President SG Suryah was assaulted by DMK cadres masquerading as journalists. There was no public condemnation when journalists were allegedly kidnapped and thrashed by a DMK MLA and his associates for reporting on illegal quarrying. Those incidents, it seems, did not merit lectures on “journalism as a public good.”

Yet when a DMK spokesperson makes a spectacle of himself on national television, she is quick to frame it as media arrogance rather than political evasion.

The News Minute And The Question Of Credibility

The irony deepens when one considers The News Minute’s own journalistic record. The portal has repeatedly been accused of running unverified or recycled stories as fresh “exposés,” including controversial reporting on Dharmasthala that lacked substantiation and was never withdrawn or corrected.

More recently, TNM drew widespread condemnation for repackaging an old court case involving entrepreneur Sridhar Vembu as a new revelation – an exercise seen as clickbait rather than evidence-based.

For a publication frequently behaving as a DMK-friendly echo chamber, sometimes as its mouthpiece and becoming TN Murasoli often, lectures on “mediocrity” and “basics of journalism” land hollow.

Adding to the contradiction is Chitra Subramaniam’s own social-media practice: championing free speech while keeping replies disabled on her posts. The irony of condemning journalists for language barriers while refusing to engage with dissenting voices altogether was not lost.

From Bofors To Blind Spots

Chitra Subramaniam’s legacy reporting on Bofors once earned her respect. But that legacy cannot indefinitely shield present conduct. Her trajectory from exposing one of India’s biggest scandals to defending a ruling party spokesperson who collapsed into laughter when questioned represents a full circle very few would have imagined.

The episode raises a larger question: when partisan loyalty begins to dictate who deserves outrage and who deserves silence, can the claim of journalistic neutrality survive?

For many watching this debate and its aftermath, Saravanan’s laughter was embarrassing. But what followed, the instinctive, selective defence from sections of the media, may have been even more revealing.

In the end, the spectacle was not just about a spokesperson who laughed instead of answering. It was about how quickly certain commentators abandoned principles the moment those principles threatened their preferred politics.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Running TN Murasoli, Preaching Journalism: Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Chitra Subramaniam appeared first on The Commune.

A judge makes a harmless quip at a public function. A media outlet turns it into a morality play about judicial bias, communal danger, and institutional collapse. That is how The News Minute sets a narrative, paints someone they don’t like (especially from the opposite camp) as a bigot.

A recent 3 minute short by The News Minute on Justice GR Swaminathan’s remarks at an event organized by Dhara Foundation recently. The video does not merely critique a judicial order or examine public conduct. Instead, it carefully strings together insinuations that paint a sitting High Court judge as communal, reckless, and politically aligned, all while cloaking the exercise as concern for “public confidence in the judiciary.”

What starts as a quip about the Thirupparankundram Karthigai Deepam court order devolves into a vicious narrative painting a sitting Madras High Court judge as communal, reckless, and unfit. And the hypocrisy? TNM deploys a young Muslim girl, Azeeza Fathima, as their star witness against Sanatana Dharma and this very judge, while staying stone-silent on card-carrying judges who moonlight as political activists.

Contempt In Plain Sight: TNM’s Poisonous Quotes

TNM doesn’t just critique; it poisons the well with statements that scream contempt of court. Consider these direct pulls from their script: “This was not just a joke. It was a reference to a controversy simmering with communal tension in Tamil Nadu.”

Here, TNM flatly labels a lawful judicial order of allowing Karthigai Deepam lamps on the Deepathoon as inherently “communal.” No analysis of the order’s merits, no context on the history of the ritual or annual traditions. Just a smear imputing communal motive to a sitting judge. Under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Section 2(c)), this edges into “scandalizing the court” by attributing bias without evidence, eroding public trust in judicial impartiality.

Worse follows: “Justice Swaminathan allowed it. The order triggered protests and raised serious law and order concerns… a judge whose order almost triggered a law and order situation.”

This is a blatant accusation. TNM holds the judge personally responsible for “triggering” protests and near-riots, as if maintaining order is his job, not the Tamil Nadu Police’s or DMK government’s. Such language implies judicial recklessness, precisely the kind of prejudicial commentary courts have struck down (recall EMS Namboodiripad v. T. Narayanan Nambiar, 1970, where ascribing improper motives to judges was held contemptuous).

The script piles on: “A judge whose order almost triggered a law and order situation, who now faces an impeachment notice, is publicly joking about it and framing his future work in explicitly religious terms.”

The Joke As Evidence, Religion As Indictment

The video treats Justice Swaminathan’s joke about the Deepam controversy as proof of impropriety, asking whether “levity is the right response” from a judge facing impeachment demands. It then ties this to his past public statements on Sanatana Dharma, including remarks such as “if you protect the Vedas, the Vedas will protect you,” and his hope that Sanatana Dharma will live forever.

Judges are allowed to hold beliefs. Judges are allowed to speak on culture and philosophy. What the video does is not question the legal correctness of any judgment but suggest that these beliefs, when articulated, undermine judicial impartiality itself.

That suggestion is serious. It implies that religious conviction is incompatible with judicial office, but only when the religion in question is Sanatana Dharma. Did they forget that it was the same judge who quotes the Bible and Quran with equal ease?

TNM links a pending impeachment (sought by DMK partisans) to “religious” impropriety, suggesting the judge’s personal faith (Sanatana Dharma references) disqualifies him. This isn’t fair comment; it’s a motive-imputing hit-job on a live judicial tenure. As a journalist, as a media house, they do not question the grounds for impeachment – do they need lessons?

What is worse you ask – TNM’s double standards hit peak absurdity when they parade their minion to pontificate on Sanatana Dharma and critique Justice Swaminathan’s beliefs. Yet this same channel ignores judges who flaunt political affiliations, Leftist darlings at rallies, “secular” icons soft-pedaling on Islamist extremism, or post-retirement Congress joiners. No videos, no “public confidence” lectures for them. Why? Because TNM’s outrage is partisan, not principled.

From Critique To Character Assassination

Line by line, the video accumulates insinuations:

• that the judge’s order was “communal”
• that it emboldened extremist groups
• that it risked public disorder
• that his religious language reveals bias
• that joking about controversy is unbecoming
• that impeachment demands lend moral weight

Individually, each claim may sit just within the boundary of harsh criticism. Together, they form a portrait of a judge as irresponsible, partisan, and unfit, without ever saying so explicitly. This is how contempt is laundered through tone.

Indian courts have repeatedly held that while judgments may be criticised, imputing motives, questioning integrity, or suggesting alignment with political or communal forces crosses a line. The News Minute skirts that line not once, but consistently.

The Real Threat To Judicial Credibility

TNM ends with a sanctimonious flourish: “The judiciary… rests on public confidence. And that confidence is shaped… by what judges say and do outside [court].”

Irony alert: it’s TNM’s contempt-laced hit-pieces that shred confidence, selectively targeting Hindu-leaning judges while cheerleading the ideologically aligned. If Azeeza Fathima’s “take” on Sanatana Dharma merits airtime, why not grill DMK ministers who make anti-Hindu statements, call for eradication of Sanatana Dharma? Or summon experts on judges who’ve ruled with blatant political wink-wink?

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post The News Minute Turns A Quip Into A Communal Hit Job Against Justice GR Swaminathan appeared first on The Commune.

The claim that Tamil Nadu’s debt cannot be compared to Uttar Pradesh’s has emerged as the latest talking point in The News Minute’s Let Me Explain series. The episode asserts that those citing Tamil Nadu’s higher total debt are “misleading” the public and that, once “context” is applied, the State emerges not just fiscally sound but unfairly targeted by number-twisting critics.

A closer look at data however, reveals TNM’s propaganda style – selective framing, casual handling of numbers, and a typical leftist strategy – pre-empting legitimate scrutiny by declaring it “meaningless”.

Manufacturing a Victim Narrative

From the opening minute, the video frames the issue not as a fiscal debate but as a moral confrontation. Critics who point to Tamil Nadu’s higher debt are cast as peddlers of a “simple story of fiscal failure”, while the anchor positions herself as rescuing viewers from bad faith statistics.

Cross-state comparison itself is portrayed as inherently political and dishonest rather than a routine analytical tool used by the RBI, Finance Commission, PRS Legislative Research, and credit-rating agencies.

Instead of asking an obvious and legitimate question of whether Tamil Nadu’s debt trajectory comfortable and sustainable, the episode pivots to a defensive posture:

• Tamil Nadu is richer, more diversified and socially advanced than Uttar Pradesh.
• Debt is merely a “tool”, and richer states can naturally carry more of it.
• Therefore, highlighting absolute debt numbers is either economic illiteracy or deliberate misrepresentation.

So, questioning policy is treated as questioning Tamil Nadu. The show abandons analysis and assumes the role of advocate.

Sloppy Numbers, Blurred Timelines

Any serious explainer must first get the numbers right. This is where the episode falters badly.

The video cites Tamil Nadu’s debt at ₹9.29 lakh crore and its GSDP at ₹35.6 lakh crore, producing a debt-to-GSDP ratio of about 26%. But ₹9.29 lakh crore is not the 2024–25 actual debt—it is the projected outstanding debt by March 2026, as per the 2025 budget.

At the same time, the GSDP figure used is from earlier projections. The 2024–25 budget places nominal GSDP closer to ₹31.6 lakh crore.

This mixing of future debt, with older, higher GSDP estimates artificially softens the ratio. The viewer is never told which year these figures correspond to, or that they are projections rather than actuals.

For Uttar Pradesh, the episode uses round figures – ₹9.03 lakh crore debt and ₹30.8 lakh crore GSDP – which align with 2025–26 projections, again without disclosure. Crucially, PRS data shows that UP, like Tamil Nadu, is also targeting fiscal deficits within the 3% FRBM band. That similarity is conveniently ignored.

For a show that repeatedly accuses politicians of “reading numbers out of context”, this casual blending of timelines and estimates is not a minor oversight, it undermines the entire argument.

One Yardstick for Tamil Nadu, Another for UP

The episode insists that debt must be judged relative to economic size, growth potential, and revenue capacity.

This is sound economics. But it is applied selectively.

Tamil Nadu is praised for keeping its fiscal deficit near 3% of GSDP and raising roughly three-quarters of its revenue from own sources.

Uttar Pradesh, meanwhile, is reduced to a caricature: a poor state surviving on Union transfers. There is no discussion of:

• UP’s own FRBM compliance,
• its recent capex push,
• or improvements in tax effort—all documented in PRS and budget analyses.

If FRBM compliance and debt ratios are the benchmarks, they must apply equally. Instead, Tamil Nadu is acquitted under rules that UP is never even tested against. What is sold as “context” increasingly resembles narrative management.

Airbrushing Tamil Nadu’s Debt Risks

The video reassures viewers that Tamil Nadu’s debt ratio has “stabilised and is slowly declining”, citing projected marginal improvements from 26.6% to 26.4%.

What it does not mention:

Tamil Nadu’s debt-GSDP ratio had already climbed sharply before COVID-19, a trend flagged by the 15th Finance Commission as a medium-term concern.

Interest payments and committed expenditure viz, salaries, pensions, interest, consume a growing share of revenue, squeezing fiscal flexibility. This is documented in Tamil Nadu’s own budget papers.

COVID-19 is used as a moral alibi: borrowing limits were relaxed, states had to borrow, therefore post-2020 debt accumulation is treated as morally neutral.

But serious fiscal analysis does not end with COVID. It begins with what comes after structural costs, welfare commitments, and political competition. These are precisely the issues the episode avoids.

A neutral analysis need not claim Tamil Nadu is on the brink. It only needs to insist that being richer than UP does not exempt the State from scrutiny. The video refuses that nuance.

Declaring Scrutiny “Meaningless”

The choice of words is deliberate. The episode could have argued that cross-state debt comparisons are incomplete without context. Instead, it repeatedly calls them “meaningless” and “misleading”.

But comparisons of debt-to-GSDP, interest-to-revenue ratios, and contingent liabilities are exactly how fiscal stress is identified by bodies that monitor such risk. These metrics are not meaningless; they are starting points.

By declaring them meaningless, the show effectively immunises the Tamil Nadu government from benchmarking. That is not explanation, it is insulation.

Welfare, Outcomes, and the Cost Question

The episode’s strongest segment highlights Tamil Nadu’s genuine achievements: lower infant and maternal mortality, better health outcomes, higher school enrolment, and a higher HDI.

It argues, correctly, that these outcomes require sustained public spending, and that low debt elsewhere can signal under-investment rather than prudence.

But here again, nuance is abandoned. All spending is treated as productive and virtuous. There is no distinction between long-term, high-return investments, and recurring subsidies and politically timed schemes with unclear returns.

To even ask whether some schemes carry fiscal risk is implicitly treated as hostility.

Explanation or Advocacy?

There is a real and necessary conversation to be had about how state debt is discussed in India. Politicians routinely cherry-pick numbers. Citizens are rarely told what FRBM rules mean. Explain-style journalism can play a valuable role here.

But rebutting spin with counter-spin helps no one.

A good-faith explainer would clearly separate actuals from projections, apply the same benchmarks to all states, acknowledge both strengths and risks, and stop framing scrutiny as an attack on the State itself.

The News Minute episode gets one thing right: context matters more than raw numbers. But in its eagerness to defend Tamil Nadu from criticism, it slips into its own form of narrative control – framing legitimate fiscal questions into a morality tale of a misunderstood, virtuous government under siege. Explainers are meant to illuminate trade-offs and risks.

Regular readers of The Commune will recognise the pattern immediately – Let Me Explain is less about explanation and more about arranging the facts to suit a predetermined narrative.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post How TN Murasoli Twists Data To Buttress DMK Govt’s Fiscal Mismanagement appeared first on The Commune.

The News Minute published a hit job article of Zoho founder Sridhar Vembu. based on US court proceedings that came out a year ago in January 2025.

A few months ago, in October 2025, TNM went after Nikhil Kamath – co-founder of Zerodha.

With the hitjob on Vembu, one can safely say that The News Minute is going after entrepreneurs, people who are generating employment and wealth and taking the country forward.

The News Minute writes these pieces as if it is an ‘independent’ media doing truthful ‘journalism’.

But did you know that The News Minute received an ‘undisclosed’ amount as funding from its investor Quintillion Media whose founders Raghav Bahl and Ritu Kapoor have been accused of corruption and money laundering?

Who Is Raghav Bahl?

Bahl co-founded Quintillion Media Pvt Ltd and currently promotes Quint Digital Media Limited, controlling thequint.com.

In October 2018, the Income Tax Department of India raided The Quint’s offices and Raghav Bahl’s residence as part of an investigation into an alleged case of tax evasion. The raid was officially referred to as a survey by the Income Tax officers.

Not just that. According to PMC Fincorp MD Raj Kumar Modi’s statement to tax officials, Raghav Bahl and Ritu Kapur allegedly invested about ₹3.03 crore in PMC Fincorp at around ₹5.50 a share, saw the price shoot up to roughly ₹848 despite no real business activity, and then sold the shares to seven Kolkata-based shell companies, booking over ₹100 crore in bogus long-term capital gains and turning unaccounted cash into “white” money; Modi further claims Bahl’s chartered accountant handed him ₹100 crore in cash for this purpose and that he took about a 1.5% commission on the amount converted.

In 2019, media owner Raghav Bahl faced money laundering accusations by the Enforcement Directorate for allegedly understating a London property’s investment value by GBP 2.73 lakh (around ₹2.45 crore) and failing to explain the source of funds. Bahl’s properties were raided previously, prompting him to release details. His assets, including a London flat, were declared in income tax filings under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme.

In August 2023, the Delhi High Court temporarily lifted a lookout circular (LOC) against Raghav Bahl and his wife Ritu Kapur, allowing them to travel abroad for business meetings amidst the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) money laundering probe. The High Court had earlier dismissed Bahl’s plea to quash the ED’s complaint, deeming it premature, and rejected his request to annul the LOC, granting only conditional travel permissions. Kapur’s plea against the ED probe is pending, asserting her non-involvement under the Black Money Act. The Income Tax Department initiated proceedings against Bahl under the Black Money Act, followed by the ED’s complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Yes, it is true that some start-ups do not disclose the amount raised as capital. However, since The News Minute portrays itself to be a transparency champion and claims itself to be doing journalism for public good asking readers to pay for ‘good journalism’, shouldn’t the ‘undisclosed amount’ of funding it received be disclosed? 

Are they being funded by laundered money?, is a question to be asked to The News Minute that lectures on accountability, justice and what not!

Now let us take a quick look at both the ‘exclusive’ pieces – both paywalled to fleece money.

Sridhar Vembu – Character Assassination, Ambiguity & Half-Truths

In Sridhar Vembu’s case, TNM builds its entire narrative on a pre-trial California order issued nearly a year ago, in January 2025, on an emergency application in an acrimonious divorce, treating it like a final judgment on character. Vembu’s counsel has since stated that the order was passed under severe time constraints, based on outrageously false allegations, and that subsequent proceedings, including appellate review, have already stayed the receivership and questioned the absurdity of the USD 1.7-billion bond figure, as mentioned by his counsel.

According to Vembu’s counsel, the bond order, now under appeal has no legal basis, is impossible to comply with, and was acknowledged by a subsequent judge as appearing excessive, with the receivership itself stayed pending appellate review.

TNM’s piece quotes every damaging adjective in that order – “without regard for the law”, “duplicitously”, “moving assets out of the US” while downplaying three basic facts that the case is ongoing, discovery and valuation are still being contested, and such aggressive interim measures are common in high‑net‑worth divorces involving offshore structures. ​

It never asks what any decent lawyer would: how often do US courts use huge bonds and receiverships as leverage in complex divorces, and how frequently are those orders modified or narrowed later. The ambiguity is inconvenient, so it is erased.

The piece uses the USD 1.7‑billion figure as the headline hook. TNM presents it as proof of extraordinary guilt while refusing to explain what a bond is. Bonds secure potential claims: they are not fines, settlements, or alimony awards. Non‑payment does not automatically prove hidden billions or fraudulent intent – it can simply mean the court has pegged security to notional global enterprise value rather than liquid assets actually within reach.

This distinction is central to the story. TNM avoids it because nuance blunts outrage.

In the same piece on Vembu, several crucial points are still disputed. It is not clear whether Zoho’s IP was really sold for USD 50 million, whether that amount was actually paid, whether Vembu’s true economic interest is 5% or higher and whether early‑2010s restructurings were legitimate corporate housekeeping or deceptive. ​

The court has doubts. Doubt is not adjudication. Yet the piece stitches together allegations, judicial scepticism and interim language into a single, seamless narrative of wrongdoing. The reader is never clearly told which parts are proven, which are inferred, and which are simply what one angry spouse alleges. TNM’s piece uses ambuiguity as its fuel.

Moreover, it is someone’s personal life – would they be fine if media goes after their founders’ personal lives and wealth?

Nikhil Kamath – Use Random Minor Incidents To Accuse

The Nikhil Kamath profile published (incidentally by the same author – Indulekha Aravind, follows the same playbook, with a different surface. Here the target isn’t a divorce order (sadly for them) but a curated “simple billionaire” persona. The article creates a persona about his middle-class upbringing, his brother, his podcast soundbites, his references to Carl Jung, Rene Girard, “mimetic theory”, reading habits and then tries to puncture them with a handful of quotes about poverty and caste, some sloppy analogies, and the 2021 chess‑cheating scandal. ​

The cheating against Viswanathan Anand on Chess.com was real and indefensible. Kamath admitted to using computer assistance and was banned. That should be a tight, contained story about personal ethics. TNM treats it as proof that everything about him is suspect.

What’s missing is revealing:

No evidence that Kamath or Zerodha fabricated titles or falsified formal achievements; even the article concedes that there is a FIDE record and that a grandmaster recalls playing “Nikhil Kamat” in an Asian Junior event. ​

No serious attempt to show that his supposed superficiality on social questions has translated into regulatory violations, client harm, or SEBI action.

No concrete case where Kamath lied to regulators, investors, or customers in the way he lied on a charity chessboard.

Instead, like with Vembu, TNM works backwards from conclusion to evidence: the man is suspect, therefore his success must be recast as performance.

Data When Convenient, Silence When Inconvenient

With Vembu, TNM scrutinizes every sentence of a family‑court order but never interrogates how asset‑holding structures are standard in founder‑led global firms. It never confirms facts with independent corporate lawyers to ask whether routing IP through relatives or long‑time co‑founders is inherently unlawful or simply common tax and control planning that can become contested during divorce. ​

With Kamath, it spends paragraphs on vibe – podcast tone, book references, “carefully crafted persona” but never digs into Zerodha’s actual market conduct, risk disclosures, or complaint record. If TNM is claiming that Indian founders are gaming the system, the first place to examine is the system itself. TNM keeps the spotlight on optics instead.

The Same Pattern: Pick The Man, Then Build The Case

The pattern for every such hitjob is the same – hard to miss.

Start with a business owner whose politics, public piety or rural‑India rhetoric do not fit into TNM’s narrative. If they have been seen with PM Modi, they rank higher on the list. If they have praised PM Modi, yeah, they get to be at the top of the list.

Then they go digging through court orders, online platforms, and old interviews, pulling out whatever sounds most damaging on its own be it a judge’s passing remark, a cheating ban on a chess site, or an offhand comment about slums or caste.

These bits are then stitched together into a long story that leans heavily in one direction. Every unclear point is read against the person being written about, and facts that don’t fit the narrative are quietly ignored. The final product is placed behind a paywall and sold as an “investigation” or an “extensive profile”.

This does not mean that Sridhar Vembu is necessarily right in his divorce case, or that Nikhil Kamath’s cheating incident was insignificant – Vembu’s marital dispute is a private matter still under adjudication, and Kamath was banned and penalised for his actions. That is where those stories should reasonably end.

What TNM does is turn personal disputes and individual lapses into sweeping judgments about legitimacy and character. They are narratives built to suggest that a flaw in one sphere disqualifies a person in all others.

When so-called ‘investigative journalists’, have to rely on private matters (gossip) and minor errors into material for larger political or ideological fights, it stops doing its job. It is obvious they are taking sides. The real issue here is not that Indian founders have flaws, that is hardly surprising, everyone is flawed. But the real issue is that a platform claiming moral authority has built a habit of turning those flaws into sellable outrage, while staying safely within the limits of what the evidence can actually prove.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post TNM Which Got ‘Undisclosed Amount’ From Money Laundering Accused, Has The Audacity To Target Indian Business Owners appeared first on The Commune.

Imagine the most horrible, cunning person you’ve ever met. Someone for whom loyalty, ethics, and truth don’t matter. Someone who would do anything for their own benefit, even if it meant selling out their own mother for money. Someone who wouldn’t even think twice before bootlicking for personal gain. Set them beside The News Minute, and that person would still come across as principled.

After a voyeuristic, Nakkheeran-style hit job peeping into the personal life of Zoho founder Sridhar Vembu, the leftist rag – or more accurately, the DMK’s unofficial mouthpiece – The News Minute signaled that it would publish a full profile of Vembu.

On 9 January 2026, they published a 10,000-plus-word hit job on Sridhar Vembu, cunningly hiding it behind a paywall like cowards to force subscriptions to their trash.

In this no-punches-pulled article, we dissect the full hitjob and expose the venom with which The Naxal Minute functions.

The profile is a long-winded character assassination. It sets its intention right at the beginning – we hate Vembu because he is a Hindu, a Brahmin, a ‘Sanghi’ and so you must hate him too.

Paragraph after paragraph, it does the same thing: cherry‑pick facts, launder innuendo through anonymous quotes, and then hang everything on the one sin TNM can never forgive – that Vembu refuses to fit their ideological script.​ Let us take a deeper look.

Rigging The Frame From Paragraph 1 

The piece doesn’t begin with his achievements, his words, or his background. But with a quote from RSS’s mouthpiece Organiser. So, with this they have stained him saffron.

Indulekha Aravind uses it as the first filter through which the reader must see Vembu. He is guilty by association before his own words even appear.​

Then comes the lush travel‑writing: poor farm labourers, “verdant paddy fields”, Western Ghats, and at the end of the road, the billionaire Brahmin in a house villagers call an “agraharam”. The implication is clear – now identify him by his caste. Then they mention the village is also home to other castes.

The word “agraharam” is waved like a caste dog‑whistle, and readers are expected to fill in the rest.​ This is TNM’s method throughout. Facts are thin; atmosphere does the heavy lifting.

Just like that, without a single example of him discriminating against anyone, they’ve painted him as a casteist living apart from the villagers. They highlight he’s a Brahmin and now frame his guilt by identity, a cheap trick to make readers view his every action through a lens of prejudice they’ve provided.

Image-Building Turned Into Moral Crime

Next comes the “poster boy” construction: Padma Shri, veshti, cycling CEO, swadeshi talk, BJP proximity. You get descriptions like he is a “poster boy” for BJP and RSS, he takes photos in veshti in paddy fields, he says “I don’t care about net worth.”​ All of it is real. None of it is illegal or hidden. But instead of asking whether any of this is false, the article pivots to anonymous voices calling him a “great marketer” and someone who “makes a virtue out of necessity.”

That’s the accusation. No specific lie is identified. No statement is shown to be untrue. Image-building itself is treated as deception because the image is politically inconvenient.

They never point to a specific thing he said that was a lie. Did he fake Zoho’s revenue? Did he invent the Zoho Schools program? Did he Photoshop himself in the village? No. They just offer anonymous opinions that he’s good at telling his story, as if every successful person isn’t. It’s a hollow accusation designed to make you doubt his sincerity without having to prove a thing.

The usual tactic these hit jobs employ is the use of anonymous “ex-employees” they claim to have spoken to—no names, no accountability, just vague references. By that standard, The Commune could just as easily spin an imaginary story citing similar “sources” who have supposedly engaged with Dhanya Rajendran or anyone else in that Leftist-Dravidianist den.

The Divorce Case – Presenting Half-Truths

When the article reaches the California divorce proceedings, it drops all pretense of balance.

Interim court language is presented as though guilt has already been established. The fact that these are interim orders that appeals are ongoing, that family courts routinely use aggressive language to secure assets – all of that is either buried or mentioned much later, after the damage is done.

The ex-wife’s allegations are reproduced in detail. Vembu’s response is reduced to a line or two. No documents. No explanation. No real attempt to present both sides. It reads less like reporting and more like a prosecution brief.

Startup Stories Don’t Work The Way TNM Pretends They Do

On Zoho’s origins, the article does the same trick. Over the years, media profiles and talks have simplified the founding story – as almost every startup founder does. In courtroom filings, Vembu’s timeline is more precise: Tony Thomas set up Advent in 1995; he joined in 1997; his brothers ran Vembu Systems in Chennai.​
TNM presents this as if they’ve unearthed a conspiracy. “There have been variations,” they say ominously, and then… stop. No smoking gun, no forged cap table, nothing.

Just the insinuation that because informal interviews and a legal declaration don’t use identical wording twenty years apart, something must be dirty. It’s investigative theatre without the investigation.

Zoho’s Product Model And Hiring: Ethics By Selective Outrage

On the business itself, TNM cannot deny the scale:

• Over 50 products.
• FY24 standalone revenue ₹11,193 crore, profit ₹3,298 crore.
• Around a million paying organisations in 80 countries.​

So it tries to degrade the achievement with sneers. Zoho is a “fast follower”, “no innovation”, just copying Salesforce for smaller clients. Who says so? A conveniently unnamed SaaS competitor. Given TNM’s nexus with DMK, one can guess that it could be the wannabe Steve Jobs who wears black turtle-neck shirt in sweltering sun and ‘kisses’. No product analysis, no technical breakdown, nothing beyond the jealous grumbling of a rival.

Conveniently, the same piece elsewhere quotes two former executives calling Vembu a “genius” and a “great mix of technologist and builder”. That contradiction is never resolved.​

On Zoho Schools, the framing borders on perverse. TNM admits that:

• The programme takes kids straight out of school, mostly from disadvantaged backgrounds.
• Trains them for two years on stipend.
• Absorbs them into jobs they simply wouldn’t get otherwise.​

Then it hacks with the sickle like a typical Communist rag: since they don’t get a degree, they are “locked in” and “it’s exploitative”. Locked into what? A stable, long‑term job in a profitable global company whose employee turnover is 7% against an industry 12–15%.

The piece produces no data on how many Zoho School grads actually wanted to leave and were blocked, or whether other firms do or do not hire them. It’s a theoretical worry converted into a moral indictment.​

Meanwhile, pay and ESOPs are attacked using anecdote: one ex‑employee says “I was making peanuts” while my product earned millions. Perhaps he was underpaid. Perhaps not. TNM never shows an actual compensation benchmark across product companies at Zoho’s stage. The line is emotionally satisfying, and that is enough.​

If Dhanya Rajendran wants to have a real debate about labour, equity and ESOPs, she might want to start with how much “equity” her own reporters hold in TNM before lecturing a bootstrapped firm that doesn’t owe the VC‑style lottery to anyone.

Political Change Framed As Original Sin

A huge part of the article is obsessed with Vembu’s shift from a rationalist, liberal blogger to a supporter of Indian cultural conservatism and the current government. TNM frames this not as a personal evolution, but as a suspicious “makeover.”

In the 2000s, Vembu liked Buddhist philosophy, free markets, and wrote about “Maoism in Silicon Valley” when a Google engineer was fired over right-wing views. Later, Vembu is seen defending the RSS, attending a Swadeshi Jagran Manch event, and praising Modi.​ They also have a problem with S Gurumurthy being his mentor.

For TNM, anybody associated with the RSS or BJP is a crime. If you’re a Hindu-hating, Modi-bashing, Yogi-dissing communist or an Islamist, you’re a warrior.

Anti-Vaccine Stand – One Solid Hit Used To Smear Everything Else

Vembu is entitled to have his views about vaccines. He cites some research – which general medicine doctors do not accept. It is his view, just because one is an anti-vaxxer or does not believe that vaccines can help people, one cannot label them with any grand smear, just because you do not agree to them. His comments on vaccines are used to suggest he’s drifting into pseudoscience. And this, they use to bleed into every other domain – business, governance, philanthropy as though one bad belief proves a general collapse of reason.

Tenkasi: Philanthropy Recast As RSS Pipeline

The reporting from Govindaperi is revealing – not about Vembu, but about TNM. Villagers say:

• He cleared a farmhand’s debt.
• He funded multiple temple renovations.
• His school feeds children, gives uniforms, bikes, runs a clinic and an ambulance.

A DMK sympathiser compares him to god: “He has done only good things for us since he moved here.”​ Any normal outlet would treat this as a complex figure: ideological right‑wing, maybe problematic on some issues, but tangibly improving one rural cluster’s life. TNM’s reflex is different: How do we spin this as sinister?

When a BJP leader says Vembu’s Swadeshi talk “will eventually help us when people start thinking of their roots, India, and religion,” TNM runs it as proof of a long game. When a DMK minister complains that Vembu is telling the global tech world DMK is “anti‑India and anti‑Hindu,” TNM prints it as “actual damage,” without producing the offending quotes. Also why is DMK being branded so? Can we talk about the venom spewed from the Dravidianist and DMK camps under the garb of rationalism? Can we talk about your own abusive writers like Bharathy Singaravel who has a Nazi mindset and spews casteist venom against Brahmins?

The villagers’ lived experience – debt relief, free education, health access – becomes less important than the party line out of Chennai. That’s TNM’s idea of speaking “truth to power”: repeat what one party says about a businessman, and ignore what hundreds of poor families say about him.

The Ultimate Sin: Doing Good For The “Wrong” Reasons

Here is the heart of TNM’s grievance. Vembu is doing things that are, on their face, good: building a free school, teaching traditional arts, funding temple renovations, creating jobs in a rural area.

But because he does these while also supporting the BJP and the RSS, TNM can’t accept that the goodness might be genuine. So, they politicize everything.

Kalaivani Kalvi Maiyam’s curriculum which includes bharatanatyam, yoga, silambam, parai, Tirumurai, savings, skills becomes “RSS ideology in the guise of cultural and social activities,” according to a DMK functionary.

TNM prints this partisan opinion as if it’s evidence. When villagers rave about the school and the clinic, their gratitude is immediately reframed. They’re not thankful beneficiaries; they’re unknowing participants in a “soft power” campaign.

His business success is treated the same way. Winning a government contract or his app getting downloads after a minister’s praise isn’t a commercial win; it’s painted as a suspicious reward for political loyalty. Questions about his app’s privacy features are presented not as tech issues, but as his moral failings.

A Conclusion Written Before The Reporting Began

This “in-depth profile” by Indulekha Aravind started with a conclusion: Sridhar Vembu is a problematic poster boy for an ideology they dislike. Then, they worked backwards, twisting facts, omitting context, and amplifying whispers to make everything in his remarkable life fit that story.

RSS, BJP are evil, so anyone associated with them in the remotest way are also evil. If you replaced RSS with say Communist, Congress or even the DMK in the same article, the very same ‘qualities’ of Vembu would have been applauded as ideological consistency, courage, or integrity.

It is obvious TNM is not neutral, we know where their loyalties lie, so they are taking so much effort to appease that audience alone. With their credibility hitting new lows after Dharmasthala, after a brief stint as TN Murasoli, The News Minute has transformed into the English version of a voyeuristic tabloid as The Nakkheeran Minute. Muzhusa Chandramukhi (Nakkheeran) ah maarina Gangava (The News Minute)ah paar.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Cunning, Cowardly, And Paywalled: Dissecting The Naxal Minute’s Hit Job On Zoho Founder Sridhar Vembu appeared first on The Commune.

A day after publishing a paywalled article centred on the personal divorce proceedings of Zoho founder Sridhar Vembu, The News Minute editor Dhanya Rajendran indicated that a more detailed profile of the entrepreneur is forthcoming. On her X handle, she announced this writing, “Coming up soon a detailed profile by @Indulekha_A. What we published yesterday was something we stumbled on while reporting the profile. The profile will be an in depth one.”

The initial article, described by TNM as an “exclusive,” focused extensively on a January 2025 interim order passed by a California court in an ongoing divorce case involving Vembu. The report relied heavily on judicial observations made during emergency proceedings and was placed behind a paywall.

Critics have questioned the public-interest basis of the article, noting that it dealt primarily with a private marital dispute still under adjudication, rather than corporate governance, regulatory issues, or matters affecting stakeholders or the public at large. They have also pointed out that the order cited in the report is nearly a year old and remains subject to appeal.

Legal counsel representing Vembu has disputed the portrayal of the case, stating that the interim order was passed on an emergency application with limited opportunity for response, that subsequent judicial proceedings have stayed parts of the order, and that the matter is still being contested. The counsel has also said that the widely cited bond amount has no final legal determination and is under appeal.

Dhanya Rajendran’s announcement about the “in depth profile” seems more like a threat than an announcement.

After what they did with the Dharmasthala fake burial case, their credibility has reached rock-bottom. Now they come up with new targets, especially on the Hindu/nationalistic side. The upcoming hitjobs on Sridhar Vembu is going to be a targeted operation aimed at systematically dismantling the public image of Sridhar Vembu, a man whose traditionalist ethos and monumental success stand as a rebuke to their worldview.

In the upcoming “in-depth” sequel, Dhanya Rajendran is hinting that the character assassination is entering its next phase. More personal details will be weaponised, more contested allegations will be presented as fact, all packaged as a ‘profile’ to lend it a garb of legitimacy.

TNM and Dhanya Rajendran’s objective is not the truth, just smear. From The New Murasoli, TNM has morphed into The Nakkheeran Minute. The promised ‘profile’ is merely the next round of ammunition in a war they have declared on a man whose very existence challenges their narrative.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post After Hit Job On Zoho Founder Sridhar Vembu’s Personal Life, Leftist Rag TNM’s Editor Dhanya Rajendran Hints At Another Hit Job appeared first on The Commune.

Legal counsel representing Zoho founder Sridhar Vembu has sharply disputed the framing and claims made in a recent article published by The News Minute (TNM), accusing the outlet of omitting crucial facts and mischaracterising interim court proceedings in an ongoing divorce case in California.

According to Vembu’s counsel, the TNM article relies on a court order that was issued nearly a year ago on an emergency application filed by Vembu’s wife. The lawyer said the order was passed at a preliminary stage, when the defence had limited opportunity to respond to what he described as “outrageously false allegations.”

The counsel alleged that the California court was misled by the wife’s attorney, who, he claimed, is not licensed to practise law in California and entered the proceedings from New York despite there being no New York jurisdictional issues involved. This context, the lawyer said, was not disclosed or examined in TNM’s reporting.

Addressing allegations of asset concealment highlighted by TNM, Vembu’s counsel stated that the Zoho founder had offered his wife 50 per cent of his shares in ZCPL, an offer she has reportedly refused to accept. He further said that Vembu had already transferred his interest in the family home to his wife, facts which were either downplayed or ignored in the article.

“Despite these steps, she continues to claim that Sridhar is attempting to cheat her in the divorce,” the counsel said, adding that such allegations were illogical given that the wife could take possession of half the shares immediately if she chose to do so.

The much-publicised $1.7 billion bond order, which TNM foregrounded as a central element of its story, was described by the defence as legally unsustainable. Vembu’s counsel asserted that there is no legal authority for such an order and noted that a subsequent judge in the same case acknowledged that the amount appeared excessive.

According to the lawyer, Vembu attempted to comply to the extent possible by borrowing up to $150 million against his shares, representing the maximum liquidity available to him. The wife, however, allegedly refused to accept this amount. The counsel characterised the episode as a “waste of time” driven more by an attempt to disparage Vembu than to secure relief.

The defence also clarified that the divorce proceedings do not involve any claim for alimony or spousal support, contrary to impressions created by TNM’s narrative. “This has nothing to do with alimony,” the counsel said, noting that no such application has been filed.

Vembu’s lawyer further stated that his client remains in full compliance with all lawful orders issued by the California court. He said the $1.7 billion bond order is invalid, incapable of compliance, and currently under appeal, while the receivership order referenced in TNM’s article has been stayed by an appellate court.

Describing TNM’s article as “old news dressed up as an exclusive,” the counsel argued that the publication blurred the distinction between interim procedural orders and final judicial findings, creating a misleading impression of guilt and wrongdoing where none has been established.

“This case does not define Sridhar Vembu,” the lawyer said, adding that the proceedings reflect the actions of the wife and her New York-based attorney rather than any proven misconduct by the Zoho founder.

As Sridhar Vembu’s counsel, I can add some facts missing from the article. The order was made 1 year ago on an emergency application by his wife, meaning we had little time to response to the outrageously false allegations she made against Sridhar. The judge in California was…

— Christopher C. Melcher (@CA_Divorce) January 8, 2026

Read the full rejoinder against The News Minute’s Nakkheeran-style voyeuristic sleaze piece here.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Sridhar Vembu’s Counsel Accuses The News Minute Of Misleading Reporting On Divorce Case, Calls Bond Order ‘Invalid And Old News’ appeared first on The Commune.