Day two of Pondy Lit Fest 2023 featured a series of engaging discussions and captivating book launches that enthralled the audience. The event showcased a diverse range of literary talents and thought-provoking conversations, adding to the festival’s vibrancy and intellectual richness. In the session, which focused on the topic “Godi Media: Supine, Constructively Critical, or Pointlessly Combative,“, Shehzad Poonawalla participated as the speaker, while Abhijit Iyer Mitra played the role of Contributing Moderator. Shehzad holds the position of National Spokesperson for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and is known for his active participation in news debates and his prominent presence on social media platforms. Abhijit Iyer-Mitra works as a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
The derogatory term “Godi Media” [meaning Media sitting on lap] was coined by Ravish Kumar to indicate the media houses that support the current government from 2014. This conversation coincides with the recent announcement made by the I.N.D.I Alliance, in which they declared a boycott of debates moderated by 14 journalists hailing from different media organisations. They have also advised their party leaders to abstain from participating in any debates featuring these particular journalists.
Hitlist, Not A Boycott
In his address, Shehzad Poonawalla explained that media houses, which once served the Congress’s “first family” but were subsequently rejected by the public, have resorted to discrediting media outlets with opposing ideologies. He argued that this term (Godi-Media) is primarily used to divert attention from their shortcomings. Poonawalla emphasised that the broader non-right media ecosystem has embarked on delegitimising the institutional processes of democracy. This involves dehumanising individuals and discrediting elements that, in reality, signify signs of fascism, which they attribute to the existing government. He expressed his opinion that although the list may initially seem like a mere boycott, it could also serve as a means to target individuals, potentially exposing them to various forms of attacks.
Positive Criticism Or Perpetual Faultfinding
When Mitra questioned Poonawalla as to why it was necessary to attack the “first family” when they are no longer relevant, instead of critiquing the government, he said that the role of a free press should not inherently be anti-establishment, nor should it appear to align with specific ideological ecosystems. Poonawalla identified a lack of balanced reporting in this media landscape, where one side is consistently critical of the government without acknowledging its positive policies and achievements. According to him, following the G-20 meeting, none of the media channels or social media accounts whom he referred to as “Supari Media” had published any content praising the successful outcomes of the meeting. He further noted that several sensational news stories aired were later proven to be factually incorrect. He asserted that the statement “The “first family” is no longer relevant” is a cliché. Shehzad also highlighted the hypocrisy of Rajdeep while discussing the incident of the opposition alliance boycotting reporters and anchors.
Morning musing: an official public BOYCOTT of individuals whose views you disagree with is ANTI DEMOCRATIC; any form of HATE SPEECH/slander is a CRIME that must be called out and punished. 🙏
— Rajdeep Sardesai (@sardesairajdeep) September 15, 2023
Can Congress Accuse BJP Of Restricting Media Freedom While Doing The Same?
Poonawalla highlighted that “journalists” like Rajdeep and others never raised questions about Sonia Gandhi’s de facto role in running the government. Instead, they often blamed individuals like Manmohan Singh and other ministers. He pointed to instances in Congress-run states where the government hounded journalists, such as the treatment of Sudhir Chaudhary (an anchor at Aaj-Tak) in Karnataka, and highlighted incidents like the attack on journalist Kamal Shukla by local Congress leaders in Chhattisgarh.
It should be noted that the Karnataka government recently unveiled a framework for a fact-checking unit aimed at combating misinformation. Nonetheless, concerns have arisen in light of past actions, raising questions about whether this initiative is designed to restrict press freedom and manipulate the narrative.
When inquired about the selection of specific media houses for the pre-election interview with the Prime Minister, Poonawalla clarified that preferring someone for effective engagement or delivery is not the same as imposing a boycott or creating a hit list. He also elaborated on instances of hit jobs, citing the case of Adani, where comprehensive investigative reports debunked the conspiracy. A similar scenario unfolded in the case of the Dwarka Expressway, where the media initially focused on a small portion of the CAG report, later revealing that the government had saved 12% of the total construction cost.
Is BJP Falling Behind In Setting The Narrative: A Pattern Of Delayed Responses
Abhijit then questioned why the BJP always seemed to lag behind in setting a narrative and instead frequently resorted to firefighting. Poonawalla replied saying that if the BJP actually wanted to win political brownie points, it had many opportunities, but the party had always considered the larger picture of running the country and trodden the path with care. He also criticised comments like “Sanathana Dharma should be eradicated” or “Inke (their) G-20” as poor examples of the opposition’s attempt to set a narrative. He clarified that in cases involving comments targeting a community or religion, the party would vehemently oppose and condemn such hate speeches.
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.