What influences or clouds editorial judgment? While The Times of India (TOI) published, pulled down and reworked stories on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Varanasi that could best be called a public relations spin for the government in power, The Hindustan Times (HT) virtually buried negative news that was on the front page of every other leading newspaper because it involved family.

Tale of two stories

Quite predictably, journalists were falling over each other to report on Modi’s first visit to Varanasi after the 2014 General Elections. His decision to adopt the village, Jayapur, 25 kms away from Varanasi, got many speculating.

Never one to miss an opportunity to take pot-shots at media people, or newstraders, as he lovingly calls them, Modi hinted in his maiden speech at the village that the press with its “fertile” (yes, he used that exact word) imagination has been churning out various stories about why he adopted the village. In his trademark style, he went on to state that he had not adopted the village and that the village had adopted him. (Remember how he did not go to Varanasi to contest elections and how “Ma Ganga” called him there?)

TOI put out two stories on its website that were perhaps written to shed some light on Modi’s decision to adopt Jayapur by delving into the village’s demography and history. Both were good examples of poor journalism and found space on TOI’s print and web platforms.

One story stated that the village does not have a single Muslim resident. The report offers no Census or population survey to back the claim. The other story illustrated how villagers of Jayapur stopped Aurangzeb’s army from demolishing a local Hanuman temple back in the 17^th century. A clarification below the story states that the report is based on a “local legend” and not on historical proof.

Now, any sharp-eyed editor would have junked the stories since they seem to be based on village hearsay and not on actual reporting. But not in TOI. The first one headlined “No Muslims in Modi’s Village” found space in the paper’s Lucknow edition on November 8 and TOI even tweeted out the piece on November 7.

Needless to say, the story incurred the wrath of bhakts within no time of it appearing online.

And the story has now altogether disappeared from TOI’s website.

Here’s a cache copy of the article for our discerning readers who may be interested in reading it.   The second story headlined “Modi’s adopted village Jayapur stopped Aurangzeb’s army”, however, remains on its website, much to the glee of the right wing.  

Given the story, according to TOI’s own admission, is based on local fable, we wonder why it continues to feature on the website as a news item. If the story about “no Muslim residents” in Jayapur was pulled down because it lacked facts to back the claim, should TOI not have pulled down a story that’s pure myth? Unless, of course, it’s not facts TOI is bothered about as much as offending the Prime Minister.

Will play down news for family

On November 11, TOI, Indian Express and The Hindu carried front-page reports on the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filing a revised final closure report on the coal block allocation scam and stating that it had “prima facie” evidence to prosecute chairman of Aditya Birla Group, Kumar Mangalam Birla and former Coal Secretary, P C Parakh, in connection with the allocation of coal blocks to Hindalco.

HT, however, carried a tiny agency copy on the new development on page 17. HT’s chairperson and editorial director Shobhana Bhartia is the daughter of industrialist KK Birla, whose brother BK Birla is the grandfather of Kumar Mangalam Birla. Aditya Birla Group has no stakes in HT Media and the paper perhaps played down the story only because of family ties. Putting it on the 17^th page, however, is better than blacking the news out as HT had done last year when Kumar Mangalam Birla was first named in the coal blocks allocation scam.

Now it’s no secret that HT and TOI have been at loggerheads over circulation figures, but perhaps the two papers could concentrate more on improving their editorial content — it might not usher in new ads, but could go a long way in helping them gain the reader’s trust.