In a series of stings christened Operation 136, Cobrapost has brought our attention back to the mess that Big Media is in today. The sting, though, abandons the scene much before the plot thickens. And, of course, it comes with all the baggage that a sting operation comes with.

There is no way to cross check or verify the authenticity of the assertions being made quite simply because we haven’t seen the raw footage. We don’t know what was left out/edited and why. There has been no exchange of money so one can’t tell if the sales executives who were stung were offering a true picture of their capacity to influence editorial or if they were simply seducing a potential client—and a very rich one at that—with wild promises.

Be that as it may, the footage uploaded on the website’s YouTube channel makes one thing clear—that most media organisations are comfortable running a polarising Hindutva campaign for a fee. Towards this end, we see them make commitments that range from being downright unethical to being a disservice to news and readers to venturing into ethical grey zones with legal ramifications.

The sting also brings into sharp focus how much a once sacrosanct division between editorial content and marketing is so blurred that basic ideals of journalism have given way to sheer profit.

That is not to say that everyone must be painted with the same brush—even as Cobrapost does so in its exposé. We see the narrator of the sting confuse advertisements with paid news far too often, with theatrical voiceovers for both. The former forms the very bedrock of the business model of news and the latter is a clear ethical violation.

Part 1 of the sting features representatives from 16 media houses, including India TV, Dainik Jagran, Hindi Khabar, SAB TV, DNA, Amar Ujala, UNI, Punjab Kesari, ScoopWhoop and rediff.com.

Part 2 of the sting features Big Media houses such as the Times of India, India Today, Hindustan Times, Zee News, Network 18, Star India, ABP News, Dainik Jagran, The New Indian Express and the Open magazine.

Why the name Operation 136? Because India ranked 136th on the World Press Freedom Index in 2017. In 2018, we fell two places to occupy the 138th position out of 180 countries. According to Reporters Without Borders, this has something to do with Mr Modi and Hindu nationalism.

Hindutva for a fee

The sting was carried out by journalist Pushp Sharma, who first came into the limelight in 2010 for stinging Ram Sene chief Pramod Muthalik for Tehelka’s rent-a-riot sting. In 2013, he stung Bharatiya Janata Party leader Prakash Javdekar to show how senior BJP leaders were purportedly helping party president Amit Shah in the Tulsi Ram Prajapati fake encounter case. More recently, in 2016, he was arrested by the Delhi Police for allegedly fabricating a Right to Information reply from the Ayush Ministry.

Pushp posed as Acharya Chhatrapal Atal from Shri Bhagwat Geeta Prachar Samiti to sting his latest victims. He says he created a complete ‘look’ that allowed him to pass off as a prominent ‘man of god’.

Pushp Sharma disguised as Acharya Atal

Pushp would move around with two to four bouncers and travel in an Innova or a Fortuner—sometimes he’d take both cars along to create a ‘good impression’. His cover was elaborate and he claims that when he visited media organisations, disguised as Acharya Atal, news professionals would fall at his feet.

It took him eight months to complete the sting, which Cobrapost bought. Pushp says he funded the sting operation on his own, which means he must make good money as a freelance journalist. A rarity. As a freelancer, he has done two stings, in 2013 and 2018. He says he managed to recover his costs by selling his sting to Cobrapost. He says only 10 per cent of the entire sting operation is in the public domain. He plans to release the remaining 90 per cent on his own website.

Pushp, disguised as Acharya Atal, approached media houses with a clear three-point agenda:

1) He wants to plug soft-Hindutva, what he explains as ‘benign’ lessons from the Geeta;

2) He wants to run smear campaigns against Opposition leaders such as Rahul Gandhi, Mayawati and so on;

3) He wants to affect communal polarisation and reap its benefits in the run-up to elections.

In most recorded conversations, the ‘Acharya’ stresses on his agenda of polarisation and spreading Hindutva. He offers up to Rs 500 crore for deals that allow him to push this agenda in various forms across platforms.

Pushp claims that most news professionals were simply blinded by the exorbitant money he had to offer.

The blurring of sales and editorial

In some of the conversations, news professionals purportedly agree to not only run ads, but also news content.

Take for example, Purushottam Vaishnav, who works as CEO, Zee Media, Regional News Channels. Vaishnav is purportedly seen agreeing to run investigative stories at the Acharya’s behest.

The purported deal here is worth Rs 25 crore—for which Zee representatives agree to run two hours of coverage a day across four states—Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha and Rajasthan. There’s also talk of running ads that look like news packages.

When Newslaundry reached out to Vaishnav, he said the whole episode was actually a case of Zee stinging Pushp. He pointed at Zee’s sting, which was published after Part 1 of Operation 136 came out, and focuses on Pushp’s conspiracy to ‘sully the ideals of nationalism’ using the cover of Hindutva. Vaishnav says he found it dubious that the ‘Acharya’ was using the card of Hindutva to fool Zee and as responsible journalists, they began following him to get to the truth of the matter. He says the ‘Acharya’ approached them through a BJP leader. “They have tampered the conversation and edited it to suit themselves. Why don’t they release the entire conversation?” he asked.  

Another example is Bangalore-based Suvarna News, the sales executive seems quite comfortable with the Acharya’s agenda. He says, “Our chairman is also a Hindutva guy.” The reference here is to Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Chairman of Jupiter Capital, that owns Suvarna News. The ‘Acharya’ is guaranteed editorial support apart from advertiser-funded programming, or AFP.

Editor Ravi Hegde of Kannada Prabha, which also comes under Jupiter, smiles and tells the ‘Acharya’ that “we are already doing [helping the cause of Hindutva]”.

In his response to Newslaundry, Hegde said the word “Hindutva” has become so controversial that even its simple usage raises eyebrows.

“Our advertising executive meant to say that our chairman is also a Hindu as he was speaking to a Hindu seer. Our Chairman is a BJP MP and a supporter of Modi, which is true and everyone knows it. But, he doesn’t involve himself in any way in running the media business. His politics and his media businesses are completely different. Professional CEOs run the business and professional editors run the editorial operations,” he says.

Hegde says immediately after Pushp met them, they became suspicious of his ‘political and religious’ motives.  “We registered a case with the Bangalore police [in October 2017] and sought their help to nab him. We tracked him for two days but he had left the city,” he said.

In its response, Suvarna News states: “Cobrapost’s sting operation video claims that their intention was to expose media channels which promote the ideology of Hindutva for politics. It is a well-known practice that we air advertisements which meet the standard media guidelines which we have been following for decades. Senior VP, Advt Sales says, ‘Jo Jo Ho sakta hain, main karvaa doonga’ – doesn’t mean that there is a blanket editorial support.” It also states that after they couldn’t trace Pushp, Kannada Prabha published a report warning the public about a swamiji from Uttar Pradesh. “What else can a responsible media house do in such cases?” asks Hegde.

Police complaint

Kannada Prabha’s report

The most fascinating conversation is with HT Media Sales Associate Vice President Avneesh Bansal. Fascinating, because it tells you how ads influence news coverage. Something reporters in Big Media houses will tell you is a daily struggle.

Bansal tells the ‘Acharya’ that he understands how media strategy is important to the Sangh. He says, “You should attack in two ways…one is tying up with media houses. So, if you’re giving me a couple of crore rupees to talk positive about you…automatically my editorial is under pressure not to go deep negative.”

The implication here is that the newspaper will not go hard against an advertiser—in this case, the Sangh. An executive of Hindustan explains the concept of ‘brand product’ through which the Archaya’s agenda can be made to look less like an ad and more like a news item.

In its response to Newslaundry, HT media Chief Executive Officer (Print) Rajeev Beotra said, “At HT Media, we practice ethical journalism, follow high editorial standards, and do not EVER let our news coverage be influenced by monetary considerations.”

He further adds that HT offers advertisers media marketing initiatives and brand solutions, featuring content created either by them or their marketing teams, but these are always clearly labelled and disclosed as marketing initiatives.

“There is also a clear demarcation of church and state at HT Media, and our editors and newsrooms operate independent of any influence from the media marketing teams. Regardless of the sales team’s conversation, which seems to be edited conveniently for sensationalisation, the above-mentioned principles and guidelines would still apply with no deviation whatsoever,” he says.

Have money? Will run ads

There are certain conversations that revolve around advertisements. This must not be confused with news content or even paid news. The current news model depends solely on advertisements and events. The former can come in the form of advertorials, advertiser-funded programmes (AFP), free commercial time, or FCT; the latter includes summits, conclaves and so on.

In the case of Network 18’s revenue team at Mumbai, there is talk of “creatives” and “teasers”. The group’s representatives offer all platforms to push the ‘Acharya’s’ agenda, including MTV, which is an entertainment channel and cannot stand up to similar scrutiny as a news channel. Network 18 has not responded to Newslaundry’s queries.

The ‘Acharya’s’ conversation with India Today Group Editorial Director Kalli Purie also revolves around advertisements and FCT. She says, “For any kind of advertising the content is not decided by us anyway. Anyone is allowed to put whatever content they want on the platform as long as is within the guideline or whatever…[the reference here is to guidelines of Advertising Regulatory Board].”

She makes it clear that the ‘Acharya’ cannot have any editorial say and that if the group did not agree with his ‘in-field activities’, it reserves the right to criticise him.

When he speaks of using the campaign to polarise, Purie says, “Don’t do it.” She is also heard saying, “Agree…but at the same time if you are doing some in-field activities that we don’t agree with editorially, we will be criticising you.” The ‘Acharya’ again stresses on his agenda to polarise, to which Purie purportedly says, “No, correct. We must understand that in terms of friendship you will have to separate all these things…I will stand by being a friend of yours, but we don’t necessarily agree on everything.” She is also heard saying “this infield activity is very worrying for me”.

After Cobrapost’s sting came out, India Today Group has issued a statement, stating that, “We vehemently deny the portrayal of India Today Group as a media house that will compromise its editorial integrity. It has never happened in the past and there is no question of it ever happening.”

It further notes: “The said broadcast is out of context and has been manipulated with clear intention to sully, tarnish, disparage, discredit and to running down an otherwise impeccable standing and reputation of the India Today Group.”

Journalist Rajdeep Sardesai who works with India Today also defended the group on Twitter.

The big fish

The most prominent face that Pushp managed to capture on his spycam is Vineet Jain, managing director of Times Group.

Before speaking with Jain, the ‘Acharya’ met Sanjeev Shah, executive president, mergers & acquisitions, Times Group. Shah tells him that Jain wants him to quote Rs 1,000 crore for the ad campaigns—the money would ensure Jain’s personal involvement in the creative aspect of the campaigns.

When the ‘Acharya’ meets Jain, the Times Group chief stresses that, as a corporate, he has to appear neutral.

The ‘Acharya’ says he would like a few questions pertaining to Hindutva to be bunged into the Femina Miss India contest. Jain says if he is not comfortable with certain things, like asking a ‘Hindutva-related’ question in the final round, then the ‘Acharya’ must understand his limitations.

Again the conversations here pertain to ads and events, not news content.

The more interesting part, though, is the deal—’Acharya’ wants to pay the money (Rs 500 crore) in cash. Jain and Shah say they don’t deal in cash at all but then venture to offer ways in which the cash can be routed to Times Group through other companies: “Aur bhi businessmen honge jo humein cheque denge, aap unhe cash de do [there would be businessmen who will give us cheque against your cash,” says Jain. Shah and Jain also take names of corporates like Essar and Adani to say the money can be routed through them.

Our queries to the Times Group have gone unanswered but an article on Times of India, says that BCCL was trying to counter-sting the ‘Acharya’. It says, “Essentially, BCCL was in the process of carrying out a reverse sting with a plan to make the so-called Acharya Atal commit a mistake or even sign legal contracts so as to expose the people and organisations behind him.”

Paytm karo?

Apart from media houses, Pushp also managed to catch Paytm’s Ajay Shekhar Sharma (Senior Vice President and Vijay Shekhar Sharma’s brother) on his spycam.

The last one minute or so is when the conversation gets particularly problematic. To impress upon the ‘Acharya’ about his closeness with the Prime Minister’s Office, Ajay can be heard saying: “Jab JK mein band hue the na pathar, pelting toh humein personally PMO se phone aya tha, kaha gaya tha ki data de do ho sakta hai ki Paytm user hon (When stone-pelting happened in J&K, I personally got a phone call from the PMO. They told us to give them data saying maybe some of the stone-pelters were Paytm users.)”

While the conversation doesn’t go into whether Paytm shared the details that were being asked of it, Shekhar’s claim that the PMO had sought such information is discomfiting in itself.

But if Paytm did share user details, it is in violation of its privacy policies that state: “We will not sell, share or rent Your personal information to any 3rd party.” In its response, Paytm has rubbished Cobrapost’s sting.

The few who resisted

This one is short and sweet. Two newspapers in West Bengal. Only two resisted ‘Acharya’s’ agenda and the money it came with. News professionals of Bartaman Patrika and Dainik Sambad refused to run ads promoting Hindutva—but one cannot tell if this was out of concern for ethics or an ideological opposition. For example, would they have taken ad money to run pro-Opposition, anti-BJP campaigns? Indeed, it would be interesting to know how media organisations would have reacted if Pushp had offered the money he did to run campaigns against the RSS, Hindutva or even PM Modi.

Some big names like The Indian Express, The Hindu, Republic TV and NDTV are missing from the sting. Did ‘Acharya Atal’ approach them, too? And if he did, how did they react? Pushp did not wish to comment on this aspect.

The thing about stings

Like we said earlier, Newslaundry cannot independently vouch for the tapes released by Cobrapost, neither have we seen the raw footage to ascertain if conversations were placed out of context. 

Looking at the sting in context with the reality of marketing and sales teams, there is no way to ascertain how much of it was simply loose talk to please a potential client or whether any of these executives had the authority to make the claims they did. None of the purported transactions were actually implemented.

It is only if a legal investigation takes place and the court asks for the unedited recordings, as the Commission of Inquiry demanded of Tehelka, will we get a clear and truthful picture of what really happened. Is there another side to the story that we do not know?

But two things become clear if we are to take the tapes at face value. One, most news organisations seemed comfortable with accepting payments worth crores in cash. This is when the government has warned against transactions of over Rs 2 lakh.

The sting’s findings, then, beg a question or two on the sort of money that runs the Indian media business.

Two, Hindutva as an ideology has made inroads into mainstream newsrooms, even as those on the Right still like to believe that it is a ‘Left-liberal’ stronghold. Most news professionals don’t so much as flinch at the thought of the ‘Acharya’ suggesting that he’d like to polarise and communalise elections.

The Radia Tapes of 2009 showed us how a section of journalists were happy to serve as brokers and stenographers for the then government, the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance. In the Cobrapost sting, we see another section of news professionals go to lengths to accommodate the current dispensation and its ideology. Don’t be surprised when they come full circle.