Smriti Irani tweet: Why did the media attack the messenger this time?

It was a judgment that was supposed to create ripples across the socio-political spectrum in India. Would long awaited justice be served? There was a strong build-up with different media outlets highlighting both the government preparations and the infiltration of the Dera Sacha Sauda members into Panchkula and Sirsa.

The judgment came and as expected the court served the verdict convicting Dera pramukh Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh for rape. News of violence started pouring in within minutes of the verdict. There were all sorts of things being reported and published. These included the number of cars in Ram Rahim Singh’s convoy to the number of people dead and to other damages wrought. Pardon the use of the word but this was nothing short of a “civil war”. The administration had failed and all things since have been extensively covered by this website and other news outlets.

Today, however, I choose to write on a controversy created by Information and Broadcasting Minister Smriti Irani who tweeted a warning that news channels should refrain from causing panic, distress and undue fear. She followed the warning tweet saying that it’s not her, but the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA), a self-elected body of news broadcasters which set the guidelines on what should and shouldn’t be broadcasted, which has issued a warning to all its affiliates on the coverage pertaining to the situation.

Her very next tweet was one condemning the violence and damages done to various media personnel and their equipment while covering this incident. In the total three tweets on the media, none of the other tweets made as much news as the apparent warning.

Various journalists and anonymous twitter handles criticised the tweet as a major threat on freedom of speech and expression. I found this stance somewhat one-sided and just a part of a narrative targeted at Ms Irani controlling the media. In this article, I would like to highlight a few aspects which may shed light on the other side of this “warning”:

1) This warning was issued by NBSA, which is an independent body set up by the News Broadcasters Association (NBA). NBSA’s task is to consider and adjudicate upon complaints about broadcasts. The NBA members include all top national news broadcasters (with varied editorial lines) including – Times Group, Network18, NDTV, ABP, Zee and ETV Group. While it may be possible but it is not very easy to muzzle such a strong body with this kind of reach. Would an individual with over 20 years of public life make threats to the entire media fraternity so openly?

2) Most channels were telecasting Live, and when it’s a minute-by-minute battle for eyeballs, there is an acute chance of sensationalising news which could have created unrest in the minds of the viewers. It’s no secret that during the 26/11 coverage, unwillingly news channels were more helpful to terrorists than anything else. Better safe than sorry.

3) In the past, various political outfits and news outlets have used misleading pictures to highlight news. Why not be conscious about the same?

4) Going through responses on her tweet about the clause, various people criticised the Government. This is a fair point, however, that her tweet was followed by another tweet which castigated the violence against the media. It should be highlighted that NDTV suffered damage and its OB van was vandalised and its journalist was hit on head. So wasn’t Ms Irani speaking on behalf of the government appealing for peace.