Indian politics: How Congress’ failure to understand media power caused its decline
Shams Ur Rehman Alavi
When Indira Gandhi was at the peak of her popularity after 1971, who could have imagined situation changing so much in few years that she’d have to impose Emergency!
Rajiv Gandhi too got a huge mandate in 1985. But in year or so, at pan shops, one could hear jokes about his language and people making fun of his oft-repeated, ‘hamne dekha hai, dekhenge, kara hai, karenge’ [we have seen, we will see] & ‘zimmew(d)ari’ lines.
The disenchantment had begun too soon. How it all happened, so fast? Remember, there were no TV channels to keep an eye on government, round the clock. There were no private media houses that could oppose or criticise the establishment.
Just one Doordarshan or DD, the government mouthpiece, and its evening bulletin that religiously aired those positive things about the central government led by Congress.
Rajiv Gandhi was doing things smartly, yet, his image was crashing. There were no ‘IT cells’ of parties — the term that became notorious in Indian politics in the last decade. There was no such concept, no channels.
Apart from the long list of top Opposition leaders at national level who were constantly in attacking mode, there was something more. Congress has failed to realise it. Let’s see the causes that led to the decline, in just five points.
1.Ayodhya movement, the aggressive stand of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Hindi press’ aggressive reports to ‘prove’ that there was temple underneath and mosque was built on it, VP Singh’s movement against Rajiv over the anti-corruption plank, all are well-known.
But, even earlier, barely a year into the saddle, when the elegant, smartly dressed Rajiv was giving speeches, touring world, people had started to grow bored, wary. That was real mystery.
Remember in 1970s, there were leading politicians from JP, Raj Narain, Morarji, Charan Singh to George Fernandes, but in Rajiv’s era too, there was a long list.
Like it or not, two top leaders of UP parties, Akhilesh Yadav and Mayawati today are not active and vocal despite the fact that their cadre is always expecting them to take the lead. There is no consistency, the opposition doesn’t act like an opposition.
Fact-based, real and strong vocal leaders in the opposition? Leaders who speak on important issues, on regular basis, it’s missing. Some of the top leaders in Opposition limit themselves to issuing statements on days & anniversaries. Then, their Twitter accounts handled by ‘professionals’!
Consistency is the key. In 70s-80s, regional satraps were vocal, even if they spoke in English or regional languages. N India too had many leaders. Many voices. That’s how momentum is built. Not that Tejashwi loses Bihar & wait 3–4 years and just getting into active mode a year or two before election.
Consistency!
2. Now, coming back to how this counter-narrative against a government is constructed. Journalist Shyam Meera Singh, who openly says that he was once a ‘bhakt’ [staunch BJP supporter] and later realised how he was cheated, spoke at length about this journey in a ‘Space’ on Twitter.
He gave example that whenever he speaks to elderly relative but latter comes with strange points on any issue, almost all of them coming from Dainik Jagran. Yes, the same paper that tried to debunk stories about bodies of those who died due to Coronavirus on the banks of Ganges. The same paper that every time publishes story about ‘anti-national slogan raised’ to defame or break a movement — farmers’ or students.
So he gave example of Jagran that it has a huge readership, and it’s there since eighties. It’s a ‘mainstream paper’ in North India, and it is not considered a mouthpiece. But it does the job more than a mouthpiece, an active supporter of the right-wing. Socialists, other parties, SP, RJD or BSP they were never serious about media.
3. Congress’ story we know. However, BJP understands power of media. Organiser or Panchjanya were there. Dailies like Swadesh & Tarun Bharat in different states. Even when they got in a position to ‘manage’ most TV channels & national papers, they strengthened own existing ones, never shut them down.
Jagran & other Hindi papers were influential in 80s and they remain so even today. In one state, one paper on a given day, can deflect all the issues and anger against government with one story. In MP, Jagran was already there. They bought Nai Dunia too. It’s not that the latter has a huge circulation.
But on a given day when in newsrooms, all papers kept on table, if a ‘different’ story is published even in small paper, it has affect, others are forced to follow. You have none. When there are mainstream papers affecting public opinion to such an extent, terming any other party’s rule as ‘Jungle Raj’ and the other as ‘Sushasan’, it works.
Those leaders of Opposition parties who today rue that media is no longer talking for days and weeks about ‘jungle raj’ in a state or region, forget that they never invested in creating or running own media. Had there been other channels or big papers as rivals, it won’t be so skewed and one sided.
4. ‘Socialists’ remained in power in UP-Bihar for decades but were happy with media houses like Jagran groups. Did anyone stop them from starting their own media houses? In Southern states, parties have channels & newspapers aligned to opposition too, hence, possibility of criticism and media is not tilted to just one side.
Otherwise, by giving directions to go slow and by stopping ‘follow up stories’ from the next day, it can be ensured that the issue doesn’t become too big. The potential for a story to become a symbol of state failure and leading to anger or movement, is brought down by a few phone calls.
You can’t control people’s mind to such an extent if there is other side too shown in TV, papers etc. Actually, Temple movement in 80s, division in society won’t have been possible had 5 major papers in entire N India, not actively become supporters of the movement.
This part of India — the North, has huge political power due to number of MPs. Hence, the role of Hindi newspapers is important. They ensured that Indian public shifted from centre towards right, through consistent reporting in a manner that people came towards BJP on all issues — Bangladeshi infiltration, Artcile 370, Temple.
5. It’s basic for any movement or party to have their own supported groups in media. Every party needs to reach to people. Since 1800, every reformer or leader tried to start a paper, either Raja Ram Mohan Roy or Maulana Azad, Gandhi or Maulana Mohammad Ali.
The right-wing understands power of communication, importance of media, how to reach people. It takes even a weekly of 2,000 or 5,000 seriously, doesn’t shut it down. It ensures the weekly reaches each panchayat or main reading room of town or places where people can take it forward.
Even a daily paper that has a circulation of less than 10,000 but published from capital, one counter-narrative story, forces other papers too to think over that aspect. But if you don’t have trusts, not even most basic investment to support your own people and run papers, it’s a tragedy.
