MODI ALL THE WAY

Narendra Modi is firmly back in the saddle for another five years. An expected verdict, though the scale of it exceeded the forecasts of most election pundits. After the triumph, Modi did not forget old wounds. So no one-on-one interviews with any news channel which aired the Tehelka sting. The winner takes it all, they say.

Here's a man who virtually singlehandedly propelled the BJP to power in Gujarat yet again. Narendra Modi weathered RSS and VHP displeasure as well as the wrath of the numerous party rebels. The likes of Keshubhai Patel and Suresh Mehta (both former BJP Chief Ministers) have been exposed as political has-beens.

Modi mastered the art of rhetoric - be it soundbytes or provocative speeches. But would his formula of asmita (pride) and development have worked to this extent if the Congress had not played into his hands?

Sonia Gandhi did exactly that, by calling Modi as a 'maut ka saudagar'(merchant of death). Right on cue, Modi, who was talking of 'development' till then, was suddenly harping on terrorism and Sohrabuddin Sheikh. The Congress would have been better served, had they been able to project at least one local leader. The TV screen only showed the imports from Delhi - Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The party had nobody to project at the local level, trying to counter Modi's claims of development. The Arjun Modhvadias and Bharatsinh Solankis remained anonymities while former BJP man Shankersingh Vaghela's influence was limited.

It is now forgotten that Modi got a shocker three years ago in the 2004 Lok Sabha polls. Defying predictions, the Congress had inched close to BJP with 12 seats and a 45.1 per cent vote share, while BJP had 14 seats and 47.4 per cent share. The Congress had enough and more time to corner Modi, only to surrender to rhetoric instead of getting their organisation right. A Congress leader said on TV that election verdicts are becoming 'geographically separated'. Against a well-entrenched local leader waiting for a pretext to polarise sentiments in his favour, grandiose accusations after flying down from Delhi simply did not work.

Modi the winner may have taken it all, but for the BJP the victory is a mixed blessing. The pundits on TV were interpreting BJP President Rajnath Singh's body language after the victory as 'glum' and 'graceless' in acknowledging Narendra Modi's overwhelming role. The party has the challenge of reconciling Modi's image with a moderate face they would like to convey to allies in future NDA coalitions. It was significant that the BJP chose to anoint L K Advani as their Prime Ministerial candidate, just when Modi was at his rhetorical zenith during the Gujarat campaign. Modi may have been able to hold on to his regional turf, despite enemies all around; but the national platform may be a different ball game.

Come Prime Time on Gujarat result day, Narendra Modi did have one competitor for screen space. And Rakhi Sawant's cries of 'dhokha' at losing out in the Nach Baliye final did turn the spotlight away from Modi on some news channels. A mixture of righteous indignation and copious tears, Rakhi was as dramatic as ever. Her latest publicity splash came as some relief to all those tired of the Moditva phenomenon.

SRK AND MEGALOMANIA

He's here, there and everywhere. The box office is chanting Om Shanti Om and every sporting triumph is accompanied by the Chak De India chorus.

Shah Rukh Khan is all over the place like never before. A hockey triumph at the Asia Cup and news channels make a beeline for SRK's comments. The Twenty20 World Cup fnal, SRK is there to celebrate victory along with the cricket team.

It's not enough being a mascot for sporting triumphs, come Om Shanti Om and the 40-something icon's six-pack abs are out to mesmerise. Sureshot material for magazine cover stories on men and the body. And then the publicity blitz for Om Shanti Om - be it soundbytes, interviews, cricket matches and Dard-e-Disco contests.

The film itself did not have much of a storyline to boast of, but successfully evoked nostalgia and retro with mostly enjoyable digs at the past. And ended up being a celebration of SRK megalomania. What else, with over 30 leading stars from the past and present jiving to the beat of Om Shanti Om.

Manoj Kumar's rant at being 'insulted' in the film only served to pump up the publicity. Add a dash of controversy over SRK's thumbs-up for smoking leaving Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss displeased. And the number one headline over BCCI comments that SRK was attending cricket matches to garner attention to his films.

Early this year one thought Amitabh-Abhishek-Aishwarya would be numero uno in Bollywood. But all the Big B's managed are disasters like Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and Ram Gopal Varma Ki Aag. Worse still, the Samajwadi Party's electoral rout in Uttar Pradesh, with people showing scant regard for his 'UP mein hai dam, kyunki jurm yahan hai kam' ad blitz. And the flak he got for the Barabanki land deal in UP. Busy doing the rounds of temples, a better 2008 is all they can hope for.

Meanwhile, leading British-Asian paper Eastern Eye's list labels SRK the Sexiest Asian man in the world in 2007.

DEFINING THE WORD EXCLUSIVE

6 am Wednesday. As the day breaks it's 'General No More' Pervez Musharraf who opens the news channel headline pack. As the stories unravel, Nawaz Sharif appears on one, then the next and then a third. In no time the quote-happy Sharif is holding forth on all three channels.

Two of them do have Sharif at the other end, while the third tries to cover up the fact that they got Sharif only on the phone with snazzy packaging. Besides getting the same man, what's common across the three channels? The word 'exclusive' blaring out on the screen.

Dictionaries say something 'exclusive' is not divided or shared with others. In the context of journalism a piece of news, or the reporting of a piece of news, obtained by a newspaper or other news organization, along with the privilege of using it first.

Did all three speak to Nawaz Sharif exclusively? If so, the English language is an ass. And the few (?) who may have switched on the telly early in the morning (that too to figure out news) easily impressionable.

To us not to reason why. Just fire the exclusive band before the competitor.

KUMBLE'S COMING, BCCI'S GOOGLY

It's good to know that there are occasions when the BCCI acts sensibly. And steals a march over news channels, bamboozling them with the perfect googly - one Anil Kumble would have been proud of.

Yesterday, all the test captaincy speculation was centred around Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Some channels were absolutely sure Dhoni would be made captain, with generous doses of 'information' from reliable 'sources'. And Dhoni profile stories were already on overdrive - small-town boy, long hair, his Bollywood fans, Musharraf's tongue-in-cheek comment on Mahi's long locks and last but not the least his test career statistics.

But as day turned to night and Younis Khan flogged the Indian bowling at Mohali, anchors began to seek refuge in doubt, and wary speculation replaced confident bluster. Dhoni still remained frontrunner but a cloud of doubt hung over the headline.

The Anil Kumble star was clearly on the ascendant and by the time India hurtled to defeat, 'information' trickling in was pointing towards Kumble. And the BCCI chose to break the news in a written statement as the clock wound its way to midnight. India may have been lurching to sleep, but the world of TV news and its denizens were wide awake. Caught napping, with all speculations laid to rest. It was time to wake up to Kumble profiles - gentle giant, India's highest test wicket-taker (and ODI too), 10-wicket haul in an innings against Pakistan and trapping Lara lbw with face heavily bandaged.

Sensible choice by BCCI in the dead of night, catching the media off-guard. For all his skills, Dhoni is still not ready for leadership in the five-day game. And it's good to have an experienced and level-headed mind at the helm, ensuring a smooth transition to the younger Dhoni later. It's also the ultimate reward for a loyal soldier, who's won far more matches for India than ad contracts.

It also helps that Kumble's shadow won't be looming over Dhoni in ODIs , the leg-spinner having already bid adieu from the one-day game.

But the intruding cameras will remain trained on the flashy Dhoni, rather than the scholarly Kumble. Today a news channel ran a story on Dhoni going to watch Om Shanti Om. The cricket correspondent was busy describing Dhoni's Om Shanti Om trip over the phone. Amen to mindless entertainment and celebrity-gazing.

Suits the unassuming Kumble just fine.

OF ANNIVERSARIES AND BIRTHDAYS

October 2007 marks the 75th anniversary of the Bodyline series. Yet another pretext for reams of articles (including yours truly) and sureshot headlines. As it is, anniversaries are grist to the mill, ranging from 100, 75, 60, 50, 25, 20, 10, 5 and many a time one (one year of the Manmohan Singh government, for example).

It could encompass 50 years after the EMS Namboodiripad-led Communist government came to power in Kerala (1957), 50 years after Roger Bannister ran a mile in less than four minutes (1954) and 60 years after the creation of the bikini (1946). There is nostalgia, there is history revisited and reinterpreted and titillation too (can't forget the infectious enthusiasm at the top level for a special show on bikinis).

Then there is the 'coinciding date' which juxtaposes an incident in the immediate past with another in the distant past. When there is a supreme irony nothing like it, for a two-pronged headline and a discussion on TV. September 11 may be just a date, but it's difficult to imagine that Mahatma Gandhi's first non-violent satyagraha in South Africa was on September 11, 1906. The irony was brought out clearly last year, the 100th anniversary of Gandhi's first satyagraha.

'Anniversary' headlines may ensure that the dust is shaken off the pages of history. But what about 'birthday' headlines? A preserve of film stars and cricketers. Here if you are a reigning idol, it's not just about numbers like 30 (mature actor), 40 (still dapper despite stepping into middle age), 50 (aeging but still hanging on) and 60 (evergreen). Any number, from 30 to 70 to the very end are good enough for 30-minute specials with the same visuals and the same thing said over and over again. Especially if you are Amitabh Bachchan, Rajinikanth or Lata Mangeshkar, just to name a few.

The TV birthday explosion was kicked off by the Big B turning 60 in 2002. There weren't too many players then, but the birthday cult and fans swaying to TV cameras had made their presence felt. Rajini had a major 50th birthday bash in 1999, but he didn't get countrywide attention. (Those were the days when there was only one English-oriented news channel and there was no comprehension about the huge English-speaking 'South India' market)

A dash of trivia helps in no small measure. Rekha's birthday happens to be October 10, a day before the Big B. The perfect excuse to showcase song after song with Amitabh and Rekha ad nauseam (Salaam-e-Ishq meri jaan, Rang Barse, Dekha Ek Khwab etc)

The following years saw the Khans, Shah Rukh, Aamir and Salman all crossing 40 and this year Akshay Kumar too has done it. But now 40, 41, 42.......every number is an excuse for a headline and half-an-hour of interviews, film clips and camera-friendly fans swearing undying devotion.

If Bollywood's there, can cricket be far behind? 2003 marked 30 years of Sachin Tendulkar and thereafter every year every Sachin birthday has made it to the headlines. Depending on their form. Dravid and Ganguly too got a look-in. Now it's Dhoni's turn.

And if you need a crash course in how to say the same thing in five different stories spread over 30 minutes, the answer is to celebrate a celebrity birthday.

It's a sign of the times that Rakhi Sawant's birthday can create hysteria among some news channels. She gets her publicity, the channels get (or think they get) their eyeballs.

Related Posts

75 YEARS AFTER BODYLINE

THE CRACK OF DOOM

THE SPORTING SIDE OF CHE

CELEBRATING RD

CAPITALISING ON DEATH

Leftist intellectual M N Vijayan is dead. Front page news on Malayala Manorama Thursday morning. There are four pictures splashed across the page. The first shows Vijayan feeling uneasy while holding a press conference in Thrissur. The second - Vijayan is drinking water. the third - Vijayan is back to the mike, all smiles. And the fourth and final picture - Vijayan is collapsing - eyes and mouth wide open as he helplessly slips into death.

A shocker of a picture to start the morning. Was the fourth picture necessary? Is the market the newspaper believes it is pandering to completely insensitive? I am told Malayalam news channels were careful with the visuals but India TV, a Hindi news channel which normally doesn't give too hoots for a story from Kerala in the distant south, played up the visuals over and over again. The entire sequence of Vijayan's collapse was played out, with an 'exclusive' tag to boot. A lesson in how to grab eyeballs out of a tragic death.

This was pure shock value and not even about social outrage, which is invoked by visuals of somebody being lynched to death or mob fury. In such cases too it's about getting there first and creating the maximum impact, with hardly a thought about what images could be disturbing.

And when it comes to breaking news of a bomb blast (Delhi 2005, Mumbai 2006 or Hyderabad 2007) things go haywire. The pressure to show visuals as soon as possible ensures caution is thrown to the winds more often than not. Contrast this with the extra-careful way the American media covered 9/11.

It's no justification but TV news is still evolving in India and there is no maturity or consolidation yet, with so many players competing for their slice in the pie (as well as expanding the pie). But what about pillars of the print media who've been around for ages? Are they falling prey to the sensationalism and shock value encouraged by TV? The market may be king but we could do with a little more sensitivity.

THINK GLOBAL, SPEAK LOCAL

The Twenty20 opening match had started. And Chris Gayle launched into the ball, swatting it to the stands. Sitting at home in Delhi, what do I hear? Pramaadam shot....aaru run. I sharpen my ears, realise the commentary on Star Cricket is in Tamil. This continued for 3-4 overs, till the cable operator switched it to Hindi.

Perhaps the first time in a cricket telecast that the broadcaster organised commentary in a regional language. When Narain Karthikeyan made it to FI in 2005, Star Sports suddenly brought in Tamil commentary in a sport which does not have Hindi commentary, considering the urban, upper-middle class profile of followers.

But that was sparked off by an individual and not by mass following for the sport. Cricket on the other hand is a sport with a mass base in India. And it's high time sports broadcasters further explore the potential of regional languages to expand their audience. There is a market clueless in Hindi and not too comfortable with English. Fans will remain fans irrespective of the commentary, but if they can relate to the commentary, they certainly can have a better illusion of participation. And yes, we need to celebrate our diversity with such subtle, albeit market-driven acts.

What next, Malayalam or Bangla commentary for the next Football World Cup?

STINK IN THE TALE

The outrageous stink operation in the capital, framing a school teacher, should make us hang our heads in shame. It may have been the handiwork of a Hindi news channel on the fringes, which needed a big stunt to bring attention. But what about the outbreak of violence outside the school which followed?

Was it a spontaneous public reaction or did the mob chew on generous dollops of footage and vox pops (reactions taken from the person on the street) relentlessly fed on TV? Of course, relentless violence is standout headline material.

Broadcasters urgently need to formulate a code of conduct without being pushed by the government. The last thing we want is a broadcast bill with the government and its content auditor (one per news channel) breathing down our neck. But with such wanton acts of headline-manufacturing, the media's moral high ground of protecting its independence looks more and more shaky.

I've come across meticulously planned and executed sting operations. A case in point being Aaj Tak-Headlines Today's Operation Duryodhan which exposed MPs accepting cash for raising questions in Parliament. Some senior editorial figures and video editos were missing for weeks, while the official word was that they were ill or on vacation. And all the extensive background effort showed in a watertight expose.

But then it was a sting operation dealing with Big Fishes and nothing could be left to chance. Editorial rigour goes for a toss when it comes to exposing small fry.

Will news channels, especially those of the Hindi ilk, unite and ensure there is a rigorous internal screening exercise confirming the veracity after a sting operation is carried out? Once something is aired, it takes ages to come out of a damaged reputation, even if the story has a faked conclusion thanks to clever camerawork and even cleverer editing. In the recent case, Uma Khurana may not be entirely innocent, but has certainly got a raw deal.

The other increasingly emerging danger to law and order is stringers (local reporters who are paid per assignment and not regular employees) eager to make a fast buck by selling footage, preferably violent clashes between groups and incidents of mob fury against wrongdoers, real or imagined. Covering and faithfully recording such incidents is one thing, but what if these stringers themselves incite mobs and encourage them to persist with their violent acts? I've seen a lot of unedited footage which looks staged, with the 'agitated' crowd looking more like performing to the moves of the camera. We have dropped many such 'doctored' headlines but some have regrettably passed editorial scrutiny, riding high on the quest for fresh headlines.

Images from Bhagalpur, when a man was beaten up by a mob and dragged behind a bike by local policemen, caused nationwide horror recently. Undoubtedly shocking and deplorable, but I can't help asking whether the stringer who shot the visuals played his part in encouraging the mob frenzy.
The electronic media is galloping at a frenetic pace with each and every player looking for 'breaking news' to stand out. It can be argued that sensationalising is a necessary evil in a young industry, but what if news is manufactured? Let truth remain stranger than fiction and not the other way round.

TWIST AND SHOUT

This morning we picked up an incident in UK, where two local churches in Taunton refused permission for yoga classes in their church premises. The priests argued that yoga was part of the Hindu ethos and impinges on Christian spirituality.

Good tabloid story considering the concept of yoga has grown beyond religion and is tremedously popular in the West. Church classrooms and auditoriums hold yoga classes and there's even a move to localise yoga in parts of the US in tune with religious beliefs.

But we fell prey to the charms of sensationalising and the news channel habit of presenting a micro picture as the macro picture. Yes, it is a headline but it's not the first headline overriding the outrageous decision by a village panchayat in Haryana to separate a child from his parents because the elders opposed their marriage.

And then we screamed, "Church Bans Yoga." Utterly ridiculous and a dangerous line, since we were talking about two priests from Taunton and not the whole Anglican Church or Baptist Church. It was an individual view and not the 'Church view'. Moreover, the Church is not one monolithic entity, with zillions of deniminations following different practices.

Soon follows reactions over the phone from leading figures in the Roman Catholic Church in India. What can they say sitting in India, on an action taken by priests who interpret Christianity differently from them in the first place.

It should have been dealt as a `local' and not a 'global' story with reactions from England, be it yoga enthusiasts or the Hindu community. Not Baba Ramdev pontificating on whether yoga is scientific or not.

We might have toned down the pitch later, but news channels are increasingly leaping into sweeping conclusions at the first hint of breaking news.

Also opposing a decision is one thing but painting it black is something else. That too, when it is a matter of faith. Priests in Guruvayur temple in Kerala are well within their rights to disallow non-Hindus from entering the temple. The punyaham or purification ceremony in Guruvayur temple after Vayalar Ravi's son visited on the other hand was a big story, because Ravi and his son both are practising Hindus. The punyaham was conducted just because Ravi's wife hailed from a Christian family. Here too, an issue of dogma within the Hindu fold was magnified into that of non-believers not being allowed to enter.

Similarly, a priest in a Taunton church is free to ban yoga within the church premises. There could be many believers in that parish who oppose yoga because they are uncomfortable with what they perceive as religious implications.

Tabloid headlines whet our appetites for curious tidbits, but it's dangerous when the Church itself is shown, albeit briefly, as taking up cudgels against yoga.