NDTV upgrades Digvijay

Blast from Past: Star News' BJP phobia

A news published in Rediff gives a interesting insight to Media games even in early days

Rediff Reports

The Rupert Murdoch-owned Star News is determined to push its anti-BJP agenda at any cost.

The Vajpayee government, though fully aware of the negative slant of the channel, is unable to counter it effectively since Information and Broadcasting Minister Pramod Mahajan is not above doing business withR athikant Basu, the channel's boss in India.

Last Saturday, Star in its prime time bulletin implied that the BJP might be involved in the murder of Indian Express correspondent Shivani. The bulletin said 'Shivani, a member of the investigative cell of the Indian Express,, had done a lot of stories against the CBI and the BJP.'

The truth is that in her all-too-brief career she hardly did a story against the BJP. So livid was Mahajan at seeing Star News that he immediately called Basu. Caught on the wrong foot, Basu in turn ordered the Prannoy Roy-owned news- making company to delete the offensive sentence. In all subsequent bulletins that night the BJP was not dragged into what was a case of murder.

So if one were to believe Rediff, the antiBJP tilt is in the DNA of NDTV

Screenshots

In 1998; CBI had filed FIR against Prannoy Roy

It seems that Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had filed a case of criminal conspiracy against New Delhi Television (NDTV) managing director Prannoy Roy in 1998.

The background to the case seems to be long war between Star's CEO and the Government which began July 1996, even before Basu joined Rupert Murdoch's channel. 

Indian Express in an article CBI case against Prannoy Roy dated 20 January 1998 reports

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a case of criminal conspiracy against New Delhi Television (NDTV) managing director Prannoy Roy, former Director General of Doordarshan and present Chief Executive Officer of Star TV R Basu and five other top officials of Doordarshan.

The First Information Report (FIR) filed on the basis of “source information'' says that the undue favour granted to Prannoy Roy had led to a loss of approximately Rs five crore to Doordarshan. The FIR names Ashok Mansukhani, the then Deputy Director General (DDG) of Doordarshan, Harish Awasthi (DDG), Shiv Sharma, the then Director General (DG), S Kapoor, the then DG, S Krishnan, the then DG, Prannoy Roy, Managing Director NDTV and the television network too

According to the CBI charge-sheet, DD suffered a loss of over Rs 3.52 crore due to the ``undue favours'' shown to NDTV as its programme The World This Week (TWTW) was put in `A' category instead of `special A' category.

Outlook in its article Star Crossed writes

In the case of NDTV, CBI records show that Doordarshan gave the producers access—free of cost—to vis-News footage that was received by the Doordarshan Kendra at Bombay. The CBI dossier also shows that Roy was given microwave and satellite uplinking facilities without being levied the correct charges.

The CBI dragnet has also swept over other Doordarshan officials like Bimla Bhalla. Records in the possession of the CBI show that, apart from the favours shown in the case of The World This Week, Basu had also made similar concessions towards Roy in programmes like News Tonight and South Asia News Capsule. Records summoned by the CBI in the latter show that the rate at which payment was to be made to NDTV for this capsule was not settled when Doordarshan began broadcasting the programme.

The confusion arose when the costing committee arrived at a fig-ure of Rs 50,000 per episode and NDTV claimed a payment of Rs 1.76 crore at the rate of Rs 81,000 per episode. In a letter to Doordarshan, NDTV stated that this had been agreed upon by the then OSD (news) Bimla Bhalla. The dispute over the payment has, however, not been settled till now.

Bimla Bhalla , Former additional secretary, cabinet secretariat (RAW), joined Star as executive director in January 1997

NDTV did declare this in their prospectus released early 2004. The prospectus declares

The Company and its promoters have also been named in an First Information Report (FIR) filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in January 1998 against certain DD officials in relation to certain violations of rules by DD officials pertaining to certain programmes produced by the Company for telecast by DD. Till date, no case has been instituted against the Company based on the investigation carried out pursuant to the FIR.

Nothing much is known about current status of this issue 

Screenshots

New Radia Tapes nails Barkha Dutt

This entry to Media Hall of Shame should be read in continuation to be read Reply to Barkhas clarification in Radia Tapes

In her clarification on Radia Tapes  published in NDTV website under Barkha Dutt on the Allegations Against Her. She has put following in BOLD ALL CAPS

AT NO STAGE WAS I EVER ASKED TO PASS ON ANY MESSAGE TO INTERCEDE ON BEHALF OF A PARTICULAR MINISTER OR PORTFOLIO. NOT ONCE, WAS I ASKED TO "LOBBY" FOR A. RAJA. NOT ONCE WAS I ASKED TO CARRY ANY MESSAGE REGARDING HIM OR ANY OTHER APPOINTMENT.

Now the new Radiia tapes released by Outlook seems to have nailed this claim. In the Radiia tapes, Radiaa was heard telling a gentleman who seems to be Shankkar Aiyyar

"Congress ne to statement Thank God issue kar diya. Barkha ne karwaa liyaa us se. Ki it's not about individuals." "Haan woh to maine dekh liya. aa gya na Manish Tewari ka". 

English Translation of the above.

Congress has Thankgod has issued an statement. Barkha got it done saying its not about individuals …. Yes I have seen Manish Tiwaris statement

So its amply clear that Barkha did speak to someone fairly high in congress so high that she managed to get Manish Tiwari to make a statement

Wonder how Barkha will now justify this? 

You can hear the audio here 25-188819-0-17-20090522-091706

Screenshots & relevant congress statement at that time

Is NDTV trying to blindside Nation?

This entry to Media Hall of SHAME is NDTV take on latest material in Wikileaks which discussed how congress will indulge in caste/religious-based politics taking reference to AR Antulays statement post 2611

NDTV published the Wikileaks matter in toto in their article WikiLeaks: Congress party stung playing religious politics . They also highlighted a section which I guess they believed was most important section of the release.  They highlighted

The entire episode demonstrates that the Congress Party will readily stoop to the old caste/religious-based politics if it feels it is in its interest.

However, they chose to ignore a far more damaging section which read

While the killing of three high level law enforcement officers during the Mumbai attacks is a remarkable coincidence, the Congress Party's initial reaction to Antulay's outrageous comments was correct. But as support seemed to swell among Muslims for Antulay's unsubstantiated claims, crass political opportunism swayed the thinking of some Congress Party leaders. What's more, the party made the cynical political calculation to lend credence to the conspiracy even after its recent emboldening state elections victories. The party chose to pander to Muslims' fears, providing impetus for those in the Muslim community who will continue to play up the conspiracy theory.

It is interesting considering the fact that Guardian in their article US embassy cables: Mumbai conspiracy allegations 'outrageous' – US ambassador

The news published by NDTV WikiLeaks: Congress can stoop to old caste politics, says ex-US Ambassador to India on this regard also only give a miss to more damning section  but also missed mentioning congress playing religious politics when entire wikileak was focused on how congress played muslim card on AR Antulays statement.

Screenshots

Media seems to have wrong Priorities

It seems Media in India has totally different priorities.

Whole country knows Parliament is standstill for last 21 days. Reason: Opposition wants an JPC enquiry into Massive 2G Scam and Congress instead of relenting, is trying to dilute the demand.

If you are a parent, you would normally be worried on effect of such massive corruption on moral values of an innocent child. But it seems Media instead is worried on what would a child think when he sees protest against corruption will have! 

NDTV in their News Students watch unruly MPs in Parliament report how

how Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman K Rehman Khan today appealed to Opposition members to restore order in the House which witnessed uproar over the 2G spectrum issue for 21 days.

Saying

"School children are watching you".

Hindustan Times in their Article Students bemused by unruly MPs in RS also takes a same. line

If given an option what would  media  expect the child to see. A opposition blind and mute towards such a massive corruption?

Please read the news to see the dramatization by media

Screenshots

NDTV-ICICI loan chicanery saved Roys

News published in the Sunday Guardian

NDTV Limited and associate companies in which Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy have a majority stake have indulged in financial misdemeanours and malpractices in connivance with ICICI Bank, and raised funds by misdeclaration of the value of shares in NDTV. These shares were held by a company called RRPR Holding Private Limited. The deal took place between July and October 2008 during a "buyback" of shares from the stock market announced by NDTV Limited at the price of Rs 439 per share.

Share prices were in a period of boom at the time, and the company expected prices to rise even further. This is why it wanted to buy the shares back. Since the company did not have sufficient liquid funds to finance this purchase of shares, it took a loan from India Bulls Financial Services of Rs 363 crores, pledging 90,70,297 NDTV shares. This was in July 2008.

In August 2008, the stock market collapsed on the back of the subprime crisis in USA; the index crashed from about 22,000 to below 10,000. The price of NDTV shares went down from a high of Rs 394 to around Rs 100.

The collateral of the India Bulls loan, therefore, depreciated, compelling India Bulls to recall the loan. NDTV did not have the money to do so. They approached ICICI Bank to lend them money. ICICI gave a loan of Rs 375 crores in October 2008 against the collateral of 47,41,721 shares held by RRPR, at an average price of Rs 439, representing a gross value of Rs 208 cr.

This was the first financial malfeasance, since the worth of the collateral was far less than the amount given. This was further compounded by what can only be described as financial chicanery, since the price of the shares given as collateral was not Rs 439 but was actually Rs 99 in the market, as of 23 October 2008. The gross value of the collateral was only Rs 46.94 crores, or one-eighth of the loan given. ICICI, a publicly traded company in which the government and its institutions have a substantial stake, therefore accepted a lie purveyed by Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, the only two shareholders in RRPR. It is also important to note that RRPR did not own a single NDTV share before July 2008, authorised and subscribed capital of a mere Rs 1 lakh.

Shockingly, just days after the disbursal of the monies, one of the directors of RRPR Holding [there were only two directors, the husband-wife team of Roys], was granted an interest-free loan of Rs 73.91 crores from the funds that had suddenly come into this inert company through the ICICI loan. The ICICI loan was an open violation of the SARFAESI Act of 2002.

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs, who received the necessary intimations of all transactions, gave implicit acquiescence of the transaction by choosing to remain silent. RBI, which had also received this information, also kept quiet.

To put this malfeasance in context, last month CBI arrested eight senior managers of LIC and other banks for a loan scam amounting to Rs 2000 crores in multiple transactions. NDTV has been a frequent borrower abroad, and also selling stakes in subsidiaries abroad and repurchasing these shares through various interested parties at prices that have no relationship to actual market values. For instance, NDTV Imagine [now sold] shares representing a face value of Rs 10, were sold at Rs 776. The benefit of such high premium obtained by these shares has not reached the Indian investors in the company. NDTV shares, on the other hand, are slipping even further, and losses rising. Its business overseas is through subsidiaries, which conduct financial dealings through accommodation addresses; one is 90 High Holborn, London.

Screenshot

Good News about Modi travels slow

One of biggest news which kept media excited was Post Godhra riots in Gujarat. Newsmedia tookup this issue with a passion never seen before even though India has seen much worse riots before. In fact, Post Godhra riots reporting became a cottage industry in itself. Livelihood of several NGO’s and reporters depended on this issue.

So one would naturally expect Media to get all excited and report when a major news on Modi and Godhra appears.

This morning TOI broke the news SIT clears Narendra Modi of wilfully allowing post-Godhra riots  Dhananjay Mahapatra, TNN, Dec 3, 2010, 12.47am IST

During the course of the day, Some others also broke the news.

India Today, SIT clears Gujarat CM Narendra Modi of wilfully allowing post-Godhra riots December 3, 2010 | Updated 09:38 IST

IBN: Clean chit to Modi in Guj riot cases: sources Posted on Dec 03, 2010 at 14:36

But even after 8 Hours several major Media houses like NDTV or Indian express are yet to even mention this news in their website.  I guess when it comes to Modi Good news (depending upon whom you ask) travels slow.

NDTV has stake in Jai Prakash Power Venture limited

As per the information published by NDTV in their annual report Core Leadership Growth - Annual Report 2009-2010, NDTV has a stake in Jai Prakash Power Venture limited

Jai Prakash Power Venture limited is an Indian power company, incorporated on Dec 21, 1994, that is part of India’s leading Infrastructure conglomerate - Jaypee Group.

Jaypee Group was recently in news for acquisition of land of the farmers by UP government for the proposed expressway and the model township to be developed by Jaypee Group

Interestingly, NDTV did not mention Jaypee Groups name in the news item Farmer agitation: MPs condemn 'forcible' land acquisition in UP

Farmers in the region have been agitating for the past few weeks over acquisition of land for building the Noida-Agra Yamuna Expressway and a township being developed by a private infrastructure company.

We at Media Watch has nothing to prove that omission of JayPee Groups name from the news has anything to do with NDTV owning share in  Jai Prakash Power Venture limited

Since this news originated from PTI, we made every effort to search PTI for related news. Screenshot of what we got is also attached.

Screenshots

Reply to Barkhas clarification in Radia Tapes

Dear Barkha, We at Media Watch thankyou for taking times to clarify your position wrt Radia Tapes expose. We think it’s a victory albeit partial to the relentless campaign by netizens . However, It would have been wise if you could have temporarily stepped down from your position until your name is cleared by an impartial investigation a stand often taken by you for politicians who are under scam radar.

In this article of Media Watch, we would like to analyze your response as something's donot addup or as supreme court would have said “there is something rotten” there

As a journalist, whose work has been consistently hard-hitting and scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister, I am astonished, angered and hurt to see the baseless allegations against me in sections of the media this week.

The first story regarding 2G scam appeared on December 11, 2008, on Raja’s main real estate front company, Green House Promoters. The details of other companies and hidden irregularities in the spectrum scam were published over the following days.

The Mint, a leading business daily, ran a front page comment Nov 11 2008 headed “Raja should be fired”, pointing out that decisions taken by A.Raja, the telecom minister, “have cost the government dear”. The Business Standard ran an editorial on October 31 headed “Licensed to make a killing”, and mentioned how spectrum had been “handed over” to a few “select” (another neat choice of words) firms.

We are fairly confident that as a Journalist you would have read and understood the implications of these revelations.

Your conversation with Radia working as Lobbyist for DMK happened on May 22, 2009, full 6 months after 2G scam came into public knowledge. But not once we repeat NOT EVEN ONCE, you brought this up during your conversation with Radia whose work for DMK would have resulted A. Raja being appointed as Telecom Minister. FYi, Raja was mentioned 8 times in your published conversation with Radia. Now isn't that strange coming from Journalist who claims to be “consistently hard-hitting and scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister”

The edited conversations between PR Representative Nira Radia and me have been headlined to suggest that I misused my role as a journalist to "lobby" for A. Raja, a man I have never met.

You as a journalist very well know now a days headlines rarely represent whats in the body of news. Even NDTV is not immune to this. You can look for several such examples in this blog itself. So you re just another victim. Our Sympathies

It may be true you may not have lobbied for Raja specifically. But per the Radia tape transcripts you seem to be providing a communication bridge between DMK and Congress which would have resulted in Rajas appointment as telecom minister and it is surprising that as a responsible journalist “consistently hard-hitting and scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister” you never brought up 2G scam?  

Allow us to quote some relevant portions of the  transcript

Conversation dated 22 may 2009 Time 10:47:33

RADIA: No, they wanted to; they didn’t want any infrastructure, that’s what Prime Minister said, so he said that’s why they give him labour, fertiliser, chemical---and telecom, IT, they said for Raja. So what has happened is, is that message not relayed to Karunanidhi?

BARKHA: Oh I see!

RADIA: They might have told some minion down the line or told Maran who is not relaying the truth.

BARKHA: I think they have told Maran.

RADIA: Yeah, now what they need to do is, they need to speak to Kani so she can set up the discussion with her father, because even the Prime Minister’s discussion was … she was the one who’s translating, and it was a very brief discussion for two minutes.

BARKHA: Okay.

RADIA: That we’ll try and work it out, and the let’s not you know take it a hasty easy decision. That’s the type of conversation that happened.

BARKHA: No, I’ll set it up as soon as they get out of RCR.

RADIA: What she saying is that, you know, that someone senior like Ghulam [Nabi Azad, senior Congress leader]---because he is the one who is authorised to speak. ….

BARKHA: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

RADIA: Right? Was to speak to her then she can tell her father that I have got this message from the Congress.

BARKHA: Theek hai, not a problem. That’s not a problem, I’ll talk to Azad---I’ll talk to Azad right after I get out of RCR [Race Course Road, presumably, the PM’s residence].

So atleast to a laymen like us here at Media Watch; you seem to have taken the responsibility of clearing the confusion between DMK and Congress (since a minion did not do proper job) knowing very well IT was for Raja!

By definition, the insinuation of "lobbying" implies either a quid-pro-quo of some kind or a compromise in how I have reported the story. As anyone who has watched my coverage of the ongoing 2G scam over the past year would know - to suggest either is entirely absurd.

QPQ can come in any sizes and shapes it can even be the “story exclusives” which directly contributes to reputation which in a way can be linked to several gains.  If I were a well paid Journo, my motivation would have been enhancement in reputation. Anyway, we at Media Watch have nothing to prove or disprove whether a QPQ was involved in this case.

Then your defense is your coverage of 2G scam. 2G scam is one largest of scam India has ever seen. According to CAG, It caused India a loss of 1.76 Lakh Crores. So my question is as a Top journalist in main stream media house could you have afforded not to cover it! Madam you had no choice but to cover it. So your defense that you have covered 2G scam is meaningless, your defence would have made sense if you had made any exclusive exposes on 2G scam. We have not heard of any.

As a matter of record, I never passed on any message to any Congress leader. But because she was a useful news source, and the message seemed innocuous, I told her I would. Ultimately, I did no more than humour a source who was providing me information during a rapidly changing news story.

Call us naïve, idealist dimwit but we tend to believe in what people say. If someone says I am going to talk to someone, we do believe he/she is telling the truth. Lets see what you told Radia

Conversation dated 22 may 2009 Time 09:48:51

BARKHA: Also, but, but the Congress needs to tell Karunanidhi that we have not said anything about Maran.

BARKHA: Okay. Let me talk to them again.

Conversation dated 22 may 2009 Time  10:47:33

RADIA: Yeah, now what they need to do is, they need to speak to Kani so she can set up the discussion with her father, because even the Prime Minister’s discussion was … she was the one who’s translating, and it was a very brief discussion for two minutes.

BARKHA: Okay.

RADIA: That we’ll try and work it out, and the let’s not you know take it a hasty easy decision. That’s the type of conversation that happened.

BARKHA: No, I’ll set it up as soon as they get out of RCR.

RADIA: What she saying is that, you know, that someone senior like Ghulam [Nabi Azad, senior Congress leader]---because he is the one who is authorised to speak. ….

BARKHA: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

RADIA: Right? Was to speak to her then she can tell her father that I have got this message from the Congress.

BARKHA: Theek hai, not a problem. That’s not a problem, I’ll talk to Azad---I’ll talk to Azad right after I get out of RCR [Race Course Road, presumably, the PM’s residence].

Conversation dated 22 may 2009 Time  18:09:06

RADIA: She doesn’t want to attend no because her father told her to come back. She has to follow what she’s father says, no. Call Ghulam then.

BARKHA: Let me call him.

Conversation dated 22 may 2009 Time  19:23:57

BARKHA: You see, what happened was everybody I know in the Congress was at the swearing in, so I haven’t been able to speak with the top guys, and now I just finished and I am going to make my set of calls.

Now you see Madam, We have a problem. Per the Radia Tapes you have promised Radia atleast 4 different time that you will call congress leaders. You being one of most eminent Journalists in India conferred even with PadmaShree an award given by the Government of India generally to Indian citizens to recognize their distinguished contribution in various spheres of activity, we tend to believe your word. Wont the entire press collapse if people start to disbelieve their journalists?

But your statement “never passed on any message to any Congress leader” implies that you never spoke to congress leaders. Do you want us to believe that you lied to Radia?

would notice that the conversation is essentially a journalist soliciting information from one of the many people plugged in - something all journalists do as part of newsgathering. And as journalists, we also often humour our sources without acting on their requests.

We also noticed that (from the published tapes) it was Radia who always called you. Is it wrong if one would expect a “journalist soliciting information” to have made the call atleast once?

And lastly every time Radia called you there was something she wanted from you and atleast to a untrained it seemes that you were happily tagging along complying to various requests. We have nothing with us which would prove or disprove whether you acted on her requests or not. You being a  PadmaShree we would have to your word at it.

The only "benefit" I ever got from talking to Nira Radia was information; information I used to feed the news.

We would kindly request NDTV to release tapes which would prove you have published the news as soon as you got it from Radia. This would rest all the doubts. Curiously, you have not attached any Videos from 23 may 2009 which would have established that you have reported information garnered from Radia

It is important to remember that at this point, in May 2009, none of us were aware of the present investigation against Nira Radia

Madam, you seem to be missing the point. The issue is not whether you spoke to Radia or not. Issue is whether your actions helped in appointment of Raja as Telecom Minister who everyone knew was mired in 2G scam.

This controversy has made me look at the need to re-draw the lines much more carefully.

Madam, This country had (Yes had) highest regard for you. We adored the brave girl who went to front during Kargil. I personally have conversed with you several time in twitter asking “where did we lose that girl”. Media Watch really wish and pray to almighty that India regains the “innocent brave girl” who seem to be lost in the murky world of politics.

Its important for nations future that Role Models donot Fall!

If Nikki Haley is Amritsars Why is Sonia not Italy’s?

As expected Indian Media has gone GaGa over Nikki Haley winning the governorship of South Carolina

However, NDTV headline Amritsar's Nikki Haley is South Carolina Governor takes the cake.

This Report on Nikki Haley will give you an Idea of how Indian she is!

So the question We at Media watch want to ask is if NDTV can call Nikki Haley Amritsar’s why cant they say Sonia Gandhi Italy’s?

Seems NDTV needs a crash course on Hinduism

In past, Fans have built a temple for Superstar Rajinikanth,  actress Kushboo and even for sexy siren Namitha. Nothing special there.  Hinduism allows people to worship deity of choice.

Similarly, A temple to "Goddess English" is being built in a village in India's Uttar Pradesh state to encourage the local Dalit community to learn English.

But if NDTV is to be believed with the act of opening a “English goddess” temple a new religion has born! NDTV reports -

In Uttar Pradesh a new religion has taken birth, Dalits in the Lakhimpur Kheri district are now worshiping the 'Goddess of English'. The followers are the Chatpatate sect of Dalits.

What's being left unsaid in most of the media is perhaps due to naivety these Dalit's will also be celebrating October 25, Birthdate of Lord Macaulay. Lord Macaulay who wanted to "form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and color, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect".

Lastly, if you think this grand scheme was cooked up by some Dalit's sitting at a nondescript village in UP, you are in for a surprise.  The brain behind this move is Chandrabhan Prasad, a researcher at Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU).

One Kalmadi Snub a day keeps CWG baiters happy

After PM Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi-Rahul Gandhi team, its time for cabinet secretary to snub Kalmadi

NDTV gleefully reports in its article Now, Cabinet Secretary snubs Kalmadi

In what is being seeing as another snub for the Commonwealth Games Organising Committee Chairman, Suresh Kalmadi, Cabinet Secretary KM Chandrashekhar hosted a 'thanks giving' dinner on Friday where most CWG officials were invited, except Kalmadi.

But look who attended the thanksgiving

The dinner was attended by the Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, Lt Governor Tejender Khanna and the Sports Minister MS Gill.

Does this mean the people who attended the dinner are above suspicion. Now lets look at the facts -

According to the information received in response to an RTI application, out of the total of 22 projects, following are the projects under investigation -

• Highest of 6 were being carried out by Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports
• 4 by Delhi Development Authority
• 3 by Organising Committee
• 2 by Municipal Corporation of Delhi
• 2 by Central Public Works Department
• 2 by Government of Delhi.
• 1 by  Department of Commerce
• 1 by Indian Meteorogical Department 
• 1 by New Delhi Municipal Council 

An analysis by Chief Technical Examination Wing of CVC earlier found alleged financial and administrative irregularities in 16 construction and procurement projects.

• 6 of them were done by PWD
• 3 by MCD
• 2 by CPWD
• 2 by DDA
• 2 by NDMC
• 1 by RITES, a Government of India Enterprise

So it seems that majority of projects which are under investigation were not under Kalmadis control. Makes one wonder is there a conspiracy to demonize Kalmadi while letting bigger fishes escape?

Has Media unleashed headline war against RSS

This entry pertains to media hype that RSS leader was ‘charge sheeted’ by Rajasthan ATS in Ajmer Blast case.

It seems media has unleashed a headline campaign against RSS. A headline campaign without any substance to backup. Surprisingly most of time information in the body is radically different from the headline.

NDTV reports RSS leader chargesheeted for Ajmer Blast However the text in the body reads

Police say there is not enough evidence to frame charges against Indresh yet, but there's every possibility he will be questioned.

NDTV should clarify whether senior RSS leader, Indresh Kumar’s name appear in charge sheet or was he charged? There is a huge difference between the two. A person can only be called charge sheeted if he is charged under sections of IPC! Indresh Kumar is not an accused unless he is charged under sections of IPC!

Times of India also reports RSS leader chargesheeted in Ajmer blast case but in first para itself TOI writes

A senior RSS leader's name figured in the chargesheet in the 2007 Ajmer blast in Rajasthan

TOI continues

ATS sources said Indresh has not been made an accused in the case as further investigation is underway to ascertain whether he had any links with the blast.

So even though TOI headline says RSS leader was chargesheeted, body says he is name ‘just’ figures in chargesheet and he is not even an accused!

IBN also reports on similar line that RSS leader chargesheeted in Ajmer blast case but IBN fails to carry information which even TOI & NDTV carried. Also, IBN mentions that their news report was based on inputs from PTI. However PTI news on same subject is RSS leader's name figures in chargesheet in Ajmer blast. PTI clearly mentions

A senior RSS leader's name figures in the chargesheet filed by the Rajasthan ATS against five accused in the 2007 Ajmer blast.

ATS sources said Indresh has not been made an accused in the case as further investigation is underway to ascertain whether he had any links with the blast.

Please note no where PTI mentions RSS leader was chargesheeted. 

All these makes one wonder is this Hype being created to take nations attention from congress wrongdoings which has been hogging headlines.

PTI report

NDTV report

Times of India report

IBN report

Was Rahuls ‘spontaneous’ train ride in Mumbai stage managed

Flashback:

February 2010. Rahul Gandhi visits Mumbai amidst MNIK controversy and if media is to be believed made history by traveling in local train after breaking his usual security cordon

NDTV reported the incident as Rahul Gandhi snubs Sena, takes Mumbai local

When in Mumbai, Rahul Gandhi decided to do as Mumbai does.
So, in a last-minute decision that undoubtedly left his security men in a cold sweat, Gandhi decided to take local trains instead of the helicopter that was on stand-by for him. He travelled both first and second class, and bought tickets that were paid for by a quick stop at an ATM on his way to Andheri station.

So per NDTV Rahul made a last Minute decision to ride local train which left his security in cold sweat.

TOI also reported the incident though not as dramatic as NDTV. TOI reports In Mumbai, Rahul takes local line, derails Sena gameplan

Rahul Gandhi—in a move that sent out a strong political signal to regional parties like the Shiv Sena and the MNS—forsook the safety of a chopper ride and chose to take the local train to move around in Mumbai for a couple of political functions on Friday.

So Media wants us to believe that Rahul Gandhi breaks security cordon without any forewarning to security personnel.

But it seems fact is something different. Rahul Gandhi himself inadvertently let the cat out in one of his interviews about his breaking of security cordons. Rahul Gandhi's press conference in Kolkata(Part-1) 25th April 2009

It is agreed with my security people that I will do that and they chose a place from the area where I was allowed to do that. I’m not actually breaking security. It is discussed with my security people and they allowed me…

So these much publicized Rahul breaking security cordon to meet common man is all stage managed to nth degree!

Also, Following is the picture of a non peak Mumbai  local train.

 

Now look at the screen Grab of train Rahul traveled. Have you ever seen a Mumbai local so empty.

 

Reminds me of Sarojini Naidu’s comment

To keep Mahatma Gandhi poor, we have to destroy treasures. His poverty is very costly.

CWG Scam: Propaganda war begins

Todays Media Hall of shame covers media coverage of IT & CBI raids in connection with awarding of contracts for the CWG.

Almost all the major media houses (NDTV, TOI, IE & HT) has reported this as

NDTV: CWG scam: Income Tax raids at BJP leader's office

TOI: CWG scam: CBI raids BJP leader Sudhanshu Mittal's house

IE: CWG probe targets BJP's Sudhanshu Mittal

NDTV in its news article writes

Among them, the office of senior BJP leader Sudhanshu Mittal, whose relatives were allegedly given major contracts for different aspects of the Commonwealth Games.

NDTV continues

On Monday, Income Tax officials visited the offices of the Organising Committee, headed by Suresh Kalmadi. Sources say financial documents linked to the broadcast rights for the Games are being studied for alleged tax evasion

So per NDTV IT Officers ‘Raided’ BJP Leaders house but they ‘Visited’ (not raided) office of OC chairman Suresh Kamadi. So one visit was called Raid and other becomes an innocent visit. I am really tempted to ask NDTV did Kalmadi offer IT officers tea when they were visiting Kalmadi. Also have they forgotten Kalmadi is also a senior congress leader

Surprisingly, what was left unsaid in most of news articles is clarification from IT dept. Hindustan Times in their article CWG probe: I-T raid on BJP leader Sudhanshu Mittal carries the clarification -

Let me clarify, these are search operations. The task assigned is to look into the books of accounts and related documents, examine the records and take custody of them, if necessary," the official said.

"We are searching for irregularities, if any, in execution of contracts. We are looking at all contractors. Whoever the contractor is, we are looking. I can't name any specific company or person,"

So these were just search operations and IT officers visited offices of all contractors. Sudhanshu Mittal may or may not be guilty only time will tell but its highly objectionable that media is creating a wrong impression by twisting and misrepresenting the facts.

The timing of this news release also is suspect. This comes just before BJP President was to make a major announcement wrt CWG corruption.

Media Watch supports online petition to NDTV

A group of concerned citizens aggrieved by the blatant anti-Hindu bias of the English language media in general and NDTV and its star anchor, Ms. Barkha Dutt in particular have filed the following online petition appealing to the channel to be objective in its coverage. The petition seems to have been an instant hit. Within an hour of filing on Sunday (October 17) night more than a hundred people signed it and this morning by the time this piece is being posted the number is approaching three hundred. The petition may be viewed and signed here: ONLINE PETITION TO NDTV AGAINST BLATANT ANTI-HINDU COVERAGE

Dr. Pranoy Roy,

Chairman & Managing Director, NDTV Ltd.,

NEW DELHI

cc: Ms. Barkha Dutt,

Group Managing Editor, NDTV Ltd.,

NEW DELHI

We the signatories of this petition, as concerned Indian citizens (resident and non-resident) would like to register our strong protest for the way in which your channel conducted debates hosted by Ms. Barkha Dutt on the judgement of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on the Ayodhya dispute.

We do hope, as a responsible news channel watched by millions of Indians world-wide, you are not oblivious to your social responsibilities, which include fostering a climate of amity between communities, especially between India’s two major religions. Sadly, we have to point out, that fostering such a climate of amity between the two major religions is not possible by harping on the victim-hood of one side alone. Unfortunately this is the net effect of the debates you telecast and could only widen the chasm between the two, exacerbate tensions and lead to a climate of mutual hatred and ill-will.

We as concerned citizens interested in fostering a climate of amity and goodwill between various communities in the country take strong exception to the following aspects of the post-verdict debates and do hope you will remedy them in future:

1. For instance if your moderator, Ms. Barkha Dutt allows one side to harp on ‘December 6 1992’ ad nauseum, as if India’s history really began on that day or as if that was the only incident responsible for Hindu-Muslim tensions, she could willy-nilly appear to be taking sides in the debate.

2. The other side could equally well argue that ‘December 6 1992’ was merely the culmination of a process of alienation of Hindus aggrieved by centuries of victimisation under alienrulers and decades of discrimination under pseudo-secular Indian rulers. But the fact of the matter is that they don’t get to voice their side of the argument because they are not allowed to, which gives one an impression that Ms. Barkha Dutt is taking sides.

3. One could ask with equal legitimacy, why the 1989-90 events should not be considered a watershed in Hindu-Muslim relations as it was during this period the Kashmir valley was cleansed of its Hindu population, leading to the exile of between 350000 and 400000 Pandits in their own homeland?

However Ms. Dutt and the panellists on the show stubbornly refuse to countenance the question as for them the concept of ‘secularism’ means one thing in Jammu & Kashmir and quite a different thing in the rest of India.

Of course Ms. Dutt is entitled to her views but if airing her views is likely to add to the belligerence that is already prevalent in the air should she not restrain herself from airing them?

4. We are pained to observe that those who advised that ‘everyone should respect the judicial verdict’ and ‘the country has moved on’ till the day of the judgment suddenly began denouncing it as soon as it was delivered. Legal experts say that it would take at least a few weeks to read and digest the 8000+ pages verdict but panellists on your channel were allowed to denounce it almost as soon it was delivered.

5. Panellists who oppose the construction of the ‘Sri Ram Mandir’ were asked loadedquestions like “were you disappointed with the verdict?” As you are aware, in legal parlance such questions are characterised as ‘leading’ calling for a ‘conclusion’ from the witness. This obviously means that the panellist would have to take a stance from which it is impossible to reconcile later even if one wanted to. As Ayodhya is a sensitive issue and is likely to inflame passions on both sides of the divide could such provocative questions be not avoided?

6. In some instances Ms. Dutt was animatedly participating than moderating the debate. She could have opposed or at least protested voicing diatribe as comment, like describing the verdict as a ‘Panchayat settlement’.

7. We believe panellists who support the court verdict could have been given more time. The court has indeed given an opportunity to the two sides to bury their differences and come to an amicable solution. Would not an amicable solution at this stage help the ‘nation to move on’ as indeed it should?

8. The moderator on several occasions used the word ‘dissenting judge’ while alluding to one of the judges on the bench, which gave the verdict. As different judges agreed / differed on different aspects of the complex issue, it would be unfair to selectively use the word ‘dissenting judge’ depending one’s view point and convenience.

9. As the verdict is being slowly digested and excerpts appear on various Internet fora it is now abundantly clear that the Honourable justices have in fact based their judgment on hard evidence and not on faith of the majority religion as large sections of the media seem to imply.

10. Transcripts of evidence tendered by the historians, archaeologists and other expert witnesses of the BMAC, their cross-examination by the defendants’ lawyers and the observations of the Honourable justices should leave no one in doubt that the BMAC has no case at all and that the Masjid was in fact built on the ruins of a temple or a existing temple was destroyed to build the Masjid.

In spite of overwhelming evidence supporting the claim of a temple having either existed or demolished on that site should the media harp on its ‘faith-prevailing-over-evidence’ line thus tarnishing the image of the judiciary, the ‘court of last resort’ for the common citizen? Will it not weaken the common citizen’s faith in the democratic institutions of the country?

On the other hand will not awarding the suit in favour of the Muslims irrespective of the merits of the case be akin to some kind of ‘road justice’, in which the smaller vehicle or pedestrian in a road accident is invariably sympathised? Will it not weaken the majority religion’s faith in the judiciary?

The Ayodhya debate was but one example of the prevailing political culture – which your channel typifies – that defines secularism as anti-Hinduism.

We are of the humble opinion that the country can ‘move on’ only if every concerned citizen – not least the opinion-shaping bodies like the media - work in tandem for fostering amity and goodwill between various sections / groups of citizenry.

The Honourable Court has indeed accorded the nation a wonderful opportunity to bring about a climate of amity and goodwill between India’s two major religions. Whether the nation seizes it or fritters it away largely depends on the opinion-making institutions like the media.

Will NDTV help or hinder the cause?

Thank you for listening.

NDTV & TOI raises the bar

This is certainly hilarious stuff. It cant get better(or worse) than this.

First NDTV thinks a athlete hugging Rahul Gandhi should be their headline news. But Pièce de résistance is NDTV claim that boxer kept waving at Rahul during his bout! So NDTV thinks Vijender was waving at Rahul more than giving punches to opponent! I hope the reporter didnot confuse punching with waving..

The medal rounds haven't started but Rahul Gandhi decided to stop by to watch the bouts. Vijender Singh clearly seemed thrilled since he kept waving to the Congress general secretary during his bout.

If NDTV has published this news how can you expect TOI to be lagging in race? They have also published this news Boxer Vijender gets VIP support and as usual TOI language was more flowery.

Rahul Gandhi and his brother-in-law Robert Vadra lustily cheered Vijender Singh during his boxing bout on Friday.

Cheered lustily!! I guess TOI might have accidently pasted a word which they meant to use for their other usual articles in TOI website such as these

TOI also informs us

Gandhi, who is also an avid fan of kickboxing, and Vadra can be seen trying to get one-up on each other in their racing bikes in Gurgaon.

Pseudo-secular abound on your channel

Following is the transcript of famous Ravi Shankar Prasad & Barkha Dutt encounter in TV while discussing Ayodhya Verdict

Barkha

and Ravi Sankar Prasad is with us. He is of course senior face in BJP and  was also one of senior advocate for one of Hindu groups ….. Ravi… How should we read this judgment according to you. There are some like Rajiv Dhawan who have argued on this channel that its a shocking one sided judgment other like the wakf board have said that its partially disappointing and your party has said that it paves the way for building of grand Mandir. What is the big message that you  take away .. Ravi from this judgment

Media Watch take: Please note she has not mentioned even a single person who was talking positively about the verdict

Ravi Shankar Prasad

Barkha let me tell you one thing very clearly.. today I am talking to you .. I will be very quick because I have to rush otherwise my plane will become late

I am not here to respond to the conventional Pseudo-secularist who are abound on your channel ..today my take is entirely different. I have got the entire judgment key points before me which I have brought from lucknow

Ram was a revered pious figure for the Hindus… Muslims never questioned. Ram was born in Ayodhya…. they never questioned. Ayodhya is sacred for Hindus…they never questioned. What they questioned was that this is not the place that the Hindus believe he was born. Issue 14, issue 22, Issue 19 has been decided clearly by a majority that this is the place where Ram was born which Hindu believe for last 1000 of years. This is a concept of deity exclusive to Hindus which I have argued and it has been accepted and Justice Khan without saying so said in so many words that before this mosque construction Hindu has treated that whole area to be a RamJanamsthan though not very specific disputed area

Now One Judge has allowed the Hindus plea completely … All the judges have dismissed the plea of Babri Masjid Action committee and Justice Sudhir Aggarwal along with DV Sharma has clearly held that the place where Ram Lalla is Virajmaan today is the place which Hindus believe for generation as the place of Birth

Now you may recall Barkha in the white paper in Narasimha Rao Govt and the Farooque Judgment also they have said if its proved is the birthplace of Lord ram, we will willing forgo our claim and today when there is a judicial determination ..What I said their in lucknow immediately there after .. I am appealing to your channel .. you are saying India has moved and I am appealing to new India and not to the pseudosecular India who are abound on your channel

Please accept this verdict with all humility… you have got the right to go and appeal but if you help the Hindus willingly to construct a temple at Janamsthan, it will pave the way to new resurgent India.. of trust … of amity barka interrupting and that India appeal which I am making today not as a BJP leader or a senior lawyer or a General Secretary of BJP or Member of Parliament or Chief Spokes person but as an Indian first barka interrupting and I am quite sure Barkha regardless of Pseudo-secularist who are abound on your channel (barka interrupting…..your) There is a India waiting to respond to that appeal

Barkha

I was going to say to you that I dont know if Javed Akhtar is Pseudo Secularist  for you but Javed Akhtar for one hour has been saying that this is an opportunity for reconciliation and that Muslim community must take away a positive message from this verdict and join hands with the Hindus

Ravi Shankar Prasad Interrupting 

Barkha I am sorry for interrupting Barkha.. I know Javed Bhai I know his attitude towards this issue.. he is a good friend but I didn't mean Javed Sahab (barka interrupting…..maybe you)

Ravi Shankar Prasad

Rajiv Dhawan you talked about him.. he is a senior lawyer … I also know law a little not as big as he is barka grinning  But if muslims would have succeeded today had Mr. Dhawan maintained same attitude? This is downright double standard … Please today create an atmosphere of amity Barkha… and I am sure there is a big India which is going to respond India has moved on bout those who are bound in your channel haven't moved

Ravi interrupting

I dont know what you.. who you mean atleast you named one person Rajiv Dhawan but Ravi in that spirit of amity that you have spoken about .. we also got Shekar gupta joining us and Javed akhtar is laughing at what you have said barka grinning but I want to ask you in  this spirit of amity at this point should the BJP perhaps abandon issues like Kashi and Mathura .. should the BJP reach out to the muslims and say ok we have got a go ahead for our mandir but your mosque can comeup along side as well…Can we hear same amity from the BJP that you want from muslims 

Ravi Shankar Prasad

Barkha I know you will ask me this questions and you have been asking this question but is it the occasion for that to ask this question.. This is the larger question I am raising today Why your language .. your Body Language … your analysis does not change for the Barkha I have known for the last 10 years

When the judgment has given a new beginning today why you are not picking up the threads of that beginning

Barkha Interrupting 

you have not been watching you have not been watching me on TV you been in a flight we have been talking about a reconciliation all day (Ravi Shankar Prasad interrupting…..Barkha you are a good friend mine) Sorry you are making an assumption here go ahead

Ravi Shankar Prasad

Barkha what I am telling you…. you are my very good friend barkha I know your view on many things I am not discussing about that but I have a appeal today to a mindset beyond Barkha dutt this question (Barka interrupting…..  This not about Barkha Dutt . This is  about country ) A large part of India

Barkha Interrupting 

This not about Barkha Dutt . its about country sir .. you didn't answer my question. I am simply saying I accept your point. (Ravi interrupting Barkha Barkha) Let me first say I accept your point. There is an opportunity for reconciliation here.  I am simply saying what can BJP do to also enhance this envirment of reconcilation.. Ravi iska to please aap jawab de

Ravi Shankar Prasad

Barkha my reply is very simple I don't owe this reply to Barkha Dutt but when the reconciliation would start a lot f positive vibes would come about but what is my worry is before my appeal has even responded to al the derailment process I see on NDTV. That is something I don't appreciate

Barkha Dutts coverage of RJB Verdict - 1

This is first of series of articles which will cover the despicable and shameful NDTV coverage yesterday

This section covers the portion where Barkha Dutt is trying to interpret the judgment on whether the disputed structure was a mosque or not

Javed Akhtar

If mosque was not according to Islamic tenets, if it was actually not really a mosque

Barkha Dutt (interrupts)

That only one of judges have said and If I am not wrong it was dissenting judge

Javed Akhtar

If we accept there was a temple there, if we accept that this is the exact place of Ram Janam. Then why 1/3 land is given to muslims… I dont understand

Barkha Dutt (interrupts)

Because… May I answer that question .. what is happened is all three judges had three separate judgments. One judge Justice Sharma had a completely dissenting judgment in favor of Hindu groups But Justice Aggarwal and Justice Sharma agreed on some things and Justice Khan and Justice Aggarwal agreed on other things and that is what is happened

This is amusing. The golden principle of journalism is report like ‘fly on wall’ but here instead of getting the expert advice. Barkha takes upon herself to explain the judgment to panelist which even consisted of a judge!! Makes one wonder who was journalist and who was panelist presenting ‘their side’ of case.

Then she goes on to read the actual judgment of Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan ,J.

Justice Khan actually says the disputed structure was constructed as a mosque by or under orders of Babar. He also says No temple was demolished for building of this mosque but he says Mosque could have been constructed over the ruins of other temples .. general temples that were lying in utter ruins for a very long time before decision was taken to build this mosque. He also says the idol of ram lalla was was placed for the first time beneath the Central dome of the mosque in the early hours of 23.12.1949. This justice khan.. to woh jo baat apne kahi(in hindi) of that not being the mosque that only the dissenting judge … we should first clarify that .. this Justice Khan very clearly saying

Justice Aggarwal has not gone into that issues he has merely said drawn a distinction… 

Clarification: Barkha used words ‘other’ or ‘general' temples’. The judgment donot have words ‘other’ or ‘general' temples’. Usage of these words may portray a completely different meaning.

Also, I am still trying to understand why Barkha chose to just refer only GIST OF THE FINDINGS by S.U.Khan J.  Is it because it suited her line of argument. A neutral commentator would have dissected all the three judgments

Justice Sanchar interrupts asks Barkha…

He (guess Justice Aggarwal) accepts it as mosque?

Barkha

Yes and he says the central dome. He draws a distinction. Justice Aggarwal from what I have understood draws a distinction between central dome and inner courtyard

So according to my interpretation; Barkha wants us to believe that Judgment says the disputed structure was a mosque. And reasons being

1. Justice Khan said so
2. Justice Aggarwal did not go into this issue and seems he accepts it as a mosque. He even makes a distinction between central Dome and inner courtyard
3. Justice Sharma gave a dissenting judgment

Following are facts -

Lets start with Justice Sharma. Justice Sharma has categorically stated that structure is not mosque as it was build against tenets of Islam

The disputed building  was constructed by Babar, the year
is not certain but it was built against the tenets of Islam. Thus, it
cannot have the character of a mosque.

The relevant tenets of Islam which Justice Sharma is referring are -

Issues No.19(c). Whether any portion of the property in suit was used as a place of worship by the Hindus immediately prior to the construction of the building in question?  If the finding is in the affirmative, whether no mosque could come into existence
in view of the Islamic tenets, at the place in dispute?

HC Ruling: Decided against the plaintiffs.(Sunni Central Board of Waqfs)

This means courts have accepted portion of the property in suit was used as a place of worship by the Hindus immediately prior to the construction of the building in question thus building in question cant be Mosque under the tenets of Islam

Issues No.19(F): Whether the pillars inside and outside the building in question contain images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses?  If the finding is in the affirmative, whether on that account the building in question cannot have the character of Mosque under the tenets of Islam?

HC Ruling: Decided against the plaintiffs (Sunni Central Board of Waqfs) and in favour of the defendants(Gopal Singh Visharad and others)

This means courts have accepted pillars inside and outside the building in question contain images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses co structure cant be Mosque under the tenets of Islam

Now lets see what Justice Aggarwal says. Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.  clearly mentions

The building in dispute was constructed after demolition of Non-
Islamic religious structure, i.e., a Hindu temple

So if structure was constructed after demolition of Non-Islamic religious structure, i.e., a Hindu temple then how can it be a mosque under tenets of Islam(per Issues No.19(c).)!  

Lastly lets see what Justice Khan say. per my reading on this issue Justice Khan dissented from other two judges. Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan ,J. however has been categorical that

No temple was demolished for constructing the mosque.Mosque was constructed over the ruins of temples which were lying in utter ruins since a very long time before the construction of mosque and some material thereof was used in construction of the mosque.

So atleast to a untrained person like me, it looks like majority of Judges were of view that the disputed structure was constructed after demolition of Hindu religious structure. If it was so, it was against tenets of Islam and if it was against tenets of Islam how can it be mosque