Elections 2009 are being fought on two fronts. One, on the ground through campaigns, rallies and speeches. The other, inside television studios. This election is the first one to be fought under the intense glare of television cameras. And that’s why some people are calling this a made for TV election.
Look at every single issue that has dominated this campaign. Varun Gandhi’s hate speech, the shoegate scandal involving journalist Jarnail Singh, the tu-tu main-main between Advani and Manmohan Singh, Karunanidhi’s breakfast to lunch fast… every single issue has been shaped by TV. It’s almost as if elections 2009 are the biggest reality show of this season.
And there’s a very simple reason for this. The airwaves are crowded like never before. In the last elections in 2004, there were less than 50 news channels in the country. Today that figure has tripled. There are almost 150 news channels, English, Hindi and vernacular put together. That’s 300 million news watching viewers. That’s 300 million votes at stake.
So much so, today some Hindi channels, like Aaj Tak, our sister channel for example, has TRPs that can match General Entertainment channels like Star Plus and Sony. This was unthinkable some years ago. And this has happened bang in the middle of the IPL season. I think the entire TV news industry can take a collective bow for that.
For the urban audiences, TV has replaced the election rally. TV is where election issues are being debated, dissected and given shape. TV has become the single biggest source of first-hand information and opinion for urban India. And politicians being smart people have latched onto it. Today you’ll find a Congress spokesperson and a BJP spokesperson in every single debate show on TV, every single night. Even parties that have an aversion to TV have gotten smart. The Comrades of the Left who always thought TV to be ‘bourgeoisie’ have got well-spoken, made for TV leaders like Sitaram Yechury and Brinda Karat. Even the BSP which brandished TV news media as ‘manuwadi’ has found an articulate spokesperson in Shahid Siddiqui.
But does that mean elections are won and lost on the idiot box? Not at all. If that were the case Arun Jaitley should’ve been Prime Minister of the country by now. TV in India hasn’t reached a stage where a debate can cost Nixon his presidency. But we’re getting there. And fast.
There are some viewers who complain that news TV has been reduced to a bunch of talking heads. The same old faces, the same boring issues. I agree with that partially. It’s not as if Indian elections don’t offer interesting stories. Muslims of an entire village in Etah boycotted Mulayam Singh because he joined hands with Kalyan Singh. But that story never made it to the nine o clock news. Dalits in a village in Solapur decided en masse not to vote for Power Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde because their village hadn’t seen electricity in five years. Again that didn’t feature in any prime time bulletin. TV is guided by what sells and what doesn’t. What gets more eyeballs and as a consequence, TRPs. But then again, that’s the nature of the medium. TV news is less than 20 years old in India. It’s still evolving. Give it some more time. Maybe by Elections 2014, it will get more altruistic. But till then, let’s have more of the Ravi Shankar Prasads and the Abhishek Manu Singhvis.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Monday, May 4, 2009
DEFENDING THE DEVIL
Two-thirds of India has already voted. Yet, it’s still an open house. But one thing’s clear. None of the three fronts, in their existing form, UPA, NDA and Third Front will be able to form the next government. There’s going to be a fair amount of churning, after the elections. And no secular government can be formed without the Left. Which is why, the possibility of a third front is now far more real than it was at the start of the elections.
Ironically though, the one thing you’ll hear, whether it’s from hard-nosed political reporters or paanwallahs on the street is that a third front government is bad for the country. Jo bhi sarkar aaye, third front ki nahin aaye, that’s a common refrain. It’s almost as if the third front will ruin all the gains made in the last ten years under the NDA and UPA. It’s almost as if the third front is the devil incarnate. If that is the case then here’s my attempt at playing devil’s advocate. Here’s why I think, the third front is not such a bad idea after all.
First, we need to clarify a few historical wrongs. The so-called third front governments in the past have all been either at the mercy of the Congress or the BJP. In effect, they were susceptible to blackmail and pressure. Readers will surely remember the trauma of the 1989 National Front Government and of the 1996 United Front Government. One was toppled by the BJP and the other by the Congress. They fell, not because regional satraps couldn’t do business with each other, but because of the sheer greed and manipulation of the national parties. In the first instance, the BJP realized the potential of the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation and dumped the Third Front. In the second, a wily old Sitaram Kesri used low trickery and political skullduggery to pull the plug. The national parties should share as much blame, if not more, for the failure of Third Front governments as the men and women who comprised it.
The very idea of the Third front is aligned to the genius, diversity, and contradictions that make up this fascinating thing called Indian politics. The third alternative, at least in theory, comprises forces that have historically fought the status quo. Look at all the social justice movements in India. Whether in the North or in the South, the Lalus, Mulayams, NTRs and Karunanidhis have empowered entire communities who were historically treated as backwards. Today a Kurmi in Nitish’s Bihar knows the value of his vote. A Jatav in Mayawati’s UP can make or mar the fortunes of a Brahmin candidate. Power now flows bottom-up and not top-down. And regional parties have played a substantial role in that by empowering backward castes. In that sense, they have made our politics more federal.
The other myth that’s being propogated is that the Third Front is anti-development. Let me give you a couple of examples to show why that’s just a lot of bunkum. The surface transport ministry has been with the DMK for the last ten years or so. As a result, Tamil Nadu today has the best roads in the country. NHAI reports and other independent studies on roads, vouch for that. It wasn’t the case ten years ago. Same’s the case with Bihar and the Railways. A Bihari has been the Railway Minister for the last decade. Today, Bihar is one of the best connected states in India by rail. In the last five years alone, Bihar has had 52000 crores worth of rail projects and 52 new trains.
There are some people, especially those in Dalal Street who say India’s economy will be in the doldrums if the Left were to be part of any future dispensation. They will ruin the fruits of liberalization that this country’s middle-class has come to love over the last decade and a half. Well, I am all for free markets. But the numbers that make up the India story tell a different tale. Less than 2 percent of India has investments in the stock markets. More than 30 percent can’t invest in two square meals. That's the fascinating story of the two Indias. May the more important one win on the 16th of May.
Ironically though, the one thing you’ll hear, whether it’s from hard-nosed political reporters or paanwallahs on the street is that a third front government is bad for the country. Jo bhi sarkar aaye, third front ki nahin aaye, that’s a common refrain. It’s almost as if the third front will ruin all the gains made in the last ten years under the NDA and UPA. It’s almost as if the third front is the devil incarnate. If that is the case then here’s my attempt at playing devil’s advocate. Here’s why I think, the third front is not such a bad idea after all.
First, we need to clarify a few historical wrongs. The so-called third front governments in the past have all been either at the mercy of the Congress or the BJP. In effect, they were susceptible to blackmail and pressure. Readers will surely remember the trauma of the 1989 National Front Government and of the 1996 United Front Government. One was toppled by the BJP and the other by the Congress. They fell, not because regional satraps couldn’t do business with each other, but because of the sheer greed and manipulation of the national parties. In the first instance, the BJP realized the potential of the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation and dumped the Third Front. In the second, a wily old Sitaram Kesri used low trickery and political skullduggery to pull the plug. The national parties should share as much blame, if not more, for the failure of Third Front governments as the men and women who comprised it.
The very idea of the Third front is aligned to the genius, diversity, and contradictions that make up this fascinating thing called Indian politics. The third alternative, at least in theory, comprises forces that have historically fought the status quo. Look at all the social justice movements in India. Whether in the North or in the South, the Lalus, Mulayams, NTRs and Karunanidhis have empowered entire communities who were historically treated as backwards. Today a Kurmi in Nitish’s Bihar knows the value of his vote. A Jatav in Mayawati’s UP can make or mar the fortunes of a Brahmin candidate. Power now flows bottom-up and not top-down. And regional parties have played a substantial role in that by empowering backward castes. In that sense, they have made our politics more federal.
The other myth that’s being propogated is that the Third Front is anti-development. Let me give you a couple of examples to show why that’s just a lot of bunkum. The surface transport ministry has been with the DMK for the last ten years or so. As a result, Tamil Nadu today has the best roads in the country. NHAI reports and other independent studies on roads, vouch for that. It wasn’t the case ten years ago. Same’s the case with Bihar and the Railways. A Bihari has been the Railway Minister for the last decade. Today, Bihar is one of the best connected states in India by rail. In the last five years alone, Bihar has had 52000 crores worth of rail projects and 52 new trains.
There are some people, especially those in Dalal Street who say India’s economy will be in the doldrums if the Left were to be part of any future dispensation. They will ruin the fruits of liberalization that this country’s middle-class has come to love over the last decade and a half. Well, I am all for free markets. But the numbers that make up the India story tell a different tale. Less than 2 percent of India has investments in the stock markets. More than 30 percent can’t invest in two square meals. That's the fascinating story of the two Indias. May the more important one win on the 16th of May.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)