Front Page
The Triple Talaq Bill in Parliament, the continuing agrarian crisis in the country and how to deal with it, and the government’s new e-commerce rules are the main headlines, Friday but there is a focus on the media too with reports on possible self regulation for streaming services and a Reuters’ photographer being refused entry into India.
Triple yes
The debate and passage of the Triple Talaq Bill in the Lok Sabha Thursday dominated TV news debates last night and Friday morning’s top headlines. As is their wont, TV prime time questioned the Opposition’s opposition to the Bill while print concentrated more on the bill’s passage “amid opposition walk out” (The Times of India).
The provocative debate receives extensive coverage in the inside pages of all the papers: The Economic Times can’t resist pun fun: “LS Gives Talaq to Triple Talaq, Again”. The report provides the thrust of the government’s position as outlined by Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and the Opposition’s position in a neat “for and against” layout.
The other big report of the day was Thursday’s discussion between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and senior cabinet colleagues on the continuing agrarian crisis– Hindustan Times, The Times of India and Business Standard and ET, carry the meeting as their lead story.
In “Govt plans income support, free insurance for farmers” , Business Standard writes, “The Central government is under pressure to do something for farmers following the ruling BJP’s defeat’ in the Hindi heartland. At the core of the plan, is a ‘direct benefit transfer scheme’ modeled on the Telangana system,” adds TOI.
Interestingly, The Indian Express and The Hindu confine the Modi meeting to the inside pages.
The government’s new e-commerce rules have not gone down well with the media or major e-commerce players as ET, BS and TOI report on reactions to the government’s move. ET and BS take on the government in their edits too. In “Retrospective Policy Changes Damaging”, ET delivers a damning judgment: the move will “hurt consumers, harm investments made in the sector, reinforce the perception of India as a country of policy uncertainty in the eyes of foreign investors and reducer efficiency in retail”.
The Express is more concerned with two media related issues: a Pulitzer Prize winning photographer “denied entry back into India” and “UP Govt order graft probe in 3 Ministries” following a ABP TV sting which reportedly shows senior UP government officials “negotiating bribes in exchange for contracts and official postings” (Express).
More worrying for the media is the fate of the Reuters photographer. “Alleged violation of visa conditions” by “travelling to restricted and protected areas in Jammu and Kashmir without permission” have kept ace photographer Cathal McNaughton out of India, Express reports.
ET also has a major media story on page 1 on streaming services, “Self Censorship: Streaming Soon on Netflix, Hotstar, Jio”. The report suggests that a voluntary self-regulatory code “that would stop them showing content that’s banned by Indian courts, disrespects the national emblem and flag, outrages religious sentiment…,” is on the cards, “according to multiple sources”, the paper writes. This is a precautionary measure to forestall “the government imposing its own rules”.
A good analysis of the media and audience preferences on BS page 1, says 2018 was “The year of the audience”. “… if there is one thing 2018 has blown to smithereens, it is our notion of who the audience is and what it wants”. Citing the success of small budget films Badhaai Ho, Stree, Andhadhun, it says “strong stories” have worked for “splintering audiences”.
And if you are planning a holiday in Kashmir, cancel it: “Kashmir freezes at -7 degrees”, reports The Hindu while HT worries about catching cold in the national capital: “At below 6 degrees C, Delhi shivers in longest cold spell over 13 years.”
Prime Time
The often fiery Triple Talaq Bill debate in the Lok Sabha was broadcast all Thursday afternoon across English news channels and for those who love a good argument, it was worth listening to.
Less rewarding were the evening TV debates where the focus of the anchors was to hold the Opposition accountable, rather than to look at the provisions of the bill, their impact on Muslim women, men and the institution of marriage in Islam which, as one panelist on Mirror Now’s debate, pointed out, was a contract which could only be broken by triple talaq.
However, Republic TV didn’t care about such niceties. Anchor Arnab Goswami asked if the Opposition was “on the wrong side of the history” in its protest against the bill. Amid the usual hungama, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokesperson Sambit Patra observed that many Muslim majority countries had banned the practice: “Muslim countries can ban triple talaq then why can’t we unite?” He asked the Opposition, “Have you thought of the woman who is left by her husband?”
All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen (AIMIM) president Waris Pathan was equally concerned about women, though he opposed the bill. “Lakhs of women came out on streets and protested against Triple Talaq bill,” he claimed, rather grandiosely and without any supporting proof. But who cares for facts during TV debates?
#TripleTalaqBill | If Muslim countries can ban Triple talaq then why can't we unite. Have you thought of the woman who is left by her husband: Dr Sambit Patra, National Spokesperson BJP pic.twitter.com/O8UZCxB0dC
— Republic (@republic) December 27, 2018
Aaj Tak took a similar line on the bill with anchor Rohit Sardana wanting to know why opposition parties were against the Triple Talaq Bill.
Congress spokesperson Ami Yagnik explained to him that criminalising triple talaq was the main problem: “The present Triple Talaq Bill will only lead to more complications as there is a criminal angle to it. We won’t be able to solve the problem of gender discrimination.”
When asked whether this is true, Sudhansu Trivedi pooh-poohed such an argument and suggested Congress was playing politics with religion: “When the issue of dowry for the Hindus came up, Congress had no opposition to that. Does the Congress oppose or support a bill over the issue of religion?”
दहेज़ उत्पीड़न के समय हिंदू पुरुषों के लिए इतनी सांत्वना नही दिखी तो आज मुस्लिम पुरुषों के लिए क्यों दिख रही है: @SudhanshuTrived #Hallabol
Live: https://t.co/fOz5QPkk43 pic.twitter.com/no9ZfwUJuW— AajTak (@aajtak) December 27, 2018
On a completely different note, India Today’s Rajdeep Sardesai spoke to actor Naseeruddin Shah in what the channel claimed was the an “exclusive”, “first” interview with the actor after he flagged concerns for his family living in India. Shah identified himself as a “liberal” and “secular” person and said he was alarmed that both words were now “pejorative”.
Sardesai asked him about his views on Modi. Shah replied: “I had great faith in 2014 when he (PM Modi) ascended to power. I won’t go so far as to say that my faith has been shaken. I still look towards the future.”
Did he feel threatened in his own country? He replied, “I think as I carry security detail with me I feel safer.”
I had great faith in 2014 when he (PM Modi) ascended to power. I won’t go so far as to say that my faith has been shaken. I still look forward to the future: Naseeruddin Shah#IntoleranceDebate
Watch the full interview, with @sardesairajdeep: https://t.co/52fBzZKqAK pic.twitter.com/YcHou5GmNY
— IndiaToday (@IndiaToday) December 27, 2018
Kher ‘creating history’
“Have you presented Sonia Gandhi as ‘a negative, vampish’ ‘control freak’, a ‘possessive mother’ who is pushing her ‘incompetent son’ to become PM?” asked Arnab Goswami in a Republic TV exclusive interview with actor Anupam Kher, making news and fuelling controversy, this afternoon.
Kher portrays former prime minister Manmohan Singh in the upcoming The Accidental Prime Minister.
The actor took the easy option of repeatedly saying, “It is part of history” and “That is what history is all about”.
“I am creating history… Dr Manmohan Singh will be immortalized by this picture… (It should be) India’s entry into the Oscars,” said Kher.
Speaking directly into the camera, he addressed Singh, saying he will be “proud” of the actor, once he watches the film, and compliment him on his outstanding performance. “(You) will want to have a cup of tea with me,” he said.
Goswami, not known to be an admirer of the Gandhi family or Congress, asked the actor some tough questions about the intention behind the film: “Is this a ‘caricature’ of Singh? Have you portrayed him as a ‘weak, ineffectual’ man, ‘a victim’?”
Kher denied it all, saying this is the “reality” and the film is based on a book of the same name by Sanjaya Baru, who was media advisor to Singh.
Asked if the timing of the film’s release just before the election season was to benefit the BJP, Kher turned aggressive:“Of course we should release the film at election time. Why not?” He added that if anyone wants to make a film about the present political scenario, “who is stopping them?”
Asked if RSS or BJP had any influence on the film, Kher stoutly denied it, adding that he is not taking “panga” with Congress or the Gandhis.
Tweet of the day
Dear #AkshayeKhanna !! Today being the release of our trailer of #TheAccidentalPrimeMinister I want to say that you have been an amazing & most giving co actor. Your brilliance rubbed on me and it helped me bring out my best. You are an inspiration. Thank you. ?? @tapmofficial pic.twitter.com/3gYvxmyULx
— Anupam Kher (@AnupamPKher) December 27, 2018