NL Hafta

n this week’s episode, host Abhinandan Sekhri is joined by Madhu Trehan, Raman Kirpal, Manisha Pande, and journalist and author Sandeep Bhushan.The podcast starts off with a peek into the complex and ever-changing realm of Indian journalism through the lens of Sandeep’s book, The Indian Newsroom: Studios, Stars and The Unmaking of Reporters. Abhinandan agrees partly with its central analysis regarding the undercurrents of the profession and says, “This entire liberal cabal is a reality in media, I don’t think there’s any doubt about it and the metrics of what was an achiever or what was a good reporter were ... someone who can sit with me over dinner and discuss wine rather than be able to crack a story, so social comfort took primacy over any kind of achievement”. The panel discusses issues of diversity in the newsrooms. Though it's come a long way today, everyone agrees that you can't ignore the fact that English news channels are still dominantly comprised of the upper class when compared to Hindi channels.Sandeep says the reality of journalism is that it's based on “brand as power and the power of access, both rolled into one”. He highlights the uncomfortably intimate influence growing between reporters and management. “Technically there’s no problem with it [the hands-on involvement of the management], but in a media organisation, I believe it has to be run differently. It cannot be run in the way other organisations are run wherein there’s Reliance, where Mr Ambani feels that his children should take over. It cannot run like that.” Madhu adds, “Their culture is well-entrenched enough for journalists who work there to know that it will be market-driven and it's not going to be journalism.”The panel moves on to PM Narendra Modi's "interview spree". Will it impact Modi's image if he takes people into his confidence during interviews regarding his failings on issues such as unemployment? “I think we are talking of an ideal situation and politics is not an ideal place … this is how political discourse should happen but it doesn’t,” says Raman. He believes that the strategy of providing the people with a false consciousness of nationalism as a distraction plays in Modi’s favour. Sandeep says this strategy of willful ignorance is beneficial to him since it helps him steer clear of the vulnerabilities associated with providing explanations for failed policies.The discussion steers towards the various events surrounding the Supreme Court. Referring to the handling of the sexual harassment allegations against CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Manisha says, “How the Supreme Court has acted is really ridiculous. What is an in-house committee? You [are supposed to] set up a Visakha committee, it's sexual harassment at the workplace.” Discussing fake news tweeted by politicians' Twitter handles, Abhinandan points out that one “cannot tackle fake news … when the political establishment’s main tool for information is fake news because they will not make laws to take that on”.The panel also discusses the nurturing of "stars" as brand-building exercises in journalism, survival tactics employed by anti-Modi supporters in the face of a hostile fan base, and much more.Tune in! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of Reporters without Orders, host Cherry Agarwal sits down with Newslaundry Correspondent Ayush Tiwari and Desk Writer Gaurav Sarkar to talk about the protests against clean chit to Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, courtroom drama during the deposition of former Union Minister MJ Akbar, Rahul Gandhi’s public meeting in Delhi, Election Commission's social media team in Bhopal and more.Gaurav was covering the protest against the clean chit to Gogoi, while Ayush attended Congress president Rahul Gandhi's public meeting in New Delhi.Gaurav talks about how courtroom proceedings (in the MJ Akbar defamation case against journalist Priya Ramani) turned into a boxing ring. He also talks about enthusiastic support from the audience in the gallery for Ramani.Ayush speaks of his experience of attending a Rahul Gandhi election meeting. Cherry and Ayush talk about the atmosphere of the meeting, the loyalty of supporters and how ideology plays a driving force for the supporters of both parties. Ayush talks about his report from Bhopal on how the election commission's social media cell in Bhopal is keeping an eye on online campaigning of political parties in the state.For all this and more, listen in. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this week’s episode, Abhinandan Sekhri is joined by Manisha Pande, Raman Kirpal, Anand Vardhan, and author Chetan Bhagat.The podcast kicks off with a deep dive into Bhagat’s book, India Positive: New Essays and Selected Column. The author explains that the title of his book is inspired by the idea of positivity. He believes that although there are several issues affecting the country, sitting for hours on Twitter and complaining about them will not make them go away. He says, “At the end of the day there are certain structural problems with India which are not necessarily Congress- or BJP-driven and we need to fix them and that’s positive to me.”When Abinandan questions Bhagat about putting a disproportionate amount of onus on the ordinary Indian to be self-employed in his book, he responds by saying, “I am not shifting the onus away from policymakers…[I’m] trying to protect the guy [ordinary Indian] …because you can’t keep fighting. Activism isn’t a very profitable trade for an individual.” He continues to say that the world is changing fast and the skill sets required are also going to change dramatically, merely defending a leader of a particular party on Twitter won’t conjure up an offer letter. The panel also talks about the dangers of the ‘messiah complex’.The panel also discusses the BJP's rise to power. Abhinandan says, “Bigotry was an acceptable price to pay for economic prosperity. For me, it's not but for a lot of people, it was.” Anand says, “When India became independent there was a subterranean domain of communalism which was not getting a politically-organised outlet. The historical processes are such that…any identity kind of politics finds an outlet…there is a kind of inevitability and it’s a kind of political catharsis for a lot of suppressed religious problems in the country.”The panel also talks about the Indian media's role in South Asia. Manisha talks about it in terms of the content produced and observes that the fundamental issues that plague journalism in India are “mediocrity of thought and group think”. She adds that there is a “complete disregard for readers and news consumers”. Raman talks about the increased dependence of media on government advertisements and says, “When they [media] are heavily dependent on the government the news automatically gets softer on them and this has happened at a very rapid pace of late.”For this and more, tune in! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of Reporters Without Orders, host Cherry Agarwal sits down with Newslaundry correspondent Ayush Tiwari, Desk Writer Gaurav Sarkar and Quint's Senior Correspondent Aishwarya Iyer to talk about the #Yeti, the Utsav Bains hearing, Elections 2019 and more.Aishwarya and Ayush were covering elections in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh respectively. They were gauging support for parties and how people in these places are forming their electoral opinions.Apart from elections, the panel also talks about the Yeti sighting and its news value. The Indian Army had tweeted out a photo of a trail of footprints in the Himalayan snow, claiming to have found footprints of the mythical creature. The panellists are clearly divided. While Ayush gushes about its history and Gaurav hopes that Yetis exist, Aishwarya and Cherry cannot help but stress on the point that it gained way more attention than it should have. In all the Yeti news, the duo felt a recently-released UN climate report got very little coverage.Utsav Bains had filed an affidavit claiming that he was approached with a “huge bribe” of ₹1.5 crore to frame the Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi in a false sexual harassment case. Gaurav shares the details of proceedings, the courtroom drama and more.Although there is too much news to discuss, Gaurav points out that Game of Thrones didn't get as much hype as it should have.For all this and more, listen in! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

ग़ालिब का एक शेर है- “हम वहां से हैं जहां से हमको भी/ कुछ हमारी ख़बर नहीं आती”. मौजूदा वक़्त में देश ऐसे ही दौर से गुज़र रहा है. पंजाबी के कवि ‘पाश’ के शब्दों में कहें तो एक हद तक यह वह दौर भी है, जब बिना ज़मीर होना ज़िंदगी की शर्त बन गयी है. ठीक उसी वक़्त यह बात जोर-शोर से कही जा रही है कि सारे सवालों में सबसे ऊपर है देश और देश की सुरक्षा का सवाल तो इसके ठीक समानांतर एक विडंबना भी है कि हमें देश की इस तथाकथित सुरक्षा से खतरा है.इस हफ़्ते की चर्चा ऐसे वक़्त में आयोजित हुई जब इस तरह की तमाम चर्चाओं के बीच देश के प्रधानमंत्री ‘पूर्णतः अराजनैतिक साक्षात्कार’ देने के बाद लोकसभा चुनावों में ‘पूर्ण बहुमत’ हासिल करने के अभियान में लगे हुये थे. इसी कड़ी में बनारस की सड़कों पर जनता ने ख़ुद को फ़कीर कहने वाले प्रधानमंत्री का शक्ति-प्रदर्शन देखा. चुनावी सरगर्मियों के बीच नेताओं के बयान पूरे परिदृश्य को सनसनीख़ेज बना रहे थे. यह वह समय भी था, जब देश-विदेश से कुछ दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण ख़बरें आयीं तो कुछ ख़बरें ऐसी भी रहीं जिनसे डगमगाते भरोसे को तनिक बल मिला.इस हफ़्ते की चर्चा में भारत के मुख्य न्यायाधीश रंजन गोगोई पर उनकी एक महिला कर्मचारी द्वारा लगाया गया यौन-उत्पीड़न का आरोप और न्यायपालिका के दायरे में इस संबंध में हुई उठा-पटक, 2002 के गुजरात दंगे की पीड़िता बिलकीस बानो के बलात्कार मामले में सुप्रीम कोर्ट का मुआवजे का निर्णय व उसके निहितार्थ, देश का चुनावी परिदृश्य और श्रीलंका में हुई आतंकवादी घटना को चर्चा के विषय के तौर पर लिया गया.चर्चा में इस बार न्यूज़लॉन्ड्री के स्तंभकार आनंद वर्द्धन ने शिरकत की. साथ ही चर्चा में लेखक-पत्रकार अनिल यादव भी शामिल हुये. चर्चा का संचालन न्यूज़लॉन्ड्री के कार्यकारी संपादक अतुल चौरसिया ने किया.इस तरह मामले की संक्षिप्त रूपरेखा प्रस्तुत करते हुए अतुल ने सवाल किया कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा ख़ुद सवालों के घेरे में आने के बाद अपनायी गयी प्रक्रिया व जस्टिस रंजन गोगोई द्वारा उठाये गये क़दम को आप कैसे देखते हैं?जवाब देते हुए अनिल कहते हैं- “यह मामला सामने आया तो लोगों ने पहला सवाल यह करना शुरू किया कि ऐसे मामलों में कानूनी स्थिति क्या है क्योंकि आरोप चीफ़ जस्टिस ऑफ़ इंडिया पर लगे थे. किसी का स्कॉलर होना, कानून का जानकार होना एक अलग बात है लेकिन इस वजह से यह नहीं मान लेना चाहिए कि जो बहुत बड़ा स्कॉलर है या जानकार है, वह अपनी यौन विकृतियों व यौन इच्छाओं से भी विवेकपूर्ण ढंग से निपट पायेगा. आनन-फानन में जस्टिस रंजन गोगोई ने एक समिति बनायी और समिति की कार्यवाही से बहुत ख़राब संदेश गया. जस्टिस गोगोई के इस कहने को देखें- ‘यह सुप्रीम कोर्ट को और मुझे निशाने पर लेने की कोशिश है, मुझे ख़रीद पाने में नाकाम रहे तो यह रास्ता अपनाया गया’- तो हमारे यहां यही होता रहा है. आरोपी यह कहता रहा है कि आप मुझसे कैसे यह उम्मीद कर रहे हैं कि मैं इस तरह का काम करूंगा, मुझे विरोधियों द्वारा साजिश के तहत फंसाया जा रहा है. तो यह जो तर्क रंजन गोगोई दे रहे हैं यह कोई नया तर्क नहीं है.”अतुल आगे कहते हैं कि हमारे समाज का यह सामूहिक चरित्र रहा है कि वह इस तरह के किसी मामले में फ़ौरी तौर पर पीड़िता के आरोपों को खारिज़ कर देता है. मामले को संजीदगी से देखने-सुनने का कोई ख़ास चलन हमारे यहां नहीं है. जस्टिस रंजन गोगोई द्वारा अपने पक्ष में बयान दिये जाने व पीड़िता को ही कटघरे में खड़ा कर देने से भी इस बात की तरफ़ ही संकेत मिलता है कि सबसे पहले चरित्र हनन उसी का होता है जो पीड़िता है. तयशुदा नियम-प्रक्रिया की तरफ़ ध्यान दिये बिना जस्टिस गोगोई द्वारा भी ऐसा ही किये जाने को आप कैसे देखते हैं?जवाब देते हुये आनंद कहते हैं- “इसमें एक पुनर्विचार उच्चतम न्यायालय के ढांचे के संबंध में होना चाहिए. जो मुख्य न्यायाधीश होता है वह न केवल न्यायिक मामलों का प्रमुख होता है बल्कि न्यायालय के साथ-साथ वह इसकी प्रशासनिक इकाई का भी मुखिया होता है. गोगोई उस प्रशासनिक इकाई की भी अध्यक्षता कर रहे हैं. यह जो फ़ौरी तौर पर तीन जजों की बेंच बनाकर मामला खारिज़ कर दिया गया यह जस्टिस गोगोई ने प्रशासनिक अध्यक्ष के तौर पर किया. शायद इसमें ‘सेपरेशन ऑफ़ पॉवर’ की सख्त जरूरत है. और इस पर विचार होना चाहिए कि क्या जुडीशियल पॉवर के साथ-साथ एडमिनिस्ट्रेटिव पॉवर भी मुख्य न्यायाधीश को दिया जाय?”इसके साथ-साथ बाक़ी विषयों पर भी चर्चा के दौरान विस्तार से बातचीत हुई. बाकी विषयों पर पैनल की राय जानने-सुनने के लिए पूरी चर्चा सुनें. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this week’s episode, host Abhinandan Sekhri is joined by Madhu Trehan, Raman Kirpal, Anand Vardhan, and journalist and author Puja Mehra.The podcast kicks off with a deconstruction of Mehra’s book, The Lost Decade (2008-18): How India's Growth Story Devolved into Growth Without a Story. Abhinandan asks Puja why she believed that the decade was indeed lost. In response, she says both Prime Ministers (Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi) were equally responsible for ineffectively dealing with the crisis. She also states that temporary emergency measures were relied upon to compensate for a mammoth crisis that demanded a permanent solution.She adds, “When an economy grows at that rate [8.8 per cent GDP growth] and is hit by a crisis, a shock, to bring it back to that level you need to take some steps. That follow-through was not undertaken.” When Abhinandan asks her if she believed that the Modi government’s economic agenda was cemented in a cultural singularity, she says that the government’s attitude is more symptomatic of a policy inattention than anything else.She describes her book as a documentation of governance in the last ten years that analyses the policies adopted while also discussing the policies that should have been. Talking about its essence, she says, “The whole argument of my book is that our politicians just don’t listen to expert advice and they assume that an economy as large as India, as complex as India, can be driven by policies that are crafted keeping political objectives in mind with complete disregard for underlying economics.” The discussion then moves to sexual harassment allegations levied against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. Madhu makes a compelling case of the escalating hubris of the Supreme Court. She says, “The Indian judiciary, for decades, has avoided any accountability. Every time they are asked for accountability, they behave like [they] are above the law. Well [they’re] not. It’s a democracy.” Puja says she prefers a system governed by rules rather her perception of the credibility of individuals in it so that one’s faith in the system remains uninfluenced by fallible individuals.Sadhvi Pragya’s media portrayal was next on the panel's list. Anand says, “In this age when you have preconceived ideas about political inclinations of a journalist, it becomes very easy to pigeonhole them and say that this will be this kind of interview…in that case it is important that [the journalist] asks controversial questions…but it is not a debate to be settled in an interview.”The panel also discusses the granularity of demonetisation, the significance of Priyanka Gandhi Vadra not contesting from Varanasi and a lot more. Tune in! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this edition of NL Interviews, Cherry Agarwal speaks to Govindraj Ethiraj about the importance of data-led stories, the credibility of data and the role of data and evidence in the public discourse. Ethiraj is a television and print journalist, who founded IndiaSpend, a data-driven journalistic platform, as well as a fact-checking website, BOOM.The discussion kicks off with the 2019 General Elections. Ethiraj says, "We've seen a steady increase in the amount of misinformation and fake news being generated. It is only getting sharper, more intensive and more creative as we go along." This is adding to the overall election temperature, he adds.Ethiraj also speaks about how data can be used during the 2019 elections. "There are two kinds of data points, one is to do with elections, candidates, what they have done and what they didn't. While they are insightful, they (such data) are a little late in the day to make electoral decisions," he says. However, he adds, over time, data can be used to empower people and informing electoral decisions.Ethiraj also speaks about why there's a need to focus on data and evidence, how data can be used to tell stories in public interest and how it can improve the public discourse. Can data be used to counter divisive, political rhetoric? Can data be used to enforce better governance and accountability? What are the challenges of making data accessible and appealing to a larger audience? The interview addresses all these questions.Listen up! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

राज्यसभा सांसद और लालू प्रसाद यादव की बेटी मीसा भारती एक बार फिर से पाटलीपुत्र लोकसभा सीट से किस्मत आजमा रही हैं. पिछली बार उन्हें पाटलीपुत्र सीट से उनकी ही पार्टी छोड़ गये रामकृपाल यादव ने भाजपा का साथ पकड़ कर पटखनी दी थी. लालू यादव इस बार चुनावी परिदृश्य से ओझल हैं, पार्टी में उत्तराधिकार का मसला जब-तब सिर उठाता है, चुनाव के बाद की परिस्थितियों में क्या राजद राहुल गांधी को प्रधानमंत्री स्वीकार करेगा और क्या कन्हैया कुमार की पार्टी सीपीआई को गठबंधन से बाहर रखकर आरजेडी ने गलती की है? इन तमाम सवालों पर मीसा भारती के जवाब जानने के लिए सुनें यह पॉडकास्ट. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

बीते हफ़्ते राष्ट्रीय व अंतर्राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर घटित हुई घटनाओं ने कई मायनों में नयी बहस को जन्म दिया. चर्चा में इस हफ़्ते उन्हीं में से तीन बेहद ज़रूरी विषयों- जेट एयरवेज़ की उड़ानें बंद होने व हज़ारों की तादाद में लोगों के बेरोज़गार होने, विकीलीक्स के संस्थापक जूलियन असांज की इक्वाडोर के लंदन स्थित दूतावास से गिरफ़्तारी और भाजपा द्वारा तमाम आतंकवादी गतिविधियों में सह-अभियुक्त रही साध्वी प्रज्ञा सिंह ठाकुर को 2019 के लोकसभा चुनावों में भोपाल से टिकट दिये जाने पर विस्तार से बातचीत की गयी.चर्चा में इस बार ‘प्रभात ख़बर-दिल्ली’ के ब्यूरो चीफ़ प्रकाश के रे ने शिरकत की. साथ ही चर्चा में लेखक-पत्रकार अनिल यादव भी शामिल हुए. चर्चा का संचालन न्यूज़लॉन्ड्री के कार्यकारी संपादक अतुल चौरसिया ने किया.भारतीय जनता पार्टी द्वारा साध्वी प्रज्ञा सिंह ठाकुर को भोपाल से टिकट दिये जाने के बाद एक बार फिर देश में उग्र हिंदुत्व की राजनीति ने जोर पकड़ लिया है. साध्वी प्रज्ञा सिंह ने 2019 के लोकसभा चुनावों को धर्मयुद्ध करार दिया है. साध्वी प्रज्ञा सिंह ठाकुर के बयानों के बाद अब धार्मिक भावनाओं के आधार की जाने वाली राजनीति तेज़ हो गयी है, जिसमें देशभक्ति का भी फ़्लेवर पड़ गया है. इसी मुद्दे से चर्चा की शुरुआत करते हुए अतुल ने सवाल किया कि जिस तरह की उनकी छवि है व जिस तरह के उनपर आरोप हैं, उसके बाद उन्हें या उन जैसे किसी व्यक्ति के उम्मीदवार बनाये जाने के कुछ मक़सद होते हैं. ध्रुवीकरण होता है और जीत की संभावनाएं ऐसे में बढ़ जाती हैं. और जबकि भोपाल की सीट भाजपा के लिये सालों से सुरक्षित सीट रही है, तो पार्टी द्वारा ऐसे किसी उम्मीदवार के ऊपर दांव लगाने के पीछे क्या मक़सद हो सकता है?जवाब देते हुये प्रकाश कहते हैं- “उनको खड़ा करने के पीछे जो मक़सद है, उसपर बात करने के पहले हमें यह देखना चाहिए कि उनकी उम्मीदवारी के तकनीकी या कानूनी पहलू क्या हैं. एक समय स्वास्थ्य के आधार पर लालू प्रसाद यादव जमानत की अर्ज़ी दाख़िल करते हैं, तो उनकी अर्ज़ी खारिज़ कर दी जाती है और यहां स्वास्थ्य के नाम पर एक व्यक्ति जमानत पर बाहर है और वह जमानत भी अपने आप में सवालों के घेरे में है. एक और मामला हार्दिक पटेल का भी है, जिन्हें चुनाव लड़ने की अनुमति नहीं दी गयी. तो प्रज्ञा ठाकुर के मामले में यह एक बड़ा सवाल है और इसमें चुनाव आयोग के काम-काज पर भी सवालिया निशान है. मुझे लगता है कि आने वाले वक़्त में जब इन सब के कानूनी पहलुओं पर बहस होगी, उनका विश्लेषण किया जायेगा तब अदालतों को भी इसमें क्लीनचिट नहीं दी जा सकती है.”प्रकाश ने आगे कहा- “मुझे लगता है कि इस कैंडिडेचर के माध्यम से भारतीय जनता पार्टी व राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ की साफ़-साफ़ घोषणा है कि अब हम उस मुक़ाम पर खड़े हैं, जहां हमें पर्दादारी की बहुत ज़रूरत नहीं है.”इसके साथ-साथ बाक़ी विषयों पर भी चर्चा के दौरान विस्तार से बातचीत हुई. बाकी विषयों पर पैनल की राय जानने-सुनने के लिए पूरी चर्चा सुनें. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this week’s episode, host Abhinandan Sekhri is joined by Madhu Trehan, Anand Vardhan, Manisha Pande, and author Kishwar Desai. The podcast starts off with a discussion on Desai’s latest book, Jallianwala Bagh, 1919: The Real Story, and why she believed that this was a book that needed to be written. She says that writing the book became “a journey of discovery” for her as she uncovered unknown facts of the incident like the “sadistic tortures that were inflicted on the people of Amritsar”, especially in its build-up and aftermath. The panel also discusses the importance of an apology, as opposed to regret, from Britain now. Anand observes that although “national psyches have this need for reconciliation with historical memory”, after the decades that have passed, “even if it [an apology] comes, it would not serve that instrumental purpose.”Abhinandan shifts the conversation towards the arrest of Julian Assange and the panel debates if his work qualifies as ethical journalistic enterprise or if it is an instance of the phenomenon of ‘information banditry’, as Anand puts it. Madhu says, “What they did was they just hacked everything and dumped it all…the way it was done was not journalism.” The panel agrees that editorial discretion is crucial when dealing with data as raw as this and that it should have been processed in a more refined manner to serve public interest.The panel picked up the recent appointment of Sadhvi Pragya by the BJP to contest the seat in Bhopal. While the panel was initially unsurprised by this decision, given the Hindutva roots of the party, Abinandan points out how indefensible this decision was. He says, “He [Kamal Nath] was in politics, he’s accused of that [1984 anti-Sikh riots] and in continuation, he got a ticket again. Sadhvi Pragya has got a ticket because of her accusation…there’s a big difference.” Anand says that Pragya embodies the victimhood narrative that is “deeply entrenched in the psyche [of the voters] that they [the BJP] want to appeal to”.The discussion steers towards: what makes a great leader and why. The panel also talks about Mukesh Ambani’s endorsement of Milind Deora, a Congress candidate. For this and more, listen up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.