TELEVISION NEWS IN INDIA - 31 DEC 2020 RATE THE DEBATE - Institute of perception studies

TELEVISION
 NEWS IN INDIA

31 DEC 2020

RATE THE DEBATE

                  1

Contents

Introduction ...............................................................................................................3
Today’s Context ..........................................................................................................3
The Distorted Media Lens ...........................................................................................4
Rate the Debate..........................................................................................................6
Methodology ..............................................................................................................6
Appendix A –Anchor Analysis .....................................................................................9
Appendix B – Media Trial Analysis ............................................................................16
Appendix C – Rate the Debate Team .........................................................................24

                                                            2

Introduction

In a rare conversation in 2012, BCCL Managing Director Vineet Jain told The New
Yorker the philosophy underpinning the transformation of the newspaper The Times of
India – “We are not in the newspaper business, we are in the advertising business.”

There-casting means that readership became the product: deliver a newspaper that
attracts subscriptions, and you can sell the readership to advertisers in a variety of ways.
It cemented what The New Yorker described as changes in the newspaper initiated by
then Vice Chairman Samir Jain – less politics, more sports, more Bollywood, more
colour, lower necklines, and few book reviews.

This inversion of relationships, in which the product is the readership, not journalism or
news, might also explain the transformation of Television News Channels this decade.
Viewership is a product, used to drive advertising revenue up. The means, again in
Vineet Jain’s words when he described Times Now, of attracting the TRPs that get
advertising attention was to make “talking heads argue, not discuss.”

Today’s Context

This strategy might have paid hand some dividends to the owners of newspapers and
news television channels. Over the decades however, it eroded the principles and ethics
that one normally associated with journalism. Simultaneously, news channels in India
are increasingly owned by organizations and individuals with conflicts of interest – it is
now evident that the presentation of news is tainted by the business and political
interests of the owners.

News Television has always been the medium through which most Indian voters and
citizens hear a set of panelists interactively convey their points of view on the issues of
the day. This has been undercut in two ways.

The issues discussed are no longer the administrative, political, economic, social and
cultural developments crucial to the well-being of Indians. One news anchor recently
underscored this troubling malaise. A panellist prefaced his comments in the debate –
                                            3

which happened to be on the tragic demise of an actor – by calling attention to the most
pressing news that day: the cataclysmic GDP contraction and further Chinese aggression
on the LAC. The anchor responded and we quote: “Go read tomorrow's paper... Don't
waste your time, the nation's time or my time.”

Some news channels also skate on the thin ice of sociallydivisive issues, spanning
hyper- nationalism, religion and communities. The facile labelling of individuals and
groups as enemies of the state or society has worrying parallels in the actions of media
that supported Fascist and Nazi regimes.

The second concern is of the anchors taking overt positions on debates and suppressing
views that counter theirs. They dominate the speaking time themselves, pack panels
with vocal supporters, and constantly interrupt or counter the minority of the panellists
who oppose the anchor’s stances.

It is not surprising either that most anchors find their views magically mirroring those of
the political party in power. Central government spending on advertisements and
publicity (Rs 5909 crore over 2014-19) constitutes a significant percentage of news
television revenues, not to mention that the owners of several channels also own
businesses that can be impacted by government spending and policy decisions. In 2019,
the Modi government was accused of using its ad spend as reward and punishment.

The Distorted Media Lens
Issues of ownership, conflicts of vested interest and the unquenchable thirst for
advertising income aside, there are two grave developments that need highlighting.

One is some media houses being accused of manipulating the only viewership rating
system in the country. Allegations about interference and underhanded techniques to
game the measurement framework are not new – competitors had detailed several unfair
means by which an English news channel (again in the dock in recent revelations) had
gained advantage back in 2017. The gravity of potential malfeasance is enormous – the
periodic impressions data provided by BARC are the basis on which news (and other
genre) channels decide what to charge advertisers. For instance, during the period
currently under investigation, Republic Bharat overtook a rival to take pole position in

                                            4

the Hindi news genre and three weeks later raised its ad rates by as much as 50%. With
regulatory oversight on the sector being sub-optimal, it is tragic but inevitable that the
judiciary becomes involved.

The second development is one that has already reached the courts –the blurring line
between “investigative” journalism in the “public interest” and media trials. Civilization
has always struggled with mobs and individuals assuming extra-judicial roles of
investigators, prosecutors, judges and executioners. The media transgresses too, and the
problem is exacerbated by the “24x7” nature of news media which constantly demands
new content, the fierce competition to break a story first and the relatively new pressure
introduced by the media’s desire to attract attention on social platforms.

Events following Sushant Singh Rajput’s tragic demise will still be fresh in the minds of
those who read this. The media inexplicably seized upon the death to weave a narrative
that had constantly shifting villains involved in the death – mental health, financial
difficulties, nepotistic film industry, friends, the underworld, politicians, drugs… but
many of them reserved the most vitriol for Rajput’s girlfriend, Rhea Chakraborty.

The frenzy had begun as soon as the news became public. A month and a half later,
when Rajput’s father filed an FIR in Bihar, some media decided – without any evidence
- that Chakraborty had committed a crime of some sort. The result was one of the most
sordid episodes of some “news” channels abandoning all pretence at upholding the
ethics of journalism.

One cannot ignore the larger sociopolitical landscape in which this narrative emerged as
the saviour of a beleaguered administration – Indians were asking hard questions about
the Chinese aggression, the surging COVID19 case and fatality counts, collapse in
economic activity, the migrant workers walking thousands of kilo metres, the floods…
The BJP, in power at the centre, had assumed explicit ownership of the political
pressure to arrest someone for what authorities consistently called a suicide–using it to
attack the government of Maharashtra (a state in which the BJP is the opposition) and to
campaign for the elections in Bihar, Rajput’s home-state.

This is the broader context in which a small group of people decided that a concerted
effort was needed to hold the television news media accountable to generally accepted
ethics and principles of journalism.
                                          5

Rate the Debate

The systematic subversion of various administrative, autonomous and other institutions
in India is compounded by this tacit collusion between the purvey or sofnews &
opinions and the political party in government. Most Media, and several television news
channels in particular, have combined their profit motive and political leanings to create
a servile publicity platform for the people in power. This must change.

Rate the Debate is a campaign to hold television news debates accountable to a set of
                                      th
journalistic standards. Begun on 16 August 2020, primarily through the Twitter
platform, the campaign evolved three distinct objectives:

The first was to provide a focal point to what we believe is a widely held opinion–many
news debate anchors are biased, pursue topics not of pressing concern to Indians as a
whole and serve as a distracting foil to the central government that is mired in its
incompetence. Rate the Debate’s social media presence can harness this opinion into a
potentially powerful demand from audiences for news debate formats and themes to
change.

The second was to present evidence, through qualitative and quantitative analyses, that
is irrefutable by the anchor or the news channel. Rate the Debate’s research team has
over a brief period of under two months developed a methodology to illustrate debate
focus areas and anchor conduct.

The third was to make a scientific attempt to define a Media Trial Index – one that could
irrefutably conclude whether coverage of a specific event or individual remained within
the boundaries of principled and investigative journalism or violated them, becoming a
witch-hunt or trial instead.

Methodology

To achieve the first two objectives, Rate the Debate picked an anchor to evaluate every
week. The first part of the analysis concentrated on what subjects the anchor chose to
debate over the previous month or so.
                                           6

As already noted, the last few months have thrown up severe challenges to the country –
the pandemic has raged almost unchecked, the economy is in a tailspin thanks to several
missteps by the central government over the last 4 years, and China has usurped Indian
territory at the Line of Actual Control. Besides, floods have ravaged several regions of
the country, unemployment is rife, students have been forced to write exams, Jammu &
Kashmir continues to exist in a bizarre limbo, scores of people are in prison charged
with unsubstantiated crimes under draconian laws, and crores of workers have travelled
across the country from workplaces to homes, many walking the entire distance.

Virtually every anchor we analysed chose to ignore almost all of these crises and
conducted media trials on Bollywood or fomented religious/communal hate.

Rate the Debate’s research team watched several of the debates held in the period from
beginning to end, and recorded various aspects of the debate–how much time the
anchors themselves spoke, what they spoke about, what points of view the panellists
presented, how anchors allocated time to panellists, who the anchors interrupted and
argued with, and how much time was wasted in cross-talk. There search team also noted
any comments by the anchor that seemed especially egregious.

Rate the Debate puts the material together into a video that we release on Twitter every
week. The response in this short period has been overwhelming. The general reaction
has been that it was about time for such analysis to be conducted, and endorsing the
methodology we have adopted.

Appendix A contains examples of the data we have collected and visualized through
various charts.

Rate the Debate will continue to pursue the objective of bringing sanity to news debates,
restoring a sense of purpose nobler than the sale of more advertising time on the news
channels and ensuring that Indian audiences receive a balanced perspective on the issues
that make the most impact on lives and society.

Rate the Debate also worked hard to outlining a Media Trial Index. Based on our own
prior academic and journalistic experience, and perusing extant literature
comprehensively, Rate the Debate crafted an Index by which news coverage could be
judged.
                                         7

The Media Trial Index we developed defined 4 Primary Indicators. Even before we got
to them, we concluded that a trial can never actually take place outside a courtroom. At
best, the media might uncover facts that investigating agencies might find relevant and
provide a platform for responsible, fair-minded opinions to be aired.

Our primary indicators rely on how the judiciary conducts a trial, assuming that a
criminal case has been registered against specific defendants and is being prosecuted.
We judge whether those indicators are triggered by a debate or a series of debates that
we record and measure exhaustively.

Rate the Debate’s Primary Media Trial Indicators are – Shaping Public Opinion, the
Presumption of Guilt, Lack of a Fair Hearing, and the Anchor Sitting as Prosecution,
Judge and Executioner over a target or group of targets. The conclusions on whether any
or all these indicators of a Media Trial are triggered will be based on a series of mainly
quantitative measurements, called Secondary Indicators -

Appendix B contains analysis we conducted of the debates of anchors against these
metrics.

                                           8

Appendix A – Anchor Analysis

A few extracts from the analysis Rate the Debate conducted of 11 anchors.

                                   9

AMISH DEVGAN, ANCHOR – NEWS18 INDIA

ANJANA OM KASHYAP (PART 1), ANCHOR – AAJ TAK

                              10

ANAND NARASIMHAN, ANCHOR – CNN NEWS18

ARNAB GOSWAMI, ANCHOR – REPUBLIC TV

                             11

RUBIKA LIYAQUAT – ANCHOR, ABP NEWS

RUBIKA LIYAQUAT (PART 2) – ANCHOR, ABP NEWS

                                       12

RAHUL KANWAL– ANCHOR, INDIA TODAY

ROHIT SARDANA– ANCHOR, AAJ TAK

                                    13

RAJDEEP SIRDESAI– ANCHOR, INDIA TODAY

ZAKKA JACOB– ANCHOR, CNN NEWS 18

                                        14

ANJANA OM KASHYAP– ANCHOR, AAJ TAK

DEEPAK CHAURASIA, ANCHOR, NEWS NATION

                                        15

Appendix B – Media Trial Analysis
DEFINITION OF A MEDIA TRIAL

                              16

SHAPING PUBLIC OPINION

RUBIKA LIYAQUAT – ANCHOR, ABP NEWS

                                     17

RAHUL KANWAL – ANCHOR, INDIA TODAY

                                     18

19

20

21

22

CONCLUSION:

              23

Appendix C – Rate the Debate Team
Dr. Kota Neelima, author, researcher and founder of Institute of Perception Studies, conceptualized
Rate the Debate. A Delhi University & JNU alumnus, she was Senior Research Fellow at The
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), Johns Hopkins University. Her
research has focused in the past 15 years on distress in rural and urban areas, and an assessment of
the role that state and non- state initiatives play in identification and alleviation

Kushagra Saxena co-ordinates the activities of Rate the Debate’s team, ensuring the seamless
production and dissemination of our reports. A passionate data scientist skilled in market research,
NLP and Neural Networks, he obtained his post-graduation in Big Data Analytics and Data
Science from the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing, and is a strong engineering
professional working in the information technology and services industry.

Ashish Srivastava advises enterprises on business and financial strategies, particularly in
establishing and scaling their presence overseas. His extensive experience across banking and
financial services enables his unique insights into economic and fiscal policy and operations. A
graduate in Computer Science, he obtained his MBA in Finance from IMM, Delhi. A keen
follower of political strategy, he loves participating in Election Campaign Management, and
watches a variety of sport in his spare time.

Santhosh D’Souza undertakes quantitative analysis and visualization of debate data. His 23 year
career in enterprise technology culminated in leadership positions at three product companies. He
now consults on technology, while pursuing his passion for current affairs, science and history. He
graduated in Electronics & Communication from Sri Jayachamarajendra College of Engineering,
Mysore University.

Saptasindhu Basu studies the debates, records the statistics and provides the voice-over for Rate
the Debate’s videos. A politically opinionated and passionate citizen, he is studying for his MBA
in Marketing at Christ University, Bengaluru and aspires to be a social entrepreneur. He earned his
Bachelor’s Degree in Commerce from St Xavier’s College, Kolkata and his interests include
Public Speaking, Writing and Social Media Marketing.

Aditya Garg creates Rate the Debate videos that encapsulate the research. While he is
professionally associated with the mining and manufacturing industry, his interests span travel
consulting, graphics design, photography and blogging. Graduating from HR College, Mumbai, he
earned his Master’s in International Business from Aston University, Birmingham, UK.

                                                24

Stay Tuned To

https://twitter.com/RateTVDebate

https://twitter.com/KotaNeelima

                 25