Now, this is my third and hopefully last post in the ‘honor’ of Padamshri Rajdeep Sardesai and his Congress News Network, called so euphemistically CNN IBN. A couple of days back Padamshri’s beautiful wife and senior editor of Congress News Network (CNN IBN); Sagarike Ghose wrote an ‘angry piece’ in another Congress rag called ‘The Hindustan Congress Times’. Sandeep my friend noticed that as ‘Revenge of the Turd’ , as Sandeep said…

How dare the BJP, till now the favorite whipping boy of the secular media, call his (Rajdeep’s) bluff by demanding accountability? That is the source of Turdesai’s impotent anger.

So far, Media has been a holy cow and Media – especially the ‘Secularist English Media’ had reserved all the ‘probity’ and right to question only to themselves. In their infinite and extremely elastic ‘ethics’ they arrogated selves with the power to slander others (like they did in Aarushi murder case), to cast apprehensions on others, to ‘Brand Individuals and Political parties’ with tags like communal etc. Freedom of speech degenerated to ‘Freedom to Abuse’. Their Channels and Papers became useful ‘extended organs’ of one or another Political Outfit. For long, this MSM high jacked the ‘Public Discourse’ and set the tone and tenor of the debate.

These worthies decided that ‘Hindus’ were communal and any body with even a sympathetic look in their eyes for Hindus and/ or a voice for them, should be branded as ‘Communal’, thus must be ridiculed, abused, sneered at and must be ‘hauled up over coals’. They perfected the art of ’secularizing’ every thing and anything and any and every body who could abuse Hindus in more and more ‘innovative’ abuses and ‘innuendos’ were invited to studios and encouraged to spew venom against Hindus in general and BJP, RSS in particular. If a riot broke out, they smelt an opportunity to increase their TRPs simultaneously, ensuring a PADAMSHRI for some ‘Teastas’ and self.

I dare both Padamshri Rajdeep 'Bhai' and Padamshiri Barkha ' Bhen' to release the tapes of their reporting from Gujarat post Godhara. DOES RIGHT TO INFORMATION APPLY TO YOU? But then Bhai Rajdeep, who otherwise would spend millions to get a ‘Tehelaka’ or ‘Cobra’ do stings and air those, conveniently when election were on, sat on tapes he him self (his channel) recorded ! “The Journalist” in quest of some ’secularism more’ or something else Rajdeep? Khushwant Singh, know how awards are won and he did tell us.

Objectivity, fairness, Pursuance of truth all fell by the way sides and got replaced with lure of titles and lucre. Rajdeep himself has admitted ‘The Journalist started demanding more’. From here on, the fall of MSM was inevitable. Cash-For-Votes-Hide-The-Tape proved ‘Rajdeep Correct’: Hamam Mein Sab Nange Hain. (OR BILKUL NANGE: My Emphasis)

Let me make it clear. I have nothing personal against Rajdeep or Barkha (both Padamshris :) awarded by 'Your President' ), neither have any personal axe to grind. Since these two ‘eminent journalists’ heads the two big News Networks and hogs the maximum spotlight, they are equally responsible – in equal proportion if not more – for all the ‘omission and commissions’ too.

Matters get worst when one such ‘Padamshri’ transparently colludes with the ‘molesters of democracy’ in disrobing the democratic spirit of the Mother India. Moreover, the other Padamshri arrogates to her the role of ‘Peace Broker’ and ‘wittingly or unwittingly’ provides the services/forum to the ‘venom spewing anti national Hurryiats and their ilk’ on prime time!

This is what I object to. Media prides self as the ‘vanguard’ of people’s interest! They demand and get ‘privileges’ and most of times, claim immunity too for the noble cause of ‘finding facts’ and telling the ‘truth’. Ah! Of late, Media has ‘successfully’ managed to get caught cheating and obfuscating the facts… First Rajdeep with his active role in Cash-For-votes-Hide-The-tape-Scandal and then other’s blatant one sided (clearly ‘pandering to Anti Nationals’) Kashmir reportage to contrasting reportage on Jammu blaming RSS, BJP and others for what clear to every one is:The popular and Spontaneous outrage of Hindus against the ‘ever increasing’ Muslim appeasement in the name of
‘Secularism’ and denial of rights to Jammuiets in the name of ’spurious’ Kashmiriat. Any one with an iota of common sense can see the difference.

As I said earlier, arrogant and power drunk MEDIA believes they are above scrutiny, if asked to account for their acts, they get mighty offended. Angry write ups follows and they seek to discipline the ‘errant bloggers’ like your truly, for their persistent questioning them. :)

BUT then, yes we will keep an eye on you as well, that is watching the watch dogs. You like it or not, damn I care. Huh!

Mr. Arun Jaitley has thrown some more light on the ‘Molestation of Democracy’ scandal. In a  trongly worded ‘rejoinder ’ he has put both ‘Husband – Wife team in the place, they rightfully belong to, i.e in the dock. :)

I have merely highlighted some more facts as emerge out from this ‘rejoinder’.

Prudent Indian.

Channel Tunnel Vision

The political class is subject to permanent critical scrutiny. We are accountable to the electorate. So we must be constantly under the spotlight. As another pillar of democracy, the media, however, are accountable to no one. Sagarika Ghose’s assertion that the BJP’s urban space “will melt faster than the holy lingam at Amarnath” (Psst… We’ve finally lost it, Aug. 13) is a case of reckless assertion of hope over reality. As Senior Editor of CNN-IBN, Ghose is understandably angry with the BJP.
Her channel has recently suffered a self-inflicted loss of credibility. If, like political parties, the media were exposed to the same level of scrutiny, how would CNN-IBN’s role in the ‘Cash for Votes’ issue be judged?

The channel’s participation in the ‘sting’ was entirely voluntary. Its editor has publicly asserted that its interest in a sting was prompted by AB Bardhan’s claim that MPs were being lured with Rs 20 crore to side with the UPA in the June 22 trust vote. The three BJP MPs were merely whistle-blowers. The channel was told that the MPs had been approached by those managing the UPA’s survival strategy and if it wished to expose corruption, it could undertake a sting. CNN-IBN chose its own team and used its own equipment. It recorded the three sequences: the interaction with Samajwadi Party MP Revati Raman Singh; the arrival and departure of the MPs to Amar Singh’s residence; and Amar Singh’s associate Sanjeev Saxena’s visit to Ashok Argal’s house to deliver the money.

After the sting was completed, strange things began happening. First, CNN-IBN claimed that the tapes were not of ‘telecastable’ quality — a spurious claim in the light of their subsequent showing. Then the channel claimed it didn’t have enough time to complete the investigation. The reality was far grimmer. The channel abandoned all
pretence of any investigation and focused on finding fault with the existing evidence. Pious assertions couldn’t conceal the fact that the channel was embarrassed by its own story.

Yet, faced with immense public criticism and loss of credibility, the channel decided to telecast the tapes on July 26. I was approached the previous day and agreed to participate in a programme at 8pm. Shortly before the proposed telecast, CNN-IBN informed me that the ‘Speaker’s office’ had requested the channel not to telecast the tapes. The Speaker later asserted that it was for the channel to decide whether to
telecast or not.

The most pertinent question in the ‘Cash for Votes’ controversy was: on whose behalf did Sanjeev Saxena deliver the money to the MPs? It is an established fact that he did deliver cash. The channel was in possession of the sms that Saxena had sent to its own reporters on July 20 inviting them for Amar Singh’s press conference at 7 pm that day. It concealed this message.

The car in which Saxena travelled was registered in the name of a company controlled by Amar Singh’s family member. The number of the car was noted by the CNN-IBN team and given to me both by a member of the team and the MPs. Subsequently, the CNN-IBN reporter publicly denied knowledge of the car.

These two evidences in possession of CNN-IBN were further proof of Saxena having come on behalf of Amar Singh. In view of the CNN-IBN having abandoned the investigation, the BJP investigated the Saxena-Amar Singh link and produced it as corroborative evidence. More corroborations have followed.

Meanwhile, CNN-IBN sought to create a perceptible equality and moral equivalence between the bribe-giver and the whistle-blower. Was it interested putting the collusive sting on par with its own genuine recordings? Amar Singh’s utterances in the programme telecast by the channel gives me the uneasy feeling that the tapes which were withheld from the public were privately screened for him. Why else would he confidently reveal in a pre-recorded comment what is on the tapes and what is not?

I am clear that it is for CNN-IBN to decide its own programming. But there is a fundamental difference in the relationship of a whistle-blower and an investigator. When a whistle blower alerts an investigator, the investigated material is held in trust for public interest by the investigation. It does not become the private property of the investigator. This is the misconception the channel suffered from.

The channel’s freedom of ex-pression may include the right to conceal. It may include the right to abuse the BJP. Yet, it seems to end where Amar bSingh’s nose begins.

Arun Jaitley is Rajya Sabha MP and General Secretary, BJP