By Faraz Ahmad,
The media, mainly the TV channels, have reacted with such outrage over Arvind Kejriwal and his Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) colleagues asking media men if they had been bought over by Narendra Modi and the Sangh to be blowing Modi’s trumpet so loudly.
In an unusual haste India TV chief Rajat Sharma rushed to Delhi IIT to pour venom at Arvind Kejriwal, as if Kejriwal committed some sacrilege by questioning the antecedents of media men and their corporate proprieters. But really speaking did he?
The controversy started with media reporting how Kejriwal exposed his carefully hidden soft saffron corner for Narendra Modi during an interaction with the corporate world in Mumbai and in reply to a specific question from Anil Singhvi, the former MD of Ambuja Cement, he replied “If you put a gun to my head I would say Modi.” Actually nobody was putting any gun to anyone’s head, least of all Kejriwal’s who has been going around putting his gun to everyone’s head. The question was pretty simple and straight that if he were to make a choice between Mayawati and Modi, who would he choose for PM since he would anyway have to make a choice. After much humming and hawing he admitted it was Modi.
Anyone following Kejriwal could easily, guess it could not be Mayawati, for his entire campaign from Youth for Equality agitation to India Against Corruption has targeted OBC and Dalit leaders, and the main grievance of this lot against Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi was the strength the subaltern leaders like Lalu, Mulayam and Mayawati derive from supporting the UPA government. Insofar as that, how is Kejriwal or Anna Hazare any different from Narendra Modi and his Sanghi comrades? Aren’t they saying the same thing and isn’t the kept media also in agreement with this perception? Anna, at least is unpretensious and made no attempt to target Modi. But Kejriwal is looking at the Muslim vote bank and therefore has suddenly decided to make a big show of fighting Modi. This appears to be a fixed fight.
Modi is currently appearing invincible because all the forces opposed to Sanghi fascism from Congress to the Left to the secular regional parties once comprising the third front, have either crumbled or capitulated before the tide of the saffron brigade. The only visible obstacle is the Muslim voter, who despite Modi advocates like Shahid Siddiqui and of late Hasan Suroor, still appear focused on defeating Modi candidates, specially in UP and Bihar, notwithstanding all the fake and fraud paid surveys conducted every day on one TV channel or the other.
To ensure Modi’s victory, this vote needs to be split and divided. In Delhi Assembly polls of December, 2013 Kejriwal succeeded through his Jhadu symbol in convincing most non-BJP voters, particularly from the poorer underprivileged sections that he was their messiah. The only exception by and large was the Muslim voter who did get enticed by AAP campaign but was not fully convinced that Kejriwal was their man. It requires extra effort and demonstration of greater stridency on the part of Kejriwal to convince the Mussalman that he is seriously opposed to Modi. That’s where all this criticism of Modi comes in and to make it credible in the eyes of the discerning observer, like the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) matches, Kejriwal has to hit Modi under the belt.
But in these critical times, when the referee is also in the arena fighting alongside the bully, a kick in the groin may hit the referee harder than the bully. And that’s what happened this time. As long as Kejriwal and Anna stuck to the script and targeted Lalu, Mulayam, Mayawati, Sonia and Rahul, he was the darling of the media, the same TV channels, Times Now, India TV, Aaj Tak et al were running every word of Kejriwal with such relish. “The Nation” wanted to know every word that Kejriwal uttered caring too hoots about its authenticity or the motive behind Kejriwal’s utterances. But the moment Kejriwal asked who was paying for Modi’s chartered planes which by any modest estimate would run into lakhs or even crores, each day, the media turned around showing how Kejriwal arrived for India Today’s conclave in a private plane as well, never mind that the plane was dispatched for him by the India Today group.
The problem for Modi and Modi lovers, of whom we have a surfeit in the saffronised media, is that, while Kejriwal’s exercise may be aimed at gaining some credibility among Modi baiters, it could actually influence some borderline voters who get unduly influenced by media hypes and they start wondering if Kejriwal was right about the Congress and its UPA allies why not pay heed to him when he turns around and exposes Modi. Moreover, whatever Kejriwal has said about the false propaganda of Modi in relations to his tall claims of being a Vikas Purush, the Congress party has been saying all these years, but nobody believed the Congress. But Kejriwal has emerged vanquishing the Congress, so he surely must be telling the truth and even if a small percentage of fence sitters start believing what Kejriwal is saying, it is a big loss. After all in Delhi, while the AAP totally decimated the Congress party, but if it damaged Congress 70 per cent, it also spoilt BJP’s chances by 30 per cent, believes the BJP. This 30 per cent damage may mean BJP stuck under 200 and that needs countering Kejriwal on a war footing. Who better than the embedded Press?
Is it not a fact that Rajat Sharma is inclined towards the BJP right from the beginning thanks to Sanghi upbringing in the ABVP? Wasn’t Deepak Chaurasia rewarded by L K Advani with a plum job in Doordarshan? Did Arnab not secure the BJP ticket for his father in the 2009 general elections from Assam? I am not saying it. Ask Bijoya Chakraverty. Is she not BJP? Is she lying? How can Arnab or Rajat then be objective newsmen or political analysts? Kejriwal and his men are right in asking why cant “The Nation” grill Modi the same way it grilled Rahul Gandhi and harangued Lalu Yadav. We all look forward to Modi being confronted with all the facts and figures about Gujarat development against his tall claims by the likes of Arnab Goswami and Rajat Sharma and not a prepaid puff job done by Prashant Mishra in Dainik Jagran. Once Modi walked out of Karan Thapar’s interview, he refused to answer embarrassing questions only recently when Vijay Trivedi confronted him and all but abandoned him midway dropping him from his helicopter, he cut short Vivian Fernandes by asking if the channels (CNN-IBN) was not paid and he made Rajdeep Sardesai sit between his feet, for an interview. Why else would the media love such a megalomaniac monster if our worthy friends were themselves not interested parties? It is simple. It is either money or political affiliations. For all we know it could be both.