The Narendra Modi government is very good at separating the individual from the institution. It finds it easy to insist that any intolerant remarks are coming not from the Bharatiya Janata Party or the government but from fringe, individual elements. In the same vein, on Wednesday, the government sought to insist that a critical report from Moody's Analytics – an economic research and analysis firm – was not an institutional report, but simply the "personal opinion" of a Junior Associate Economist.

Five days after the report was issued, Arun Jaitley's Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, not an organisation given to subtlety, put out a press release featuring everything from regret to surprise to distress. Its problem? News reports suggesting that Moody's, a term that generally refers to the international credit ratings firm, was telling Prime Minister Narendra Modi to rein in members of his party or risk losing credibility. The articles all covered a forecast report from Moody's Analytics which acknowledged that Modi had distanced himself from nationalist gibes but still needed to keep his party's members in check to maintain credibility.

"It is with regret the Government of India notes the irresponsible and distorted reporting by certain sections of the Indian media on what was the personal opinion of a Junior Associate Economist employed with Moody’s Analytics," the government's press release said.

In statements to the press, Moody's Analytics has responded making it clear that the note was not a personal opinion. "The report was published by and is the view of Moody’s Analytics as part of its economic outlook series," a spokesperson told the Indian Express. "The report included a section observing political developments in the context of their potential economic impact, and did not advocate any political agenda or perspective. Moody’s Analytics provides economic research and analysis and is a separate company from Moody’s Investors Service, the ratings agency."

The government's release from earlier had laid out three problems with the coverage:

*That the media failed to make a distinction between Moody's Investor Services, the ratings agency, and Moody's Analytics, a separate research firm from the same corporation.
*That the "personal opinion" of a junior analyst was reported as being the opinion of Moody's Analytics, and
*That this personal opinion was then "passed off as a commentary by a Rating Agency to buttress the narrative it wants to portray".

Unfortunately (and surprisingly) the Indian print media – not always the most diligent group of institutions – isn't guilty of all of these claims. Take the first, that the media didn't point out that the report had come from Moody's Analytics.

Four of the country's biggest newspapers covered the story: The Times of India, the Indian Express, the Hindu and the Hindustan TimesAll four mentioned, within the first few paragraphs, that the report had come from Moody's Analytics. Their headlines, for brevity (or nefariously) might have only said Moody's, but the stories themselves did not further any suggestion that the report had come from Moody's Investor Services, which is the credit ratings arm.

Next, there's the question of the report being the "personal opinion" and not that of Moody's Analytics. Here's how the firm's website describes the commentary that shows up in its commentary section:
"Dismal Scientist® provides real-time coverage of the global economy, including in-depth analysis of more than 300 economic indicators events, topics and long term trends, plus forecasts by Mark Zandi and the Moody's Analytics team... Our economists provide objective, stimulating, jargon-free analysis of current economic and financial events worldwide. They are especially adept at explaining economic concepts to nontraditional or occasional users of economic information."

This makes it clear that the reports are coming from individual economists, but it also asserts that what's provided is objective, jargon-free analysis for all of Moody's Analytics customers. Naturally objectivity only goes so far – economics involves opinionating – but the work of Faraz Syed, the economist who wrote the report about India, was not on his personal blog or Facebook page. It was a forecast from Moody's Analytics team, the same as any other of scores of forecasts the firm churns out on a daily basis, each one of which could be characterised both as "personal opinions" and also being from Moody's Analytics.

The ministry's third grouse, which combines the previous two, probably has more to do with television reporting than anything in print. Most TV channels said that the credit ratings agency had cautioned Modi, with India Today TV here, for example, even using a picture of Moody's Investor Services, to cover the story and went so far as to quote the report and credit it to Moody's Ratings Agency. (TimesNow's Arnab Goswami, meanwhile,  took this as an opportunity to lecture Moody on its inability cover the troubles faced by Black people in the United States).



Here the government has a credible reason to be "distressed" as it says – although it may also want to disavow spurious online discussions about Syed being related to an Indian historian who has raised his voice about the climate of intolerance.

While not all channels were equally complicit, CNBC-TV18 for example clearly said that the report had come from Moody's Analytics, across TV debates the discussion used "Moody's" as a short hand for the report's authors. Moreover some directly said it had come from the credit ratings agency, giving the government a genuine reason to be annoyed, though more likely because of incompetence rather than any nefarious plot to bring down the government.