× Close

If you care about press freedom, perhaps it’s time to boycott Arnab Goswami?

'The Newshour' anchor's refusal to stand up for fellow journalists who were subjected to assault is galling.

With adversarial debate marked by interruptions and whataboutery, sanctimonious nationalism, and invasive on-screen graphics, Arnab Goswami and his nightly show, The Newshour, on Times Now dominate English primetime news ratings to such an extent that most of his rivals have long since adopted diluted versions of his model. But the ongoing controversy at Jawaharlal Nehru University has demonstrated that Goswami stands alone in his refusal to value the principle of journalistic freedom.

Let us examine what various primetime news anchors were doing on Tuesday, February 16. Barkha Dutt of NDTV and Rajdeep Sardesai of India Today TV, who are direct competitors every weeknight, jointly led a march from the Press Club of India to the Supreme Court to protest against the violence against journalists the previous day at Patiala House court and the police’s failure to respond. Ravish Kumar of NDTV India, in many ways the anti-Arnab, not only participated in the march but featured it prominently on his 9 pm show. Zakka Jacob of CNN-IBN, a channel many feared would turn into a government stooge following its takeover by Reliance Industries, went further than anyone in his criticism of the government’s failure to protect the press.

But if, like a majority of those who watch English news, you chose instead to watch Arnab Goswami’s NewsHour on Tuesday night, you would be forgiven for total ignorance about any attack on journalists. Goswami began his nightly monologue, as usual, with a harangue, but his target was not, for a change, the JNU students, but his fellow journalists – he speaks of “the media” in a manner that suggests he does not consider himself part of it– whom he accused of misleading their readers and viewers by concealing the true extent of the “anti-national” slogans at JNU and elsewhere.

A colleague's defence

Goswami’s colleague Aditya Raj Kaul has hit back against those who criticised the anchor's absence from the Delhi march by pointing out that Goswami was at his father’s hospital bedside. But this did not prevent him from hosting his show as usual, and the line he took suggests that even if he had been at liberty to attend, he would not have done so.

During the debate that followed the monologue, perhaps mindful of the common criticism that, in this instance, he has been deferential towards the government, Goswami launched a half-hearted attack on Bharatiya Janata Party spokesman Sambit Patra, accusing the government not of coming down too hard on the students but on not coming down hard enough. He demanded more arrests. The only time he was silent was when he allowed former intelligence offer RSN Singh an extended tirade against JNU faculty, whom Singh said needed to be “purged” wholesale.

Leave aside Goswami’s hypocrisy. Having refused to show his viewers JNU students’ union president Kanhaiya Kumar’s moving speech, with its appeals to Parliament and the Constitution, he is no one to talk about concealing the whole truth. It is his refusal to show the slightest solidarity with his fellow professionals that is so galling.

Repeat offender

In Patiala House, journalists were prevented from doing the most basic aspect of their job – reporting – through physical violence and intimidation. The police present deliberately declined to fulfill their most basic function – protecting citizens from violence.

Subsequent statements by Delhi Police Commissioner BS Bassi and Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju illustrate the extent of the government’s concern for the journalists. Speaking to CNN-IBN, Rijiju dismissed the incident as “minor” and asked rhetorically whether anyone had been murdered.

This was a direct threat to the freedom of the press, perpetrated by a mob but abetted and implicitly encouraged by the state. The extent of the solidarity shown by print and television journalists is proof that even the country’s most prominent and powerful media figures directly feel this threat.

Our news channels crassly proclaim their superiority to the competition, constantly patting themselves on the back for real or imagined accomplishments. Most of our newspapers have explicit or implicit policies that ban the mentioning of a rival in print. The Indian media scene is characterised by vigorous competition, which on the whole is a good thing. On this occasion, that competition was suspended. Goswami stood alone in his lack of any regard for the profession he purports to practise.

This is not the first time that Goswami has chosen to attack fellow journalists rather than to stand up for the principle of press freedom. When NDTV was barred from broadcasting the documentary India’s Daughter on the December 16, 2012 gang-rape incident in Delhi, he accused the channel of “voyeurism”, and with a delicious lack of self-awareness of a “desperate attempt to get TRPs”.

But even by his standards, this time is different. To refuse to stand up for fellow journalists when they are subjected to assault, indeed to indict them rather than the state that has condoned the assault, is to display a staggering selfishness and want of principle.

Taking a stand

Goswami’s lonely stance has not gone unnoticed by supporters of the government’s position. The filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri claimed that participants at the march spent time plotting Goswami’s downfall.

The columnist Swapan Dasgupta called Goswami the “real, unspoken target” of the march, and in a chillingly Orwellian turn of phrase, lauded Goswami for his “dissent”, a word that apparently now means the aggressive, jingoistic embrace of authoritarian state action.

Far from a brave dissenter, Goswami, with flames rising from the bottom of the screen, and his voice achieving ever more impressive feats of indignation, has come increasingly to resemble Lewis Prothero, the hyper-nationalist TV host in the film V for Vendetta.

Like his occasional panelist, the author Chetan Bhagat, Arnab Goswami appears to relish criticism, which he uses to perpetuate his narrative of an outsider challenging the media establishment. So it is time to do more than merely condemn him.

He often congratulates himself on featuring a wide range of views on his show. The Newshour relies on the participation of journalists, activists, politicians and other citizens. At this point, any journalist who appears on The Newshour is in effect endorsing Goswami and his refusal to stand up for the profession. The same is true of other non-journalists who believe in the principle of press freedom. Even when press freedom is not at stake, those who have been invited to express the position opposed to Goswami’s are subject to hectoring, ridicule and humiliation. It is time for all of those who value a free and strong press and a productive public discourse to boycott The Newshour. The loss of a few minutes’ television time is a price worth paying.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BULLETIN BY 

45% consumers purchase financial products online according to our survey. Here’s why

How one of the last bastions of offline transactions is rapidly moving online.

With flight bookings, shopping and buying movie tickets all moving online, it was only a matter of time before purchasing financial products followed suit. In fact, with greater safety, better user interfaces, simpler processes and of course, busier lives, many Indians are opting to buy financial products like insurance and bank deposits online and on-the-go rather than at a bank branch.

We conducted a survey among 150 consumers in 4 metro cities (Mumbai, New Delhi, Bangalore and Ahmedabad) and 2 tier-II cities (Indore and Bhopal) to understand the financial products Indians are buying online and their needs.

The market for financial products still has huge potential for growth with 29% respondents reporting that they owned no financial instruments. Insurance is without a doubt the most widely owned financial instrument for Indians. Nearly half the sample—45% of the respondents—reported investing in insurance. Apart from that, around 27% invested in bank deposits like Fixed and Recurring Deposits and only 13% opted for mutual funds, 13% bought stocks, and just 10% took home loans. While many people still consume financial products only at their bank branches, a large number have started seeking financial information and buying financial instruments online.

The shifting tide

We found that 45% of the survey respondents bought financial products online, indicating that a large chunk of Indians is trusting the internet to manage something as sensitive as their financial investments. It is clear that Indians value the distinct advantages of transacting online. Convenience is an integral part of the experience—60% of those who bought financial products online felt that convenience played an important role in choosing to purchase online. Multiple aspects of convenience resonate with buyers—over 40% felt that the availability of 24/7 services and the ease of comparing different products from drove them to buy online.

However, findings also reveal some concerns that even tech-savvy Indians have with the online medium.

Security is king

Understandably, security is a key factor for buyers of financial products. Even among the 45% who purchased financial products online, almost half felt that the lack of security prevented them from buying more financial products online. Tellingly, the most commonly bought financial product online is general insurance. It has to be bought (in the case of travel) or renewed (in the case of car insurance) regularly and quickly, which is easier done online. It also doesn’t require the submission of too many personal documents—another­ factor reported by many as a barrier to online purchase of financial products.

To overcome these security concerns, many companies are taking concrete steps to improve the online security of their portals. They are setting up SSL security systems that encrypt and protect the user’s data and payments and are educating customers on how to recognize online payment scams. Thus, people are slowly moving towards buying high involvement financial items like life insurance as well online.

The human factor

Research is a crucial part of the buying process, and most buyers seek information from multiple sources. While research for several consumer products like electronics and furniture has moved online even if purchase is offline, financial products have been slower to move, especially due to the need for expertise. From the sample, 55% rated talking to financial consultants and advisors as very important. Similarly, 55% rated advice from friends and family as very important.

As is evident, while the world is going online, there is something to be said for the familiarity and comfort of human interaction. Even online buyers value non-digital channels of communication. Of those who bought financial products online, 25% felt that visiting bank branches was important, 30% felt that recommendations from friends and family was important, and 33% felt that discussing it with financial advisors was important.

However, we find that online forums and aggregators are also gaining in terms of people using them to research products. According to a BCG report, search queries on life and health insurance have grown 4.5 times from 2008 to 2013, showing that digital is certainly influencing the research part of the buying cycle. Many life insurance companies and banks have caught on to this trend and are finding ways of making customer service executives available online through chat facilities on their portals. Additionally, companies are also investing in a better online user experience by designing their websites to be simple, attractive and easy-to-understand, so that the process of purchase becomes easier for customers.

When it comes to buying insurance, finding an appropriate plan is not an easy process. Life insurance companies are using technology and algorithms to overcome these human biases with innovative products like life insurance calculators. An example of this is the HDFC Life insurance profiler which simplifies the process of choosing an insurance plan. A person can enter five to six parameters and get an objective opinion on the best insurance plan suited to his or her time and status in life.

HDFC Life Insurance has also taken detailed note of its customers’ requirements as they move towards the digital age. Its product website has been designed to ensure consumers feel secure and well attended to when transacting online. All payment gateways have SSL security and are ISO 27001 certified to ensure optimum security. Additionally, to facilitate easy query resolution, it offers an online chat function along with co-browsing where a user can give control of her or her system to the chat executive so that details can be filled in for them. To solve for the barrier of document submission, HDFC Life even allows users to submit documents through e-mail or upload files on Google drive in place of hard copies. Easy e-KYC facilities allow for the Aadhar card and address proof to be uploaded online to quickly verify identity. To find the right insurance plan for yourself and experience the innovative services that the organization has to proffer head to their insurance profiler to start your journey towards buying a life insurance plan.


This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of HDFC Life and not by the Scroll editorial team.

× Close