Around the Web

‘I was told not to do journalism till 2019’: Watch Barkha Dutt speak about bids to intimidate her

The journalist was elaborating on her tweets on Thursday claiming that she had received veiled threats from powerful people in the establishment.


“How do you lodge an FIR against insidious intimidation, which is effectively about using instruments of power to create a coercive environment of fear?” Barkha Dutt said in an interview with journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta on Friday.

Dutt appeared on the online video news network Newsclick to elaborate on her claims on Twitter that she had “received chilling veiled threats and “messages” from powerful people in the Establishment” that her family and her are under surveillance and that she would be “smeared and maligned” to stop her from starting new projects.

Many users on Twitter responded to Dutt’s tweets asking why she did not file an FIR against the people who had been attempting to intimidate her. In the interview with Guha Thakurta, Dutt clarified that she had not received physical threats from members of the Bharatiya Janata Party but was being pressured in a more “insidious” manner. “There is the obvious kind of intimidation, where somebody threatens you, abuses you and makes a physical threat,” Dutt said. “But there is another kind of insidious intimidation. It is harder to spot, it is harder to define and it is much harder to place in an FIR. And that is the sort of insidious intimidation that I’m talking about.”

Dutt claimed in the interview that on several occasions in the last year and a half, promoters of television channels had approached her to offer a role as an advisor or a host but each time they backed out fearing the government’s reaction. Dutt said promoters had told her that “the top two or three people in the government and the party” do not like her, referring to the BJP. She went on to state that she had received a call from a BJP member who asked her to “not do journalism till 2019”, to do “something else” and to “sit this one out”.

Dutt said that after a trade website reported that she was launching a new channel, she was visited by a close friend who has links to the BJP and told her that a “section of the party” that has “an influence on the government” had a meeting to decide how to prevent her from appearing on television and was determined to “shut her down”. Dutt claimed that the meeting included questions about who she lives with, how to get details about her bank account and who she is dating.

Dutt stated that the participants in the meeting said, “I hope she understands the severity of the situation, tell her she should get some personal security and tell her she should not take this lightly.”

While clarifying that she was not accusing the entire party of intimidation and that some BJP members had even given her interviews in the last few months, Dutt emphasised that the blame lay equally with the government and with the media industry. “For the last year, I’ve had a very intriguing exposure to how terrified the news media industry is of the government,” Dutt said. “We’ve seen news channels that are supplicant to the government in a way that in my living, adult life, I’ve never seen before.”

Bringing up the difficulty in getting licences for new television channels, Dutt pointed out how Republic TV was the only station to obtain one in period of just three months whereas entrepreneurs like Raghav Behl have been waiting for a year and a half.

Claiming that she, along with journalists like Rajdeep Sardesai and Karan Thapar, had not been “neither forgiven not forgotten” for covering the 2002 riots in Gujarat, Dutt said that while print and digital media had people fighting for it, no industry member has fought for removing the welter of clearances required from the government in the television news segment.

“If the media wanted to stand up to power, it can,” Dutt said.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.