On April 11, 2014, Newslaundry published an article titled “The Untouchables”. No, it wasn’t a profile of Sean Connery and Robert De Niro. It was a report on what was a very clear violation of a law by the country’s news channels. The report was about how news channels had collectedly connived to pull off the violation. To save the time of our esteemed readers – the violation pertained to the telecast of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s manifesto release on April 7, the same date the Big Indian General Elections (2014 edition) had begun. According to Section 126(1)(b) of the Representation of People’s Act “the display to the public any election matter by means of cinematograph, television or other similar apparatus” before 5 pm, April 12,was unconstitutional. “Election matter” here is defined as anything that is “intended or calculated to influence or affect the result of an election”.

Back then, the likes of Rajdeep Sardesai (CNN-IBN), Arnab Goswami (Times Now) and Shazi Zaman (ABP News) dodged our questions on the rationale behind the live coverage of the manifesto release in spite of a very clearly stated law prohibiting it. The story, however, has got a new lease of life thanks to a bunch of Right to Information activists who have doggedly pursued the case with the Election Commission, the News Broadcasters Standards Authority and the violating channels.

In a recent development, the NBSA has taken cognisance of the complaint lodged by two RTI activists, Visha Kudchadkar and Syed Shah Ali Hussaini against the broadcasters. The NBSA has called the parties concerned for a hearing on the issue on July 17, 2014.

Newslaundry got in touch with Bhanupriya Rao, who’s worked in tandem with Kudchadkar and Hussaini on pursuing the issue. In an email to Newslaundry, Rao pointed out a report in The Times Of India on April 5, 2014 where the EC categorically states its position that news channels cannot cover the BJP manifesto release. “They (Kudchadkar and Hussaini) shot off complaints after digging footage to NBSA as also to all the major channels (CNN-IBN, TimesNow, NDTV among others) asking why they violated the law (all the while citing from the law). By now, the legal departments of all the channels knew the names of Ali and Vishal very well…So they replied saying that they did not violate any law (a standard template). The NBSA, which was silent before, now sat up and started asking for clarifications from the broadcasters based on their complaint”, she further added.

The trio, to their credit, managed eliciting considerably substantial responses from the violating channels. Interestingly, though, a look at the positions taken by the channels makes the case against them even stronger.

NDTV, in its response to a query by NBSA on the subject, said the channel had covered the manifesto release “in such a way so as to not influence the voters of any region going to elections” (Newslaundry has a copy of the email).  In the same email, NDTV states that the “manifesto release is a matter of great national importance” and “it is in public interest that people are made aware of the key highlights of it”.  Seems like that’s quite a task – highlighting key points in the manifesto and at the same time not “influencing” voters. And if this video clip is anything to go by, NDTV did a rather great job of the former, highlighting key issues in neat graphics and even comparing the manifesto to the Congress’.  Whether it also managed not “influencing” voters, we don’t know. Although if you are broadcasting something live we are not sure how you can ensure the coverage is done “in such a way so as to not influence the voter”. That prerogative lies entirely with the person whose address or speech or release is being broadcast. But with NDTV  being the most “trusted” news brand in the country, who knows.

When Newslaundry again contacted NDTV (since we got no specific answers the first time), Ajay Mankotia, President (Corporate Planning and Operations) reiterated, “NDTV  believes it has done no wrong in the matter”.

CNN-IBN’s response (of which Newslaundry has a copy) to NBSA stated that it covered BJP’s manifesto because of “public interest” and since it had covered the manifesto of all other political parties. Also a part of the response is the following paragraph:

We would like to further submit that the Election Commission of India has not issued any formal communication/notice with regard to telecast of BJP manifesto on 7th April, 2014. In absence of any formal communication/notice, we had gone ahead with the telecast of the release of the BJP manifesto.

Achain of email conversations (which Newslaundry is in possession of) that transpired between editors of almost all major news channels on April 7 clearly suggests that the EC did in fact issue an advisory. Rajdeep Sardesai, CNN-IBN’s Editor-in-Chief was very much party to this conversation. In fact, the final mail in the email chain was sent by Sardesai himself which reads:

Sorry! Sampath has called back. Ec has now changed its mind. Ec legal counsel mr mendiratta has now said that it cannot be shown till 5 pm. Any violation he says will attract section 126 right away. This is subsequent to amtg with ec officials. Ec claims position has been made amply clear that manifesto can infleunce voters in tripura and assam and cannot be shown till polling is complete. It is now for us to decide. But ec says it is a clear violation and any live telecast will lead to notices being served. I would suggest collective action, whatever it be.

Unless one contends that VS Sampath’s telephonic call to Sardesai doesn’t strictly qualify as “formal communication”, CNN-IBN’s official response to NBSA is far from an accurate/honest representation of things.

Kshipra Jatana, Group General Counsel of IBN TV18 Broadcast Limited (and the signatory of the aforementioned response) didn’t respond to Newslaundry’s email.

TV Today’s response to the original complaint by Kudchadkar urged him to note “that our channel cut live to the Manifesto release only after national channels started showing it”.  The response also cites the lack of any “clear direction” from the EC.  Notably, more than one editor of the TV Today group was marked in the mail sent by Sardesai.

Times Now hasn’t responded to NBSA’s notice or Kudchadkar and Hussaini’s complaint.  Our email to them hasn’t been answered either. When we had contacted Times Now’s Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami in April for a comment on the episode, he had told Newslaundry that “I don’t give interviews”.  Even if the nation wants to know, Arnab? But it seems he has changed his interview policy since as he did give an interview to The New York Times last month. Or perhaps, the rules are different for foreign publications.

Come July 17, our news channels (or at least their legal representatives) would find themselves in a position they are not very used to – answering questions instead of asking them. Hopefully, they will exercise the same level of honesty they demand of others.