Are the Editors Guild’s statements selective?

On January 3, the Editors Guild issued a statement in support of ANI editor-in-chief Smita Prakash. In its statement, the Guild noted with concern “the words used by Congress President Rahul Gandhi” in his criticism of Prakash.

Gandhi, on January 2, had termed Prakash’s interview with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s as “staged” and said that it was conducted by a “pliable journalist”.

In their statement, the Guild stated its belief in “healthy and civilised criticism” of journalists, while noting that “labelling of journalists has emerged as a favourite tactic on the part of the establishment to discredit, delegitimise and intimidate them”. The Guild added that in the recent past, top BJP leaders, as well Aam Aadmi Party leaders, have used abusive expressions such as “presstitute, news-traders, bazaaru (saleable commodities) or dalals (pimps)” for journalists.

To say the least, the Guild’s statement has evoked more response from Twitteratti, including journalists. While some have lauded the Guild for a timely statement, others have pointed out the Guild’s selectivity of causes for which a statement is issued. A Twitter account, @IndiaExplained, also stated that the Guild’s statement had been rejected by a “majority of the members of the Executive Council”.

Newslaundry reached out to all three office bearers of Editors Guild, including President Shekhar Gupta, and four executive committee members with the following questions:

1. The Editors Guild put out a statement in support of ANI editor Smita Prakash. The Guild is yet to put out a statement about Manipur journalist arrested under NSA for his criticism of Modi or the journalists who were heckled and attacked while covering Sabarimala. Is consent of all members taken before a statement is put out? What are the grounds on which a statement is issued?

2. Your comments on the criticism that statements put out by the Guild are selective?

While some respondents declined to comment, others were unavailable.

Speaking to Newslaundry about the selectivity of Guild’s statements, Sheela Bhatt, treasurer of Editors Guild, said, “It is not selective because previously we had issued a statement when this presstitute and bazaaru allegations were hurled. I was not an office bearer then, but the Guild had issued a statement.”

She added, “There are media issues and pressures that even the media hasn’t covered, particularly because lots is happening in non-English media. The Indian media world is huge. It’s expanding fast. There are many unfortunate events happening, but we can’t react frequently. We can’t reach out to everybody. We try our best to maximise our resources.” The Guild office bearer also added, “We get a lot of complaints, we get requests to reflect on many quarters of the media. The three of us are not even a year old, we are trying to set things up.”

Responding to Newslaundry’s questions about why statements were issued in certain cases, and not in cases like the Manipur journalist arrested under NSA, Bhatt said, “I agree with you that we need to go deeper, we need to investigate more, we need to have fact-check and have a machinery in place. We are planning to send a two-member team, someone from Northeast and someone from here, to investigate facts, application of NSA is very, very serious. We are working on it.”

Commenting on whether the consent of all members is taken into account before issuing a statement, Bhatt said, “There is a consultative process where Chatham house rules are followed. All members of the Executive Council of EGI are part of it. We will be fine-tuning the process of consultation. It will be done soon.”

Newslaundry also spoke to journalists for their input in the matter.

Commenting of the erratic nature of the Guild’s statements, freelance journalist Ammu Joseph said, “Their statements certainly appear to be erratic. For example, they have chosen to highlight Rahul Gandhi’s use of the relatively mild word ‘pliable’ to describe one journalist when far worse words have been used to label journalists as a whole. Were statements issued when ‘presstitute’, ‘bazaaru’ or ‘dalal’ were first used? Also, I don’t remember the Guild issuing a statement when journalists, including women, covering the stand-off at Sabarimala were intimidated, attacked and prevented from doing their jobs over the past several weeks.” Joseph also pointed out the absence of any statement from the Guild on the laying off of hundreds of journalists by various media organisations over the past few years.

Geeta Seshu, founder of Free Speech Collective, said, “I am perplexed by the EG’s statements. To my mind, this is a non-issue.” Seshu points out that the Guild does not respond to other important issues, including the alarming lack of freedom of media in India. She said, “What about the fact that our Prime Minister chooses his interviewers and their questions. Or hasn’t held a single press conference since he got elected. This is a greater issue, but the EG is silent on that. The EG continues to be silent on issues of more importance like the attacks on journalists in Sabarimala. Last week, it issued a statement on a journalist editor arrested in a Ponzi scam in Kolkata though that really isn’t a media freedom issue.”

Seshu also added that the Editors Guild “is selective in what it chooses to respond to”. She said, “I do not know why they have this selectivity or how this might benefit them. The EG’s hurry to issue these statements instead of addressing more important issues does cast doubts on whether this is a distraction from the main issues.”

Journalist Rohini Singh said, “It is great that the Editors Guild has issued a statement condemning the sort of language used by politicians against journalists. However, it would have been better had the Guild named VK Singh and the Prime Minister for using some of the most offensive terms for the media, which the Guild has quoted in its statement. To name Rahul Gandhi and not Narendra Modi only strengthens the perception that the Guild is pliable.

With inputs from Ahwar Sultan.

Note: This piece has been updated.