What did we learn from Hardeep Puri’s media blitz? 

Through the day yesterday, Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Hardeep Puri has been given the chance to hop from one channel to the other explaining how he’s smelling of roses on the whole Epstein thing. Quite literally.

Since his presser this week, the E word finally made it to TV news, only for our anchors to put out an awkward defence for Puri. One anchor at NDTV explained how apart from being a paedophile, Epstein was basically a professional power broker. “Paise toh woh power brokeing kar ke kama raha tha na?” Lovely. She went on to explain how a mere mention in the files doesn’t mean criminality and quoted a lengthy passage on someone mentioning Rahul Gandhi. 

Of course, the facts here are that Puri wasn’t a mere mention in the Epstein files, he had a very active interaction with Epstein. The same anchor went on to interview him on why he used the word “exotic” for his infamous islands, and what he meant by have fun not that you need encouragement for it. Puri shot back that “Rahul Gandhi goes to Vietnam for fun”. Here’s how that went. Paraphrasing here:

Anchor: But what kind of fun…

Puri: I have no clue…he’s not a personal acquaintance of mine…mine is not that kind of relation. I am talking about Reif Hoffman.

Anchor: There was no knowledge what was happening in the exotic island.

Puri: All this came out in 2017…we had switched off from that. 

Anchor: Hmm…there is one other email...this email talks about investment in India and digital boost, which is great.

The point is exactly that it is not great — pitching India to a paedophile. 

The minister has gone to lengths to tell each anchor on each channel how one of Epstein's mails referred to him as two-faced, and that somehow means he’s done the moral thing here. As if being mildly insulted by a convicted sex offender is a certificate of integrity. The other justification Puri offers is that public life demands that you meet shady characters, he’s met people like LTTE’s Prabhakaran. But certainly he would have met Prabhakaran because the Indian government required him to do so. He wouldn’t have met him as a private citizen to pitch India’s defence growth.

For television newsrooms that seem determined to blur the basics, it’s important to restate: Jeffrey Epstein was a convicted sex offender. In 2008, he pleaded guilty to soliciting sex from a minor. A Reuters report from back then says he used to get naked massages from minors and allegedly sexually assaulted a few. Years before his 2019 arrest and death, there were credible, widely reported allegations that he had trafficked and sexually abused underage girls. Multiple victims have testified that they were 14, 15, 16 and 17 when they were groomed and exploited.

The issue globally has never been limited to who participated in crimes. It has also been about who chose to associate with a man whose criminal conduct was already known. This is exactly the sort of line of questioning we need to see our journalists do on precious primetime space.

It is a no-brainer that being mentioned in emails with Epstein or even emailing him does not make someone a sex offender. It does not establish criminal culpability. It does not automatically imply participation in abuse.

But it does raise a question of judgement.

Across the United States and Europe, public figures whose names appeared in Epstein-related documents have responded with statements expressing regret for poor judgement. Some have apologised for maintaining contact after his conviction. In certain cases, investigations were initiated not because guilt was assumed, but because standards of public accountability demanded scrutiny.

That seriousness is totally lost on Indian news anchors.

Publicly reported emails show that Puri met Epstein at his Manhattan townhouse in February 2015, January 2016 and May 2017. Email exchanges between the two span June 2014 to June 2017. Puri joined the BJP in January 2014 and became a minister in September 2017.

On Arnab’s show, Puri says he felt “a sense of unease” after his first meeting with Epstein. But that clarification does not address a broader question: why engage repeatedly, cordially, and even warmly with a convicted sex offender whose past was easily verifiable? And someone who you by your own admission found fishy.

Among the reported emails are not only pitches for investment but casual familiarity – references to Epstein’s travel, meetings for coffee, exchanging books, and enquiries about when he would be back from his “exotic island”. The tone suggests more than a one-off diplomatic courtesy.

Again, none of this establishes criminal conduct. But it makes the “private citizen pitching India” defence insufficient. Public life demands discretion about whom one chooses to cultivate.

Internationally, the Epstein scandal has forced uncomfortable conversations about elite impunity. Why did so many powerful people overlook warning signs? Why did association carry so little reputational risk for so long? Why were victims ignored?

But don’t expect any of that here on mainstream Indian TV news channels. Oh and did we tell you that Babur was bisexual? Yup, Babur liked men and apparently so much that it drew him to madness.