edia Watch Ossified myth, sycophancy unadulterated

M

Because the media sycophants felt she should retain her sainthood and not be exposed? Not all newspapers, may it be pointed out, favoured Sonia. Writing in The Statesman (May 20) its New Delhi resident editor, Saubhik Chakravarti exposed Sonia.

It was Tavleen Singh who first exposed Sonia Gandhi'spretensions at sacrificing her claim to the prime ministership of India. Subsequently Deccan Chronicle (May 19) carried a report from its ?Own Bureau? in New Delhi under the heading: ?Did Kalam'sPoser have Sonia Back Off??. The report said: ?The President is said to have informed her that according to Section 5 of the Citizenship Act of 1955, she has no right to assume the office of the Prime Minister of India and that he was seeking the advice of the Supreme Court on this issue.?

Section 5 of the Citizenship Act of 1955 says the rights and privileges allowed to foreigners who become citizens by application (not by birth) are conditional upon the rights and privileges granted to Indians in the country of the concerned person'sorigin (in this case, Italy). The President reportedly told Sonia that he had to ascertain the legal position in this matter as there was no confirmation that all the rights and privileges granted to persons of Italian origin are reciprocated by Italy in the case of Indians who become citizens of that country. Sonia is said to have decided not to take the risk after the President'sbriefing.

What does the paper expect the President'soffice to do? Reveal top secret conversations? What sort of intelligence is that?

It should also be noted that the President in his letter on Monday invited her only to ?discuss, assuming the post of Prime Minister and not to assume office.?

It is somewhat strange that no other paper followed this up. Why? Because the media sycophants felt she should retain her sainthood and not be exposed? Not all newspapers, may it be pointed out, favoured Sonia. Writing in The Statesman (May 20) its New Delhi resident editor, Saubhik Chakravarti exposed Sonia. In his lead article on the editorial page, Chakravarti wrote: ?This newspaper will not speculate on the President'sactions but we note that, contrary to usual practice, no effort has been made by the (Congress) Party to contradict these suggestions.? Only that the ?Honourable President himself has categorically denied having said anything to Sonia on the subject.? Chakravarti added: ?It is an amazing good fortune for India that Sonia Gandhi is not the Prime Minister.? It seems that in 1999 ? a respected, retired espiocrat? wrote in The Stateman that he would have had enormous misgivings about sharing the secrets of the country with Prime Minister Sonia Gandhi.? The paper in its editorial said: ?Those who have watched Sonia perform in full public gaze, cannot be in doubt that she was not prime ministerial material, despite hysterics from her followers.?

As for the ?hysterics?, Indrajit Hazra, writing in Hindustan Times (May 20), has something interesting to say. He had apparently watched the proceedings in Parliament Hall of the Congressmen who had come to hear Sonia make her statement. Of that tamasha he wrote: ?But what my ? inner voice? reacted violently against was the sycophantic spectacle I witnessed before, during and after Sonia finally announced that she won'tbe PM. That apocrypha about the Congress being a party of Nehru-Gandhi chaprasis isn'tsimply a Sangh parivar?or until yesterday, a Left Front?canard, was in full and obscene evidence on Tuesday evening.? And he added: ?The howl of anguished protest and chest-beating that was on display simply took one'sbreath and self-respect away. It showcased a full-blown farce whose simple theme was faw-ning supp-lication.?

As for the Congress?and Sonia?repre-senting India, writing in the same paper (Hindustan Times), Cho Ra-maswamy said: ?Though the Congress has emerged as the single largest party, its ?victory? is not only incomplete, but also not truly representative? . Out of the 417 seats the Congress had contested, it has won just 145, which is less than a 35 per cent success rate. In effect, the Congress has been rejected in 65 per cent of the constituencies it had contested across the country. Similarly, the Congress and its allies have been rejected in 60 per cent of the seats they had fought. This is the overall picture.? Ramaswamy, who is editor of Tughlak, also noted that in West Bengal and Kerala, the Left has decimated the Congress and ?in states like MP, Chattisgarh and Rajasthan, where it took the BJP head-on and in states like Orissa, Karnataka and Punjab where it faced the BJP and its local allies, the Congress has been virtually routed.?

And writing in The Telegraph (May 20), Sarmila Bose pointed out that ?proclamations of a Congress victory are somewhat off the mark?, considering that while the Congress won 145 seats with a ?success rate? of 35 per cent, the BJP won 138 seats with a success rate of 38 per cent. So much for Congress boasts!

?…Whether by design or circumstance, public displays of sycophancy have become a raging side show.? Pointing out all the rubbish in which Congressmen have been indulging in, the paper sternly said, ?They must stop.?

But the naming of Dr Manmohan Singh has been acclaimed very widely. The Asian Age (May 21) said Dr Singh has ?already calmed stormy waters? and that the Congress Party and its allies are ?happy that they now are being led by a seasoned, mature person who can be relied upon not to jolt, but to stabilise the new coalition government.? Vicious as ever, The Times of India, forgetting what the President might have told Smt. Gandhi, spoke of ?Sonia'spolitical and moral victory?, pointing out that the President'soffice has ?mercifully denied that it had questioned Sonia on her citizenship?. What does the paper expect the President'soffice to do? Reveal top secret conversations? What sort of intelligence is that?

Incomparably, the best editorial is from The Free Press Journal (May 21) which spoke of the ?mock shows of mourning and breast-beating? indulged in by Congress leaders, saying that ?there is clearly something that does not meet the eye in her self-avowed abnegation, though her inexperience and intellectual inadequacy, coupled with her Italian origin were the most likely factors which forced her to keep away from the hot seat.? The paper added: ?Another myth that needs to be broken before it gets ossified in the minds of Congressmen and other myopic observers is that the 2004 verdict is a rejection of the economic reforms undertaken by the Vajpayee government. It is not.? The Indian Express (May 21) said that ?if the manner of Sonia Gandhi'srefusal to be Prime Minister was an astute political drama, the scenes outside her doorstep are fast spiralling into a pathetic spoof. Whether by design or circumstance, public displays of sycophancy have become a raging side show.?

Pointing out all the rubbish in which Congressmen have been indulging in, the paper sternly said: ?They must stop?.

The Times of India can only see the BJP wrong. Grow up, old lady of Bori Bunder. There is more to politics than sycophancy. Try to be analytical. Not abusive. When journalism is turned into a circus and a bout of name calling, someone must be called in to impose a ban on bawdy headlines and street-smart writings.