Coverage of elections 2004 -- Part III

IN Books | 18/08/2004

Extracts from Monitoring Television Content

General Elections 2004: Citizen¿s Response
Study conducted by Viewers Forum and Centre for Advocacy and Research

Qualitative Analysis Observations

When the BJP-led NDA announced elections in early February 2004, they were very confident of victory. At the time, this confidence did not seem misplaced: almost without exception, the media, political commentators, political parties and urban, civil society believed the results were a foregone conclusion – especially after the BJP¿s major successes in the December 2003 assembly elections in five states. There was, also, the perception that the Congress Party was in complete disarray after the assembly defeats and in no position to offer competition to the NDA.

There were other reasons for believing the NDA would win: for the first time a non-Congress government had remained in power for its full terms; for the first time a coalition government had given the country stability. Prime Minister Vajpayee¿s leadership was unquestioned, his stature acknowledged world wide – especially after talks with Pakistan and Kashmiri separatists. The NDA also had the advantage of going into the elections after a good monsoon, with a strong Sensex and high growth economy. It was with this background that the NDA government dissolved the Lok Sabha in early February 2004.

In opinion polls conducted by India Today (January 9^{th )} , Outlook (February 19^th.), and The Indian Express-NDTV (March 5^th), the NDA was an outright winner crossing the magical 272 figure for a majority. The estimates varied between 330+ (India Today) to just below 300(Outlook and Express-NDTV poll). The most generous estimates said the BJP would increase its individual tally to over 200 (it had 181??) while the Congress was likely to dip below its current strength of 114 seats.

For the media, the 2004 General Elections were a watershed election. This election was the most widely televised election in our history with over a dozen TV news channels providing 24-hour and, often, live coverage. Our study indicates up to 60 per cent of news coverage during March-May 2004 for the elections. This figure would be higher because our study does not adequately reflect the continuous live coverage during the day of election campaigns or press conferences and exit/opinion polls that sometimes extended into a four-hour single telecast.

All of these show were retained for the general elections. In addition, there was a great deal of live coverage and towards the end of the period, daily psephology shows and even qawaallis. Election 2004 was treated rather like a mela, where there is something for every whim or fancy.

The most compelling reason for this extensive and `entertaining¿ coverage is that elections have become a great source of commercial revenue for news channels. It is estimated that advertising and sponsorships on TV news channels, during the election campaign period, touched Rs.170 crores with channels like NDTV India charging up to 400 times (to be confirmed) their usual rates. In terms of viewership, there was also a sharp increase – channels like NDTV India and Star News registered (% to be confirmed) increases in viewership.

The fact that the elections have a mass viewership is attested by the nature of the advertising on news channels during the months of February-May 2004. High profile companies such as Maruti Suzuki, Samsung, LG, Raymond Suitings, insurance and investment companies as well as manufacturers of undergarments, pens, ball points pens, paan masala, spices etc., advertised during the elections. Advertisers assume that the entire country is interested in the election coverage – not just the urban elite.

The political parties recognised the importance of the media¿s role, none more so than the BJP. In February, Finance Ministry released an ad campaign that came to be known as the `India Shining¿ campaign with the slogan, ``the feel good factor¿¿. These ads celebrated India¿s progress, emphasising successes on the economic front and reflecting a confidence in the NDA coalition that it would not be a victim of the anti-incumbency factor. By releasing this ad campaign just before the election campaign officially started, the government had signalled its intention to fight the forthcoming elections on the platform of its achievements – particularly on the economic front.

The India Shining campaign indicated that the media was an important component of the BJP-led government¿s election strategy. It was an acknowledgement that the media, in particular TV news channels, were going to play a crucial role during the campaign.

Apart from its ad campaign, the BJP decided that Mr.Advani would embark on his traditional rath yatra for the elections. Called `Uday Yatra¿, this one was to be the most ambitious, criss-crossing the entire country in a two-phase journey. However, unlike previous yatras, this time the Deputy Prime Minister was traveling in a mechanized yatra - a van belonging top Chhattisgarh leader, Dilip Singh Judeo.

We assume the Uday Yatra was used for several purposes: it was symbolic of a continuity with the past and earlier successful yatras and by association, election campaigns; it inaugurated the BJP-NDA campaign with a flourish and, it was ideal vehicle for media coverage. Indeed, journalists were courted by the BJP to join the Yatra on its progress through the country.

In another apparent strategy to capture and retain media attention, the party unleashed a constant, almost daily stream of `personalities¿ or stars who joined the BJP throughout February and early March – from Jeetendra, to Navjot Singh Sidhu , Dharmendra, Bhupen Hazarika, etc. TV news channels gave extensive coverage to these star personalities who were introduced at special media press conferences.

In response, the Congress saw actors like Govinda, Poonam Dhillon and Om Puri join the party. Apart from the presence of these personalities, the Congress was heavily dependent on Mrs. Gandhi for its entire campaign. And if the BJP had Mr.Advani¿s Uday Yatra, Mrs. Gandhi had announced her plans travel to different parts of the country, by car, in her own `roadshow¿.

Also, in a departure from previous elections in which Mrs.Sonia Gandhi barely spoke to journalists, Mrs. Gandhi made herself very accessible to the media. There were TV interviews and she gave frequent sound bytes – in Hindi as well as English. Furthermore, she was the early bird, beginning her election tours of the country, well before BJP leaders such as L.K.Advani embarked upon theirs.

In these early media interactions, Mrs. Gandhi challenged the India Shining perception.

``I haven¿t seen India Shining anywhere,¿¿ she told the Editor In Chief of The Indian Express, Shekhar Gupta on his talk show, Walk the Talk, (NDTV 24X7) ``…I was travelling in western UP, Poorvanchal, eastern UP, in Orissa. If there is economic growth, it is not seen in the rural areas. There is tremendous distress and suffering among farmers, amongst the youth, and unemployment is rising… ¿¿

Thus, the India Shining campaign was controversial from the day of its release. So much so, that the Congress set out too woo the very people Mrs. Gandhi had identified: its ad campaign claimed the party was with `aam aadmi¿ for whom India had still to shine.

The India Shining controversy and opinion/exit polls that indicated a drop in support for the NDA, provided the media with the ideal opportunities to take a closer look at the issues that really concerned the public. This opportunity was, largely, ignored.

The case of India Shining is the most interesting. Our data shows that it was discussed as an issue in itself during the election campaign. References to it were scattered throughout the speeches of major political leaders and it ran as a subtext throughout the election coverage.

``Aaj hamein lagta hai ki desh mahaan hai…Yeh aatma vishwas hai, issi ko Feel Good Factor kehte hain. Yeh Feel Good factor sare desh mein hai… isliye hai kyunki kendra mein bethe Vajpayeeji ke leadership mein …unhone tair kiya jo kaam 50 saal mein nahin hua….¿¿

Today, we think the country is great…This self-confidence is what we call the Feel Good Factor. This feel good factor is throughout the country... because the central government under Vajpayee ji¿s leadership has accomplished what has not been done in 50 years...¿¿ -Advani on 17^th March quoted on DD News.

However, it increasingly acquired pejorative overtones with Sonia Gandhi using to challenge the NDA during her campaign. Towards the end of the campaign, even the Prime Minister, said in a TV interview to Star News that he did not understand what India Shining or the Feel Good Factor meant. This was after opinion and exit polls had indicated a waning in support for the BJP.

For the first time, opinion and exit polls assumed tremendous significance with channels commissioning them for each of the five phases of polling and telecasting them at great length. These polls were the only real indicators of public opinion. Yet even when the polls indicated some public disenchantment with the NDA, the coverage on TV news remained much the same with no in depth effort to examine why the public might not want to vote for the NDA. Instead, TV channels continued to cover campaigns, the press conferences, the polling in a routine manner.

We also found very poor representation of women and women¿s issues. Except for Sonia Gandhi, no female politician receives any significant coverage When they did it was for their star value – actors Hema Malini and Smriti Malhotra and activist Nafisa Ali received more media attention than Mayawati or Mamta Bannerjee and Jayalalitha.

In 1998 and 1999 general elections, the question of 33 % reservations for women was an election issue and did receive coverage. This was not the case in these elections which almost completely bypassed the issue. Furthermore, in the last few years, human rights violations against women, especially in terms of violence, be it in conflict zones like Kashmir or cities such as Delhi or Bangalore, have been very prominent in the media and public discourse. However, such issues find no mention in the election campaign.

This lacuna is all the more glaring in view of the fact that on at least two occasions, there was a window of opportunity to take a deeper look into the condition of women. The first presented itself right at the start of the campaign in the J&K Permanent Resident [Disqualification] Bill, 2004. TV news coverage of the issue politicised. We heard from politicians belonging to different political parties – Congress, BJP, Panther Party, NC; time and again, we saw women protest on the streets of Srinagar but seldom heard their opinion.

Similarly, the saree stampede in Lucknow, prior to Mr.Vajpayee¿s filing his nomination from Lucknow, was covered as a poll violation on the part of Lalji Tandon in whose honour the saree distribution ceremony was held. TV channels concentrated on the political fall out of the deaths on the elections in UP, rather than dwelling upon the condition of women who would risk death for a Rs.40 sari. These were opportunities the media could have taken to explore a much larger human dimension and did not.

The media coverage of the elections seems to have been dictated by perception, more than fact. Our analysis of TV coverage of the election campaign reveals that the media, as much as everyone else, believed that the BJP was to be an outright winner. This alone, can explain the disproportionately high coverage the BJP – not the NDA – received throughout the campaign across all channels. There was an air of invincibility about the BJP and inevitability about its victory that gripped the media.

In a sense, the media followed the political agenda and ignored the public¿s opinions. In our analysis, we find very little on the situation in Andhra Pradesh vis a vis, suicide of farmers, there is little or nothing on the mood in UP and Gujarat where the BJP was to suffer unexpected reversals.

The media appears to have followed media opportunities created by political parties, especially the BJP. For instance, our study shows that Advani¿s Uday Yatra, the daily parade of high profile personalities who joined the party - received very high coverage in the first part of the campaign. The very high coverage of Advani¿s Uday Yatra was disproportionate. In the first four weeks of our monitoring, Mr.Advani was the major and only media star, receiving daily coverage. He was so far ahead of all the others, that it was almost a walkover. It is worth mentioning that the coverage of the Uday Yatra was far higher than our figures show because of live coverage - something our study has been unable to reflect. Mr.Advani was over-exposed: viewers in our monitoring team complained that all they saw was Advani¿s Yatra.

Our study indicates that while Advani dominated the first half of the campaign in March and early April, Vajpayee¿s visibility increased as the campaign crossed the halfway point. This is surprising given the fact that Mr.Vajpayee was meant to be the single greatest asset of the NDA.

In contrast, coverage of the Congress was devoted almost entirely to Mrs.Sonia Gandhi – and her children when they entered the fray. In visual terms, the contrast was between elderly statesmen of the BJP and the younger Congress Dynasty.

What is important here is to see how these leaders decided to be projected by the media and the possible influence this projection had on the viewing public. In our analysis we found that Vajpayee and Advani were projected as leaders who had already ¿arrived¿. Advani would emerge from the top of his van, as a larger than life figure, Vajpayee was always shown speaking from the podium. In terms of content, they spoke of local and national issues: Mr. Advani harked back to the past: 1947 and the birth of secular India, the Emergency, Ayodhya, Ram Rajya; he also spoke about a new Bharat, his relationship with Vajpayee.

Quote:

Mr. Vajpayee spoke of the stability of his government and the NDA¿s achievements, raised questions about Sonia¿s foreign origins.

"Hum ne paanch salo mein jo kaam kiya hain usko kasauti mein kus ke dekhe uski pariksha lein. Humein tajub nahi hain ki uski pachaas saal aur humari paanch saal ki tulna kare."- Vajpayee in Patiala, 18^th March 2004, NDTV India.

On the other hand, Sonia Gandhi projected herself as a leader who was willing to ¿arrive¿ but with the consent of the people. In the visual coverage, she was seen to mingle with the people – reaching out to them. So too her children during their tours of UP.

More over in her role as a opposition party leader, in almost every speech quoted on television be it in , (Gujarat), Hyderabad, Karimnagar or in Rae Bareilly, she spoke on development issues.

" Kendriya Sarkar ne apni nitiyo se na kewal berozgari barai, na kewal kisano ki mushkile barai, na kewal naujawano ki ummido par pani phera, na kewal logo ka jeevan mushkil kar diya, magar brashtachar ki bhi had kar di."- In Andhra Pradesh, 30^th March 2004, Star News.

"Electricity, irrigation and water is a problem. And everybody is saying Congress layo aur BJP hatayo (bring in Congress and remove BJP)."- In Gujarat, 17^th March 2004. Aaj Tak and Star News.

These difference, advertently or inadvertently could have played a crucial role in affecting the perception of the people.

Our analysis of the election coverage on 6 news channels over two months emphasises the narrow focus of the coverage, its preoccupation with a few issues and personalities. There seems to be a gap between the media and the public, in terms of what either considers important. Can this distance between the two be bridge, reduced? If so, how? Or will the distance grow?

These are questions we need to debate and find answers to.

(Concluded)

Contact: cfarasm@ndf.vsnl.net.in