Mind it, rascalla
As a BJP supporter, Pioneer wrote a huge 1,235-word edit that downplayed the BJP's loss, carefully let Modi off the hook and focused on a long homily to the AAP.
DARIUS NAKHOONWALA surveys editorials the morning after. Pix: The Indian Express edit on 11 February.
You don’t say!
Darius Nakhoonwala
I have been repeatedly pointing out how the Telegraph of Kolkata has lost its way; and if ever you wanted proof, here it is: it didn’t bother to write an edit on the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) massive victory in Delhi, a victory that has left the BJP and its leader Narendra Modi severely wounded and the Congress decimated.
How stupid can you get?
But as if to make up for the Telegraph’s wantonness, the Indian Express wrote three editorials. Yes, three, one of which focused on Arvind Kejriwal introducing his wife to the crowds. “Does Delhi have its first couple in the Kejriwals?” it asked fatuously.
Does the reader really care?
Its other two edits made more sense. One was about the AAP’s massive win and what it means. The other was about the BJP’s massive loss and what that means. There was nothing new in either. The paper warned, as it were, both the BJP and the AAP about this and that.
Mind it, rascalla, was the tone.
But it was really the Pioneer’s reaction that I wanted to see. As a BJP supporter, it wrote a huge 1,235-word edit that downplayed the BJP’s loss and focused on a long homily to the AAP. But there was nothing new there as it was along familiar lines of how Mr Kejriwal now needed to behave himself, how the party had to act more maturely, and how the peoples’ trust thrust an enormous responsibility on it.
There was a hidden warning as well to Mr K: “… he will have to shed his earlier attitude and work in close cooperation with the Centre. This is even more essential in the case of Delhi, which, being a quasi-State and a capital-State is more dependent than the other States on the Union Government for the success of a host of governance issues.”
In short, bad behaviour could mean no money.
Out of those 1,235 words, it devoted a mere 352 to the BJP. Asking it to introspect, the paper was careful let Narendra Modi off the hook. But it did suggest internal sabotage. “Given the considerable traditional base the BJP has had in the State… it is hard to believe that the pathetic slump in its seats could have happened without the play-out of factors that are extraneous to the public support it has had. Therefore, accountability must be fixed… Nevertheless, it would be silly to assume that the loss is a colossal rejection of Prime Minister NarendraModi and his regime, or that it will definitely adversely impact the BJP in the Assembly elections to various States in the next few months, especially Bihar, which is slated to vote towards this year-end.”
Keep on hoping.
The Times of India made the important new point that “by capturing 67 out of 70 seats in Delhi…(the victory was) emphatic enough to settle all doubts about AAP’s durability as a political force.” It was also the only one to point out, quite rightly, that increasing urbanization means a different kind of politics. “No doubt PM Modi is right when he calls for greater urbanisation, but this also implies greater attention to problems of urban governance.”The paper should have developed this point a bit more instead of leaving it hanging after one sentence.
The Tribune, which may have to cover a similar AAP surge in Punjab which elected four MPs to the current Lok Sabha, wrote “The voters have taught the mighty Modi a simple lesson: Pride hath a fall. The BJP, which plays divisive politics and allows hate speeches by extremists in its ranks, has seen even supporters desert it…It is a vote not just in favour of ArvindKejriwal but also against the arrogant NarendraModi-Amit Shah duo. The Shah strategy of winning elections has failed.”
The Hindu, despite being a regional paper like the Telegraph, did write an edit, albeit a wordy one. “We wish Mr. Kejriwal’s Delhi Spring well. But we also urge him to recognise that the widespread expectations of his commitment to accessible governance are what have brought him to power. Only then would it really be the rule of the AamAadmi.”
We? Royal, eh?
All the business papers also wrote. None of them focused on the economics of Delhi. Silly fellows, because from now on it is going to be about that only.
Such articles are only possible because of your support. Help the Hoot. The Hoot is an independent initiative of the Media Foundation and requires funds for independent media monitoring. Please support us. Every rupee helps.