The 100 days nonsense

BY Darius Nakhoonwala| IN Opinion | 05/09/2014
Everyone agrees it is too short a period and then goes to town criticising new governments for not doing enough in 100 days,
says DARIUS NAKHOONWALA. PIX: Narendra Modi

You don’t say!
Darius Nakhoonwala

If memory serves right, it was the first UPA government that started the nonsense about 100 days of the new government. It arose from the Congress party’s jubilation at having won, against all predictions, the May 2004 general election. 

So swept off its feet was it that it made some wild promises to match the NDA/BJP ‘India Shining’ rhetoric. Until 2004, the new governments would be given between six and nine months before they were held to account by the media. 

But it is a foolish government that makes such wild promises. It takes around a year for a new government to settle down because usually around two-thirds of the ministers have no experience of government and Parliament. That is perhaps why Narendra Modi, who had been elected chief minister thrice before being elected prime minister, chose not to make 100 days a benchmark date. In fact, he is even more handicapped: 95 per cent of his ministers are inexperienced. 

But once these things get going, the media, especially if it has nothing more sensible to do, tends to get its teeth into it. So Modi’s first 100 days, in spite of his not having made any claims, have been turned into a free-for-all. As with UPA 1, the underlying tone is critical but not ungenerous. Deep down the journalists know it is unfair, so early in the game, to start blaming the government for things yet undone.   

I decided to see what had been said about the UPA-1’s first 100 days. No surprises there: the media had nothing useful to say because there was actually nothing much to say. The government had made many promises. It had also executed some of them in the sense that a start had been made. 

To be sure there were the usual bickering amongst coalition partners – remember the Congress had no experience of coalitions – and bureaucrats who had been ousted bitching at parties that journalists attended. But by and large it was peaceful.

India Today intro
(September 13, 2004)

There has been no shortage of turmoil in the UPA's first 100 days: a budget passed without discussion, the political discourse hijacked by "tainted" ministers, a chief minister jailed, the leader of the Opposition arrested, an icon insulted and a storm in the prime ministerial chamber.

Many papers ran stories on those first 100 days of the UPA. Most of them were just a listing – read re-write of the PIB handout – of the achievements. At the top was the ‘de-saffronising’ agenda of the Congress. Governors were changed wholesale and education became a priority area so that the questioning of the Congress’s record during the NDA period (1998-2004) could be brushed out. 

 
In general though, the media was content to report what the Opposition was saying. The Left, which though supporting UPA 1, insisted on behaving like the Opposition. Its criticism was even sharper than that of the BJP. It got huge play.  

By 2009, the media had changed and planned ahead. It got after UPA 2 which had again won an unexpected and highly convincing victory. 

By now the Right to Information Gateway was in place and, unlike for 2004, the overall tone was critical, as well it might be, because it wasn’t 100 days this time but 375 days. Generally everyone agreed that UPA 2 was starting to falter.

Times of India intro
(August 29, 2009)

Hundred days is a small moment in the life of a government. It is perhaps no surprise that celebrations are muted as UPA 2 cruises past this milestone. The decision to keep matters low-key seems to have been deliberate as the government looks to take stock quietly of how its second innings in office is progressing.
 

Some TV channels carried out opinion polls, only to come to the banal conclusion that it was too early to judge but overall, after five years in power, more was expected. Few media platforms were seriously analytical in their criticism. 

It has been only slightly different for the Modi government. Aware that 100 days is too early and aware too that he is handicapped by a lack of talent, the media has been generally approving of most of his policies, though not of the seeming lack of vision. 

But it has been sharply critical of his decision not to engage with the media except on his terms and of his total silence on the anti-Muslim venom being spewed forth by the Hindutva brigade. 

This, at least, is as it should be. 

References:

  1. India Today: “100 days of discord” (http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/congress-bjp-in-state-of-conflict-and-argument-in-2004-congress-politics-of-confrontation-energises/1/195341.html).
  2. The Times of India: “UPA cruises to a 100” (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Team-UPA-cruises-to-a-100/articleshow/4947044.cms?curpg=2),
  3. TCA Srinivasa-Raghavan: “Press AnyKey to Start” (http://ia.rediff.com/money/2004/aug/28guest.htm).
  4. Government: http://www.rtigateway.org.in/Documents/News/Aug-2009.pdf).

 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.