Hindu Vivek Kendra
«« Back
While The Hindu talks about two sides of a national story, its coverage on CAA presents only one side

Author: S sudhir kumar
Publication: The Hindu
Date:  January 6, 2020
URL:      https://www.opindia.com/2020/01/the-hindu-two-sides-of-story-caa-pro-anti-one-sided-coverage/

It was imperative that this documentation was done – to showcase to the world how lopsided and one-sided coverage of this issue is being perpetrated by The Hindu.

The Director of Editorial Strategy (whatever that means) of The Hindu, Dr. Malini Parthasarathy was recently worried that the Government of India “doesn’t see two sides of the national story any more!” The “national story” she is referring to here refers to the CAA and NRC headlines. I read The Hindu daily, and reading her tweet immediately prompted me to think if Dr. Malini’s newspaper actually sees two sides of a national story?

For example, I felt that irony died a million deaths when a column titled “FACTWISE” was written by Srinivasan Ramani. Srinivasan Ramani is no stranger to spreading lies, fake numbers and analysis under the garb of “facts”. In his article, “A tale of two demands”, he boldly proclaims that, “Dr. Singh and the CPI(M) demanded citizenship for Bangla refugees, but not on the basis of their religion”

The treachery is simply astounding.  In 2003, Dr. Manmohan Singh stood up in the Rajya Sabha and said that “the minorities in countries like Bangladesh have faced persecution”. The CPI(M) party resolution in 2012 reads – “the CPI(M)] demands a suitable amendment in Clause 2 (i)(b) of the said Citizenship Act in relation to the Bangladesh minority community refugees”

The full statements are widely available on the internet. I copied the above lines from the very article that The Hindu published. Both Dr. Singh and the CPI(M) are very clear that minorities in Bangladesh need help. Yet, Srinivasan Ramani had the courage to lie openly that the demands were “not on the basis of religion”! Bangladesh is a Muslim majority country. Islam is the state religion of Bangladesh. In this context, what does “minorities in Bangladesh” mean? Except for alleged journalists, it is crystal clear to everyone that the reference is based on religion because the persecution is based on religion!

Can you imagine the lies this newspaper would have spread in days when social media wasn’t active? Do you shudder at this thought? In case you think this is a one-off case, let’s look at more examples.

On December 10th, The Hindu publishes a news article that says “1000 signatories express concern”.
The Hindu

Scientists, scholars call to scrap Citizenship Bill


DECEMBER 10, 2019

1,000 signatories express concern

About a 1000 scientists and research scholars from some of India’s premier research organisations have signed a petition demanding that the Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019 (CAB) be withdrawn in its current form.

“We are issuing this statement in our personal capacity as concerned citizens to express our dismay at the reported plans to table the Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019, in the Parliament,” says the petition.

The CAB was tabled in Lok Sabha on Monday and seeks to grant citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

While the petition welcomes the CAB’s “objective” to provide refuge to persecuted minorities from neighbouring countries, it objects to the Bill’s use of religion as a legal criterion for determining Indian citizenship.

Noted scholar Ramachandra Guha tweeted, “Some signatories are world-renowned scientists, others brilliant Ph D students. They work in our top institutes. This is the brain power of India; not alleged ‘anti-nationals’.”

The petitioners are affiliated to the Indian Institutes of Technology, the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research, Indian Institute of Science, Delhi University, Chennai Mathematical Institute, International Centre for Theoretical Science, Tata Institute for Fundamental Research. Some of the signatories were also affiliated to international institutes such as the University of Bonn, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the University of Oslo.

“We do not have access to the exact text of the current version of the Bill. Our statement is based on media reports and the text of the previous version of the Bill that was passed by Lok Sabha in January 2019. The idea of India that emerged from the independence movement, and as enshrined in our Constitution, is that of a country that aspires to treat people of all faiths equally. The use of religion as a criterion for citizenship in the proposed bill would mark a radical break with this history and would be inconsistent with the basic structure of the constitution. We fear, in particular, that the careful exclusion of Muslims from the ambit of the Bill will greatly strain the pluralistic fabric of the country,” the petition notes.

On December 21st, more than 1000 academicians signed a letter in support of the CAA. Guess what, there was not a single reference to this letter in the newspaper on December 22nd. Don’t believe me – here is a snap of their national news section on December 22nd.

Or you can even search in their online section here. However, The Hindu published the PTI version of this story on their website. Now, take a look at the accompanying image that The Hindu chose to publish for this particular news item.
The Hindu

Over 1,000 academicians release statement in support of CAA


DECEMBER 21, 2019

The statement comes in the midst of countrywide protests against the new citizenship law.

As many as 1,100 academicians and research scholars from various universities across India and abroad as well as prominent persons released a statement in support of the amended Citizenship Act on Saturday.

The signatories to the statement include Rajya Sabha member Swapan Dasgupta, Shishir Bajoria, Chairman, IIM Shillong, Sunaina Singh, Vice Chancellor, Nalanda University, JNU professor Ainul Hasan, Abhijit Iyer-Mitra, Senior Fellow, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies and journalist Kanchan Gupta.

The statement comes in the midst of countrywide protests against the new citizenship law. Students from various universities have also joined the agitation.

In the statement, the signatories appealed to every section of the society “to exercise restraint and refuse to fall into the trap of propaganda, communalism and anarchism”.

“We also note with deep anguish that an atmosphere of fear and paranoia is being created in the country through deliberate obfuscation and fear-mongering, leading to violence in several parts of the country,” the statement said.

Two weeks ago, over 1,000 scientists and scholars had signed a petition demanding that the Citizenship Amendment Bill in its current form be withdrawn, with noted academician Pratap Bhanu Mehta saying the legislation will transform India into an “unconstitutional ethnocracy”. The petition had come after the Lok Sabha had passed the bill and before it was passed in the Rajya Sabha.

Later, 600 artistes, writers, academicians, former judges and former bureaucrats had urged the government to withdraw the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, terming it as “discriminatory, divisive” and violative of the secular principles enshrined in the Constitution.

The signatories to the statement congratulated Parliament for “standing up for forgotten minorities”, “upholding the civilisational ethos of India” and “providing a haven for those fleeing religious persecution”.

The act fulfilled the long-standing demand of providing refuge to persecuted religious minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, the statement said. Ever since the failure of the Liaquat-Nehru Pact of 1950, various leaders and political parties such as the Congress, CPI(M) etc., cutting across the ideological spectrum, had demanded grant of citizenship to religious minorities from Pakistan and Bangladesh, who mostly belonged to the Dalit castes, it added.

“We also note with satisfaction that the concerns of the north-eastern states have been heard and are being addressed appropriately. We believe that CAA is in perfect sync with the secular Constitution of India as it does not prevent any person of any religion from any country seeking Indian citizenship,” the statement said.

Nor did it change the criteria of citizenship in any way; merely providing a special expedited redress, under special circumstances, for minorities fleeing religious persecution from three specific countries i.e Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, it added.

“It does not in any way prevent Ahmadis, Hazaras, Baloch or any other denominations and ethnicities, from these same three countries, seeking citizenship through regular processes,” the statement said.

What explains the publication of an anti-CAA image in a pro-CAA story? If an anti-CAA letter merits a publication in the newspaper, why doesn’t a pro-CAA letter merit the same? What kind of treacherous mentality aids The Hindu to squash one side of the story completely?

Around the same time that The Hindu published a “viral photo” of a girl giving a rose to policemen, Farhan Akhtar’s video of him not knowing what he is protesting against also went viral. Just one video from Rahul Kaushik that was RT’ed by Smriti Irani had a whopping 4,40,000 views!. If this is not the definition of viral, then I don’t know what is! Why is this important video, that exposes the utter callousness of popular folks, not an important news item to cover?

Let’s now see how carefully The Hindu has attempted to downplay the violence. Here is an image The Hindu has published on December 14th.

We can very clearly see that the “students” in this image are resorting to violence. Yet, The Hindu, in their caption tells us that this image is of “JMU students protesting against CAA and the NRC”! Is this not treachery that The Hindu choses to mask violence in the garb of “protests”?

An infographic was presented by The Hindu, with the title “Rising restrictions”. This was in reference to the ban on Internet in areas where violence was happening. Please take some time to study this infographic.


Once you are done with it, can you please point out how is the 2019 data in anyway indicative of “rising restrictions”? 137 instances in 2018 versus 106 in 2019! If we remove J&K, then we are looking at 59 instances in 2018 versus 31 instances in 2019! Barring the problematic J&K, 31 instances in the entire country for an entire year, in various states (including West Bengal, the liberal group’s favorite state) – is that a number we really need to be alarmed about? If we are to be alarmed about them, then here is an open challenge to the Director of Editorial Strategy, The Hindu – can you please share with us 31 editorials and op-eds in The Hindu denouncing these instances as and when they occurred?

On December 18th, The Hindu front paged the following – “21 hurt as protestors clash with police in Delhi”. Somewhere in the article we are told that 15 out of these 21 are police personnel only! No information on how police personnel were getting hurt.
The Hindu

Anti-CAA protests: 21 hurt as protesters clash with police in Delhi


DECEMBER 18, 2019

Anti-CAA agitation takes violent turn in Seelampur; two police booths set on fire, two police bikes damaged

Twenty-one people were injured when a protest at Seelampur in east Delhi against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the police action against students at Jamia Millia Islamia University in the capital turned violent on Tuesday.

Two police booths were set on fire and three vehicles, including two police bikes, were damaged, the police said.

“A total of 21 persons sustained injuries, including 15 security personnel and six members of the public. The injured include three Rapid Action Force officials, 12 Delhi police officials and six members of the public,” Joint Commissioner of Police (Eastern Range) Alok Kumar said.

Two FIRs registered

Mr. Kumar said two FIRs had been registered in connection with the case — one at the Jaffrabad police station and the other at Seelampur — on the charges of rioting, arson and damage to public property.

The police said the protests were peaceful for four hours but towards the end, when the people were dispersing, some of them started throwing stones.

“No one was lathi-charged, but tear-gas shells were used as a crowd control measure,” Mr. Kumar said.

Those present said the protest was peaceful when it began around 1.30 p.m., and it was only after the police lathi-charged them that they resorted to stone-throwing. The protesters also broke the windows of two buses.

“We wanted to go to the Seelampur Metro Station and block the road so that our voice will be heard,” said Guddu Khan, 24, one of the protesters. “But when we reached the Seelampur red light, the police stopped us and didn’t allow us to go forward. Though we tried to negotiate with them, they lathi-charged us and the people retaliated by throwing stones,” he said.

Some videos, thought to be of the incident and shot by the locals, showed the police beating the protesters with lathis.

Meanwhile, 10 persons were arrested in connection with Sunday’s clashes; none of them was a student. All have criminal backgrounds, and were identified from CCTV footage.

Multiple protesters said the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens are against Muslims. They said they will continue to raise their voice against them.

According to the locals, some of the protesters who withdrew from the main road, due to the lathi charge, ransacked the police post and burnt motorcycles outside it. The protest went on till about 5 p.m. Police said a total of five companies including one from the Rapid Action Force (RAF), along with personnel from three districts, have been deployed in the trouble spots.

On December 20th though, The Hindu’s headline was crystal clear – 2 die in police firing!
The Hindu

Two die in police firing in Mangaluru as anti-CAA protests rock the country


DECEMBER 20, 2019

Protesters across the country take to the streets against the citizenship law, defy prohibitory orders in many places and brave police crackdowns

Two persons were killed in police firing in Mangaluru on Thursday as protesters across the country took to the streets against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), which in combination could potentially introduce a religious test for citizenship in India.

Police in the coastal city of Mangaluru lathi-charged and later opened fire at protesters they claimed were trying to set fire to a police station and had targeted police personnel in Bunder area.

The police said the exact cause of death of Nausin, 23, and Jalil Kudroli, 49, would be known only after post-mortem examination. The two, who were injured in the violence, died in hospital.

Mobile Internet data service has been suspended in the entire Dakshina Kannada district for two days “to prevent misuse of social media platform”, police said. Curfew has been clamped in the Mangaluru City Police Commissionerate area till December 22 midnight, and all educational institutions will remain shut.

Elsewhere across the country, marchers thronged cities, defying prohibitory orders in many places and braving police crackdowns in areas under BJP rule.

People from various backgrounds, across age groups and professions came together in response to calls given by civil society groups and opposition parties, in Mumbai, Kolkata, Jammu, Lucknow, Thiruvananthapuram, Chennai and Patna, and several other towns.

In Lucknow, a man died of an alleged firearm injury as protests turned violent, leading to the arrest of at least 55 persons and the shutdown of Internet in the State capital. More than two dozen vehicles, including a State bus, TV broadcast vans and police vehicles, were torched at different locations as parts of old Lucknow witnessed chaotic scenes.

Thousands gathered at Mumbai’s August Kranti Maidan and raised slogans, displayed placards, sported painted faces, sang songs and played music. There were repeated announcements throughout the rally to keep things peaceful. Former IAS officer Kannan Gopinathan and actor Sushant Singh took part in the Mumbai protest.

Kolkata witnessed five rallies, of which the one held without the support of political parties drew no less than 20,000 people. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has dared the Modi government to go for a UN-monitored referendum on the contentious issue.

Internet blocked

In the national capital, the police — which is under the Union Home Ministry — detained people from various locations and thwarted a demonstration. Mobile phone and Internet services were cut in parts of the city and 19 stations of the Metro Rail in central Delhi were shut but hundreds managed to assemble at Jantar Mantar, an earshot from the parliament building. Around 700 flights were delayed and 20 were cancelled in Delhi.

The CAA, passed by Parliament recently, offers a route to citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, while the NRC, according to Home Minister Amit Shah, will identify and remove “infiltrators”.

An unsigned note circulated by a Central government functionary around noon said when the NRC is rolled out, people will be able to use existing documents to establish citizenship. However, there was no formal announcement from the government regarding concerns raised in the rallies across the country that the hand of the new citizenship regime will be heavy on Muslims and poor people who are unlikely to possess documents.

In Mumbai, actor Sushant Singh, who was removed by television show Savdhan India for his position on the CAA-NRC, said, “I must thank the students of this country for letting us know that India’s blood hasn’t cooled yet.”

Historian Ramachandra Guha was among the people detained in Bengaluru.

Smaller cities in Karnataka, particularly Kalaburagi in North Karnataka, witnessed huge turnout for several protests.

In Lucknow Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath said protesters who damaged public property will be forced to pay for it.

“No protest can take place without permission,” he told news agency ANI.

Policemen injured

Several policemen including an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) were injured in heavy stone pelting when a march turned violent in Shah-e-Alam area of Ahmedabad.

Expressing solidarity with the nation-wide protests, students and various organisations took to the streets across Kerala, even as Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan warned the Centre against using force to crush democratic and peaceful means of protest.

We are also then told that “Anti-CAA protests rock the country”. This was around the same time many pro-CAA rallies were also taken out in the country. No prizes for guessing if The Hindu covered them with the same vigor or not.

The Lok Sabha passed the CAB on December 9th. Since December 10th, in addition to all of the above news published in the guise of views, following are the headlines of just some of the views that were published as Editorials & Op-eds:

1. Dec 10th: Editorial titled “Unequal, unsecular: On Citizenship Amendment Bill”
2. Dec 11th: Congress and Partition (“The idea of religious identity being the basis for Partition has less to do with the Congress…”)
3. 11th: A patently unconstitutional piece of legislation (“The CAB, 2019 has a sinister political logic — the first de jure attempt towards a Hindu Rashtra”. Although I wonder how does giving refuge to Christians make us a Hindu Rashtra!)
4. 11th: Wholly subordinated to the majoritarian nation
5. Dec 12th: A law not based on religion (about the 1950 act)
6. Dec 13th: In the name of a majority
7. Dec 16th: Editorial titled “Many mutinies”
8. Dec 17th: CAA isn’t a Hindu-Muslim issue
9. Dec 18th : Left to the whims of the executive
10. Dec 18th: Time to defend India’s secularism (This one was by the CM of Kerala!)
11. Dec 19th: Are fears over the CAA misplaced?
12. Dec 19th: The last bastions of Secular India
13. Dec 19th: Jairam Ramesh Interview – NRC places an intolerable burden on the poor and vulnerable sections
14. Dec 20th: In thrall to its own violence
15. Dec 20th: A tale of two demands
16. Dec 23rd: Mixed Signals on NRC
17. Dec 23rd: The three-step communal game plan
18. Dec 23rd: A Hindu critique of Hindutva
19. Dec 24th: North East in Turmoil
20. Dec 26th: Dangerous Doublespeak
21. Dec 26th: An Act that fails the Constitution
22. Dec 26th: The return of the Secular
23. Dec 27th: What are the amendments that the CAA needs
24. Dec 28th: In CAA narrative, finding the judiciary’s lost voice (Virtually bullying the SC!)
25. Dec 28th: Fuel to the fire: On Cabinet announcement on NPR
26. 30th: Arms and the man: On Gen Rawat’s comments
27. 30th: A dangerous new low in state-sponsored hate
28. 31st: Uncovering the CAA’s larger stratagem
29. Jan 1st: An anatomy of anti-CAA protests
30. Jan 1st: It is everybody’s constitution
31. Jan 2nd: The abiding power of protest
32. Jan 4th: Defying the legalisation of the unjustifiable
33. Jan 4th: Missing the wood: On anti-CAA resolution in Kerala Assembly

Dear reader, do you want to know how many pro-CAA articles were published by The Hindu in this period? A grand total of One. Yes, ONE. An article by Subramaniam Swamy on Dec 21st – “A premature denouncement of the Citizenship Act”

What I have presented to you in this article is perhaps 50% of what The Hindu has done during the past one month. The myriad news articles trying to cover-up for the violence and the myriad views trying to spread falsehood, create fear would take an eternity to cover. However, it was imperative that this documentation was done – to showcase to the world how lopsided and one-sided coverage of this issue is being perpetrated by The Hindu. It has been proven time and again, that the last entity on earth to lecture about “two sides” is The Hindu.

«« Back
  Search Articles
  Special Annoucements