A young Norwegian journalist asking Narendra Modi why he would not take questions from the press created an uproar in India. Helle Lyng was trolled and conspiracy theories about her political leanings and funding were circulated. Every effort was made to discredit her. Many Indians were not bothered that Modi did not take any questions while every other leader did so.
Modi has not taken questions from the press since taking office in 2014. He has only addressed citizens directly or participated in curated conversations with a few journalists or actors. It is obvious that he is afraid of being questioned or challenged. Interestingly though, his spin doctors have turned this weakness into an advantage. We are told that Modi prefers to speak directly to the people, much like a monarch. The entire Indian press has been villainised, justifying its marginalisation by India’s prime minister. The Indian press, especially television media, has become so partisan that it reserves all the questions for the Opposition while being frontline cheerleaders for Modi. Unfortunately, for Modi, this closed and protective ecosystem does not exist elsewhere, especially in the Scandinavian countries. Consequently, he and his staff
were caught off guard and embarrassed.
Critics of Modi have been circulating videos and pictures of former prime ministers being interrogated by the media and activists and claim that Modi’s avoidance of the press is a new phenomenon. While I am in agreement with this assessment, romanticising the past as ideal is incorrect. We have always been a country where politicians have been uncomfortable about being questioned. There are innumerable incidents of members of the press being abused or shouted down by politicians of all hues. Hoisting cases on publications and the arbitrary arrest of journalists are not new. What we are experiencing now is a full-blown and unabashed version of media suppression. But the seeds of this attitude lie in our social consciousness.
We were and are a deeply hierarchical society, determined by class, caste, sex and gender, where feudalism thrives. In such an environment, the social location of an individual and his/her specific scale of power determine freedom. Even the freedom to think is limited. These ranges are fixed from the time of birth. Some flexibility emerges later due to an individual’s socio-political accent. All this controls the bandwidth of questioning. But when there is no true freedom of thought, there can be no questioning. In fact, we are not even taught how to frame a question in our homes and schools. Fear and obedience are inculcated.
A politician is but a product of such a society. A person in a position of supreme power feels he is entitled to be arrogant and condescending towards everyone else. Questioning the person seriously breaks the social order that has given him the power he enjoys. It is not only a problem of the question but also about who is asking the question. Gender and caste play a crucial role. In the case of Lyng, the fact that she was a woman made the reaction that much more violent. After all, Modi has displayed himself as this macho man with a 56-inch chest who takes on world leaders. Every video of his shows him walking alone and waving at the people. This ideal alpha male was pushed into a corner by a woman before the entire world. Modi himself may or may not have been bothered but his fanboys were insulted. They felt the need to come to his rescue and attack the woman. When women are attacked, the language immediately descends into unquotable territory. If it had been a man who threw that question at Modi, the reaction would have been strong but not as disgraceful. If Lyng had been a woman of colour, I am certain that the attacks would have also had a racist angle.
There was yet another problem: Lyng’s age! Age is a major factor for Indians. Respecting the elderly is considered a prerequisite to being cultured. However, what this respect actually means in action is unclear. More often than not, this translates into ‘don’t ask questions of seniors, accept what they say, do as they say.’ The elderly, in turn, demand unquestioning obedience. You will hear them say, ‘Just do as I say, you will understand all this when you grow up.’ The young are not treated as equals. Those who break these shackles are scorned. A Tamil expression used for such young people is ‘adigapprasangi’ or an over eager, impertinent person who speaks too much or asks unnecessary questions. Lyng fits this bill!
The attacks on her also involved questioning her knowledge of India. The MEA secretary, instead of answering her question, gave Lyng a history lesson. He was also making the point that she is young and knows nothing about India. It was an ageist attack. If she had been older, people would not have gone down this track.
Then there was the bit of how the question was asked. Lyng literally waylaid the prime minister. But she had no other choice. He was on his way out and she wanted to push her question through. And as Lyng herself said “That’s how confrontational journalism works...” In the Indian context, questions have to be asked ‘respectfully’. The implication is that the party being questioned cannot be made uncomfortable. You are not allowed to threaten that person’s authority. The implication of these unwritten conditionalities is that many questions are out of bounds. In other words, the respondent already knows the scope of the questions he will receive. This is detrimental to serious journalism. But some questions have to be asked directly without any sugar coating. If we are culturally trained to tiptoe around the truth due to the fear of hurting someone, we can never get to the truth.
This entire episode has not only revealed the fragility of Modi and his Establishment but also pointed to a far deeper societal problem. Though defenders of Indian traditions will refer to the Upanishads as proof of our critical nature, reality tells us another story. We do not know how to question. We do not like being questioned. We will condemn the questioner. India is ranked 157 out of 180 in the World Press Freedom Index released by Reporters Without Borders. This is not only a reflection of the oppressive nature of the State but it also exposes the restrictive design of our social structure.
T.M. Krishna is a leading Indian musician and a prominent public intellectual