RSS believes foreign media's Delhi riots coverage was biased; decides against giving comments

Vibha Sharma
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, March 7

Bharatiya Janata Party’s ideological fountainhead Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has decided against giving comments to the foreign press—a development that comes in the light of several right-wing thinkers accusing the foreign media of false and biased reporting during last week’s Delhi riots.

Sangh leaders claim that representatives of foreign media call for comments/responses on issues, which are then interspersed in stories and reports with “pre-determined slant/prejudice/bias”.

“If they want our (Sangh) view, they should be ready to publish an article written by us. Often they (foreign media) put our responses/comments at the end of their report, the slant of which has already been decided. Our comments are used to justify that the other side has been given space/representation in the report,” some sources say.

Shaheen Bagh and similar anti-CAA protests and following events have led to unprecedented criticism of the Narendra Modi government by a section of the international press. However, like government and party representatives, RSS leaders also blame the Opposition. Describing the last week’s Delhi riots as a case of violence in which both communities were affected they dismiss allegations of any role of the BJP in fomenting trouble.

“What did the government gain amid a high-profile visit (of President Donald Trump),” sources say.

 “We have talked to many ‘sanjeeda’ (serious) Muslim leaders/organisations and they agree CAA should not have been made an issue. There can be apprehensions regarding NRC but not CAA or NPR. Though ultimately you will have to decide who citizens of the country are,” some Sangh leaders said, defending the National Register of Citizens, which Prime Minister Narendra Modi said has not yet been discussed within the government.

Saffron leaders blame the Opposition for “spreading misinformation” and “misleading reports” in foreign journals regarding “the government’s complicity and silence” and “trauma on victims due to lapses in providing timely and good quality treatment”. Accusing foreign media of “bias and wrong reporting” they also cite examples of “misleading/false” quotes of families of victims in their reports. “Most international journalists have not read or understood CAA. A brother of a victim alleged he had been falsely quoted by an international journal,” they say.