Arnab Goswami Ideology Counters Secular Credentials


Arnab Goswami Ideology Counters Secular Credentials
Salary Issue of SSA Teachers Under Active Consideration: Govt
DSEK Revokes Suspension Order, 102 Centers Authorised For Private Tuitions
Govt Foils Naqshband Sahib ‘Chalo’

To accuse protest as terorrism and to assume every criticism seditious reminds the grand old days of British Raj

Mir Shahid Majeed

Secular credentials form the premise of Indian nation. It is a composite multitude of nationalities built after fierce struggle for hundreds of years. The Constitution framed after independence laid down the noble ideals of country. This vision is inspired by the dreams of freedom fighters.

They took tiresome efforts for realisation of secular and Democratic india. Thenceforth Democratic attribute has seen the thicks and thins in journey till date.

Emergency period oft repeatedly quoted as darkest phase in Democratic history of country. It doomed the fate of essential ingredients which upholds the attributes keep  going. Thereafter this order traversed tricky routes and is present among us as largest established democracy on earth.

But the story isn’t as writing is rated from wall. Emergence of some exceptional stress and strains had downgraded the morale of Democratic attributes and doomed the faith mammoth  billion people.

Arnab Goswami took to reigns of journalism with much vigour and vitality. The specific line of thought perused by mentality of this TV anchor raises eye brows on the methodology used and the ideological orientation perused adopted. Most of the debates hosted in the presence of said Anchor proves contrary to mentality of majority of citizens in backyard.

What does this ideology mean to secular india?

Historical records proved the ideological orientation heavy for him. He was expelled from Times Now. After the incident he joined Republic TV where large number of intellectuals discuss the day today affairs of country. The issues in the countryside and the problems in front of nation.

Every time the debate stretches to an extreme end with “Take it or leave it attitude”. Whenever the debate on kashmir issue is brought with participation of local personalities it is dragged to an inflexion point.

The erratic behavior and the harsh language at times doesn’t behoves the media fraternity. Once he called MLA Engineer Rashid the Grandfather of another participant. The debate indicates only two things about the Anchor. Either he is unaware about the history or he turns blind towards it.

He must trace the historical significance of dispute for any discussion on the topic. Wasn’t Nehru the PM of India ? Hasn’t he promised to hold plebiscite? Infact the genial genius in Nehru compelled him to resolve dispute through UNO.

And the repetition and rememberence of same historical fact by MLA isn’t a extremism. When the democracy and rule of law is in place , the freedom of expression is fundamental right it’s no more  strange to express oneself within parameters of law. If the law doesn’t guarantees sedition it even doesn’t provides license to defame and insult an elected MLA.

Extremism in Arnab Goswami is anti thetical to secular nature of society. The harsh tune towards whole minority on basis of exceptional cases isn’t fair and impartial. The miniscule numbers in extremism groups isn’t a general ideal in whole society. Law serves the due through equality.

An inhuman and brutal act performed by any citizen shall not be generalized as similar feature of whole citizenry.The extreme ideological orientation in last three years has its repurcussions already inshape now.

It dramatically reversed the gains on majority of attributes. The anchor proved incapable to read writing on wall. He oft repeats the extremist tune in serious debates and tries to impose the minority opinion on intellectuals.

Some commentators have criticized Goswami for his style of TV panel discussion. Kavita Krishnan, a Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) (CPI-ML) affiliated activist, criticized Goswami’s stance on sensitive issues and stated that “When channels and newspapers brand terror accused as “terrorists”, or rape-accused as “rapists” and orchestrate the chant for the death penalty for them; when they act as stenos or loudspeakers for the police or investigative agencies in terror cases; are they not doing grievous harm and endangering people’s lives and safety? Are they not conveying allegations as guilt.

Caravan magazine editor Hartosh Singh Bal referred to Arnab Goswami’s anchoring as “scripted drama and he’s often happy to a play a role.Outlook running a cover story titled ‘The Man Who Killed TV News’. “Newshour is where Arnab plays judge, the audience the jury”, the report stated, adding that “On key news events, Arnab has emerged as The Great Polariser, his acid tongue stripping complex issues of all nuance”.

The points of criticism raised by numerous publications at repeated times is a cause for concern to this heated ideology. He downplays the original and basic principles on which the foundation of country rests. To accuse protest  as terorrism and to assume every criticism seditious reminds the grand old days of British Raj. In fact the decades of time remained unsuccessful to change the penal codes framed by Colonial Rulers for their vested interests. Although career of TV anchor flourished in recent years but the majority seems in harsh tune towards Arnab.

The father of nation lefts a sincere lesson in “Eye for an eye will make whole world blind”. Arnab Goswami led ideology needs strategic refit in backdrop of eying democratic power status. It has established various platforms like Indo Us Democracy Fund in 2009 inaugurated by Manmohan and Obama.

It envisions to support democracy along length and breadth of world. It aims to provide financial and intellectual support for democratic governments everywhere. When such ambitions are in pipeline,the perverse ideological orientation in Arnab Goswami is anti-thetical.The harsh tune in live debates with intellectuals of the time is an ethical and moral disaster for whole media fraternity.

There’s a common resolution regarding approach to societal functioning by holding “unity in diversity ” in letter and spirit. Unless and untill this utility comes to intellectual class , the dangers may prove disastrous. Its repurcussions in shape on Ikhlaq lynching, Govind pansare, Dabholkar and Rajasthan episode is a serious concern to be looked for. Media Moguls should take care of this mental makeup for a functioning of a society in a compassionate way.

Writer Shahid Majeed Mir hails from Misribehak Machil Kupwara and can be reached at


Please support the site
By clicking any of these buttons you help our site to get better