E-media telecasts in Andhra Pradesh created legal, social and political controversies besides ‘provoking’ arson against a corporate giant, Reliance. A TV debate laced with rumours of conspiracy, around mysterious and accidental death of Dr Y S Rajasekhar Reddy on September 2, 2009 in a helicopter crash kicked up troubles raising doubts about responsibility of media, political parties and the response of the Rosaiah Government. Finally at least three channels of vibrant electronic media in Hyderabad are going to face both criminal and civil litigation from Reliance corporate body.

Two Editors, Brahmananda Reddy and Venkatakrishna of TV 5, a 24-hour news channel in Telugu were arrested on charge that they aired serious comments ‘containing a rumour or alarming news with intent to create or promote or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities’ [Section 505(2) Indian Penal Code]. TV Journalists were also charged under Section 153A for creating differences and causing conflicts between two sections, and under Section 16 of the Cable TV Networks Regulation Act 1995 for violating the program code which prohibits provocative reports. But the judicial magistrate found no prima facie  basis for these charges and dropped them, while remanding the journalists to judicial custody for a couple of days under Section 505(2). As other channels, Saakshi TV (belonging to YSR’s son) and N TV also followed the similar reports and thus facing criminal charges. On 7th itself MP and Saakshi TV owner, which also telecast the story, Mr. YS Jagan appealed to public not to indulge in violence. Value of these appeals after the debate was initiated, need to be ascertained in the court of law.

Here the rumour referred by the FIR was the allegation that death of YSR was not just an accident but result of conspiracy, with baseless blaming of the bigwigs of Reliance, as published in a Russian website news journal called ‘The Exile’.  None knows what kind of journal was this, but it was as old as dated September 3, that is, just a day after YSR’s helicopter went missing, even before his death was confirmed.  Main doubt raised was, why the channel chose a three month old website and launched a debate. Channel claimed that it was because of remarks of former Minister Mr Mareppa, who ventilated similar charges. On the evening of 7th January, the channel was beamed the controversial debate with an advocate and former police officer talking on missing links in the narration of accident, location of pistol, missing bullet, delay in revealing contents of voice recorder, etc besides the need to bring out the truth to satisfy the public in general.

There was widespread arson and attacks against reliance outlets, first in Hyderabad and then in Guntur, Prakasham and some districts of Rayalaseema causing destruction of 93 reliance properties. In YSR district Kadapa alone 31 attacks took place. Whether attacks took place first or telecast is a big question, about which a political controversy is raised within hours. TV5 anchor-cum-input editor was making an appeal to calm down and understand that they were just debating on speculation and the allegation was yet to be substantiated.  Reliance Industries issued first page colour advertisements in main stream newspapers strongly refuting allegations, lodged complaints against the TV channels in police stations and set the law into motion. Reliance Industries unequivocally refuted ‘all the allegations with the contempt they deserve. The unsubstantiated, malicious and motivated reports are utter rubbish, without an iota of truth in them. That the news channels sensationalized a speculative story appearing on a little-known foreign website of dubious credentials, without crosschecking with us, betrays their malafide intentions’, said the advertisement. Claiming that reliance was law abiding corporate citizen, it said that ‘this is further evident from the sudden, pre-meditated, organized and well coordinated attacks on RIL installations that ensured within minutes of the first news broadcast.  RIL also threatened to proceed against TV5 legally for loss of reputation and loss caused to customers. Those litigations, if ensued, will be real challenge for the electronic media to face the consequences of speculative reporting with serious allegations followed by destruction.

Quoting this telecast the AP Chief Minister K Rosaiah requested CBI and Civil Aviation Directorate to include ‘sabotage angle’ in their inquiry scope. State booked 96 cases and arrested 187 persons, mostly Congress workers, which Saakshi claimed as strategically targeting one section of congress party. Telugudesam party alleged that YS Yuvasena called for Bandh through SMS at 4.55 pm some time before the telecasting began and another SMS allegedly in the name of a NSUI leader Vamshi Chand Reddy (who was arrested later) to 681 numbers calling for attacking corporate outfits, which contained slogan of Jai YSR.  Chandrababu Naidu, Leader of Opposition alleged that simultaneous attacks and telecast was result of a political conspiracy. He questioned “how could a Russian website confirm that it was conspiratorial murder on September 3 itself, even before YSR’s body was not located. If there is really a conspiracy behind the accident, why not Congress party which is ruling both at center and state probe and establish it, instead of creating destruction in the street?”, Naidu questioned. Congress leaders and their supportive media strongly condemned Naidu’s remarks.

While Eenadu daily (8th Jan) described the events of 7th Jan as result of irresponsible reporting by news channel, Saakshi daily (8th Jan) called that a channel brought the facts into lime light and YSR fans were emotionally enraged. While one newspaper blames Jagan group by name, another newspaper calls them ‘yellow lobby’ (yellow being the colour of Telugudesam party). With the news channels and newspapers openly aligning themselves with one or the other party, viewers and readers are taking the news with necessary ‘rebate’ of credibility and possibility of bias. But the whole evolution of events crossed the stages of ‘ethics’, ‘objectivity’, ‘critical analysis’ to ‘sensational or criminal allegations’ to ‘crimes of arson and destruction’ and to ‘civil and criminal litigation involving journalists and politicians’, an unfortunate fall, indeed.

Media should realize that telecasting sensational programs based on mere earlier publication or statement of someone would not absolve them from burden of proving the truth of allegation or getting convicted to imprisonment or liability to pay huge sums for defamation after protracted litigation. The law infers bad intention from irresponsible and reckless reporting and criminal knowledge of journalists from ‘reason to believe’. As publication need not be proved because it is electronically recorded, the media, if not careful, will be courting the court troubles. Can we hope that at least the ordeal of court trials make the media responsible, objective and truly professional?

Author is the Coordinator, NALSAR Proximate Education &Center for Media Law Studies, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad

MORE READING ON THE AUTHORS ARTICLES