A free speech ‘champion’ turns anti-freedom

function name : gab_postmeta_detail
27 Aug 2012

http://www.niticentral.com/emailshare/emailshare.php?pid=5125&url=http://www.niticentral.com/2012/08/27/a-free-speech-champion-turns-anti-freedom-5125.html&title=A free speech ‘champion’ turns anti-freedom&id=nc

A free speech ‘champion’ turns anti-freedom

Many years ago, while I was still with The Statesman, I met Vinod Mehta for the first time. In those days he was something of a hero for young starry-eyed journalists, having fought with newspaper owners and walked out of jobs. Actually, till then he had walked out of only one job – that of the editor of The Indian Post. Or was asked to put in his papers by Vijaypat Singhania who didn’t quite know how to deal with a Bolshy editor in the habit of throwing caution (and discretion) to the wind and printing stuff that many businessmen-turned-newspaper owners would consider subversive.

Before floating The Indian Post, Vinod had spent a pretty long spell as editor of Debonair, a poor man’s desi version of Playboy with dollops of pretentious highbrow stuff, usually lifted from elsewhere. (In his autobiography A Lucknow Boy, Vinod says he wrote it all himself, issue after issue.) Debonair sold the most at railway stations where travelling salesmen would pick up copies to while away time on overnight journeys and lonely hotels with stained bedsheets in upcountry towns. Vinod was okay with the idea of inserting glossy pages splashed with lurid photographs of women minus their clothes. It was supposed to be ‘art photography’; there was nothing arty about the photographs that were printed — the models looked desperate for money. I doubt Vinod had any compunctions about printing nude photographs to keep Debonair going. It was all freedom of the Press for him — the raunchier Debonair was, the freer it was from what he would consider undesirable shackles, including those of the law. The other publication he had floated and edited was The Sunday Observer, billed as India’s first Sunday newspaper. It didn’t have pin-up girls but their absence was more than compensated by salacious gossipy stories bordering on slander.

Among the many outrages committed by Vinod, admittedly with great dashing and flair, was to publish a fake obituary of Khushwant Singh, written by Dhiren Bhagat (those who knew him found him insufferably obnoxious) in 1983. Beneath the sophistry of Dhiren’s I-am-so-clever language skills lay a vile, vituperative and vicious attack on Khushwant Singh, “giving him a taste of what he has given to many” as Vinod once gleefully told me. There was nothing to suggest that it was a fake take on Khushwant Singh. When it was found to be a tasteless joke, there was understandable anger in the fraternity. But Vinod robustly defended (and still defends) Dhiren Bhagat’s slanderous article as a writer’s prerogative, his freedom of speech.

I had heard quite a few stories about Vinod, the eccentric editor who had pitilessly lampooned those behind Mrs Indira Gandhi’s Emergency, most notably Sanjay Gandhi on whom he had written a book, and prized freedom of expression, of speech and of Press (that was the only medium then as television came many years later) above everything else, including his own job. As I said, he was a bit of a hero for young journalists who, like him, had a Bolshy streak in them. And so it was that I felt excited on spotting him at Samovar, the restaurant at Jehangir Art Gallery (I wouldn’t know if it still exists) where my colleague Shireen had taken me for lunch. Vinod had strolled in with Mario Miranda and a couple of others. The group sat down at the table next to ours. I couldn’t resist the temptation of walking up to him and introducing myself. I don’t remember what he said in response. What I do remember is that he was wearing a funny pair of trousers. The next time I met him was at Ayodhya and we had a long chat at Lucknow airport. A couple of years later I relocated to Delhi to join The Pioneer whose editorship he had taken over under the new owners, the Thapar Group.

Frankly I knew little of Vinod as a person or as an editor till I joined The Pioneer. But there was something about him that inspired confidence. Over the next four odd years, that confidence turned into respect. He wasn’t politically inclined towards any party and fashioned himself as a liberal in a charmingly 1960s sort of way. He would let me write without telling me what not to write and was perfectly at ease with various shades of opinion. Everybody was fair game, including Sonia Gandhi who was very much in purdah as PV Narasimha Rao straddled both the Government and the Congress.

If there was something on which Vinod would often hold forth it was censorship – not only official but also the subtle and not-so-subtle variety imposed by owners and editors. So fierce was he about fighting censorship and making a statement of it that he asked me to get hold of a copy of Taslima Nasreen’s novel, Lajja, which had just been published in Bangladesh and kicked up a massive storm, leading to its instant ban. Mullahs on both sides of the border wanted her dead. Vinod found all of it appalling and unacceptable. Contacts were used to procure a copy and excerpts were translated by my wife for publication in The Pioneer. It was flag-waving at its most vigorous, sloganeering at its most raucous.

I recall three other occasions when Vinod refused to be persuaded by the need to exercise editorial discretion. One day we received a letter in an envelope, written and signed by a Muslim, castigating APJ Abdul Kalam for designing missiles for India to be used against Pakistan. The language was harsh and foul, clearly inflammatory. Vinod was adamant that it should be published in toto despite some of us urging restraint. Vinod would have nothing of it. The letter was prominently published in the Letters to the Editor column. Predictably, its incendiary contents were noticed by law-enforcing agencies and charges were filed against the paper for promoting communal disharmony. Vinod was unimpressed. I understand that case took years to resolve.

On another occasion, he published a letter headlined “RIP Advani” (after December 6, 1992) which was not only in poor taste but actionable under defamation laws. LM Thapar was horrified and wanted Vinod to apologise to Advani. Vinod refused to do anything like that (I don’t know if he did say sorry and kept it a secret). The third occasion when he demonstrated his fierce commitment to the right to publish and be damned was when he ran an interview with General SF Rodrigues in which the Army chief described politicians as ‘bandicoots’. There was predictable uproar and Thapar, to put it mildly, was displeased. Once again Vinod stuck to his guns and had his way. Vinod recounts similar instances in A Lucknow Boy.

In the end Vinod had to go. He resigned rather than compromise on principles.

The story, however, does not end there. Vinod went on to produce Outlook which broke several stories under his tutelage and became a fierce critic of the NDA Government. Sadly, all that fierceness evaporated in the summer of 2004. Overnight, Vinod and Outlook became hand maidens of the Congress — or, to be precise, Sonia Gandhi. Various reasons are mentioned for this, among them Vinod’s craving to feel important. He began running concocted stories to malign the BJP. The Vinod I knew at The Pioneer had a healthy contempt for “according to sources” journalism. This was a different Vinod, one who raised “according to sources” journalism to the lofty heights of ‘exclusive’ cover stories. Everything that made the Congress, the Queen, the Prince and the Regent look good was kosher, as was anything that made others lookbad.

To hide the fact that he had become a Palace loyalist and maintain the façade of his being fiercely independent, periodically he would declare his freedom by running 10,000-word essays by Arundhati Roy through which she openly advocated sedition, promoted terrorism and poured scorn on the state and its laws. Much of what appeared under her name and in Vinod’s magazine would not be touched by other editors, not the least because what Arundhati Roy wrote was hurtful to victims of terrorism, hateful to those who don’t share her ideology, and harmful to the national interest, albeit couched in clever-clever purple haze prose. Yet, to his credit he did not cave in to criticism and outrage. He stood by his (by then tarnished) reputation as a Bolshy editor who wouldn’t countenance censorship in any form.

It is, therefore, with amusement that I read his column in a recent issue of Outlook, in which he has not only endorsed the Congress-led UPA regime’s move to impose Internet censorship but also called for social media to be “kicked out” if it did not suck up to those in power. Is it age that has mellowed Vinod and turned him into a drumbeater of the Establishment? Or was he always like this but pretended not to be because there were many steps to be climbed?


Vinod Mehta in Outlook:

“This double-headed monster in the form of the social media must be regulated… I’d support any measure, including censorship, to stop platforms like Facebook and Twitter from being used to spread terror. The misuse of the social media is hardly a secret. It has been left untouched in the interests of free speech. However, it can’t be allowed to challenge the fundamental rights of the citizen. If those who own platforms capable of misuse plead helplessness, they must be kicked out. Sacrificing them is a small price to pay for the greater common good.”


Kanchan Gupta was Editorial Director of Niti Digital from 2012 to June 2014 and had previously worked at several newspapers, including The Telegraph, The Statesman and The Pioneer. During a break from journalism he served in the PMO as an aide to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and as Director of Maulana Azad Centre in Cairo.

(c) NiTi Digital. Reproduction and/or reposting of this content is strictly prohibited under copyright laws.

http://www.niticentral.com/emailshare/emailshare.php?pid=5125&url=http://www.niticentral.com/2012/08/27/a-free-speech-champion-turns-anti-freedom-5125.html&title=A free speech ‘champion’ turns anti-freedom&id=nc

Please read our terms of use before posting comments.
  • Prashanth K.P.

    A deservingly brilliant and fierce rebut to the maverick journalist called Vinod Mehta. It spells out the incongruities of Vinod Mehta’s rather long and zig zag reign in the media world that has ended in a Zenith with, of course Vinod Mehta’s ultimate cleaving with the Congress Party in General and Mdm Sonia Gandhi in particular. An excellent eye opener.

  • Manj

    I hope someone records this part of the indian history …

    The narrative would look like :

    A few brave writers and social media folks took on a corrupt govt and a pro-establishment media hand-in-glove with their masters in power.
    These were the real dark ages of the Indian media.

    In these times of hypocrisy , nothing was what it was called or appeared to be .India which called itself a democracy was actually a dictatorship following the divide-and-rule policy. The liberal word actually meant hate mongers and propagandists.Samajvadi actually meant anti-social. Term “Hindus” was used contradictorily: some meant effete people , others communal or extremists. Media actually meant circus . Assam actually meant shared territory with Bangladesh allowing free people movement (one way only ), Governance actually meant inaction and brazeness and lastly Congress actually meant the degenerative disease of corruption, divisiveness ,mismanagement and intolerance, which India suffered from 1947-2014 (except for a brief period of temporary recovery). It was Dr Modi from 2014 onwards, who eventually cured India of this disease , and then all the ulta-pulta usage of such terms was corrected.

  • guru bhat

    Poor Vinod would want to hide in the womb and pretend he was never born, if he reads this. Minced meat of a high ego. Hope Vinod won’t harm himself if he survives a heart attack.

  • asha

    Vinod Mehta fathered a child through a eastern European girl when he was in London and did not own up to his paternity…this is his own admission in his biography….to expect any higher calling from such a person is ridiculous…he always was a closet commie and congress sympathiser…only now it is being displayed in public view….

  • anup

    Vinod Mehta is long known in Govt circles to be a peddler of the Congress line. He doesn’t realise that the brand Outlook is being gradually sidelined by the Open magazine and his current views about social media will only accelerate that process.

    Kudos to the mass protest by tweeples (minus yours truly :() against the internet ban. In addition to the mass protest by tweeples against the twitter censorship, it was clearly the US State department’s advisory to manage security concerns as well as internet freedom in regard to freedom of expression, that saved the day. My guess is that the US knows very well that the next general elections is Narendra Modi’s to lose and don’t want to run the unnecessary risk of being seen as condoning the current highly unpopular dispensation by keeping quiet wrt the prospect of a ban on social media; a high percentage of whom want to see Modi occupy the highest chair in India.

  • Paddy

    Mr.Kanchan Gupta, this is a very interesting article about Mr.Vinod Mehta. As someone who watches him participating in “intelligent debates” on television, it is easy to understand what you are saying here. He tries to show that he is very independent and bipartisan, but it’s easy to spot that he always takes the Congress’ position. But does anyone really care for his opinions anymore?

  • http://twitter.com/gopimaliwal Gopi

    The year with ref to RIP Advani should be 1992, right?

  • Pingback: A free speech ‘champion’ turns anti-freedom « Janamejayan's Weblog

  • http://twitter.com/Ravi_Bharatiya Ravendra Singh

    One more congressi agent exposed in media. So Mr. Mehta think freedom of expression should be limited to journos only and can’t tolerate there criticism from general public, what a pathetic and Shameless JOURNO Vinod Mehta is…He is Actually ” SUNNY LEONE ” of Journalism…Thanks @ K Gupta for exposing the bastard.

  • Neela

    For a moment, I thought Vinod Mehta is someone we must all be proud of. Until I read the last part of the article.

    Dear Mr. Kanchan Gupta,

    One by one, the mask of cowards, cheats and hypocrites is being peeled off.
    Small steps of weeding one here, another there , but they are all needed in the path to re-instating Dharma in this land.

    Well done Sir.


    Here is something in return. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsW_35hwVuE.

  • V.N.Seetharam

    None can fault Vinod Mehta of having ever possessed high moral values or having pursued a brand of journalism that demands integrity,honesty,commitment and fearlessness. People like him some how or other made it to the limelight and continue bask devoid of ethics and true patriotism. His views are tailored to please the Italian immigrant and a bovinely placid and now strangely an occasionaly butting and fuming and frothing Sikh PM who has negated all the values of a warrior as envisaged by the great Gurus. Mehta is a survivor devoid of grace and stature. His often broadcast TV debates are ample proof to his sympathies with the tottering UPA. Vinod does not merit any appreciation for the way he continues to present himself as an intellectual of any worth.

  • http://twitter.com/madhusudan41 Madhusudan Thakkar

    Kanchan Ji you forgot to mention about his “Independent” days in Mumbai.Story on late YB Chavan as CIA agent in Indira Gandhi Govt.created uproar in Maharashtra and he has to leave job subsequently.I fail to understand his double standards vis-a vis his views in social media & important role played by “outlook” in Niira Radia tapes.

  • Pingback: How Narendra Modi Spoiled Media Prime Time Party | The Rediscovery of India

  • Pingback: How Narendra Modi Spoiled Media Prime Time Party « Janamejayan's Weblog

  • Pingback: How Narendra Modi Spoiled Media Prime Time Party « Home | www.narendramodi.in

  • Dinkar K.

    Extremely well-written. I always found Vinod Mehta amusing. But not anymore. And yes, Mr. Gupta, ‘Samovar’ at Jehangir Art Gallery still exists :)

  • Pingback: The Rediscovery of India | wisecracking

  • Ashish

    ‘Lucknow Boy’ is a well written book till two-thirds the way. From the first mention of Sonia Gandhi, the shift to wag tailing is very evident. Vinod Mehta could not restrain himself to emerge as a literal boot-licker even at the expense of killing his autobiography. Blatant proof to the extent to which he has sold his soul…… It is a pitiable site to see the likes of him and Vinod Sharma singing only the congress tunes…

  • Pingback: How Narendra Modi Spoiled Media Prime Time Party | India Mart Online

  • http://twitter.com/happy_1989 Atul Gupta

    Freedom of media is of utmost importance…..I just dont understand why most of the media channels just sing on the tunes of govt, not because of any compulsion but out of their greedy choice….Certainly a very objective responsibility needs to paid in the interest of the nation without any vicious and biased cynicism!!

  • Nobody

    Excellent !
    This could have been: RIP Vinod Mehta

  • http://confidenthindu.wordpress.com Hariharan Iyer

    Vinod Mehta’s journalism is based on character assassination and catching readers’ attention. Arun Shourie explains how mean Vinod Mehta had been. How many defamation suits Outllook has faced and how many apologies, including the latest apology to M K Venu. He does not seem to have learnt his lesson. That Vinod Mehta had tried this bitter trick against Kushwant Singh also is news to me. I had always thought that the two were pally.

    Even his response to this article is marked by tasteless sarcasm- that he takes offense to the phrase ‘funny pair of trousers’ as if that is the only portion worth responding to. Apart from the fact that he needs no further proof of funny pair of trosers that looking at his current ones in the mirror, if could lend credence to anonymous letters on Kalam, he should respond to specific charges in this article. The fact that he has done so indicates he does not have any defense.

  • Pingback: How Narendra Modi Spoiled Media Prime Time Party | India Mart Online

Recent Comments

Subscribe to Newsletter