As lawyer Mihir Desai was arguing on the bail application of Stan Swamy lying on ventilator support in the Holy Family Hospital, news came in that he was no more. This frail, old priest succumbed to cardiac arrest caused by pulmonary infection, Parkinson’s disease and post-Covid-19 complications. The jail authorities had allegedly denied him medical care for more than 10 days since he contracted Covid-19, courts had thrice denied him bail in nine months of judicial custody and the investigation agency never asked for his custody but kept him jailed for nine months. So the lawyer is justified in demanding an investigation into the whole process that failed a life.

The tragic death in custody of a frail 84-year-old citizen suffering from Parkinson’s disease, founder of Bagaicha (Garden), a Ranchi-based organisation that works for tribals and downtrodden, has shook the civilised conscience of the world. His death raises some pertinent questions to investigative authorities (police and NIA) which have shown impunity towards fundamental principles of country’s criminal justice system and also to those judges who remain in complete disconnect with human rights and its established practices to be using laws like UAPA, NSA, AFSPA, etc, in most casual and blasé ways. At this point in India›s history, leaders in Parliament should stop juggling word-wars and try to reach out to ethics embedded in law and institutions of criminal justice. There is much to introspect on how India sank to a rank as low as 75thout of 100 nations in 2019 and has only partly recovered to 67th in 2021 in the Freedom House Report on ‘Freedom in the World’.

Two basic shields are provided to citizens against state arbitrariness in the administration of the criminal justice system. These shields are preventive measures that thwart oversights of ill-equipped investigative agencies leading to incidents such as the tragic death of an 84-year-old Stan Swamy. First shield is a legal doctrine that ‘bail is a rule, jail is an exception’, laid down by the Supreme Court of India in a landmark judgement of State of Rajasthan vs. Balchand alias Baliya (AIR 1977 2447). Second is an outcome of Anglo-American legal culture of presuming an accused to be innocent until proven guilty which has been substantiated by several judgements of higher judiciary in which one of the most famous of Blackstonean maxim shines out to remind the judges that, “[I]t is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer.” While we associate the first shield with Justice V. Krishna Aiyer, who based it on Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India, we have found its enlightening analysis in Glanville Williams’s The Proof of Guilt (1963), one of the greatest juristic works on criminal law.

Stan Swamy had been questioning the dragging pre-trials of 72 youths lingering in jails, mostly SC/ST arrested for alleged Left-wing extremism. In 2017 he filed a PIL in Jharkhand High Court against such a big arrest from just one district, West Singhbhum. He was continuously asking for the implementation of the Fifth Schedule which gave some administrative autonomy to the tribes inhabiting these areas. Para 4 of the Fifth Schedule provides for establishment of a Tribes Advisory Council (TAC). This is seen by many to have put Swamy under trouble as implementation of the Fifth Schedule would have prohibited or restricted the transfer of land, or regulated the allotment of land to members of tribal communities and also restrained the conceitful eye of the money lender on tribal property and life. It also restricted the Governor’s discretion by making it necessary for him to consult TAC before formulating any law or rules for the area.

Perturbed by arbitrary detentions of many young people by the police on flimsy grounds, Swamy had insisted that a court-monitored investigation should be immediately undertaken in all districts of Jharkhand so that tribal poor may live a life of safety. An FIR was registered against him at the Vishrambaug police station, Pune, for inciting people through his inflammatory speeches leading to caste violence during Kabir Manch-sponsored Elgar Parishad at Shantivarwada in December 2017. Three years after the FIR, on 8 October 2020, he was arrested but now it was the NIA that led the terrorist charges against him. Two days before his arrest, Swamy linked his arrest to his dissent against government policies. Swamy was flown to Mumbai against repeated pleas that his comorbidities and Parkinson’s disease make him more vulnerable to Covid-19 infections during travel. He was produced before the NIA court the next day on 9 October, and sent to judicial custody till his death on 5 July at a private hospital where he was shifted in his last few days on orders of the court. During these nine months he had thrice filed for his bail but was each time rejected by the court. Interestingly, NIA had never sought his custody even for a day but this frail Jesuit priest remained in custody and had to undergo some of the most inhuman conditions perpetrated by an unpardonable jail administration, which is known to be sneaking mobiles to criminals inside but took fifty days and a court order to provide a sipper and a straw to a Parkinson’s patient to drink water with.

This whole case of Stan Swamy brings out demoralising facts from the crevices of our crumbling criminal justice system to which he was probably the oldest victim charged with terrorism under UAPA 1967. Herein, on a contrary note, bail comes as an exception. From the early decades enlightened judges have maintained that the accused person is entitled to bail as a norm. In Maneka Gandhi’s case (1978 (1) SCC 248), Art 21 requires a fair, just and equitable procedure to be followed in criminal cases and which bestows some rights to the accused as well. The Supreme Court in AIR 1962 SC 605 has even observed that “the alleged conflict between the general burden which lies on the prosecution and the special burden imposed on the accused under Section 105 of the Evidence Act is more imaginary than real” and so in Rishi Kesh Singh And Ors. vs The State (1970) it was established that if a doubt is created in the mind of the court that the defence of the accused might reasonably be true, a resultant doubt would accrue about the commission of the crime and hence the guilt of the accused. So the accused should be acquitted as a practice. Yet the NIA insisted that the 83-year-old was taking “undue benefit” of the pandemic and that the pleading about his medical condition was “merely a ruse” to obtain interim relief. On the second 31-page bail plea filed on grounds that no purpose was being served to keep a sick person in custody who is not even a flight risk was rejected again. On rejecting Swamy’s third bail plea of March this year, the court said that his grounds for seeking relief such as old age and sickness “were outweighed by the collective interest of the community”.

How was Swamy kept in judicial custody even without conviction? The government data that one can find in 2016-17 records more than 69% of inmates lodged in jails across the country are under trials. The jails in India have a capacity of 380,876 only but they are stuffed inhumanly by 14% more inmates to 433,003. This leads to a serious crisis of toilets, drinking water, infections, clean food and beds. There are absolutely no WC and washroom facilities for the elderly who crawl and crumble inside jails with a failing memory and yet to be told where they went wrong. This is the picture of our criminal justice system that provokes the UN, EU and other international agencies to come heavily on our government. If the government tries to silence them, it would only prove its impunity, if it reforms, it can at least wash some blood on its hands. Glanville Williams writes that “the sad thing is that there has never been any reason or expediency for these departures from the cherished principles (of criminal law); it has been done through carelessness and lack of subtleties”. So Stan was prophetic in his last words, that “what is happening to me is not something unique happening to me alone. It is a broader process that is taking place all over the country… I am not a silent spectator, but part of the game, and ready to pay the price, whatever be it”. The government should capture these feelings and revisit the country’s criminal justice system with honesty, commitment and fair understanding.

The author is president, NDRG, and former Professor of Administrative Reforms and Emergency Governance at JNU. The views expressed are personal.

The government data that one can find in 2016-17 records more than 69% of inmates lodged in jails across the country are under trials. The jails in India have a capacity of 380,876 only but they are stuffed inhumanly by 14% more inmates to 433,003. This leads to a serious crisis of toilets, drinking water, infections, clean food and beds. There are absolutely no WC and washroom facilities for the elderly who crawl and crumble inside jails with a failing memory and yet to be told where they went wrong. This is the picture of our criminal justice system that provokes the UN, EU and other international agencies to come heavily on our government.

It does seem as if the much-awaited Cabinet reshuffle may finally happen, especially after the Prime Minister reshuffled the governors and sent Thawarchand Gehlot onto a gubernatorial posting. Gehlot was Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment before this and the SC face of the government. But more importantly, the fact that he was transferred out of the Union Cabinet is what confirmed the rumours that the reshuffle was now a certainty.

If nothing else then the reshuffle buzz has fired up the political class as various names are doing the rounds. Topping the list of the obvious is course Jyotiaditya Scindia, but will he be given a hefty portfolio is a question. Since one of the criticisms of the Modi government is that it lacks bench strength the PM is expected to transplant some faces with governance experience at the state-level and bring them to his Cabinet: Such as Sushil Modi, Sarbananda Sonowal, and Narayan Rane. Earlier Sonowal was not keen to be brought to the Centre, but had wanted a role in the Northeast similar to what was offered to Himanta Biswa Sarma when he was CM. Nevertheless, sources claim that Sonowal is now ‘reconciled’ to a stint at the Centre. Another name that was doing the rounds was that of Devandra Fadnavis, and if well-placed sources are to be believed, it seems he has fallen out of favour despite his proximity to Nagpur. Some names from the party headquarters who could be drafted for governance include Bhupendra Yadav, Anil Baluni and Jai Panda.

Will the JD(U) claim the civil aviation portfolio that was offered to it earlier but at the time Nitish Kumar has refused to join the Cabinet? Currently Hardeep Singh Puri is doing a fine job in managing the sector — especially during the lockdown when the government earned a lot of goodwill (and revenue too) via the Vande Bharat evacuation flights. While Puri, a consummate administrator, will be of credit in any other ministry that he is placed in, the question remains: Will the BJP let go of this ministry at a time when the Air India disinvestment is still to take place? Moreover, Nitish will also have a tough time deciding which of his men to reward with a Cabinet berth for he will have to choose between the rival claims of Rajya Sabha MP and party president R.C.P. Singh, and Lok Sabha MPs Lalan Singh and Santosh Kushwaha. Perhaps this is why Nitish Kumar is demanding two Cabinet berths and one MoS (ministry of state) with the BJP only willing to give one Cabinet and one MoS. Within the LJP too, Chirag Paswan has threatened legal action if his cousin Pashupati Paras is made a minister from the LJP quota.

The reshuffle will be the Prime Minister’s first and probably the last reshuffle before the 2024 elections, and so, one has to look for a larger message beyond the state polls. The health sector has been under the scanner, especially post the second Covid-19 wave. With rumours of a change of guard at the ministry, auditioning for the job has already begun. But the general consensus is that if the PM does go in for a change, he would look for an able administrator rather than a medical professional. Agriculture too needs firefighting, especially, with the farmers not letting up on their agitation, and the crucial state polls of Punjab and Uttar Pradesh due early next year, so the PM could go in for a change of face in this ministry. Moreover, the incumbent Narendra Singh Tomar, is a Lok Sabha MP from Morena and belongs to the same region as Scindia. Will the PM keep two ministers from the same region in his Cabinet? The Education Minister enjoys the blessings of the RSS but sources claim that the PM may be looking for a more progressive face to head this ministry.

The crucial question of course is: Will the PM shift any of the Big Four? That’s a big-ticket question, and while sources claim the PM is not too happy with one of the four ministers, no one knows as to whether he is considering a change or not. But in the end, political temperatures are at an all-time high on reshuffle eve.

In June this year, the Hong Kong police arrested top journalists of the city’s largest pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily that had been a relentless critic of the government in Hong Kong and mainland China. Its bank accounts were frozen and the paper was forced to shutter. Its fearless owner-activist Jimmy Lai sits in prison. The ‘Committee to Protect Journalists’ presented Mr. Lai with the 2021 Gwen Ifill Press Freedom Award, which is given to journalists who are imprisoned, attacked or killed while performing their duties.

Hong Kong’s draconian action against freedom of the press was pursuant to China’s National Security Law passed last year that aims to silence Hongkongers and totally integrate the Island with the mainland. Under the new law, courts have sentenced pro-democracy activists and artists to prison. Free speech and independent journalism are anathemas to President Xi Jinping’s autocratic rule. China’s suppression of press freedom in Hong Kong is blatant and cruel. The pretense of “one country, two systems” is dead as the dodo.

It’s not only in China; journalists all over the world have been disappearing and some have never been heard again. Some have been imprisoned, tortured, and killed. In 2020, 274 journalists were imprisoned and 32 killed worldwide, according to CPJ. “China, which arrested several journalists for their coverage of the pandemic, was the world’s worst jailer for the second year in a row,” the report said. In the United States—the land of the free—110 journalists were “assaulted or criminally charged” last year during the Black Lives Matter protests.

Journalists, nevertheless, have never stopped reporting the facts as they see them, regardless of the consequences. Former CBS News correspondent Lara Logan suffered a brutal sexual assault in Egypt’s Tahrir Square in 2011 while covering the country’s Arab Spring upheaval. In 2014 an Islamic State video showed the beheading of Steven Sotloff, a US journalist who was held hostage by the militants. Daniel Pearl, a Wall Street Journal reporter was kidnapped and murdered in Pakistan in 2002. Since the military coup, many journalists in Myanmar have been imprisoned; some have disappeared, and some have left the country. Nevertheless, according to Reporters Without Borders, many are still reporting clandestinely.

A good society based on democratic values cannot survive without a free, fearless, and robust press. Journalists have played important watchdog roles based on their abilities to cultivate confidential sources. For example, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post depended upon a confidential source, Deep Throat, an FBI agent Mark Felt, for their path-breaking investigative reporting about Watergate that brought President Nixon down. Corporate whistleblowers have disclosed corrupt accounting practices, dangerous products (of Big Tobacco, for example), and other malfeasances to journalists, who dug deeper to authenticate their sources and published stories that saved millions of lives.

But today journalists face a new kind of threat to their profession: state-sponsored social media-propelled disinformation discreetly spread by countries such as Putin’s Russia and Xi’s China; non-state actors such far-right QAnon’s conspiracy theories in the United States; and fake news websites, which threaten to undermine the legitimacy, authenticity, and trustworthiness of the long-established news organizations. For four long years, our man in the White House used the Twitter bully pulpit and every other platform to demean and intimidate journalists. But the more Trump denounced journalists, the stronger became their voices.

There’s another sinister challenge to journalists. Most people get their news from their smartphones. But the smartphone has eliminated the space between news, opinions, ads, and sponsored news. In the Google News platform, for example, the scandalmonger tabloid National Enquirer and The New York Times are the same. The brand does not matter for the hurried consumer of the online news. Instant social media journalism, unfiltered and unchecked, is harming the legitimate news media. From The New York Times’ motto “All the News That’s Fit to Print,” to today’s social media platforms, any hogwash is fit to print, the scenarios are changing.

Some organizations with their political agendas publish news leaks and classified information from anonymous sources. Some are challenging the traditional news media by launching their own investigations. Sometimes they collaborate, as it happened in 2010 between Wikileaks and some major newspapers including The New York Times, the Guardian, and Der Spiegel regarding the release of classified documents about the Iraq War. Now we have new media actors on the world stage, Putin’s Russia, Xi’s China, and others who can spread selective disinformation to affect political discourse, especially during times of crisis. These non-media foreign agencies have played a definitive role in US politics and may also do so in other open democratic countries, such as India, by spreading disinformation.

To re-establish trust in the age of news suppression, false narratives masquerading as online journalism, and state-sponsored hackers spreading disinformation, the news media must provide honest, fearless, and vigorous journalism. Journalists must call a spade a spade if there’s a “reckless disregard of the truth.” Excessive deference to authorities can be corrosive to democratic values. More than any other time, when China and other autocratic countries are trying to control the global narratives by spreading misinformation, journalists need to provide fearless in-depth reporting whether it is about the Xinjiang internment camps, Wuhan Lab virus escape, Russia’s political protests, Trump’s 6th January catastrophic misadventure, or the existential threat of climate change. When journalists bring facts to light and speak the truth, people listen, and the powerful behave.

The writer, professor of communications and diplomacy at Norwich University, Vermont, is the author of Digital Freedom: How Much Can You Handle. Views expressed are writer’s personal.

Today journalists face a new kind of threat to their profession: state-sponsored social media propels disinformation discreetly spread by countries such as Putin’s Russia and Xi’s China; non-state actors such as far-right QAnon’s conspiracy theories in the United States; and fake news websites, which threaten to undermine the legitimacy, authenticity, and trustworthiness of the long-established news organizations. For four long years, our man in the White House used the Twitter bully pulpit and every other platform to demean and intimidate journalists. But the more Trump denounced journalists, the stronger became their voices.

Is China’s President Xi Jinping about to be reduced to a caricature? His bluster at Tiananmen Square—the site of the massacre of the students who led China’s democracy movement in 1989—to mark hundred years of the Chinese Communist Party was ridiculous at best, given how almost in the same breath he talked of peace and bashing heads bloody on a steel wall. Sentences such as, “Peace, concord, and harmony are ideas the Chinese nation has pursued…China has always worked to safeguard world peace” give way to a belligerent “heads (will be) bashed against the bloody great wall of steel” if China is bullied, inside the span of a few sentences. It is not known which world leader can use such rhetoric in public without inviting all-round condemnation. Nor is it known who has been bullying China. In fact, it’s just the reverse. China, guilty of both economic and geopolitical overreach, is the biggest bully in the world, and has made coercion, intimidation, force and plain blackmail the instruments of its state policy. Ask the countries that have got caught in China’s debt trap “diplomacy”. Ask Australia and other countries against whom China has used economic coercion to enforce its own trade rules. Ask India with whom China refused to share hydrological data of the Brahmaputra river because of the Doklam stand-off of 2017, even though it was agreement-bound to do so. Unscrupulous to the core, China’s Communist leadership uses even an essential item such as water as its weapon to meet its strategic goals, even if that means causing either floods or droughts and bringing misery to countless common people. And these are just a few examples.

Xi’s bluster could have been dismissed as just that—bluster—but for China’s potential to cause actual harm to other countries and its actions on the ground, especially along the Line of Actual Control and in the South China Sea region. There is only one way to describe a country that has made muscle-flexing or wolf warrior “diplomacy” the core of its foreign policy—a dangerous bully. It is said that China believes in winning a war without firing a single bullet and is hence engaged in a 24X7 unrestricted warfare with the rest of the world. The fact is the world is paying a very heavy price for such a warfare, if the coronavirus pandemic is taken as one of the most dangerous manifestations of it. At the same time, the possibility of a kinetic conflict cannot be ruled out, and it can happen anywhere.

That China is world power is because the rest of the world has allowed it to control the supply chains, with a firm eye on profit margins. Ironically, it is these heads that Xi Jinping threatened to bash against the steel wall in his CCP centenary speech. Instead of dismissing the reference as mere rhetoric, those who have worked hard to make China a “great power”, a partner of the West, need to learn a lesson from it. China is an uncontrolled beast and the West has played a part in making it one. However, many of them still believe that China will help them reach climate goals and hence cooperation is necessary. Even as baby steps are taken to operationalize the Quad to contain China, and others converge on the Indo-Pacific, many of them are not averse to cutting trade deals with China. It is as if security/sovereignty and trade can exist in different silos. While decoupling from China may not be easy, and may not happen in the immediate future, sooner or later countries such as India will have to diversify their import baskets, while also moving towards self-sufficiency. That is the primary way of containing China.

As for bashing heads on steel walls, it’s hoped that Xi Jinping is intelligent enough to keep it at the level of the rhetoric, for in the real world, any attempt to bash the enemy’s head on the wall may result in a Galwan like situation or much worse. And we all know what happened in Galwan.

The nationalist narrative based on dharma and righteousness is increasingly finding traction among the youth. Questioning the infallible is the new normal. They no longer depend on a television channel or a newspaper to form an opinion or raise their concerns. The Clubhouse is the new medium where the youth feel safe to vent their feelings about what they think is wrong. They have increasingly become vocal and assertive.

A case in point is the recent Supreme Court decision in April that dismissed a petition filed by UP Shia Board Chairman Syed Wasim Rizvi while terming it “absolutely frivolous”. Rizvi had argued that certain verses in the Quran preached violence against the non-believers and hence needed to be removed. The court imposed a fine of Rs 50,000.

Rizvi cited 26 such verses which he said were extrapolations in the original text and were used to justify attacks on non-believers. He had pleaded that these be declared “unconstitutional, non-effective and non-functional” since these, he argued, promoted extremism and terrorism and posed a serious threat to the sovereignty, unity and integrity of the country.

In normal circumstances, this should have settled the argument since there is a lot of sanctity attached to what the apex court says. But the youths of India are discussing the issue threadbare in an open and free atmosphere in various rooms of the Clubhouse (CH) app. They want to discuss what each of these verses says and what should be done if a religious text indeed preaches hatred against other communities.

In this context, one room in the CH was discussing “Should the Koran be banned?” They know it is extremely difficult and almost impossible but still, they are discussing this. They are spending hours discussing the provocative issue. “You can say your religion is the best, but can you say religions of others are bad,” one participant in such a discussion asked. The youths speak their minds fearlessly as they are confident that no big brother is watching and also that nothing that they say is on record. CH rules and participation ensure that the discourse is civilised even if the topic is controversial or someone has strong views.

Similarly, love jihad and forced conversion are favourite issues and discussed almost daily. While some may have a different take, the youth largely argue that love jihad is a weapon to change religious demography and make India an Islamic state. How can a person of a liberal Hindu religion get converted into a faith that is considered conservative? The recent cases of conversion of Sikh girls in Kashmir and Hindu girls in Uttar Pradesh figured prominently.

Today nothing can be swept under the carpet simply because it is politically incorrect to publicly speak so blatantly on these issues. Actually, there is a club by the name Politically Incorrect where speakers are chided if they are scared of speaking their minds. Where was the need to convert the Sikh girls even if the couple decided to marry, one speaker asked.

These youngsters are not much bothered about the various editorials that have given their opinions on anti-conversion legislation in some BJP ruled states. The classic case of love jihad being discussed is that of Muzaffarnagar (Uttar Pradesh) where a Muslim youth Usman married Amandeep Kaur after giving her a Muslim identity. But his game was over when he married again and Amandeep, now Jannet Qurashi, objected to his second marriage.

Two Hindu girls from Gomti Nagar (Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh) converted to Islam and were forcing their family members to convert. Uttar Pradesh ATS found links of forced conversion in the state to Gujarat where they caught one businessman Salahudin who had funded Mohammad Umar Gautam running a conversion racket through his organization Islamic Da’wah Centre.

And if a BJP leader is spotted in the audience (one can’t hide one’s identity) and accepts the moderator’s request to speak, the pet question will be when will Modiji bring population control law. One such speaker answered: “Trust Modiji. He has delivered on promises and he will do what is in the best interest of the country”. The youth there had unflinching trust in the Prime Minister. 

The other question often asked is what should be done to those who return to Hindu faiths because acceptance of such people is not easy. The questions being asked now in open circles were earlier discussed only in close quarters. It is the ascension of PM Modi that has made this possible. TheNew York Times’s advertisement asking anti-Modi ideologue to be a fit person to become its employee as a media person has angered these youths who see this as an affront to Indian nationalism. They are firmly behind the Prime Minister.

Anyone can enter these discussion rooms and raise his or her voice. One can hurl abuses also, but the person does not get a second chance and is sent packing from the list of speakers by the moderators. The choice is either to lie silent or raise issues logically and without raising the voice. Faces are not visible, only the voices of the participants are heard. This helps people multi-task and also listen to the arguments made in the CH at the same time. Every aspect is debated on merit. Anyone can walk into the room and listen to the arguments. Some of the arguments are brilliant and backed by research. Rivals also raise issues but they are forced to back their opinions with facts and research.

The youth of the country who may have felt slighted by the secular media are suddenly finding the adrenalin of liberation. They no longer depend on traditional media and can argue their point of view fiercely. The way issues are debated, can emerge as a model for a healthy democracy. 

While nationalist forums try to appease opponents by giving them full space to talk and counter, the same is not visible in rooms run by Left-leaning and anti-Modi groups. During one such debate on Uttar Pradesh, the room was discussing how the Yogi government has been selective in encounters, but the moderators found it tough to face questions from a young girl who reeled out statistics to prove that they were wrong. The moderators expelled her and opined that such people are indoctrinated and cannot be expected to see the truth.

Seemingly the Congress has realised the importance of the presence of the youth in CH. I have been told that Congress leaders such as Manish Tewari and Sam Pitroda have addressed the Clubhouse Rooms recently. Naturally, they would speak against the Modi government. If you speak impeccable English, you can hide your failures.

BJP spokesperson from Haryana Raman Malik is a regular at the club and he strongly felt that some of the clubs run by anti-Modi camps have identified him and other people for asking questions based on facts. “These clubs do not allow us to be speakers and on many occasions, they evict us after seeing our CVs. They are not interested in debates. They indoctrinate the young and fill them with hatred.”

I visited some of the rooms in the CH that were discussing issues against Prime Minister Narendra Modi to examine the trend. Those conducting the discussions faced a tough time moderating rival viewpoints. The moderators were seen explaining that the people with contrary opinions were completely indoctrinated. They failed to, however, see the point that they were indoctrinated too to find everything wrong with what the Prime Minister did.

The common theme in various rooms was intolerance, and most arguments made were if the Hindus were intolerant compared to Muslims. The debate then focused on how Islam treats non-believers. One participant argued that Hindus remained Hindus because they were brave. Those who converted did so under fear or attraction. One Muslim participant argued that Quran was good but some people interpreted it differently. A young girl cited some verses from the Quran and asked him to reply but he checked out when cornered.

CH is emerging as a 24-hour university where knowledge is being imparted on various issues from vaccines to the Olympics to investment and business. One can go and sit in any class silently and gain knowledge. If there are any queries one can raise the hand and ask questions or give an opinion. All kinds of activities are going on across the world and participants are not limited to any one part of the world.

It is extremely difficult now to control the narrative. Anyone can start a discussion room on the topic of his choice and others interested would join. One need not be an expert. The so-called Left-wing that thrived on controlling the narrative is not finding traction here. Those who talk of a strong country, against intolerance and terrorism and hatred are being heard the most. It appears as if dharma or righteousness will rule.  

A one-sided narrative would not be accepted. If people are supporting the Arab world, there are more who would support Israel’s right to exist. If China celebrated 100 years of the foundation of the Communist Party, many questioned the reason for celebration when millions died in various Chinese experiments in forcible implementation of the Communist ideology.

People were extolling the demand for Khalistan in one such room saying Sikhism was a separate religion and different from Hinduism. There was a Sikh from the Indian Army who said the country is first and for him, his own religion comes after his religious duty to work for the country. Others argued that if religion can be the basis of the formation of a country, why should India not be declared a Hindu Rashtra. Some Islamic supporters for Khalistan went silent against this argument.

While the mainstream media may have ignored Swami Vivekanand’s death anniversary on 4 July, youngsters intensely discussed his teachings and contributions in the CH. A young lady associated with the Ramakrishna Mission recommended that the nine volumes of Complete Works of Swami Vivekanand should be read to understand him. Various anecdotes were shared by participants and these were truly enlightening.

Nothing, absolutely nothing goes without critical scrutiny. While one such room discussed why PM Narendra Modi did not address a press conference, others in the room argued if it was essential to address the media that was so hostile. Others argued that the PM has been communicating directly with the electorate through social media and other modes of communication.

The writer is the convener of the Media Relations Department of the BJP and represents the party as a spokesperson on TV debates. He has authored the book ‘Narendra Modi: The Game Changer’. Views expressed are writer’s personal.

The Covid-19 pandemic has adversely disrupted all the sheen our Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME) sector had amassed in the last few years. Almost 82% of small businesses have been impacted due to this pandemic. It is common in today’s time that you read about the havoc this pandemic has wreaked everywhere, but its impact on the small businesses is very difficult to build back, looking at the sheer time and impact. This is the global story today as more than 200 countries have been impacted.

More than 50% of the MSMEs in India are expected to cut down, shut down or sell this year due to the disastrous impact of the second wave. Only 22% of Indian Startups and MSMEs have over 3-months of sustenance. Small businesses have an inherent advantage of agility which helps them create a market space for themselves, but the challenges are dependence on manpower and tight cash flows.

India has taken a sizable brunt of this Pandemic. Small businesses like shops, restaurants, stores, boutiques, salons, and many more have been going through a tough time. Times for sure is challenging but it is for everyone, which is the saving grace. Hence, firm resolve, and a smart approach will hold the key here. The solution must be affordable, easy to use, time-tested, proven method and tool.

Due to the pandemic, corresponding lockdowns, and virtual ways of working, a new kind of market and segments with altogether varied demographics have emerged as a bigger cloud community, hence the ways of reaching and influencing have to be new and digital. Digital marketing is the solution.

Digital marketing has drastically changed the way businesses operate today. More than 100 million people use Facebook Watch every day and there are over 280 million Facebook users in India only.

Globally it’s not just the big businesses and brands who benefit from digital marketing, but small businesses benefit more with very low costs. 24% of marketers plan on increasing their investment in content marketing in 2020. Hence, it has become very critical for the MSMEs today to get inside this arena. Today there are over 8 million active advertisers on Facebook, the vast majority of which are small and medium-sized businesses. Also, to talk about Instagram, it is the social channel with the second-highest Return of Investment (ROI) among marketers globally.

Let’s discuss some easy and key elements which can do the magic.

SOCIAL MEDIA AND SOCIAL MESSAGING PLATFORMS

Increased use of social media and social messaging apps can help retain and engage. 2020 saw more people increase their time online, including how they researched products, brands, and organizations. Organizations have seen a saving of more than 30% on the cost of reaching customers and with more geographical coverage as a bonus. You will be surprised to know that in April 2020, WhatsApp was the top messaging app in terms of monthly active users globally. In the same context, Influencer Marketing is very effective and highly result-oriented. Almost 97% of top searches on Pinterest are unbranded, hence there is so much scope for small and medium-sized businesses.

DEVELOP MORE VIDEO CONTENT

In 2021 it is crucial to use various video content formats that fit your brand, niche, and industry and optimize them throughout the customer’s journey. As per global sources, almost 93% of brands got a new customer because of a video on social media and over 84% of people say that they’ve been convinced to buy a product or service by watching a brand’s video. Moreover, almost 87% of video marketers say that video has increased traffic to their website and around 80% of video marketers globally claim that video has directly increased sales.

ASSISTING CONTENTCREATION AND DELIVERY THROUGH CHATBOTS AND AI

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and chatbots will accelerate content creation and delivery strategies and become inextricable parts of the global user experience. AI can be the game-changer in the current matrix. Chatbots fuelled by AI are predicted to handle over 88% of customer service by 2021.

The digital marketing landscape is ever-expanding, it is estimated that by 2023 the number of global social media users is expected to reach almost 3.43 billion. Moving ahead in time, you will not be surprised to know that big and small, all kinds of companies spend more on digital marketing than on traditional marketing.

The trend today is newspapers to e-papers, radios to music apps, TV to Content Platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime, hoardings hold minimalistic value if you have people working from home, and kids studying online at home, other BTL advertising now competes with e-commerce and online marketplaces. Hence, to conclude, it would be fair to say that since markets have evolved so the marketing has to evolve, adapt and innovate. Technology is taking the centrepiece in this evolution and throwing a new challenge to the marketing fraternity globally.

There is one silver lining in all of this and that is early adaption. The faster adaptation will be the key to survival and your ticket to growth..