The world is perceived to be oriented along four cardinal directions: north, south, east, and the one that holds India in awe. Modiji remains at the helm of India's leadership as the nation reaffirms its commitment to democracy. Whether or not the global community approves, that's the way things unfold. Securing an impressive third consecutive victory, Modiji's win prompted the Western media to resort to its customary practice—critiquing the Indian narrative.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi Waves After Taking Oath, At Rashtrapati Bhavan In New Delhi, Sunday, June 9, 2024. (Photo: PTI)
As the largest democratic exercise in history, India's general elections captured global attention. The results of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections received prominent coverage in major international publications—albeit with a distinctly sensationalist bias.
Following Narendra Modiji’s triumph in the Indian general elections, Western media exhibited a discernible partiality in their reporting. This partiality took different shapes, ranging from focusing selectively on specific facets of Modi’s politics to presenting a narrative that frequently neglects the intricate dynamics of Indian democracy and the socio-political backdrop that underpins Modi’s popularity.
Here's How Western Media covered the Indian election results:
1) The Guardian: Modi set to win third term but may fall short of landslide victory
A piece in The Guardian read: “India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, looks set to win a third term in power but early election results indicated he had not achieved the landslide victory that many had predicted.”
The paper notes how BJP was set to lose almost 70 seats, a distinct departure from the two-thirds majority that many exit polls had predicted over the weekend. It added: “Meanwhile, the opposition alliance, which goes by the acronym India, appeared to far outperform expectations, collectively winning 234 seats, according to the early count. The alliance, formed of more than 20 national and regional opposition parties, had come together for the first time in this election with the aim of defeating Modi, who has been in power since 2014.”
Speaking about the INDIA bloc, article noted: “But the INDIA coalition proved more resilient than many analysts had expected and was boosted by strong performances by regional parties such as the Samajwadi party in Uttar Pradesh, the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party in Tamil Nadu.”
2) Washington Post: India’s early election results point to rebuke for Modi and his party
Meanwhile, Washington Post wrote that the result had delivered an ‘unexpected repudiation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’ claiming there was ‘tepid support for his Hindu nationalist party, piercing the air of invincibility around the most dominant Indian politician in decades’.
The piece further read: “Such a result would be a rare setback for an Indian politician who has never failed to secure a majority in state or national elections over a 23-year political career and cultivated an image as a popular strongman and a serial winner. Most analysts expected him to easily brush aside India’s enervated and poorly funded opposition parties, some of which had their bank accounts frozen, and their leaders jailed by the government in the run-up to the election.”
3) The New York Times: Modi’s Party May Need Partners to Form a Government
While noting that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was still likely to form the government, the NYT noted that his poorer performance will have “political ramifications”. A report stated: “At a minimum, the B.J.P. will have to depend more on the junior members of its existing multiparty alliance. Two of the most prominent parties do not share Mr. Modi’s Hindu-first agenda. And if the governing alliance does not win a majority, the B.J.P. will be able to form a government only by adding new partners. It may not come to that. As of Tuesday afternoon the alliance was on track to scrape by with a narrow parliamentary majority — far short of its target of 400 seats, but enough to stay in power with its existing members.”
4) WSJ: Indian Stocks Drop After Early Election Results Point to Tighter Win for Modi
The Wall Street Journal meanwhile focussed on Indian stocks falling which they attributed to “damping expectations for business-friendly reforms”. The piece notes: “The benchmark BSE Sensex index closed 5.5% lower, its largest one-day percentage decline in over four years. It fell as much as 8% earlier in the session. Banking, power and industrial stocks were among the worst hit. Shares in State Bank of India fell 14%; Tata Steel dropped nearly 9%. The rupee weakened about 0.5% against the U.S. dollar.”
5) FT: Narendra Modi on course for India election win with weakened mandate
Noting that the result was poorer than expected, Financial Times stated that it would be a return to ‘coalition politics’. The report stated: “If the numbers don’t change, it’s a return of alliance politics that had characterized India from 1989 to 2014. In that sense, it will have to be a much more negotiated government. I’m not sure how much business will like it.”
The report further added: “Many Indians had expected a clear Modi victory in an election seen as a referendum on his decade in office and following a campaign focused largely on the personality of the 73-year-old prime minister. A victory would make him India’s first PM to serve three consecutive terms since independence leader Jawaharlal Nehru.”
6) Global News, Canada
The Canada-based Global News reported that the BJP ceded seats to a more formidable opposition, marking the first instance since 2014 where the ruling party failed to clinch a majority independently. Describing the outcome as a "stunning setback" compared to anticipated landslide triumphs, the report quoted a commentator suggesting that the BJP will now rely significantly on the support of its allies.
7) Deutsche Welle
Deutsche Welle’s headline was no different. It quoted a political scientist calling the elections “a personal setback for Modi”.
8) The Telegraph
Instead of calling it a triumph, The Telegraph termed Modi as suffering from a “surprise loss of majority in the India election”. Furthermore, the article underscored public discontent by quoting an analyst who sees the results as “a sign of fatigue with the Hindu nationalist, communal rhetoric and is also a verdict on the economy.”
9) The Economist
The Economist’s report titled “A shock election result in India humbles Narendra Modi” was also critical of Modi’s win, stating, “The idea of Mr Modi ruling for another ten years is now far less likely given his personal brand has dimmed.”
10) Bloomberg
These narratives did not sprout of the sky post results but were woven well before. Bloomberg , in its special report, argued why the southern part of India is rejecting Modiji, saying, “The more progressive and successful part of the country is drifting away from the poverty-ridden north and its majoritarian leader”.
11) France24
France24 did a report emphasizing the “trust deficit” in India’s electronic voting system.
Conclusion
This wave of criticism from Western media underscores a significant bias, reflecting their tendency to focus on narratives that undermine Modiji’s achievements while ignoring the broader democratic endorsement he received. This perspective fails to appreciate the complexities of Indian politics and the substantial voter base that continues to support PM Modi’s vision for India. Influential international media undermining a democratic exercise by one of the world’s most significant countries reveals a highly problematic lens on India. Such biased reporting disregards the fact that Modi's leadership is backed by a large segment of the Indian population.
Acknowledging the facts, Modiji’s victory may not have been as spectacular as some predicted or claimed. However, this does not justify making it the focal point of every story the West writes about the Indian election results. Western journalism needs to rebrand its narratives because Indian citizens no longer succumb to buying into negative portrayals. It is crucial for international media to recognize the intricacies of India's democratic process and the diverse opinions of its electorate.
Comments