One good reason to unfollow Modi on Twitter
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a social media junkie. He is also a news junkie. Yet, he ignores the mainstream and traditional form of media and prefers to communicate through social media channels such as Twitter and Facebook.
Time magazine has called him an "internet star". A University of Michigan study has declared him a powerful online brand. In Twittersphere, Modi, with over 18 million followers, is the second most popular politician after US president Barack Obama, the study says. He also has over 32 million Facebook followers.
The difference between Obama and Modi, though, is that Obama interacts with traditional media on a weekly basis. He discusses major policies in interviews with newspapers, magazines and lays out his vision on television networks. Modi never does so.
Not merely that. Modi's use of Twitter is also selective. With a view to getting international stardom, he is quick to post tweets on global events but keeps silent on more pressing issues closer home that cry for his attention.
 |
| An artist takes measurements of Modi for his wax statue at Madame Tussauds. |
In the latest example, he lost no time in sending out a tweet on the Brussels terror attack on March 22. "News from Brussels is disturbing. The attacks are condemnable. Condolences to families of the deceased. May those injured recover quickly," Modi tweeted.
News from Brussels is disturbing. The attacks are condemnable. Condolences to families of the deceased. May those injured recover quickly.
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) March 22, 2016
He wouldn't do the same, for instance, on the lynching of Mohammad Akhlaq of Dadri. Even as the government's reputation was blown to smithereens, Modi's Twitter handle was idle on the issue. Even as the suicide of Rohith Vemula - a Dalit scholar at the Hyderabad Central University (HCU), and the arrest of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) students on sedition charges made international headlines, the prime minister remained aloof.
His penchant for the micro-blogging site is such that he tweeted birthday wishes to Afghan president Ashraf Ghani two months in advance, only to be reminded of his gaffe by Ghani himself.
Happy birthday @ashrafghani. Praying for your long life & exceptional health and a joyful journey ahead.
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) February 12, 2016
@narendramodi Greetings from Munich Mr. PM. Although, my Birthday is on 19th May, but I'd still like to thank you for your gracious words :)
— Ashraf Ghani (@ashrafghani) February 12, 2016
Modi's strategy of using Twitter over traditional media as a form of communication hides a dangerous tendency. Firstly, it speaks of his proclivity to have complete control over information and information channels. Secondly, and ironically for a junkie, it shows his mistrust of independent press.
Twitter users enjoy absolute control over the medium. One can say whatever one likes and wishes to communicate in 140 characters. It's a personalised social tool. Unlike newspapers, radio and television, social media doesn't obligate users to observe the ethics of fairness and impartiality.
It's true that like any other medium, a Twitter user gets feedback both for and against from other users who comprise supporters as well as trolls. However, Modi's stratospheric list of Twitter followers stands like a virtual protective wall around him to keep his tweets inviolate. His millions of followers transform themselves into trolls and are ready to wage war for him whenever there is an attempt to critique his tweets that may be a policy announcement or an expression of views.
In the process, Modi ends up communicating with or in dialogue mostly with his own supporters who tend to agree with his ideology and policies. This sort of communication is a one-way process. It forecloses the option of Modi's interactions with those who don't necessarily agree with the government. Basically, it stifles dissent.
It's because of this mistrust of the media that Modi has avoided holding press conferences during nearly two years of his government. He doesn't give interviews, and even during his many foreign visits, he keeps the media at bay. The prime minister's office (PMO) has no press and communication adviser to facilitate his interaction with the media.
 |
| Modi has avoided holding press conferences during nearly two years of his government. |
Modi has friends among media czars. He has friends among senior journalists. But he hasn't given them many interviews. He has been using the official radio medium to communicate to the wider public through a programme called "Mann Ki Baat". That is a monologue.
The monologue on radio and tweets can't be substitutes for interactions that a head of the government must have with the press in a democratic system. Without a proper system of feedback and interactions, in the absence of rigorous analysis and critique, governments start believing in the lies that they weave.
Mistrust of the independent media is characteristic of a leader with authoritarian tendencies. Anything that might not be to their liking and anything perceived as unfavourable is viewed as a threat. During Modi's government, independent newspapers and television news channels are being sidelined or ignored. The government-controlled media outlets and social media channels are the sole and favourite vehicles of communication.
The prime minister's overdependence on Twitter and social media has created an undesirable and dangerous hiatus between the government and the public. It has created two different and mutually antagonistic spheres - one of his fans or "Bhakts" as they are called, and the other of citizens who are not his die-hard supporters and are his critics. The two spheres are continuously at war with each other.
This sort of antagonism arises because Twitter with its 140-character limit encourages blunt, non-varnished messaging. It basically eviscerates any message of its context and details. It's left for users to interpret and read in the context they appreciate or imagine.
Modi and his supporters might be relishing his popularity as an internet and Twitter star. But the prime minister doesn't realise that in the absence of proper interactions through newspapers and television, his government is impeding the process of participation of the common people in the political process and thereby, alienating them.
He must also remember that overdependence on government-controlled media had led former prime minister Indira Gandhi into believing that the common people were happy with her 20-point programme and she could win the elections after lifting the Emergency. She was in the dark, as in the absence of an independent press, she couldn't gauge the mood of the people. She was routed in the 1977 general elections.
Modi can celebrate his status as a Twitter titan. But he must also remember that the Modi brand can prove to be his nemesis.