On 12th February I had written this post on Mr Bhupendra Chaubey. Unlike most MSM journalists, who would have and have in the past ignored such critiques, Mr Bhupendra Chaubey decided to respond and attempted to rebut some of my claims. For this alone, I applaud him.
Coming to Mr Bhupendra Chaubey’s reply. Sir, let me first clear that I am a male, as is evident from my twitter DP and the “bwoy” in my handle, which for some reason you did not notice. So please stop addressing me as “Mr/Ms”.
Mr Chaubey starts off with the assertion that I am guilty of bracketing him “with the “bazaaru “ media“. I re-read my post and couldn’t find any line which could mean the above. Next he declares that since he is from Varanasi, his English may not be as good as mine. Sir, you are/were the face of a leading, if not the most popular (going by your own channel’s claims) English News Channel. I am sure your English is as good or even better than mine. Anyway we are not playing Spelling bee or Grammar Nazi so we can skip the attempted victim-hood.
Mr Chaubey then goes on to say his tweet cannot be a threat, especially because he has previously showered accolades on Modi. Sir, there are several journalists who take turns on praising Modi as and when required. You’re own ex-colleague Mr Rajdeep famously declared he was never “anti-modi”, just when his book was about to release. So I don’t think precedence is something we can rely on. Mr Chaubey further claims he is a “small fry” and his opinion wouldn’t matter to the PM. Dear Sir, if you are a small fry, I wonder how I could describe myself. Yet my opinion mattered to you (hence the reply from you). Similarly I am sure your opinion also matters to the PM especially since you command such a huge following.
There are some more irrelevant and factually incorrect points like a quote from a CSDS post poll survey, which I would skip as it would make me digress from the core issues. Mr Chaubey next says that his tweet was “meant to start introspection” among BJP and its supporters. It amuses me that when Modi calls some media “bazaru”, you want BJP to introspect, but when Kejriwal calls the media “paid” and wants to jail media people, you call for introspection within the media. Sir, Why these double standards? Why is Kejriwal’s word Gospel Truth and Modi’s word slander. I have gone through your entire post and at no place you have even touched on this issue. I was disappointed.
Mr Chaubey is also silent on my question that why he treats Gujarat and Gujarati voters differently from Delhi? Are they dumber, less educated, more communal, more subservient than Delhi voters? I sadly get no response.
Mr Chaubey, coming to your repeated assertion that your tweet isn’t a threat, Let us see what you tweeted yet again:
Two loud and clear messages to Modi: 1: dilli is no Gujarat; get rid of politics of autocracy. 2. If you call media “bazaaru”;u won’t go far
You say there are clear messages to Modi. You don’t say from whom. Firstly, let us assume the messages are from the voters. Would an ordinary voter be bothered and troubled by Modi’s branding of media “bazaaru”. I could understand if Modi had called the voters names, and hence they reacted in a a particular fashion. Also, in Lok Sabha elections, Modi had called the same media “Newstraders” multiple times. The voters gave him a message of “282” seats. Even Delhi voters gave him 7/7 seats. So I cant see any great affection of voters towards media.
Next, since the tweet is from you, could it be a message from you? If its not from the voters, it has to be from you, as a representative of the media. And it also makes sense, since you, by virtue of being part of the media, were also called “bazaaru”, hence your natural reaction. So essentially what you’re saying is: “My/Media’s clear message to Modi: You call media “bazaaru”, you won’t go far”. I am sure every student studying at the lowliest schools of Varanasi would interpret that as a threat, especially in the backdrop of Delhi election results.
Even so, let us forget about the “threat” part, and let us only focus on the other two questions, which I had already asked but you hadn’t answered, which I will repeat now:
1. When Modi called Media “bazaaru”, and his party lost Delhi elections, you say it’s a message to Modi to stop calling media “bazaaru”. When Kejriwal calls media “paid”, says he wants to “jail media”, and then loses Lok Sabha elections, you say “media has a lot to answer” and introspect about. Why the hypocrisy?
2. Why is Delhi no Gujarat and why does autocracy work in Gujarat and not Delhi? What are the clear shortcomings in a Gujarati voter as compared to a Delhi voter?
I hope your next reply (if any) will clearly address the above two questions instead of beating around the bush with irrelevant details. It is a matter of your credibility sir and I hope you will clarify on the same.
