Brigid: You're listening to All Of It. I'm Brigid Bergin in for Alison Stewart. Here, in the US, most of us are aware of the idea that there are media echo chambers. Dedicated Fox News viewers or MSNBC fans rarely watch the other network. In India, things have become even more divided and dangerous. Nationalist sentiment has been on the rise under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and many news broadcasters have followed suit, shouting, and accusing their guests of what they call anti-nationalism, a term to describe a kind of disloyalty to India.

Standing apart from that crowd was Ravish Kumar, a news anchor from NDTV in New Delhi. Kumar wanted his programming to run counter to what he saw as the nationalist echo chamber and instead focus on issues like unemployment and access to basic necessities like water. Kumar is no longer with NDTV, but he is the subject of a new documentary titled, While We Watched, it's directed by Vinay Shukla, and it's playing now at the IFC Center. Joining me now to discuss the film are the director, Vinay Shukla, and Ravish Kumar himself. Welcome to All Of It. It's so great to have you both here in studio.

Ravish: Thank you, Brigid, for having us. Thank you very much.

Vinay: Thank you.

Brigid: Vinay, as the filmmaker, how did you first encounter Ravish's work?

Vinay: I think I remember watching one of Ravish's broadcast. Unlike most news anchors, who spend a lot of time telling their audiences that the audience is number one, and we are here to serve the audience, what I found really surprising on Ravish's broadcasts was that he was actually scolding his audiences and telling his audiences that they need to stop watching TV, and they are a part of the problem now. It seemed like here was a news anchor who was not only questioning governments but also questioning his own audiences and asking them to do better.

He seemed like a mid-career protagonist, who had now begin to wonder if there was an audience for his work out there. I was interested in making a newsroom drama. When I saw Ravish in his broadcasts and what he seemed to be going through, I thought maybe I should go and try and find out more.

Brigid: How long ago did you think to yourself, "Okay, this is the person that should be the subject of my documentary"?

Vinay: I think I started shooting in 2018. I shot till early 2020.

Brigid: Wow. Ravish, as a journalist, you are usually the one reporting the stories. Did you have concerns about becoming the story yourself?

Ravish: Yes, but I realized very soon that the story of Indian media is something different, and it's a story in itself. We cannot ignore, we cannot afford to have a rogue media in a beautiful democracy like India. These news channels started demolishing whatever decency we have earned for our democracy. The attack was so mammoth and vast that no sober journalist could have-- any journalists should have done that and question that why this is happening.

I thought, and at that time, I was collecting evidences of the decline and demolition of this Indian media, and Vinay came into the scene, and he had a proposal to make a document from inside, so I had no problem with him. I think that journalist many times we say that we journalists should not be a part of any story, but this is the story, this is the biggest story of India. This is not a regular decline of media, media has become a weapon to destroy decency of democracy. That's why media is a story and anyone who is a part of this media is a part of that story.

Brigid: What was a concern for you or what was important to you about how he told your story? Did you have questions for him going into it to really understand what kind of story he wanted to tell and how he was going to be a part of your life for a significant period of time to do that?

Ravish: Honestly, not really, I discussed with him that how he's going to shoot and how he's going to use. My only promise to him was that I will not going to interfere in your work, the way how you are going to show me-- you can show me in a bad light, you can show me in a good light. It's up to you, you know, and I live it to your concerns. Yes, I had different kind of concern about my family's being on the screen. At that time, I started protecting them from public glare, we stopped going out.

When I was shooting discreetly everything, and many part of their life is on the screen, that's the only concern, but much of me is in the public life, anyway.

Brigid: Vinay, for American listeners who may be less familiar with the situation in India, can you talk about what has been driving some of this rising nationalism that you talked about that is infiltrated the rest of the media in the last few years, and how has that shaped the media coverage?

Vinay: I think, to be honest, maybe Ravish is more qualified to answer the changes in media because he's been so-- Ravish, do you want to take that?

Brigid: Sure.

Ravish: In short, I'll try to keep it short. First, destruction, and second, weaponization. This media started with the news room were demolished at once. It was avalanche where everything was washed away. The other thing happened is the weaponization. Day in, day out communal vicious agenda, and pro-government coverage made them turn into a weapon. They started using communal things, and we all know that any hatred, especially communalism is a capacity to give a birth to criminal impulses in a largest part of our society.

The society got radicalized. Part of the society got radicalized, and this was done by the television. This is not a Fox versus CNN story. You only have one media in India right now, and that one kind of journalism is being done by hundreds of channels together. Hundreds of channels are attacking and doing the same propaganda, killing any kind of voices, which are qualified to be opposition in their eyes.

Brigid: Ravish, one point early on in the film, you say, "Nationalism today is basically a cover-up for religious fundamentalism." Then you also said, "Nobody should be so powerful that they're above being questioned." I felt like those two ideas were really speaking to each other. Again, for our American audience, can you talk more about how those ideas play out in India and in your work?

Ravish: First, I have to say that our Prime Minister hasn't done any live press conference in his nine years of rule. Yes, he's not being questioned by the same mainstream media, and also, mainstream media has just started thinking that no one can question him, question this media. That's why I'm here to tell our Indian diaspora and everybody who is concerned with the media in any part of the world, that this is the story we cannot ignore right now. They started using nationalism, they started using religion and propagating which was coupled with the trolling system.

Trolls right now, it's a very different trolls in India. They have become a kind of authorities and authorities are behaving like a troll. If trolls are after you, you will find yourself in jail, you will find yourself in different kinds of cases being filed against you. You cannot separate authorities and troll in a different way, both are complementing each other. This kind of media was used first nationalism, and now, they don't have to use anything. They have become a censoring agency. Earlier, we all have gone through the government is censoring media, now media is censoring media.

Media is censoring-- suppressing news. Right now, we have a huge story from eastern part of the country, Manipur, two women were paraded nakedly on camera and the media is suppressing this story. There not as serious question is being asked, not only about this incident, but about the state is being in a turmoil for three months, almost three months, but the media is not doing enough on-ground reporting, and not asking question to this government.

Brigid: There's a really powerful scene where you were speaking at a university. There were questions that were asked and one of the questions, the second question that's asked, I think the woman was probably a professor, but she essentially challenges the speech that you gave there where it was a speech of about what's needed for higher education and you talked about this critique of the media, this one-sided view that people are getting. Her pushback was that that had nothing to do with higher education.

Your pushback was you're afraid that someone's watching you. Can you talk a little bit about what you do when you're confronted with, not even people who are in the media, but with lay people who have become affected by this media that you are responding to?

Ravish: Media legitimizes this argument in our society, and everyone becomes the spokesperson for the media and for the government, and the man who is the part head of the government. Before 2014, I used to be invited by many universities, colleges, and I used to go to give a lecture on that. After 2014, I become a persona non grata. Some of the students try to invite me through subverting the topics. Using different topic that bring him to speak on education. They got permission in the name of education and I started speaking something on the current politics.

That's why the lady who was the authority in this scene stood up and she marked her presence as I was the one who objected him to save her job. Then I asked question to the student. These kind of things are happening. Many principals are not easily ready to invite me. When a student say that we want to invite Ravish Kumar, they get big no, that, "No, you should invite someone else." That scene was very powerful and you rightly mentioned.

Brigid: Vinay is the filmmaker. I'm sure that you saw a lot of scenes like that play out, that tension between what Ravish represents and how people have been affected by this media that he's challenging. You chose that particular scene. What was it about it for you that really stood out as a telling moment?

Vinay: One of the reasons why I made the film is people have gotten absolutely desensitized to the crisis of news and to what people who create the news are going through. One of the reasons this film is a very immersive look at what goes down within a news media organization, within a newsroom, what's a day in a newsroom like. When I saw that, Ravish would very often face those encounters, wherein people feel very, very passionately about the news and news people. In a way, I welcome it because people are looking to partake and engage with people in the news.

News is a major system of public information. People come to the news to hopefully learn something, in my understanding, to hopefully learn something that will help them make more informed decisions. I appreciate the challenge. At the same time, the lack of rigor within that challenge is something that Ravish also keeps mentioning has been propagated by the current news ecosystem. Another reason why I really liked that scene is because it reminded me of one of my favorite voice, Aaron Sorkin. He's made a show called The Newsroom.

I remember the opening of The Newsroom where he was very similar to what played out there. The cinema file in me was happy about that.

Brigid: That's a great comparison. I'm wondering what challenges, you faced now that you're trying to release the film. Have you had any difficulty getting people to screen it?

Vinay: The film premiered last year at the Toronto International Film Festival. It won there. Since then, it's won at a bunch of film festivals. I released last week in UK. We released in more than 40 cinemas. We are here at the IFC Center this week. Our opening night Q&A was done by John Oliver. There was Amy Goodman the night before. To be honest, I've only received love in terms of from the audiences. Every time I put something out on social media, people are really looking forward to watching this film and they're championing it.

It's a very small film and we've had a very long journey. The second part of the answer would be with regards to distribution in India. I currently don't have any offers from Indian distributors to get the film out in India. I have done one screening in India, which was very widely attended, but only for friends and crew. I'm hopeful. This film is an act of hope for me. I believe that I'm ultimately aspiring for a dialogue around how do we build a better news.

People from across the spectrum have seen the film in New York and at other places, wherever it has screened, and everybody wants to have this conversation. I am really, really hopeful that I'll be able to get the film out widely in India.

Brigid: We're talking about the documentary, While We Watched with director Vinay Shukla and Ravish Kumar, the subject and former NDTV director. Ravish, you are regularly accused of being "anti-nationalist or anti-India". What does that mean for someone to be accused of anti-nationalism?

Ravish: Anyone who is questioned, who stands against this government. If you raise a story about women being paraded naked on camera, you are called anti-national, anti-Modi, anti-government. Many anti, your names are labeled with your names. This is the trend emerged after 2014. This means nothing. This means only one thing that better not to speak, better not to ask, better not to question. Keep silent. We will label you as anti-national. I thought, "Let them. I will keep asking."

Brigid: Let's talk about some of the issues that you think the news should be looking at in the country. You already mentioned that most recent, really terrible story about the two women. You, in your documentary, during the time when it was filmed, looked at issues of unemployment and issues of access to basic necessities. Why is unemployment so important in this documentary? Then how did you cover it in a way that you felt like others were ignoring?

Ravish: Because, yes, if you look at this Indian media, you will not find representations of public issues. Even we had increase in petrol prices, inflation was increasing. The media was not discussing these things in detail. They started ridiculing when oppositionists question this government policy and achievement on the basis of employment, which every government gets criticism on this issue. Government and this media started ridiculing issue of unemployment. They started calling that. Employment is not lacking in this country because policies are doing so well.

The problem of youth is that they are not skilled, they are not ready for the employment, which is not true. They are being blamed. On many occasion, every day you can see that this media is not representing public voices. They are creating issues out of thin air. Also, the most part of media and most part of the content is dedicated to the communal agenda. Every time they are doing anti-Muslim story, directly, indirectly, most of the time, they are very directly doing anti-Muslim story. They are picking issues which are polarizing the society and giving legitimacy to those rogue elements and organizations on the road.

They have the media, they have the kind of legitimized argument, so they can do anyone. From lynchings to public beating that are happening on the road. It's all things, you can see a greater link between what media is showing and how society is expressing through their violence and through anger.

Brigid: Vinay, while you were in the process of making this documentary, a large and deadly terrorist attack against Indian soldiers took place. We see that moment in the newsroom. You were there as the reporters, producers, and the anchor were processing what was happening. How did this terrorist attack change the shape of the story you were telling in this documentary?

Vinay: It was a very quick primer for me to understand just how rigorous newsrooms have to be at such short notice. As a documentary filmmaker, very often, I have the privilege of patience of letting things play out over days, sometimes over months before I decide my mind as to how I'm going to read things. When a story like that, a big story about, these terrorist attacks that took place, when that sort of a story breaks out, the newsroom and the systems that it has in place really kicks in.

Around the NDTV newsroom, I saw them, fact checks videos that were coming in to figure out to be able to corroborate stories, to be able to reach out and find out victim stories. It was really an eye-opening experience for me. Also, it really helped me understand just how quickly narratives are shaped during such times, the kind of words you use, the kind of language you use, the kind of messaging that's decided. It's something that helped me appreciate how important processes are, how much time are newsrooms spending on training their journalist.

For example, in complexity. What I'm reporting is a very complex job. Just like, for example, the pandemic is a complex problem. Migration is a complex problem. If newsrooms today are investing more time with their journalist because these are the new realities that we are living in, for example, there's a war on in Ukraine right now, how much time are newsrooms spending on training their journalist? It's something that I keep coming back to again and again because I think that's one of the most fundamental aspects of the job.

A lot of us look alike and a lot of us come to the same office, we don't have access to the same information resources. It's almost imperative that news organization train their journalist in complexity. That's something that I'm really hoping that people will try and make it happen.

Brigid: Also, in that newsroom, you saw a lot of people leave NDTV. What did you observe about the conditions there that might've been causing so many people to leave the company?

Vinay: Honestly, those were some of the most heartbreaking days that I've ever spent shooting because you would see people who have done this job for about two decades. It's not easy to have done something for over 20 years and then be asked to leave for reasons that may not necessarily have to do anything with your skill. You may still be very good at your job, but the organization cannot afford to have you anymore. To start your life again when you're in your mid-40s, when you're in your mid-50s to go out and find a job, it's also humiliating to be very honest.

Not too many people should have to face that, especially when you did everything that people expected of you, the industry expected of you. There were many factors for people to have to leave. Of course, one of the major factors was just that the organizations couldn't afford to have them around anymore. Not everybody left out of their choice. Their hand was also forced to go and look for lesser opportunities, take up lesser opportunities because they didn't know how long this profession or this company would be able to sustain them.

I am hoping that when people watch the film, they're again, sensitized to this crisis that are currently affecting those who create our news every day. We have all become so desensitized to what news people go through. Of course, there have been some bad agents, but there has been such a massive disinformation campaign that we have stopped caring about a journalist. It's absolutely, fundamentally important that if you're looking to build a better society through journalism, then we start appreciating our journalists.

Brigid: In our last few minutes, Ravish, I've said that you are a former anchor at NDTV, and that's because a billionaire who is a friend of Modi's has taken over the station, and so you left the station and now you run your program on YouTube. I'm wondering, what do you think needs to change for the Indian media landscape?

Ravish: This Indian media is not going to change because power and government would not like to have them changed. I do not see that question is happening in any way. Money is not a problem. Two biggest billionaire of India are having end number of channels, and they are planning to have more news channels, but both of them should be rival with their content, but the content are almost same, whatever they are showing suits with the agenda and the power.

I do not see any hope to this media is going to change unless we speak about, we discuss about this media and stop watching this kind of media to save our children, to save our youngster, to make them into radicalized and polarized. The anchors are just not loud and shrill. Their voices are led in with communal things. This is very dangerous reaching drawing room every day through hundreds of news channels. Nothing is going to change because they have money, they have news channels, they have resources at their disposal, but they do not have courage to start journalism in this country.

They are buying prestigious share in prestigious universities of America and you will find many university chairs in their name, but they are not doing the good thing for the country through the news channels. This kind of irony, I can see we need to highlight that, "Here we are, a billionaire." Who is spending money on American University to have a chair on his name and what kind of channel he's going to making for Indian masses? Both are very contradictory. We have to be alert and keep alerting our masses, our viewers. That's what we can do and we will keep doing this.

Brigid: Well, thank you so much.

Ravish: Thank you.

Brigid: I wish you luck as you continue to do it. I've been speaking with Vinay Shukla, the director, and Ravish Kumar, the former NDTV anchor, currently an anchor on YouTube. The film is While We Watched, you can see it at the IFC Center. Thank you so much for joining me on All Of It.

Ravish: Thank you.

Vinay: Thank you for having us.

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.