The Economist's Misjudgment on PM Modi and Media Criticism

Recently, an article in The Economist on Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi struck a chord with many. Instead of focusing on meaningful issues, the article suggested that Modi should not change his clothes multiple times a day to maintain a dignified image but instead exhibit simplicity and poverty by wearing torn clothes to public events. This overlooks the complexities of modern political leadership, reflecting a misunderstanding of both the role and public expectations of a head of state.

This critique extends beyond PM Modi and touches on a larger critique of The Economist's coverage of Indian affairs. Critics argue that the publication, when it comes to issues involving India, often resorts to what can be termed as outright silliness and a lack of intellectual rigor. For instance, the suggestion that Modi changes clothes frequently is viewed as unnecessary marketing tactic, forgetting that politicians, like businesspeople and actors, rely on public perception to advance their agendas.

Another pressing issue brought forward is the criticism related to political press freedom. The article mentions a perceived lack of press freedom in India, drawing attention to the media landscape. However, it overlooks the media outlets that are ideologically close to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the ruling party. In fact, some of the major news channels like NDTV and their coverage of the current government have been more critical than those of previous administrations. Instances where the Prime Minister has shied away from press conferences entirely due to lackluster criticism from the media highlight how the media now seeks any valid criticism, thus leading to articles like The Economist's.

Critics further argue that this kind of reporting serves to undermine the quality of journalism. The reliance on trivial issues, such as personal habits of political leaders, diverts attention from more pressing and important concerns. Indeed, if newspapers like The Economist continue to publish such articles, it could lead to a decline in their reputation and financial health. In the face of increasing pressure from digital media and changing public consumption habits, such reports only serve to diminish the credibility of traditional print media.

It is important to recognize that political leaders, especially those in high-profile roles like the Prime Minister, are expected to look and act in a certain manner to maintain a positive image. Changing clothes multiple times a day is not a marketing strategy; it is about presenting a dignified and professional image to the public. Moreover, such suggestions ignore the significant challenges of poverty and economic development that the government is working to address.

The broader issue at hand is a reflection on media bias and the need for balanced and thoughtful journalism. Instead of focusing on trivial matters, media outlets should seek to provide deeper insights and meaningful critiques that truly impact public discourse.

In conclusion, while it is understandable for media outlets to occasionally take a probing look at the leaders of a country, the coverage by The Economist on PM Modi is a clear example of misplaced priorities. This kind of reporting does a disservice to the profession of journalism and serves to trivialize critical political issues.