TELEPROMPT
Sweet moments, finally
Mannika Chopra

Life is full of those “where were you” moments. Where was I on Tuesday evening when the historic Women’s Reservation Bill was being voted in the Rajya Sabha? Right there, glued to the TV, waiting for the (A)yes, realising that after 63 years of Independence, women in India, not having secured equality through a spontaneous natural process, needed it to be achieved by force of law. Many have argued that it is an imprecise formula but the Bill itself was a good beginning for some kind of gender equality, as Sonia Gandhi very happily told NDTV’s Barkha Dutt, and later, in a more abridged form, CNN-IBN and Times Now.

Dutt’s interaction was clearly more comfortable and compelling, though naturally it gave no inkling of the deals struck. Tuesday was so different from Monday. Then it was assumed a civilised debate on the Women’s Reservation Bill, which promised 33 per cent reservation for women in Parliament and regional assemblies, would take place on March 8. Coinciding with the centenary of International Women’s Day, the Bill promised equality, liberty and, yes, sorority to women legislators. Sadly, the coverage as it panned out on our screens, courtesy live feeds on Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha TV, had very few sweet and wonderful moments.

Instead, the story was inaugurated by seven MPs who began tearing the Bill out of the hands of the chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, who looked visibly shaken. As unparliamentary behavior went on, the unruly activities of these MPs touched an all-time low. These unexpected actions and the non-debate of the Bill on Monday spurred news broadcasters into action mode. CNN-IBN preformed credibly, putting into place lengthy and live coverage of the debate from the mid-morning onwards outside Parliament and in their studios. As the discussion pointed out, the idea of the Bill was not a neutral concept. It was a constitutional amendment that promised, for the first time, affirmative action for women in Parliament.

The Women’s Reservation Bill promises equality and liberty to legislators

The premise was not completely flawless, and some panellists (mostly male) playing the role of conscientious objectors, saw in it a shrewd proposition that needed to be procedurally refined. Advocates of the Bill like senior journalist Neerja Chowdhury, on CNN-IBN initially and later on Doordarshan, believed that the Bill was an important way to break the vicious cycle of discrimination. The night before CPM leader Brinda Karat said much the same thing while chewing up Times Now anchor Arab Goswami in News Hour for daring to suggest that the Bill would only succeed in perpetuating the bahu-beti brigade rather than ushering in any equality.

Of course, all anchors, reporters and experts agreed that the Bill would have had a greater chance to succeed had politicians and parties pursuing it put a master plan in place. From channel to channel the run-up to the Bill and Parliament’s dysfunction was the hot topic of discussion, completely overtaking the symbolic salute to womanhood programmes that are normally aired on March 8. Interestingly, News X, in between high-voltage debates, showed us how quietly and efficiently the recent Panchayati Raj election in Rajasthan had been. The low-key report was not about the battle of the sexes or about being politically correct but more about being logically correct.

Contrary to popular expectations, Rahul Mahajan wed his dulhaniya in a three or was it a four-hour extravangaza in Rahul Dulhaniya Lejayega? From the mehendi to the sangeet to the actual wedding, it was there for all to see. And for those who could not stay awake for the late night pheras on Saturday night, there was a repeat on Sunday and a repeat of the repeat on Monday on NDTV Imagine. Not only had Rahul chosen Dimpy Ganguly (the hot favourite, according to competitor Nikunj Malik) and married her, now he is also in the process of going on an international honeymoon.

That is, if he gets hold of his passport currently in custody of the court because of a drug abuse case (Mr and Mrs Ganguly, are you listening?). In its coverage of the shaadi, News 24 argued that the wedding was almost a sham since it was actually a contract marriage, thereby implying it already came with an expiration date. But the goofily grinning Rahul denied all.