INDIA should play up its martyr appeal
Congress's Pawan Khera showcased his semantic side when he pointed out the difference between these three Bs and 'non-cooperation'. He contended that the Opposition flotilla INDIA's 'boycott' of a posse of TV news anchors considered to be 'more loyal than the king' was no boycott — or ban or blacklisting — but Gandhian 'non-cooperation'.
Is he splitting hairs? Or making a pointed pushback against what the Opposition perceives as GoI/BJP's banana republic split tactics? Not engaging with mediapersons whose job may be to portray Opposition voices in a bad light can be a tactic. But along with Nitish Kumar, we agree that not engaging is not only strategically unsound, but also ends up portraying the 'non-cooperators' as plain boycotters, 'banners' and blacklisters.
The very fact that one is 'there' even in a hostile and biased environment is an important Gandhian gesture.
There is less purpose, never mind glory, for the person who gives the other side a 'walkover'. By being seen as trying to engage and failing because of the media platform's portrayal of INDIA in a bad light may, actually, be used to put on a martyr quality to those being reportedly browbeaten.
Instead, a smarter strategy would be to highlight the bias on other, less antagonistic platforms. No?
