Sometimes words uttered by people not known for speaking too much attract much attention and call for a proper analysis of their statements.

Same goes for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh whose recent comments made during a press conference forced many to do a reality check.

During the conference he said: “History will be kinder to me than the media.”

Singh is one of those Indian leaders who did not reach the top by leading any revolution or by riding atop any populist wave. He is neither considered a great orator nor an extremely media-friendly person.

It would not be an exaggeration to claim that in today’s India media could break or make any person or entity. It was the effective use of media and extensive media coverage that should be given the credit for the success of Delhi’s Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and his Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The same holds true for the confidence exuded by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in projecting Narendra Modi as its key leader.

Media helped build Kejriwal’s image as a common man’s leader by focusing on him surrounded by apparently common people. Modi’s populist image is partly due to media’s attention to large crowds attracted by rallies and other meetings that he addressed.

Singh’s is an altogether different case. Certainly, he is seen addressing people on national occasions and sometimes as part of his party’s electoral campaign. It would be unfair to assume that the media did not extend any coverage to those events. But unlike the continuous coverage accorded to Kejriwal and Modi, there is a formal tag attached to official news linked with Singh’s programs.

Actually the coverage Singh received can be equated with the importance accorded to his government’s policies. When it is time for presentation of the annual budget, Indian media leave no stone unturned in covering all the aspects — positive and negative. Such a treatment to Singh is unavoidable, as being the fourth estate the media has to study his statements and actions thoroughly in the larger interest of the country.

Kejriwal has just stepped into politics. Modi’s political power is still confined to Gujarat but he aims at taking the center stage following parliamentary elections. If media were to ignore them and other political leaders, there would be risk of media being labeled as government’s mouthpiece. Commercial stakes as well as media ethics refrain most leading media outlets — even if rival parties back them — from literally acting as mouthpieces.

If Singh feels that the Indian media has not been very kind toward him, it also implies that the media has not acted as the government and/or Congress mouthpiece. Maybe, media has not accorded him as extensive coverage as it has given to Kejriwal and Modi. But then as mentioned earlier, Singh is not riding atop any populist wave or leading any campaign. For about a decade, he has headed the Congress-led government as the prime minister.

The Indian media has played its due role in giving substantial coverage to Singh’s interactions with foreign dignitaries.

Nevertheless, there lies greater meaning in Singh’s belief that history will be “kinder” to him than the media. Notwithstanding the nature of his achievements, history bears witness to Singh being the country’s prime minister for two consecutive terms. He assumed office as the country’s 13th prime minister in May 2004 and continued in office following the return of Congress-led coalition government in 2009 parliamentary polls. Singh holds record for being India’s third longest serving prime minister.

Paradoxically, Singh has earned this honor despite the media not being as kind to him as it has been to his rivals and that to his party. There is no denying that media can contribute to enhancing popularity of various leaders and their political parties. Yet, the same popularity can crash or be strengthened formally, depending on the electorate’s decision at the time of casting votes. Singh did not play any major role for his party in 2004 parliamentary elections. His selection, decided by Congress leader Sonia Gandhi, is known as a wild card entry. He has been a member of the Rajya Sabha (Upper House) of the Indian Parliament but never of the Lok Sabha (Lower House). Thus, Singh has definitely made a point by expressing that history will be kinder to him than media. It cannot be denied that Singh entered the center stage of Indian politics without media creating any populist waves for him. But media has duly played its role of according coverage to him, his views, policies and programs.

Email: [email protected]