No Apology From Republic TV's Arnab Goswami For Misreporting Despite NBSA Order
New Delhi, Sept 07: The News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA), an independent body set up by the News Broadcasters Association, on August 30 directed BJP MP Rajeev Chandrashekhar’s news channel Republic TV to air a full-screen apology to its viewers for inappropriate comments made by its editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami.
But despite the deadline given by the body passing by – before the 9 pm debate on September 7, 2018 – the channel has yet to tender an apology.
The complaint was filed by A. Singh and his partner Pratishtha Singh after the channel ran a video alleging that the complainant was one of the people who harassed their reporter, Shivani Gupta, while reporting at Vadgam MLA Jignesh Mevani’s ‘flop show’ rally.
“I want their faces circled more. I want the family members of these cheap, perverse goons to watch their family members doing this … at this event which was the Jignesh flop show. Let’s name and shame these people,” said Goswami at the beginning of the debate as a small video of the event played on the screen.
Multiple times during the hour-long debate, Goswami can be seen calling the complainant a “vulgar thing”, “pervert”, “goon”, “sexist”, “hyena” and “anti-Indian”. The channel reportedly removed the video from its website and YouTube account after the complainant sent them multiple mails. The debate on the topic is still available on the channel’s website.
In the video, Gupta can be seen surrounded by a small crowd as she reports on the lack of supporters at the event. In the end she had to be escorted away by the police.
In its original reply, Republic TV had claimed that Singh was “interfering with the reporting done by its reporter by moving towards her in an intimidating and aggressive manner and shouting the words “jhooth bol rahi hai (she is lying)” as she was confronting another person harassing her”. They also claimed that the complainant engaged in further sloganeering aimed at the reporter.
Responding to the channel’s allegations, Singh said that in the video he can be seen saying, “Koi aapko tang nahi kar raha, aap jhooth bol rahi hai (You are lying. nobody is bothering you.)” and can’t be labelled a “vulgar thug”, “pervert”, “goon”, “sexist” or “anti-Indian” on the basis of that. Demanding an apology from the channel, Singh and his partner claimed that after the show was aired, many of their relatives called expressing shock and the broadcast has brought shame and loss of reputation to the family.
In its August 30 order, NBSA noted, “The footage does not show use of any objectionable words by the complainant or any gesture which can be described as “lewd” or “threatening”.”
Chastising Goswami for his choice of language, NBSA said, “Use of words like ‘I am going to show these crude, lewd hyenas/show the dirty faces of lewd, cheap, vulgar, sexist, pervert anti-Indian goons‘ by Mr Arnab Goswami who was anchoring the programme was totally unwarranted and unjustified and the same was in violation of the broadcasting standards.”
Serial offenders
This wasn’t the sole incident of misreporting by the channel while covering this story. They were forced to apologise to an ABP reporter after Goswami labelled him as one of “one of the thugs who tried to intimidate Gupta”.
#JigneshFlopShow | Arnab: Tonight, I will put out videos circling the pictures of the vulgar thugs who tried to intimidate @ShivaniGupta_5 and failed. Republic reporters represent young India much better than your goons, @jigneshmevani80 https://t.co/lpnVZxoMbs
— Republic (@republic) January 9, 2018
Turns out the reporter was actually trying to make sure Gupta is escorted away safely from the mob.
Dear @republic the person you are claiming to be the man who heckled your female journalist at Mevani rally in Delhi is actually one of the finest TV reporter in Hindi journalism. @jainendrakumar is currently with @abpnewshindi
— उत्कर्ष कुमार सिंह (@UtkarshABP) January 9, 2018
You should apologies for this ASAP@milindkhandekar pic.twitter.com/Z1AkFKuoOP
In its apology, Republic TV said, “On the debate yesterday, we inadvertently circled visual of a reporter from ABP News, Jainendra Kumar, while running pictures of our News Editor, Shivani Gupta, being targeted by individuals present at the Jignesh Mevani rally.” The clarification stated that visuals indicative of Kumar being the heckler was an unintentional oversight by the channel’s video editor, reported NewsLaundry.
.@republic TV apologises for calling ABP News correspondent @jainendrakumar a 'goon' during its report on #JigneshMevani's rally. The channel says it was a mistake. pic.twitter.com/rsKznMgvdq
— ABP News (@abpnewstv) January 10, 2018
Republic TV also stated that their apology was issued “as per the highest norms of corrigendum and clarification on such editorial matters” and added that this was a follow up on ABP News’ behest.
Courtesy: thewire.in
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
CJI calls for 'unified judicial policy', use of technology to converge practices across courts
Jaisalmer (PTI): Pushing for a "unified judicial policy", Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said technology can help align standards and practices across courts, creating a "seamless experience" for citizens, regardless of their location.
He said high courts -- due to the federal structure -- have had their own practices and technological capacities, and "regional barriers" can be broken down with technology to create a more unified judicial ecosystem.
Delivering the keynote address at the West Zone Regional Conference in Jaisalmer, Kant proposed the idea of a "national judicial ecosystem" and called for an overhaul of India's judicial system with the integration of technology.
"Today, as technology reduces geographical barriers and enables convergence, it invites us to think of justice not as regional systems operating in parallel, but as one national ecosystem with shared standards, seamless interfaces, and coordinated goals," he said.
He emphasised how the role of technology in the judiciary has evolved over time.
"Technology is no longer merely an administrative convenience. It has evolved into a constitutional instrument that strengthens equality before the law, expands access to justice, and enhances institutional efficiency," he said, highlighting how digital tools can bridge gaps in the judicial system.
Kant pointed out that technology enables the judiciary to overcome the limitations of physical distance and bureaucratic hurdles.
"It allows the judiciary to transcend physical barriers and bureaucratic rigidities to deliver outcomes that are timely, transparent and principled," he said, adding that the effective use of technology can modernise the delivery of justice and make it more accessible to citizens across the country.
The CJI called for implementing a "unified judicial policy".
He said India's judicial system has long been shaped by its federal structure, and different high courts have their own practices and technological capacities.
"India's vast diversity has led to different high courts evolving their own practices, administrative priorities and technological capacities. This variation, though natural in a federal democracy, has resulted in uneven experiences for litigants across the country," he said.
Kant underscored that predictability is crucial for building trust in the judicial system.
"A core expectation citizens place upon the courts is predictability," he said, adding that citizens should not only expect fair treatment but also consistency in how cases are handled across the country.
He pointed to the potential of technology in improving predictability.
"Technology enables us to track systemic delays and make problems visible rather than concealed," he said.
By identifying areas where delays occur, such as in bail matters or cases involving certain types of disputes, courts can take targeted action to address these issues and improve efficiency, Kant said.
The CJI explained that data-driven tools could identify the reasons behind delays or bottlenecks, allowing for faster, more focused solutions.
"Technology enables prioritisation by flagging sensitive case categories, monitoring pendency in real time and ensuring transparent listing protocols," he said.
Justice Surya Kant also discussed the importance of prioritising urgent cases where delays could result in significant harm. He highlighted his recent administrative order that ensures urgent cases, such as bail petitions or habeas corpus cases, are listed within two days of curing defects.
"Where delay causes deep harm, the system must respond with urgency," he stated, explaining that technology can help courts identify and expedite such cases.
Kant also raised the issue of the clarity of judicial decisions.
He noted that many litigants, despite winning cases, often struggle to understand the terms of their judgment due to complex legal language.
"Although the orders had gone in their favour, they remained unsure of what relief they had actually secured because the language was too technical, vague or evasive to understand," he said.
He advocated for more uniformity in how judgments are written.
"A unified judicial approach must therefore extend to how we communicate outcomes," he said.
The CJI also discussed the role of AI and digital tools in improving case management. He pointed to the potential of AI-based research assistants and digital case management systems to streamline judicial processes.
"Emerging technological tools are now capable of performing once-unthinkable functions. They can highlight missing precedent references, cluster similar legal questions, and simplify factual narration," he said, explaining how these technologies can help judges make more consistent decisions.
He also highlighted tools like the National Judicial Data Grid and e-courts, which are already helping to standardise processes like case filings and tracking.
Kant reiterated that the integration of technology into the judicial process is not just about improving efficiency but about upholding the integrity of the system and strengthening public trust.
"The measure of innovation is not the complexity of the software we deploy, but the simplicity with which a citizen understands the outcome of their case and believes that justice has been served," he said.
