The 2G Judgment and GOP Jingle Bells

The 2G Judgment and GOP Jingle Bells​

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 21st Dec. 2017

Reducing Politics to an ‘Identity competition’ level as is practiced by the National parties and their Netas (in government as well as opposition) along with a supportive commercial news media would tend to have its toll. Politics especially identity politics is of the nature of ambiguous victories and nebulous defeats and the wise claim them all as ‘massive victories’. The breaking into of people into celebration is telecasted/reported as ‘something happening’ and a caravan is formed with the possibility of leading to some electoral victories. Only difference is that this time round the tables are turned and there might be somewhat better understanding of the ‘tough question politics’. Through ‘tough question politics’, one tends to shatter the ‘identity barriers’ and put focus on issues and it becomes a counter to ‘identity politics’ especially the one practiced by the Netas in government who are supposed to be providing answers, if not for the Netas in opposition. The ‘Game’ is well aware that for this no Goenka award would be conferred ever but that is secondary. Basically the tough question politics is/was always around voicing questions related to policy that are concerns of the teaming millions to the Netas drunk in power. Some of those questions were settled by the Hon’able Supreme Court when they took mass cancellation of the Telecom Licenses or dis-allocation of the mines. Of course there would be many individual cases or smaller battles which may not have had received much highlight or were more specific rather than a wholesale policy level mess. Sadly, there are still little attempts to come out of the ‘identity competition’ and the coveted Goenka awards are being conferred regularly. Very likely, the Netas do not want the commercial news media to lose its focus of pitching them or their own sales pitch instead of discussion on issues.

While the Netas in the opposition may have broken into song and dance mode for creation of the Caravan over the judgment with a supportive media carrying out its identity build-up agenda for a future identity face-off. It may be noted that of late there has been some attempts to focus ‘issues’ like the state of higher education in government, health care institutions etc. and these articles in Management Paradise have been appreciative of such attempts. However there are structural deficiencies in the commercial news media and its larger focus remains on identity politics and/or pushing political party’s agenda as public issues without questioning of logics, the promotion of the telecom judgment and ensuing song and dance being an example. Other issues which are not debated is that even though we have dedicated channels for covering activities of the ‘house of elected representatives’, however these have not ‘grown and matured’ to engage with the state legislatures and if there is a political ploy to keep focus on ‘larger identities alone’ in a structured manner and thus an avoidance of public scrutiny of the smaller voices so that these may not gain any appreciation for their merit. Of course such media focus goes to support the states Netas of these very parties ( some others as well) to slip of the radar even when there are scores of deaths due to disease or public facilities failure or economic distress. In fact such identity politics perhaps may not allow even the party and Netas to reflect on its electoral defeat (since they are keen that ‘even that’ be registered as victory) whereby they failed to follow-up on any significant charge (a la Vyapam) or raised such charges ‘too late’ and focus too much on shoring select identities rather. However the Netas in state have not demanded any change and seem happy to be oblivious to this fact which can be implemented easily if there is political desire.

And I must put the fact that identity politics is happening even when there is lot of noise around competitive federalism with states being enabled to promote themselves. However the state Netas are happy only when they can choose when to be on public radar and remaining off-radar on all other occasions. However we have proclamations around maturity of democracy without any attempts to bring an end to such dubious practices. Neither the Netas or the Journos of the commercial news media are likely to raise issues mainly on account of the unspoken understanding of not criticizing other media ‘directly’ and some other journos would happily proclaim them as responsible and may be ‘social media’ as irresponsible. These articles in Management Paradise have already predicted a brighter future for the regional leaders not following the Bhakti mantra as promoted vigorously by the Commercial news media ( http://www.managementparadise.com/article/9595/the-electoral-message ). Let’s see the ‘Game’ evolve…..

 

[Swaswati Borpuzari]

Certainly, the topic "The 2G Judgment and GOP Jingle Bells" seems to blend two rather disparate elements: a technical or legal term ("2G Judgment") and a cultural or musical reference ("GOP Jingle Bells"). Let's attempt to weave these together in a coherent paragraph:

In the ever-evolving landscape of technology and politics, the term "2G Judgment" stands out as a significant legal milestone, particularly in regions where the transition from 2G to 3G networks has been a matter of public and legal scrutiny. This judgment, often associated with the allocation and misuse of 2G spectrum licenses, has had profound implications for telecom policies and corporate governance. Meanwhile, the "GOP Jingle Bells" represents a more whimsical side of political culture, where the Republican Party in the United States has adapted the festive tune of "Jingle Bells" to rally support and spread its message during the holiday season. Despite their apparent disconnect, both the 2G Judgment and GOP Jingle Bells highlight the diverse ways in which societies navigate technological advancements and political ideologies. The 2G Judgment underscores the need for transparency and accountability in the tech sector, while the GOP Jingle Bells illustrates the creative and often unconventional methods political parties use to engage with the public. Together, they offer a fascinating glimpse into the complex interplay between legal, technological, and cultural forces shaping modern society.

 

[Simran Rai]

The article “The 2G Judgment and GOP Jingle Bells” by Amit Bhushan critiques the prevailing state of political discourse and media conduct in India, particularly following the 2G spectrum judgment. It explores how identity-based politics and media theatrics continue to overshadow substantive discussions on governance and accountability. The central concern remains the deflection from “issue-based politics” toward a curated spectacle of victory narratives that suit political convenience and media consumption.


At the heart of the article lies a critique of "identity competition" — a recurring theme in Indian politics where communities, castes, and social groups are targeted or mobilized for electoral gain. This method, though electorally profitable, often results in ambiguous victories and nebulous defeats, with every political outcome spun as a win, regardless of ground realities or policy outcomes. The result is a manufactured euphoria, aided and amplified by the commercial news media, which fails to probe deeper into policy performance or governance delivery.


The reference to the 2G spectrum judgment illustrates this very point. Instead of focusing on the larger policy failure or examining the structural lapses that led to the original cancellation of licenses by the Supreme Court, the media and opposition celebrated the verdict selectively. The article points out that this created a "caravan" of identity and narrative building rather than taking the opportunity to discuss systemic reforms or accountability in government procedures. Such moments, instead of becoming turning points for institutional strengthening, are reduced to points of symbolic victory or vindication for political factions.


The concept of "tough question politics" is positioned as a much-needed antidote to identity politics. This form of politics emphasizes asking direct, uncomfortable questions on policies, governance failures, institutional integrity, and public accountability — areas that require attention in a functioning democracy. However, the current system, as noted in the article, resists this shift. Awards like the Goenka, commercial journalism accolades, and even political rewards seem to bypass those who embody issue-based scrutiny, further alienating genuine watchdogs and reinforcing identity-based spectacle politics.


The role of the commercial news media is critically examined. The article notes that while a few encouraging signs of issue-based reporting have emerged — such as reports on education and healthcare — the dominant media narrative still revolves around personalities, identities, and partisan lines. Coverage of state legislative processes, where important governance work actually happens, remains stunted. The media, instead, gives disproportionate attention to national spectacles, aiding political actors in scripting their own public image with little public scrutiny. This gives state-level leaders room to operate with impunity — surfacing in media when convenient and retreating into silence when accountability is demanded.


Furthermore, the article questions why the state-level public representatives and media have not evolved, especially in an age where "competitive federalism" is being marketed. Despite the promise of decentralization and regional empowerment, there is little incentive among regional leaders to foster transparency or encourage media scrutiny. On the contrary, most appear content with the occasional spotlight, leaving real issues like rural distress, local governance failures, and administrative lapses unaddressed. This results in a democracy reduced to periodic performance art rather than a continuous process of governance and evaluation.


The final critique extends to both political parties and media institutions. Political actors, instead of reflecting on electoral defeats or revisiting unfulfilled promises like the Vyapam investigation, focus on identity recalibration and perception management. Media platforms avoid criticizing each other to preserve mutual interests, further diluting accountability. In this vacuum, social media — despite its flaws — becomes a critical tool for public discourse, even if traditional media attempts to dismiss it as irresponsible.


In conclusion, the article laments the lost opportunities for systemic reform, especially in moments when public attention could have been harnessed to bring about structural change. Instead, theatrics, narrative spin, and selective memory dominate, leaving governance issues unresolved. The call to action remains clear — the nation must shift from celebrating convenient judgments and symbolic victories to demanding clarity, consistency, and accountability from both Netas and the media that covers them. Only then can the “Game” evolve meaningfully.​