India’s Daughter: #banBBC

India is engulfed in a media storm, with the British Broadcasting Corporation at its epicentre. 

The BBC stands accused of commissioning and broadcasting a documentary that is part of a worldwide ‘conspiracy to defame India’. The film, India’s Daughter, examines the the gang rape and murder of a 23 year old female student, Jyoti Singh, in New Delhi in 2012. Most controversially, the film includes an interview with Mukesh Singh, one of the men convicted of the crime.

India’s Daughter was produced by the British film-maker Leslee Udwin and was made possible due to the unprecedented access she was granted to one of India’s high security prisons where Mukesh Singh has been held on death row. In total, sixteen hours of filming with him was undertaken over a period of three days. This, it is reported, was done with the full knowledge and support of India’s Home Affairs ministry and the jail’s authorities. Other interviews were conducted with the legal team of the four men convicted of Jyoti Singh’s rape and murder, along with the support of her mother, friends and family members.

The film has attracted considerable international interest. It was due to be shown simultaneously in the UK, India and six other countries – including Switzerland and Norway – on Sunday 8th March to mark International Women’s Day. This was to be followed on Monday 9th March with the launch of the India’s Daughter campaign to raise awareness of gendered violence against women and girls in India and worldwide.

Notwithstanding these international arrangements, as of this moment (4th March) the film has been banned in India by order of a Delhi court. This followed an acrimonious debate in the Indian parliament and pronouncements by a Government of India spokesman that, “We can ban the documentary in India but there is a conspiracy to defame India and the documentary can be telecast outside.” The BBC, in response, brought forward its broadcast and showed the film on BBC 4 earlier this evening.

The response to the film has been even more dramatic on social media, including Twitter where the #banBBC hashtag has become of the highest trending topics on the site. Tweets have supported the BBC’s decision to commission and broadcast the film, but the overwhelming majority of Tweets from India have been intensely critical of the BBC for a variety of reasons. Some accuse the BBC of perpetrating a long ‘colonial hangover‘, others of a desire to defame and destabilise India, and others still suggest more pernicious intent:

The #banBBC hashtag is suggestive of the preferred response to the BBC’s alleged recalcitrance. Many Indian tweeters have called for the BBC to banned from operating in India, for their offices to be closed and their correspondents deported.

This has been a fascinating and somewhat reminiscent example of anti-BBC outpourings from within India. As I have written elsewhere, India has had a hotly contested relationship with the BBC since 1947 – one that still speaks of postcolonial anxieties, resentments and a widely (if latently) held belief that the BBC subjects India to greater scrutiny than other comparable nations. As K.C. Sharma (1994) noted:

The relationship between the BBC and Indian listeners has been one of love and hate. Love for the professional competence and hate as it represented the voice of a colonial empire. Even during the post-freedom period, more often than not a bias against India was discernible in BBC broadcasts in our conflicts with Pakistan, particularly on the Kashmir issue. The BBC also did not miss an opportunity to project the seamy side of our people and polity (K.C. Sharma 1994, p 82)

Forty-five years ago – in 1970 – anti-BBC feeling in India reached a particular crescendo when the BBC announced its intention to broadcast the film Calcutta by the French filmmaker, Louis Malle. A visually rich, ‘impressionistic portrait’ of India’s second most populous city, the film that had already received considerable international attention, including the Palm D’Or at the 1969 Cannes Film Festival.

Nonetheless, it was the BBC’s decision to screen the film that provoked consternation from the Government of India, who appealed to the Corporation and the UK government to cancel the broadcast. The BBC refused (inevitably) and the political standoff only intensified when the Indian High Commission in London announced that the functioning of the BBC representative in India would become ‘superfluous’ if Malle’s film was permitted to ‘vitiate the minds of the British people against India’. When the BBC refused to back down – rightly claiming that the Government of India had no right to determine the television schedules of the United Kingdom – their offices in India were forced to close, their press recognition revoked, and their British employees deported. Rallies occupied the streets of Delhi and effigies of BBC staff were duly burnt. The BBC’s correspondent, Ronnie Robson, and representative, Mark Tully, were duly evicted and departed India under a hail of ‘neo-imperialist criticism’ – from the public and Government alike.

It is clear from social media that many Indian nationals would welcome a similar response from the Government of India today. What is less clear is whether the Modi government will bow to the growing social media pressure in the same way that Indira Gandhi’s government reacted to the outpouring of letters and street protests in 1970. There are, of course, crucial differences between then and now, not least India’s evolving narrative as a rising and globally connected power and Mr Modi’s need to be regarded as a progressive international statesman.

The next few days will reveal a great deal about how and whether the evolution of India’s political and social structures have kept pace with the country’s extraordinary economic progress over the past decade or so. One test of this will be whether #banBBC continues to proliferate online, whether this will be challenged by a counter movement within India to ensure that the ban on India’s Daughters is overturned, and how the Modi government will ultimately choose to respond.



3 thoughts on “India’s Daughter: #banBBC

  1. There are 69000 rape cases against women and 9000 against men in UK & Wales. Of these only about 15000 get reported to police and another 3000 reach the courts for trial and conviction. Has BBC or Leslee Udwin done a research project on those 69000 + 9000 victims and accused to understand the real reason for committing those rapes? Of course not. White men and especially British men are too much of a gentelmen to indulge or commit such crime. This happens only in India or in coloured skin society since they are not suppose to lead a normal and dignified life. UK media had an issue with India sending a space mission to Mars. When there is so much poverty why send a mission to Mars,they said. Does Britain send money to India to run its economy that India should seek advice from them on space mission. Britain still has a colonial mind set and a superiority complex about their white skin and historical past of ruling the simple and naive coloured people by indulging in all kinds of fould play to extend their rule across colonies by

  2. If the BBC is viewed by many in India in a negative way, there are deep seated reasons for it.
    Time and again, the BBC comes across like it is still living in a colonial past, and that the Indians are less deserving of respect, or to even be viewed as fellow humans. This is not restricted to merely social issues. During the 26/11 Terror Attacks in Mumbai, the BBC adamantly referred to the terrorists as ‘gunmen’. Yes, it was a small skirmish involving a few gunmen, nothing out of the ordinary than what occurs in East Ham, just a few blokes with guns blagging an old lady’s grocery money, innit?

    Or for that matter, the BBC referring to the Hindu festival of Holi as a ‘filthy festival’, classifying the video under ‘Week’s Weird Videos’. (Link 1) So a joyful festival with colours all around is filthy, yet, I’ve never seen the BBC term the act of Eucharist as weird or filthy. Why not?

    None of this is to say that we as a nation do not have a problem. We do, and we realise it. People who came out on the streets were from our very own society, not airlifted from the English countryside and the prairies.
    However, in the grand scale of things, neither the BBC, nor anyone in the West is in a position to pontificate. The UK is undergoing a rape and paedophilia epidemic, with confirmed Child Sex Aficionados including Royals such as Prince Andrew (Link 2), noted BBC presenter Jimmy Savile, and atleast 40 Members of Parliament (Link 3).
    Specific to rape, consider these rape conviction statistics (Link 4 and 5):

    In England & Wales: 6.5%
    In Scotland: 2.9%
    In India: 26.4%

    Us lowly heathens in India managed to prosecute at a far higher rate than stalwarts of peace, justice and women’s rights from Most Glorious Nation on Earth™.

    Also, while blaming the victim of rape is a horrible phenomena, again, citizens of Most Glorious Nation on Earth™ ( also known as United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) – though it was ok to be raped, molested or slapped around and assaulted in many circumstances, with even women agreeing. (Link 6) And this phenomena is precisely what Leslee Udwin pointed out, and called India a “sick society”. (Link 7 and 8) Can a film maker with such racist views not even expect some questioning and backlash over her views?

    That’s not it, however. Leslee Udwin paid the rapist INR 40,000 for the interview, and violated agreements with the jail authorities to not show unedited footage, and to not use the research for commercial purposes. (Link 9 and 10)

    After all this, tell me, do you seriously think someone from the UK is in a position to come and lecture us lowly heathens in India? Still carrying on with White Man’s Burden, are we? Are there no rapists in Most Glorious Nation on Earth™ – United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – or did you really need to show people about us evil heathens from a ‘sick society’? And do we not have a right then, to feel this lady who is a despicable racist, had an agenda against us?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s