How TOI and Jagran
differed in their currency
ban coverage
BY ANKITA PANDEY| IN MEDIA MONITORING | 28/01/2017
Analysis shows that Dainik Jagran’s front pages and editorial
stance backed demonetization while TOI was more nuanced
and critical
ANKITA PANDEY explains the contrast
On the night of 8 November 2016, when the Prime Minister surprised
the country with the demonetisation of high value currency notes, the
measure touched everyone across the country simultaneously and
captured a lot of space in the news media. This monitoring analyses the
coverage in the Delhi editions of two national newspapers, The Times of
India (TOI) and Dainik Jagran, between 9 November 2016 and 1 January
2017. January 1 was included because the Prime Minister’s December
31 speech was covered on that day.
This analysis is based on the coverage of demonetisation on page one
and on the editorial pages. Along with the editorial page, the front page
reflects the stand/opinion of a newspaper. All front page news items
which contained at least one sentence and/or photograph in addition
to the headline were included in the analysis.










Highlights of front page findings
About 80 per cent of the demonetization news on the front pages
of Dainik Jagran was related to government messaging and news
releases.
About 50 per cent of the coverage on TOI’s front pages was related to
the above categories.
News on raids, seizures, etc was the single biggest category of news
in Dainik Jagran.
Public discomfort/anger was the biggest category of coverage in TOI.
Dainik Jagran published only eight front page stories related to public
discomfort including standalone pictures, and confined its coverage to
Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
TOI published 39 items on how people were suffering and had feedback
from 12 states.
In both newspapers, government messaging received the second largest
coverage and political opposition to demonetization, including the
disruption of parliament, got the fourth largest coverage.
In comparison to TOI, Dainik Jagran published more statements of
parties other than the BJP and the Congress.
Left parties did not receive any independent coverage in either of the
two newspapers.
Both newspapers accepted that demonetisation was a bold move.
However, Dainik Jagran preferred to highlight the benefit of
demonetisation, while TOI pointed out the short-term inconvenience
and possible economic disruption.

In a number of cases both covered the same news but selectively
highlighted different portions. While Dainik Jagran was supportive
and TOI was critical, neither supported the stand of the opposition
parties.
Findings in detail
After the announcement of demonetisation, the issue was covered daily
on the front pages of Dainik Jagran and TOI between November 9, 2016
and January 1, 2017. During these 54 days, TOI published 252 news
items on demonetisation on the front page compared to 204 news items
by Dainik Jagran (Table 1). TOI usually has more news items on the
front page than Dainik Jagran.
Table 1: News items on demonetisation on page 1
Week
Dainik Jagran
The Times of India
Week 1/Nov 09 - Nov 15
23
43
Week 2/Nov 16 - Nov 22
32
45
Week 3/Nov 23 - Nov 29
36
34
Week 4/Nov 30 - Dec 06
18
29
Week 5/Dec 07 - Dec 13
27
33
Week 6/Dec 14 - Dec 20
30
25
Week 7/Dec 21 - Dec 27
24
21
Week 8/Dec 28 - Jan 01
14
22
8 weeks/54 days
204
252
About 80 per cent of the demonetization-related news on the front
pages of Dainik Jagran was related to government messaging
(statements and interviews of members of the government and the
ruling party aimed at building support among people for the measure),
announcements of rules and regulations, incentives for going cashless,
and raids, seizures and arrests targeting black money (Table 2). In
comparison, about 50 per cent of the coverage on TOI’s front pages was
related to the above categories.
News on raids, seizures, etc was the single biggest category of news
in Dainik Jagran, whereas public discomfort/anger was the biggest
category in TOI. Dainik Jagran published only eight items related to
public discomfort including standalone pictures capturing public
irritation. The first news on public discomfort was titled “Naye note ki
chah mein aapadhapi, poora prabandh asafal, kashmir se kanyakumari tak
lagi rahi kataare”(Rush for new notes, all arrangements fail, queues
from Kashmir to Kanyakumari) on November 12.
"News on raids, seizures, etc was the single
biggest category of news in Dainik Jagran,
whereas public discomfort/anger was the
biggest category in TOI."
In terms of geographical coverage Dainik Jagran covered only Delhi,
Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. Himachal Pradesh and Punjab were
mentioned in passing in just one news item. TOI, however, published
39 news items on public inconvenience covering 12 states, namely,
Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala,
West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra
and Rajasthan. Delhi and Uttar Pradesh, respectively, accounted for 29
and 20 per cent of the coverage on public discomfort. TOI also
published pictures of queues and violent reactions of people.
Table 2: Classification of news items on demonetisation on the front pages
Classification of news
Dainik Jagran
The Times of India
Declaration of rules
10.8%
8.3%
Tax schemes
4.4%
5.0%
RBI monetary/Banks
3.4%
5.0%
Incentives for cashless transactions
10.8%
4.6%
Raids, seizures, arrests
23.5%
14.7%
Government messaging
17.6%
15.1%
Political support
1.5%
0.8%
Public/Non-political support
4.9%
0.8%
Public discomfort/anger
3.9%
15.5%
Political opposition
6.4%
6.7%
Non-political opposition
0.0%
0.4%
Parliament
2.5%
1.2%
Judiciary
2.0%
2.4%
Newspaper’s own assessment of the situation
3.4%
6.3%
Short term impact on economy
0.0%
8.7%
Long term impact on economy
0.5%
0.0%
Humanitarian response of government officials
0.0%
0.4%
Miscellaneous
4.4%
5.2%
Total
100%
100%
In both newspapers, government messaging received the second largest
coverage and political opposition to demonetization, including the
disruption of parliament, got the fourth largest coverage. The Congress
party received greater coverage in comparison to other opposition
parties on the front pages of both newspapers. In comparison
to TOI, Dainik Jagran published more statements of parties other than
the BJP and the Congress. Interestingly, the Left parties did not receive
any independent coverage in either of the two newspapers. Other than
the BJP and the Congress, only the Samajwadi Party, Bahujan Samaj
Party, Shiv Sena, Aam Aadmi Party, Rashtriya Janata Dal and Janata
Dal (United) figured on the front pages.



Highlights of findings from editorials and edit page articles (op-eds)
Sixty percent of Dainik Jagran’s editorials on demonetisation were
published in November, while sixty percent of TOI’s editorials on this
issue appeared in December.
The November editorials of Dainik Jagran supported demonetisation,
questioned the response of the opposition, and suggested measures to
ease the cash crunch and reduce public discomfort. Dainik
Jagran published the first critical editorial “Sahee salaah” (Right advice)
on December 05; TOI on November 15.
While a few editorials in TOI praised demonetisation, on the whole they
criticised the decision for affecting the economy, particularly daily wage
workers, small traders and industry. It also raised the issues of
cybercrimes and data use by tax and other enforcement authorities.
During these 54 days, Dainik Jagran published 30 editorials on the
issue, while TOI published 33 editorials, including four that mentioned
the issue in passing, on 46 days (Table 3). Dainik publishes editorials
daily while TOI does not publish editorials on Sundays. Sixty percent of
Dainik Jagran’s editorials on demonetisation were published in
November, while sixty percent of TOI’s editorials on this issue appeared
in December.
Table 3: Number of editorials and op-eds on demonetization
Dainik Jagran
Week
The Times of India
Editorial Op-eds Editorial
Op-eds
Week 1/Nov 09 - Nov 15
8
5
4
7
Week 2/Nov 16 - Nov 22
5
5
4
7
Week 3/Nov 23 - Nov 29
5
7
5
11
Week 4/Nov 30 - Dec 06
5
8
3
10
Week 5/Dec 07 - Dec 13
1
3
4
10
Week 6/Dec 14 - Dec 20
3
7
6
7
Week 7/Dec 21 - Dec 27
2
4
5
2
Week 8/Dec 28 - Jan 01
1
4
2
9
8 weeks/54 days
30
43
33
62
Total (excluding entries that mention
demonetisation in passing)
30
38
29
45
The November editorials of Dainik Jagran supported demonetisation,
questioned the response of the opposition, and suggested measures to
ease the cash crunch and reduce public discomfort (Table 4). In an
editorial “Charam
par
starheen
rajneeti”
(The height of opportunistic politics, November 16), Dainik
Jagran highlighted the support of people and criticised the behavior of
the opposition in the following words: “jab . . . log behtar kal ki aas me
shanti aur sanyam ka parichay de rahe hai to netao ka ik samuh asahmati ki
aad me kutark kyun kar raha hai?” (When people are observing restraint
for a better future, why is a section of politicians peddling illogical
claims under the cover of dissent?).
Table 4: Policy assessment in editorials on demonetisation
(Dainik Jagran / The Times of India)
Week
Supportiv
e
Supportive with Critica
conditions
l
Neutral/
Unrelated to policy
Week
1
3/2
3/2
-
2/0
Week
2
-
3/0
0/4
2/0
Week
3
2/0
2/2
0/2
1/1
Week
4
-
3/1
1/1
1/1
Week
5
-
-
1/2
0/1
Week
6
-
-
3/2
0/1
Week
7
-
1/1
1/3
0/1
Week
8
-
1/0
0/1
0/1
Total
5/2
13 / 6
6 / 15
6/6
Dainik Jagran published the first critical editorial “Sahee salaah” (Right
advice) on December 5 in which it argued that hasty demonetisation
had resulted in a slowdown in business and trade activities and
encouraged the conversion of black money into white. In
December, Dainik Jagran carried critical editorials alongside supportive
ones. The critical editorials commented upon the negligence of banks
and the Reserve Bank of India, questioned the stand of both ruling and
opposition parties on the issue of political funding, and the
preparations made by the government.
Front page news items based on Dainik Jagran’s own assessment of the
situation published on the front pages follow a similar trend. Dainik
Jagran published four assessments in November that drew attention to
procedural loopholes in demonetisation and public support for the
PM’s move. The first critical assessment “Sarkar kala dhan ka anuman
lagane se chuki” (Government failed in estimating the value of black
money) appeared on December 3 (two days before the first critical
editorial was published). In December, Dainik Jagran also published
two other critical assessments of the RBI and the government’s larger
economic policy.
Initially, TOI supported demonetisation as a bold step and “a rough
shove towards cashless economy” (It Ain’t White But Hot Pink,
November 12) (Table 4). Its fourth editorial on the issue highlighted the
supportive mood of the public but also pointed out that “if cash flow is
not normalised soon this supportive mood could quickly flip” (High
Stakes Gamble, November 15). Later on, it criticised demonetisation as
“a carpet bombing of all economic activity” (Nurture Savings,
December 12) and “the return of Inspector Raj” (Out Of Gear,
November 21). TOI editorials also highlighted the winning of the BJP in
the municipal council elections in Maharashtra, as a mini-referendum
on demonetisation (Focus On Reform, November 30) and the support
of industrialists for India’s transition to a less cash economy (Make
Haste Slowly, December 6).
On the issue of the disruption of parliament, TOI criticised the lack of
unity among the opposition parties (Disunited Inc, December 28),
stressed the responsibility of the ruling party in running Parliament,
and suggested that the prime minister “should take inspiration from
Vajpayee who thrived on engaging debate in Parliament” (Winter
Wipeout, December 16).
It also criticised Rahul Gandhi for his allegation of corruption against
Narendra Modi (Stop Muck Raking, December 23) and Mamata
Banerjee for dragging the army into her fight with the centre and for
calling a Bharat Bandh (Post-truth Mamata, December 5 and Ban
Bandhs, November 29). On political funding, the paper criticised the
government by saying “the Modi government must address the very
fount of corruption and black money in our society: political funding”
(Lead By Example, December 21).
"Dainik Jagran was supportive of the
government on demonetisation and was less
critical and TOI criticised the ruling party as
well."
Neither of the two supported the conduct of the opposition.
However, Dainik Jagran was supportive of the government on
demonetisation and was less critical and TOI criticised the ruling party
as well. Dainik Jagran’s criticism was restricted to improper
implementation and loopholes in the system that allowed the
conversion of black money into white. It suggested measures to address
public distress in arranging cash from banks. TOI, on the other hand,
criticised demonetisation as affecting the economy, particularly, daily
wage workers, small traders and industry.
Another crucial difference between the two papers was that Dainik
Jagran published 123 letters to the editor on 44 out of 54 days, whereas
TOI published ten letters on five Sundays. Compared to 20 per cent of
the editorials of Danik Jagran that criticised the move, about 33 per
cent of the letters were critical. This suggests that while Dainik
Jagran did not directly criticise the government, it allowed more room
for popular criticism.
Analysis of the op-eds
Dainik Jagran publishes editorial, articles, letters, blogs, tweets, rhymes
and polls on the editorial page. TOI also publishes editorials, interviews
and articles on its editorial page. On Sunday, TOI does not publish
editorials. It only publishes articles, interviews, letters and rhymes on a
page titled “All That Matters”.
TOI published 62 op-eds including 17 articles that mentioned
demonetisation in passing, 28 articles by columnists, “War on black
money” by economists Jagdish Bhagwati, Pravin Krishna, Suresh
Sundaresan, US-based academic economists, and “Revenge No
Development Strategy” by Ruchir Sharma, Chief Global Strategist at
Morgan Stanley Investment Management. The latter was also briefly
mentioned on the front page.
The paper also published seven interviews of the following: Robert
Vadra (also highlighted on the front page), Mallikarjun Kharge
(Congress), Subramanian Swamy (BJP), Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi (BJP),
Rakesh Sinha (RSS), S. Gurumurthy (RSS/Swadeshi Jagran Manch),
and Anil Bokil (social activist who purportedly inspired Modi). The
interviews of non-BJP/RSS personalities appeared in December.
Dainik Jagran published 46 op-eds on the issue including five articles
that mentioned demonetisation in passing, an article by Lord Meghnad
Desai “Kale dhan ka krantikari ilaaj” (Revolutionary cure for black
money), seven articles by the newspaper’s editor and five by its
associate editor. Lack of preparation by the government was first
highlighted in the article “Achhe faisale ki aausat taiyari” (Average
preparation for good decision, November 24) by Dr A. K. Verma,
Director, Centre for the Study of Society and Politics, Kanpur.
The first critical article of Dainik Jagran “Cashless ke kanuni pahlu” (Legal
aspects of going cashless) by Virag Gupta, Supreme Court advocate,
appeared on December 16. Another critical article, “Nayi Arthik Rah ki
Jarurat” (Need a new economic approach, December 20) by Bharat
Jhunjhunwala, former Professor, IIM Bangalore, criticized
demonetisation for creating a negative environment for investment and
Make in India.
Contributions by Krishnamurthy Subramanian, Indian School of
Business and S. Gurumurthy, Swadeshi Jagaran Manch, appeared on
the op-ed pages of both newspapers. Seven TOI columnists who wrote
more than one piece on demonetisation, together contributed 28 op-ed
pieces. Dainik Jagran’s five op-ed contributors, including two members
of staff who wrote more than one piece on demonetisation, together
contributed 18 op-ed pieces.
Interestingly, repeat contributors did not change their assessment over
time and maintained their stand. This is unlike the editorials which
adjusted their stand with the changing situation.
"While they differed on the extent of their
support for the government, neither newspaper
supported the stand of the opposition parties."
In both newspapers, only 15 percent of the op-ed writers were
economists (academics and banking professionals). Academics and
professionals associated with other disciplines got roughly comparable
space. (Journalists contributed at least half of the op-eds, while
politicians contributed about a tenth.) This shows that these
newspapers did not view the issue of demonetisation in narrowly
technical terms.
Half truths and selective highlighting
Both newspapers accepted that demonetisation was a bold move.
However, Dainik Jagran preferred to highlight the benefits of
demonetization while TOI pointed out the short term inconvenience
and possible economic disruption. For example, on November 25, both
newspapers covered Moody’s report on the impact of demonetisation.
The title of Dainik Jagran’s story implied the benefit of demonetisation
in the long run “Notebandi ka lambe samay me hoga faayada”
(Demonetisation will be beneficial in the long run), while TOI’s title
indicated a short term adverse impact “Moody’s: Note ban will hit eco
growth.”
Both discussed the other side of the story as well but it is interesting
that their headings highlighted two opposite aspects. On the same day,
in another item covering the speech of former prime minister
Manmohan Singh, Dainik Jagran highlighted Singh’s support with
(“Ham faisle ke virodh mein nahin hai” – We are not opposed to the
decision) while TOI highlighted his opposition (“organised loot and
legalised plunder”).
Likewise both newspapers covered the issue of availability of cashless
payment options in hospitals. Dainik Jagran published two news items
“Ab AIIMS mein hoga marijo ka cashless ilaaj” (Now patients do not need
cash for treatment at AIIMS) on November 29 and “Safdarjung hospital
me har tarah ki jaanch hui muft” (All kinds of check-ups made free at
Safdarjung) on November 13.
TOI published a report based on the visit of a correspondent to five
hospitals “Despite digital push, govt hospitals still in cash mode” on
December 14. It noted that AIIMS was found to accept payment
through cards and the remaining four hospitals including Safdarjung
hospital were accepting only big payments through cards. On the follow
up page, it discussed the inconvenience to people caused by the lack of
cashless payment options in the hospitals across the country.
In another case, both newspapers published the killing of two brothers
by their depressed father. Dainik Jagran published this news under the
title “Avssad ke shikar pita ne apne do beto ko maar dala” (Depressed
father kills his two sons) in detail on the front page on November 17. It
highlighted unemployment, the death of his wife and complaints by
neighbours as the reason for the man’s depression. This news was also
discussed in the editorial on November 18. TOI, however, published this
news as “2 brothers killed by dad among 7 dead”. A brief news item
on TOI’s front page blamed demonetisation for the death of these two
siblings, who were allegedly murdered by their father who was
“frustrated at returning empty-handed from ATMs for two days, cops
said.”
Concluding remarks
Dainik Jagran was supportive of the government on demonetisation and
less critical. Its criticism was restricted to improper implementation
and loopholes in the system that allowed conversion of black money
into white. It suggested measures to address public discomfort. While a
few editorials in TOI praised demonetisation, on the whole it was more
critical. TOI praised the voluntary disclosure scheme but Dainik
Jagran criticised it. Several times, both papers reported the same story
but selectively highlighted different aspects of it.
While they differed on the extent of their support for the government,
neither newspaper supported the stand of the opposition parties. The
divergence between their stands seems to have been driven by their
choice of time frame for analysis – the short run or the long run. It is
difficult to say if the choice of time frame was politically motivated, i.e.,
they deliberately chose to look at only one aspect.