 First, the session topic is politics in public, how flow of communication shapes the nation's sentiment in economy. And you know, I'm doing a session after Madhavan has moderated a session. Where is Madhavan? He's just stepped out, right? Madhavan is one of those people who's very witty in life and very witty on internet. So when I'm doing a session after lunch and after Madhavan, I have the same dilemma that the seventh husband of Elizabeth Taylor faced on the night of the honeymoon. Do you know what was the dilemma? What was the question? On the night of the honeymoon, the seventh husband of Elizabeth Taylor said to Elizabeth Taylor, Darling, I know what I'm supposed to do but I hope I make it interesting. Right? So Madhavan, I hope after I'm following you, I make it interesting and relevant. Please welcome Shazia Elmi. We'll bring her round of applause. You know, these are people you'll soon see in parliament. They will determine our destiny, so please be nice to them. Anyway, the anchors are sometimes not nice to them for that reason be nice to them. So coming to the session, I want to give you a brief background of these three panelists. So Shazia was a journalist. She was an anchor. She was a journalist. She was a reporter. She worked extensively in the media. She has friends in the media and she crossed over to politics. She understands our domain. She understands journalism. She understands communication. She joined the Amadmi Party and now is the spokesperson for the Bhartiya Janta Party. Gansham Tiwari again went to a top notch business school, one of the IIMs. He's an edu tech entrepreneur and he's a Samajwadi Party spokesperson. And last but not least, Mr Khan, because I don't know you well. I know Shazia really well and I know Gansham a little bit but I can talk to them with their first names. If you permit me to call you by your first name, I'll call you what? Mohammad or Ali? Mohammad. So Mohammad is a lawyer and he worked extensively with Mr Jairam Ramesh when the land acquisition bill was introduced. That was his research. He worked very closely with Mr Jairam Ramesh and now he's a spokesperson of the Congress Party. So all these three are professionals. She was a journalist. He's an edu tech entrepreneur and he was a legal and development activist. Let's put it this way. So I'm going to start with Shazia. Shazia, are there any channels that are biased? Well, is there any channel which is not? So tell us the names of some of the biased channels. No, I think we have a fair idea of channels which turn to one side of the spectrum or the other. But I think this whole idea of journalistic bias, the reason that there has to be objectivity, I think it remains very utopian because I have been a journalist. I pass it from a film school and there are certain biases you live with. And if you really believe what you do, if you've been indoctrinated or been trained to think a certain way, you do vilify one side and not the other. So true objectivity can be totally utopian and difficult to achieve, can be very elusive. Having said that, there remains a responsibility for every input head, reporter, correspondent, producer, to present both sides. So let me ask you this question. There before yesterday and yesterday when the elections were coming out, there was a certain anchor and let me do a quiz. Who on his channel, his I've given away so maybe I've given you the answer, was saying that these assembly elections don't have any impact on Lok Sabha elections. Tell me the name of the channel and the anchor. Which anchor and channel would it be? You said these assembly elections have no bearing on Lok Sabha. By the way, we have a music website called The Loud List, but it's very nice. It's the business of music and we do a huge conference on the business of music called Music Inc. But yes, the answers are right, right? So people know the biases. There is a journalist who shouts loudest and for years there have been journalists who are very refined and very cultured and they speak very good English. Which, who are these? No, no, everybody knows and they don't shout but they are extremely politically motivated. They have an agenda, they present things just the way they want to present because they clearly belong to one side of the spectrum. And you don't criticize them because they're not in your face but they're in a very sublime, surreptitious, insidious manner, effect the narrative. Intelligent way, very intelligent way. Yeah, but well, they get caught out also. Shazia, before I go to Gansham and I go to Muhammad, if you had a choice to go to say on an election day or a day when a significant issue was being debated, if you had a choice to go to a friendly channel versus going to a hostile channel, which channel would you go in, go on? If at all there are friendly and hostile channels. You know, it depends on the day really. So the day we lose elections, I mean everybody kind of turns hostile and wants to seek answers. So I think most of them at least pretend to be not biased but as spokesperson we don't have that liberty. We have to go to all and sometimes you get more bashed up than other channels and sometimes less but yeah, we have to be prepared for all, all situations. Okay, I have my viewpoint and I'll come to that at the end. Gansham, you're from a party that was doing very well in the Uttar Pradesh and it is not doing well. Tell me, last two days, will they make India, media more independent? Do the Indian media owners, journalists feel liberated? Will you see little different discourses on television and different op-ed pieces in news? Now, will the public discourse change little bit? Absolutely, I see these results as detoxification of India. He sees the results as detoxification of India. The results will shape a discourse that is much more real. If any of you uses Google Trends, this is something that you can check for yourself how public discourse has changed. Look at the word Hindu on Google Trends, last five years India as the geography and the word Muslim, last five years India as the geography. Give us statistics. Yes, five years back for every time within the geography of India on the web, the word Hindu appeared hundred times, the word Muslim would appear 25 times, 30 times, which is roughly proportionate with population here and there. But if you look at the graph in the last five years, the graph for the word Muslim has gone like this. Somebody out there created news that was centered around Hindu-Muslim agenda and Google will tell you which states what agenda. So I think relating to two questions. One discourse, other is channel bias. I am not worried about bias of channels, biases emerge from life experience. What I am worried about is agenda setting. And when television becomes a media where agenda is not of the people, each television channel has its own loyal audience and then some floating audience. When the agenda does not respond to people, the platform loses its credibility. As a spokesperson, I have believed that in the last two, three years, there was a concerted effort to ensure that television as a platform loses credibility for public debate. As a result, if there are more shout-outs between people, people are presenting facts that do not add up and the agenda doesn't meet what the day-to-day needs of people are. It meant that somebody wanted this platform to lose its credibility in public discourse. So if television loses credibility in public discourse, social media we already know it has its toxic elements and on and off it loses its credibility. Print is a jainer that is different in public discourse, but social media, television and then finally parliament. Last year parliament met for less than 50 days or nearly 50 days. In an entire year. So where is the public discourse happening? That is the question that kept me... And you think TV debates are public discourse? I believe that when you go as a spokesperson, this is not about punches and counter punches that you are going to exchange. At least as a spokesperson, I believe that it is your part of a story that matters to the country and it does not matter who has said what agenda, it is your responsibility to plug in to that story that matters to the country. Beautiful Gansham, we like that perspective. Mohammad, you heard Shazia, you heard Gansham. You know you come from a research background, you come from a technical being a legal. Tell me how much research does a spokesperson do or his team before you go to a TV debate? And tell us an example of a day when you did research and it made a difference and a day when you did not do research and this politics in public convergence didn't happen. Give us a real example. That is a very good question of course but it presupposes that I come from a research background. Louder, louder. Can you hear me? Yeah, now better. I was saying that's a very fine question but it presupposes that I come from a research background which I do not. Even if you don't. You know how we do research in the Congress party? We have a very streamlined cell over the last four years. Our cell has become extremely professional and amazing. Now, for example, in the BJP or in the Samajwadi party, channels get- So you have a troll brigade too? No, we don't actually. You don't have a troll brigade? Nobody has a troll brigade? No, at least we don't. It's for Shaziaji to say whether her party does- No, I didn't refer to their party. But I'll tell you something. Research, I believe that discourse, which is purely based on rhetoric, comes with an expiry date. You can shout at each other for so long, you can call each other names for so long. Doesn't seem so. The people who are shouting for many years and they're carrying on. I'll give you three examples. I'll tell you something, Anuragji, from personal experience. We get a lot of feedback at our cell for the quality of the points we put out. Absolutely. Anchors get in touch with us and tell us which point of ours they like. People are monitoring all of our spokespersons at any given point of time to see the performance and give feedback. So is there an internal ranking? Well, there is no ranking. Do you have an award in the congress party? Bex post person, worst spoke person, most aggressive spoke person, fighting spoke person. Well, they're kind enough not to- Why did you get me? I think we should start a new award. I'm the last. I think I've given you a new product idea. But they're very kind. They don't rank us otherwise, you know, some of us would have serious self-esteem issues. But other than that, they equip us very well. Suppose today's debate topic is Adhaar. Before the day begins, our research team will have compiled some of the best and most recent stories from a vast spectrum of sources. It would be arguments for and arguments against. These will be distilled into the party position. What is the opinion of our party? Where are we going? And our effort remains the same during the debates. It is a consistent effort that we keep bringing the debate back to topic. You must have seen congress spokesperson by and large, and I say this with a lot of pride, are almost always better informed. We are made to memorize- Do you agree, Shazia? No. Which are the BJP and hopeful. Thankfully, this is not a TV debate. But I'll say this. Yeah, but you're not a subjective bias. Believe whatever you want to believe. I'll tell you something. We are made to memorize figures that the government presents on parliament. We are made to memorize. You may need to do a lot of changing on memorization, right? Because these are very dynamic numbers. No, absolutely. That's a fair point. So every day our research team will feed us with the information as it is updated. I'll give you an example in Madhya Pradesh. Farmers' issues were key. They made us understand the price per produce, whether it was wheat, bajra, johar, and I was in a debate with Shazia Ji where I had the privilege to raise these issues as well. They made us memorize, What was the difference? We couldn't go on air without these figures. I am telling you. This I can tell you for a fact. Our media cell and our media strategy, the way it is run, we have no say for example as a spokesperson, I can't pick a channel. I can't decide. The question you asked Shazia Ji and Ghanshyam Bhai, I can't pick and choose to go on channel XY or Z. The cell will give me my schedule for the day at the start of the day, that you will be on channel XY and Z. The other thing they do very well, I believe, is they identify subject matter experts. So for example, I would go on issues as Ghanshyam Bhai will attest, which are legal in nature, which are parliamentary in nature, and which are economic in nature. I will not go on issues, say for example with regard to the Ram Mandir and so on and so forth. But to that extent the party identifies strengths and weaknesses of its spokesperson and employs them accordingly. So Shazia Ji, I want to ask you two questions. One question is for all three of you and you can... And I want to as honest answer, and I know this is your job, so you believe in the jobs, so to say, in your mission, whatever you want to call it. But you really think TV debates, and I am a media owner, do you think really TV debates impact public opinion? My first, how seriously do you... Second, I watched this movie about five, six years back called Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, Meryl Steep, beautiful movie. And in that there is a dialogue that Margaret Thatcher says, and she is talking to one of her cabinet ministers and he is telling him that Margaret, you are going down the wrong road, we lose elections, and then Margaret retorts back that you are right because the electorates feel and vote. They don't think and vote. Do you really think rhetoric's symbolism wins on a TV debate and hence impacts public policy or data logic? Because what I see is a lot of people who really present data logic don't get time. The anchors cut them short. The people that create theatrics, whether it's good, bad, positive, are the ones that get time. So I rag out, qualify my answer. I've been trained as a filmmaker from Jamiya. I was in star news for many years. Then I left it all for Anna Hazare movement and we created this entire movement and I kind of spearheaded the media part of it. It was hugely successful only because it had resonance. Of course then... It had an emotional connect, you mean? So I think emotional connect matters. The way you use data, but eventually your political message has to be emotive, has to have an emotional connection with audience. And let me tell you whether in doing the Nirbhaiya Andulan and I was a part of that, so when you're deeply connected and when you're talking about something that impacts people, that affects my life, my family, my home, there's a fantastic immediate rapport connected in the political speech. But when it's only data, without the emotional cords that need to be there, which makes a connection happen, I think it loses luster. But yet I must tell you that media has been excellent in showcasing matters of gender importance. Now you just see whether it's me too movement, it had an impact. Or the Sabrimala issue. Sabrimala, people got to speak and also how public discourse should be vis-a-vis women, reporting matters about women, the whole Nirbhaiya movement about how women are talked about, sexual harassment. So these are big takeaways. VVIP culture. I mean all the media channels when Berserk, especially the one you talked about... I didn't talk about it. Those guys there talked. But it mattered, because now people are, and across the parties, now they are scared to flaunt their wealth. So it also has a positive takeaway, is what I would like to say. And what about the effectiveness of debates? Effectiveness of your role? No matter how great a political communicator you are, and every party would claim to be well-equipped, well-researched, you lose the connect with the masses, with the Zameeni Hakikat, you stand nowhere. No matter what the tools you have, no matter what your Twitter bases are, Facebook, Instagram, and what have you, it's not about the content, it's not about the form, but also the content. And communication or any work of art is about both. What I'm saying and how I'm saying. Sometimes how I'm saying it becomes less important than what I'm saying. So the what of it? What am I saying? What is the substance? What is the mood point? That becomes important at all times. And I'm not talking about just in today's context, this is my experience of years of communication, as an anchor, as an activist, as a politician. Thank you, Ganjabji. Same question, the effectiveness of your role and its impact on public policy. Well I think the role in politics today of public platforms, public discourse platforms is immensely important. Like everything else around us, e-commerce and other things, I'm an education entrepreneur so I can say that I teach roughly 3 lakh students through videos on YouTube, WhatsApp for class 11 and 12. Like everything else, politics is also becoming B2C. So it does not matter whether you are... What I'm like, politics is also becoming B2C. Is politics a business? No, I'm not saying business. That's what you said, business to consumer. You said it. No, I said B2C, I'll tell you, I'll come to it. I thought politics is a service. Like media is a service. Like religion is a service. On that, the classic model for the youngsters here. Tricky question, huh? To think about politics is, politics is either a business or a service. And if you look at the realm of politicians that have emerged, and this is not just India, this is... I hope you're not referring to a farmer from Maharashtra. One of my Howard professors wrote an entire paper over it. And you have to choose one realm. I have always treated it as a service and that is the reason it gives me a certain conviction. But coming to the B2C part, what I meant from there is the phenomenon where it does not matter whether you are contesting for panchayat or you're contesting for parliament. The voter wants to hear from you. And it does not matter whether the voter hears from you individually on television or on his WhatsApp, on his Facebook, but they want to hear from you. And now, even if the voter is not literate, they have a digital record of your video. So tomorrow when you go back to the same voter, that is what is counting against Prime Minister Modi in my opinion. You go back to the voter, they will refer to you. As a result, you have to be authentic no matter which medium you use and you have to have conviction. And consistency. Yes, so conviction that you will be consistent and you mean what you say. Otherwise, the same voter will come back and not vote for you, your credibility will be demolished. My final point is that within this, as you go on television debates, it is not about punches and counter munches. It is not about how one section of what I say will be split and sent out to become viral. I saw a phenomenon last year at least in BJP, I will name it, in BJP, where a set of spokesperson came and they thought that what should I say to anyone who becomes viral and at night becomes a big BJP spokesperson for social media. Tell me the name. Because we don't know. I don't think you should say things that you can't understand. It's very unfair because I can say something about you. When you were in Congress, you said this, now you are an SPU saying this, so I don't think it's fair. Let's just be decent about this and name it and substantiate it. That's a message it gives about data and not rhetoric. So prove that by enunciating it. I am not saying the seasoned spokesperson of BJP. When we sit on a panel, allow me. When you sit on a panel, if you look at last two years. Maybe they were unseasoned, spokesperson of your party, SPU, Congress, wherever you are from. By the way, there are some SPU that are in BJP now. We are very popular these days. He was from... I was not in Congress, please allow me, please allow me. You were in DSP. RJD. This is not a KBC. This is not a KBC, please allow me. Please don't heckle me. The point I was trying to make is, in the last two years, when we sat on a debate, you would see a VHP spokesperson sitting. You see a RSS spokesperson sitting. People who have zero accountable stake in politics. I would like to disagree with you. Because any normal citizen can also sit on a TV debate and have a point of view because he's a citizen. Can I state some statements without being heckled? Please. So, when they go on a debate and they announce by themselves that, look, RSS, we are a Samajik Sangatan. We have nothing to do with politics. VHP, we are a Samajik, we are a religious Sangatan. We have nothing to do with politics. Then you start engaging... That is the job of a journalist to define what they represent. I don't think there's a reason for somebody to be insecure. What I'm trying to say is very, very simple. When you are debating, you have to look at the stake that the person is bringing. How will I debate on jobs with somebody who says that I don't care about jobs but he gets equal media share on television and the reason he's using that media share is to make a pile... My question was impact but I get what you're saying that some people who are not domain experts have no locustine, I get disproportionate. I don't think it's a fair... I don't think it's an unfair comment. But I think that's for the journalists and the media organization to decide and for viewers to decide whether they want to stay on that out of the 30 channels that are really on that channel or not. Khansa, how do you create fake news? No, sorry, how do you deal with fake news? Sorry, I think I have not eaten my lunch. I want this question. How do you as spokesperson of the BJP... BJP, Sapa, Congress deal with fake news, I think? Well, I think your question is directed to the wrong person. Who's the right person on the panel? I firmly believe... Congress and SP, what do you expect? And I'll give so many examples that both will have to be quiet for a while. His debate format, I think it's more free flowing so let's keep it civil. So Shazia Ji, let me start by addressing some things that both of them said. First of all, Shazia Ji is absolutely right. Thank you very much. When you are sitting in such a beautiful room... Thank you very much. What did he say? What did he say? That data or logic will never sway someone. You have a very short span of time in a debate. And especially in Congress, many anchors don't let us speak. Which anchors? Tell me, I'll talk to them. They were on the last panel. But let me tell you one thing. That's July Bond. Bubej Chaube Ji. I don't even know who Sunitra Ji is talking about. No, I don't know who she is talking about. Anurag Ji, let me tell you something. So, Shazia Ji's point is absolutely right. You cannot go with cold, hard data and logic. The viewer switches off. I agree with you. That's the question I was asking. If your anchors are so accurate, people won't be interested. We do. We marry them with interesting Jumlas. We have learned this. Congress has started to do Jumlas. I know it's their domain and I know they have a monopoly over it. Don't take royalty from them. But Anurag Ji, this is an important point. If we take royalty, then there are many things. People will have to take it. If we take Ram Mandir, people will have to take Kashi Mandir, people will have to take Ram Mandir, people will have to take Ghotra, people will have to take Shazia Ji. Let us do each other the courtesy of not speaking over each other. Now, here's the thing. You have to use such words that sound good on your ears. Give us an example. Like we just said, and I think this resonated very well, that Ali and Bajrang Bali were with us. So, you know that summarizes a position. It ties up a plot point nicely. Similarly, we prepare these plot points on a day-to-day basis. You take an example of Madhya Pradesh. So, we will say, if we summarize, that our Prime Minister goes to different places. The farmers come in the number of lakhs. They say it with a lot of pride. But despite that, they talk about Christian Mitchell, they talk about Gandhi's family. They talk about how they are being attacked. How vulnerable they are. And then we say that contrast this with our leader. He speaks about farmers. He talks about Adivasis. He talks about Karzamaaf. That would be simplistic. But yes, you are right. The whole format of TV debate, I see you reaching for the mic. I think I should get a word. I have another point. You spoke at length. I will say this. I will say this. I forgot to have lunch. So, I would simply say this. Yes, data and facts are important. Just to summarize this point, I will tell you something interesting. A very prominent voice on social media. A gentleman by the name of Vikas Pandey. He is part of your IT cell also. Vikas Pandey. And five days ago, Vikas put up a poll. He asked the Twitter audience and Facebook audience, what do you think Bhajpa can do better? You know what was the most interesting thing about that poll? More than half Shazia ji. I am not joking about this. We actually screen-shotted it so that if you deleted it later, we would have a record. You seem very arrogant. Many of your spokesperson are very arrogant. Who is the most? Tell me one name. The one who came from Sapa. No, no. Mr. Anurag ji, this is a very important point. If in the public who are their own supporters, their own people are coming out and saying this that this is an issue, it turns us off. Then you have to take into mind. It's also about confidence. It's about the tone flowing from the top. It's about being in the power. I'll make my second point. Gansham bhai spoke about the nature of politics. In this regard, there is a fantastic essay by Max Weber. Politics as a vocation. And in that, Max Weber talks about two things. He says in politics, there are two kinds of people. Those who live for politics and those who live of politics. The people in the first category are the one who make a difference. I think that is a guiding... I think the lines are blurring. Let me say that the lines are blurring. Gansham, we'll take one last comment on the question of where I came from. I just wanted to answer that very quickly. I'm a semiconductor engineer by training. I lived in 10 states across the country. Studied in Kende, Vidyalaya. Went to IIM to do management programs. Then went to Kellogg, worked with McKenzie. Went to Harvard. But at Harvard, I started working on Bihar project which was with Nitesh Kumarji in 2010. It was the first time we could borrow ideas from Obama campaign to look at how a development campaign could be crafted in Bihar. After five years, I volunteered for JDU with Nitesh Kumar in Bihar and I'm very proud of the work I did. Since then, I started my education startup last year, 2017. I joined the Samajwadi party as the national spokesperson. That has been my journey. Throughout that journey, I've lived with what Mohammad Bai said. You cannot, in my opinion, and I'll stick to it throughout my career, you cannot do business with the state when you are dealing with the business of the state. You have to figure it out. So I will not bite the political bait at all and I will just stick to the topic and talk about communication. So whether it was Anna Hazare movement or Nirbhaya Andolan and the last one, Triple Talak, Talake Biddat, I see myself more like a I don't think there is any difference between a journalist or an activist or a politician if your idea is messaging of a certain time, raising the consciousness on some issues. So the forms differ but the substance of the content remains the same. So in that sense, I haven't really changed any hat, so to speak. And I think in all of these, it was so important to have that connect with the people, to make it about you and me, to make it about your family and yourself. And in saying that, I must say that it's very important to have that integrity about you. If people feel and I know people believe what they want to believe. You know, I must say that. So the people who are... Yes, so the same spokesperson that are being criticised would also be liked by a huge section of society and all the programs that we think are too loud and raucous by one audience might consider it really superb and would actually get huge GRPs. So all these things... Do you know what GRP means? What does it stand for? The television rating point. No, Tadkali in Rasht Patal. But Shazia ji, can I add something to what you are saying? Shazia ji finished it. So I really think if for any... You know, it's like when we talk about data and all of that. You know, there's a very famous share. This is... Yeah. So my entire message can be about the experts but my conversation is with the masses. And that I think is the centre point of communication. I wanted to make the last point and I want to ask you a question too. Then bring it. So Shazia ji, you are right. Different sorts of people like different types of debates which is what different channels people like different kind of food. Exactly. It's fine. That's perfectly fine. But here... People love a spectacle. They love to see people fight. Some people want to watch a more down to earth grounded debate based on facts. Now that is true. If at all it exists. It does. In fact, Ghan Shyam bhai and I were on a debate recently. That's not ours. Ghan Shyam bhai and I were on a debate recently. And the anchor kept trying to bait us against one another. And we just simply refused to take the bait. We said we are very fond of each other. We are allies regardless of what happens. But the anchor couldn't swallow it. It also comes from a personal value system. I'll conclude by saying the following. That is why different horses for different courses. And here's the problem in my opinion with the BJP. All your spokespersons are aggressive. All your spokespersons are aggressive. I think it's very unfair. I think it's very unfair. My friends, I must tell you, I was told. I think it's very unfair. I have filed a case in the cyber. The kind of dirty filthy snakes. I don't like the... You asked for a name. I'm asking you for a name. In the BJP, one spokesperson who is so bad. Someone who is actually... I would say some. Don't do that. Give me one example. I'll leave it here. I have one last question for you. Tell me this conversation between for the public. Impact on policy. In the next six months, five months, tell us three issues that will be important according to you that will shape up this conversation. Second, tell us about a spokesperson that you admire. An old spokesperson current in your party, outside party and why. So one which are the two, three issues that will dominate the conversation on channels or in any form of media. And second, one spokesperson from your party, other party from now or before that you admire and you want to be like when you grow up. Well, I think Arun Ji used to speak earlier. As in Mr. Jit, not Arun Chauri. No, no, no. Arun Jitli ji clarified that. And also of late, even Nirmala Sitaraman I think she was there very very forceful, very pleasant, gave the facts out very well. But many of them admire from other parties as well, you know. So as many of them admire. One from other parties, one. Say one. Keep your heart. He is above you. Come back to me, let me think about it. And the two or three issues that will be the conversation in terms of the Okay, so I think development and economy inclusive development and what is happening Ram Mandir will definitely be one of them because every party is now asking BJP whether we will make Mandir, because not BJP asking, but others asking what have you done for a half years and BJP will answer that and is committed to it but definitely inclusive development what's happening with the economy and the beneficiaries of all the schemes from BJP's point of view, beneficiaries will stop or will not? It goes from both the sides. It's a joke of Mr. Modi. It's a joke of Mr. Ram Mandir. I don't approve. And I think there's a call for action and intervention, I would say three of us are here. I stand for a mohazzab debate a refined debate and I think we should really put an end and in that I would ask all of you to give your opinions and talk about all the spokespersons from all the parties to channels which encourage this because sometimes it's not just us so it's a demand and supply situation like it is in everything else in life so it is voters are consumers in a different way so please also talk about what you feel of vis-a-vis channels and vis-a-vis spokesperson without biases political biases. I think as I read the Mandir that just came in I believe in Gujarat farmers stopped voting for BJP in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan. The youth joined the chorus and have stopped voting for BJP I think the two formidable things that will dominate the political discourse farmers and youth so employment and farmer issues. And the third is middle class if you do any analysis of salaried class today we as salaried class have paid more taxes in the last four years, four and a half years than previously. Salaried class was already compliant but I'm saying as a result the salaried class is also getting squeezed. And who are the spokesperson you admire? Thora Bhatia? A lot of them. A lot of them. As a political voice I admire Akhilesh Shadavji first and foremost as a young political voice he can keep his cool and use good weight Akhilesh Shadavji, then let's go. As spokesperson in Congress we have Abhishek Manu Singh who can speak with good logic, good facts in BJP Shah Nawaz Usain is there, he never loses his cool, he's always respectful. I think spokesperson who see their political voice as a continuation rather than a volatile entity I think I admire those spokespersons. Mohamed Hishu and spokesperson you love. Samad Mahapatka? You mean Sandip? I'm a lip reader so I kind of got it. No but he's right and as the results have shown the issues that will matter most are jobs. A channel did you and he are talking about the same alliance or not in your UP? But let me tell you one thing a channel was doing data-wise analysis and they are millennials who are 18 to 28 years old. I'm sorry. If you add these two then I get older. So they voted NMAS against the BJP and I think a very worrying trend for the BJP. Jobs, farmers issues, economy. Because end of the day hate comes with an expiry date. People get fatigued if you keep trying and rile them up against one another they say it's a good treat. I hope so. I saw a documentary 3-4 years ago that I'm talking about Babri Bajjit or the Ram Mandir Ram Mandir and Babri Bajjit is a kind of bread that no one eats. So there's never been an expiry date. But spokespersons that you like Just to conclude on this one point I really believe this is a very strong country. Many parties have come many governments and many English people have come who have tried to divide people people of this country have always been one. That to me is the biggest sense. Who do you like the most? Valentine's Day Ghan Shyam Tiwari I often turn to him for feedback also BJP Arun Shuri My favourite spokesperson Arun Shuri BJP's spokesperson He's one of the most vociferous cases on TV and within my own party The current crop of the only person The only one I like personally is Nallin Kohli When did he come? I would also like to know if he came Now let's see I think So I really like Manish Tiwari I mean I know as a spokesperson of Congress in the last years and a former IMB minister and also no no as a media spokesperson at that point of time I really like Renuka Chaudhary because every time she spoke she was a recruiting sergeant I like that Though I have questions I think we are running out of time We have two quick questions but really quick Please allow me to ask Okay one minute Mr. Kurana I have a question Do you need a mic? Modiji comes in two countries How many times do you need a mic? Please allow me to ask two questions, one to Shazia and one to both of you Thank you Shazia I would like to ask that we have just discussed what are the problems and how you will make the policy Short question sir please Just short question Just tell me what are you going to do to generate employment Do you have a job issue that we need 2,000 people for trolling Apply Do you still have a lot of conversation with MSP about the commission So where to college I am really sorry So what are the steps you are going to take Communication related question We can take it offline In course of time you will know there will be very specific information given out on both the subject that you are saying Thank you One big round of applause Rest you watch them Big round of applause Did you enjoy it Who was the best out of these 3 Narayan Thank you Sir I would request you to stay on stage and everyone else and I would request Mr. Madhavan Narayan to come on stage to our speakers Let them have another round of applause for this high voltage panel that it was It was no less than a live TV debate to be very honest