 So we also wish Rajdeep all the best for today and for his coming years. Of course, he set the tone for tonight. We're going to be talking about media in the age of mistrust. There used to be a point in time when like how Rajdeep said that the journalists were a little wary of the PR industry. And now I guess the PR industry is a little wary of the journalists. This is what's probably going on right now. And we've got a robust panel talking about the various nuances of media as we experience it today. Risk, reputation, brand building, effective communication. Of course, as far as journalism itself is concerned, the divide which is happening literally. So I'm going to be calling out the names of our panelists here tonight. Request you all to please come and these are fancy nice bar stools for you all. We don't want you to be too comfortable because we want you to come back and party with us here on the floor. All right, with a loud round of applause, I invite my first panelist on stage, Ms. Pooja Patak, co-founder and director, Media Mantra, a successful entrepreneur with immense creativity and business acumen, which assists her to undertake diverse roles in life, including being a businesswoman, a lecturer and a mother of two lovely kids. I think that really kind of requires a loud round of applause to be handling homes and professions. And now we need to be imparting this knowledge to the men folk as well, I guess. Mr. Bhupendra Chaubey, TV journalist since 2000 from NDTV to CNN and IBM, has covered three general elections as a political journalist now host. So we can show hot seats rights for various Hindi and English publications both online and offline. And thank you, Mr. Chaubey, for taking the time for being here. Ms. Vibha Bhakshi, a national award-winning filmmaker acknowledged by the President of India for the best film on social issues. She's also made films for the United States government and HBO, both of which have been highly acclaimed. Vibha has also studied journalism and broadcasting from the Boston University and New York University. Thank you, Vibha. For taking the time for being here tonight, our moderator, Kumar the Banerjee, who heads external communication for Vodafone, looking into stakeholder engagement for reputational brand management. Prior to this, he's been a broadcast journalist with Zee, Ajthak and Bloomberg TV. Thank you. Ex-colleagues, yes. And last but definitely not the least, can we hear it out loud for Mr. Sharif Ranglaker, Chairman, Integral PR, a former journalist and researcher. Sharif has led the firm as its CEO for over 10 years and taken over as its chairman in 2015. Amongst other things, of course, we all know Sharif personally, but I don't know how many of us do know he's associated with an initiative I Am Who I Am and also a band Friends of Linger. He sings as well and he's raising his voice for the LGBT community as far as India is concerned. Can we hear it out loud for Sharif? All yours. 45 minutes, Kumar Deep. Please do keep at least 10 minutes for this wonderful audience to post some questions to you. All yours. All right. Is the mic working now? Yeah, fine. Thank you, Subarna, for that wonderful sort of an introduction that, say, it takes away about five minutes from the introduction which I had set out. So very good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for making it through this traffic-filled Delhi evening, which is a common feature in the central part of Delhi. Thank you for all being here. Thank you, Exchange for Media events. Thank you, Subarna, for getting an eclectic mix of ladies and gentlemen and putting them under the spotlight this evening to discuss one of the most crucial existential angst that has hit humankind ever since the general elections in one of the most prosperous democracies in the world. OK. Well, not that dramatic, but yeah. As Rajdeep was mentioning, today we discussed something what Denzel Washington had once said that if you subscribe to the media, you are uninformed. And if you do not subscribe to the media, you are uninformed. If you do not subscribe to the media, then you are misinformed. So media, in the age of mistrust, is what we are going to discuss. And we have a whole host of experiences right here under the spotlight. And we carry forward what we call the bar side chat, because this is not a five-side chat. So we'll go ahead with our bar side chat. And Suparna and rest of you, some of you are far bigger authorities sitting right there at the back on the topic at hand and on the switching of narratives, the shifting of narratives, the shifting media escape, the bipolarity, the polarities in the world that we are seeing right now. So we will have ample time for question and answer. Suparna, please be the timekeeper. If any of us tend to exceed that 45-minutes window, do raise your hand or do throw away, throw some of those stuff that you could find near you. Without much ado, quick opening remarks from our fellow panelists. Should I go left? Should I go right? I don't know which one. But let me go with you, Sharif. So Sharif has got some interesting takes on mistrust and media. So let's hear you. Let me put in a question towards your opening remarks. Do you think a good amount of mistrust is actually good for business? Maybe you can tackle it as well. I really don't think mistrust is good for business. Mistrust might be good for certain media houses, I think, to mislead people. And due respect, I think the thing is that we're taking up this topic perhaps a little. It's a good topic to take up and that toward a PR forum. Because invariably the trust aspect, as Rajdeep said, has been questionable when it comes to the PR industry for a long time. And even today, I think there are a lot of journalists who don't trust PR people. But I think the biggest problem is really not in PR. Because I think as an industry, the clients that we represent stand for scrutiny. They're up for scrutiny. We engage directly with the press. We engage with other consumer groups, stakeholders, et cetera. But I think the story of mistrust, as far as the press goes, goes back a long way. And I think many of you all would remember an ad campaign from one of the largest newspapers in the world, in the world actually in English, which compared a newspaper with the price of a newspaper with a samosa. I think at that time itself, the press itself started to re-look at itself as what it was. A leading promoter of the same group stands up and compares a newspaper with a fast-moving consumer group, consumer good, which is basically saying it's like a soap, it's like shampoo, et cetera. So I think the dumbing down of press itself started long ago, and perhaps we didn't notice it. And if we look at even the current situation, as Rajdeep also pointed out, you're seeing a polarization. Where certain press believe they're nationalists, certain press believe they're anti-national, or they're being termed anti-national. There are press where, as you just said, should I look left, should I look right? So that ideology is another problem that the press is facing. So I think the issue for PR is much easier today, as far as trust and representing brands. But I think the problem lies really and resides mostly with the press who today is owned by corporations. And while there might be Chinese walls, but we all know Chinese walls, the Chinese wall is not a wall. And so we don't know where that gray area is perhaps a challenge for us to address, but in terms of credibility, it's for the press to really sort that out. Well, thank you, Shari, for those opening remarks. They are pretty cogent. Should I turn to Bhupendra too? Do you want to directly take that on, or do you, should I go with the ladies and for your opening remarks as well, Bhupendra? I don't think you're audible, do you want to mic? And this is one of those rare moments when you are being subjected to a moderation and not audible. Okay, this is fine. Firstly, thanks to the organizers of this event, lovely place, last place to be having an intellectual, intelligent conversation since the bar is right in front. The bar side chat. Yeah, it's a bar side chat. But since the topic is such and since Sharif has set up this debate in frankly, if I may say so, very predictable manner, all points which he's raised are points which have existed before the press for a very long time. And the fact that this debate has been kick-started by a journalist pontificating about what the PR industry is all about also tells us a lot about the times that we live in. So firstly, let's be honest about the reality of the times that we live in. I have a lot of friends in the PR industry and truth be told, Sharif, who the last seven to eight years, some of the best stories that I've done have all come from the PR sector. So huge round of applause to all of you because I do believe a lot of my colleagues have actually switched over to the PR profession. So I don't buy this theory for a moment that there was a time when PR was being looked down upon and journalists were these great souls and PR people were somewhere there. I don't buy that at all and that's one of the reasons why I'm here. What I do believe where this word mistrust has kind of got embedded with our industry and I'm even willing to say that this is a huge opportunity before India as of today, where PR and press can frankly both coexist and cooperate with each other. I do not see anything wrong whatsoever with a representative from the PR fraternity coming to me and telling me about a story which let's say may be helping a certain client of his or may be against a certain client of an adversary as long as a story is factual. As long as there is some merit and some depth, if it is backed by facts, if it's backed by documents, I'll go with the story. My job is not to look after your client's interests or the interests of someone's adversaries. My job is to bring the information out. Now if to that extent if the press will be called compromise, if the press will be called taking sides and so be it, our job is to bring out facts, our job is to bring out the story. On the question of Chinese walls, on the question of corporate ownership, I've just earned 40 this month, this year. And I have been around now for what? I started working with NDTV with my dear friend, Shivraj, sitting right there many, many years back. Since the time I started working as a professional journalist till now and even before when one would be hearing about the press and about the media, all these questions have been raised. If the allegation is that the press is compromised today, let me say press was always compromised. If the allegation is press has no credibility, let me say press has never had any credibility whatsoever. Having said all that, I think there is still enough scope. Despite the restrictions, despite the pressures which Rajdeep very lucidly has pointed out, which are applicable in all of us, I think there is still scope, there is still opportunity in which all of us can discharge our responsibilities. And as much as I salute and compliment my friends and colleagues in the PR industry, similarly I compliment all my friends and colleagues in the journalism space who despite those polls and pressures still managed to put up some kind of a reasonable product out there night after night. This challenge of whether you're right, whether you're left, what's your ideology? I face this challenge on a daily basis. I'm just 48 hours back. I'm looking at a scenario where a political party has sued us for supposedly towing the line of a party B and the party B 24 hours later sues us for supposedly towing the line of party A. Now both these parties are upset and both these parties are going to accuse us of taking their sides and I think that we're doing something right. Because our job is to ensure that both party A and party B are equally upset with us. Thank you, Bhupinder. That's an interesting conversation to have and you have the round of applause to suggest what it means. We will park some of the thoughts that you have raised there and I'm sure our lovely audience, the informed audience that we have has some questions. But let me turn to you, Viva, and you more from a civil society perspective, more from an observer perspective, though you are one of fairly vocal content created in this space. How do you look at this entire media space? How do you look at the narratives which are being weaved around mistrust through various channels? First of all, a big thank you to everyone for being here. I've just landed from, well, just driven down from Haryana where we've started the sequel for our film, Daughters of Mother India. But I just want to say that as a documentary filmmaker, I will always be a struggling filmmaker. The issues that we take up are going to be very sensitive. And the last one that we took up was on what happened to India after the night of Nirbhya's rape and murder. I don't think I could have got into a more sensitive and a volatile zone. And the result has been that, besides the National Award, which we are very grateful for, the film got embraced by the government, by the police, by the activists and academia. And I think there was a lesson to learn there, which was that even as a documentary filmmaker, you can create emotions that you have that ability to create emotions. And so you have to be very responsible. When this film came out, there was only thing, there was only one thing that the team said, that we will make a responsible film. And if the intent and emotion is right, your viewer is very smart to understand it. We have gained access to the Delhi Police control and command room, and I could have done whatever I wanted with the police. The codes that I could have got would be similar to the other film that got released. It would have been sensational. I would have swept the international awards. At one point, I really thought nobody would watch Daughters of Mother India besides our families. But that's not what happened. And that's when I say, you've got to be true to yourself in whatever you do. Your viewers are smart enough to understand that. The film had no solutions. The film had no heroes or villains, and that's what we talk about. It doesn't have to be black or white. Leave it to the audience to derive what they want to out of it. And I think I am an extremely small part of what unleashed. You need the help, and that's where I bring up the Public Relations Company. We could not have made a small film like Daughters of Mother India Movement without Weber-Shackwick, which is a PR company that supported us pro bono. And really a big round of applause to them because we could not have done this alone. And that's when I appeal to everybody that those who are in the position of power and influence then do it the right way. Use it when you need to because that's far more important than just branding. Thank you, Viva. That was very interesting because you alluded to what Rajdeep was saying. Facts are sacred, and if you have the right kind of intent, then facts are what it matters. But let me turn my attention to Pooja and you are a career communicator, as well as a mother of three, though Subarna said mother of two. Having said that... What is the company? Okay, we will not create mistrust here. So tell us, how does one manage reputation? What are the reputational risks and reputational management risks in an era of mistrust? Something which you are passionate about. A very good evening to all of you present here. I think today's discussion is something which is very alarming and it is something which is very crucial considering the point of time and the point of art that we are today in. There's no silver bullet solution to deal with this kind of worst situation. But the only thing that has to be done in today's epoch of mistrust is that we need to prioritize our integrity and we need to start respecting our values. That's the first thing that we need to do as responsible individuals and that's the first thing we need to do as responsible professionals. Not just that, the issue of mistrust is not in one industry. It is seen across the verticals and it is seen across the sectors. You take the recent example of Tata and Cyrus. That's the clear-cut case of corporate mistrust. We take the example of surgical strikes. That's the case where we are today questioning our own army officers. This is completely uncalled for and this is something which we have never done in so many years. I have insurance claim for everything but we cannot have an insurance claim for reputation. So it is therefore important to handle reputation with lot of care and with lot of caution. Thank you, Pooja. Well said, well said. And there you have the teams clapping for you. Let me turn a quick question to Bhupendra. Sorry. So there are these echo chambers which exist and we are somehow tired. We are part of the process. We are somehow drawn into it. What Rajdeep was alluding to as surround sound of media. Do you think that it's the birth of these echo chambers which is keeping away the real narrative from emerging in front of the audiences? Actually, what is a real narrative? Let me put that question on the table. What is reality? What you describe as an echo chamber, what a lot of people around us describe as a platform which thrives on a non-imperty, which thrives where reputations are assassinated on a daily basis, if not an early basis. For many, that's the reality. For many, the reality that we attempt to dish out on a daily basis on our news platforms is not the reality. It's a skewed version of reality. So it depends on which side of the table you are really on. I think what has really happened and why you're having this debate and why you're using this word mistrust is because somewhere along the line, maybe because of the kind of spectacular growth that social media platforms have seen, maybe the fact that increasingly news increasingly gets broken on Twitter or Facebook and more often than not, when it breaks on a social media platform, it turns out to be false. But because, because there are no checks and balances as such, you know, you wanna say something about me, you can go, you can tag 20 people, you can say whatever you want to say about me. I wanna say something about you, you know, and let me just say this, that while I applaud and compliment my friends in the PR fraternity, manipulation of social media, manipulation of perceptions as many of you would certainly know, itself has turned out to be a huge industry. I mean, you know, I don't wanna take names here, but let me just say this, that some friends of mine, they actually showed me, they actually showed me how Twitter trends can actually be manipulated. Now someone is doing that, boss. You know, there are professional teams out there which are manipulating perceptions, something that I'm describing as perception. As I said to many, that's the reality. And they say that what we dish out is a perception. If I fall for that, then that's where my fault is. And I think that's where also the distinction between the so-called mainstream media and the so-called social media really comes in, the new forms of media really comes in. Because at the end of the day, I think there is still some filters. They've been compromised, they've calmed down, quality may have calmed down. I'm always the first one to admit that, but I think it's still much better in comparison to where we are as far as social media platforms is concerned. And I think it will take some time, you know, before both these really come together. So this word mistrust will forever remain embedded with our industry, with our profession, till such time there is no equality of sorts between what is new age media and what is so-called old world convention media. Thank you, Bupendra. Very interesting. I would like you to think upon one interesting bit. Has the world really changed post the general elections in the US when we saw these echo chambers leading to what they did in a way? But we'll park that thought, but let me turn to Sharif and perhaps Pooja and Vibha also. Do you think it's the echo chambers as the social media is turning out to be which is the real culprit for this mistrust? Or do you think there is more manipulative agenda at play? And if the social media weren't there, there would have been something else. See, I think Bupendra is right. I mean, there's perhaps a lot more manipulation that takes place because a lot of what flows around in social media is also word of mouth. And then if Bupendra is my friend and he posts something, I trust him. I might repost it, but I may not be able, I may not verify what he's posted. And a lot of that happens. But I think manipulation, just like he said, this whole issue of credibility in the press or credibility of PR, they've been consistently perhaps questionable for a long time. But I think the manipulation is seems to be part of a certain kind of culture that we also live in, just like was being saying the times that we're living in. Because when you have ideologies also impacting, and I think it was, if I remember, Madan also, Madan Behalov, adfactors had tweeted when the US results came, and he's made a tweet which had something to do with that the press in the US should have put its ideologies aside and reported the news of what was happening. And I think, so when you're looking at manipulation, it's not just in the US, but it's been happening here as well. When a large corporation that has also been, the name was mentioned, pulls out an ad campaign or pulls out all of its ads from a newspaper and uses that as a tool to determine what stories also come, that's also manipulation. And that goes back a long time, so it's not today. Can I just add, and can I really be blunt with this? I think the word mistrust is being debated here in this manner simply because there's one simple perception and there's one simple thought, and I just want to put it very, very clearly. By the day, I'm getting more and more convinced that hatred in our society is getting institutionalized. We love to hate each other, we don't love to love each other anymore. And that's why we love it. If I could be distrustful towards you, if I could find a reason to hate you, it'll keep me going, and it's a very sad thought. I kind of, I just want to add something because this whole thing of hate, and without referring to which television program we're talking about. This is not television. No, no, but I'm just saying. This has got nothing to do with TV or politics. It's the times we live in. We were sitting in an ad agency, one of the largest ad agencies, and they were debating this primetime TV news thing. And they said the most of the people watch it