13 March 1937: British activist Agatha Harrison on progress in India

From our correspondence.

Agatha Harrison was a Quaker, welfare activist and pacifist who worked closely with Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian League towards Indian independence. She acted as an intermediary for Gandhi while he was on hunger strike, and was the first academic tutor in Industrial Welfare at the London School of Economics. When she died suddenly in 1954, Krishna Menon – India’s first post-independence High Commissioner to London – said: “She had no office or title, and no flags were lowered for her, but all over India people honour her name.”

13 March 1937

The Situation in India

SIR, I have just returned from India, where I had the opportunity of being on the spot while the elections were taking place. The editorial comment in your issue of March 6th—that “the meaning of the Indian provincial elections has not yet begun to dawn on public opinion” here—is all too true.

You rightly say that the recent elections in which Congress has secured such striking results are a “plebiscite” on the new Constitution. With a majority in six out of the eleven provinces, and forming the largest single party in another three, Congress must be reckoned with seriously. When Mr Gandhi came to the second Round Table Conference in 1931 he was ridiculed, and ever since the range of this party has been belittled, and attention focused on its diversity rather than on its unity. So, in this country, we face the present situation ill-prepared; knowing little of the history of the growth and scope of the movement; almost nothing of its leaders, save Mr Gandhi and Mr Nehru.

In the third week of March Mr Nehru, the President, has summoned a meeting in Delhi of the All India Congress Committee to consider the question of office acceptance. In preparation for this, “reasoned recommendations” have been called for from local, district and provincial Congress committees “outlining the course of action to be taken up by Congress members of the legislatures to further our policy of rejection of the Act as a whole and to impede further development of the federal scheme.” Once again, attention here tends to be diverted from the main issue and concentrated instead in forecasting possible spilts “that may occur when the meeting takes place. Surely this time would be better spent in studying the basis on which these men and women have been returned to power.

On April 1st the Government of India will inaugurate the India Act. On the same day Congress has called a nationwide hartal, or general strike, “in order to demonstrate effectively the will of the Indian people to resist the imposition of the unwanted constitution…” The Government of India and the Congress are faced with a grave position; one that calls for great qualities of statesmanship on both sides; and for men and women in this country to be watchful and informed.

Agatha Harrison.

A snow-laden Gandhi in Union Square, New York. Photo: Getty Images.

Letters, articles and notes from the New Statesman's centenary archive.

Getty
Show Hide image

The toxic new right-wing media will outlast Trump even if he’s impeached

Fox News and a network of smaller outlets have created an alternative version of reality. That ecosystem might prove more durable than the US president. 

An early end to Donald Trump’s presidency looks more feasible than at any time in the 117 days since his inauguration.

The New York Times revealed on Tuesday that FBI director James Comey – who was fired by Trump a week ago – wrote a memo recording the President’s request he “let go” an investigation into links between Michael Flynn, Trump’s pick for national security advisor, and Russia.

Already there is talk of impeachment, not least because the crime Trump is accused of - obstructing justice - is the same one that ended Richard Nixon's presidency.

But with a Republican-controlled Congress the impeachment process would be long and fraught, and is only likely to succeed if public opinion, and particularly the opinion of the Republican voters, swings decisively against Trump.

In another era, the rolling coverage of the president's chaotic, incompetent and potentially corrupt administration might have pushed the needle far enough. But many of those Republican voters will make their decision about whether or not to stick with Trump based not on investigative reporting in the NYT or Washington Post, but based on reading a right-wing media ecosystem filled with distortions, distractions and fabrications.

That ecosystem – which spans new and (relatively) old media - will be going into overdrive to protect a president it helped elect, and who in turn has nourished it with praise and access.

On Monday, BuzzFeed’s Charlie Warzel took a forensic look at how a new breed of hyper-partisan right wing sites – what he calls the "Upside Down media" – tried to undermine and discredit claims that Trump disclosed sensitive security information to Russian officials.

The same tactics can already be seen just 24 hours later. Notorious conspiracist site Infowars talks of “saboteurs” and “turncoats” undermining the administration with leaks, mirroring an email from Trump’s campaign team sent late on Tuesday. Newsmax, another right-leaning sight with links to Trump, attacks the source of the story, asking in its web splash “Why did Comey wait so long?”. GatewayPundit, which published several false stories about Hillary Clinton during the election campaign, appears to have ignored the story altogether. 

As Warzel points out, these new sites work in concert with older media, in particular Rupert Murdoch’s ratings-topping cable news channel Fox News.

Fox initially underplayed the Comey memo’s significance, switching later to projecting the story as a media-led attack on Trump. At the time of publication, the Fox homepage led with a splash headlined: “THE SHOW MUST GO ON Lawmakers vow to focus on Trump agenda despite WH controversies.”

Fox acts as a source of validation for the newly established right-wing sites. Once Fox has covered a story, smaller sites can push further and faster, knowing that they aren't going too far from at least one outlet considered respectable and mainstream. If anything should make the UK value the impartiality rules, however imperfect, which govern its broadcast news, it’s Fox’s central role in enabling this toxic mix of misinformation.

These new media sites have another weapon, however. They understand and exploit the way internet platforms - in particular Facebook - are designed to maximise attention. They have found that playing on very human desires for stories that confirm our biases and trigger emotional responses is the best way to build audiences and win fans, and they have little compulsion abusing that knowledge.

This isn’t just a Trump or Fox-related phenomenon. It’s not even just a right-wing one. In both the US and the UK left-wing hyper-partisan sites with a tenuous relationship with the truth have sprung up. They have followed the same playbook, and in most cases the same advertising-based funding model, which has worked so well for the right. Emotive headlines, spun stories, outright fabrications and an insistence that “the corrupt mainstream media won’t report this” work just as well in generating clicks and shares for both ends of the political spectrum.

The main difference between the two political poles is that the right has benefited from an ideologically and temperamentally suited president, and a facilitator in Fox News. 

Of course the combined efforts of this new media and the Fox-led old may still fail. Trump’s recent transgressions appear so severe that they could break through to even his diehard supporters.

But if Trump does fall, the new right wing media ecosystem is unlikely to fall with him. 

0800 7318496