OpIndia

Last updated

OpIndia
OpIndia logo (transparent).png
Type of site
Available inEnglish, Hindi, Gujarati [4]
Headquarters New Delhi
OwnerAadhyaasi Media and Content Services
Founder(s)
  • Rahul Raj
  • Kumar Kamal
Editors
  • Nupur J. Sharma (English)
  • Chandan Kumar (Hindi) [5]
CEORahul Roushan
URLopindia.com
CommercialYes
LaunchedDecember 2014;10 years ago (2014-12)

OpIndia is an Indian far-right [2] news website known for frequently publishing misinformation. [11] [12] [28] Founded in December 2014, [18] the website has published fake news and Islamophobic commentary on numerous occasions. [37] [43] OpIndia is dedicated to criticism of what it considers liberal media, [14] and to support of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) [47] and Hindutva ideology. [3] According to University of Maryland researchers, OpIndia has shamed journalists it deems to be in opposition to the BJP and has alleged media bias against Hindus and the BJP. [13]

Contents

In 2019, the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) rejected OpIndia's application to be certified as a fact checker. [53] IFCN-certified fact checkers identified 25 fake news stories and 14 misreported stories published by OpIndia from January 2018 to June 2020. [35] A study of 54,850 OpIndia articles published between 2014 and 2023 found that OpIndia consistently characterised Hindus in positive terms and Muslims in negative terms to further the website's Hindu nationalist ideals. [39] OpIndia published a series of reports in 2020 falsely claiming that a Hindu boy was sacrificed in a Bihar mosque. [54]

The website is owned by Aadhyaasi Media and Content Services, a former subsidiary of the parent company of the right-wing magazine Swarajya . [13] : 2  [14] The current CEO of OpIndia is Rahul Roushan, and the current editors are Nupur J Sharma (English) and Chandan Kumar (Hindi). [5]

History

Ownership and leadership of OpIndia's parent company, Aadhyaasi Media and Content Services, as of June 2020 OpIndia ownership graph.svg
Ownership and leadership of OpIndia's parent company, Aadhyaasi Media and Content Services, as of June 2020

OpIndia was founded in December 2014 [14] by Rahul Raj and Kumar Kamal as a current affairs and news website. OpIndia is owned by Aadhyaasi Media and Content Services, a private limited company. [35] In October 2016, Aadhyaasi Media was acquired by Kovai Media Private Limited, a Coimbatore-based company that also owns the right-wing [13] : 2  [14] magazine Swarajya. [24] [55] Kovai Media's most prominent investors were former Infosys executives T. V. Mohandas Pai (three percent ownership) and N. R. Narayana Murthy (two percent ownership). Kovai Media retained ownership of Aadhyaasi Media until July 2018. [35]

Raj left OpIndia over a disagreement with the site's editorial stance. [24] OpIndia and Aadhyaasi Media separated from Kovai Media in November 2018. [35] Rahul Roushan was appointed the CEO of OpIndia, [56] and Nupur J. Sharma became the editor. [55] Roushan and Sharma each owned half of Aadhyaasi Media after the transition. In January 2019, Aadhyaasi Media was acquired by Kaut Concepts Management Pvt Ltd, which gained 98 percent ownership of Aadhyaasi Media and left Roushan and Sharma with one percent each. Kaut Concepts has a 26 percent stake in TFI Media Pvt Ltd, the operator of TFIpost—a Hindu nationalist website also known as The Frustrated Indian, and is directed by Ashok Kumar Gupta, who is associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and campaigns for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Aadhyaasi Media's directors are Sharma, Gupta, and Roushan's wife, Shaili Raval. [35]

In the 2018–2019 financial year, Aadhyaasi Media reported ₹1 million (US$12,000) in profit. [35] Between March and June 2019, OpIndia purchased ₹90,000 (US$1,000) of political advertising on Facebook. The BJP petitioned Facebook to allow OpIndia to receive advertising revenue on the social network in November 2019. [51] [57] [58] In 2020, the West Bengal Police filed first information reports (FIRs) against Sharma, Roushan and Ajeet Bharti (then editor of OpIndia Hindi) in response to content published on OpIndia. The Supreme Court of India stayed the FIRs in June 2020 after hearing a plea from the defendants which argued that the matter was outside the jurisdiction of the government of West Bengal. [59] [60] In December 2021, the Supreme Court quashed the FIRs after the West Bengal state government informed the court that they had decided to withdraw the FIRs. [61]

In 2022, OpIndia was sent a legal notice by a woman at the Tikri protest site for doxxing her and falsely claiming that she was raped at the site. [62]

Content

OpIndia denounces what it describes as "liberal media". [14] In an analysis of the 284 articles published by OpIndia in 2018, University of Maryland researchers Prashanth Bhat and Kalyani Chadha identified five recurring patterns in OpIndia's content: [13] [27]

  1. Portraying mistakes as fake news: OpIndia has provided coverage of "misquoted statements, incorrect headlines, or errors" in various mainstream media outlets, including NDTV, The Times Group and BBC, and claimed them to be "fake news". After the outlets published corrections, OpIndia continued to allege that the errors were intentional. According to Bhat and Chadha, the rhetoric employed by OpIndia is similar to the strategies used by European right-wing populist publications that aim to engender distrust in the mainstream media. [13] : 5–6 
  2. Shaming journalists: OpIndia has attacked the "professional integrity" of specific mainstream media journalists that the website believes to be opposed to the ruling BJP, including journalists from The Wire , The Indian Express , NDTV and The Quint . OpIndia has accused these journalists of sexual harassment, plagiarism, financial misconduct, "malicious editing" and other forms of unethical behaviour. Some stories in this category were obtained by monitoring the journalists' social media accounts for "inconsistencies or contradictions". Bhat and Chadha compared OpIndia's method of attacking journalists to practices used by American right-wing publications. [13] : 6–7 
  3. Alleging partisanship: OpIndia has alleged the existence of a "news media conspiracy" in which mainstream media outlets are biased against the ruling BJP and India itself, and favourable toward the opposition Indian National Congress (INC), which the website considered part of the "establishment". OpIndia claimed that the media produced too little coverage of the INC's use of Cambridge Analytica, while providing too much coverage of the BJP's handling of the Rafale deal controversy. English-language outlets are the primary targets of OpIndia's criticism. [13] : 7–8 
  4. Amplifying criticism: OpIndia has regularly featured stories in which celebrities and public officials criticised mainstream media outlets, and reports in which the outlets apologised to critics. In these stories, OpIndia accused journalists of various faults, including "insensitivity and irresponsibility", misinformation, publishing sensitive information and compromising "national security". In one story, OpIndia covered the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting's criticism of journalist Nidhi Razdan, then played down the Minister's correction after the situation was revealed to be a "misunderstanding". [13] : 8–9 
  5. Alleging bias against India and Hindus: OpIndia has accused Indian publications of having a liberal media bias and of publishing stories that are "anti-India", particularly regarding India–Pakistan relations. The website published allegations that mainstream media outlets were "anti-Hindu", including in rebukes of Times Now and CNN-News18 for covering weight loss tips and fireworks bans around Diwali. Bhat and Chadha wrote that OpIndia's portrayal of the mainstream media as "pro-minority and anti-majority" is in line with the narratives communicated through Norwegian and German right-wing websites, and that the Diwali accusations resemble the "War on Christmas" allegations published by American right-wing outlets. [13] : 9–11 

Raj, in 2014, intended for OpIndia to combat media manipulation and distinguish "what is being reported" from "what the facts are". [35] In 2018, Sharma stated that OpIndia is openly right-leaning and does not claim to be ideologically neutral. [22] Sharma described OpIndia's dislike of left-liberal ideas as one of the website's "ontological positions on the basis of which we operate" in 2019. [19] As of June 2020, OpIndia declares on its website that it aims to produce content "that is free from the burden of liberal bias and political correctness". [35] The site accepts article contributions from its readers. [14]

Fact checkers certified by the Poynter Institute's International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), including Alt News and Boom, have identified multiple instances in which OpIndia has published fake news. [37] According to a Newslaundry data compilation, OpIndia published 25 fake news stories and 14 misreported stories between January 2018 and June 2020 that were fact-checked by other organisations. False reports on OpIndia frequently criticise Muslims. [35] Newslaundry found 28 articles on OpIndia released from 15 to 29 November 2019 with headlines that explicitly named Muslims as perpetrators of various crimes. A writer who left OpIndia due to this trend told Newslaundry, "If the accused in an incident belongs to the Muslim community, then you have to mention his name in the heading. The news is to be published in such a way that if the reader is a Hindu, then he starts developing hatred for Muslims." [34] In April 2020, Bharti blamed the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in India on Muslim "martyrdom" in an OpIndia video that was disseminated among Hindutva-oriented WhatsApp groups. [15] According to Alt News, OpIndia propagated 18 instances of misinformation in 2022. [63]

After the Wikipedia community declared OpIndia an unreliable source in March 2020, OpIndia began publishing news content on a regular basis portraying Wikipedia in a negative light; it has accused the English Wikipedia of having a left-wing and socialist bias. [64] [27] In June 2020, Newslaundry compared OpIndia to the American far-right website Breitbart News , stating, "It's fair to say even Breitbart wouldn't publish the sort of stuff that you'd routinely see on OpIndia." [35] An August 2021 Association of Computing Machinery conference paper that examined website articles and Twitter posts related to the COVID-19 pandemic in India showed that "~ 66% of the 50 most frequently occurring articles from OpIndia portrayed Islamophobic behaviour", that OpIndia's COVID-19 coverage focused on Muslims and the Tablighi Jamaat, and that OpIndia prominently published tweets that the Perspective evaluator identified as "rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable content". The paper concluded that "The widespread presence of media sources like OpIndia in our dataset, that frequently publish anti-Muslim content, shows that people used external sources to further Islamophobic views." [38]

Discourse & Society released an analysis of 54,850 OpIndia articles published from December 2014 to May 2023, determining that OpIndia's content conformed to a Hindu nationalist discourse that designated Hindus as the in-group and Muslims as the out-group. For Hindus, OpIndia used first-person pronouns (such as "we") and positive descriptions that depicted the in-group as "innately good, non-offending, hapless" people who are "surviving and enduring atrocious crimes and being on the verge of perishing". For Muslims, OpIndia used third-person pronouns (such as "they") and negative descriptions that characterised the out-group as "self-victimising, conspirators, radical elements, merciless, brutal, blood lusty, brainwashing, and demanding privileges". OpIndia promoted the love jihad conspiracy theory and terms including "mob", "Taliban" and "Al Qaeda" to present an exaggerated representation of Muslims as violent offenders, while using the term "community" for Hindus and minimising instances of violence conducted by Hindu nationalists. [39]

Bihar human sacrifice claims

OpIndia's 10 May article containing the human sacrifice claims. The headline was later revised. OpIndia Gopalganj article.png
OpIndia's 10 May article containing the human sacrifice claims. The headline was later revised.

Between 9–14 May 2020, OpIndia published a series of seven articles (one in English and six in Hindi) [36] falsely claiming that Rohit Jaiswal, a Hindu boy, was sacrificed in a mosque in Bela Dih – a village in Kateya, Gopalganj, Bihar – after which his body was disposed of in a river on 28 March. [40] In the articles, OpIndia alleged that the suspected perpetrators were "all Muslims". [40] One of the articles asserted, "A new mosque had been built in the village and it is being alleged that there was a belief that if a Hindu was 'sacrificed', the mosque would become powerful and its influence would increase." [40] [41] The stories were accompanied with videos of Jaiswal's sister and father, in which neither of them mentioned a sacrifice or mosque. [41]

Jaiswal's postmortem report indicated that his cause of death was "asphyxia due to drowning". [41] [42] Local residents in the village, including Jaiswal's mother, declined to corroborate the human sacrifice claims, [40] [41] and a local journalist said that the village did not have a new mosque. [40] The first information report (FIR) filed by the father on 29 March listed six suspects (five Muslim boys and one Hindu boy) [36] and did not reference a sacrifice or mosque. [41] [42] OpIndia later released an audio recording of its interview with Jaiswal's father, in which he claimed that Jaiswal was murdered in a mosque. In a follow-up interview with Newslaundry, the father retracted the claim and said that he made the accusations in "sheer frustration" of the attention around Jaiswal's death. After Newslaundry interviewed Bharti—then editor of OpIndia Hindi, OpIndia deleted the word "all" from the phrase "all Muslims" in its description of the suspected perpetrators. [42]

Vijay Kumar Verma, a Deputy Inspector General of Bihar Police, disclosed on 14 May that he had filed an FIR against OpIndia under Section 67 (obscenity) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 295(A) (inciting religious outrage) of the Indian Penal Code for its reporting of the false human sacrifice claims. [26] [36] [40] The FIR stated that OpIndia published the claims "without knowing or understanding the case". [41] On 17 May, the Director General of Bihar Police, Gupteshwar Pandey, examined the drowning incident and found no evidence supporting the human sacrifice claims or the suspicion of communal motives behind the death. [40] [41] [42]

Plagiarism

OpIndia has also been engaged in plagiarism and copyright violation in their articles without attributing to the original publishers. It was later discovered by Alt News when OpIndia published an article covering 2020 Pulitzer Prize nomination about three Kashmiri journalists who were awarded for their photographs [65] taken during the state-wide lockdown imposed in 2019 by the ruling party, the BJP, after the revocation of article 370 involving the Kashmir conflict. [66]

Reception

In March 2019, the IFCN rejected OpIndia's application to be certified as a fact checker. [19] While noting partial compliance on a number of categories, the IFCN rejected the application on grounds of political partisanship and lack of transparency and raised concerns over questionable fact-checking methodologies. [53] The rejection disqualified OpIndia from fact-checking contracts with web properties owned by Facebook and Google. In response, Sharma criticised the IFCN assessment and urged for acceptance of outlets with "declared ideological leanings". [19]

After co-founder Raj departed OpIndia, he described the website as a "blind mouthpiece" of the BJP on Twitter in August 2019. [35] Raj criticised Sharma, alleging that she and others "started as trolls" and "abuse and play victim card when questioned". [24] OpIndia was blacklisted from Wikipedia in March 2020 (alongside Swarajya and TFIpost) after Sharma, in an OpIndia piece, published personally identifying information about a Wikipedia editor who helped write the encyclopedia's article on the 2020 Delhi riots, which resulted in the editor leaving Wikipedia. [27]

Stop Funding Hate, a British social media campaign, urged organisations to withdraw their advertising from OpIndia in May 2020 after the website published an article asserting that businesses should be able to declare that they do not hire Muslims. The head of the campaign, Richard Wilson, said that "OpIndia is becoming internationally notorious for its hateful and discriminatory coverage" and that the campaign has "rarely seen such overt advocacy of discrimination on religious grounds". Over 20 organisations, [35] including advertising network Rubicon Project, video streaming service Mubi, personal care brand Harry's and the Saïd Business School, ceased advertising on OpIndia as a result of the campaign. Sharma responded that she would "stand by our article and our content 100%" and that OpIndia would "never alter its core belief system or content". [49] [67] Roushan stated that advertisements constitute a minority of OpIndia's revenue and claimed that OpIndia received a "700% jump" in donations during the campaign. [35]

See also

References

  1. ↑ Kumar, Keval J. (2020). Mass Communication in India. Jaico Publishing House. p. 71. ISBN   9788172243739. Archived from the original on 1 December 2022. Retrieved 1 December 2022.
  2. 1 2 Sources describing OpIndia as far-right: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
  3. 1 2 [13] : 4  [48] [49] [50] [51] [52]
  4. ↑ "અમારા વિષે(About Us)". ઑપઇન્ડિયા[OpIndia] (in Gujarati). Archived from the original on 1 June 2023. Retrieved 10 June 2023. અમારા આ જ વાચકવર્ગની માંગણીને માન આપીને 2019માં ઑપઇન્ડિયા હિન્દી બાદ હવે 2022માં અમે ઑપઇન્ડિયા ગુજરાતી લાવી રહ્યા છીએ.[Respecting the demand of our same readership, after OpIndia Hindi in 2019, now in 2022 we are bringing OpIndia Gujarati.]
  5. 1 2 "हमारे बारे में" [About Us]. ऑपइंडिया[OpIndia] (in Hindi). Archived from the original on 18 April 2021. Retrieved 14 April 2021. ऑपइंडिया (हिन्दी) के वर्तमान संपादक चंदन कुमार हैं[The current editor of OpIndia (Hindi) is Chandan Kumar]
  6. ↑ Dutta, Mohan J. (30 April 2024). "Digital platforms, Hindutva, and disinformation: Communicative strategies and the Leicester violence". Communication Monographs : 1–29. doi: 10.1080/03637751.2024.2339799 . ISSN   0363-7751. Note here the following post from the Twitter handle of Nupur J. Sharma, the editor of the far-right Hindutva platform OpIndia that disseminates hate speech...
  7. ↑ Siddiqui, Mohammad Amaan (5 January 2024). "The Role of Far-Right Media Houses and Organisations in Disseminating Hindu Nationalist 'Love Jihad' Narratives on X". Global Network on Extremism and Technology . Archived from the original on 16 July 2024. Retrieved 26 September 2024.
  8. ↑ Manuvie, R.; Maurya, S. (July 2020). "An Atmosphere of Hate Case Study: OpIndia" (PDF). The London Story. p. 1. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 September 2024. Retrieved 25 September 2024. OpIndia as a far-right media house has in recent times not only promoted a highly Islamophobic narrative in India...
  9. ↑ Elliott, Vittoria (22 May 2024). "A Far-Right Indian News Site Posts Racist Conspiracies. US Tech Companies Keep Platforming It". Wired . ISSN   1059-1028. Archived from the original on 6 October 2024. Retrieved 25 September 2024.
  10. ↑ Chaudhuri, Pooja (28 May 2024). "How Four Hindu Nationalist Websites Make Their Money". Bellingcat . Archived from the original on 6 October 2024. Retrieved 25 September 2024. Bellingcat identified two such far-right outlets–OpIndia and Hindu Existence.
  11. ↑ Lal, A. (2017). India Social: HOW SOCIAL MEDIA IS LEADING THE CHARGE AND CHANGING THE COUNTRY. Hachette India. p. 69. ISBN   978-93-5195-213-8. Archived from the original on 30 November 2022. Retrieved 30 November 2022.
  12. ↑ Chadha, Kalyani; Bhat, Prashanth (14 September 2022). "Alternative News Media and Critique of Mainstream Journalism in India: The Case of OpIndia". Digital Journalism. 10 (8). Informa UK Limited: 1283–1301. doi:10.1080/21670811.2022.2118143. ISSN   2167-0811. S2CID   252511758.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Bhat, Prashanth; Chadha, Kalyani (31 March 2020). "Anti-media populism: Expressions of media distrust by right-wing media in India". Journal of International and Intercultural Communication. 13 (2). Routledge: 166–182. doi:10.1080/17513057.2020.1739320. S2CID   216480199. Archived from the original on 15 June 2020. Retrieved 21 February 2021– via Taylor & Francis.
  14. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Chadha, Kalyani; Bhat, Prashanth (14 February 2019). "The media are biased: Exploring online right wing responses to mainstream news media in India". In Rao, Shakuntala (ed.). Indian Journalism in a New Era: Changes, Challenges, and Perspectives. Oxford University Press. pp. 115–140. ISBN   978-0-19-949082-0 . Retrieved 12 May 2020– via ResearchGate.
  15. 1 2 3 Nizaruddin, Fathima (February 2021). "Role of Public WhatsApp Groups Within the Hindutva Ecosystem of Hate and Narratives of "CoronaJihad"". International Journal of Communication . 15. USC Annenberg Press. ISSN   1932-8036. Archived from the original on 29 April 2021. Retrieved 25 February 2021.
  16. 1 2 Eaton, Natasha (14 December 2020). Travel, Art and Collecting in South Asia: Vertiginous Exchange . Routledge. ISBN   978-1-000-26255-1. Archived from the original on 26 March 2023. Retrieved 19 January 2021– via Google Books. The online press has many such stories whose intent is largely divided between sensationalism and anti Muslim sentiment as any browse of the right wing site www.opindia.com shows.
  17. ↑ Bosu, Soma (3 February 2020). "Jamia Millia Shooting: Making of a Hindutva Terrorist". The Diplomat . Archived from the original on 15 April 2020. Retrieved 21 April 2020.
  18. 1 2 Bhushan, Sandeep (25 January 2017). "Arnab's Republic, Modi's Ideology". The Wire . Archived from the original on 1 November 2019. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
  19. 1 2 3 4 Ananth, Venkat (7 May 2019). "Can fact-checking emerge as big and viable business?". The Economic Times . Archived from the original on 8 August 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  20. ↑ Mihindukulasuriya, Regina (8 May 2019). "BJP supporters have a secret weapon in their online poll campaign — satire". ThePrint . Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  21. ↑ Ghosh, Labonita (17 June 2018). "The troll who turned". Mumbai Mirror . Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  22. 1 2 Manish, Sai (8 April 2018). "Busting fake news: Who funds whom?". Business Standard . Archived from the original on 20 May 2020. Retrieved 3 March 2020– via Rediff.com.
  23. ↑ Chaturvedi, Swati (2016). I Am a Troll: Inside the Secret World of the BJP's Digital Army. Juggernaut Books. pp. 11, 23. ISBN   9789386228093. Archived from the original on 26 March 2023. Retrieved 16 September 2020.
  24. 1 2 3 4 Matharu, Aleesha. "Tables Turn on Twitter's Hindutva Warriors, and It's the BJP Doing the Strong-Arming". The Wire . Archived from the original on 16 May 2020. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  25. ↑ Pullanoor, Harish (17 February 2019). "After Pulwama attack, Indians vent their anger at Pakistan, ethnic Kashmiris, and media". Quartz . Archived from the original on 20 March 2020. Retrieved 20 March 2020.
  26. 1 2 "Why Bihar Police filed an FIR against OpIndia and other right-wing website over minor's death". The Free Press Journal . 17 May 2020. Archived from the original on 18 June 2020. Retrieved 17 June 2020.
  27. 1 2 3 4 Kauntia, Nishant (30 November 2020). "How Wikipedia earned the ire of the Hindu Right" . The Caravan . Archived from the original on 7 December 2020. Retrieved 9 December 2020.
  28. ↑ [13] : 1–2  [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27]
  29. ↑ "Search results for OpIndia". Alt News . Archived from the original on 16 March 2020. Retrieved 16 March 2020.
  30. ↑ "Search results for OpIndia". Boom. Archived from the original on 16 March 2020. Retrieved 16 March 2020.
  31. 1 2 Chakrabarti, Santanu; Stengel, Lucile; Solanki, Sapna (20 November 2018). "Duty, Identity, Credibility: 'Fake News' and the ordinary citizen in India" (PDF). BBC. pp. 87–88. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 January 2020. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  32. ↑ Singh, Prabhjit (29 November 2020). "Farmers at Kundli upset over media misrepresentation, accusations; confront "godi media"". The Caravan . Archived from the original on 6 May 2021. Retrieved 19 January 2021.
  33. ↑ Khuhro, Zarrar (9 July 2018). "Digital death". Dawn . Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  34. 1 2 3 Kumar, Basant (3 January 2020). "Fake news, lies, Muslim bashing, and Ravish Kumar: Inside OpIndia's harrowing world". Newslaundry . Archived from the original on 31 January 2021. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  35. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tiwari, Ayush (23 June 2020). "OpIndia: Hate speech, vanishing advertisers, and an undisclosed BJP connection". Newslaundry . Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
  36. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Alam, Mahtab (15 May 2020). "Bihar: Case Against Rightwing Sites For Fake Claims of Communal Angle in Minor's Murder". The Wire . Archived from the original on 1 May 2021. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  37. 1 2 Sources describing OpIndia's publication of fake news: [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36]
  38. 1 2 Chandra, Mohit; Reddy, Manvith; Sehgal, Shradha; Gupta, Saurabh; Buduru, Arun Balaji; Kumaraguru, Ponnurangam (25 August 2021). ""A Virus Has No Religion": Analyzing Islamophobia on Twitter During the COVID-19 Outbreak" . HT '21: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media. Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 67–77. arXiv: 2107.05104 . doi:10.1145/3465336.3475111. ISBN   978-1-4503-8551-0 . Retrieved 1 January 2025. Surprisingly, we observed a large number of URLs from a few websites that have been known to disseminate anti-Muslim news (OpIndia, Jihadwatch, and Swarajyamag). The frequency for URLs from OpIndia is maximum and double that of Aljazeera, which shows the scale of probable Islamophobic content shared through the URLs on Twitter.
  39. 1 2 3 Jaisal, E. K.; Majumder, Shinjinee (13 October 2024). "Delving deeper into OpIndia.com's representation of Hindus and Muslims" . Discourse & Society . Sage. doi:10.1177/09579265241287560 . Retrieved 27 December 2024. To conclude, OpIndia's portrayal of Hindus and Muslims perpetuates a perniciously polarising discourse that demonises Muslims and is potent to deepen the wedges, disaffection, and hostilities and even trigger violence among the communities.
  40. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Chandra, Divya (18 May 2020). "Hindu 'Sacrificed' in Bihar Mosque? Family Says Nobody Witnessed". The Quint . Archived from the original on 25 May 2020. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  41. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Jha, Priyanka; Sinha, Pratik (17 May 2020). "Gopalganj case: Boy drowns in river, OpIndia claims he was sacrificed in a mosque". Alt News . Archived from the original on 17 May 2020. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  42. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kumar, Basant (19 May 2020). "'Human sacrifice in mosque': How OpIndia communalised a Bihar boy's death". Newslaundry . Archived from the original on 28 May 2020. Retrieved 20 May 2020.
  43. ↑ Sources describing OpIndia's publication of Islamophobic content: [15] [16] [38] [39] [34] [35] [36] [40] [41] [42]
  44. ↑ Majid, Daneesh (4 September 2020). "Many like Raja Singh are still benefitting from Facebook". The Siasat Daily . Archived from the original on 17 September 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  45. ↑ Mishra, Soni (7 August 2020). "EC faces controversy over hiring social media firms close to BJP". The Week . Archived from the original on 10 August 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  46. ↑ Daniyal, Shoaib (28 July 2019). "Modi goes secular? BJP's minimum outreach to Muslims is causing heartburn among party's supporters". Scroll.in . Archived from the original on 1 October 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  47. ↑ [13] : 4  [31] [44] [45] [46]
  48. ↑ Thaver, Mohamed; Singh, Laxman (18 September 2019). "Mumbai: Online battle over Aarey car shed gets ugly". The Indian Express . Archived from the original on 16 January 2021. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  49. 1 2 "MUBI, other brands drop advertisements from OpIndia following 'Stop Funding Hate' campaign". Scroll.in . 30 May 2020. Archived from the original on 4 June 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
  50. ↑ "Announcement of Film on Muslim Freedom Fighter from Kerala Leads to Hate Campaign". The Wire . 23 June 2020. Archived from the original on 3 August 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  51. 1 2 "BJP asked Facebook to monetise OpIndia, remove Bhim Army page: Indian Express". Newslaundry . 1 September 2020. Archived from the original on 4 September 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  52. ↑ Chopra, Rohit (2019). The Virtual Hindu Rashtra: Saffron Nationalism and New Media. Noida: HarperCollins. ISBN   9789353029579.
  53. 1 2 Kaur, Kanchan (11 February 2019). "OpIndia.com: Conclusions and recommendations". International Fact-Checking Network . Archived from the original on 10 March 2019. Retrieved 12 December 2019.
  54. ↑ [36] [40] [41] [42]
  55. 1 2 Manish, Sai (7 April 2018). "Right vs Wrong: Arundhati Roy, Mohandas Pai funding fake news busters". Business Standard . Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  56. ↑ "OpIndia CEO Rahul Roushan calls for mob violence, deletes tweet". Alt News . 17 February 2019. Archived from the original on 31 May 2020. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
  57. ↑ Mehrotra, Karishma (1 September 2020). "Before 2019 polls, BJP flagged 44 'rival' pages, 14 now off Facebook". The Indian Express . Archived from the original on 5 September 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  58. ↑ "On BJP's Request, Facebook Pulled Down 14 of 44 Flagged Pages, Reinstated 17 Deleted Pages". The Wire . 1 September 2020. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
  59. ↑ "Supreme Court stays FIRs against OpIndia editors, gives anchor protection from arrest". Express News Service. 27 June 2020. Archived from the original on 24 August 2020. Retrieved 7 September 2020– via The Indian Express.
  60. ↑ Venkatesan, V. (28 June 2020). "As FIRs Against Media Pile Up, Inconsistent SC Response Points to Judicial Incoherence". The Wire . Archived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 7 September 2020.
  61. ↑ "Supreme Court quashes FIRs lodged by West Bengal police against 'OpIndia'". The Indian Express. 10 December 2021. Archived from the original on 22 March 2022. Retrieved 22 March 2022.
  62. ↑ "OpIndia twists woman's allegation of eve-teasing at Tikri border as 'rape', woman issues legal notice". Alt News . 14 June 2021. Archived from the original on 16 June 2021. Retrieved 15 June 2021.
  63. ↑ "Among media outlets, Times Group, Zee shared most misinformation in 2022: Alt News". Newslaundry. 4 January 2023. Retrieved 29 October 2024.
  64. ↑ Harrison, Stephen (16 June 2022). "Inside Wikipedia's Historic, Fiercely Contested "Election"". Slate. Archived from the original on 24 August 2022. Retrieved 14 September 2022.
  65. ↑ Jawed, Sam (9 May 2020). "OpIndia's article on 'yellow journalism' is a work of plagiarism". Alt News. Archived from the original on 21 October 2020. Retrieved 26 September 2020.
  66. ↑ "AP's Kashmir photographers win Pulitzer for lockdown coverage – India". Al Jazeera. 4 May 2020. Archived from the original on 5 March 2021. Retrieved 26 September 2020.
  67. ↑ Goel, Kritika (29 May 2020). "OpIndia Loses Ads After UK-Based 'Stop Funding Hate' Campaign". The Quint . Archived from the original on 4 June 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.