Ratifying a nation’s constitution is a matter of pride for every country. It was a historic day for Nepal as well on September 19, 2015, when an overwhelming 507 members of the parliament passed the constitution (BBC, September 17, 2015). The ratification of the constitution was a sign of progress after a 65-year-long wait following people’s war (Rai, 2015) that lasted more than 10 years and led to the overthrowing of a century-long monarchy (Pokhrel & Essald, 2015).
The local and international media gave ample coverage to this event. While the local media were praising the event as historic with headlines like, ‘CA makes history, endorses the new constitution of Nepal’ (The Kathmandu Post, 2015), BBC on same date mentioned ‘Nepal’s parliament has overwhelmingly approved new constitution.’ At the same time, there was mixed and critical response from a few other countries, like from the neighboring country of India that had different insights on the event. India, who had been a key player in Nepal’s politics during the time of overthrowing its monarchy, was now unhappy, which could be seen from the news coverage after the ratification of the constitution. The Times of India wrote ‘Nepal snubs India, adopts constitution amid protest.’ Similarly, The Hindu in one of its articles presented it as a ‘highly controversial constitution and clearly flawed.’
After the ratification, the country was soon hurled into political disturbance caused by an ‘unofficial’ economic blockade (economic embargo) at the border between India and Nepal. The embargo was claimed by Indian press to have been led by the angered ethnic minority group ‘Madheshi’ of Nepal (Pokhrel & Essald, 2015), who felt discriminated in the constitution, which sparked protests. The same incident was referred to as ‘unofficial’ economic blockade done by India (Nepali Times, 2015) in the Nepali press. According to the Human Rights Watch Report (2015), before the ratification of the constitution, there had already been 45 deaths reported between August and September 11, 2015, during protests against the drafting of Nepal’s new constitution. While both countries’ media were covering this event from their own perspective, notable differences in the presentation in the news could be seen. So, this study aims to provide empirical support to this observation.
The gap in literature is evident when talking about Nepal-India relations and their coverage in media. To fill that gap, this study will analyze how newspapers in the two countries covered the disagreement between these nations regarding the ratification of the constitution. The study also analyses how media coverage is influenced by politicians, as suggested by the prominence of these actors as news sources in the coverage, and examines the tone of the news. Using a systematic content analysis of the leading newspapers in both countries, the study sets out to establish whether there are any significant differences in the way the event was portrayed to the Nepali and Indian public. Some possible reasons for the difference are discussed, including the political and economic contexts as well as the countries’ foreign policy stances, which might explain the framing, tone, and sources in the stories under scrutiny.
Scholars argue that foreign policy interests are a key factor that determines manipulation of news media by governments to serve their purpose to the extent of structuring the ways stories are to be written (Malek & Weigand, 1997). India’s foreign policy and its internal political interests are discussed later in detail. Oftentimes, media’s presentation of any country’s image “is based largely on how journalists present the country’s image in our mind’’ (as quoted by Noshina Saleem, in Zelizer & Allen, 2002).
The theoretical framework for this study is framing. Socio-economic research related to India’s role in Nepali politics has shown that India has some vested interest in Nepal. Mishra (2004) argues, especially while shaping the past 60 years of Nepali political history, that India has played a crucial role. Whether it be removing Nepal’s 104-year-old Rana dynasty in 1951, the restoration of its multiparty democracy in 1990, or the Maoist insurgency to people’s movement in 2006, India has been a decisive player in Nepali’s internal affairs. In this regard, framing of Nepal’s dispute after the ratification of its Constitution in 2015 and differences in presentation of news in two different media systems could have mirrored the two countries’ political stances and disagreements. By applying the framing theory to a less explored region of the world, this study brings new references in the field of framing studies.
Also, international media play an important role in determining the image of any country. Not everyone gets an opportunity to travel around the world. In that scenario, coverage by international media plays an important role in bringing information from remote areas. Especially developing countries generally don’t get attention in the international news arena or are topic of discussion. As a study by Poornanda (1998) suggests, the developing countries of South Asia become a point of interest only during crises or epidemics, crimes, disasters, and conflicts and failure of government, all of which have a negative news element. Geographically and economically, Nepal is an insignificant country for the world, but India isn’t. Due to its rising economic power and sheer size, what its media convey about its neighboring countries does matter to the wider audiences as it presents the world view from India’s perspective.
There have been studies regarding Nepal and India relations by scholars from political science (e.g. Mishra, 2004; Singh, 2013); studies related to Nepali journalists (e.g. Ramaprasad & Kelly, 2003); foreign policy and domestic conflict (Miklian, 2008); protests concerning Tibetan protestors in Nepal (Prajapati, 2011), but studies concerning India-Nepal disagreements and their coverage in the media are scarce, firstly because of being a less developed country and secondly because of its reduced significance in terms of economic and political relations with the U.S. (Poornananda, 1998). But that scenario is different today. New media technologies have made the whole world a global village, with news circulating faster and farther than before. This study is also an attempt to introduce how media function differently between a rising economic power and a less significant developing country. Another objective of this study is to find if classic media theories that are popular among Western scholars, like framing, have some significance in the Eastern part of the media world, which has been less explored.
This study aims to provide empirical support to the theoretical proposition that two different media systems from two different countries have a profound impact on the way important political events are framed in the mass media. Yang (2003) argues that each country’s media have their vested interest behind presenting their national image based on their reporting methods, organizational routines, organizational culture, national interest and other factors.