Dear Editors of The Hindu,
Please apologize to your readers. On the morning of August 17, you,
, published survey findings from
with a headline claiming that Indians are losing “trust” in the Election Commission. Interestingly, on the same day,
launched his Bihar Yatra, alleging so-called “vote chori.” However, you failed to cross-check even the most basic facts from the survey. The survey was not pan-India; it covered only six states: Assam, West Bengal, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Delhi, with 500 respondents per state. This detail was buried in the fine print, which almost no one reads. Assam and Uttar Pradesh were given the same weightage in the survey—an obvious flaw in methodology. Yet, The Hindu amplified the conclusion as if it represented the entire country.
You did not question CSDS about why only these six states were selected or inform readers that four have high Muslim populations: Assam (40%), West Bengal (35%), Kerala (27%), and Uttar Pradesh (19%). Sanjay Kumar admitted the figures for Assam and West Bengal in his interview with Karan Thapar, but you overlooked this. Additionally, The Hindu ignored its own data tables. Table 10 shows that in Assam, 99%, and in West Bengal, 97%, of respondents already had the required 11 documents for the proposed SIR (this survey predates the Aadhaar judgment). However, Table 11 indicates that 45% still fear “Vote Kat Jayega!” Any reputable newspaper would investigate: if nearly everyone has the documents, why do almost half still fear their votes may be cut? That contradiction warranted scrutiny, but The Hindu printed the claim without investigation.
By failing to demand transparency from CSDS—no raw data, no explanation of sample design, no randomization—The Hindu transformed from a newspaper into something else. Readers were left with sensational headlines but lacked the context to judge credibility. This is not quality journalism. As one of the most trusted platforms, which I read every morning, The Hindu must:
- Demand raw data from CSDS instead of blindly publishing.
- Conduct its own fact-checking.
- Avoid acting as a mere postman; stop serving what is spoon-fed.
- Question contradictions, such as why ‘fear’ remains high if documentation is near-universal.
- Correct the record for your readers.
Sincerely,
Dilip Mandal