A conman, a demolition man: How 'prominent' scribes are defending Pritish Nandy

How to defend Pritish Nandy? That’s the big question some of his so-called fans seem to ponder, especially amidst sharp criticism of his alleged insensitivity during his journalistic career. One such incident involved the theft and publication of the birth certificate of Masaba Gupta, daughter of actor Neena Gupta, in the Illustrated Weekly of India, which Nandy was editing at the time. He reportedly did this to uncover the identity of Masaba’s father.

While his defenders argue that Nandy was a multi-talented individual—poet, author, journalist, filmmaker, and more—I was a little taken aback by a Facebook post defending him. The post was written by none other than Rahul Singh, a former editor of Reader's Digest, a journal that was once a household name among English-speaking elites. Personally, I never liked Reader's Digest, particularly its articles staunchly defending the ghastly American war in Vietnam.

In his post, Singh surprisingly praises Nandy—imagine!—for being a "conman." A conman is someone who tricks or deceives others, often through manipulation or fraudulent schemes, to gain money, valuables, or other benefits. Conmen are adept at gaining the trust and confidence of their victims, exploiting them in ways that ranged from small-scale scams to elaborate schemes.

Singh cites how Nandy ran multiple journals into the ground while managing to deceive three of the smartest people in India. He calls Nandy “a fine editor,” who was “talented” and published “scoops that startled everyone.” Examples include the revelation of cricketer Vivian Richards as Masaba Gupta’s father and the exposure of the "fake godman, the despicable Chandraswami."

However, Singh adds, “Nandy was also a master conman who pulled the wool over the eyes of three of the smartest men of that time: Samir Jain, the then boss of the hugely powerful Times of India group; Dhirubhai Ambani; and Balasaheb Thackeray."

According to Singh, Samir Jain made Nandy editor of the Illustrated Weekly and the Evening News. Nandy allegedly ran both publications into the ground, prompting Jain to ease him out. Similarly, Dhirubhai Ambani initially trusted Nandy and made him head of the Sunday Observer, then the largest-selling standalone Sunday paper in the country. But Nandy killed that paper too, leading to his dismissal—although he managed to retain the flat he had demanded when he joined the job.

Masaba, Neena Gupta

Singh claims Nandy’s biggest con was winning over Balasaheb Thackeray to such an extent that he was given a Rajya Sabha seat by the rabidly communal and right-wing Shiv Sena, despite Nandy supposedly having left-wing sympathies. Singh adds that Nandy even convinced Thackeray that he was Hindu, though he was actually a Christian.

Singh concludes his post with, “Hats off to Nandy for having duped and outsmarted three of the smartest people of his time.” Ironically, Narayani Ganesh, an associate editor with the Times of India, commented on Singh’s post, recalling that Nandy was once called “Demolition Man.”

Apparently, few of Nandy defenders care to care state that Nandy's relationship with his journalist colleagues, how he had to be eased out of the Illustrated Weekly following his journalist colleagues opposing him for being an outsider, who had little experience in pictorial journalism. 

Also, it's not pointed out that under Nandy's very nose, the Business and Political Observer, which he was made to head long with the Sunday Observer, was turned into what the journalists called an Ambani family paper, losing its credibility, and finally collapsing.

Further, while Balasaheb Thackeray might have realised that it was his mistake to have made Nandy a Rajya Sabha member, the latter did not stop praising his political boss, calling him an "unlikely politician" who "did not speak in riddles"or "obfuscate matters of national interest", and "did not mince his words."

Nandy further says, "I knew him over thirty years and what never failed to charm me was his wit, wisdom and wicked sense of humour. It was part of his infallible appeal, his charisma and he was often able to score sharp political points not through boring, didactic speeches but clever satire that every man on the street could understand and appreciate. I guess it came from his original calling as a cartoonist."