Jagan Mohan Reddy recently asserted that extensive surveys conducted before and after the elections revealed no signs of anti-incumbency despite sampling a staggering 17 lakh individuals. He made these statements during his recent review meeting with YSRCP leaders. However, a closer examination reveals a different narrative, shedding light on the suppression of dissent and the manipulation of information within his administration. As outlined below, there are multiple reasons why such false information reached Jagan’s table all the time.
1) People chosen by Surveying agencies as samples not disclosing their dissent
2) Surveying Agencies sharing wrong information to Jagan
Suppression of Dissent during Jagan’s Rule and people hide their dissent until the day of Elections:
Below are some of the incidents that made people believe it is unsafe to voice against Jagan’s government. These incidents made people hide their antipathy towards Jagan.
a. The Tragic Fate of Doctor Sudhakar: Doctor Sudhakar’s ordeal, from suspension to alleged torture and eventual demise, stands as a chilling example of the consequences faced by those who dare to speak out against the government’s failings during the COVID-19 pandemic.
b. Silencing Voices on Social Media: Instances of individuals being targeted and driven to tragic ends after raising concerns about governance issues, such as the quality of liquor or the state of infrastructure, highlight the lengths to which dissent is suppressed within Jagan’s regime.
c. Persecution of Political Opposition: The case of a Janasena cadre who faced intimidation and harassment after confronting a YSRCP MLA over the issue of repairing the roads underscores the ruthlessness with which dissent is handled, often resulting in dire consequences.
d. Curtailing Media Freedom: Instances where media personalities like anchor Pradeep faced warnings for light-hearted remarks about the capital of AP in a comedy show, expose the erosion of freedom of speech and expression under the current administration.
Additional Factors Contributing to Misinformation
e. Ignoring Constructive Criticism: Jagan’s dismissal of warnings from individuals like Prashant Kishore, who stood with him in the previous elections, coupled with subsequent distancing, reflects a concerning pattern of disregarding constructive criticism.
f. Manipulation of Survey Findings: Surveying agencies also know that Jagan is in no mood to listen to any sort of negative news even if it is close to the ground reality. So, the possibility of survey agencies providing favorable yet false reports to maintain business relations with YSRCP cannot be ruled out.
Despite Jagan Mohan Reddy’s claims of no anti-incumbency, a deeper examination uncovers a reality marred by suppression of dissent, manipulation of information, and the tragic consequences of speaking out against the establishment.
