NAMO in, SIR out: an election the media did not question
“We can count the votes that were cast. We cannot recover the votes that were never allowed to be cast,” writes Gilles Vernier, a researcher at the Sciences Po in Paris. Vernier, who had helped build up electoral data from past elections while at Ashoka University, has been a long-time poll analyst.
In a column published in The Economic Times on 5 May 2026, however, he wrote that he was unable to analyse the results in West Bengal. Election Commission’s interference, he added, had muddied the outcome and ‘precluded any clear analysis’.
Newspapers and the electronic media, however, scrupulously avoided mentioning the role of SIR which disenfranchised 34 lakh voters in West Bengal, all of them Indian citizens (even the election commission does not say they are foreigners or Bangladeshis) on dubious grounds. Barely 1,600 of them could reach out to the appellate tribunals which restored 99 per cent of them back to the electoral roll. Which way they would have voted cannot obviously be known but that a disproportionate number of them were women and Muslims are now public knowledge.
Headlines foregrounded spectacle and personality. Images of Narendra Modi in a Bengali-style dhoti dominated front pages, with newspapers crediting him for the BJP’s performance in Bengal and Assam. Wordplay flourished. The Tribune ingeniously but clumsily highlighted ‘Bengal’s historic TriNAMOol shift’. ‘JeetMuri’ was the headline in Rajasthan Patrika, a laboured reference to the photo-op of the prime minister’s stop to buy the popular street snack jhalmuri (puffed rice with green chilli, onions and other condiments) while campaigning in Jhargram.
Among Hindi newspapers, The Navbharat Times (NBT) carried a large illustration of the penalty area of a football field. With goalkeeper Mamata Banerjee sprawled on the ground and Modi shown having taken the penalty kick, the ball is in the net while Amit Shah in football gear is celebrating with arms raised—the only front page that highlighted the Union home minister. The NBT headline in Hindi hailed both the men as ‘Bharatiya Rajneeti Ke Babumoshai’, whatever the headline writer and illustrator may have meant.
Newspapers, apparently. pic.twitter.com/bznEMpeiiy
— churumuri (@churumuri) May 5, 2026
The front-page report in The Economic Times, predictably perhaps, carried a large photograph of Modi in the Bengali style dhoti and dramatically put the following words, as if spoken by the Prime Minister: ‘Aandhi Ban Ke Aaya Hoon (I have arrived like a storm)’—a clear and unabashed reference to this year’s Bollywood blockbuster Dhurandhar The Revenge. The prime minister would have been pleased. Other financial dailies were less theatrical. ‘A vote for change and continuity’, headlined the Business Standard. ‘A shock verdict in Tamil Nadu and Bengal’, read the Business Line headline while Mint led with ‘Saffron storm in Bengal’. ‘Parivartan, delivered’ was the headline in Financial Express.
The front-page headline in The Telegraph splashed in orange took the easy way out. It simply said, BJP’s Bengal with the outline of Kolkata’s iconic Howrah bridge. The largest circulated Bengali daily newspaper Ananda Bazar Patrika was even more cautious, headlining the verdict as the fall of Mamata and the rise of the BJP in the state. Neither SIR nor the Election Commission of India and Supreme Court found mention in the lavish coverage in the two newspapers.
The front-page headlines in newspapers outside the state were either bland or effusive. Times of India came up with ‘BJP is Bengal Janata’s Party’. Hindustan Times went with ‘Sunset for Satraps’. The Hindu, as always, played it safe and said ‘Change and Churn in Bengal, TN and Kerala’.
The Indian Express was the only one which tried to analyse the effect of SIR on voting in West Bengal, only to tie itself in knots. The misleading or mischievous headline of its front-page report read ‘Bengal SIR: TMC won 13 of 20 seats with highest voter deletions’. However, the report went on to say: ‘In the 187 seats that saw over 5,000 names deleted, the BJP won or was leading in 119. Of these 187 constituencies, the number of excluded voters was higher than the margin of victory or leads in 47. Overall, in these 187 seats—results were available for 170 and leads for 17—the number of excluded voters was higher than the margin of victory or leads in 47 seats, an analysis by The Indian Express shows.’
The Hindu in its editorial made a passing reference to the ‘tainted election process’. For all practical purposes though, the Indian media appeared to have moved on from SIR and its implications.
