USAID Controversy: Shows by Republic, CNN-News18, Times Now had clear partisan bent

by Ankita Mahalanobish

In February 2025, when US President Donald Trump and his former adviser Elon Musk claimed that $21 million was disbursed to influence India’s electoral process under Joe Biden’s administration, several Indian media outlets swooped in to “call out” Opposition leaders; some even branded them “sellouts”. They claimed American money was pumped into India to influence elections against the BJP. Six months later, these outlets had little to say.

On August 21, 2025, minister of State for external affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh informed the Rajya Sabha that India did not receive any funding from the United States agency for international development (USAID) for voter turnout initiatives between 2014 and 2024. He cited communication from the US embassy in New Delhi from July, where the embassy categorically said that USAID had neither provided nor facilitated any such funding, nor had it conducted any voter engagement activities in India.

USAID was established in the 1960s to administer humanitarian aid programmes on behalf of the US government. It was the principal US agency that extended assistance to countries recovering from disasters, escaping poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms. The allegations levelled by Trump and Musk were serious but unsubstantiated. However, shows by several broadcast news outlets turned the allegations into judgements with charged political commentary attacking BJP critics.

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Trump Claims Biden Administration Gave India $21M for Elections

The controversy surrounding the alleged $21 million USAID grant for voter turnout in India gained traction after the US department of government efficiency (@DOGE) announced on February 16, 2025, that funding to several countries had been cancelled, including a $21 million allocation for “voter turnout in India”.

Trump, too, amplified the claim that India was given money for elections. “…And $21 million for voter turnout in India. Why do we need to spend $21 million for voter turnout in India? Wow, I guess they (Biden administration) were trying to get somebody else elected. We have got to tell the Indian government,” he said at a summit in Miami on February 20. Three days later, he reiterated this: “Well, they don’t need money. They take advantage of us. They are one of the highest-tariff nations in the world. They have a 200 per cent tariff, and then we give them a lot of money for elections”. 

In turn, the BJP used Trump’s words to attack the Opposition. BJP’s IT cell chief Amit Malviya led the charge.

Malviya also accused the Opposition of receiving funding “through various George Soros-linked fronts and a labyrinth of NGO structures to meddle with India’s electoral process”.

However, amid this political battle and trading of allegations, several television media channels clearly took sides. They broadcast suggestive shows that attributed blame to Congress for using foreign aid to meddle with elections.

Republic

On February 19, Republic broadcast an interview with Sajeev Sanyal, a member of the Prime Minister’s economic advisory council. During the show, hosted by the channel’s editor, Arnab Goswami, Sanyal remained focused on the argument that USAID was allowing independent agencies to collect data and information that helped in deploying surveys where India did not fare too well:

“In the last few years, this is a proliferation of indices, how do you think they popped up? They popped up because agencies like USAID, Soros’ Open Society etc fund this layer upon layer. It’s like money laundering where they create these agencies, you can’t really chase them…. it’s the same 4-5 guys funding layer upon layer of these international agencies… with that they create a certain narrative which then gets embedded into sovereign ratings, into academia, it is the data on which AI is trained…”

However, Goswami tried to steer the conversating into “naming the sellouts” who took money that interfered in Indian elections. Sanyal maintained that they had no way of knowing. “… We can infer it here and there, but ultimately the data lies with Americans”.

While the basis of the debate were claims by Trump and Musk, the channel refrained from positing them as claims and instead broadcast them as facts.

 

Again, on February 21, on his prime-time broadcast, Arnab Goswami described Trump’s remarks as “very explosive,” suggesting it revealed a dangerous “reality” of alleged foreign funding to influence India’s elections against the BJP and PM Modi.

He claimed that a so-called “anti-Modi” and “anti-BJP ecosystem” was being financially supported by foreign entities. This ecosystem, according to him, was an extensive network comprising politicians, NGOs, activists, and media outlets who were “selling the country” and surviving on foreign funding.

“… Now we have proof that $21 million came just before the 2024 elections,” he said without emphasising that this “proof” was claims by Trump and Musk, not documentary evidence. Throughout the segment, Goswami posed provocative and leading questions, such as: “Who is selling our country, Bharat, to foreign interests?”  He also referred to the “cheats” as “Mir Jafars” to inflame nationalism.

The senior anchor then went on to argue that these “sellouts” were trying to undermine India’s sovereignty by attacking Modi, discrediting the nation’s developmental progress, and sowing social and political chaos. He accused them of masquerading as defenders of democracy who raised slogans like “Sanvidhan khatre mein hai” (the Constitution is in danger), while facilitating foreign-backed propaganda designed to interfere with India’s electoral process.

Visuals of Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi participating in public demonstrations played on screen while he made these accusations.


He also referred to Rahul Gandhi’s “routine foreign trips” to cities like London and Washington before major elections as his bid to maintain connections with “dangerous anti-India forces,” including US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and US assistant secretary of state Donald Lu, who he labelled “pro-Pakistan” and “Islamist” sympathisers.

Goswami just short or directly naming the Gandhi family. Instead, he said, “I’m not saying he [Rahul Gandhi] took the money. No… But it is quite clear that the people who took the money did not want Modi to be elected.” Yet he continued questioning Gandhi’s intentions and affiliations, casting aspersions based on the timing of his foreign visits.

Without presenting evidence, Goswami also alleged that several media outlets amplifying “anti-India” narratives and questioning India’s growth were also being sustained through foreign aid.

In amplifying these unverified narratives, Republic blurred the line between journalism and political advocacy without critically examining Trump and Musk’s claims, which we now know were baseless.

Times Now

In a debate on February 17, less than 24 hours after the X post by DOGE, Times Now editor-in-chief Navika Kumar hosted a debate on how American dollars were used to undermine India’s democracy. She said that while the Congress party kept going on about tampering of electronic voter machines, “there is now proof in black and white” of Biden-era interference in the Indian election. DOGE, led by the world’s richest man and Trump’s right-hand man Elon Musk, cancelled Rs 180 crore approved under former president Joe Biden’s administration, she said.

On February 20, during her prime-time show Newshour, Navika Kumar held a longer debate on the issue. While the discussion was ongoing, tickers such as “BJP sees ‘Soros anti-Modi ploy'” and “Who sold desh to defeat Modi?” displayed across the screen.

The debate was largely focused on a foreign ploy to defeat Modi at the 2024 general election.

“Aap chronology samajhiye. Prime Minister Modi told me ahead of the elections that foreign powers were trying to rig Indian elections. Elon Musk confirmed that. Yes, indeed, the Biden government and the deep state funnelled funds into India and today President Trump has vindicated PM Modi, saying that someone in the United States didn’t want Modi to return to power… Yes, we still don’t know who the recipients of the $21 million were, what they used this fund for, but we do know that Trump has said there was a foreign ploy to defeat Modi in 2024… So, who would benefit if Prime Minister Modi lost the 2024 elections?” she said.

Soon after, Navika went into “decoding the link” between the Congress and these foreign funds. Showing funding details and clips from Rahul Gandhi’s speeches abroad, she said that he sought foreign help and “parrots” George Soros’s words. She also reminds readers that the US had cancelled Modi’s visa in 2005 over his alleged role in the Godhra riots. “No such action was taken against any Congress prime minister or chief minister after riots during their regime,” she added. Bringing up the US’s stance on the Modi government’s alleged inaction against minorities, she quipped: “Why are India’s internal matters a concern for Americans and did they have puppets in India through whom they tried to push such narratives?”

Throughout the 40-minute show, little was said about examining Trump’s claims critically, especially considering the US President has, on several occasions, shared misinformation and hurriedly made remarks on social media to blame Joe Biden’s administration. Somehow, the show turned into a bashful discussion about Congress and Rahul Gandhi and their foreign links. She even says that Trump has stirred a hornet’s nest in the “Samvidhaan bachao ecosystem” (referring to Congress).

“Is it a coincidence that time and again allegations of Cambridge Analytica changing the narrative, all of them come and stop at Congress’s doorstep?… Is the Congress completely exposed?” she said while asking a BJP spokesperson to speak on the issue. As she moved on to the next panellist, she began with another leading question: “The fact that Rahul Gandhi goes abroad and says that Europe and America should intervene because democracy is in danger. Not one Opposition party raises a hue and cry that how can an Indian leader ask for intervention from foreign powers from foreign countries into the Indian democratic system. You are weakening your own democracy and then you come and carry the Constitution copy in Parliament almost as if you are under attack.”

When a Samajwadi Party panellist pointed out that if this aid was given to boost voter turnout, clearly BJP had an advantage because they emerged as winners, not the Opposition, Navika asks the BJP to respond. The BJP panellist resorts to Trump’s statement as proof.

Again, in her shows too, Navika Kumar not just sided with the BJP’s claims but attributed judgments without critical evaluation, often resorting to infantilising the Opposition’s arguments. The discussion seemed to have a predetermined outcome.

CNN-News18

On his show, Hard Facts, aired on February 21, 2025, CNN-News18 anchor Rahul Shivshankar too amplified the claim that $21 million from USAID was used to influence India’s 2024 elections against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Shivshankar argued that Trump’s statements had made the so-called “anti-Modi ecosystem” in India “very, very nervous,” and described the ecosystem as one built on hollow claims of defending democracy and free speech.

In his opening remarks, he highlighted how Trump had, over the course of a week, repeatedly referred to $21 million spent on India by USAID to influence voter turnout. He added that while the specifics of USAID’s operations may not be fully known from India, “those within the system—like Trump—surely know what they’re talking about, at least for their own people.”

Despite the emphasis on “facts,” Shivshankar did not question Trump’s assertions, nor did he seek corroborating evidence. Instead, he appeared to accept the US president’s statements at face value.

He cited a “highly-placed source” claiming that over $3,000 billion had flowed into India since 2015 through a network of organizations. Shivshankar then quipped, “Clearly, Modi didn’t need their money. But why was the UPA (Congress-led United Progressive Alliance) so needy?” He also cited the source as saying that it was NGOs and not the government that received substantial USAID funds post-2015, including Catholic Relief Services, which was granted $218 million, and CARE International, which received $208 million. “Additionally, the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), which has been accused of publishing reports allegedly targeting the Modi government, received $47 million,” he said. He also added that the source mentioned USAID-backed programs such as InterNews, which trained Indian journalists, were allegedly intended to “shape media narratives” demeriting the Modi government.

Shivshankar’s claims regarding who received the funding were explosive but lacked documentary proof and relied solely on the words of a “highly-placed” but unnamed source. After the MEA denied that India received foreign aid, the channel’s reliance on such sources becomes even more questionable.

Dismissing an investigation by The Indian Express, which pointed out that the $21 million aid referenced by Trump was actually allocated to Bangladesh, not India, Shivshankar implied the IE report surfaced “conveniently” as a broader attempt to undermine Trump’s credibility. The anchor referred to DOGE and Trump’s statements as fact while questioning the data-led investigation by IE. He claimed the article “mixed things up,” adding that BJP sources had clarified the $21 million was “to be sent” to India, but the grant was ultimately scrapped. He did not explain the quagmire of these mixed-up claims.

He further cited BJP’s Amit Malviya, who dismissed The Indian Express report by alleging that the newspaper failed to disclose its connections to George Soros, who has been accused by the BJP of funding anti-Modi narratives. Shivshankar concluded the segment by arguing that the Opposition was attempting to portray Trump as a liar, stating, “Somebody either has lost their mind or is so blinded or blindsided by the desperate attempt to prove something wrong, and they will try, obviously, resort to fake news.”

Evidently, this segment too was more advocacy than journalism.

Unaccountable Journalism?

Besides the above, several other digital reports also seemed to take these claims at face value without using terms like “alleged” or “claims” in their headlines. NDTV published a report on February 17 on “How USAID funneled $21 million to India for voter turnout”. Similarly, Business Standard’s report was titled “DOGE nixes $21 million US grant to increase India’s ‘voter turnout'”. The piece merely highlighted political reactions, particularly comments from Malviya, who used the claim to target the Congress party.

It was only the Indian Express that independently verified the authenticity of the $21 million claim, instead focusing on who said what and stoking the controversy. Its report, which was part investigation and part fact-check, was published on February 22, identified that the aid was given to Bangladesh. From the report: 

“* The only ongoing USAID grant to CEPPS matching the denomination of $21 million and the purpose of voting was sanctioned — with Federal Award Identification Number 72038822LA00001 — in July 2022 for USAID’s Amar Vote Amar (My Vote is Mine). This is a project in Bangladesh.

* In November 2022, the purpose of this grant was modified to “USAID’s Nagorik (Citizen) Program”. A USAID Political Processes Advisor in Dhaka confirmed this on social media while on a US visit in December 2024: “The USAID-funded $21 million CEPPS/Nagorik project… which I manage.””

On February 22, Washington Post also weighed in on the controversy. Three US officials familiar with USAID operations dismissed DOGE’s announcement as inaccurate. One of them told the publication, “We were all shocked to see that claim from DOGE. We don’t know anything about elections in India because we have never been involved.” Another US official said the Musk-led department seemed to be “conflating numbers” from other programs.”

However, political leaders like Malviya kept questioning the report by Indian Express and kept reiterating the publication’s so-called link to George Soros.

As outlined above, on prime-time television, anchors affiliated with key English news channels fell just short of propagating certain ideologies. Not even a strawman view of Trump or Musk’s statements was considered. Even after the MEA’s statement that India did not receive foreign aid, these channels did not issue corrections or modify their shows or hold debates that looked at their own views critically. The damage had already been done.

The incident not only highlights the pressing need for credible journalism in the country but also shows how broadcast media channels, watched by thousands of viewers, remain susceptible to misinformation and show a partisan view that could colour judgements. Such programmes, dressed as news, could easily be used by political parties to further their agendas.

Donate to Alt News!
Independent journalism that speaks truth to power and is free of corporate and political control is possible only when people start contributing towards the same. Please consider donating towards this endeavour to fight fake news and misinformation.

Donate Now