Suhel Seth's tweetstorm against The Economist is beyond snarky

His spat on Twitter with the publication's India correspondent over an article on Ratan Tata transformed into a tweet-size critique of foreign media reporting on India

Ratan Tata and Cyrus Mistry are not the only known faces fighting it out thanks to the Tata Sons boardroom battle. The fresh outbreak in the shooting war came when marketing consultant Suhel Seth got into a heated exchange with the India correspondent from The Economist, Stanley Pignal. 

The cause? An article from The Economist, which said Ratan Tata was largely to blame for the fiasco. 

The article argued that the Tata conglomerate's reputation for good governance had been "shredded owing to a brutal fight for control between Ratan Tata, the group’s 78-year-old patriarch, and Cyrus Mistry, his successor", and advised Tata to "get a grip".

 

Seth's response to the article was acerbic, to say the least. "The Economist is sadly always economical with the truth and the dolt of a writer has always had an agenda," Seth tweeted. Pignal, in response, asked Seth over Twitter whether the latter was a paid advisor to any of the parties involved in the Tata-Mistry spat.

The Economist is sadly always economical with the truth and the dolt of a writer has always had an agenda https://t.co/UqstCfqxfi

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

By the way @suhelseth can you confirm if you are a paid advisor to any party in the Tata story? Speaking on behalf of anyone?

— Stanley Pignal (@spignal) November 18, 2016
 

I'm completely OK if @suhelseth is spinning on behalf of Tata (or some related entity). I just want to know what I'm dealing with. Not clear

— Stanley Pignal (@spignal) November 18, 2016

No. And I am not a typical colonial Journo like you who sells his soul. And listen STANLEY try this on someone you can bully. Not me! https://t.co/hn1S8xvr71

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

Some of these colonial journos come to our country, abuse everything from the air to our people to our values and believe we must run scared

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

The goddamn @TheEconomist has always followed an anti-India agenda with purpose! STANLEY Pingal is their rep. Bloody joke!

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

And listen @spignal, we in India don't have to be paid to have conviction! We believe and we speak! Must be unique to a colonial lad!

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

Some of these journos from the so called foreign publications drink every evening for free, go for long walks and talk about air quality!

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

Seth's next response was explosive. Stating that he was not someone who would "sell his soul", Seth advised Pignal to try such questions with someone the latter could 'bully'. He did not stop there, and, with his ire provoked, took aim at the publication at large. "The goddamn @TheEconomist has always followed an anti-India agenda with purpose! STANLEY Pingal is their rep. Bloody joke!" Seth tweeted. Apparently, Seth does not think much of a certain section of journalists. Calling them "colonial journos", Seth said that they "abuse everything from the air to our people to our values and believe we must run scared". 

Don't tick off Seth

If there is one thing that the tweets which followed prove, its that it is not wise to tick off Seth, and a slighted Seth is likely to pursue you with prejudice. 

Drawing on India's colonial past, Seth sought to remind Pignal that it was the year 2016, and not 1942. Seth added that no one took the likes Pignal seriously in this country. As for the article, Seth called it "biased". 

Hey @spignal it's November 18, 2016. Not 1942. We don't give a toss about you. Stay here for freebies. No one takes you seriously

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

This little sad boy @spignal writes an article which is totally biased and believes the world will trust him! Rogue.

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

Yes! You're English! Can't you understand the language you silly dolt???? https://t.co/tJmjbtrOVp

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

And do me a favour! Go grab a free drink at some colonial club and leave India alone you agenda lad https://t.co/tJmjbtrOVp

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

And finally @spignal the only half good thing about your name is the Assocation with chips!

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

You are as wrong as Mountbatten and Cripps were about India. I am on no payroll unlike you! https://t.co/hipLn9GJPR

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 18, 2016

Pignal, for his part, seems to have had kept his temper at check. He followed up Seth's tweets by asking the latter whether he was confirming that he had not been paid by the Tatas, Ratan Tata or any other party involved in the boardroom battle. Seth answered that indeed, he was not serving any of those involved in any professional capacity, albeit with more intemperate words. 

Pignal tried once more to get an answer out of Seth, stating that his previous question had been ambiguously worded. To this, Seth answered: "I am on no payroll unlike you."

Do not call Seth a PR manager

Seth clarified that he was involved in the field of marketing and not PR. Suhel is the managing partner of Counselage, a strategic brand marketing consultancy. Finally, Seth explained that he did not manage the website in question and that any claim on it stating that he was engaged in PR for the Tatas was an "error". Seth also called, not for the first time, Pignal a "dolt" as the exchange ended.

It is an error! I don't manage my site! @Farrhad manages it and it is clearly not updated! And I am not into PR! Into marketing! https://t.co/zxRmsyZEbz

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 19, 2016

You bet and the dolt is a journo and doesn't know the difference! https://t.co/nphFyK4y3s

— SUHEL SETH (@suhelseth) November 19, 2016

We won't judge. Either way, being a journalist has its own professional hazards, and so does making allegations against Seth.