Bloomberg Criticised for Echoing Congress’ Unverified Electoral Fraud Narrative
Bloomberg has drawn sharp criticism for uncritically highlighting Rahul Gandhi’s renewed allegations of large-scale electoral fraud by the Election Commission of India (ECI). On 9 December 2025, Gandhi claimed in Parliament that the ruling BJP and ECI were colluding to delete opposition voters and add fake supporters ahead of the Bihar elections. He also demanded digital voter rolls. These statements repeat accusations he made in August 2025, which the ECI had labelled “baseless” and “misleading.”
Bloomberg’s electoral fraud story spotlighted Gandhi’s charges but omitted the ECI’s repeated requests for sworn evidence, its formal rebuttals, and its warnings to Congress leaders. Critics argue that the piece echoed an opposition narrative shaped by recent defeats in Maharashtra, Haryana and other states rather than presenting a balanced examination of the facts.
ECI’s Detailed Rebuttals Undercut Congress Allegations on Electoral Fraud
Since August, the ECI has issued several notices asking Gandhi to submit his allegations under oath as required by the Registration of Electors Rules. The poll body made clear that Congress must provide admissible evidence if it expects an investigation. Chief electoral officers in Karnataka, Maharashtra and Haryana also warned of legal action for spreading false claims.
One of Gandhi’s key “proofs” involved a Bengaluru woman who, he alleged, voted twice via Form 6. The document was later verified as fake and not issued by any polling official. Despite this, Congress continued to raise allegations without filing formal complaints or producing RTI-based data that could support its claims in court.
Meanwhile, Bihar’s ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) has followed routine procedures used before every major poll. The exercise aims to remove 35.5 lakh ineligible names, including foreign nationals from Nepal and Bangladesh. Officials report that 88% of voter enumeration has already been completed transparently. The opposition’s rhetoric has not aligned with the documented SIR process.
Opposition’s Narrative Reflects Post-Poll Pressure Due to Losses, Not Proven Irregularities
Claims of hasty revisions in a dozen states mirror Congress’ earlier attempts in 2018, when similar irregularity claims in Madhya Pradesh were rejected after defects were corrected before voting. For many observers, the timing of the allegations—immediately after major electoral losses—suggests political deflection rather than verified malpractice.
Allies such as NCP’s Supriya Sule voiced concerns about public trust, yet treasury benches, including JD(U) and LJP(RV), argued that the opposition must introspect on its electoral setbacks instead of blaming constitutional institutions. They cite the absence of any legal petitions filed by Congress seeking judicial scrutiny of alleged voter roll distortions.
Bloomberg’s electoral fraud story has been criticised for amplifying one side of the conversation while failing to highlight this context. Critics say such omission risks reinforcing a “tired script” of electoral conspiracy narratives that flare up after defeats but fade when challenged in formal legal forums.
Media Bias Concerns as Bloomberg Stands Alone Among Western Outlets
Major Western outlets—BBC, Reuters, The Guardian, CNN, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal—have not published similar stories on Gandhi’s 9 December parliamentary claims. BBC covered earlier opposition protests in August and Gandhi’s September “vote thieves” remark, but those reports consistently mentioned the ECI’s clear denials and factual clarifications.
Searches across international platforms show that only Indian outlets such as NDTV, India Today, Times of India and OpIndia covered the December speech, and all highlighted the ECI’s rebuttals alongside Gandhi’s charges. Bloomberg remains the lone global publication to foreground the December 2025 claims without integrating the poll body’s responses.
This divergence has raised questions about Bloomberg’s editorial choices. Critics argue the platform risks feeding partisan disruption by framing allegations without evidence in the same weight category as verified institutional statements. Analysts also warn that such asymmetry may erode public confidence rather than illuminate genuine electoral issues.
The Debate Ahead
The controversy has opened a broader discussion about media responsibility, especially when reporting on democracies with established electoral safeguards. Critics assert that elevating unverified claims without parallel scrutiny of official explanations compromises journalistic standards.
With India preparing for another round of state elections in 2026, scrutiny of electoral narratives—domestic and international—will likely intensify. Whether Bloomberg adjusts its approach or continues to highlight opposition rhetoric without corroboration remains to be seen. For now, the Bloomberg electoral fraud story stands as a key flashpoint in a larger debate about balanced reporting in politically charged environments.
