The Kashmiri Pandits have given Mirwaiz and Bilaal a taste of their own medicine in Chandigarh.
http://www.rediff.com/news/report/kashmiri-pundits-manhandle-mirwaiz-at-seminar/20101125.htm
And now in Delhi.
Though NDTV's headline on their front page is a bit intriguing: Right-wing activists attack Mirwaiz in Delhi.
Though on the article itself, the heading reads:Right-wing activists attack Kashmiri separatist leader Mirwaiz in Delhi
I am sure the front page headline is because of space considerations and not any biased view that might make NDTV think that the BJP being right-wing is more important to highlight than the Mirwaiz being a separatist.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Will the Indian media rise to this challenge?
The Open Magazine cover story has created quite a stir in the cyber world. Netizens have kept up the issue alive on Twitter and Facebook to the extent that #barkhagate is among the most trended topics on twitter.
However, our “free” press is entirely a different story. There is a complete blackout of barkhagate on most Indian TV channels and newspapers. For a media that picks up every small item and sensationalizes it to no end, this is really suspicious.
This topic needs to be debated. The media's argument that one must refrain from passing instant judgments on the people involved makes sense. Thought I am not convinced that they buy it themselves. However, it is equally (if not more) important for the concerned folks to come out and accept or deny the issues raised by the recordings. The issues themselves are very serious and touch the ethics of journalism.
Karan T says “The news media has better things to write about. No law has been broken and nothing has been proven in court. India has more important issues. Kudos to the news channels for not wasting their and our time on this.” I do not think any media waits for court decisions before sensationalizing issues. There are countless examples every day to substantiate this claim. If Harbhajan slaps Sreeshant, it is prime time news. If someone gets thrown out of a reality TV show, it is prime time news. But, if journalists are caught discussing items of national import, and making deals with lobbyists, that is not worthy of prime time?
Sagarika Ghose makes the argument that Barkha Dutt may not have made any favors or broken the law. And that she might have just lied to get some info from Nira Radia. Now, that is a flimsy argument. If Barkha lied to Nira once and did not deliver, Nira would drop Barkha from her circle like a hot plate. Anyone would. So Sagarika, at least try to hide your bias.
Sagarika also argues that lobbying is a legitimate profession and that Barkha Dutt talking to a lobbyist does not mean anything. Agreed. No one is accusing Barkha of talking to a lobbyist. The accusations are more serious – those of currying political favor, aiding mega deals, selectively projecting the truth, all of which causes a lot of loss to the national exchequer. Sagarika, isn’t this a violation of journalist ethics?
All this raises a question about the neutrality of Indian media. Isn’t this a topic worthy of discussion? Can we trust you, the Indian media, to take this up? Or should we equate current talk shows “We the People”, “Face the Nation” with “Rakhi ka Insaaf”?
However, our “free” press is entirely a different story. There is a complete blackout of barkhagate on most Indian TV channels and newspapers. For a media that picks up every small item and sensationalizes it to no end, this is really suspicious.
This topic needs to be debated. The media's argument that one must refrain from passing instant judgments on the people involved makes sense. Thought I am not convinced that they buy it themselves. However, it is equally (if not more) important for the concerned folks to come out and accept or deny the issues raised by the recordings. The issues themselves are very serious and touch the ethics of journalism.
Karan T says “The news media has better things to write about. No law has been broken and nothing has been proven in court. India has more important issues. Kudos to the news channels for not wasting their and our time on this.” I do not think any media waits for court decisions before sensationalizing issues. There are countless examples every day to substantiate this claim. If Harbhajan slaps Sreeshant, it is prime time news. If someone gets thrown out of a reality TV show, it is prime time news. But, if journalists are caught discussing items of national import, and making deals with lobbyists, that is not worthy of prime time?
Sagarika Ghose makes the argument that Barkha Dutt may not have made any favors or broken the law. And that she might have just lied to get some info from Nira Radia. Now, that is a flimsy argument. If Barkha lied to Nira once and did not deliver, Nira would drop Barkha from her circle like a hot plate. Anyone would. So Sagarika, at least try to hide your bias.
Sagarika also argues that lobbying is a legitimate profession and that Barkha Dutt talking to a lobbyist does not mean anything. Agreed. No one is accusing Barkha of talking to a lobbyist. The accusations are more serious – those of currying political favor, aiding mega deals, selectively projecting the truth, all of which causes a lot of loss to the national exchequer. Sagarika, isn’t this a violation of journalist ethics?
All this raises a question about the neutrality of Indian media. Isn’t this a topic worthy of discussion? Can we trust you, the Indian media, to take this up? Or should we equate current talk shows “We the People”, “Face the Nation” with “Rakhi ka Insaaf”?
Sunday, November 21, 2010
The Barkha Dutt Nira Radia Controversy
Read the transcripts of the interaction between Barkha Dutt's and Nira Radia on Mid-Day.
The Chicago Independent Press makes the assessment that "Barkha Dutt has emerged as a lobbyist for the Congress government. [Link]
And Barkha of course is trying to defend herself, though she does not seem to have a lot to offer right now in terms of a substantial denial: [Link]
This is getting murkier and more interesting at the same time.
The Chicago Independent Press makes the assessment that "Barkha Dutt has emerged as a lobbyist for the Congress government. [Link]
And Barkha of course is trying to defend herself, though she does not seem to have a lot to offer right now in terms of a substantial denial: [Link]
This is getting murkier and more interesting at the same time.
Freedom of speech - India shtyle
Apparently privatization in the media does not really mean freedom of speech. If Ms. Gandhi does not like something, it will not get aired in the media. And the media house owner, in this case Mr. Jagan Reddy, did not really have a choice. Looks like the channel decided to pull back a show that was apparently critical of the high command. So much for freedom of speech.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)