It is shameful to misguide people

"News" reports after August 30 and September 18 were fascinating in many ways. For one thing, there is not a single critical or negative line in any of them. Across hundreds of pages, the "news" consists solely of how wonderful particular candidates were, their achievements, and the progress of their campaigns. Nothing about the issues. Their rivals, people of fewer resources, did not exist in these newspaper pages except, perhaps, as fall guys.

http://beta.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article69681.ece?homepage=true

I am surprsied that Sainath is "fascinated" by paid news. This has been rampant for the past 5-6 years - thanks to the cluttered market.However, what fascinates me is that a paper that sings paeans for China and and- to reuse Sainath's words- ensures "there is not a single critical or negative line" against China has no qualms whatsoever in lamenting the fall in journalistic standards. In a way, the paper in question is a pioneer in "customizing news" to please its masters.

It will be a classic case of missing the woods for the trees if one were to ponder whether the supplication is attributable to financial favours or ideological affinity.It appears that Sainath - and by extension his employers- are quite ok with manufacturing news if non-cash favours are returned. The paper in question regularly publishes "news" that consists solely of how wonderful China is and its achievements. Critics of Chinese policies, people of fewer resources, do not exist in its pages except, perhaps, as fall guys.Remember one Mr. Dalai Lama? What kind of coverage is extended to him? On what moral grounds can a veteran prostitute take offence to a young girl starting to sleep around to make a few quick bucks? Or is this a manifestation of a concern that competition is giving better bang for the buck (no pun intended!) ?

Double speak is nothing new for the paper in question. We read dozens of well written articles on human rights violation in Guantanamo Bay while precious little is said on Darfur or China's trackrecord on human rights, political and religious freedom. Not surprising given that the paper that swears by freedom of expression blacks out letters critical of its coverage and until recently did not even let readers comment on its stories online!

The LiC has on several occasions defended being a Chinese lapdog saying its his editorial prerogative and has sought to keep it beyond scrutiny. The editors of these Maharashtrian newspapers too exercised their editorial judgements and acted the way they have. Why then this sneering "holier-than-thou" posturing? It is shameful to misguide people. I hope the message gets across loud and clear to newsrooms not only in Maharashtra, but also in Chennai!

CPM doublespeak

Ideology and all that bunkum once again stands exposed. Guys like Karat and his communist folk have repeatedly assaulted the sensibilities of Hindus. Inspite of they repeatedly going overboard, we have done little to counter them.

It is high time we put these guys on the defensive. Here are the basic thumbrules:
All communists are traitors unless proven otherwise.
CPM is a rabidly anti-Hindu, fundamentalist party.
CPI-Maoists / Naxalites are Christian terrorist organizations.

Dont bother about redefining Hindutva or fretting over its connotations. Begin by redefining communism -- especially in the Indian context. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that Indian communists have been and are working against national interests.

They indeed have a long history of traitorous behaviour. They were the British stooges during pre-independence. Then they took their salaries from KGB. And now they are the paid agents of China.

They supported China during the 1962 war. They hold that Arunachal Pradesh is part of China. They opposed India's nuclear tests but hailed China's. The list is very long and it just keeps going longer.

We have failed in getting the label "traitor" to stick to the communists. What a failure it is. Everytime the communists shout Hindutva, we should be clearing our throats and shouting back: "traitors". Instead we go back and try to make Hindutva more appealing to these traitors. BS.

The much touted Leftist ideology becomes irrelevant once the tag sticks. A Leftist will first have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that he has the country's interests foremost in his mind. Does it not automatically make him a "nationalist"?

We have given these Leftists a free ride for too long. It is time we made them play the game on our rules.

CPM doublespeak: It’s right when it is Right and wrong when it is Left

CPM General Secretary Prakash Karat, opposing the ban on the Maoists, said on Monday that his party’s line was to fight them “politically and administratively.” However, such a battle, it seems, is not possible with Right-wing extremists.

While he talked about combating the extreme Left “politically,” he conveniently forgot the numerous occasions on which his party had demanded ban and action against organisations such as the Bajrang Dal and VHP.

Karat's dual rule: Ban VHP but not Maoists - India - The Times of India

Opposing Centre's decision to put the Maoists on the list of outlawed groups on the ground that they are a terrorist outfit, CPM general secretary Prakash Karat said the ban would serve little purpose, and that the extremists should be combated politically and administratively.

"It is important because we have to isolate them from people with whom they have been forging relations, Banning them will hardly serve the purpose, as they will come up with a new name," the CPM boss said.

Karat's opposition was also at odds with the strong pitch that CPM has made for ban on VHP and Bajrang Dal, as well as the fact that the outlawed jihadi outfit SIMI remains a banned outfit also in Marxist-controlled West Bengal.

Campaign journalism

The LiC has on many occasions blown his own trumpet "claiming" that Chindu never indulges in campaign journalism. Everyone knows that is as true as Madam Maino claiming she is Indian. After Sorrabuddin Shiek and Md.Haneef sagas, here is another instance of Chindu's campaign journalism.


A pro Ashis Nandi campaign is currently on and am sure the LiC would have little trouble in "explaining" the contradiction if it is brought to his notice.After all the LiC was someone who effortlessly did a somersault on the N deal. The ease with which he managed the somersault made me wonder whether he is preparing for the gymnastics event for the Beijing Olympics.Perhaps, his bit to help boost China's medal tally.

Now, this selective approach to campaign journalism raises many questions. When the the entire ELM was milking the Jessica Lal, Priyadarshini Matoo et al cases dry, the Chindu was restrained. Was this due to its inability to derive mileage out of these or because of principles? I bet the LiC would say it is because of the latter. Why then was this principle not followed in the Haneef/Sorrabuddin or now in the Ashis Nandy case? What is the basis for this selective approach?

The urge to uphold the freedom of expression cannot be the reason because this very paper refused to publish a signature campaign by similar intellectuals protesting the Nandigram pogrom.

So it's neither principles nor ethics, but sheer opportunism that guides its policies. Why doesn't Chindu just stop being pretentious and acknowledge that it is as bad as other newspapers. It just doesn't deserve taking the moral high ground.

Pardon the wolves, punish the lambs

Often in Bollywood despite a lack of reason the director will introduce a joke bashing a stereotype and those scenes will have no relation with the plot. The Chindu taking a line from those producers decide to do the same in today's Leader page articles. Praveen Swami writes a paean about how there are 2 Americas based on race and the influence it has on the Presidential election. The article can be read here,
http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/22/stories/2008042255570800.htm
He raises some valid historical points. However what was irking me the most in that article was his fact of comparing Jammu and Kashmir with Philadelphia.

Philadelphia’s failure to build an inclusive, egalitarian society has bred a culture of violence. As many as 392 people were murdered in 2007 — 10 of them in a single weekend in April last year that saw bullets flying across the city, including in its normally peaceful centre.
Just how astounding these figures are becomes evident when one considers that last year Jammu and Kashmir, described as “the most dangerous place on earth” by the former President, Bill Clinton, saw 764 combat-related fatalities, of which only 170 involved civilians. Given that Jammu and Kashmir has an estimated population of 7.7 million, five times that of Philadelphia city, the statistics are startling.

Few things stand out here, if only 170 involved civilians then 120 people from the military were killed as per the South Asia Terrorism Portal. The satp article can be read here,
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/index.html
How often do we read an article criticizing the jihadists for killing innocent civilians and military men?
How dare Praveen state that "only 120 civilians" were killed. What if one happened to be his family? Would he have the same disdain to human life? Shame on you Chindu for showing no respect for the lives of Indian civilians

Why we must continue running this blog...

From: Ranjith
Date: March 18, 2008 12:03:18 PM
To: letters@thehindu.co.in
Subject: Internal affair ?


Dear Editor,

CPI(M) refuses to comment on Tibet issue as it is an "internal matter of China" and they condemn U. S. report on Nandigram as it is an internal affair of India. But in the past CPI(M) Polit Bureau (PB) has issued comments on internal matters of other countries, like Nepal. A PB press release dated 7 April 2006 denounces the "crackdown" by the King's regime in Nepal against the "movement to restore democracy". That statement also asks the Government of India to interfere in the Nepal affair. Isn't that a clear double standard?

Thanks Ranjit for sharing this letter.

Now, when a supposedly objective paper behaves in a shamelessly partisan manner and filters out any voice of dissent, where is the outlet for the other view- views of people like Ranjit.

Now, who is doing all this ? - the very N Ram, who thundered about freedom of expression when Jayalalithaa's men barged into his premises.

This is a direct challenge to the freedom of speech and expression,"It's outrageous and highly undemocratic. ... It has become a major national question. Political India and constitutional India will have to make up its mind on the issues at stake," he said."It's a criminal misadventure, a foolish misadventure. It is going to backfire," he added.

Well, this , coming as it does from a person who blacks out anti-China views, blacks out anti-CPM views in nandigram and blocks any view that runs contrary to his ideology. This very paper slammed the Modi government for "allegedly" restricting access to journalists covering the Gujarat riots. In Nandigram, the CPI(M) beat the BJP in this game. In China, there isn't a scent of free speech. The internet is heavily censored, foreign journalists are evicted from Tibet and nearby provinces and the only source of information is Xinhua. The commies have been consistent in maintaining double standards and their propaganda vehicles are more than happy to wag their tails faithfully.


I am not for a moment suggesting that Ram must not be left leaning. He has every right to embrace an ideology and propagate it. My only problem is with his claims of being objective and unbiased. Let him declare himself to be Marxist mouthpiece and continue his yeomen service to the cause of communism. By not doing so, he is misleading the pubic and committing a fraud on unsuspecting minds.

Thankfully, the blogs aren't censored in India and they strip dubious publications/politicians naked. Against this backdrop, it is no wonder then that the Chindu(and the commies) want India to ape China!

Chindu facing financial crunch?

When I picked up Chindu this morning, I was surprised to see that it carried a full page ad (atleast the Chennai edition) for a luxury home builder on its front page. Not that it's uncommon in India, but Chindu never misses an opportunity to pat itself on its back for not selling away its front page to advertisers (though selling the front page to "ideological partners" is perfectly fine).
As recently as Jan 14,2008 the Liar-in-Chief penned this rather effusive self congratulatory piece to mark the 50 th anniversary of the day when news replaced advertisement on the front page.

From that piece: (control your giggle)

Trust is the most important asset of a serious newspaper. “Our Front Page,” the third editorial published on January 14, 1958 and reproduced here, is a fine example of how a great newspaper wins and renews trust by being transparent and by communicating openly with its readers, advertisers, and distributors. The interplay of tradition and modernity, of continuity and change is an important theme here. So is the commitment to maintain “the high standards of journalism” as a “public service.” The observation that “we have moved into an age when events go rushing by in such headlong fashion that a reader to-day has often no time even to pause ‘to open his paper’ for the news but must get it the moment he picks his paper up” sounds contemporary (except that in several mature media markets, although not in India, fewer and fewer young people seem to be picking up printed newspapers even to scan the front page).

Till Jan 14 the readers did not have time and hence news had to be on the front page, but on Feb 29, the reader "suddenly" (like "sudden removal of Modi") has all the time in the world? What has changed? What about the "commitment to maintain “the high standards of journalism” as a “public service.” "? Perhaps it might have dawned on the editor that the paper in any case isn't maintaining that and might have decided to fill the coffers with some easy money. Where has all the Chinese money gone? Given the massive Chinese investment in American bonds, the recent turbulance in American markets might have wiped off a significant portion stemming the fund flow to propaganda vehicles. Poor Chindu has to fend for itslef - atleast for now.

I feel sorry for the paper for it is contradicting itself with a sickening frequency. The paper revels in shamelss doublespeak and this latest "change" is no exception. It is consistent with the paper's policy of "Don't practice what you preach".Today's mess was compounded by the fact that the paper carried two mastheads. The Front page carrying the ad had a masthead as also the next page which carried the news. It was a meek attempt to show that "Look.. This inner page is the actual front page and not the one carrying the ad".

What is right in Kosovo is wrong in Gujarat

Look who is providing column inches to the action - reaction theory. The same theory that was met with derision in Gujarat suddenly becomes a legitimate tool to fight the US.

Having recognised Kosovo’s independence, Washington has openly violated Serbia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. So, why is it angry at a Serbian student who did a similar thing to the U.S. Embassy? Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

http://www.hindu.com/2008/02/25/stories/2008022553741100.htm

Is Chindu plain stupid to contradict itself so openly or does it think its readers must read any garbage thrown at them?

Yet another double speak

Chindu gives unsolicited advise on how constitutional authorities must function. But, as usual, the same does not apply when its friends are in trouble.

Under the Indian Constitution, it is surely not the job of a Governor to offer public judgments on how an elected government should have handled a tricky situation

-CBCNN's reaction to WB governor's observations on the Nandigram fiasco.

http://cbcnn.blogspot.com/2007/03/nram-asks-wb-governor-to-shutup.html

Today, you have the commies questioning the EC's decision to hold the Gujarat elections in 2 phases. (Note that they are not bothered about Himachal. No prizes for guessing why.)

The EC knows when and how to conduct elections. It is none of the commies' business.

Also, they were the ones who vociferously opposed a 7 phase election in WB and a 3 phase election in Kerala. Why do they want the EC to do the same in Gujarat?So, what is 'wrong' in WB is right in Gujarat?
http://www.hindu.com/2007/10/12/stories/2007101255641400.htm

Taking double speak to new lows

On Saturday(6-Oct-07), CBCNN found it hard to hide its glee over the Supreme Court's order restraining the Gujarat Government from issuing possession letters vesting ownership rights over forest land in tribals.This found space on the Front page and CBCNN patted itself on the back thus:

A “Forest Bench,” comprising Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices Arijit Pasayat and S.H. Kapadia, passed the order after amicus curiae Harish Salve (acting on a report published by The Hindu on October 3) filed an application that ownership rights over forest land were handed over to 30 tribals by Chief Minister Narendra Modi on October 2. The Bench issued notice to the Gujarat government seeking its response to the application.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/10/06/stories/2007100661790100.htm

On Sunday, (7-Oct-07), the same Supreme Court came under fire from "intellectuals" who gathered in Chennai to "debate" the 'Limits of judicial authority’ .Only that they chose to debate the SC's stinging observations against the DMK govt and not the order against the Gujarat govt.

No prizes for guessing who the "intellectuals" were.Brinda Karat, Liar-in-Chief Ram, Kanimozhi, A Raja and a former judge.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/10/08/stories/2007100860371600.htm

Such comments were objectionable and reflected judicial overreach and encroached
on the role of the legislature

- Brinda Karat

No definition existed of what constituted scandalising a court or interfering
with the administration of justice.

- N Ram

Fair enough. Who decides what is judicial over reach and what is a welcome intervention?Is the Supreme court there to pass judgements to please the powers that be at Gopalan Bhawan and Gopalapuram?What the same court tells is gospel truth only when it castigates the BJP and its leaders in the Babri masjid case and Gujarat riots, restrains Modi from distributing land documents to tribals and saves CBCNN from Jayalalithaa's onslaught.Isn't this strange? or is this double speak?

Judging Judges

I have no faith left in the prosecution and the government. I am not saying
Article 356. You have to protect people and punish the guilty. What else is raj
dharma? You quit if you cannot prosecute the guilty. It is not your personal
property. If you cannot protect the property of the people you cannot continue


- Frontline October 10, 2003

http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2020/stories/20031010002903700.htm

At times, the news media project these oral observations — which, not being
even obiter dicta, are not part of the court record, have zero weight in law,
and cannot be cited in any meaningful way — in a manner that fails to
distinguish between what is relevant and binding in court proceedings and what
is not.

- The Hindu October 3,2007

http://www.hindu.com/2007/10/03/stories/2007100353901000.htm

What has changed from 2003 to 2007? The govt at the receiving end. 2003:BJP govt.2007:DMK govt
What has not changed?: Blatant anti-BJP bias, blind support for the DMK, giving objectivity a silent burial.That is CBCNN for you.

The first quote was the Supreme Court's observation against the Gujarat Govt in the Best Bakery case. Frontline did not publish an 'apology' for failing to mention that these were mere oral observations.It did not come up with a scathing editorial criticizing 'judicial overreach'. But, when the DMK government is facing the music, the choicest of words is reserved for the same court. Sample this:

No seeking the facts on the ground, no patience in hearing the other side — a
pre-emptive leap to an extreme provisional conclusion

The supreme court is supreme only when it takes on the BJP. When CBCNN's friends face the heat, it springs to their defence.Why this special treatment for the DMK? If this is not double speak, what is? So much for "objective journalism".