A place to comment about media in India and world media talking about India.
Of late, there's been a lot of aggressive writing in support of the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. Here's an interesting article:
"Indo-U.S. space cooperation adrift".
The author questions:
If the U.S. is unwilling to relax controls in the arena of space technology, where ISRO stands to gain in commercial terms, why should India yield on the nuclear front?
Why all this fuss, especially in the Indian Express? Why run down our scientists and engineers who have toiled all these years to develop something under severe international restrictions? I don't know how many of these writers have worked on any technology development project. If you really want to target mediocrity, you should start with the Indian Railways (where the British gave us a headstart of about 150 years) and the Indian telecom industry. I've always been an avid reader of Indian Express, but lately I'm starting to see a pattern there that makes me uncomfortable. We need American technology, and fuel, all right, but how many technologies have we developed in recent times that benefitted from American input directly? Why make so much fuss then? Do you think the US would be offering this nuclear deal to India if their business interests are not involved?
I've always had a funny feeling - actually a sick feeling sometimes - watching Indian TV channels and reading the English language newspapers. On the one hand, they show the promise of becoming world-class, and appear to be the much-needed counterweight against the ever-present villain, namely, the politicians. But on the other hand, they all seem to be copy cats and rather shallow in their analysis, and pretty lazy in their coverage. Disappointingly, they seem to be only an extension of the urban society in general. India has a surfeit of communication technologies - or so it seems...Literally hundreds of TV channels, newspapers, and, on top of it all, the internet! All this should contribute to a wider and deeper dissemination of knowledge, and, hopefully, truth, you would think...But the coverage on the latest anti-reservation protests seemed too one-sided, condescending, or, at best, patronising. At first I thought they were being just lazy to do the research and analysis, or they just chose what would make sensational news (these still seem to be factors involved) - but I just came across this article by Siddharth Varadarajan in "The Hindu" that came like an eye-opener:
Lately I find myself reading "The Hindu" a lot - does it mean I agree with everything they say? No - my nature does not allow me to agree with anyone completely... :)
On the other hand, I can recognize quality, the reach for perfection (even while not quite reaching it), and the seeking and dissemination of 'truth', while keeping one's passions under control, when I see them. Come to think of it, these are what a 'Brahmin' is supposed to hold as ideals while serving as a role model for society (well, I made that up - but I heard something to that effect somewhere. Frankly, I couldn't care less for the caste 'system' anyway - and I truly believe it belongs at the bottom of the landfill!). I digress - but the point is, here is an article (and you can find more, regularly) that has gone beneath the surface of all the cacophony, and points out to the madness of all the noise masquerading as 'news' (that was my understanding, anyway...God, why am I making all these disclaimers today? This is MY blog - and I'm free to write what I think, right? :)
I honeslty wonder how many of the 'protesters' would have the patience and the open mind required to read through this entire article? I have to say, I agree almost entirely with Siddharth Varadarajan on this one (he has his own blog, too), and he has done a much better job than I could ever do - mostly because I find it difficult to write with a 'cool head' when I see something annoying, outrageous or feel contempt towards something - such as what happened during all the so-called 'protests' and the coverage by the 'mainstream' Indian media!
Whenever I read news articles and columns, I cannot help wondering where the writer/columnist is coming from. I have become an expert at spotting their biases towards one way or the other. However, some columnists really make it easy - you don't really need to read between the lines to see where they are coming from. A case in point: Dhruba Adhikary from Nepal.
After reading just one of his articles by accident, which seemed to have not only an anti-India stance, but also an anti-Maoist and a pro-Hindu, pro-elite flavour, I decided to do some quick research. First, parts of that article which got my attention, "India caught in a ring of fire" - in Asia Times:
Right at the start, there is this introduction, about an article in India Today, a leading magazine, about instability in the neighboring countries of India.
a leading Indian publication, India Today, led its May 28 edition with a cover report headlined "Neighbors on fire". Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal are four countries covered by the magazine.
This was immediately followed by:
Although they are very much part of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the publication has conspicuously left out three countries: Afghanistan, Bhutan and Maldives. Perhaps New Delhi thinks these three can't afford to antagonize the rulers of India.
I thought, "What the ....!" - he is mixing up India Today, which is a popular magazine, with the rulers of India?! It would be childish, if it weren't so mischievous.
The mischief becomes more evident from these other passages:
Does India, the world's largest democracy, stand to gain from such a scenario? ...Anyhow, when its immediate neighborhood is on fire, what should be India's reaction? ...New Delhi, of course, could take some pleasure if it were discreetly assisting those responsible for setting the fires in the neighborhood.
He goes on to talk about India's actions in the neighborhood:
These include the wars with Pakistan, the clash with China, support to the movement to "liberate" Bangladesh, the annexation of Sikkim, and the landing of Indian troops in Sri Lanka to protect the Tamil population. And, in a more recent case, pitting Maoists, democratic parties and the monarchy against one other - thereby destabilizing Nepal.
OK, I am not a mindless, nationalistic moron who claims that everything that one's country has done has always been based on moral principles. But to say that India landed its troops in Sri Lanka "to protect the Tamil population" makes one seriously wonder whether this writer is also a total ignoramus, apart from being mischievous (you don't need too much knowledge to create mischief, anyways). "to protect the Tamil population" - from who? Indian troops, when they were in Sri Lanka, were fighting the LTTE, moron - that is, they were fighting Tamil guerrillas!
The article goes on and on - I actually read the whole thing - and it even tries to bring in the US and China into this, while seeming to lament their apparent cohesive approach along with India!
OK, it was time to do my little bit of research, solely with the help of Google. This is what I found in one of the blogs:
Dhruba Adhikary: Your Typical Pahadi Liar
The gist of this blog (please take a moment to read it) is summarized, IMO, by these lines:
And Dhruba Adhikary's article reads outright Goebbelian, Stalinist. This is not journalism. This is propaganda hack work.
Dhruba Adhikary, Yubaraj Ghimire and Tilak Pokharel are some of the top names in Nepali journalism. The media houses they have been speaking through are some of the top global names. That is what makes this whole thing scary. This is too mainstream. This should be happening on the fringes, if at all.
In another article, by Dhruba Adhikary, "Maoists face up to political reality", also in Asia Times, I found this:
"It is still debatable whether Parliament had the mandate to declare Nepal a secular state," Devendra Raj Panday told the Kathmandu Post newspaper.
Hmm, now, why would he be against Nepal becoming a secular state? The following lines should give an indication:
Panday's view broadly represents opinions of those who are keen to see Nepal as a republic, but are in favor retaining the country's Hindu identity. They cite a 2001 census indicating that more than 80% of the population follow the Hindu religion.
And there was this:
One other issue that the controversial declaration included relates to the government's proposal to liberalize citizenship laws, thereby opening the door for millions of Indian migrants to qualify for Nepali citizenship. It is a belief that Koirala agreed to back the proposition to drop Nepal's Hindu identity on the suggestion of a powerful Western lobby, and listed the subject of liberalized citizenship laws at the behest of India. Two of India's most populous states, Bihar and Uttar Pradhesh, share a porous border with Nepal.
OK, I don't live in Nepal, nor anywhere near the Indo-Nepal border - but I would have to change my general world view a great deal to imagine millions of Indian migrants clamoring for Nepali citizenship! I wonder if an analogy of millions of American migrants opting for Mexican citizenship would be out of place here. I am not being supercilious - but, honestly, this was the first time I have ever heard anyone mention this. I mean, come on, there are apparently anywhere up to 10 million illegal migrants from Bangladesh in India, I'm sure there are lots of Nepalis too - earning their livelihood in India...and there are Tibetan refugees, Sri Lankan refugees in India...Heck, you'll even find lots of people of Chinese origin in Calcutta and some other parts of India...but, Indian migrants trying to get Nepali citizenship? I would have to find someone to talk about this!
So, that's what prompted me to write this piece - these guys are writing in newspapers like Asia Times, the New York Times, etc. - publications which most people read with a certain amount of trust. Shouldn't they be doing a bit of homework - even when Nepal is not really a hot region or hot topic for many of their readers?
The same blogger I quoted above, also has this other entry:
Pahadi Bias Colors Global Media
Sure, there are some who might support the views of people such as Dhruba Adhikary - as seen from these letters to the magazine: Letters1 Letters2
But it's pretty clear where these letter writers are coming from, as well. I suspect that it is the uneasiness and inability of upper-caste Hindus to deal with the changing times and to embrace concepts such as secularism and equality that is behind a lot of problems in Nepal (and India, too).
Having been raised in a Hindu family myself, I feel it is time for caste Hindus to do a lot of soul searching and see the fallacy of the whole caste system - which is nothing but another form of tribalism, IMO. People of rational thought and with genuine humanism in India, Nepal and South Asia in general, should find a way to pull the region out of its negativity and help realize the true potential of the region's peoples.
For the record, I don't really care much for the communists!