Media In India/elsewhere

**acharya** · 06-11-2006, 10:24 PM

Fanaa: Aamir Khan tries to justify separatists in Kashmir?
From Aditya Pradhan in Mumbai

IF Gujarat has opposed the Hindi movie Fanaa, it has got good reasons. First, let us analyse the movie before we get into the issue of protest. The protagonist in the movie Aamir Khan unapologetically defends jehadi terrorism. It makes you wonder if Dawood gang has started to influence the mainstream Hindi movies also. In these heady days of secularism when anything in favour of the minority community is considered fashionable in the English-elite class of people, the new propaganda from Bollywood should not appear disturbing. But when you watch a movie in a run-down theatre like Mehul in suburban Mumbai, the peopleâs reaction during the movie has to be seen to be believed.

First of all, the press conference, where many of the Bollywood bigwigs were herded to address the issue of the movie ban in Gujarat, was admittedly organised because Aamir Khan did not find much support for his tomfoolery in the Narmada issue, and the media had highlighted it. Even after the conference, other than the usual suspects like Mahesh Bhatt, there was no one in Bollywood ready to give his or her sound bytes on the ban. The stars were ready the next morning with their clarification which undid all that they said during the press conference. Aamir Khan, when asked about the trickle of support from his peers, said, âIt doesnât matter if anyone is with me. But I will speak for issues that I think are right.â Well, god be with him.

The story of the movie is about a jehadi masquerading as a tourist guide in Delhi. The first half of Fanaa is essentially slapstick with some embarrassing moments of a cameo making faces at the camera, just like Dada Khondke. A few street-side shayaris by Aamir Khan are supposed to be so endearing to heroine Kajol (who is blind and whose affability is infectious even to the viewers) that she falls in love with him. Well, for a Bollywood movie, it is par for the course. But in the midst of these sweet nothings Aamir Khan even calls the blind girl dumb. Donât know how many blind people would love to be called dumb. Calling names seems to be quite an in-thing around the Red Fort.

If you had believed Aamir Khan for his perfectionism, this movie will liberate you. A jehadi in Kashmir gets into the identity of an Indian Army officer who has been killed by Aamir Khanâs terrorist group. But the imposter Aamir Khan is not recognised by even his colleagues whom he later goes on to kill in mid-air on a helicopter.

The idea behind the movie is evidently insidious, trying to make a case for Kashmirâs âfreedom struggleâ. Aamir Khan never gives up his jehadi cause till the end even when he is shot dead by his wife Kajol. When Kajol finds out that he is trying to smuggle a nuclear trigger for his terrorist group, Aamir Khan tells her that the trigger is only to force India and Pakistan to come to the negotiating tableâas if India has been averse to negotiations. Aamir Khan should read newspapers instead of griping of their coverage of events.

There are several such fatuous events and scenes in the movie like Kajolâs eye operation where she is reeled out of the operation theatre and moments later she opens her eyes in broad daylight. Aamir Khan is hurt grievously after being shot several times when escaping the Indian Army but even without a doctor he recovers at the hands of Kajol and her father Rishi Kapoor.

But the most stark moment that viewers loudly jeered is when Aamir Khan walks into the life of his paramour Kajol six years after break-up but Kajol is unable to recognise him or his voice. Aamir and Kajol in the beginning of the movie are shown in intimate scenes going on city tours around Delhi. She even brings up their child though Aamir and Kajol did not get married after all the shayari-filled courtship. When he meets Kajol after six years he even stays with her for days on the end but till he reveals his identity she never realises that her lost love is her midst. Aamir Khan, who is known to meddle with everything on the sets to make his films perfect, and sometimes would even change the script of the movie, seems to be unaware of the fact that blind people have better sensory abilities than ordinary people. He should see Al Pacino starring Hollywood movie Scent of a Woman which is today considered inspiringly perfect movie on vision-impaired people. As the name of the movie suggests the rest of the sensory abilities of the blind are extremely powerful.

Tabu, an officer in the anti-terrorist wing in the government, is projected as Musharrafâs spokesperson trying to justify the âfreedom struggleâ in Kashmir. The idea behind the movie is evidently insidious, trying to make a case for Kashmirâs âfreedom struggleâ. Aamir Khan never gives up his jehadi cause till the end even when he is shot dead by his wife Kajol. When Kajol finds out that he is trying to smuggle a nuclear trigger for his terrorist group, Aamir Khan tells her that the trigger is only to force India and Pakistan to come to the negotiating tableâas if India has been averse to negotiations. Aamir Khan should read newspapers instead of griping their coverage of events.

And in a scene of the rescue by the anti-terrorist wing, Tabu takes a day to reach Kajol (in Kashmir) who is hounded by Aamir Khan. Tabu is based in Kashmir and Kajolâs location was given to the anti-terrorist squad. Is the movie trying to prove that the anti-terrorist operations are inefficient?

When the protests on the movie were doing its rounds the filmâs crew and stars made a case that Fanaa was not just about Aamir Khan. The movie has several other actors and technicians whose future was at peril because of the ban in Gujarat. Which, in essence, meant that they did not subscribe to Aamir Khanâs views on the dam and hence should not be bracketed with him. One wonders why BJP did not seek banning Fanaa all over the country when the theme was unambiguously anti-national.

06-14-2006, 07:12 PM

came via email
QUOTEThe coffee-drinkers of Mambalam, the rest of Tamilnadu (and some parts
of Bharatam) should introspect and wonder: how come someone is trying
to stop an ABC certification to a rival newspaper? What is the fear?
Is it the fear of losing monopoly for distribution of PTI news, laced
with news from commie politburos? Even after paying for syndication
rights to ex-colonial media like The Guardian or acting as the
mouthpiece of Xinhua News Agency? Or, even after Mt. Road Mahavishnu
gets branded as English Murasoli?

Maybe, one cannot be a commie and a capitalist at the same time <!--emo& Smile

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />--

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
[url=http://www.televisionpoint.com/news2006/newsfullstory.php?id=1146813442
]Bombay HC rejects Hindu plea for Deccan Chronicle[/url]
Friday - May 05, 2006

Televisionpoint.com Correspondent

The Bombay High Court has rejected the plea by The Hindu to restrain
the Audit Bureau of Circulation (ABC) from issuing an \"ABC
Certificate\" for the circulation of the Chennai edition of the Deccan
Chronicle for the period JulyDecember 2005. The plea was made by Ms
Kasturi and Sons, publishers of The Hindu, and was rejected by an
order dated April 25, 2006, signed by Justice (Ms) Nishita Mhatre.

In a revealing comment, the publishers of The Hindu admitted in their
plea that such a certificate issued to the Deccan Chronicle \"would
adversely affect the circulation and advertising revenues of The
Hindu\" and would \"also adversely affect the business interests of
The Hindu, which has a dominant market share in Chennai.\" The
statements implicitly recognised the fact that the Deccan Chronicle,
which started printing in Chennai on March 28, 2005, had effectively
eroded the claimed monopoly of The Hindu in Chennai.


</div>

07-04-2006, 04:31 AM

Just the usual poison from BBC. They are very good at teaching DIEs to self-hate.

The 'curse' of having a girl

QUOTEBlaring car horns, loud belching exhaust fumes, the electronic beats of Bollywood tracks - all competing for attention in the kaleidoscope of sound that fills the air.

<b>And the smells too, the foul stench across the highway from the Yamuna river: an exotic blend of poisonous sewage and household waste. </b>

Along these banks sit small children who squat, wash and drink from the river. Their homes are in the filthy shanty towns that line the road the three of us will take home.

In my parents' native Punjab, girls are often killed at birth. It has skewed the ratio of girls to boys so much that some villages have not seen the birth of a female in years. Thousands of men in rural areas now have trouble finding a wife. 

QUOTEI am of Indian descent but my husband is a blonde, blue-eyed and fiercely proud Scotsman.

Same with Gurinder Chadha (Paul Mayeda Berges), Deepa Mehta, Meera Nair etc.

07-04-2006, 04:53 PM

QUOTEJust the usual poison from BBC.

This is not the first time.A year or so back when I suddenly switched on the T.V and tuned on to the BBC,they showed a documentar in which the mother-in-law of a pregnant lady from Rajasthan was asked how she would receive the new born based on gender.

The gentle woman replied that if it were a boy it would be better.Even if it is a girl
it would be O.K.

I did not wish to keep the T.V tuned on any more.

Why do you have the nick 'Manu'?

07-05-2006, 01:00 PM

Name.

Not just a nick.

07-07-2006, 03:04 AM

<!--emo&

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /> Govt may censor private TV channels

- Nidhi Razdan

Thursday, July 6, 2006 (New Delhi):

For the first time since the satellite TV explosion, the government wants to take total control by directly deciding if content violates norms imposed by them.

So, an external regulator appointed by the government decides content of a particular channel is anti-national, incorrect or false or obscene.

The channel can be punished with the harshest being to cancel the broadcasting license. The decision of the regulator will be final and cannot be challenged in court.

Speaking to NDTV, I&B Minister Priyaranjan Dasmunshi said that this is still a draft bill and many of the provisions can be changed, but insisted there's need for some regulation.

Internal regulator

There will also be an internal regulator who will comprise industry representatives and members of the government.

According to the proposed bill the internal regulators will point out violations and issue warnings.

The code of content is being prepared by a committee headed by the Secretary of Information and Broadcasting and is likely to be in place by the next Parliament session.

"This issue will be taken up in the next consultative committee meeting. As of now we have not got down to discuss this," said Nikhil Kumar, Chairman, I&B Standing Committee.

However, most controversial is why a government appointed representative should decide whether a channel's content is anti national or incorrect.

Prove story

For instance would an interview of a Kashmiri militant leader talking of Azaadi be anti-national and if a journalist has to prove his story is correct will he be asked to reveal his sources.

Especially since the move for punitive action was triggered off by the home secretary.

VK Duggal, Home Secretary, wrote to the Information and Broadcasting ministry arguing that it is necessary to penalise channels for showing anti-national or incorrect content.

"This is censorship through the backdoor and should be never done. The government is scared of criticism and wants bring in censorship through the backdoor," said Kuldeep Nayar, veteran journalist and former Rajya Sabha MP.

The I&B ministry maintains that just as the Press Council of India guides the print media, the censor board regulates the film industry. The advertising standards council regulates the advertisment industry.

Television channels also need regulation it believes that the proposed law allows the industry to regulate itself.

It is not regressive in nature there are important differences however.

Disguise for censorship?

Across television newsrooms and studios, the question on everybody's mind is whether the government's new bill is a disguise for greater control and censorship.

Yes, say many, who believe television in India will be throttled if the new legislation comes into force.

"State-sponsored, state-regimented discipline is just not acceptable. It's not good for this country and we have had a bad experience with it in the past," said Uday Shankar, CEO, STAR News.

Ironically Union Minister Jaipal Reddy who held the I&B portfolio, said at a seminar last year, "The Lakshman rekha is to be drawn by the press, not by the government or Parliament."

Self-regulation is exactly what media groups are talking about, like the Press Council of India, which has guidelines, not laws, that govern the print media.

Interestingly, there are already around 30 laws that cover the press, from defamation to national security.

"Each channel needs a self regulatory mechanism. Converting the press council into a media council could be the answer," said KS Sachidananda Murthy, Press Council of India.

It isn't just news channels; the obscenity debate has resurfaced, with many interventions proposed for music and entertainment channels.

Bharatvarsh · (This post was last modified: 07-26-2006, 05:21 AM by Bharatvarsh.)

Shekar Gupta the Congressi whore caught with his pants down:
QUOTE....On the other side, in April Hindu fanatics bombed the Jama Masjid, the stately 17th-century mosque in old Delhi that is an abiding symbol of Islam in the Subcontinent.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13879451/site/newsweek/
People start mailing newsweek and the b@st@rd himself to apologise for lying.

07-26-2006, 06:22 AM

Guys n Gals,
write mass email to newsweek, I have sent my piece of mind.

07-26-2006, 06:52 AM

QUOTE(Mudy @ Jul 26 2006, 06:22 AM)Guys n Gals,
write mass email to newsweek, I have sent my piece of mind.
[right][snapback]54589[/snapback][/right]

done.

07-26-2006, 08:21 AM

QUOTE(vishwas @ Jul 25 2006, 09:22 PM)<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mudy @ Jul 26 2006, 06:22 AM)Guys n Gals,
write mass email to newsweek, I have sent my piece of mind.
[right][snapback]54589[/snapback][/right]

done.
[right][snapback]54590[/snapback][/right]
</div>

Done.

agnivayu · 07-26-2006, 08:23 AM

While he was the kissing the a$$ of his white leftist friends, some sh*t must have gone down his pipe.

QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Jul 26 2006, 05:18 AM)Shekar Gupta the Congressi whore caught with his pants down:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE....On the other side, in April Hindu fanatics bombed the Jama Masjid, the stately 17th-century mosque in old Delhi that is an abiding symbol of Islam in the Subcontinent.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13879451/site/newsweek/
People start mailing newsweek and the b@st@rd himself to apologise for lying.
[right][snapback]54585[/snapback][/right]
</div>

Bharatvarsh · 07-29-2006, 07:34 AM

QUOTECorrection: In Shekhar Gupta's original submission of the story "A Cause for Comfort," (July 24) Gupta wrote, "They [terrorists] bombed Jama Masid, the stately 17th-century mosque in old Delhi..." Unfortunately, due to an editing error, the sentence was changed in the magazine's print edition to "Hindu fanatics bombed the Jama Masjid." NEWSWEEK regrets the error.

Â© 2006 Newsweek, Inc.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13879451/sit...week/#jama

07-29-2006, 10:16 AM

hahah
How it is possible?
They [terrorists] bombed changed into Hindu fanatics bombed.
It was not editing problem, mass emails made the difference. And Shekhar Gupta credibility as usual in drain.

**acharya** · 08-01-2006, 02:19 AM

Comparisons and contrasts

K. Narayanan

Too often I venture into areas that are not my province. And every time the reasoning I offer is that it is giving expression to readers' concerns. This column is intended to serve that purpose, and so here we go again, this time on editorials.

What editorials express are a newspaper's views. It is entitled to hold them and propound them. Readers may disagree, and it is those who disagree who are most vociferous â and sometimes vituperative. They now have a ready target for their barbs â the Readers' Editor.

There are instances of unanimous approbation for an editorial, but these are not frequent. The freedom to criticise the views in an editorial is granted, and the dissent is seen by those responsible for them. But the critics cannot question the paper's right to have its own views on issues, which is decided by and is the prerogative of the Editor-in-Chief and his team.

What is taken up here are some views of readers who have no animus but are concerned with what they see as inconsistencies in the paper's stand, which they feel affect its credibility. Going through their comments I was surprised by these readers' range of recall; and realised it is not correct to assume that public memory is short.

The latest instance pointed out was the editorial "Autonomy as a shield" (June 27, 2006), which supported the decision not to pay salary to the AIIMS doctors for the period they were on strike: "The principle of no work, no pay is something industrial workers across India have always been confronted with when they go on strike. The AIIMS staff cannot expect an exception to be made to them." The editorial also recalled the suffering of poor patients.

Readers pointed out that three days earlier, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Karunanidhi announced that the period of general strike by the State Government employees in 2003 and 2004 would be treated as "on duty." Why did The Hindu not comment on this, which affected an entire State and more number of people than the AIIMS patients, they asked.

An editorial that attracted a huge volume of "Letters to the Editor" was that on "A case of presidential overreach" (June 1, 2006), sharply criticising President Abdul Kalam's action of returning the Office of Profit Bill. Since readers have expressed themselves against (the larger proportion) and in support of the editorial, I do not touch upon those points. Here the reference is to the comparison some readers made with The Hindu's stand on President K.R. Narayanan's rejection in 1998 of the Vajpayee Cabinet's recommendation to dismiss the Rabri Devi Government and impose President's rule in Bihar.

On Mr. Kalam's decision, The Hindu wrote, "When the Rashtrapati pits his constitutional and political wits against key decisions made by the Cabinet, not to mention Parliament, it certainly goes against the spirit of the Constitution and parliamentary government. ... President Kalam seems to have played into the hands of the main Opposition party."

But President Narayanan was lauded when he set his face against a Cabinet decision. An editorial on a Sunday (September 27, 1998), headlined, "Well done, Mr. Narayanan," said: "Mr. Narayanan has demonstrated that he as Head of State can be relied upon to intervene effectively â and within the parameters set by the Constitution... . The Vajpayee Government has realised the imperatives of being seen to respond responsibly to the President's counsel."

A reader found the stands "incorrigibly partisan" depriving The Hindu of "the right to adjudicate between the President and Parliament."

Readers have also raised the alleged contradictions in The Hindu's stand on the Dutch cartoons on Prophet Muhammad and M.F. Hussain's paintings of Hindu gods in nude. "Needless and nasty controversy" (February 9, 2006) said: "Freedom of expression is supremely important. But surely it does not require its champions crassly to cause offence to the faith and beliefs of an identifiable group." "Outcry against Hussain" (October 10, 1996) described "the orchestrated outcry ... led by Hindutva forces and ... by the Maharashtra Government" as "a threat to freedom of expression ... The latest instance ... is part of a concerted effort by fundamentalists against the freedom of expression and needs to be condemned outright."

Another instance is not a comparison of two editorials, but citing an editorial to question news coverage. "Stop the witch hunt" (June 23, 2006) said, referring to the police action against Apollo Hospitals in Delhi after the Rahul Mahajan episode, "It is a shame that some sections of the media have put out unsourced, tendentious reports at the behest of a police force that has been leaking like a sieve." A reader lays the charge that this applied to
<span style='color:red'>
The Hindu in its reporting of the police investigation against Sri Jayendra Saraswati, the Kanchi Sankaracharya.

"We don't claim to be neutral or impartial. Editorials take a stand, provide an assessment or judgment, and where appropriate, applaud, comment, criticise, deplore, condemn, oppose," according to the Editor-in-Chief. None of the readers cited in this column has questioned this right. They have only pointed out what, according to them, are some contradictions. </span>

http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/31/stories/...891100.htm

08-04-2006, 04:03 AM

Has Independance Day lost its Significance??

I don't understand what is the objective behind such type of survey?

Bharatvarsh · 08-09-2006, 06:57 PM

QUOTEOfficially, more than 1,000 people, mainly Muslims, were hacked or burned to death in rioting after 59 Hindu pilgrims died in a train fire originally blamed on a Muslim mob but which investigations later found to be an accident.

http://www.reuters.co.in/news/newsArticle....&archived=False
Look at the blatant lie, what investigations have concluded that Godhra was an accident except for the report by Banerjee (paid stooge of Laloo). If it's an accident then why are the Godhra accused still in jail and cases are going on in the courts?

Husky · (This post was last modified: 08-09-2006, 07:23 PM by Husky.)

The media is always full of blatant lies when it has ulterior motives. The Armenian genocide was ignored forever. The Serbian genocide during WWII had entries in all 'reputable' encyclopaedia (incl. Britannica) in the 80s, but thereafter it went completely unmentioned in later editions. The Hindu genocide in Bangladesh is <i>never ever</i> mentioned in all those 'religious tolerance' sites that now list even the Armenian one. Why oh why could this be.
No one in any western country has any idea of the scale of murder and terror inflicted on the various South American nations' populations under dictators that the US put in place. They make sure no one does.

Reuters and AAP will write what they write. People have to make up their own minds. The problem is, people outside of Godhra (and India), only get to see what the media tells them. The media thrives on the fact that the rest of the world is not present at any incident that is being reported on, and so people have to rely on the media to tell them the facts of the case. They'll not realise it's a blatant lie like we do, only because incidents in their own backyards are not generally fictionalised.
Bits of truth + bits of lies = media. It's really a great recipe.

08-09-2006, 07:32 PM

QUOTEmore than 1,000 people, mainly Muslims, were hacked or burned to death in riotingThat report was by some Indian (Rupam Jain Nair).

It amazes me with what hypocritical skill these p-secs indulge in 'sympathising' with Indian Muslims in such cases, but they have not one ounce of compassion for the daily, silent, murder of Muslim children and women the world over. They are hacked, burnt, hanged, stoned, shot - they bleed to death at the hands of their own relatives, the ones that should have protected them.
India's p-secs don't care for anything: not for truth, not for humanity. If they did, they would realise how much of the blame for all of this is to be laid at Islam's door. Islam cannot even tolerate its own people, why is there such pretence t surprise when Islam shows its inability in getting along with people of other ways of life?

08-10-2006, 01:36 PM

Main stream media and Political correctness

QUOTEA Pew People and Press poll in 2003 revealed two key facts. Firstly, that 90 percent of mainstream US journalists voted Democratic and held predominantly liberal views. The spectrum of liberal views of mainstream media journalists in America thus in no way reflects the predominantly conservative views of the general public. But even more relevant is the admission by most journalists that ideological preference (bias) does influence their news reporting.

utepian · 08-23-2006, 05:50 AM

Login




Remember me Lost Password?