01-15-2008, 06:45 AM
<b>Modi, a hero</b>
Though I also operate within the realms of Indian English media, <b>though I am aware of its âpseudo-secularâ credentials, I was baffled by the kind of lop-sided, anti-Modi coverage of the Gujarat elections, especially in the electronic media</b>.
The English newspapers and news channels <b>declare themselves as âunbiased and secularâ while they act as if they are the stooges of one particular political formation</b>. I strongly feel unless you are the mouthpiece of a political party, you are supposed to keep your biases aside while writing and reporting. But on the day the Gujarat election results were announced, <b>I saw open disappointment on the faces on many English news channels,</b> and many were seen commenting in the beginning that all was not lost for the Congress and only the urban results had started trickling in and once the rural and tribal-area results were out, it would be a totally different picture. Is this the way the balanced media should report? I think not.
Once it was known that Modi had swept Gujarat, the discussion took on a different direction. The champions of âsecularismâ declared that in no time, there would be grave problems in the BJP as Modi had become bigger than the party. They also predicted that his next target would be L.K.Advaniâs position. Various news channels speculated on how Modiâs victory would adversely affect the BJP.
<b>But not a single journalist spoke about how ineffective Madame Gandhiâs and Rahul Gandhiâs campaigns had been. Like the sycophantic Congress, the âsecularâ media also did not find anything wrong with the Gandhis</b>. The fault, the incompetence lay with the local leadership. Or was it the electorate that was to blame for their choice?
The newspapers, like the Communist parties, wanted the Congress to rethink and regroup so that the nation could be saved from the âcommunalâ BJP. Many newspapers, in their editorial advised the Congress on how to stop the âcommunalâ BJP. But the funniest comment came from the CPM; âwhat is required is a determined and uncompromising struggle against the communal ideology of Hindutva and the capacity to launch sustained struggles of all sections of people who suffered from the right wing economic policies of the Modi government.â
As an Indian, certain questions come to my mind. One is, by talking for the majority, if the BJP becomes communal, what do you call the Congress for exploiting the minority which they have been doing ever since India won independence? If the BJP is polarising the society, what do you say about the Congress that had been polarising the Indian society on caste and religious lines?
In Gujarat also, had they not been trying to exploit the Patels? You look at Kerala, how many caste based parties are there? Both the Congress and the communist parties field candidates based on the caste preferences of the area. How do you describe this? Secularism?
Among the news channels, nobody except noted journalist M.J.Akbar was interested in analysing the reasons for Modiâs spectacular victory and his unbelievable rise in popularity throughout the country.
Throughout the campaign, <b>Modi spoke about the kind of development he had brought about in Gujarat but how many newspapers and television channels spoke about that? Gujarat could attract investment of US$ 17.8 billion in 2006-07 when the country as a whole attracted $69 billion during the same period. When Indiaâs GDP growth is 9%, it is 13% in Gujarat. Industrial growth in India is 11% while it is 15% in Gujarat. Gujarat accounts for 20% of Indiaâs industrial output, 25% of the countryâs textile production, 40% of its pharmaceutical production, 47% of its petrochemical production and 21% of the countryâs exports.</b>
Dr. M.S. Swaminathan, the father of Indiaâs Green Revolution, (who makes it clear he differs with Modiâs politics), recently told me in an interview, âSome states like Gujarat have done good work, so the agricultural growth rate in Gujarat is over 9%. That is because they have been given the soil health cards, they have been given credit; in short, they have been given all the support system. They have a lot of land in the Kutch region, and they have developed it. Whatever may be Modiâs politics, which I may not approve, he is a very good administrator.â Gujarat achieved this when the countryâs agricultural growth was a mere 2%.
I wonder if Modi is maut ka saudagar, what do you call the Congress for what happened in 1984? What do you call the Communists for what happened in Nadigram?
It is high time the nation knew what Modi had done for his state rather than talking about communalism? It is high time to find out what the younger generation of India find in him?<b> It is high time to find out why he is the hero of modern India? It is also high time the English media in India came out of the warp of pseudo secularism and see the reality that is there in the country. </b>
http://notanobserver.rediffiland.com/blogs...i-a-hero-4.html
Though I also operate within the realms of Indian English media, <b>though I am aware of its âpseudo-secularâ credentials, I was baffled by the kind of lop-sided, anti-Modi coverage of the Gujarat elections, especially in the electronic media</b>.
The English newspapers and news channels <b>declare themselves as âunbiased and secularâ while they act as if they are the stooges of one particular political formation</b>. I strongly feel unless you are the mouthpiece of a political party, you are supposed to keep your biases aside while writing and reporting. But on the day the Gujarat election results were announced, <b>I saw open disappointment on the faces on many English news channels,</b> and many were seen commenting in the beginning that all was not lost for the Congress and only the urban results had started trickling in and once the rural and tribal-area results were out, it would be a totally different picture. Is this the way the balanced media should report? I think not.
Once it was known that Modi had swept Gujarat, the discussion took on a different direction. The champions of âsecularismâ declared that in no time, there would be grave problems in the BJP as Modi had become bigger than the party. They also predicted that his next target would be L.K.Advaniâs position. Various news channels speculated on how Modiâs victory would adversely affect the BJP.
<b>But not a single journalist spoke about how ineffective Madame Gandhiâs and Rahul Gandhiâs campaigns had been. Like the sycophantic Congress, the âsecularâ media also did not find anything wrong with the Gandhis</b>. The fault, the incompetence lay with the local leadership. Or was it the electorate that was to blame for their choice?
The newspapers, like the Communist parties, wanted the Congress to rethink and regroup so that the nation could be saved from the âcommunalâ BJP. Many newspapers, in their editorial advised the Congress on how to stop the âcommunalâ BJP. But the funniest comment came from the CPM; âwhat is required is a determined and uncompromising struggle against the communal ideology of Hindutva and the capacity to launch sustained struggles of all sections of people who suffered from the right wing economic policies of the Modi government.â
As an Indian, certain questions come to my mind. One is, by talking for the majority, if the BJP becomes communal, what do you call the Congress for exploiting the minority which they have been doing ever since India won independence? If the BJP is polarising the society, what do you say about the Congress that had been polarising the Indian society on caste and religious lines?
In Gujarat also, had they not been trying to exploit the Patels? You look at Kerala, how many caste based parties are there? Both the Congress and the communist parties field candidates based on the caste preferences of the area. How do you describe this? Secularism?
Among the news channels, nobody except noted journalist M.J.Akbar was interested in analysing the reasons for Modiâs spectacular victory and his unbelievable rise in popularity throughout the country.
Throughout the campaign, <b>Modi spoke about the kind of development he had brought about in Gujarat but how many newspapers and television channels spoke about that? Gujarat could attract investment of US$ 17.8 billion in 2006-07 when the country as a whole attracted $69 billion during the same period. When Indiaâs GDP growth is 9%, it is 13% in Gujarat. Industrial growth in India is 11% while it is 15% in Gujarat. Gujarat accounts for 20% of Indiaâs industrial output, 25% of the countryâs textile production, 40% of its pharmaceutical production, 47% of its petrochemical production and 21% of the countryâs exports.</b>
Dr. M.S. Swaminathan, the father of Indiaâs Green Revolution, (who makes it clear he differs with Modiâs politics), recently told me in an interview, âSome states like Gujarat have done good work, so the agricultural growth rate in Gujarat is over 9%. That is because they have been given the soil health cards, they have been given credit; in short, they have been given all the support system. They have a lot of land in the Kutch region, and they have developed it. Whatever may be Modiâs politics, which I may not approve, he is a very good administrator.â Gujarat achieved this when the countryâs agricultural growth was a mere 2%.
I wonder if Modi is maut ka saudagar, what do you call the Congress for what happened in 1984? What do you call the Communists for what happened in Nadigram?
It is high time the nation knew what Modi had done for his state rather than talking about communalism? It is high time to find out what the younger generation of India find in him?<b> It is high time to find out why he is the hero of modern India? It is also high time the English media in India came out of the warp of pseudo secularism and see the reality that is there in the country. </b>
http://notanobserver.rediffiland.com/blogs...i-a-hero-4.html