Author: M.V. Kamath
Publication: Afternoon Despatch
& Courier
Date: June 11, 2004
URL: http://www.cybernoon.com/DisplayArticle.asp?section=fromthepress&subsection=editorials&xfile=June2004_mediawatch_standard60&child=mediawatch
Introduction: Not Bollywood, the
Indian media is the best entertainer in the country
The one outstanding characteristic
of The Hindu is that it publishes in full such documents as are relevant
for the information and education of its readers. It is, for example, the
only paper to publish in full the text of the United Progressive Alliance's
(UPA's) Common Minimum Programme. In that sense The Hindu is about the
only reader-friendly newspaper in India and one can't thank it enough.
The CMP is quite an interesting
document. It begins with an entirely uncalled for - and worse still, incorrect
- assertion. It says: "The people of India have voted decisively in the
14th Lok Sabha elections for secular, progressive forces..."
The people have done nothing of
the sort. The people, sure, have voted, but most often they voted on a
caste and religious basis. The believe otherwise is to indulge in delusions.
Most of the parties which are allies of Congress are strictly caste-based,
but if the Congress thinks otherwise one can only congratulate it for its
pig- headedness.
Fooling the public
The party can fool some people some
of the time but it can't fool all people all the time. One can't see why
the party should be so self-indulgent. It has received no mandate from
the public, that is for sure. In fact, the Congress, percentage-wise, received
far less votes than it did in 1999. Why can't Congress let truth alone?
Then there is the issue of Sonia Gandhi's citizenship.
Writing in Deccan Herald (May 24)
Rajeev Dhavan, a senior advocate of the Supreme Court vented his spleen
at Atal Behari Vajpayee and literally called him a coward. Supreme Court
senior advocates (or, for that matter, even junior advocates) must know
how to mind their language. It now turns out - and we have the word of
a senior columnist - that Sonia Gandhi had spoken to Atal Behari Vajpayee
on the issue of her citizenship and whether she should accept prime ministership
of India and had been politely told that both in her own and in the country's
interests she should not.
Adv. Dhavan may not be aware of
the conversation but lawyers - even senior advocates - do not necessarily
make good journalists. Mr. Dhavan claims that there are British MPs of
Indian origin in the House of Commons and Mr. Jindal nearly became the
Governor of Louisiana. What he forgets is that there are several million
Indians in Britain as there are in Louisiana who are registered citizens.
How many Italians are there in India who have taken up Indian citizenship
and pay their taxes? How many, apart from Sonia Gandhi?
Mr. Dhavan uses very bad language
in his column insisting that "the worst practice is the xenophobic, short-sighted
nationalism," of the BJP and that "to harp on Sonia Gandhi's foreign origins
is part of this communal agenda".
Communal? Who made Rajeev Dhavan
a "senior advocate" of the Supreme Court? As for the Common Minimum Programme
(CMP), Deccan Chronicle (May 29) has its own views. It is sceptical about
the UPA's abilities to implement the promises made in the CMP saying: "Promises
and commitment to honour them do not necessarily result in performance."
Aptly put.
Equally sceptical, The Telegraph
(May 28) said that "the United Progressive Alliance" has "set a precedent
of sorts, if only by displaying openly how the joints creak and grate before
the machinery is ready for work".
The Statesman (May 26) wondered
how the UPA can ever work smoothly considering the quality of Dr. Manmohan
Singh's cabinet filled with "tainted figures". "Having these people on
board means that the ministry is starting on the wrong foot." Strong criticism
of the way in which individual ministers are putting their foot in the
mouth is now becoming common.
"The angularities of Natwar Singh's
foreign policy vision are damaging," wrote K.P. Nayar in The Telegraph
the other day (June 2). Natwar Singh indeed has needlessly got himself
entangled in a war of words with Pakistan sufficiently for The Telegraph
(June 2) to issue a warning.
Saying that "it is unfortunate that
a new war of words between India and Pakistan is being played out before
the media," the paper said that "given the fragility of India- Pakistan
relations, it would not be at all surprising if bilateral relations derail
once again."
The trouble with ex-diplomats is
that they think they know everything. Diplomats must stick to diplomacy
and leave politics to politicians. If Natwar Singh does not change, Nayar
warned, "Indian diplomacy will pay a price not only for the external affairs
minister's persona, but equally for his idea that the country's foreign
policy has to be jump-started from where Rajiv Gandhi left off in 1999".
Meanwhile, if anybody is interested
in the ongoing fight between Hindustan Times and The Times of India for
Delhi's readership, here is a bit of news: The latest Audit Bureau of Circulations
figures show that Hindustan Times Delhi edition is the largest single-edition
English daily in India - again.
The fight for circulation between
these two papers has been going on for years now and it is getting to be
a bore. Neither paper cares much for news: it is all entertainment. Everything
- politics, defence, foreign affairs, crime, whatever - is treated as a
subject for entertainment. Each paper calls the other as "Number Two".
Claiming that it has now become
Number One: Hindustan Times (May 31) said in a front-paged report: "At
HT we have always believed in the real thing. We take pride in reporting
the news as it is. When we make a claim we back it up with facts. These
are basics in journalism..." That's how newspapers fight.
Tall claims
Incidentally, Hindustan Times is
about the only paper which has published an article that claims that the
UPA will last its full five-year term. According to commentator Pankaj
Vohra "the point is that this government which enjoys majority support
in the Lok Sabha has come to power on the strength of its ideological commitment
to preserve secularism".
And to stress the point further
Vohra writes (May 31): "The parties may have fought against each other
but those who have joined the government do not endorse any communal agenda
unlike the participants in the previous BJP-led government... The Left
parties have their concerns but they cannot be expected to act irresponsibly
when the BJP-led NDA has been voted out". It is nice to know. Only, one
wants to know who let the Charan singh government down.
It is fun reading our newspapers
these days. A day after Vohra's fulminations against the NDA, The Statesman's
editor-in-chief C.R. Irani (June 20) was saying: "The winning Congress
is floundering badly even after waiting endlessly to go in and form a government...
The winner is Harkishan Singh Surjeet of the CPI-M... I am driven to say
that this government does not inspire confidence...". Oh well. Over to
you, Mr. Vohra.
The Indian media is the best entertainer
in the country. Take note of it, Bollywood.
