Thursday, December 4, 2008
Corruption is deep rooted......!!!
I was shocked to learn that an IAS officer, Subhrendu Bhattacharya, was taken back into service even after disappearing without information for almost a decade. If the government is so liberal towards its employees, how can it ever expect to eradicate corruption in the system? It’s time the government learnt something from the private sector.
Stringent action required......!!!
The statement by the sports minister M.S.Gill,and I quote.... "Is it possible for one team to arrive in Mumbai and indulge in mass murder,and have another team go and play cricket in the winter afternoon sun at Lahore" unquote, echoed the common man’s thinking.The BCCI must stop all activity with Pakistan till they stand with the people of India and hand over the terrorists as demanded by India.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Voting for PEACE................!!!
The huge voter turnout shows that the people of the Kashmir Valley are fed up with insurgency and want peace to return.Elsewhere in the state,the commitment of the six polling staff and the enthusiasm of the six registered voters in Thugsey Gompa,who braved temperatures of -20 Celsius, is commendable.The nation salutes them.The election has been absolutely free and fair.When the new state government is formed, it must be mindful of the trust of the people and respect their disapproval of terrorism and insurgency.
Whatever the outcome of the polls in J&K, the electorate has ignored the call of the separatists to boycott elections. The 64 per cent (Huge 64% turnout on Kashmir Day 1)polling has shown that separatist leaders have no base and should not be given undue importance.The marked increase in voter turnout shows that,like in the case of militancy in Punjab in the past,the people are fed up with empty rhetoric and yearn for development.Kashmiris,who have taken the bus ride across the LoC must have convinced them that they are better off than their relatives in PoK.
Whatever the outcome of the polls in J&K, the electorate has ignored the call of the separatists to boycott elections. The 64 per cent (Huge 64% turnout on Kashmir Day 1)polling has shown that separatist leaders have no base and should not be given undue importance.The marked increase in voter turnout shows that,like in the case of militancy in Punjab in the past,the people are fed up with empty rhetoric and yearn for development.Kashmiris,who have taken the bus ride across the LoC must have convinced them that they are better off than their relatives in PoK.
A rogue state.............!!!
it is preposterous that many social scientists plead for the bailing out of Pakistan. After all, the country is not facing a natural disaster. Its economic meltdown is self-inflicted as it insisted on acquiring nuclear weapons and let Islamist terrorism flourish. Ever since its inception in 1947, Pakistan chose to subsist on foreign handouts. It never bothered to learn the art of earning its living through strategic planning, economic reforms and investment in higher education. Instead of propping up Pakistan time and again, is it not time the West encouraged Islamabad to cut its defence spending on nuclear technology, missile development and proxy wars, and is taught to live within its means?
Media.....Media.....Media....................!!!
I have not seen a more negligent action by the media in my life! While the anti-terror commando actions were going on, the media was televising it "live", in real-time, so that the terrorists holed up inside Nariman House, or their handlers, could see it all on their monitors and give suitable instructions to evade the trap laid for them, or to kill the commandos. Bravo!! I never knew that Indian journos were so irresponsible. Who benefits from such journalism? God save the commandos — they don’t need enemies if they have such brainless friends.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Shaheedon ka samman..............!!!
Hats off to the brave policemen and soldiers who laid down their lives to save innocent men, women and children taken hostage by the shameless terrorists. Our politicians will hardly care for these great martyrs after a few weeks. They will announce cash compensation which may not reach the families of these martyrs. Through your columns, I earnestly appeal to the media to set up a martyrs’ fund which should be headed by a responsible individual, such as Ms Kiran Bedi, former President Abdul Kalam, and Mr Julio Ribeiro. Donations should be called for from the entire nation. From this fund, generous amounts should be sent to the family of the martyrs and be used for the education of their children. We salute our men in uniform.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Who will hold up a mirror to the media?
They say the media holds up a mirror to society. If so, then this must be most true of the electronic media which, unlike the print media, is so instantaneous in their response and presentation that there is no time for sober consideration and adjustment. But that also means that many weaknesses of our society may well be not just reflected in but even reinforced and sometimes worsened by the media. This thought came while watching television coverage of the horrifying terrorist attacks in Mumbai last week.
There is no point repeating all the clichés. In any case, even the commonly used words — shock, fury, anguish, anxiety — do not suffice to describe all the emotions that most of us have been through while watching the horrific events in Mumbai. But while people across the country were glued to television sets to find out what was happening as the grim and tragic drama unfolded, the role of newscasters inevitably also came under scrutiny. And sadly, the electronic media too has been found wanting on this occasion.
The most shocking aspect may have been the fact that so many news channels persisted in the urge to be sensational and to come with scoops over other channels, over the most elementary sense of responsibility in coverage. It should be obvious to the meanest intelligence that if the enemy — in this case a handful of highly-armed terrorists — is provided with any information during an encounter, it is bound to give them an advantage and make the task of the authorities much more difficult. This is clearly even more the case in prolonged operations in urban locations when only the official side is hampered by the need to prevent civilian casualties.
This means that those covering such actions must be particularly careful not to provide any information that could be relayed back to terrorists and provide them with any advantage. Yet, during the extremely sensitive and fraught military-style operations in the three Mumbai locations, competitive journalism obviously trumped such considerations, even though it was suspected that the terrorists had satellite phones and could, therefore, access and use information that was being relayed on television.
At least one television channel openly bragged about the special information it had obtained from members of the forces brought in for the rescue operation. Some provided detailed descriptions of the ongoing anti-terror operations, down to details such as which rooms and which floors of specific hotels the National Security Guard commandos would enter.
Most of the channels kept their cameras directed at the areas identified as “trouble spots” or areas where the militants were suspected to be hiding. And every time there was some movement on the part of the commandos, or even the police outside, the newspersons would be rushing to train their cameras on such movement and speculate on what it was for.
We can only guess how much help this provided to the militants. But the prolonged nature of the operations in all three locations suggests that such media hyperactivity certainly could not have helped the brave men who were risking their lives in a very complex and difficult operation against deadly enemies.
On several occasions, jostling and confusion among the crowd of assembled journalists created such commotion that police had to step in to control them. At times when they were asked to step back behind cordons for their own protection as the possibility of crossfire grew, or to allow the military action to proceed, there was resistance and several tried to sneak back when they thought they could get away with it.
And then, once again because of the continuous presence of the cameras, we were treated to the sorry spectacle of complete lack of sensitivity of the TV journalists when they rushed to surround and interrogate the exhausted and traumatised survivors as they were brought out from the hotel buildings.
Even when they begged for restraint and respect, microphones kept getting shoved in front of their faces and questions poured down on them, until finally they could manage to push their way through the melee of journalists into waiting vehicles. Those who had suffered personal tragedy, losing family members or close friends and themselves still in shock, were not spared media scrutiny as the cameras panned in on their tears and watched their agony.
Is this the sign of media gone crazy, an explosion of competitive journalism that is so obsessed with sensationalism and being the first or the most able to come out with certain news that it has lost sight of essential humanity? Or is it that we as a society are now so degraded that even something as ghastly, tragic and horrifying as these incidents of terror and their awful personal aftermath for the victims can be treated like a TV reality show?
It is common in such situations to call for introspection. But maybe introspection is no longer enough, especially if there is no subsequent change in behaviour. Since the prolonged encounters finally ended, we have had to suffer the main presenters, especially on the English language channels, hold forth pompously and at length on the need to change many things in polity, society and the nature of governance. “Enough is enough!” they announced, and said that citizens would not tolerate any more.
Unfortunately, none of them recognised any problems with the media’s own behaviour, or acknowledged that there was any need to change. Is it possible for society to now hold up a mirror for the media?
There is no point repeating all the clichés. In any case, even the commonly used words — shock, fury, anguish, anxiety — do not suffice to describe all the emotions that most of us have been through while watching the horrific events in Mumbai. But while people across the country were glued to television sets to find out what was happening as the grim and tragic drama unfolded, the role of newscasters inevitably also came under scrutiny. And sadly, the electronic media too has been found wanting on this occasion.
The most shocking aspect may have been the fact that so many news channels persisted in the urge to be sensational and to come with scoops over other channels, over the most elementary sense of responsibility in coverage. It should be obvious to the meanest intelligence that if the enemy — in this case a handful of highly-armed terrorists — is provided with any information during an encounter, it is bound to give them an advantage and make the task of the authorities much more difficult. This is clearly even more the case in prolonged operations in urban locations when only the official side is hampered by the need to prevent civilian casualties.
This means that those covering such actions must be particularly careful not to provide any information that could be relayed back to terrorists and provide them with any advantage. Yet, during the extremely sensitive and fraught military-style operations in the three Mumbai locations, competitive journalism obviously trumped such considerations, even though it was suspected that the terrorists had satellite phones and could, therefore, access and use information that was being relayed on television.
At least one television channel openly bragged about the special information it had obtained from members of the forces brought in for the rescue operation. Some provided detailed descriptions of the ongoing anti-terror operations, down to details such as which rooms and which floors of specific hotels the National Security Guard commandos would enter.
Most of the channels kept their cameras directed at the areas identified as “trouble spots” or areas where the militants were suspected to be hiding. And every time there was some movement on the part of the commandos, or even the police outside, the newspersons would be rushing to train their cameras on such movement and speculate on what it was for.
We can only guess how much help this provided to the militants. But the prolonged nature of the operations in all three locations suggests that such media hyperactivity certainly could not have helped the brave men who were risking their lives in a very complex and difficult operation against deadly enemies.
On several occasions, jostling and confusion among the crowd of assembled journalists created such commotion that police had to step in to control them. At times when they were asked to step back behind cordons for their own protection as the possibility of crossfire grew, or to allow the military action to proceed, there was resistance and several tried to sneak back when they thought they could get away with it.
And then, once again because of the continuous presence of the cameras, we were treated to the sorry spectacle of complete lack of sensitivity of the TV journalists when they rushed to surround and interrogate the exhausted and traumatised survivors as they were brought out from the hotel buildings.
Even when they begged for restraint and respect, microphones kept getting shoved in front of their faces and questions poured down on them, until finally they could manage to push their way through the melee of journalists into waiting vehicles. Those who had suffered personal tragedy, losing family members or close friends and themselves still in shock, were not spared media scrutiny as the cameras panned in on their tears and watched their agony.
Is this the sign of media gone crazy, an explosion of competitive journalism that is so obsessed with sensationalism and being the first or the most able to come out with certain news that it has lost sight of essential humanity? Or is it that we as a society are now so degraded that even something as ghastly, tragic and horrifying as these incidents of terror and their awful personal aftermath for the victims can be treated like a TV reality show?
It is common in such situations to call for introspection. But maybe introspection is no longer enough, especially if there is no subsequent change in behaviour. Since the prolonged encounters finally ended, we have had to suffer the main presenters, especially on the English language channels, hold forth pompously and at length on the need to change many things in polity, society and the nature of governance. “Enough is enough!” they announced, and said that citizens would not tolerate any more.
Unfortunately, none of them recognised any problems with the media’s own behaviour, or acknowledged that there was any need to change. Is it possible for society to now hold up a mirror for the media?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
