MxMIndia

Category: RANJONA BANERJI

Ranjona Banerji’s hard-and-soft look at nightly news and the fare in the morningers

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Media frenzy over VK Singh’s age

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    On Monday night, I really thought the world had come to an end, what with India’s army chief suing the government over his date of birth. At least, that’s what I understood from Times Now, Newsx and a random sampling of Hindi channels. NDTV had move on to Pakistan to look at their own crisis, with the military playing its usually stellar role of villain cum hero.

     

    But by Tuesday morning, oddly, India was no longer at the brink of some terrible crisis. Yes, the army chief’s problems were headlined everywhere and while newspapers found his court action unprecedented, they were not concerned that India was at some crossroads or the other. The issue is undoubtedly serious but TV likes to see everything as a catastrophe or a victory and this attitude can cloud real issues.

     

    From my point of view, the big story was the ASER report about the tragic state of rural education in India (I confess that column for Mid-Day tomorrow is about this). The report made to the front pages of most newspapers but the attitude of the Times of India, I found most intriguing. A single column on page 1 spent half the space talking about how this report wasn’t the biggest as it claimed to be – as if that was the main point of the exercise. One inside report was about a possible education ombudsman and the other about enrolment of girls being up. Compared to this meagre sampling, DNA, Indian Express, Hindustan Times focused on the revelation that class 5 students cannot even read class 2 textbooks.

     

    * * *

     

    The Times of India was the only paper (only?) to carry the story of the possibility of writer Salman Rushdie not attending the Jaipur Literary Fest because of security concerns raised by the government after some hardline Muslim groups objected to his presence. TV is all over this story now and judging from the latest “source” news, the government may well be changing its mind.

     

    The lack of commitment to freedom of speech and expression from our government agencies remains a worry. The attempts to muzzle Google and Facebook have also got plenty of newspaper space.

     

    * * *

     

    The Indian Express had its fifth Ramnath Goenka Awards for journalistic Excellence in Delhi on Monday. Vice-president Hamid Ansari said that “watchdog journalism” is “vibrant journalism”. He also pointed to the more pertinent problem – that the slow corporatisation of the media has led to falling standards. “The slow erosion of the institution of the editor in Indian media organisations is a reality. When media space and media products are treated solely in terms of revenue maximisation strategies, editors end up giving way to marketing departments.”

     

    The cat is out of the bag as far as the media is concerned and we need to address this issue more seriously than we have so far, no matter how many EMIs will suffer as a result.

     

    Press council chairman Markandey Katju couldn’t resist a little dig about the poor intellectual level of most media people but that still is the lesser problem. Ansari’s diagnosis is more apt.

     

    * * *

     

    One suspects that MS Dhoni must be thanking army chief VK Singh for taking him off headline news!

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers.

    Journalism, a very intriguing career choice

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The Economic Times has an interesting story on how High Street brands record higher sales atDelhiairport than any mall inIndia. While recording lots of facts and figures and quotes from retailers, the article nowhere suggests one possible reason: delayed flights and trapped passengers. Conspiracy theorists have the chance to build up a case here.

     

    * * *

     

    Is Salman Rushdie coming toIndiaor not? The Times of India set the cat among the pigeons saying that he is not coming or has been de-invited or that the Rajasthan government was playing chicken. Today’s Hindustan Times says he is coming but then doesn’t either corroborate or provide further information. The upshot seems to be that the Jaipur Literary Festival is being neither brave nor cowardly but nothing at all. The newspapers haven’t done enough homework and the TV channels are looking for bogeymen and monsters around every corner and under every bed.

     

    * * *

     

    While television appears to be all in favour of army chief VK Singh and his defiance of the government, newspapers have presented a more balanced view of the date of birth controversy. Indeed, it might even be gleaned from various articles and opinions that newspapers have been a wee bit critical. It is interesting to see that television news anchors and reporters are unable to exercise any objectivity where the armed forces are concerned – it is as if worship has been ingrained since childhood. This makes journalism a very intriguing career choice.

     

    ***

     

    Vice-president Hamid Ansari’s speech at the Ramnath Goenka journalism awards is the main edit page piece in the Indian Express. Excerpts were quoted in yesterday’s Freaking News. It makes some points which are worthy of discussion – editors being coerced by management, better professional training for journalists and the role of the media in a democracy.

     

    * * *

     

    Talk show queen Oprah Winfrey’s visit toIndiahas actually inspired less hysteria than I thought it would. Perhaps much as she “loves”India, she has decided to orchestrate the TV hoopla herself.

     

    * * *

     

    The Hindustan Times has picked the women’s finals at the Australian Open as their “no television” day. They must be crazy if they think someone like me will even pay attention!

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Some clarity on Rushdie, please!

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The case of Salman Rushdie and the Jaipur Literary Festival gets curiouser and curiouser. After the Deoband seminary asked that the writer be denied a visa to attend the festival, Rushdie clarified that he did not need a visa to visit India. Newspaper articles and TV debates focused on freedom of speech and the sentiments of Muslim voters keeping the UP elections in mind.

     

    After a couple of days of confusion, the Rajasthan government said it feared violence if Rushdie showed up. Soon after Rushdie announced he wasn’t coming because of death threats reported by the Mumbai and Rajasthan police. It took The Hindu to break the lies off that story – there were no such threats said the Mumbai police and they had passed on no such information to anyone. The Rajasthan police then corroborated this and the Rajasthan government waffled on about how they felt there was a threat and the Union home ministry also issued an advisory about a threat and then said that the government was willing to provide security.

     

    So far then we have examples of religious sensitivities, an election, a controversial writer and governmental pusillanimity. By now, confused readers and viewers were weeping for a comprehensive report putting all these diverse elements together. No such luck. Front page news and top of the hour headlines give you updates but not explanation and analysis.

     

    Editorials and opinions were still about freedom of speech and not so much about all these other angles popping up. India’s long and controversial history of dealing with “sentiments” also needs better examination. Sidharth Bhatia has commented very aptly on our fear “offending” sentiments in Asian Age/Deccan Chronicle. Fali Nariman on the Indian Express edit page points out that blasphemy laws in the UK apply only to Christianity and are still in use.

     

    The additional problem now seems to be that the organisers showed some extra caution or cowardice – depending on how you look at it – by seemingly giving in to official pressure. Apart from a little hysteria on TV from the Hyderabad-based Asauddin Owaisi of the MIM, not enough effort has been spent perhaps speaking to Muslims and their representative groups about the issue, except perhaps by Mohammed Wajihuddin on the Times of India and by the Indian Express.

     

    **

     

    TV and the newspapers have kept up the pressure as far as the story goes, however. Extra twists have come from four writers, who in protest, read from Rushdie’s Satanic Verses, which is still banned in India. These writers were then either asked to leave the festival or left of their own accord. Again, reports are confused. Writer Hari Kunzru writes on his blog that he read from the book as a form of protest but seems to imply that the organisers wanted him to go since they had been “advised” of a threat or arrest. Jeet Thayil is quoted as saying that the organisers did not ask him to leave per se and they must have their reasons. Ruchir Joshi writes in India Today that Rushdie should be judged on fact not fiction.

     

    Everywhere then there is this “perceived” threat from some or the other Muslim groups but it’s all very bewildering. Nowhere have there been reports of massive street protests by Muslims or vandalism or anything similar. The organisers have appeared on TV saying that Rushdie chose not to come and that they had even at the last minute informed him that the Rajasthan government was willing to provide security. Yet, according to TV reports on Monday morning, even a video link up to Rushdie was seen as a terrifying idea.

     

    **

     

    Clearly, what we need is clarity! If someone could please do a little investigation and give us the real and perceived threats and figure out who is really in danger, other than the Indian Constitution.

     

    eom

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    What the government can’t, Goswami can!

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Last night on Times Now, Arnab Goswami took on the case of an Indian couple in Norway whose children have been taken away from them by the Norwegian authorities. What the government of India could not do, perhaps Goswami will. Child welfare is a concept that Indians know little about (any journalist who has visited orphanages in India or tried to meet any official in the concerned government departments will know what I mean). Therefore, the outrage is all to do with Indians being made to suffer rather than the legality of the case. Indians, as we know, cannot be criticised, attacked, ridiculed, or made fun of. We absolutely will not tolerate it. Look at the anger over a reference to Amritsar’s Golden Temple on American comedian and TV host Jay Leno’s Tonight Show if you want further proof.

     

    Meanwhile, it is amusing to watch Goswami use the BJP’s Mahesh Jethmalani for target practice. If I was Jethmalani, I would ignore calls from Times Now for a bit. It’s not easy to defend the BJP and its Sangh Parivar friends when the debate is about freedom of expression.

     

    TV anchor Barkha Dutt’s American-type accent as she interviewed US talk show empress Oprah Winfrey was also amusing. Where did that come from? Can Winfrey not understand if there’s not a couple of rolled rrrs in every sentence?

     

    **

     

    The Mumbai Anti-Terrorism Squad has made two arrests in the July 13, 2011 bomb blasts in Mumbai. However, given the police track record in such cases, TV and newspapers both displayed a little scepticism here. The two arrested are already in custody for some other cases and the masterminds are still elusive. Everyone has pointed that out. In which case we must ask ourselves if we really want to see giant photographs (Hindustan Times) of police officials with photos of the accused in their hands? Needless glorification of public servants who are just doing their jobs? Return of favours by grateful reporters?

     

    **

     

    It is a measure of how much Anna Hazare and his friends have faded from the public eye that their letters to political parties did not get the full treatment from the media. They asked many questions to which no party has bothered to provide any answers.

     

    **

     

    The Salman Rushdie controversy continues to intrigue and annoy. It seems to have taken precedence over whether the army chief was born in 1950 or 1951.

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Time for media to not get jingoistic

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    After all the tears and threats, Salman Rushdie appeared on NDTV and said whatever he wanted – including praising his controversial Satanic Verses – in an interview with Barkha Dutt. So that’s a lot more potential viewers than at a literary festival – so much for fears of riots and violence.

     

    It is amusing to see that “liberals” are now a legitimate attackable category of people in India. Religious and social fundamentalists on television have a field day since liberals uphold the Constitution and other wishy-washy stuff like that. In print, several Muslims, prominent and otherwise, have said that this whole “ban Rushdie” idea is unacceptable – The Times of India has a report – but these presumably “liberal” Muslims do not usually find their way on to TV. The reasons are clear – they may not provide enough provocative drama.

     

    While Rushdie was calling Deobandi’s “dreadful people” on NDTV, Rahul Singh wondered on Times Now whether many Sikhs in the UK were not former Khalistanis! Everyone now in the mood to call spades shovels? TV has got needlessly exercised about this whole Jay Leno-Golden Temple fracas; today’s newspapers tell us that Sikhs in the US are not bothered by it. We also learn that Vylavar Ravi, Union minister for Indian overseas affairs, had not even seen the Leno show and did not know exactly what offence had been committed.

     

    The media needs to stand up and take a call about not getting all jingoistic about perceived insults. I have to side with Markandey Katju here – surely we have other things to worry about?

     

    **

     

    Republic Day tomorrow and I fear it is my cynicism, long years and grey hair which makes me feel like newspapers are really paying lip service and doing nothing new. The last week told us that our children are educated, our babies and young mothers are dying and we have no sanitation or hygiene systems to speak of. But we have to periodically be told what a great and wonderful country India is. The marketers and the believers in “good news” will get upset otherwise. O dear, I sound like Katju again.

     

    **

     

    The upcoming assembly elections are taking up newspaper space but not TV time. The reasons for this are obvious – TV in India thrives on sensationalism, so unless Mayawati sends another aeroplane to Mumbai to buy shoes, we will have to read not hear what she’s up to.

     

    **

     

    Mid-Day turned into a broadsheet for the day, for marketing reasons, but it actually looked quite nice.

     

    **

     

    India’s run in Australia has clearly upset our media so much that cricket is now restricted to the sports shows and pages. This is some change from the usual. Having said that, some very good daily cricket analysis from Ayaz Memon in Mail Today – he doesn’t hold his punches but given his experience, doesn’t fall into our current
    mood of patriotic funk! Insightful and scathing both.

     

    While on sports, it’s good to see tennis and the Australian Open sharing news space with everything else. (Go Federer!)

    Ranji matches have also been getting a fair run in newspapers.

     

    **

     

    And, Happy Republic Day!

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Making fun of Page 3 culture

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Have to say, I just love the new Hindu ads. Making fun of your competition is not just unexpected from India’s most sober newspaper but it is also rare in India. Are these ads a direct response to The Times of India’s Chennai campaign, where the ads alleged that the Hindu put people to sleep? Perhaps not, since the Hindu campaign seems all-India and directly accuses the Times of dumbing its readers down. There is nothing implied in the Hindu ad – we can clearly see that all the idiots being quizzed on their knowledge (or lack of it) claim to read The Times of India, bleeped out though the name may be.

     

    The print ads include one which says “we also have pages 1,2, 4, 6” and so on, a clear dig at The Times’s introduction of society and celebrity news on Page 3 of the Bombay Times many years ago. “Page 3” culture is now part of our lexicon and indeed Madhur Bhandarkar even made a film about it, almost as scathing as the Hindu’s ads. The funny thing is that we always have had a society-celebrity media, what Bombay Times did was to both magnify and expand it. The even funnier thing is that almost every other publication in the country was quick to copy the TOI. Even the Hindu, which may not have a celebrity circus page, was increased its light feature content.

     

    It’s also curious that DNA ran a very similar campaign to the Hindu’s recently – interviewing young people who knew nothing about anything except Bollywood and then it turns out that they only read DNA After Hrs! In DNA’s case, there was apparent pride in ignorance; Hindu mocks it.

     

    In these times, when the media itself has become the news, the Hindu ads – done by Ogilvy – are bound to get attention and approval. There are many who believe that trivialisation of the media is dangerous and that there is cynical marketing manipulation of our apparent obsession with Bollywood. The Press Council of India chairman Markandey Katju is probably nodding away happily, especially when he sees line like “Because government malfunctions matter more than wardrobe malfunctions” – another of the Hindu’s print ads.

     

    For my money however far worse than the trivialisation of newspapers is the fact that all celebrity news and gossip is actually fake – paid for by the stars, studios, sponsors and so on. The readers are fooled into believing that what they are reading is the result of some digging up by journalists – as it used to be in the old days, even film news. The truth of course is that it is handed to newspapers by public relations companies or by the marketing department to the editorial staff.

     

    Bad enough that we are trivial, we are also, it seems, foolish and exploited!

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Headlines Today scores on 2G

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The fault is mine: I got to the television two hours late on Thursday – after the Supreme Court ruling on the 2G licences. The punishment was purgatory: I knew something had happened but I had no idea what. Every TV news channel showed a press conference addressed by the BJP’s Arun Jaitley reacting to the court ruling but no one told us what the ruling was. I travelled up and down the channels that my cablewallah allows me and learnt nothing. Jaitley could have been ranting or talking sense but since I had no context I could not fully appreciate or understand him.

     

    After 10 minutes of fruitless frustration I did the sensible thing: got online and read the latest updates by print journalists. Till Thursday evening, the whole thing was only about “reaction” on television, sometimes from small-time party functionaries and sometimes by bigwigs like Kapil Sibal who had to counter Jaitley with his own spin. One poor reporter even ran after the judge AK Ganguly as he retired and asked him how he felt. The honourable judge ran away as fast as he could. All through the day they broadcast a reaction from some telecom honcho but never told us who he was.

     

    It says something about the way television journalists operate that they cannot explain events or interpret them for viewers themselves. Something as important as this 2G ruling requires reporters and anchors to get all the facts themselves and tell the viewers exactly what has happened before playing the “reaction” game. Also, instead of telecasting every single press conference live in its entirety, they could edit or cut back to studio to explain what was happening mid-way.

     

    Business channels were, sadly, no better since they are all obsessed with the stock market and cannot consider implications beyond that. But one would imagine that the cancelling of 122 licences would have huge impact on their constituencies. I guess one imagines wrong.

     

    The most sensible TV debate on the subject was a surprise – it was not at prime time and it was on Headlines Today. Thanks largely to Paranjoy Guha Thakurta as well as to Sandeep Bamzai, we got a clear idea of the economic and political implications of the judgment.

     

    The rest of debates seem to have the usual suspects who talk about everything – Chandan Mitra, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Mahesh Jethamalani, Nirmala Seetharaman, Renuka Chowdhury and perhaps Suhel Seth was there somewhere but I didn’t catch him.

     

    Niira Radia and Ratan Tata were not there.

     

    * * *

     

    This round once again goes to newspapers who explained the matter in every detail from the political implications for the UPA government to the business implications for the telcos to the fortunes of A Raja and P Chidambaram and so on. However, while every newspaper and TV channel said it was 122 licences, The Times of India decided on 121. No idea why.

     

    Most newspaper editorials did raise the question of the unfairness meted out to telcos which were being punished for following government laws. This is a tricky one. It would be interesting to see whether there’s more discussion about the dangers of corporate lobbying and the role played by journalists in getting A Raja the ministry of his choice.

     

    I’m not holding my breath, actually.

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Yuvraj cancer news first lead?

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The unveiling of Justice OP Saini’s verdict on the petition filed by Subrahmaniam Swamy to make P Chidambaram a co-accused in the 2G spectrum case on Saturday was fascinating. Times Now gave us second by second coverage about nothing at all happening outside Patiala Court. The other channels thankfully limited themselves to studio panel discussions about the possible implications of this verdict.

     

    The BJP was very cocksure that Swamy would succeed. The Congress was largely invisible, relying on a few of its friends to state its case. The old telecom companies were part of the discussion. The new ones (and now licence-less) were invisible.

     

    As Navika Kumar talked about the butterflies in her stomach waiting for the verdict (why?), she conceded that Chidambaram may have bigger airborne insects inside his digestive organs. This waiting outside this courtroom was apparently the most exciting journalistic assignment ever! Wow!

     

    Anyway after hours of pointless speculation and some interesting debates on other channels, the judge then called Swamy for a private discussion and cleared the courtroom. Immediate outrage at this ill-treatment of the media! But then someone pointed out that the judge wasn’t in the courtroom at all. More inconsequential details followed. Then the judge just said the petition was dismissed.

     

    Suddenly, we were told that actually Swamy looked deflated when he came out of the private discussion with the judge. This, however, was not noticed before the petition was dismissed, a sort of after the fact observation.

     

    As expected the BJP tried to put up a brave face and then vanished and the Congress, to its credit, did not go too far in its victory dances. Swamy appeared “first” on Times Now but refused to answer who finances his penchant for litigation. By Sunday his bravado was back and in Monday morning’s papers he was saying the judge was good but his judgment was bad (damned with faint praise?) and Swamy would be going higher up the judicial ladder.

     

    * * *

     

    Sad as the news of cricketer Yuvraj Singh’s cancer is, am not sure whether it is first lead news, but most Indian papers seem to think so.

     

    * * *

     

    The divorce between Sahara and Indian cricket also appears to have come as a surprise to our intrepid sports journalists and here again Yuvraj Singh’s health seems to be have been an issue. Some further investigation here may be a good idea but whenever a big money player is involved, the media’s newsgathering resources seem to shrink.

     

    * * *

     

    Press Council of India chairman Markandey Katju is apparently on twitter with the handle (@mark_katju. There is some speculation on twitter whether this is a genuine account or not but today’s newspapers seem to think it is. I’m following it anyway just to check.

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Porn-happy Karnataka ministers hog TV limelight

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Was it naughty of ministers in Karnataka to be supposedly watching pornography when they should have been paying attention to a debate in the assembly? Undoubtedly, yes. Was it necessary for TV channels to show this almost non-stop on Wednesday morning, having already milked it on Tuesday night? Arguably, not. But the morning onslaught was relentless – for those who might imagine there was nothing else happening in the country, why, the first round of voting started in Uttar Pradesh. So far, this has been billed as the most important assembly election yet, a precursor to the next general elections. But for a while, it was the porn-happy ministers of Karnataka, who have apparently since resigned. Not happily of course. The young anchors and reporters of TV channels were very happy that these moral policers had been caught out in this manner.

     

    * * *

     

    The newspapers on Wednesday morning had the slightly more depressing if less salacious news about India’s GDP forecast being pulled down to 6.9 per cent because of the economic slowdown. This is the sort of news which neither mainstream TV news nor business channels seem equipped to handle. International news channels on the other hand run from civil unrest in any part of the world to economic recession in the west in an endless loop. The world and the west are both usually very accommodating.

     

    * * *

     

    The inquisition of former Indian Premier League head Lalit Modi on Times Now on Tuesday night was an illuminating lesson in how not to conduct an interview. Arnab Goswami, Sanjay Jha and Boria Majumdar would have done Torquemada and the Auta da Fe proud. Whatever your views on Modi, having asked him to speak to you it is usually better to let him say what he has to. Tough questions are fine, indeed necessary, but yelling at him about why he tweets what he does is ridiculous. Modi’s interview with Rajdeep Sardesai on CNN-IBN was more intelligible. Times Now sometimes overplays its role as the sole guardian of India.

     

    * * *

     

    India is pitifully short of experts, the newspapers tell us – Crest ran an excellent article on this a few months ago – and nowhere is this more evident than on TV. The same people are rounded up and herded from studio to studio where they are everywhere “exclusive” and experts on everything.

     

    It is always amusing to see senior TV anchors having to rely on senior print journalists to analyze events – why are they so frightened of doing it themselves? I know why of course but surely they should have gathered enough confidence by now to bullshit away by themselves?

     

    Good for print journalists of course and I hope they pay them for their expertise?

     

    * * *

     

    Hrithik Roshan needs to sack his publicist and take his money back from Medianet for allowing a picture of himself to be printed on the front page of Bombay Times where he looks like CGI dinosaur of some kind with an over-developed thorax.

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    SIT’s report makes for exciting TV but bad journalism

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    The Special Investigation Team as appointed by the Supreme Court to look at the involvement of Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi in the Gujarat riots of 2002, particularly with reference to the Gulbarg society case has submitted its report. The report is still in sealed cover. But television spent half of last week going to town over the “clean chit” given to Modi and promptly a number of TV debates were held.

     

    The BJP, quite relieved to get a break from the behaviour of its ministers in Karnataka, sent out its publicity army in full force. TimesNow insisted that it had exclusive “leaks” from the sealed report while every other channel had their “sources” who told them what was in it.

     

    Newspapers, however, were forced to be more circumspect, although Times of India did initially blow up this “clean chit” – ironically on the same day that it headlined the slamming of Modi by the Gujarat High Court over his government’s inaction during the riots.

     

    By Friday morning, newspapers decided to wait for the actual report even as beleaguered BJP spokesperson Nirmala Seetharaman was begging channels to wait for the report. Some like Swapan Dasgupta and Yatin Oza were happy to jump the gun and blame secularists, the Congress, Muslims, activists and other wicked people for blaming Modi.

     

    Much as all this makes for exciting television, it also makes for bad journalism. One can understand our desire for tamasha but one can hope that at least we have some facts before we start jumping to conclusions.

     

    * * *

     

    It was interesting to hear Chief Election Commissioner Y Quereshi telling NDTV how hard the commission has worked to encourage higher voter interest during these UP elections. For some reason, after that the discussion became about low voter interest in Mumbai with lyricist Javed Akhtar and columnist Sandeep Desai holding forth. Quereshi did point out that Allahabad’s track record was worse than Mumbai’s.

     

    * * *

     

    The arrival of Comedy Central on our televisions has meant the welcome addition of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart to our homes. It is well worth watching at 11.30 every night as the comedian takes on American and world politicians and politics, among other things. No one is spared, which is wonderful.

     

    Of course, I understand that all Indian people and things are sacrosanct and far above humour and satire and must never be so sullied but still, kudos to Cyrus Broacha and The Week that Wasn’t on CNN-IBN.

     

    * * *

     

    While on satire, Europe has to sometimes win the day for its devil-may-care attitude. The clip about Rafael Nadal and the power of Spanish athletes – implying drug use – on the satirical programme Les Guignols, shown on the French + Canal channel has Spain up in arms. Legal action will be taken says Spain, as this is one more in a series of allegations by various French sportspersons and media that Spanish sportspersons take performance-enhancing substances. The clip, available on YouTube, is very wicked!

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Expect the same old, same old this Valentine Day

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    Television is the favourite whipping boy of most media commentators and, for the most part, not only is it justified but it also great fun. (Is it also a coincidence that most media commentators have a print background?) But this Sunday’s newspapers were so dull that TV seemed to be a brutal relentless machine working its poor journalists to the bone with its constant hunger for more and more news and therefore deserving of much sympathy. I get five newspapers on a Sunday and finished the lot in an hour.

     

    Most Sunday papers run on a weekly cycle, which means there is ample time to plan and execute. But instead of fresh ideas and stories, we got the same old, same old. It is amply clear that the cutting of newsgathering resources and the desire to replace all talent with an army of sub-editors and, yes, boys and girls has led to a lack of imagination in newsrooms. Is there any point hoping that this is a temporary trend?

     

    Valentine’s Day, which is tomorrow, therefore threatens to bore us to tears as we read about real and manufactured love, as we did last year and the year before.

     

    We are constantly told in the media that we have to appeal to young audiences but I refuse to believe that every 20-year-old in the country is a dimwit who has no chance of recalling the same claptrap which was fed to him or her last year.

     

    * * *

     

    Can someone in The Times of India please get a promotion quick for wonderful stories to promote the boss’s daughter, so we can stop reading stories about Trishla Jain’s exhibition? The subject seems to have been stretched to the absolute limit.

     

    * * *

     

    TV and print seem to have taken quite opposing views on the army chief and his battle over his date of birth. TV was all for General VK Singh and put the government in the dock – and any studio guests who said otherwise were immediately put in the “unpatriotic” category.

     

    In newspapers however, commentators were more balanced and the dangers of the army chief’s actions were discussed. Now that the Supreme Court has rapped the army chief and the government on the knuckles, a more sober approach is being taken. Well, sort of – some sections of the media have now decided that the army chief must resign to protect his honour.

     

    This obsession with other people’s honour is a new media phenomenon andIndia’s star cricketers are its usual victims.

     

  • In Freaking News, Ranjona Banerji reviews the fare on primetime news and in the papers

    Need to relook at aid

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    In a total break from television, let’s look at today’s newspapers and some thought-provoking opinion pieces. On The Times of India’s edit page, Ramesh Thakur looks at the conundrum of foreign aid which helps the donor more than the recipient. The issue has popped up again with the British media replaying Union finance minister Pranab Mukherjee’s year-old comment that the aid which India gets from Britain is “peanuts”.

     

    Thakur discusses how aid can often be crippling to a country trying to pick itself out of a crisis and what is most required is not handouts but forcing governments to perform. The Africa experience with aid has been much discussed and certainly no continent has suffered as much. Pakistan is also paying the price of too much and not even home-grown development.

     

    When India tried to stop aid from Britain, it was the British agencies which asked for the aid to continue. The call in Britain is to use that money internally, needed in times of cutbacks. It would make good sense perhaps for the governments of India and Britain to relook at aid to India. If we don’t need it and they do, why should we still take it?

     

    **

     

    In the Business Standard late last week, Mihir Sharma argued that contrary to popular belief, Indian governments give too many handouts to the rich and middle classes (“Handouts for the well-heeled”). It’s a well-argued piece, bolstered by facts, which should prove a shocker to middle class thinkers and people who usually see the poor as some undeserving, greedy, grasping lot who are a burden to the exchequer.

     

    **

     

    Sundeep Sengupta on the Hindu’s edit page puts into perspective how far India has strayed from its earlier stand on climate change and the consequences of conceding so much ground in Durban. Climate change no longer seems to be a hot ticket as far as the Indian media is concerned but that doesn’t make it any less important!
    Another subject which hasn’t perhaps been adequately discussed is the situation in Syria, especially from the Indian point of view. Krishnan Srinivasan, former Indian foreign secretary, has a look at the war-like situation in Syria and examines the role of UN sanctions.

     

    **

     

    Since it is Valentine’s Day, the Deccan Chronicle has looked at it seriously. Novelist Charu Nivedita questions whether India can know real love, hampered as it is by convention!

     

    On which note…