Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Home Blog Page 6899

Saba Naqvi: The line between being a journalist and being an AAP cheerleader

Gaurav
-
0
Saba Naqvi: The line between being a journalist and being an AAP cheerleader

The news of controversial journalist turned AAP leader Aashish Khetan threatening journalists online is still fresh in our minds. When some journalists tweeted a link to a very damning report of the corrupt practices being followed by AAP the party and also its Government, Khetan lost his cool and admonished them and even went as far as threatening them. Perhaps the realisation that this information will open a pandora’s box was what led to the outburst.

One of the allegations made in the report was that AAP had appointed as many as 25 journalists on the governing bodies of  28 colleges funded by the government affiliated to the Delhi University. They achieved this by dissolving the governing bodies despite opposition from the university and hundreds of non-permanent teachers. Apparently, most of them were working journalists, many of whom report and write about AAP. The list of these journalists got leaked online and can be verified from here (some of them have rejected the appointments):

As columnist Anand Ranganathan noted on twitter, most of the names of journalists are mentioned as “recommendations” but it seemed that the recommendations were accepted in totality. Two very prominent names on the list were those of journalists M K Venu, founding editor of thewire.in, a leftist site, and that of Saba Naqvi, a journalist and TV panelist. While Mr M K Venu rejected the appointment, Saba Naqvi happily chose to accept AAP’s gift to her.

What might have been the reason to give Saba Naqvi this honour? Surely it had nothing to do with her hagiography of the messiah of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal? The other ex-journalist who wrote on AAP, Ashutosh is already in AAP.

After the leak that Saba Naqvi had indeed been appointed on a Governing council, old media followed the code of Omerta, with no one reporting this news, while social media began asking tough questions of this journalist. She had remained silent when she was appointed, but now, the justification given by her on twitter, after she was questioned, was this:

2
Saba Naqvi’s response

Has a journalist, who is supposed to be an independent, unbiased reporter, openly accepted that her single-minded goal is to thwart the RSS? Is this the role of a journalist? Can the bogey of RSS be raised to justify the acceptance of a political handout? The appointments were recommended as early as  July 2015. It is almost a year now. Did we see any disclosure or announcement from Naqvi for so long, before this leaked out?

It is not illegal for anyone to accept political handouts and largesses. Many parties do it and have done it in the past and so also journalists have also accepted the same. But once journalists openly admit that their agenda is not reporting, but is rather to keep a section of the society at bay, for which they have a visceral hatred, then the so-called journalism of such journalists must be placed under scrutiny.

Take for example this flowery “tribute” to Arvind Kejriwal and AAP offered by his co-opted political appointee, Saba Naqvi. This was written long after the appointment to the Governing Council.

A tribute
A tribute

Is this a fair, unbiased, honest assessment of AAP then? Or is this a piece which is written out of gratitude to dear leader who rewarded a hack? The entire article only speaks of the glories of AAP rule, some maybe genuine, some maybe over-hyped. A rally in Punjab means AAP gets entry into “new terrain”. The odd-even scheme which failed in reducing pollution is hailed for reducing traffic and “the special ability of Kejriwal and his young party to do unconventional things“. The piece is littered with praise and adulation for the great leader.

Naqvi signs off the piece as “Delhi-based author and journalist”, no disclosure about her being appointed by Arvind Kejriwal, the person who she is deifying, on the governing council of a college. This is how journalism works in India.

Or take the time when AAP’s nationwide ad frenzy had created a furore. For days on end, Delhi based AAP advertised in virtually every part of the country, with double-page “advertisements”. The ads, were designed to give the effect that they were news reports, whereas they were actually advertisements. Eventually it was revealed that the Delhi Government had splurged over Rs 15 crores in 3 months on this blitzkreig. And Saba Naqvi came to the defense of her benefactor AAP:


The tweet is stunningly idiotic.

Firstly, the use of whataboutery as the only means to defend her benefactor Kejriwal.

Secondly, comparing the advertisement expense of a national party, to that of a regional party which has electoral presence in only 2 small Northern Indian states.

Thirdly, the ad expense during a national election campaign being compared to the ad expense when there are no state elections coming up in which AAP is contesting.

Fourth, the AAP ads were paid for by the Delhi Government, i.e. by Delhi’s common taxpayer, whereas BJP’s 2014 ad campaign was paid for by the party, not from taxes collected for the welfare of the state.

To a layman, the argument put forth by Naqvi may seem illogical, but when you consider she has been benefited by AAP, it all makes sense.

There seems to be a growing conflict of interest situation. Naqvi praises Kejriwal in her book, gets a plum posts, goes on to further praise Kejriwal. All fine, but until you consider she is supposed to be a journalist. Ironically, this is what she wrote on “Augusta Patrakars” (she spells Agusta as Augusta):

We can question the accepted practice in the media of accepting hospitality from anyone, but just the act of going on a sponsored trip does not make a journalist corrupt. Personally, no one ever offered me such trips as I am unlikely to accept a corporate sponsored trip. But that’s me and my personal code.

Seems she broke her personal code for AAP? Or are only foreign trips included in her code? As this secret is now out, that she is one of the journalists who were rewarded by AAP, we must now wait and watch how many media houses drop her from their shows, their columns, or at least educate the reader about her background. And we must also wait for Naqvi, to claim that she is being attacked by Hindutva misogynistic bigots for being a free-thinking muslim woman, and not for her gross impropriety as a journalist.

New York Times uses lies to insult victims of Godhra carnage in a report on Gulbarg Society judgement

Nirwa Mehta
-
0
New York Times uses lies to insult victims of Godhra carnage in a report on Gulbarg Society judgement

Yesterday was the verdict of the Gulbarg massacre that took place during the 2002 riots in Gujarat. The 2002 riots were one of the worst riots which ever took place in Gujarat, a state which is prone to communal riots. Before 2002, the worst riots in Gujarat’s history took place in 1969 during the rule of Hitendra Desai, a Congress chief minister. The riots saw the death of over 660 people (official number) whereas, the unofficial number is pegged at over 2000, most of which were Muslims.

I don’t want to get into how fair/unfair the verdict is. I am no legal expert.

But I will take it upon myself to correct the international media when they write about my beloved Gujarat. I was going through this New York Times piece on the verdict.

I want to show how an international publication either misrepresents the facts, or chooses to completely ignore stating them.

Ellen Barry, South Asia bureau chief of NYTimes, in her article writes

A judge in Ahmedabad, Gujarat’s largest city, acquitted 36 people for lack of evidence, including a police inspector and a midranking official in the Bharatiya Janata Party, led by Mr. Modi.

Agreed. I like how she describes Ahmedabad as Gujarat’s largest city, but misses out on the fact that it was no ordinary judge. He was a special judge appointed for the special court.

Rest of the article is in poor taste, but I will not let my political inclination cloud my dislike for the lack of facts.

However, my blood started boiling when she quoted Teesta Setalvad and described her as “an activist who has spearheaded a campaign to prosecute Gujarat officials”. She very conveniently forgot to give the disclaimer that Setalvad is accused by the residents of the Gulbarg society of embezzling donation money they collected for building a museum. Although the Supreme Court has said Setalvad and her husband should not be arrested, they have been told to provide all documents needed.

Barry could have given this little disclaimer to give the international readers a fair chance at getting a balanced view.

Moving along, Barry then describes how the 2002 riots started.

The Gujarat riots began on a February morning, when a train carrying Hindu pilgrims was surrounded by a mob of Muslims and caught fire at a train platform in Godhra. An investigation later concluded that the fire had been accidental, but it was widely blamed on Muslims. The remains of 59 people burned to death on the train were displayed in Ahmedabad, stoking anti-Muslim fury.

Pay attention to the point where Barry claims the train carrying Hindu pilgrims “caught fire”. To substantiate this, Barry links back to another NYT piece, this time from 2002 itself. And oddly, this piece does not even contain the word “caught”. All it says is the train was “set on fire” and multiple occasions:

An angry Muslim mob Wednesday morning set fire to a train loaded with Hindu activists………..some in the mob, who had been stoning the coaches, set fire to the train, probably with gasoline from a nearby pump….”

So Barry has no basis of saying that the train “caught fire” and in fact her own provided links show a contrarian view. Further, note how Barry says:

An investigation later concluded that the fire had been accidental, but it was widely blamed on Muslims

Again Ellen Barry is playing with facts. A Judicial Commission set up to enquire into the incident had found that it was indeed set on fire, and courts had sentenced several people based on this.  But Barry was probably referring to the report by the second commission set up, the Bannerjee Committee, which was set up by UPA 1, and which contradicted the first report. Barry chose deliberately to hide the fact that courts had subsequently thrown out the Bannerjee Commission report, even restraining the Centre from tabling the committee report in Parliament or taking any further action on it. How convenient of Barry.

If Barry is to be believed that the train “caught fire”, then Farooq Mohammad Bhana, who’s arrested under charges of conspiracy to set the train on fire must be innocent.

This is how Times of India describes Bhana’s alleged involvement:

ATS officials said Bhana, who was on the run for 14 years, was staying in the slums of Andheri (east) in Mumbai under the fake identity of Mohammed Umar for the last seven years. He even did some petty work on contractual basis at the Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation. “We have seized some forged identity documents from him,” said an ATS official.

In 2002, Bhana was an independent councillor in the Godhra municipality, representing Polan Bazar ward. His arrest is considered a prized catch as investigators say he was involved in the alleged train burning conspiracy “right from the beginning till the end.”

J K Bhatt, inspector general of police, ATS, said, “We suspect that Bhana could have visited Pakistan while being on the run. He was staying in Mumbai for the last seven years. We are probing whether he had procured a fake passport.” He was remanded in eight-day SIT custody.

Elaborating on Bhana’s role in the train carnage, ATS officials said that he was present at a meeting in Aman Guest House where the conspiracy to burn the train was hatched on February 26, 2002. “Bhana had allegedly instructed other conspirators about the attack plan and directed them to store 140 litres of petrol to burn the coach,” said Bhatt.

J R Mothaliya, member of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing Godhra train carnage, said that Bhana was involved in the “entire planning, right from the beginning till the end”.

Bhana was arrested on May 18, 2016. By the way, NYT did not report on Bhana being arrested. Guess it wasn’t important enough. Guess, Barry has finally adopted Indian and Indian media when it comes to reporting news.

So called South Asia bureau chief for NYT, Ellen Barry, welcome to India. We love you

Congress IT cell caught spreading fake pics of BJP supporter

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Congress IT cell caught spreading fake pics of BJP supporter

The Congress social media team has often been caught peddling untruths on social media. Just 2-3 months ago, a Congress IT cell member who has now been thrown out, was caught spreading a photoshopped “survey” showing PM Modi in bad light. After our expose the account apologised and deleted the tweet. Yesterday, Congress leader Ajay Maken too was caught in a similar situation when he was shared picture where he tried to claim that “Service Charge” which is not a tax but a source of income for restaurants, was also one of the taxes levied by Governments:


Add to this the fact that Congress and AAP trolls love to harass independent, free thinking women online, like Shefali Vaidya, only because she supports BJP. Shefali has already told us how she was harassed, abused and even her child was threatened on social media.

Combine the above: photoshop skills of Congress and and the pathological hatred for people supporting the BJP then what you get is this: Congress IT cell members and spokespersons spreading fake pictures of a social media post which is touted to be made by Shefali Vaidya, but which actually belongs to a fake profile.

These are the tweets by Rachit Seth who claims to be from the “Indian National Congress MSM Communication Department” and of Gaurav Pandhi  who claims to be a member of “Digital Communication at Indian National Congress”.

Tweets of Congress IT cell
Tweets of Congress IT cell

Congress spokesperson Priyanka Chaturvedi too tried to help spread the above image by replying to a tweet by another Congress sympathiser (the original tweet was later deleted):


//platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsThey claimed that the post was by Shefali Vaidya, whereas the post was actually by a facebook profile called “Shefali Vidya”. The profile seems to have been created recently, and seems to be posting only messages which could serve as embarrassment to Right Wing supporters. Further, although the profile is named “Vidya” the screenshot used by the Congress IT cell says “Vaidya” which clearly shows that photoshop was used. So a fake profile’s screenshot is photoshopped and used to malign and harass Shefali Vaidya. 

Photoshop experts
Photoshop experts

When Shefali pointed out to both Pandhi and Chaturvedi that the screenshot is not hers and is fake, both of them did not pay heed to her points but ridiculed her:

3
Pandhi’s reply
4
Chaturvedi’s reply

Being a national spokesperson and a woman, it was expected that at least Chaturvedi would sympathise with a woman being harassed. But party loyalties are stronger than ties of humanity hence she chose to ridicule and ignore Shefali Vaidya. //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Contradictory media reports lead to confusion over beef found at Dadri

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Contradictory media reports lead to confusion over beef found at Dadri

Recently we read reports in all media that contrary to the initial “prima facie” reports, the meat found at Dadri was indeed beef or rather more specifically: “of cow or its progeny”. While the nature of the meat does not take anything away from the fact that a very gruesome and vile crime occurred in Dadri, the reporting of the latest twist indeed warrants scrutiny.

If reports in media houses such as India Today, Hindustan Times, Mumbai Mirror (which is based on a PTI report), Deccan Chronicle, Times of India (based on a ANI report), The Hindu and ABP News are to be believed then the meat was found in Akhlaq’s home or refrigerator.

chronicle
Deccan Chronicle
ht
Hindustan Times
idty
India Today
mirror
Mumbai Mirror

 

ABP News
ABP News

But as we see news reports from Economic Times, Times of India (a TNN report) and NDTV we are told that the meat was not from Akhalaq’s house, but was found in a garbage dump / dustbin / tri-junction near Akhlaq’s house. The Times of India report bases this theory on the version of an unnamed “senior UP Police officer” while the Economic Times says that they obtained a copy of the seizure memo prepared by the UP Police on the day of the incident which confirmed that the sample was taken from meat found by sub-inspector Tej Pal Singh from a “tri-junction near a transformer“ in the village.

If one goes back to the earlier reports from December, which had “prima facie” declared the meat to be mutton, they too  indicated that the meat was sourced from inside Akhlaq’s house. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Even media reports from just days after the incident, which mentioned that the meat had been sent for testing, said that the meat “which was consumed” or which was from the fridge of Akhlaq, had been sent for testing. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). One cannot find the mention of any dustbin or dump in these reports.

The handwritten note which specifies the nature of the meat also makes no mention of the source of the meat, hence it is indeed intriguing as to how the media has found out the source of the meat.

This small detail changes the complexion of the case, because if the meat was in Akhlaq’s house then there can be a claim that there was a genuine reason for the anger of the villagers (although it doesn’t justify a murder). And on the other hand if the meat was from outside Akhlaq’s house, then a claim can be made that either Akhlaq threw away the meat, or worse, it was planted by someone to “frame” Akhlaq.

In this situation it is bewildering how at the time when the meat was sent for testing and at the time when based on prima facie tests, the meat was said to be mutton, all media reports were unanimous in saying that the meat was indeed from Akhlaq’s house, but now as soon as the final report says it was in fact beef, a few reports carry a new found piece of information that the meat was not sourced from Akhlaq’s house. Was the media getting it wrong all this while and have they suddenly got the right information? Or is this new information a cover up?

Irrespective of what the meat was, Akhlaq must get justice and his murderers must be punished in the most severe manner. Meanwhile, the search for the facts regarding this aspect must continue.

AAP leader Aashish Khetan loses cool, threatens journalists after exposé of AAP’s corruption

OpIndia Staff
-
0
AAP leader Aashish Khetan loses cool, threatens journalists after exposé of AAP’s corruption

Yesterday, controversial journalist and now AAP leader, Aashish Khetan unleashed a set of tweets on journalists, full of anger and even a few threats. What prompted this reaction?

A website called FountainInk released a detailed investigative report on the functioning of AAP the party and its Government. The report revealed widespread corrupt practices, disappointed MLAs, malpractices to influence media and techniques used by the party to suppress negative information. Some of the key points were:

1. Delhi Government gave honorary positions to journalists at educational institutions by dissolving the governing bodies of 28 colleges despite opposition from the university. AAP nominated 25 journalists and some former journalists listed as “Educationists” to these bodies, making for more than 20 per cent of all nominations. At least four senior journalists in the Bennett Coleman group (which publishes The Times of India, The Economic Times and Navbharat Times)  had accepted the appointment but had to resign as such office goes against group policy.

2. Party workers, businessmen who didn’t have a background in the education industry, were listed as “social workers”, some others were listed simply as “Professional” to draft them into above bodies. The posts play a pivotal role in the hiring process. These appointments are also the ones for which huge bribes are paid.

3. AAP has a list of digital marketing consultants and crores of rupees are paid for such consulatncy, to manipulate online news such that positive news is pushed up and negative news about AAP is suppressed. The report cites the example of the scam in which Minister Gopal Rai was caught renewing licences of only favoured autorickshaws, and how the stories were suppressed.

4. A tainted firm, which was rejected by other states and even the previous Delhi Government was given a contract for High Security Registration Plates. Officials who raised an alarm over past misconduct of the firm were threatened into silence and the firm got business from the Delhi government. In exchange AAP workers and MLAs were “enriched” by the said firm.

5. AAP has also started a lucrative “transfer-posting” industry where officials are either transferred to a particular post because of their ability to generate cash through various means, or because the officer coughs up enough money for party funds for a transfer to a particular department or for a promotion. The report also gives a detailed modus-operandi of the entire scheme.

6. In October 2015 AAP directed its MLAs in Delhi to contribute Rs 1 lakh each per month to fund its Punjab campaign. Later the party declared then that the plan had been shelved. Barely six months later, however, it has quietly passed on instructions to MLAs to deposit Rs 1.5 lakh every month towards the Punjab elections, according to several party workers and MLAs interviewed for the story. MLAs now claim that they cannot stay honest even if they want to, thanks to this demand.

The report further claims that multiple attempts to contact AAP spokespersons, Nagendra Sharma, media advisor to chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, and leaders like Ashutosh and Aashish Khetan failed. They didn’t respond to calls on their mobile phones. An email questionnaire sent to Khetan went unanswered.

What sparked off Khetan’s outburst was the fact that another controversial journalist, Rana Ayyub had shared the story. Hartosh Singh Bal, another journalist also shared the story on Twitter. Mind you, this story was originally published by the site on 18th May, but somehow it landed up in the reading lists of both these journalists only almost 2 weeks later.


Khetan even went ahead and issued an open threat saying “One more trashy tweet & I will show what it takes to defend one’s honour”

He further went on to make personal attacks on the author of the story, who happened to be his ex co-worker:

The writer also responded on Twitter to Aashish Khetan:

Khetan also denied that he had ever been contacted by the author. In the heated exchange with Hartosh Singh Bal, Bal asked Khetan to clarify on some issues:


But when asked about specifics, Khetan did not answer:


The amusing thing in this entire incident is how people who were on the same side a few days ago have all changed stances. It was just on 30th May when AAP supremo Kejriwal had congratulated Rana Ayyub on her badly written book. The same content, which even the then Managing Editor of Tehelka Shoma Chaudhury, claimed “did not meet the necessary editorial standards”. Shoma had further said that “there were a lot of loopholes and serious concerns about the procedure that had been followed”.

Coming back to Kejriwal, here is AAP supporting Rana Ayyub a few days ago and then within a few days, Ayyub tweets out an anti-AAP story, to which she gets a threatening response from Aashish Khetan from AAP. Even Hartosh Singh Bal, who is a known Modi-hater was attacked by Khetan.

Does the key lie then in Khetan’s remark that Bal would get a reply only if Caravan (the publication he edits), sends a formal letter? Will we see a rebuttal of sorts in Caravan? Is this what one would call a “friendly-fight”? In fact even the original investigative report tells us that when AAP is hit with negative news, they create more negative news about their adversaries. Further, how does a story published on 18th May become a focal point almost 2 weeks later? So is this AAP playing by their own rule-book? Only time will tell.

5 times Arnab Goswami went ballistic on Newshour

OpIndia Staff
-
0
5 times Arnab Goswami went ballistic on Newshour

Arnab Goswami is India’s angry young man. Love him or hate him, you cant ignore him. Every night he picks up one topic, often picks a side, and then lambasts all the people on the other side. Yes he screams, yes he shouts, but he also has the highest TRPs. And on a macro-level, if you see his coverage he seems to be more neutral than most of India’s left-inclined anchors: He hounded the NDA Government for almost 2 weeks in a row to sack Sushma Swaraj over the Lalit-gate issue. He went after the Congress on the Agusta Westland scam. He attacked AAP over the fake degree issue.

And yesterday, he lost his cool. Known Congress sympathiser masquerading as an “independent” commentator, Sanjay Hegde was at the receiving end as he tried to allege that since Arnab is related to some BJP leaders, he is biased. Arnab does no take allegations on his independence lightly:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1Z_6-6Q8pc?start=1140]
This was not the first time. 2 years back BJP leader Meenakshi Lekhi had alleged that he received money from the Government, and she too got an Arnab special:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tF9YSXe2vo]

Then there was the time when Ashutosh of AAP got a earful from Arnab. Ashutosh actually thought he could extract an apology from Arnab!

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riQei4qtrMs]

During a debate on the Shashi Throor issue, Arnab literally asked Congress representative Shehzad Poonawala to leave the debate, humiliating him repeatedly for trying to disturb the debate:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoZJyNHZsnM]

And of course there was the time when the JNU students namely Umar Khalid and his friends, got on the wrong side of Arnab Goswami:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONvVrtosssk]

What are your favourite Arnab moments? Please write to us in the comments section below.

Online bullying of serving defence officers by journalists

rohitagarwal
-
0
Online bullying of serving defence officers by journalists

This is a follow up of a prior post on the issue of online intimidation by journalists, of ordinary social media users, especially of serving armed forces officers. I was witness to a similar incident, where a pair of journalists ganged up on someone, apparently a serving officer.

It started when the officer objected to one of them linking recent statements of Gen VK Singh as a minister, to question his selection for the army by the SSB. The journalist, instead of arguing the point raised, started mocking the questioner, and soon his colleague joined in taunting the officer. He even insinuated that the officer was being paid a ‘twitter allowance’ for his tweets.

01

Undeterred, the officer persisted with his original query.

01a

The journalist’s reply was a shocker – that just because the general had served in the army, he had no right to be in politics.

He then switched to personal attacks, even questioning the officer’s courage in battle. He continued mocking the officer, asking him if he had ‘filled up his forms to be on social media’, and then even accused him of being an impostor.

02a

02b

A few veterans including myself noticed this conversation and questioned the journalist’s assertions. Again, instead of debating his stand/views, he insinuated that I was being paid ‘twitter allowance’, and then proceeded to block me.

05

06

The whole episode raises serious questions about the conduct of such journalists vis à vis serving officers. The environment on social media has resulted in every assertion and utterance of anybody being open to scrutiny and remark. It’s an undeniable fact that after politicians, journalists are probably the most ‘trolled’ group online. There is a large section of people who are openly abusive and insulting to them, and this must be quite trying on their patience. There is very little they can do to such abusers apart from ignoring/blocking them. However, there is a distinct trend amongst the defence journalists to turn around and browbeat service officers, even when they’re not abusive and ask perfectly reasonable questions. This and this previous post on a similar exchange are clear illustrations of this trend.

The question is, why do these journalists, otherwise helpless against even the most abusive of trolls, consider service officers soft targets for venting their pent-up frustrations? By virtue of their beat, these defence correspondents get frequent opportunities to interact with senior officers. While visiting units and formations to cover stories, they are treated with the utmost respect and courtesy, with junior officers even being deferential to them (as they are with all guests). This possibly creates in their own mind a false sense of their own position being relatively higher up in the military hierarchy. Thus the obvious sense of outrage and contempt when their views are questioned online by a relatively junior officer.

Being familiar with the military environment, they are aware that if they report an alleged transgression by an officer to the highest headquarters (accessible to them due to their professional role), the officer concerned is likely to get in some amount of trouble. Although there are no rules prohibiting officers from being on social media and expressing their views (except on service and other prescribed matters), to a young officer serving a unit, a complaint of alleged misconduct coming down the chain of command all the way from Army HQ via intermediate formations would mean a lot of harassment, irrespective of the veracity of the charges. It is this fear that is being exploited by these journalists.

It is nobody’s case that service officers, or anyone for that matter, should be allowed to get away with being abusive or threatening online. Yet, it is also not in order to suppress their rightful freedom of expression just because they are part of a disciplined organization and respect rules. It is a pity if the adherence to the same rules is being used to threaten and browbeat them into silence, even if the issue raised by them are perfectly reasonable and nothing to do with security or service matters.

It is for the organization to take cognizance of such insults being heaped upon its officers and take steps to prevent their recurrence. This can include amplifying the current orders to mention, in addition to what serving personnel can’t do online, what they are permitted to do. We can take a page from similar orders for the US forces which are more elaborate, as under.

usp

In addition, the organization should also look at discouraging such conduct by journalists who derive their sense of power from their accreditation to the organization itself by blacklisting defaulters. And while the importance of good relations with the media is understood, the organization should realize that any wilful disrespect to one of its own members is a disrespect to the organization, and take strong steps to prevent sundry people from walking all over their officers.

What’s wrong with Tanmay Bhat’s video on Sachin & Lata and what’s wrong with the reaction

Gaurav
-
0
What’s wrong with Tanmay Bhat’s video on Sachin & Lata and what’s wrong with the reaction

Tanmay Bhat’s done it again. One of the most prominent faces from AIB has once again being engulfed in a controversy for his “jokes”. Last year, we had the AIB Roast, which was littered with expletives, was insulting, demeaning, rude and vile, and made a lot of people, angry. Most angry being the Archdiocese of Mumbai, with whom AIB met, after which they tendered an unconditional apology to the entire Christian community. The other groups offended are probably still fighting it out in courts.

What happened last year was simply this: The “Roast” which is supposed to be an offensive form of comedy, was brought from a mature society like USA to India, where people were grossly unprepared for it. While the people who willingly took part in it had probably given their consent, the people whose names were dragged into it without being a part of it had issues. Right from religious people to Bollywood celebs.

Come 2016 something similar has happened. But first a little background. So Snapchat (the scene of the crime) is another social media platform, which is known for images and videos. The key differentiator on Snapchat though is unlike Twitter or Youtube or Facebook, the images/videos shared there have a maximum life of 24 hours, after which they are auto-deleted. Photos get auto-deleted in a mere 10 seconds. Further, there is no commonly viewable Timeline per se, where one can troll the other. No comments section. No way to amplify your content beyond your reach. Naturally users can feel “untrollable”, hence freer to express views.

Owing to this, Snapchat has become popular for sending risque photos or making seemingly crass and inane comments. Understandably, the users get the feeling that the content there can be a little less civil since it will disappear within 24 hours. Users of the platform admit that there is indeed a lot of content which could be considered offensive. Of course, this is a by-choice platform, you need to opt-in to receive any such content.

Coming back to Tanmay Bhat, he has been doing an on-going series on Snapchat, which spoof’s Sachin Tendulkar and in this latest episode, Lata Mangeshkar also made an appearance. Things headed south when Tanmay uploaded this latest video from Snapchat onto Facebook. But Indian audiences have seen far too many people spoofing Sachin Tendulkar and even a few doing Lata Mangeskar acts, so what’s the problem?

The “jokes” in this video, were at the level of the AIB Roast. Insulting, crass, derogatory, but some may find them funny. And apparently, a lot of the content, for aforesaid reasons, is at similar “offensive” levels in snapchat. Conceptually, this was AIB Roast happening all over again. A piece of comedy, which is brought to an audience which is just not used to it. It is almost like that offensive joke you told your friends, at a private meeting, which you would dare not tell the public. EXCEPT Snapchat is not your group of friends, it is the public at large. The content of the video can be offensive to a wide ranging group: Sachin’s fans, Lata’s fans, Maharashtrians, “respect your elders” brigade, Feminists, “Dont-abuse” brigade and maybe even to a normal Indian.

The reaction to this video was different from the reaction to the AIB Roast though. The first people to take offense were not religious nuts or average twitter “trolls”. This time Bollywood stars led the way, stars across age groups and political and social spectrum. Riteish Deshmukh, Celina Jaitley, Anupam Kher, Kamaal R Khan (yes even him) were some of the celebs who spoke out.

After this came the usual social media outrage. Tanmay Bhat began getting hate from many corners. Some dug up his old (now deleted) tweets where had made some very offensive “jokes”. Some people did not go as far back but just went to his recent snapchat video itself where he was all pro-feminism, and how he had now mocked Lata Mangeshkar just because she looks old. Some floated conspiracy theories that this is a campaign to get people to use Snapchat, because a lot of Tanmay’s tweets were in fact asking people to come to Snapchat to see his “clarification”. People were offended and they vented their feelings. And as is the case with social media, some of it was over-amplified. It doesn’t help when you’re a person who in the past has said very offensive stuff. To add this, if you’re a known sympathiser of AAP, the outrage will also get a political colour.

Next came the real world outrage, and from where things began going down-hill. Someone from MNS lodged an FIR and threatened to beat up Tanmay. Cops began tracing IP addresses and taking action to take down the video. NCP held a protest against him. Pahlaj Nihalani suggested he be locked up. Basically people began over-reacting to what can at worst be called, bad, offensive “comedy”.

And then there were some who turned a new leaf (short-lived perhaps). Barkha Dutt, who usually stands up to every sort of abuse or offensive message on social media (especially against women), seemed to be supportive of Tanmay and his “jokes” on Lata Mangeshkar. One would have expected the feminist in Barkha to rise up and slam offensive messages about a celeb emanating from social media, but this time she seems to have played a different tune.

If Barkha and the others in favour of Tanmay’s freedom of expression are so adamant on this basic right then this should also extend to the likes of Kamlesh Tiwari, who till date is languishing in jails, but not one so called “liberal” is speaking up for him.

All in all, it’s a theatre of the absurd. And all for what? a stupid video.

This brings us back to the debate on free speech we had last year. Even when some morons had dragged AIB to court for the Roast, we were against the morons, but were happy that the court case may finally settle the laws on free speech in India. USA, which is one of the most free-speech friendly nations in the world, too has struggled with such issues. Today, an outfit like AIB won’t get jailed in the USA, because their courts have debated such issues for ages and now the legal system, as well as the society, has a fair idea about what constitutes obscenity and what not. The “Seven Dirty Words” is one of the prime examples of this.

In India, we still have to evolve, the people and so also the laws. Some distasteful words cannot and will not affect legends such as Sachin Tendulkar and Lata Mangeshkar. This does not mean there should be no outrage. If the offender has the Freedom to Express his “jokes” the viewers too have the Freedom of Expression to express their displeasure. And ideally it should stop there. But as the legal system stands, we can still approach the courts for such issues and that’s where this issue too is headed.

AIB of course have set an unfortunate precedent of apologising to a section of the public, so one wonders whether at some point anyone will emerge who manages to get enough leverage to force another apology.

Disclaimer: I am not a Sachin fan nor a Lata fan (nor a hater). I did find some bits offensive and I did laugh at some bits of Tanmay’s video.

One tonne onions sold for one rupee: The truth

Ashutosh Muglikar
-
0
One tonne onions sold for one rupee: The truth

Few days ago almost all media houses carried a story with a bizarre and sensational headline that a farmer in Pune earned Re 1 after selling nearly a tonne of his Onion crop. These news items and a copy of the invoice showing payment of Re 1 due to the farmer Devidas Parbhane have been shared widely on social media with huge backlash against the “Policies” of the Government and the “Apathy” of the farmers in Maharashtra. So is there any truth to this story?

The “Invoice”

The invoice dated 10th May 2016 which is in Marathi is issued by “Pallavi Trading Co. Pune” to the farmer, showing supply of 18 bags of Onions weighing 952 kgs at a price of Re. 1.6 per Kg. This way the total consideration comes to Rs. 1523. As the supply was done to an agency in Pune Agriculture Produce Market they deducted Commission (Rs.91.35), labour (Rs. 59) loading (Rs. 18.55), weighing (INR 33.30) and transport cost of Rs. 1320. When these charges (Rs. 1522) are deducted from the sale price (Rs. 1523) the farmer was supposed to receive net Re 1. Does this mean he sold “One tonne onions for Re. 1”?

Prices of Onions in Pune APMC on 10th May 2016

The rates as mentioned on Pune APMC website which can be accessed here for 10th May 2016 show that Onions received a minimum of INR 400 per quintal to a maximum of 800 per quintal. A simple reading of rates on different dates should tell you that the variance in rate is based on the “quality” of the onions and arrival quantity. As on today the Maharashtra State Agriculture Marketing Board website also displays near about same price range for Onions as was received by Farmers in Pune APMC on 10th May 2016.

So if rates are between 400-800 as claimed on the Pune APMC website, how come the farmer Devidas Parbhane received only Rs. 160 per quintal?

Upon enquiring with the Chairman of the Pune APMC and according to their clarification, it was brought to the fore that the said farmer had supplied “Chingli” quality of Onions. Chingli or “shallot” Onions are of small size. These onions are best used within a span of few days from the date of harvesting as they cannot be stored for a long time unlike other quality of onions which can be stored for months together.

Pune APMC Chairman revealed that the Chingli Quality of Onions are generally used for feeding livestock or at best used as fertilizers and seldom it’s used for human consumption. In fact this report also claims that the trading company has advised farmers not to get such onions to the market. Instead they can feed it to the animals or compost it to make fertiliser.

Yes, Rates are bad, but not as bad as Rupee 1 per tonne

Nowhere an attempt is being made to justify receipt of Rs. 160 per quintal (or Rs. 1.6 per kg) to the said farmer. However it is pertinent to note that in the same sensational news item, it’s mentioned that exports have fallen and production of onions has increased by 15-20% as per Maharashtra State Agricultural Marketing Board thereby causing a steep fall in the onion prices across the state.

So depending on the “quality” of the onions supplied by the farmer and taking into account the increase in production and other market forces prevalent, the price arrived for this quality was Rs. 1.6 per kg. On the same day, good quality onions were procured at Rs. 4 to Rs. 8 per kg by Pune APMC.

Did he actually get Rs 601 for his onions?

This is the most important aspect that emerges from the clarification issued. The APMC claims that the transport cost from Wadgaon to Pune is Rs 40 per bag. For the 18 bags of the farmer, the cost should have been Rs 720.The note further says, in this case, the farmer had taken Rs 600 advance, in cash, from the transport company called “Puja Transport” to take away the onions and sell. Hence in the final dues settlement bill, this Rs 600 was added to transport cost and recovered from the dues to the farmer, thereby leaving him with Re 1 only. So did the farmer receive Rs 600 (in advance) + Re 1 total Rs 601 for the crop? If this claim of APMC is true then the whole “Re 1 for 1 tonne” argument collapses completely. The amount may not be much but the sensationalism is lost.

Sensationalism by Media

Another fallacious argument which is observed in the articles is that the media tries to link this isolated incident to farmer suicides and shows the “apathy” and “neglect” of the state towards the farmers interests. The particular farmer does not even belong to Marathwada region and is not drought affected but this case is used to sell the idea that state is doing nothing for the farmers who are “reeling under severe drought”. There is no doubt that the state is under severe drought but is that in any way connected to this one isolated case? Is it correct to make a sweeping argument and write off all efforts because of one such case?

As per news reports, Maharashtra Government has already passed resolution allowing farmers to sell their produce freely anywhere in the state and removed the “hold” of APMC markets over the farm produce. This in itself is a bold step. It is not “compulsory” for any farmer to sell produce only at APMC as media houses are trying to make you believe. If at all the farmer decides to sell it at any APMC, he has to pay the mandatory charges and such decision shall be solely his.

Further the Government of India has started the National Agriculture Market connecting all APMC’s for providing real time information services for commodity arrivals & their prices, buy & sell trade offers. This is to achieve transparency in pricing. Particularly the Pune APMC also provides information about prices, arrival quantities on a daily basis and disseminates this information widely in surrounding areas so that no farmer is paid less by any Trader. Much more can be done for our farmers and Maharashtra State Government and Central Government are taking efforts.

The media, if they desire, can identify many real issues troubling our farmers and awaken the government machinery to bring about change. However making such fallacious arguments only shows that the intention is not to help the farmers but to grab eyeballs and create controversies and sell lies.

A Smriti Irani fan asks a question: Why?

Hariharan
-
0
A Smriti Irani fan asks a question: Why?

Dear Ms Irani,

In a recent social event of the expatriate families in Dar-es-Salaam, where I stay, husbands and wives were asked to fill independently a questionnaire. The idea was to check how much their views on various issues coincided— some simple Hindi serial type game. One of the questions was: Who is your female icon? You know what? My wife and I replied ‘Smriti Irani’.

Such is our faith in you. You are an icon for us. And when the icon puts the common enemy on the mat, it is a delightful sight. A masterful performance. That is what I felt when I watched your interview to Barkha Dutt—your 2nd in the last six months; in fact exactly on the six monthly anniversary of your first interview to her November 26, 2015. You put her on the defensive on many issues. A part of me enjoyed those precious moments when you steadfastly refused to yield even an inch to Barkha on the issue of hate she and NDTV nurture for BJP.

But then that was just a part of me, the emotional part. Another part, the logical one, asked me, especially after the childish excitement of watching you put Barkha in her place subsided, ‘Why this interview?’ It was an important day for you, a day that marked the 2nd anniversary of the BJP government in Delhi. You chose to be Amethi, which shows your commitment to the constituency though you lost the election. Right day, right venue, but why wrong company? I celebrate my birthday, anniversary and such important occasions in the company of near and dear ones, not with my sworn enemies.

Your genuine regret, you said, rightly so, was: Why would we go to a Barkha Dutt show when she demonises all of us? You voiced similar sentiments even during your previous interview. But you did not explain on both the occasions why you chose to swallow the regret and give the interview. Which makes me wonder whether there was a pressure on you to accord Barkha/ NDTV’s request. I would not be surprised if there was. After all, you are not the only one to rush to NDTV to give interview. Top BJP leaders—Arun Jaitely, Nitin Gadkari, Manohar Parikkar, and so on— make a beeline, ignoring the protests of online supporters.

Elaborating further, you said, ‘The regret is that I would talk to a Barkha Dutt and still not have her treat my leadership well.’ You will agree with me that this reason holds good even today. You would not have forgotten her recent open letter to Modi in which she poured venom on him. You were, in fact, tagged by her in her tweet promoting the open letter, which led to a spat between you and her. She used the pretext of JNU issue to recount and justify everything she had done since 2002. I would not like to go into the contents of her letter, which I feel has been written in bad taste. However, the fact that a rebuttal in OpIndia by a tweeple—not quite a celebrity like Barkha—trended in Twitter and was shared more than 9,000 times goes on to prove the revulsion she and her channel generate among BJP supporters.

If Barkha’s and her channel’s approach has not changed, what else has, to warrant the interview? Viewership of NDTV? If at all there is something that everyone—cutting across party lines, media lines, and political affiliations—agrees it is NDTV’s dwindling viewership. It comes a distant 3rd or 4th after Times Now. If you wanted your Amethi visit to be covered, which is a Hindi heartland, would it not have been better if you had chosen a Hindi channel? In any case, the viewership of Hindi News channels is far higher. Based on week 20’s (May 14th to 20th) viewership data of BARC, the viewership of top 5 Hindi News channels is 185 times that of the top 5 English channels.

Referring to the spat you had with Priyanka Chaturvedi in Twitter, you said that you had given a new lease of life to her by acknowledging her. Ma’am, it is not the Congress spokesperson you have given new lease of life, but Barkha Dutt and NDTV.

Though I hate, I am forced to compare this support-the-hostile-channel approach with what a weak Congress, which is on the verge of decimation and is so insecure as to ask its legislators to sign affidavits of support to Gandhi family, is doing to the more popular Times Now. The party has successfully reined in its spokespersons from participating in the News Hour. It beats me why a strong BJP cannot afford to ignore a weak NDTV?

I want to quote here the concluding part of your interview to Barkha in November 2015:

NDTV: Smriti Irani, pleasure talking to you, I hope it won’t be another year and a half before we speak.

Smriti Irani: Depends on the social media reaction. 

NDTV: Now come on, for somebody who said I don’t care about what people say should your decisions be guided by social media?

Smriti Irani: Please understand, these are the people; I have one kid called Shilpi Tiwari online, seven months pregnant, genuinely a very tough pregnancy, left everything, came there and sat there to help in Amethi. I call him Madcap Bagga, Tajender Bagga, who everybody in the Leftwing seems to hate, Bagga never asked me for anything, quietly came and put up posters supporting me, all the rickshaws of Amethi, I owe them, Barkha.

NDTV: But do you defend the kind of toxicity that you see on twitter?

Smriti Irani: I owe them

You owe us, Ms. Irani.

1...6,8986,8996,900...6,967Page 6,899 of 6,967

Contact: [email protected]

About us

News and opinion website that brings you reports and narrative from a perspective often ignored or suppressed by the mainstream media of India.

Follow us

© OpIndia.com