Friday, November 15, 2024
Home Blog Page 6943

Organizers rubbish conspiracy theories on Seinfeld cancellation, give clean chit to Mumbai police

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Organizers rubbish conspiracy theories on Seinfeld cancellation, give clean chit to Mumbai police

Events company Only Much Louder (OML) had roped in popular veteran comedian Jerry Seinfeld for a stand-up act in Mumbai at National Sports Club of India for 2 back-to-back shows on March 14 and 15. Sadly, this grand event had to be cancelled by OML because they did not receive the appropriate permissions from Mumbai Traffic Police with regards to the parking arrangements at the venue. There have been multiple conspiracy theories floating on the internet all day long:



Late evening, Founder of OML, Vijay Nair, took to twitter to set the record straight. In a series of tweets he tried explain all that has happened. Nair said that they had begun work on this show well in advance, and had all their licensing & permissions ready. He claims they had the traffic NOC too as on 5th March. The blow came on March 11 when Mumbai Police said they cannot allow a show at that venue on a weekend. Although Nair didn’t explicitly name the event, he believes the cops had to re-think giving a license for events at the venue after the major traffic chaos caused by an event attended by CM Fadnavis earlier in the month. According to Nair, they tried to provide parking for additional 600 vehicles and offered to change show timings, but the cops weren’t satisfied. Hence on the night of 11th March, they called the artist and the crew and cancelled all the arrangements and private jet etc.

HOWEVER, when OML was about to announce the cancellation of the event, the authorities were trying to help them with a plan to let this event carry on to avoid a last-minute cancellation. At this stage, OML tried to re-book the artist and a charter flight, but even though they found some flight options, “rest of the logistics couldn’t come together”. Hence they had to cancel the show.

Nair squarely refuses to blame the Mumbai police for this cancellation. He says he understands the “tremendous pressure” on the police force and hence their need to re-examine the license. He also applauds them for their “stellar job” during all their past events. But he also hopes, “decisions taken by the authorities are made on the basis of a majority of the events (at the venue) are conducted and not by using one show as a benchmark”. By the “benchmark” we assume he is referring to the CM’s event.

On the conspiracy theory about freedom of expression and censorship, Nair clearly states that “the Censor Board didn’t find anything objectionable with Seinfeld’s content”. Also, to a pointed question from a twitter user whether he thinks the authorities were teaching OML a “sadistic lesson” for organizing the controversial AIB Knockout, Nair had this reply (OML had organized the AIB show too) :

There was another conspiracy theory that the show was cancelled to cut losses because the show wasnt sold out. Many people were complaining about the exorbitant prices and last week, OML slashed the prices by 50% in an apparent bid to boost sales. They even offered 50% refunds to the people who had booked the tickets at full price. This theory was also rubbished by Nair saying that cancelling this late wasn’t going to help them as all the payments had been done and they also have to refund the tickets.

The viability of the show was always a bit sketchy since as per this report, the losses from cancellation could be to the tune of $ 2 Million i.e. around Rs 12.5 Crores. The venue has 5000 seats and even at Rs 10000 per seat (the costliest seat, rate before the 50% discount) the ticketing revenue would around Rs 5 Crore, which means almost Rs 7 crore would have to come vis sponsorship. Factor in that tickets eventually had to be sold at 50% of the price and most seats were at a cheaper rate, the deficit sky-rockets. Even Nair in his tweet mentions that both the shows “were sure to sell out, without a doubt”, implying that maybe they weren’t sold out as on date.

From all this, some things are clear. There was no case of any moral-policing or censorship in this cancellation. Nair also categorically demolished the claim that it was the AIB backlash by saying they have already done many shows without a hitch after AIB. Nair also refuses to blame the cops, and in fact mentions that they eventually tried to accommodate the show. The changed stance of the Traffic Police could be a fallout of the mess the last event at NSCI created, and as Nair mentions OML was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. Whether the show was still financially viable is another question, but as Nair says, cancelling it so late wouldn’t really help curb losses. 

Censor Board split wide open, Members oppose moral policing by Nihalani

Rahul Raj
-
0
Censor Board split wide open, Members oppose moral policing by Nihalani

During this World Cup, Pahlaj Nihalani has managed to maintain the highest strike rate of hatred and stupidity. He had started hampering creative freedom in Bollywood as soon as he was appointed as the Chairperson of CBFC, and now he has started stifling his team mates too. Last week, when I was expressing my personal angst against Pahlaj Nihalani, I didn’t expect that Ashoke Pandit too will be voicing his discontent over Nihalani in open. However, to my pleasant surprise, not only Ashoke Pandit, but other Censor Board members like Chandraprakash Dwivedi, Mihir Bhutala and Nandini Sardesai have started opposing Nihalani.

On 11 March 2015, Ashoke Pandit wrote:

TYRANNY GONE LOOSE IN CBFC

I was in a major conundrum wondering whether I should be really writing this article as I am a CBFC board member and President of Indian Film & Television Director’s association too; regarding the recent unfortunate occurrence happening in the corridors of the CBFC because of Mr. Pahlaj Nihalani-the CBFC Chairman. But my conscience took over logic and I felt that it is high time that voices need to be raised against the wrong and the tyrant.

When the new team of CBFC board members and chairman was announced there was a sense of positive wave in the industry because for the first time the board was majorly comprised of members from the film fraternity. But seldom did anyone think that reason for celebration would turn into a catastrophe just because of a mayhem being committed by the senior most chair of the board, Pahlaj Nihalani.

From the day this man has taken the reins of the Board, the CBFC is resembling like a wild horse gone amok. His ridiculous diktats and autocratic functioning has made CBFC a laughing stock not only amongst the film makers but also the cinema viewing audience.

This gentleman refuses to accept that CBFC is to certify films and not to censor them. He makes his own guidelines his own rule of functioning and the most awful thing is he is creating an anarchic environment in CBFC. The height of his totalitarianism was when he publicly issued a list of cuss words and this almost took the shape of a major unwarranted scandal. There was an immediate board meeting convened and his ridiculous cuss word list was declared null and avoid by the entire Board. To the extent, Honorable State Minister Rajyavardhan Rathore also supported this board decision and commented that every film will be treated on its own merit rather than blanket bans. Even this didn’t stop Mr. Nihalani who has almost made his life’s mission to mar the sanctity of the institution which has endorsed the greatest Indian films of all times.

Nihalani’s diktats are supported neither by logic nor law, nor does he appreciate the intelligence of the film-maker & the audience. He literally functions like an archaic monarch treating CBFC and its office like his own fiefdom. Under normal circumstance, seldom an occasion arises where the Chairman ever views the film. But in case of Nihalani he has a personal viewing of every film in his personal cabin, over riding every rule in the book and calling film-makers to his cabin who are expected to bow to his diktats. He has totally deafened himself to concerns of the entire Board. Members like myself, Mr. Mihir Bhutala, Dr. Chandraprakash Dwivedi and Mrs. Nandini Sardesai are at our wits end to stop the tyrant run of this man. He is leaving no stone unturned to foil the sanctity of the chair. We are fighting a losing battle with a man who is so hell bent on satisfying his ego, he does not even flinch before defiling the purity of the Institution and Cinema. This man’s ego massaging is taking monstrous proportions. The biggest victim of his warped world view is the Hollywood films which are finding it difficult to get a clearance through the certification board because it does not suit the absent sensibilities of Nihalani. Films after films are becoming innocent victims of his mindless tyranny. The recent victim of his crass functioning is NH-10.

Inspite of ministerial interventions and strong concerns being expressed by the board Pahlaj Nihalani has again gone ahead and done what he does best – create blasphemous blunder. The kind of cuts that have been imposed on NH-10 is downright laughable and shocking. The cuts have been levied inspite of the film-maker agreeing to an adult certificate. The lead actress and the producer of the film Ms. Anushka Sharma has taken the matters in her own hands and has taken refuge in judiciary to safeguard her artistic endeavor from Nihalani.

Mr. Mihir Bhutala, Dr. Chandraprakash Dwivedi, Mrs. Nandini Sardesai and I are feeling like helpless bystanders to this man’s ultimate intention of completely putting a question mark on the existence of the Institution. If this man continues; the day isn’t far enough when Indian Cinema will truly step into dark ages just because of the doing of one wrong man on a right chair – called Pahlaj Nihalani.

Ashoke Pandit
Film-maker & CBFC Board Member

While Ashoke Pandit has accused Nihalani of acting like a “tyrant” and creating an “anarchic environment”, Dr Chandraprakash Dwivedi another Censor Board member, has raised strong professional objections. Apart from highlighting his concerns for the list of cuss words released by Nihalani, Chandraprakash Dwivedi expressed against cuts in Anushka Sharma’s film, NH10. Dwivedi wrote a letter to the CBFC chief mentioning that he feels “uncomfortable” being a CBFC member because “collective voice” is ignored in the way the board functions. He allegedly described certain cuts in NH10, Navdeep Singh’s directorial venture, as a ‘violation of trust‘.

Voices against Nihalani started getting louder after the Censor Board blocked Fifty Shades of Grey and asked the makers of Dum Laga Ke Haisha to remove the word “lesbian” from the film’s dialogue, but the rift was out in the open after ridiculous cuts were made in NH10. Anushka Sharma, the producer of NH10, said the censor board lacked compassion for filmmakers. At one point, Sharma was asked to reduce violence in her film by 30%. In an interview with NDTV, she also accused censor board for killing creativity and acting like a nanny.

Hope that Pahlaj Nihalani is removed before he turns the Censor Board into a bunch of laughing stock. We have raised our concerns through this petition. Join us before some good movies are killed a brutal death.

Is media spreading hysteria over Swine Flu? A fact check

Guest Author
-
0
Is media spreading hysteria over Swine Flu? A fact check

As per the latest released data, Swine flu (Influenza A H1N1) death toll in India reached 1,005 while the total number of cases reached 18,105 in 2015.

Note that not all the deaths are directly due to Swine flu. Some may be due to comorbid conditions (like lung disease, liver disease, kidney disease, diabetes etc.) and compromised immunity of the patients.

The Health Ministry sought the opinion of the health experts like Nata Menabde, WHO Representative to India and medicine experts from AIIMS, RML, Safdarjung hospitals, NCDC, and ICMR.

They agree that the present strategy being followed by the Health Ministry in terms of the treatment protocol, vaccination policy, Schedule X status for Oseltamivir drug etc., is broadly in the right direction.

The full details of the Health Ministry’s strategy can be read here[pdf]:http://mohfw.gov.in/showfile.php?lid=3080

Also, the Ministry says there is sufficient quantity of medicine (Oseltamivir) available to treat Influenza A H1N1 cases and no new medication has been advised apart from the existing one.

india-swine-flu-2009-8-13-11-10-15High temperatures are a deterrent for the virus. So, we hope the spread of the virus will be halted soon.

What about media reports that Swine flu virus in India has turned even more dangerous ?

These scare-mongering media reports are supposedly based on an MIT research findings in the March 11 issue of Cell Host & Microbe

However, a reading of the research suggests no cause for panic.

According to the report, only two Influenza sequences have been deposited during 2014–2015 from India into international viral databases

The researchers examined these two sequences and found a set of mutations, which may be a potential cause for concern.

However, the report says that due to limited Indian-origin influenza sequences available in the public database, it is not possible to make any causal inference on the perceived increased fatalities in India.

They conclude that the potential threat of the current outbreak in India cannot be determined without full genome sequence information.

In an interview to MIT News, the authors state that, “The point we’re trying to make is that there is a real need for aggressive surveillance to ensure that the anxiety and hysteria are brought down and people are able to focus on what they really need to worry about.”

Instead, Indian media is doing the opposite.

The National Institute of Virology says that the strain mentioned in the report of 2014 has no relevance to the current outbreak of 2015. Recently NIV has analyzed six full genomes, which also suggests absence of such mutations. Subsequent report on this H1N1 virus by CDC/WHO as communicated to NIV also did not report any oseltamivir resistance.

– by @narenbalaji

As ‘Solar’ takes flight worldwide, Indian Government clips wings of conventional ‘Power’

OpIndia Staff
-
0
As ‘Solar’ takes flight worldwide, Indian Government clips wings of conventional ‘Power’

Solar Impulse-2, a solar-powered plane which is flying without any fuel, has already created a record by flying the longest ever distance for a solar powered plane going point-to-point. Over the next five months, it will skip from continent to continent, crossing both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. The solar plane is an indication of upcoming solar boost throughout the globe.

India is not only eyeing its stake in the global solar market, but is also trying to emerge as an industry leader. The central government has already declared its ambitious plans for solar energy in India. The solar buzz created by Modi is attracting lots of foreign players. We talked to the Executive Director of Ornate Solar – Distributors in India for the World’s largest Solar Panel Manufacturers – Trina Solar to understand the possibilities and seriousness of involved machineries in this. Mr. Goel told us that he is very optimistic about the solar plans of India and he is satisfied with recent developments in the sector.  Re-Invest, organized between 15 -17 February 2015, was globally seen as a big milestone in renewable energy sector.  Just before the RE-INVEST Meet, FICCI also organized a Chinese and Indian Solar Energy Industry meet to explore partnerships between the companies of both the countries.

Not only that, even state governments are taking tough steps to keep this sector clean and booming. Acme Solar and Lanco Solar are leading names in the Indian Solar industry. These companies have done huge business in India and they are backed by political and business houses. Despite the fact that Lanco has been violating laws and guidelines in the past, it was allowed to run business. In fact in 2002, Lanco Solar Energy, a fully-owned subsidiary of Lanco Infratech Ltd, won the IESA Award for most innovative product 2012.

On 26 February 2015, KREDL (Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Ltd.) blacklisted some companies which included Acme Solar and Lanco Solar.

2015-03-10_16-12-04

Blacklisting of LANCO Solar and ACME Solar by the KREDL from participating in Solar tenders for a period 2 years is a sign of a renewed confidence of government officials to act ‘Without Fear or Favour’ in line with the increased emphasis on transparency and providing a level playing field for all industry participants – irrespective of their size.

Blacklisting also becomes a big thing because effectively they not only become ineligible to participate in Karnataka tenders, but a lot/ almost all other PSU/ State/ Central project tenders which have this clause mentioned in them:

  •  Any entity which has been barred by the Central/ any State Government, or any entity controlled by them, from participating in any project, and the bar subsists as on the date of Bid, would not be eligible to submit a Bid, either individually or as member of a Consortium.
  • A Bidder/ Consortium Member should, in the last three years, have neither failed to perform on any contract, as evidenced by imposition of a penalty by an arbitral or judicial authority or a judicial pronouncement or arbitration award against the Bidder, nor been expelled from any project or contract nor have had any contract terminated for breach by such Bidder/ Consortium Member.

The current Karnataka government is under the leadership of Congress. By taking serious action against defaulter companies, KREDL has not only raised the bar for other state organizations, but they have also added hope and confidence in machineries.

Masarat Alam – To Free Or Not To Free

Guest Author
-
0
Masarat Alam – To Free Or Not To Free

While most border (and Line of Control or Line of Actual Control) issues have two parties, which are generally the countries on either side, the Kashmir issue has multiple facets to take care of. Scores of journalists, politicians, scholars, bureaucrats and dignitaries have offered solutions to this gargantuan problem. All promise to be pragmatic, somehow none has been successful. India, Pakistan, separatists, Kashmiri pandits and the Indian Army are all interested parties in the valley, one way or the other.

Cut to a cold night of January,1990. It was the 19th day of the month and most loudspeakers in Kashmir blared:

“Hum kya chaaaahte: Azaadi

Eiy zaalimon, eiy kafiron, Kashmir humara chhod do”

This is what journalist Rahul Pandita and a large number of other Kashmiri Pandits heard when the unfortunate exodus began some 25 years ago. It must be frightening to think being driven out of place you have always lived in and called home, right?

Anyway, everyone wants a free Kashmir. Yet, nobody gets a free Kashmir. At least till now, no one has. It is a dilemma. It is a question of what is most likely India’s right versus what might be right. So what is right and what is not?

This brings us to the current debate of freeing up Masarat Alam. The 44 year old Masarat Alam Bhatt was let out of jail a two days ago by the new PDP government. (Actually, not. The new government is just following the court’s orders passed before the PDP-BJP alliance came into power). A political activist cum “stone-thrower”, Alam began his ‘political’ career at the age of 16 in 1987. He initially participated  in the rallies of separatist parties. Disillusioned as he was, and remains, he became a militant in the early nineties, rising in ranks to become a a commander of Hezbollah. The separatist leader and ‘freedom’ activist was arrested in 2010 after the stone pelting incident in which as many as 112 people were killed. Well, to be frank, you can Google all this information and read it up.

The real question that beckons is whether Masarat Alam should have been freed from jail or not?

The supporters of democracy, who like to refer themselves as ‘liberals’ will argue that we are a democratic nation and hence, it is wrong to arrest and keep in detention any activist. Rightly so. But what if the so called “activist” is hazardous to national interest? Mind you, this man has been pro-Pakistan in the past. Could we allow such a person to roam freely and exercise his freedom of speech? Should the rights of an individual be kept at an altar higher than the entire country? That is debatable. Or is it?

According to him and a reputed media outlet’s report, he says and we quote “it shows how tenuous is the silence on the ground which is often portrayed as peace, and how afraid the Indian and pro-India establishment is of our ideas and beliefs.”

If we, honorable Sir, are pro India, how are we wrong? Isn’t national security of paramount importance? Or should we let the whims and fancies of a handful of so called leaders rule our judgement and thereby decide what is best for India? Should Kashmir be given away, just like that, to separatists like Alam, who as he says, “India is an oppressor and has occupied this land since 1947. India should go… People of J&K are mature enough to decide their future as a nation… They’ve seen so many things… The situation has educated them. But first, and most important, India should quit J&K”.

Having said that, it was indeed wrong (for him) to be detained for years without any incrimination. However wrong he might be, he has his rights as an Indian citizen and those must be provided to him. But with the goodies bag of rights, comes duties as a citizen, which most of us tend to forget. Alam wants Kashmir to be an independent state, a country with allegiance to neither India nor Pakistan. And how does he intend to run it? As a personal fiefdom? Does he guarantee us that there will be no terrorist attacks in future in Kashmir? That it shall be all peaceful and people will indeed live happily ever after? I doubt so.

Pakistan has far too many problems of its own to come and annex Kashmir. The economically crippled nation must first resurrect itself from the valley of woes it is falling in. Kashmir might have been an ego game, a power trip for Pakistan, the separatists and some other players. But for the nation, for India, it remains an integral part. I would still go by the childhood teaching of Kashmir is the head of our great nation.

– कपूत बालक

(The above post originally appeared on campusghanta.com )

Kejriwal’s Political Career via Chetan Bhagat Novels

Gaurav
-
0
Kejriwal’s Political Career via Chetan Bhagat Novels

1. When AAP was formed

1

2. When Kejriwal left Delhi for Varanasi

2

3. When Kejriwal fought against ex-colleague Kiran Bedi

3a

4. When Kejriwal expelled Bhushans and Yogendra Yadav

3

5. When a sting operation showed Kejriwal indulging in Horse Trading

5

6. *Future*

6

#AdarshLiberal trends in India. Find out what goes into making of an ideal “liberal”

OpIndia Staff
-
0
#AdarshLiberal trends in India. Find out what goes into making of an ideal “liberal”

How did it start:  It was first noticed on Reddit and RT’d by Reddit India by tagging @AdarshLiberal


The Aadarsh Liberal poster tweeted by @AdarshLiberal
The Adarsh Liberal poster tweeted by @AdarshLiberal

Just after a few hours, #AdarshLiberal started trending on Twitter. Here are some of the interesting tweets that we spotted:


 


 


 


People are still tweeting at the time of filing this report. Please put your favourite tweets in the comments section if we have missed those.

Stand-Up Comedy and the art of Political Propaganda – A true story

Guest Author
-
0
Stand-Up Comedy and the art of Political Propaganda – A true story

Editor’s note: The following is a submission from one of our readers who attended a comedy show. He/She doesn’t want to reveal his name for personal reasons. 

What was supposed to be an outing with my college friends helped me figure out the true nature of our Stand-Up comics. I along with my College friends attended a Comedy event where Vikram Poddar, Varun Grover, Karunesh Talwar and another new comic (whose name I can’t remember) performed.

Vikram Poddar was playing the role of a host cum standup comic. He warmed up the crowd, introduced the comics, took over when they left and he did all this very well. He joked on himself, some observations, and some jokes on the audience. But in his entire set, he made no political jokes. In fact when he was picking on some Gujarati members of the audience, I expected some jokes on Modi but he steered clear of any reference.

Next up was Varun Grover. I follow Varun Grover on Twitter and I am aware of his Political Stance. And as expected, he devoted 50% of his time to jokes on Narendra Modi. Of course there were no jokes on Rahul Gandhi or Kejriwal. To be fair, his jokes were on very valid topics, like Modi’s monogrammed suit and how it was a fashion disaster and how ridiculous the stories in the Bal Narendra comics were. But what irked me were the blatant lies he put through his jokes.

Grover attempted to suggest that Modi himself had got his suit stitched, and the resultant story of “gift” from some businessman was all a cover up. I was shocked to see him lie like this, because I read the truth on OpIndia.com itself. I remember the reactions of some of my friends who are not very politically aware. They naturally ridiculed Modi for narcissism. Grover also ridiculed the suit auction idea, asking whether it was an artifact like a Shivaji sword etc, which deserved auction. Personally, I wouldn’t mind auctioning Grover’s underwear, if it raised money for worthy causes, but it’s a different matter that it’s worthless, just like Grover’s twisted argument.

Karunesh Talwar came up next. I do not follow him on Twitter so I had no idea what were his leanings, but he made them clear from the first sentence. “I did not vote for Modi, nobody should have. I don’t support someone responsible for genocide” was Talwar’s opening statement. This deliberate ignorance of rulings of multiple courts shows a deep hatred for Modi which has now reached a boiling point, because he became the PM. When someone laughed at a Modi joke, Talwar reprimanded him by saying “People are watching, Aaj raat teri gaand mein Trishul ghusega”.

To be fair to Talwar, unlike Grover, he made 2 jokes on Rahul Gandhi. But the only Kejriwal reference of the entire show was a positive one, calling him a “different” politician. Talwar ended his set by again directly indicting Modi for the Godhra riots with a parody song which depicted Modi singing how he crushed Muslims in Godhra and destroyed all the evidence. This is subliminal messaging at its peak, the last thought which the audience goes out with is Modi is mass-murderer.

And of course, the entire show was peppered with the choicest abuses. Chutiya, Chutiyapa, Chutiya kata, Gaandu, Gaand, were just some of the words used in reference to Modi and his actions. It was an AIB roast all over again. Of course for the roast, the argument for using abusive words was “we took consent, we are all friends”. I wonder if Modi or anybody else gave their consent to get abused on this show.

In summary, my problems with this show are:

1. Blatant lies being propagated by likes of Grover to further their political agenda.

2. Disregard for India’s judicial system by likes of Talwar, where even though courts have pronounced someone as innocent, self-appointed paragons of justice continue to sully names of people they hate

3. Fear mongering by the likes of Talwar that Modi’s goons will “stick Trishuls up the asses” of people who mock them

4. Profuse use of abusive language, which as the law stands, is an offence ( although I am personally ok with this stuff)

5. The façade of being “neutral” by such stand-up artists when it’s clear where their political affiliations lie

6. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY: The hypocrisy of such Stand-Ups who one hand cry that Freedom of Expression is being throttled in Modi’s India, and on the other hand proceed to spread lies and hatred for Modi, day in and day out via their “comedy shows”

To be clear, I am a Modi supporter. I voted for him because I felt he was the best option. This doesn’t mean I can’t take Modi jokes. I laughed at the factual Modi jokes, or the ones which didn’t emanate from hatred. But I couldn’t laugh at lies. Even my apolitical friends felt both Grover and Talwar went overboard with their hatred for Modi. And we also found the only Non-political comic, Vikram Poddar, way better than both Grover and Talwar.

 

P.S. I wish to remain anonymous because I fear I might be tracked down from the ticket I purchased for this show. I am not important enough to have a hash tag trended in my support.

Questions keep piling up about the people and processes behind India’s Daughter

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Questions keep piling up about the people and processes behind India’s Daughter

Even as India’s Daughter is being seen all over the world, back in India, numerous questions are being raised of the people behind the documentary, the processes followed, the intent and the legal poisition. We found no reason to ban the documentary based on its content, but had some issues regarding the legality of the release. Now more questions are being asked:

1. Intent

Although the documentary doesn’t directly indulge in stereotyping Indians as a whole as “pro-rape”, some people found its messaging subtle. Leslee Udwin’s own remarks give away her intent. In an interview to Reuters, Udwin said the following:

Q: What do you think about the portrayal of women in Bollywood?

A: I think Bollywood movies are pornography. I think that women are objectified. It’s all part of this disease, this culture.

Even on the show on NDTV, Udwin remarked that the Rapist’s defence that he raped her to “teach her a lesson” for roaming out at night, “is what most people think in the society“.

2. Processes

In this piece, Lawyer Amba Salelkar raise very important questions regarding the procedures followed by Udwin. She says she “is struggling to find the appropriate provisions under which such a procedure is authorised”. She also wonders if this interview of the rapist was shot in the presence of jail officials, because then it could change the legal nature of confession, and could affect the case in progress in the Supreme Court. She also questions whether “the accused given to understand the nature of the interview and the repercussions it could have on his case?”

Coming to the rapist and his interview, it has now come to light that he was paid Rs 40000 by Udwin for his statements. It has been reported that he initially asked for Rs 2 lacs, but eventually settled for Rs 40000. Given that he was paid for this, is it possible he was “told” what to say and what not to say? The rapist’s repeated usage of the word “juvenile” has already raised doubts on his being tutored, and this cash paid to him, has compounded the doubt.

Even the guidelines of BBC themselves are against such payments to criminals: “The BBC does not normally make payments to criminals, or to former criminals, who are simply talking about their crimes“. If so, was BBC aware that Udwin had paid the Rapist? All this needs to be checked and investigated.

Lawyer Manoj Ladwa has also asked a series of important questions to NDTV regarding the broadcast of the documentary. Ladwa claims there was UK legal advice to not show the documentary before Indian Supreme Court verdict. He also raises valid points whether by selling the rights to BBC and NDTV, had Udwin violated the condition agreed by her that the documentary was only for social, non-commercial purposes.

Not only this, Udwin’s Indian collaborator on the project, Anjali Bhushan has reportedly written a stinging open letter making her stand clear. Bhushan says the project was ” overshadowed by the self-promoting agenda of” Udwin by “her attempt to exploit the subject matter of the documentary in a self-advancing attempt to sensationalize the content”. Bhushan also says that “Ms. Udwin knowingly and cynically breached the conditions and undertakings under which the permissions were granted.”

And why did Udwin have an Indian collaborator? Because as per this report, government rules state that a foreign filmmaker is not allowed entry inside an Indian prison. Udwin chose Bhushan as a partner to circumvent this rule and later dumped Bhushan when she raised various objections. The same report also mentions Udwin created a series of “shell” firms to “hide hide something on the UK joint venture”. ‘Apricot Sky Entertainment’ owned by Bhushan, which was originally mentioned in the papers is now missing from the official credit list and replaced by ‘Tathagat Films’. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has no records of ‘Tathagat Films’ but there are 3 production houses running by that name in Mumbai and Delhi.

 

Yogendra Yadav Sting – What does it say about the media?

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Yogendra Yadav Sting – What does it say about the media?

Recently it was uncovered that an AAP worker, secretly recorded a conversation with Chandra Suta Dogra, a journalist and used it to malign/expose Yogendra Yadav. This news has been reported as either a bad intra-party squabble, or the breach of the journalist’s trust by an AAP worker by taping their conversation. While these are both valid points, this piece by SP Singh, a senior journalist, on the issue raises some very pertinent questions of the ethics in journalism.

First a backdrop of what happened. Yogendra Yadav, met a bunch of journalists at the house of a local AAP leader in Chandigarh on 15 August 2014 over breakfast. Dogra then claims that, Yadav spoke about politics in “the backdrop of the AAP’s performance in the Lok Sabha elections, and the party’s decision not to contest the (then forthcoming) Haryana assembly polls”. She continues saying She continued, “Since this was not a formal press conference, we were told not to attribute the information to Yadav in our writings, but we could use it in other ways.”

Dogra, who was then employed with The Hindu, then published this story, in which she quoted “sources” to make the following assertions:

The State executive committee also gave a unanimous opinion in favour of contesting. The Hindu has learnt that when the matter went to the 22-member National Executive Committee of the AAP, 15 of the 17 members who voted did so in favour of contesting. Mr. Kejriwal and five others who are close to him did not vote

On the very day this article got published, Dogra was called by a Bibhav Kumar (now serving as PS to Arvind Kejriwal). Bibhav told her that the information she had published was false, to which Dogra told him that this was told to her by Yogendra Yadav. This conversation was recorded by Bibhav and was recently spread to malign/expose Yogendra Yadav.

This of course is Dogra’s version. Senior journalist SP Singh, who wrote the earlier mentioned piece differs with her. Singh claims that he was present at the same meeting with Yogendra Yadav on 15th August. Using colourful language, Singh clearly states that whatever information Dogra claims was given by Yogendra Yadav, was in fact never given by him. He states “if Yadav did indeed give out the juicy tidbits mentioned in Ms Dogra’s story, that plate did not make it to the breakfast table where we were seated. Intriguingly, there was only one table.”

Once this recording leaked out, Yogendra Yadav made an online post re-iterating that he had never given such information to Dogra. He also refers to mail testimonies from two other journalists present in that breakfast meeting. who are on record saying that the sensitive information about Haryana disclosed in the article was never discussed at the breakfast meeting. Lastly, he questions Dogra saying “Why did she report on a breakfast conversation that was clearly understood to be not for reporting? Why did she reveal her sources to an interested party?”

To this, Dogra replied by saying “Considering that nine people were present at the breakfast meeting, there was no element of confidentiality. Since he was the chief spokesperson of AAP, one assumed that the party was aware of the breakfast meeting”

This entire episode points out quite a few things:

1. Dogra had no qualms about giving up her source to an interested party, even though it meant endangering the source (Yogendra Yadav in this case). Non-Disclosure of “Sources” is considered to be the hallmark of standard reporting, but Dogra failed on this test

2. When questioned by Yadav as to why she did so, Dogra non-nonchalantly says “nine people were present at the breakfast meeting, there was no element of confidentiality”. This is hypocrisy. SP Singh rightly points out that if indeed there was no element of confidentiality, why didn’t she reveal Yadav’s name in the story itself? Why reveal it only when prodded by an AAP worker?

3. SP Singh who attended the meeting, and Yogendra Yadav, are in agreement on one issue: The information reported by Dogra was never discussed by Yogendra Yadav. The question then arises, did Dogra make up this information? Or does she have some other source who she is protecting?

In all this, some things are clear. Journalists have become less trustworthy than they used to be. A journalist can reveal sources, at the same time claim that a source isn’t confidential, and can even cook up some details if need be. To end, we tend to agree with what Saikat Datta, Editor on National Security at Hindustan Times, and Sachin Kalbag, Editor of Mid-Day had to say on this issue

1...6,9426,9436,944...6,962Page 6,943 of 6,962

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