As per Rubin Frank's definition The first one is advertising and the second one is news.Isn't it? But don't u think an upcoming product requires some advertising lest people idea of India till very recently was that of land of snakes and snake-charmers. So advertising is necessary, rather vital.
As far as news part is concerned, it is my opinion that any flaw is removed (or lets say rectified) once it's pointed out. So the news part is an important prophylaxis measure for any society.
Hence we need both Advertisement+ News as far as a developing country like India is concerned.
Ispita

Ispita,
good observation, I'm assuming you are thinking as if you are an Indian. Think from the media prespective, maybe the first one is news and the second one advertising, that will sell the paper. How many are interested in the first one.
Just a thought
VJ

I think what he was saying is that they turn the news into advertsing.

Have you ever seen those commercials from like the Plastic Institute of America and all the wonderful things plastic does?

Why would they advertise a notice like this?

It is called buying good press.

Well, Richard, that's another way to think about it. So we have three prespectives to one situation and maybe more coming!!

have you read the text of Harold Pinter's speech on receiving the Nobel Prize for Literature on 7th December 2005? What a man receiving the highest prize for literature for a lifetime's work has to say should be worthy of everyone's attention. And yet.

its here:
http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,1661516,00.html

But no newspaper will publish it in its entirety.

Who really owns the press?

Vijay,

Rubin Frank basically nailed it on the head.
You all remember the 14 virgin thing when you get to heaven muslim thing, well that was something that someone made up and the media reported it.

Well this AIDS HIV Highway India thing is along the same lines. I doubt it. The reason being that HIV cannot penetrate healthy skin tissue. So unless all these people are suffering from deficiencies (80%+ in US do) it is a farce. Even if they do the problem is not HIV is the deficiencies. So rather than teaching people take the things that will increase tissue strength, eliminate tears, and sores etc. like vitamin C and Lysine and other supplements they create the AIDS crisis which causes stress and conflict and generates a lot of money.

That aside I argued with specialists decades ago that since HIV was detected by measuring antibodies the human immune system was fighting it and needed to be boosted.

Well guess what just last month Nov 13th the first documented cure of HIV occured. They even tested him twice and his first sample from 2001 and 2003. The doctors thought it a miracle. When asked what did he do, he said he took a lot of supplements. He had no other treatments, now they are thinking he must have something special in his body that others do not have. Yeah right, he took supplements and boosted his immune system.

You would thing this would be the biggest news everywhere, on the front page of every newspaper, on CNN etc. Well it is not. You know why that might be? If this idea ever got popular it would destroy a 1.6 trillion dollar industry becuase it would not just end that disease it would end most others. Guess who is on the medical industrial complex payroll? The media. How many drug commercials do you see on TV? Most of them.

http://www.sundaytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,17236060%255E401,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article326894.ece

http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2237102005

I wrote an article called in 98 and posted it all over USENET and other places.

Vitamin C, British Superiority, The Solution to our Health Care Problems

Centuries ago it was it was not unusual for entire naval expeditions to be wiped out by scurvy. Between 1600 and 1800 the British Navy lost over a million sailors to scurvy. Yet the cure was discovered and recorded back In 1535. French explorer Jacques Cartier found his ships frozen in ice off the St. Lawrence river, scurvy started to kill off his crew. An indian friend showed them a simple remedy. A drink made using needles and bark (both rich in vitamin C) from the White Pine. The drink brought immediate improvement and swift recovery. Cartier returned to Europe and reported this new found remedy. The medical authorities scoffed at this "witch doctor" cure and continued blaming scurvy on some unknown toxin, or bacterium that lurked in in the dark holds of ships.

The cure for scurvy was known. But, because of scientific arrogance, it took over two hundred years and cost hundreds of thousands of lives before medical experts began to accept and apply this knowledge. Finally in 1747 John Lind a young surgeons mate in the British Navy discovered oranges and lemons produced relief from scurvy. He recommended that the Navy include citrus fruits in the stores of all the ships. And yet it still took fourty-eight more years before his recommendation was put into effect by authorities. When that did happen the British were able to surpass all other sea-faring nations and the "Limeys" (so called because they carried limes on board) soon became rulers of the seven seas.

The greatness of the British Empire in large measure was the direct result of overcoming scientific/medical prejudice against vitamin therapy.

This same Prejudice is today hampering the growth of our nation, costing lives and money and causing needless and painful suffering. The medical establishment because of it's desire for profit neglects and avoids low profit and the most optimal methods of treating and preventing disease.

The FDA which has become a huge structure supported by the dollars spent by Drug companies to have new drugs approved. If disease is eliminated so is the need for many new drugs, and the regulation of older ones. If the FDA were to promote our best interests they would be destroying their own bureaucratic empire.

Vijay,

Rubin Frank basically nailed it on the head.
You all remember the 14 virgin thing when you get to heaven Muslim thing, well that was something that someone made up and the media reported it.

Well this AIDS HIV Highway India thing is along the same lines. I doubt it. The reason being that HIV cannot penetrate healthy skin tissue. So unless all these people are suffering from deficiencies (80%+ in US do) it is a farce. Even if they do the problem is not HIV is the deficiencies. So rather than teaching people take the things that will increase tissue strength, eliminate tears, and sores etc. like vitamin C and Lysine and other supplements they create the AIDS crisis which causes stress and conflict and generates a lot of money.

That aside I argued with specialists decades ago that since HIV was detected by measuring antibodies the human immune system was fighting it and needed to be boosted.

Well guess what just last month Nov 13th the first documented cure of HIV occured. They even tested him twice and his first sample from 2001 and 2003. The doctors thought it a miracle. When asked what did he do, he said he took a lot of supplements. He had no other treatments, now they are thinking he must have something special in his body that others do not have. Yeah right, he took supplements and boosted his immune system.

You would thing this would be the biggest news everywhere, on the front page of every newspaper, on CNN etc. Well it is not. You know why that might be? If this idea ever got popular it would destroy a 1.6 trillion dollar industry becuase it would not just end that disease it would end most others. Guess who is on the medical industrial complex payroll? The media. How many drug commercials do you see on TV? Most of them.

HIV cured

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm

href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article326894.ece">http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article326894.ece

href="http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2237102005">http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2237102005

HIV cured

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm

href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article326894.ece">http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article326894.ece

href="http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2237102005">http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2237102005

http://www.sundaytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,17236060%255E401,00.html">http://www.sundaytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,17236060%255E401,00.html

my cousin,(he is 15 years)whose entire schooling took place in canada was misinformed by other canadians(school friends) tht even now sky scrapers in most parts of India was built with mud..(like harrapa ruins)..he did not listen to his parents claims tht most of India is developing ..and all hav concrete walls..
wen he was on a visit recently his illusion was broken..
India as potrayed by movies like devdas and paheli show some kind of nostalgic India...but as a country we hav developed a lot in the last 10 years ..but the other side of the coin is we hav a large number of people just scrapping by without any resources..like shelter,nutritious food ,water ..(which is purified)
i feel advertising in India is done for tourism ..but the facts shud be news..

manish,
the link u hav given shows how truth has no place anywhere...in media,news or any other communicating medium..

Hi Vijay,

Those articles in NYT caught my eye as well. SepiaMutiny, a insightful and self-proclaimed 'desi' blog mentioned the articles saying that it reinforced stereotypes typically associated with India, while in a parallel vein talking about how its moving ahead with its infrastructure modernization program. Of course, the onus would be on the reporter to present the information in as unbiased a manner as possible.

The more interesting question is that is it necessary for news about rapidly developing countries like India and China to be presented in a way that does appeal to currently existing culturally perceived sensitivities of the American public? In other words, in order to break stereotypes, does the media continue to propagate them because existing stereotypes are a part of our individual and group cognitive biases....without getting too technical, I guess I'm basically trying to say that in some ways this is a difficult cycle to break out of. The media is trying to satisfy a public desire for information, however, in doing so they reaffirm previously held beliefs...its going to take a large scale critical effort on the part of reporters to attempt to move beyond the existing paradigms of observation and analysis of developing countries....

The Netherlands, yesterday, news:
Na Zdrowie!

Congratulations with the honour of recieving the dutch "Militaire Willems Orde" for General Sosabowski. On the other hand: it's a shame that it took the dutch government so many years to take this decision. It's also a shame that mr.Montgomery blamed General Sosabowski for the defeat at Arnhem. So now in turn it's the British government who should review history.I really hope you succeed in changing their mind and fully support that.

to restore the good name of General Stanisław Sosabowski and his Brigade's role in Operation Market Garden in 1944 should be happened 50 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanis%C5%82aw_Sosabowski

http://sosabowski.com/

We call that, Polish history!

Love, Passion!

Dear Vijay,
What the media reports is propaganda and publicity, more often than not. One has to be intelligent enough to decipher the truth out of what is being projected. In other words, we have to read not just in between the lines but also what went behind reporting those lines. We live in a world of deception and lies. The ability to know the truth (behind the propaganda) is the most important survival skill needed in contemporary times.

Cheers!
Navin

Hi Manish,

If a family member is sick, we may not want that to be true, but facing the fact allows us to get them to a doctor. Also, if a family member is sick, the whole family is not sick.

In the NYT series, I sensed two attitudes at the same time: (1) the reporters were being truthful; (2) the reporters were having a bit of a schadenfreude moment (schadenfreude means being happy at another's troubles).

Cheers, Heather

I am a regular reader of NY Times and Washington Post. I find NY Times more balanced in its reporting. Somehow I get the feeling that WP editors and publishers in the payroll of THE establishment (like drug companies, oil companies etc.)

Regards,

Ravi

Hi Vijay - I read all three of those articles, plus the follow-up question and answer session with Amy Waldman.

When I first came to the US, I was so wowed by the New York Times. To this day, I have never seen writing talent of the kind they have, i.e., stylistically speaking. The Washington Post comes a poor second and all serious journalists in Washington get the NYT anyway. None of the London papers come even halfway close to the NYT in excellence either.

Having said that, when it comes to reporting about India, the NYT is no better than your average tabloid. They are very much caught up in the caste, cows and curry syndrome, have zero understanding of Indian culture, and report through a very biased, westernized, christianized, imperialistic, condescending lens. These three articles were not so bad though and I have begun to notice since the last year or so that there is a slight improvement in their reporting about India.

One of the problems facing western journalists is that their only source of knowledge about India is through the english-speaking population of India. This population, of course, is itself westernized and christianized and looks at Indian culture through the western lens. So we have this loop of the west saying nonsense about India, which is dutifully repeated in the Indian drawing-rooms and newspapers, and is once again picked up by the west.

I have a Korean friend who felt the same disconnect with the NYT regarding news of Korea. My guess is that like most things American, the New York Times too does not have much understanding of anything outside the western sphere.

Why blame the media, I have friends who visit India after a gap of 3-4 years having lived in the west, and they come back completely confused about what is happening there.

India is complex and it is evolving, way too complex and way too fast for most to comprehend. Its full of paradoxes and they co-exist.

So each of those reports tell a story, and they are all true depending on the context .

http://www.netwerk.tv/index.jsp?p=items&r=netwerk&a=205034

The Netherlands, yesterday, in the news,

Congratulations with the honour of recieving the dutch "Militaire Willems Orde" for General Sosabowski. On the other hand: it's a shame that it took the dutch government so many years to take this decision. It's also a shame that mr.Montgomery blamed General Sosabowski for the defeat at Arnhem. So now in turn it's the British government who should review history.I really hope you succeed in changing their mind and fully support that.

to restore the good name of General Stanisław Sosabowski and his Brigade's role in Operation Market Garden in 1944 should be happened 50 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanis%C5%82aw_Sosabowski

http://sosabowski.com/

We call this, Polish history,
more than 60 (!!!) years defacto,

Love, Passion!

Are western media groups acting responsible when reporting on stories from developing countries or are they profiting from the adversary developing countries are facing? Good question....
When we consider that Disney(ABC)and GE(NBC)and other companies which "sell the American dream", own many media outlets, and that men that sit on boards for weapons manufacture also sit on news boards, then we start to look at the real role of their reporters: to sell the readership or viewers on their particular point of propaganda.
My take on coverage such as the new highway in India is that the newspaper's reporter pitched the series to the editor, whose decisions shape the newspaper. Stories of faraway places can encourage or discourage the reader to go there or to invest there. Bottom line, the stories will embrace the world view of the paper. If the paper presents problems like AIDS among India's poor starkly enough, it will motivate some readers to want to help. Others will probably think, "they" have a big problem over there. My belief is that if a problem is presented so that the people portrayed are shown to be very much outside the economic or emotional mainstream of the readership or the viewers, then readers begin to have an opinion that people in other countries are so "far gone" that we, the "moral majority", may need to send in the troops. A weapons manufacturer sitting on a news board will like the program or article that makes the readers feel like "those people over there" are almost savages, somehow inferior. After all, it was this kind of propaganda which allowed and continues to allow the "American People" to profit from illegally taken lands from our native tribes, who continue in most cases to operate on the reservations as third world countries. This is acceptable to mainstream American because the propaganda has convinced them that "those people" are "still savage".

Well...Honestly Speaking Western media is 95% right about reporting to Developing countries like India.

Let's face it India is country of Curry, Snake Charmers, poor infrastructure and overly populated and polluted country and Nonsense Bhangra....Only 1 or 2 % of India or Indian people can stand with developed country.
I mean compare day to day life in India It is like hell (That is what I understood from my friends and Media (TV,NYT etc etc)..

Vijay Be honest about india.Coutry is full of crap that is why It is not able to hold good professional in India. Most of the people in India are not professionals. That is why good people are moving out from India. I am sure outsourcing will not work.

Dear Jignesh,

I think you are not being fair. India is a country of one billion people, and an insignificant percentage of that population trains to be "professional". And in any case, majority of these "professionals" in fact do work in places like Bangalore or Chennai.

Just because many people are not able to or opt not to train as professionals, don't make them or the country full of crap. Given the right opportunities and education most Indians have the capability to hold on their own, in comparison with any other national.

In case if you have not noticed, India is on the ascendent. It may have a long way to go, but it is the turning point in its history, and there is nothing that will stop India from achieving greatness.

Regards,

Ravi Kulkarni

Hey Ravi,

Well..I am not expert on India or developing country.Infact I have very vague memory about India.However only point I want to make is most part of India is still full of crap.
And Do you know Infrastructure in developed Indian city like Banglore, It is horrible.

We will see Indian greatness???????????????

Jignesh

Jignesh - The west that you're busy worshipping won its glory through slavery, genocide, robbery and exploitation. Up until the 16th century Asia was far wealthier than Europe. With the development of firearms the west overtook the world on the strength of gunpowder and the Bible. India was looted for 250 years and bled nearly to death and is still recovering. The west continues its policies of exploitation of the whole planet to its own benefit and maintains it's superiority. It also maintains a storyline that it won its glory on account of its superior civilization which people like you happily swallow like true slaves.

I agree India is in a sorry state now. My theory is that it is in a sorry state precisely because it copies the west in its every stupid move. It would suffice if India just copied the west in its more intelligent moves, i.e., science. How we use the science however could be more intelligent that it is now.

Also, I understand you are a young man and easily swept off your feet by the western razzle-dazzle. Give it some time and one of these days you will notice the emotional and spiritual bankruptcy of the west. When you're down in the dumps maybe you'll understand there's more to life than infrastructure.

Hi Vijay,

I look at this issue in the same way Heather does. I think he is trying to show both sides of what is happening in India.

We need to inform the world that India is not a country of astrologers and snake charmers(though many outsiders whom read this blog might still think that way) and at the same time, the world needs to know the problems that exists in India. HIV problem is real. BJP govt. can deny it. The current congress govt. can deny it. However the truth is different. There is nothing to be ashamed of the news. We need to gear up and tackle the issue. I think Indians are yet to grasp the reality on this issue. Probably the second article will help in this regard. The first one might help people to know that India is a land which is advancing enough in spite of several astrologers and snake charmers roaming around in the streets and blogs.

Never believe if someone who says he is a hardcore Indian patriot (for that matter, never believe anyone who boasts himself as patriots in any country). They are the most hypocritical people. They would want nuclear weapons but they wouldn't bother if half the country doesn't have electricity or even major cities lose electricity frequently. A really patriotic person is one who doesn't boasts about his patriotism and gets the priorites straight when it comes to his country.

"The west that you're busy worshipping won its glory through slavery, genocide, robbery and exploitation."

"How we use the science however could be more intelligent that it is now."

Well said.

Jignesh what you are saying where you are living ? I Indian Professional. I doing the out source. I living in the Bang Lore. It infra structure beautiful. Outfra structure also beautiful. In fact total structure is beautiful. Snake Charmer in India ? Where they are living you tell me the Jignesh. I have never seen Snake also. So where I will go for Charmer. But I know one charmer that is the Charms cigratte. Ah, Charms! Like that one advertisement will be coming. Ah! Jignesh, say it with me. Ah! Charms! Ah! Comeon Jignesh, Can I call you Jiggy ? Jive with me Jiggy. Ah, Charms! Aah! AAAH! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! Ok, now I have come in the underpants. So I will replace my VIP underwear and come back. Because after all I Indian Professional. My Infra Structure is amasing. Even outfra is not bad bole to Jignesh.

Comments using changed name starts again.

Indian Professional :
You are happy in India..Right???...
Hey....Have a nice "time" in india...
BTW,Sometime if you get time, see San Francisco,California in TV or internet...I live there...
May be it is not as "beautiful" as banglore for you..I do not want to argue with you..
Jignesh

Divya:

I have respect for your point of view However It seems to very theoretical to me..

I mean it is good on book however it does not have any practicality.

I was just comparing day to day life in USA and India…And my onions about India was based on observations, media and some relative’s experiences in India…

Jignesh

Indian Professional:

I am not sure if it was deliberate or just your style but this is a post that fits RIGHT INTO Kavita's "Laughter is the Best Medicine" blog man!! You had me in splits.. you almost sounded like the guy who wrote "The Cow" essay! :-)

Hey, keep coming back and write more.. I LOVE your writing!

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Jignesh - I felt the same way about India when I was in my 20's so I do understand where you're coming from.

Anyway, it's not theoretical at all. Why do so many Indians return to India? I too am constantly dreaming of returning.

By the way, I cannot imagine India without snake charmers. It's been ages since I saw one. Have they been outlawed?

Not only have I seen snake charmers, I've seen snake and mongoose fights, rooster fights, pigeon fights, monkey theater, bear dances, camel festivals, performing elephants, fortune-telling cows, and a whole host of other stuff. I've seen all of this many, many times, not just as some unique special event, as part of everyday life when I was growing up.

It would be a shame if India lost this aspect of its identity. What's nice about all of this is that it is part of ordinary street life and not something you go to see in a theater or something. I understand the big cities need to get animals off the streets, but I hope this culture survives in the smaller towns and villages.

Divya:

"India was looted for 250 years and bled nearly to death and is still recovering. The west continues its policies of exploitation of the whole planet to its own benefit and maintains it's superiority."

Thank your stars that it was Britain who ruled.. the way we were - Mir Jaffers and Mir Qasims .. it could have been Mauritius!

Btw, East India Company got the charter to do business in India on Jan 1, 1600. The Battle of Plassey was fought in 1774.

WHICH COMPANY has a 150 YEARS strategic plan that it can follow to the T and then disappear in the next 100??

The brits ruled over us because we were plain weak and idiotic!

If someone hits me that is because I let him hit me! Plain and simple.

So, lets stop cribbing about how west or the Mughals looted us.. they did because we were JUST no damn good!

50 years from now - when India's Engineers will rule over the engineering world - I will have the same retort for the Americans. With idiots like Lou Dobbs and Bush... what do they expect to happen?

Every country and society has strengths and stereotyping is not a good way to approach things. In our neighborhood - mostly white in Texas - I have seen stay-at-home Moms who really care for their kids.. more than any of our desi families I meet. So its all relative.

And Jignesh: Same goes for you boy. To understand India you have to live there.. and see first hand how there is Method to the Madness. Under the chaos there is a system that runs.. not easy but effective nevertheless.

Nandan Nilekani (INFY chief) said in one of his interviews on China vs India.. he said that recently Indian pvt airlines have made deals to purchase 60 more planes. Now, we dont even have airports to land them on! So the development model in India is - We buy the planes.. they fly up .. but cannot land.. and the public and the businesses start shouting and threaten the politicians.. who against their will (and much despondency at having to move their ass - my words here).. start building airports.

CHina doesnt work like that - the top honcho says "AIRPORTS" in CHinese .. and within a couple of months they are ready! To hell with the cost or the ROI or the need!

So there is a difference.. but in all these years that I have lived in the US after living 28 years in India... I still find Indian society to be more free and more open to accept. Due to corrupt politicians who can trigger massacres and call them "riots" - we may not seem so secular.. but my heart says .. we are inherently MORE secular and free than most of the west.

Cheers
Desh
Drishtikone.com

"we are inherently MORE secular and free than most of the west"

I agree.

Desh - The Muslim rule was an internal rule within India and Indian wealth stayed within India.

The Brits looted the wealth out of India for 250 years non-stop. Not only that they completely destroyed the Indian textile industry and forced Indians to buy British textiles - after copying the indian textile industry and setting it up in England. This was a major blow to the Indian economy.

Similarly they destroyed the shipping industry in Bengal which wreaked all sorts of havoc and created a famine in Bengal.

They changed the land distribution system so that they could tax it to death and the havoc these policies created lasts to this day - this is responsible for the rise of the dowry system as we know it today.

They forced Indians to grow crops such as jute and tea which was of use to the Brits rather than let Indians grow what was of use to Indians. The Brits scaled the length and breadth of India to loot it of every last ounce of wealth. And you expect the country to recover in 50 years? Specially when the intellectuals are busy licking western boots all the time.

There are many, many reasons for the British success and none of them relates to the fact that Indians were "no damn good" as you put it. I think it has everything to do with the fact that Europeans were extremely ruthless.

It's easy to think that Indians were (or are) fools. The fact of the matter is that our civilization still survives to this day. How can a foolish civilization survive? Where is the Greek civilzation today? Where is the Egyptian civilazation? Native America? Okay, Europe flourished for 500 years but look at it now. I am not in the least bit sorry to see it menaced by Islam and look forward with glee to the partition of France which we can expect in the next 30 years. So shall we say that the French are idiots? That's one way of looking at it. But a truly free people just cannot imagine the workings of a fanatic mind and that's one of the reasons for their downfall. India was (and is) in a similar plight.

"we are inherently MORE secular and free than most of the west"

I have problem with free part of your quote…

Since you guys always brag about superior Indian culture.
Let’s debate about it…
I have few questions about it.
Are woman in India or even here in US(Traditional Indian Family) equal? No
Do Indian males beat their wives and kids unnecessarily (I am not saying all Indian Man do However It is accepted in Indian Society)? YES
Is Divorce big taboo in India and even some Traditional Indian in West for girls.? YES
Is arranged marriage without knowing anybody is very common in India? Yes

These are few examples, I can give you more examples if you want.

So Do not tell you are more free than most of the west.

Now about secularism, Do you want to make minority happy in expense of majority or you want to have society where both minority and majority treated equally…
I mea if somebody says USA is Christian country what is wrong in it, 80% of population is Christians. By calling Christian country does not mean minority will treated badly.It is respect to majority.

Jignesh - You poor misguided soul. Are you under the impression that the US is secular?

As for the social issues you are so off the mark it's not even worth replying. The important point is not what you can or cannot do but how happy you ultimately are. Look at it from this perspective and see how foolish your points sound.

Jignesh:

Here are your answers:

Are woman in India or even here in US(Traditional Indian Family) equal? No

ANS: HARVARD UNIVERSITY became CO-ED in 1970's and that too because there werent enough male students coming in due to the war! Before that Women were considered inferior in that school to even EXIST in that same class!

Women in US GOT THE RIGHT to vote in 1960's!!

Do Indian males beat their wives and kids unnecessarily (I am not saying all Indian Man do However It is accepted in Indian Society)? YES

ANS: And the point is? That US men dont? You live in a wonderland .. dont you?

Is Divorce big taboo in India and even some Traditional Indian in West for girls.? YES

ANS: So Divorce should not be a taboo? What's so liberating about Divorce?? It has been proved by research time and again that kids that grow up in a divorce - good or bad divorce doesnt matter - end up far worse than those who come from unbroken families!

Is arranged marriage without knowing anybody is very common in India? Yes

ANS: IS IT? Is Arranged marriages that occur all over urban India - WITHOUT the consent?

just btw, the way it happens is - People advertise on singles (matrimonial) pages. Someone out there has a criteria checklist (both girl and boys do that) .. the families meet and then the guy and the gal ALONG with the family decide. In India the FAMILIES have to BUY-IN into the alliance.. THAT is the reason why even bad marriages end up surviving!

What do the folks here do? Get into a bar . .. get drunk and meet someone who they can spend a good night with.. and if that night ends up coming more than once.. they think for a longer relationship.

Ok, thats also a stereotype... but you get the message dont you?

I guess DIvya's contempt for your views is fairly placed!

Cheeers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Now about the secularism of the West:

In the second debate between Bush and Kerry - BOTH were asked about their Views on Abortion.

Bush said - I am against it! there was no explanantion except that its not "moral" (or what God did not intend to do)

Kerry said: I was an altar boy myself and I follow Christian teachings.. but I believe this is my value. I cannot force it on any one else who does not believe in it. I can recommend or promote that we should desist but I cannot make it a law!

And KERRY was called "CONFUSED" by the media NEXT day.

Just change the question to any issue in Shariat or even Shariat itself. And then just replace the word Christian with Hindu.. Bush's answer is something that Bal Thackeray in his moment of swagger will give. Kerry's answer will be hailed as "SECULAR" in India!

Do you get the idea?

In a country where Larry King can address Billy Graham (who has nothing but disdain for Muslims matching Bal Thackeray's) with respect and get him on prime TV with not a twitch in his stomach.. CAN NOT claim to be more secular than a country where Billy Graham's Hindu counterparts are virtually burnt on the stake!

Desh
Drishtikone.com

Desh:

You are not getting my point..Bottomline is girls in india treated like shit.They have to compromise at all time because of So called Superior cultural values..
And about arranged marriage When I say without knowing It means Without knowing in all the way...
So you are compromising...Why the hell you want to compromise for life decision...
Anyways, you guys do not want to look at other side of free western culture ..It is about choice,equality and indivuality....
BTW what's problem in going to bar and pick up girl if both wants to have fun...It's free country....

Jignesh

Krish and Divya,

You are so right! However the west has not discriminated; they screwed and are still screwing Latin America and Africa equally! There is a light at the end of the tunnel though, but it may end up being a train that levels us all.

With an accumulated debt of over 8 trillion dollars, 40% of it externally, the US will have to balance the books sooner or later! If they don’t, we all end up Third World countries.

Jignesh,

You have all wrong facts or exaggerated ones.

I have one question to ask.

India had a woman as Prime Minister long ago (maybe early 70s). Even the supposedly fanatic and islamic state Pakistan had a PM who was a woman. This also happened in 80s. Also remember these two countries are independent only for the past 58 years or so.

Let US (which declared independence in 1776) elect a woman as President, then I will respond to your question. Till then, I will definitely keep India way above US regarding women's issue.

Actually Skeptisch, it is my nightmare too.

I want US to be a successful state. This is the reason why I oppose Bushies :-)

Diya,

You are absolutely right. No where in the U.S. Constitution it is stated "Separation of Church and State." It is a myth, reinforced by an ill-informed media. You can read the First Amendment for yourselves. See last paragraph below.

"Jignesh - You poor misguided soul. Are you under the impression that the US is secular?" Divya.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Regards.

ron,

What does "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" mean?

Krish:

Higher positions in USA are based on Competency of candidate not based on group they belong (Women,minority etc).So may be Condi or Hillary will be president for 2008..I will love to see condi vs hilary cat fight(If possible).Bytheway condi would be best candidate for Republican Party strategically because It will help republican party to get minority votes.

Jignesh

Jignesh:

I wonder if you realized that your last sentence (of COndi vs Hillary) CONTRADICTS your first (of group vs caliber)!!??

:-)

Was the last post meant to be funny? LOL

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Condi is Competent republican…
And after Katrina ,Republican party imgage among minority is not good at all..So, this will give message to all American that republican party is all about democratic values and equality for all.Bytheway She has to pass through GOP Primary.
I was just exicited about catfight about condi Vs hilary..
I will go for Giuliani and McCain in 2008.

Jignesh

Jignesh,

By your first statement, do you mean women are incompetent so far? If yes, this is the point I wanted to highlight. This doesn't happen in Indian society.

India never considered women to be incompetent. Also, any competent women in the Indian society can reach any position without any issue. Whatever issues you quote are due to individual's male chaunism and the individual woman's acceptance that male is a dominant partner. it is not due to Indian society. Several thousand years back, we used to have powerful queens who ruled certain kingdoms. Indian societry WAS the most liberal society. A society that gave Kama Sutra to the world. I don't want to paste a rosy picture about India either. There are problems. It is due to lack of education. Remember, independent India is only 58 years old. These problems will go away pretty soon. India, not only had woman Prime Minister, it also allowed ALL its citizens to vote from day 1. All its citizens had the same rights from day 1. This is not the case in US at all. Only now minorities and women have somewhat equal rights. Even now women cannot decide on her own on many issues like abortion. This is the state of affairs in US. Compared to this, India is far better. Any issue over there is due to individuals and families. It is not an issue due to state. Maybe you are too young to understand this.

Jignesh, here is an open challenge I am posting here (with the assumption that Intentblog will be there in 2008 and I will be alive then).

If republican party votes Condi as the candidate in the presedential elections, I will publicly apologize in this forum for everything I said about Bush, Republicans and Evangelicals.

Dear Krish,

Once you have clearly understood the true definition of secularism, then go back and re-read the First Amendment. After you have done all this, Krish, I promise, I will debate you further on the issue.

If you have misconstrued the tenets of the First, you will not be the first to do so, it is a common mistake.

Regards.

I have understood the true definition of secularism.

You are saying that separation of state and church is not stated in the constitution. My question is how does "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" allow the congress to bring in church to govern the state? Doesn't this part stop the congress from embracing any religion?

I am not a constitutional expert. I only interpret this as a way to stop using religion while governing the state. If you think there is a correct interpretation to it, I would like to know what it is.

Krish,

Where in the First Amendment is it categorically stated that there shall be a "Separation of Church and State?"

For a country to be definitively secular, its constitution must clearly state so. If you read the second part of the first sentence of the First, you will also read that the U.S. Congress shall not PROHIBIT the free exercise of religion. It therefore becomes a matter of interpretation.

If you are locked in to the first part af that sentence, you will come away with a dictionary interpretation of secularism. Understandably, the Constitution leaves the door wide for ongoing debate on the defition of secularism...thus it becomes a matter of jurisprudence.

Again, the U.S.Constitution does not emphatically stipulate the separation of Church and state. In this sense, the U.S. cannot be secular.

Regards.

Regards.

Wow, This discussion took to a new level!
Ravi, I always felt that WP is a bit more pro-India than NYT. WP tends to be a bit more supportive to the pro India lobbyist's in hill than NYT, which used to have the cold war hang over. That being said, NYT is getting more india-business friendly in the last few years, something worth mentioning. IHT and WP are considered two of India's best friends.

Divya, I agree that NYT has better presentation than WP. the story by NYT is true as santhosh put it, they are true depending on the context. Warming of relations between India and US and some serious wining and dining is making NYT see the potential in India and the danger with Pakistan.

Jignesh, you totally lost me there.Business schools in US,Europe are now sending their students to India to learn about India and our corporate management, learn about India's vibrant culture and ecconomy. Celebreties are going to India to get insipiration from Indian culture and music. US, UK and other countries are studying some of the technological advancements that India has to learn and implement in US. The world is moving their R&D center's to India and outsourcing fom India is expected to grow over $60bn in 2010!!
There are challenges with infra-structure and we dont have roads there like in US, but the positive thing is that it's improving. I can't agree any less with Kris on the political challenges and things will hopefully improve with the ecconomy.
Last but not least, I don't think Condi wil be the GOP candidate. She doesn't have the financial backing to win the nomination. Hilary might select Obhama the only black senator to run for VP. Hilary is not going to have a easy run,she has strong financial backing, but there are other areas she lacks.she will be good for India though. She is very pro-India.

Hi Ron - Very perceptive comments. The debate about where to draw the line between church and state is an ancient one and has never been resolved. Every once in a while it is put to the test and people butt heads over the issue.

In fact the concept of secularism itself is based on a religious paradigm. Christianity considers the material and the spiritual to be two separate spheres. In the beginning of Christianity's history the Church was the governing authority in all spheres of life so it didn't make a difference. With the Protestant movement people fought for a separation of powers based on the religious world which governed the spirit and the secular world that governed material affairs. The Enlightenment movement fought along the same lines and managed to expand the sphere of the secular world and decrease the authority of the Church. In other words, they just drew the line in a different place.

The cognitive structure however, remains exactly the same to this day. There is a presupposition that the world is divided into a material sphere and a religious sphere. So people who argue that they are secular because they don't believe in promoting religion fail to notice that the concept of secularism is not a religion-neutral concept to start with.

The Asian world was never structured in this manner. In India, the priests never had any State authority ever. The spritual ideal was dharma which was meant to apply in every spere of life, and specially politically, I would think. After all it would be ridiculous to propose a-dharma as a way of life.

In any case, the situation with the secular set up is rather absurd because of its lack of cognitive sophistication. Even if the US pays lip service to secularism, what difference does it make if George Bush and the rest are not secular? You can't just turn on some sort of a secular button all at once.

Divya,

Very well stated!

As always, you have articulated your case in a clear, sophisticated and brilliant manner.

Regards.

Hey Vijay and others,
What do you think of Indian media reporting on US? They always have bad things to talk about us. Now how do you defend that. Media will write things that will sell with their subscriber base.Some papers are for the working class, some for the professionals and they pick stories that is best sutied for the readers,and we all consist of them, why blame the media when we fuel the frenzy.

If you folks want to keep a watch on Indian infrastructure/economic development, check out this forum:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=450

For highway pics especially:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=221282

Ragh,
Thanks bro for your comments, finally! Ragh and me had this discussion on the media in India and how they report in Pakistan and vice versa.

If you take one particular incident in Kashmir and look at the way the media reports in India and pakistan, you will see why we don't have peace there. Media write what sells, can we forget the famous page 3 of The Sun.

ron,

I did consider both the sentences when I argued. This is how I see that. The first part says that state should not do anything that might promote a particular religion. I consider that religion interfering with state as a way of promotion of that particular religion. I consider the second part to be directed towards the citizens of the state. The citizens have the right to practice any religion without the interference of the state. This is my interpretation of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof". I really see no other interpretation to this.

Vijay (Sappani), I fully agree with your statements regarding Indian press. I also want to point out that Bollywood has also misused the "lack of trust" between India and Pakistan. We did see so many movies depicting Pakistan as villians.

Jignesh,

I get the impression that as far as India is concerned, even though you have vague memories of it, you wish to see the glass as half empty while seeing the USA as half full. Of course there are great, huge problems in India, no one or any Indian will deny that. Now please try looking at it from another perspective - just two bland facts.

By 2020, India's population is expected to be around 1.4 to 1.5 billion and it is expected that by then 20% of the population would still be illiterate. So will you see this as a country where 300 million are illiterate or as a developing country which has over a billion people who are literate? Similarly (as per an article I read somewhere, I think it was at BBC World quite some time ago) India already had more millionaires than all of Europe combined and including the states that comprised the Soviet Union. Yet there is no escaping the fact that India also is home to 25% of the world's poorest. So it is really a case of where a lot needs to be done. At the same time, there is no denying that it has also achieved a whole lot in almost 60 odd years, starting almost from scratch as far as planning, developing industry and infrastructure are concerned.

Now as to the respect that women command in India, you have to come back and see for yourself. A lot has been done and yet again, even more needs to be done and done very fast.

One could question the amount of respect you profess for them in your own statement:
"I will love to see condi vs hilary cat fight(If possible)." Now if someone labelled you an old fashioned MCP based solely on that statement I think you'd have a tough time explaining yourself. LOL I'm not implying you are, just pointing out how one can look at things the way one wants to and pre-judge issues on personal bias.

There are two opinions I have about the media whether newsprint or TV and am resigned to living with it to keep myself informed.

Firstly, no agency is impartial, each one has it's own axe to grind or a particular view to project. Secondly, it is a marketable commodity and is guided purely by market forces.

Personally, I find that the authors I am most wary of are those who are labelled as specialists or analysts. They have convinced themselves that the average reader is either an imbecile, a blithering idiot or one who has absolutely no ability to think out an issue or formulate an opinion without their enlightened assistance.

Dara - I used to feel the way you do, that the writers thought the readers were blithering idiots......, that the papers and tv conglomerates were driven by market forces. Now I see that the newspapaers and tv conglomerates ARE the market forces....If they treat you like an idiot, it's because they want you to feel idiotic if you don't "get" the message they are carrying. And "we" are not responsible as consumers for all that goes on the air or in the papers for public consumption. The fact is that in the USA, thanks to Ronnie RayGun, there is no absolute requirement that tv news even inform us. So to think that "we" the consumer are driving the stories is pretty much a mirage.

Vijay and Vijay - What you say is true but so superficially true that it is irrelavent.

I tend to go along with Dara and Veg Head in recognizing market forces, but on a slight tangent. Being a little out of touch with India, my comments here are based on an understanding of the situation in the US. There are only two forces that control every sphere of life (including the media) - Business and Christianity. Whatever political fights take place are on account of the conflicting interests of these two giants. The media may label it as a liberal or a conservative issue, or a free speech issue or whatever the heck it wants to. Bottom line is that the interests of one or the other of these two entities is at stake.

Now, both of these two giants control the distribution channels of *knowledge* and they control it *worldwide*. Knowledge that is blessed by them is privileged, gets taken seriously, becomes "official" over time, gets reproduced by other scholars, works its way into mainstream, encyclopedias, popular media, popular consciousness and into the world media. Based on the views of these two giants, certain voices are rewarded and others ignored. So the likes of Arundhati Roy gain instant credibility in the eyes of Indians and the world. Her book fits the western (christian) narrative of the hindu as backward and caste-ridden and is duly rewarded. A while ago there was some talk of the banning of the Swastika in Europe. Fortunately the matter was dropped but if it had gone ahead full steam there is no way pagan, idol-worshipping hindus would be able to establish that the swastika is anything but a symbol of racial hatred. Credibility is simply not on our side no matter which paper does the reporting.

In thus controlling the framing and distribution of knowledge, the dominant powers color the perception of the rest of the rest of the world so as to fit in with their own schemes. This is specially true in India. There may be a bit of local color to the stories, and Pak will bash India and India will bash Pakistan, but the basic structure of their thinking and rationalizing is dictated by the west.

Veg,
"If they treat you like an idiot, it's because they want you to feel idiotic if you don't "get" the message they are carrying."

I loved that statement, it is so true. I think it is necessary to counter this by letting them know that "we" see through them. But it's a hard nut to crack. Have written a few times on similar lines in letters to the editor and not one of them has seen the light of day (the letters, not the editors :), though I could be right on that count too!).

Had no idea that it is not requirement of the tv channels to be informative. Are you serious? Does this apply to the 24hr. news channels? Increduluous.

Divya,

I feel similarly that the press and media is influenced by thinking in the West - there are of course the few exceptions when the worm does turn - but seldom. Moreover I also see this as pandering to what they THINK the average reader wants to hear and see. Sometimes of course they contradict themselves and get away blatantly, but who cares - we are buffoons anyway.

In India anything about Pakistan sells, specially the negative. We claim to be heading towards greatness in international standing and the media panders to that. Yet we are never short of being reminded that Pakistan is doing something better than us. For example Pakistan recently took fresh initiatives to restructure ties with Israel (why shouldnt they?), the media went ballistic - we were being upstaged by Pakistan! the Indian Government was sleeping and doing too little! Give me a break please! I could go on and on..

Dara - Amazing, isn't it, that the press has no responsibility to the people any more? I heard a speech on the radio this fall by Robert Kennedy Jr., and will excerpt portions of his speech which can be found at http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091705Z.shtml
Begin quote
"This all started in 1988 when Ronald Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine said that the airwaves belong to the public. They were public trust assets just like our air and water and that the broadcasters could be licensed to use them but only with the proviso that they use them to promote the public interest and to advance American democracy. They had to inform the public of issues of public import. They had to have the news hours. None of those networks wanted to show the news because it’s expensive, they loose money on it. They had to avoid corporate consolidation. They had to have local control and diversity of control. That was the requirement of the law since 1928.

Today as a result of the abolishment of that doctrine, six giant multi-national corporations now control all 14,000 radio stations in our country, almost all 6,000 TV stations and 80 percent of our newspapers, all of our billboards and now most of the Internet information services, so you have six guys who are dictating what Americans have as information and what we see as news.
The news departments have become corporate profit centers, they no longer have any obligation to benefit the public interests, their only obligation is to their shareholders and they fulfill that obligation by increasing viewer ship. How do you do that? not by reporting the news that we need to hear in to make rational decisions in our democracy but rather by entertaining us, by appealing to the prurient interests that all of us have in the reptilian core of our brain for sex and celebrity gossip [applause]. So they give us Laci Peterson and Michael Jackson and Kobe Bryant and we’re today the best entertained and the least informed people on the face of the earth and this is a real threat to American democracy. "
end quote
Plus, don't feel alone that your letters to the editors don't get published. I've sent letters out over ten times, and only got one published. That one was severely edited, so that the pivitol part of the letter and most controversial part was dropped.

Veg,

Thanks, very informative. I am not going to give you examples from the Indian press except to mention that its strange how similar media is all over the world. To quote from the end of Kennedy's piece "..we’re today the best entertained .." is what I think most of us feel about the current situation.

I guess in a way its perhaps a drawback of a democratic system - nothing or no one is perfect. But we can at least try to get there.

As far as 24/7 news channels are concerned though, I do have something to add. I am getting more and more convinced that they really have nothing to say most of the time. Instead of just repeating themselves every hour they are forced to conjure up news out of junk.