Hey NL Team,

Subscriber and big fan,

Itching to write an elaborate mail for long but can’t gather all my thoughts right now, so a small comment.
In latest Hafta 119 Madhu, kinda pounced upon our Kumauni star Manisha (I am a Kumauni too :)).

It was regarding why western media, did not go deeper in WMD propaganda and when Manisha said they should have, Madu in a scolding teacher’s tone asked her “why did you not counter Indian government version of Surgical strike, you could have why didn’t you and if you did not, don’t ask why western media ran with WMD story.

I am willing to give Madu benefit of age, however, I hope during her meditation she will realize the futility and irony in her statement.

If not let me help, Madhu’s basic argument is if you can’t do something don’t crib why others are not doing it. She must realize the journalism as a profession does not solve anything it points out irregularities and shortcoming because solving is not their context, highlighting/commenting is. And they do this in hope that someone in a position of solving might take heed and solve it. So to rant out this corporate bullshit that “don’t come to me with problem give me a solution” works in certain context and it sounds absurd without that context.

Ironically NL team is so bootstrapped that they have to raise funds separately to cover some stories that mean Madhu understands as NL journalist Manisha has no resources ( unlike big western media with a huge international network of correspondents and sources) to cover a story like the surgical strike in depth, thus asking “why didn’t you” is both foolish and ironic in my view.
Rest keep up the good work.

Regards
Ashish Chaudhary

Hey guys,

I want to bring to attention a fabulous response on the Anand Vardhan article on Beef Democrats. The comment is by Shubhanga Pandey. It is by no means balanced or perfectly encapsulating of the topic but it definitely adds something of value to the conversation.

While I frequently get my cheap thrills reading (and sometimes egging on) outraged commenters (commentators?) on Swarajya’s Facebook page (and Beef Janta Party, OpIndia, etc), it is comments like Shubhanga’s that are a big reason why I keep coming back to Newslaundry.

The comment:

I would replace Omkar Joshi’s adjective “despicable” with “cowardly” when it comes to Vardhan’s partisanship, since he is so keen in making rather unoriginal rightwing claims without directly professing that ideology, and with the shield of “the rustic majority,” conveniently forgetting that rural India, and north India in particular, has a vibrant history of progressive politics. (A small example from a large corpus of such works: http://www.oupcanada.com/ca… To paint a portrait of the north Indian Hindus, based on personal experience and not on anything substantial seems to me like a pretty lazy and self-reinforcing exercise. Anyways, that is the least of my problems.
The points Vardhan makes here and over in the podcasts over the failures of the liberals is a very tired repetition of the last decade and a half of Anglo-American conservatism. You can go read back issues of New Criterion, Commentary, Weekly Standard, National Review, Spectator, Salisbury Review, and any number of rightwing publications and recognize the shapes Vardhan’s arguments take — even their stale vocabulary of the 1970s and 1980s provincial conservative writing. And one hates to admit, but there are better written and more wisely edited (yes, I am looking at you NL editors!) regurgitations of those ideologies in the post-2004 columns by hacks like Swapan Dasgupta and Kanchan Gupta. It is too bad that the NL Editors have not kept up with the history of ideas, conservative to socialist — and liberal is the centre, not the left — (please go beyond New Yorker or Atlantic), and therefore find people like Vardhan, or that chauvinist uncle a few weeks back, that interesting.
One could even try to be a bit clever about vocabulary — as many conservatives are wont to — and say that ‘this is an imposition of Western ideas that we are determined to stop and that is so toxic to our socie….’ and so on. But of course, the Tories in Delhi are a different creature. They will present it in the form that will benefit them. I have, at this point, only one exhibit, which used to be the Twitter profile, and blog bio of Swapan Dasguupta: “Politically conservative; socially Anglophile; emotionally in 1930s.” These lines are slightly annoying. But even more they are quite sad, and depressing, and tell us a lot about the insecurities of Delhi-centric Indian conservatives.
All this to say that things are even worse in other media organizations. It seems that liberal-bashing, which I used to enjoy as a socialist, is now en vogue, but from a different and more sinister direction. And all kinds of journalists and columnists seem to benefit from it, financially as well as from the point of view of exposure, for all you have to say is that “those liberal/kabab-eating/English-wallahs/JNUs are out of touch” and that so-called “real India is reasserting itself,” for better or worse. No more arguments needed, no sociological/anthropological/political-economic analysis required, despite the near-daily production of useful works available in journals in the country and outside. Just say “rustic” India wants it, forgetting that most of India, rustic and otherwise, likes to eat meat and gives little hoot about someone’s bovine affections. The whole beef-emergency is not a function of personal, religious psychology or religious theology, but political economy. And I wish there were more people in the media, and in NL, who could make that point. (PS: anthropological works on Dalits and consumption of meat will be very useful. And I cannot recommend this book by Rupa Viswanath enough, on the relationships between colonial economic rationales, the political need for labour control, and the caste system: “The Pariah Problem (https://cup.columbia.edu/bo….”

Sheshank

Hi Newslaundry team,

I am a subscriber planning to bump up my subscription plan soon. Let me get to the point straight. But before that I must disclose that I am an AAP supporter and Arvind sympathizer even before AAP was formed, but please don’t bracket or paint me into a blind supporter and skip through all the arguments I want to make in this letter.

I think India Against Corruption was mostly Arvind’s brain for which he is not even allowed to take credit for. And why is Anna interested in every allegation, every win or loss of AAP is not a mystery. Like every old generation person, he cannot stand people “jo kehna nahin maante”. Coming back to your last week Hafta and numerous others in which you talked about AAP. I am very disappointed that you spend your time speaking the same old things. It is like you all have safely locked up your thoughts to unchanging positions, even when AAP’s status and positions changes a lot every other day.

First Sekhriji – I would have loved to know more about things that we didn’t know from other news already. Corruption or not, we have all rights to know AK’s side for accusations against him. Even if you speak something and they are just your opinions, it would matter a lot to us as it shapes our way of looking at things too. I eagerly listen to Newslaundry for wise opinions of panelists. Sekhriji, I find your opinions in particular extremely honest and very well thought out.

Madhu mam – “naivety” is not a crime. You are accusing somebody who have accused the strongest people in India and still standing tall of being naive. You have a prejudice that Arvind is not able to bear these situations, but still he comes out strong few days later looking fearless, and you never correct yourself. I think your hatred for AK comes out of his persona rather than how good a person he is for politics and society. Very few activists and whistleblowers are likable in my opinion because they focus on negative aspects, but we need more of them. I think that journalist should be more objective in their judgement of politicians based on their efforts and political positions rather than how powerful or charming they are. I found it objectionable to respect power of a person more than his or her values, courage and integrity.

Ranga uncle- Why would you overburden any political party or organization with blind expectations. To think that a party can be completely corruption free is a big loss of realism. When AAP was being formed I knew that even if party founders never do corruption, they will have hard time finding someone who have never done corruption in their life. With all the focus and attention, people were eager to prove them that they were corrupt even before they might were. But is media not the one who accuse AAP of losing too, then mocks them of how naive and how inexperienced they are and how nobody supports them. And yes, there definitely has been corruption in AAP, but direct involvement of AAP national leaders is not yet proved enough. With such a low support crowdfunding would not have ever been sufficient for Punjab elections. But if AAP was such a corrupt party “like everyone else”, what good does removing Chhotepur right before the elections do to the party?

Manisha- Before we decide if AK is “aam” or not, we need to come clear of who is “aam”. Economically speaking none of us are “aam”. “Aam” would be a person who earns much lower than we do. If we try to judge by where they live, if they are accessible – I don’t think any formal political system persona can be “Aam”, because people will never treat them like that. What you might want to say is that he is most vulnerable because he is an easy target. And I think we all can agree. How many people will think twice before saying things against AK compared to some of the ShivSena Bajrang Dal BJP supremos. I think that should support your point.

Before you dismiss as a blind AAPtard, let me say that I question them enough too. I remember the day I realized that AAP’s donors list was put down from AAP’s website. I went to their website to donate and then didn’t. I was disappointed, but then they are actually the best choice out there, I would support AAP until I find another better, no matter how many elections they lose. May be we never did let them win with being ethical and that is India’s loss. Also I agree with Niku – scale matters. A cutlery theif is not the same as a mafia don. Especially when it comes to judging corrupts, it is always going to be about who is more and who is less. Because as Ranga uncle said, sometimes corruption can also be when you ignore to stop corruption – which practically you would have to do as a political leader sometimes, right?

By the way, I am a great fan of all of you. Every friday your voices sounds like music to me. I am particularly appreciative of Abhinandan for sticking to his ideals and leading this great team for the motive of independent media. Your team is one of the best organization I know in India which thrives with its diverse view points and introspective behavior. I am sure Mr. Sekhri must already know how important it is that he makes something out of the precious time that newslaundry members put up. It is his obligation now to make everyone’s voices reach more places. I as subscriber and promoter would try my best to help Newslaundry with that in whatever way I can. I am also waiting for you to start with your everyday podcast.

Regards,
Rajat Aggarwal
(always trying to defend unfairly treated weak side