India Media role in contempt and derision about India

[Prem]

gumasta?

Well I have a friend called "Gumaste" - which is a family name, so maybe Sepoy is best?

Call them Fuddus= Nonsensical Hot Air Pseudo Intellectual Stinker

[Agnimitra]

Nirad C. Chaudhary is a must read to see the heart of the deracinated Anglicized Indian view of India without any confusion or pretense of what is considered superior and what culture is considered a chronic, inveterate cauldron of the corrupt and the mediocre, where only the cream that happens to be at the top have any chance of tasting what its like to serve (not even BE, but serve and imitate) a truly civilized, creative, original and vigorous human. NCC lived out his life in the mother country - UK - and was awarded and recognized as the best author of his genre.

[Neela]

Both these facts grate uncomfortably against western social mores that have been pushed on Indian society as "modern and desirable". "Individual freedom" is touted as the most important freedom in the west - especially in the US to the detriment of family. And in fact individual freedom extends only so far - because after a point government and society step in even in the west to curb individual freedom in favor of the many. Only family and social structures that protect the family have been rendered irrelevant.

Social stratification in the so called caste system is no different from social stratification anywhere else - but as long as it occurs in India it is dubbed as "caste system" and bad. Most Indians live confused lives in which they are taught that "caste" is bad and are apologetic about it, even while their lives are built around an extended family support system which is what "caste" actually is. India are unable to say how caste can be both good and bad and revert to apology without understanding that what they call "caste" was not meant to be a system of stratification as interpreted by missionary and other Christian observers from Europe.

What is known as "caste" is actually our identity that indicates which part of the country you hail from, who your extendd family are and what your social customs are. Even educated Indians are unable to parse the fact that "caste" has been dumbed down into four groups and painted as being rigid in those four groups. In fact the word "caste" needs to be discarded. Even among those four groups are a million sub-families indicative of language, geographic origin and culture. The variety is so large that Europeans were unable to make sense of it. Indians who learned about it from the European viewpoint are now unable to see it the way it works in India.

- http://www-tc.pbs.org/kcet/when-worlds- ... lorder.pdf
Caste derives from the Iberian "Casta" - and the system itself was originally a classification of people according to races and social order in the new world.
So after the conquests, a system was enforced to set the norms for who gets what in the social pecking order.

When the missionaries came, they , as Shiv mentioned, wanted to paint of picture of evil Indian society to push through their message of the good lord. This became the basis of any discussion on Indian castes. And they used the same (familiar) terminology that was in place in South America and in Europe to explain to themselves what the social system in India was.

In the normal case, any work on Indian social systems that is based on oriringal missionary work & terminology should be dismissed as this is a "conflict of interest".

But then, when in 2008(?) , the Sydney Morning Herald , after Australia lost a test to India, uses the "Castes" of Rahul ,Ganguly and Tendulakr to get back at Indians, you know it is something that they want ot hold to when all else fails. Effete losers

[Ramu]

For Indians we need better terminology to refer to Indian House Negroes. DIE - deracinated Indian elite may be a good expression - but I would like an expression that is easily understandable. DIE is a nice acronym but the expansion is unclear. Any ideas?

indian house negro itself sounds good to me.

[KLNMurthy]

I wasn't looking at it from the parent-child analogy, KLN Murthy! More like, India being a developing, third world country with some traditional 'power structures' still in place, and with poverty, overpopulation and corruption, it would share a lot of problems with countries like Indonesia,Brazil, Nigeria et al. But we don't get those hard, harsh remarks from within those countries, that we often see from India. Nor do we hear of controversies such as this recent one involving Wendy Doniger in India.

There must be books, movies, plays, paintings, sculptures and individual academics which outrage or offend people in those places. Why don't we hear of them, and why aren't those controversies brought to international attention, the way the same issues are raised in India? That's what I'm referring to.

Absolutely, the condescension of the NY times, Washington Post, CBC and BBC must be countered as much as their double standards with respect to India and other developing nations. One example of condescension, or putting the questioner in a position of authority, would be something like "Dr Radhakrishnan( ISRO chairman) I'm trying to get a sense of why now, why is it necessary for India to send a satellite to Mars now, when critics would argue that the country has many other priorities" . As someone pointed out, that same question is not asked of China, Russia or France. Nor is the Cambodian, Mongolian, Peruvian, Mozambiquan or Lithuanian broadcasting corporation asking India or ISRO that type of question!

Sorry, but it sounds to me like the above is also is a kind of a plea from "us" to western media highlighting the imbalance in their negative coverage of India as opposed to Indonesia or whatever. I can understand using such highlighting of imbalance as a tactic to put western media on the defensive, but to my mind the bigger question is, who appointed the NYT et al arbiters of what is right or wrong about India?

[KLNMurthy]

gumasta?

Back in pre-independence days, a person who tried to spout in (usually shaky) English when Telugu would have done perfectly well was often derided for flaunting his "butler english." So, butler?

[shiv]

I guess there are a lot of appropriate expressions - I just thought of one more - the "ji huzoor" mentality that is displayed by the Indian for his white master.

[member_22733]

Bhura-Ghulam

[member_22733]

tooting my own horn here:

xpost from bositive news (the four-father one)

BTW, every extreme position that every imperial power has taken (in this case slavery, in Briturdias case: Colonialism and in Japan's case for ex: Japanese Imperialism). There is a large part of the economy that survived their imperial collapse and now fund this 'industry of apologists'. This 'industry of apologists' is an ecosystem with a hierarchy (for all practical purposes a caste system): Where anyone who finds 'positive' about imperial excesses are rewarded heavily. The educationalists are on the top of the food chain, followed by the media folks, followed by evangelists.

There is another layer of this hierarchy which resembles a caste system. An apologist belonging to the same ethnic identity as that of the imperialist he is in a higher caste than the apologist belonging to the ethnic identity of the oppressed. The key thing is, the oppressor apologist has deep network ties into powerful structures of the imperialist while the oppressed apologist does not, and has to try hard (be a MUTU) to get those same privileges.

In essence an oppressor apologist can take more risk in his career, can in fact call the imperialist for what he is, a mass murderer, and still survive through his career. The oppressed apologist will be shunned the moment he calls the imperialist out. The moment he steps out of the apologist line he will lose those carefully cultivated networks.

Paraphrasing the words of Frantz Fanon: Imperialism divides the world into two without giving those involved a choice to switch sides. Those who share the ethnic identity of the oppressed will always be separate from those who share the ethnic identity of the oppressor, no matter what one does. Its as permanent a caste system as one can get.

The Indian media still behaves like a loyal colonial babu. A native who hates himself and secretly curses the almighty and his fate for being born in the oppressed 'caste'. Indian media babus are in that category. They are colonial servants serving a master who is not in command. Its like they are 'free slaves' who still hang out at their masters feet and fight each other for the masters attention. They can just get up and walk away, but they wont because they dont know how to exists outside the masters boundaries.

[member_20317]

Gulam Zehaniyat
Nafsiyat-e-Ghulami
Khud Farebi

- ideas from the kabila in the west.


But why such a need for rechristening. DIE is good enough.

[Gus]

you have to explain DIE to non-BRF. and this attitude is not only in elites but also pretty much prevalent in all classes in all regions...just the degree varies. heck..i remember being one myself.

gumastas were our 'house negros', groomed by colonial british to act as a layer between the white and sdre. to interpret their law to people below and then explain the sdre to the master above. i can see this almost sheepishly embarrassed way people explain indian things to americans here in offices and parties etc. i feel like banging my head on the wall sometimes..

[Agnimitra]

WOGs.
Gungadins.
Khansamas.
Coolies.
Sepoys.
Uncle Toms.

[UlanBatori]

Interesting. Is there any substance here?
Listen very carefully.
"In India, which claims to be an emerging power since 2003, more than half the country does not have access to power".

"Now, sadly, India has picked up bad habits of the West, there are plastic bags everywhere".

But there are NOT, hey? Plastic bags are banned in Mallostan at least, and you can't find any.

Listen to qns from audience:
1. What r u doing to get funding for us?
2. What is ur partnership with SD, WHO, UN?
"Number of them quite interested... see the value.. over the next few months job is to convert that into funding.."
IOW, Kezunga, Kezunga!

[shiv]

you have to explain DIE to non-BRF. and this attitude is not only in elites but also pretty much prevalent in all classes in all regions...just the degree varies. heck..i remember being one myself.

gumastas were our 'house negros', groomed by colonial british to act as a layer between the white and sdre. to interpret their law to people below and then explain the sdre to the master above. i can see this almost sheepishly embarrassed way people explain indian things to americans here in offices and parties etc. i feel like banging my head on the wall sometimes..

Well here is something you and others should enjoy...
http://www.aadisht.net/blog/2014/01/31/ ... -breeding/

[Varoon Shekhar]

I wasn't looking at it from the parent-child analogy, KLN Murthy! More like, India being a developing, third world country with some traditional 'power structures' still in place, and with poverty, overpopulation and corruption, it would share a lot of problems with countries like Indonesia,Brazil, Nigeria et al. But we don't get those hard, harsh remarks from within those countries, that we often see from India. Nor do we hear of controversies such as this recent one involving Wendy Doniger in India.

There must be books, movies, plays, paintings, sculptures and individual academics which outrage or offend people in those places. Why don't we hear of them, and why aren't those controversies brought to international attention, the way the same issues are raised in India? That's what I'm referring to.

Absolutely, the condescension of the NY times, Washington Post, CBC and BBC must be countered as much as their double standards with respect to India and other developing nations. One example of condescension, or putting the questioner in a position of authority, would be something like "Dr Radhakrishnan( ISRO chairman) I'm trying to get a sense of why now, why is it necessary for India to send a satellite to Mars now, when critics would argue that the country has many other priorities" . As someone pointed out, that same question is not asked of China, Russia or France. Nor is the Cambodian, Mongolian, Peruvian, Mozambiquan or Lithuanian broadcasting corporation asking India or ISRO that type of question!

Sorry, but it sounds to me like the above is also is a kind of a plea from "us" to western media highlighting the imbalance in their negative coverage of India as opposed to Indonesia or whatever. I can understand using such highlighting of imbalance as a tactic to put western media on the defensive, but to my mind the bigger question is, who appointed the NYT et al arbiters of what is right or wrong about India?

No, it's a dual criticism, of the imbalance in their coverage of India vis a vis other developing countries which have the same problems, as well as a rebuke to their condescension toward India itself. Yes, why should the NY Times, CBC, Globe and Mail et al criticise the internal policies of India. And if they are going to be condescending, let them also criticise Indonesia, Philippines et al in detail.

You can really put them on the defensive by telling them that thanks to their awful, shallow coverage of countries like Indonesia, Philippines, Brazil and Nigeria, I don't know what the major issues in those countries are, what are the opposition parties and their platforms, what is the state of the environment, what are their achievements in science and technology, and how do they perceive their own achievements economically, politically, technologically, socially. Whereas for India, I can obtain a fair assessment, by all the juicy quotes you receive from Indians that you interview. There must be any number of controversies and issues in other developing countries, and I know virtually nothing of them, thanks to your incompetent coverage! And besides, what is your business to meddle in India anyway?

That's taking it to them!

[ramana]

Bhura-Ghulam

You need an idiom that Indians are familar with.

What is the word for the Palace hijadas like Malik Kafur/malik Amber /Malik what not etc that were the power behind the Muslim sultanates?

They are powerless by themselves but are all powerful on their masters' behalf.

OR sarkari/videshi hijadas.

[UlanBatori]

I feel that this is all highly disrespectful. I am SHOCKED.
Why not describe them respectfully and with proper admiration for their Expertise on Injya? Indologists, that's what they are!

Or call them Kafilas

[Prem]

I feel that this is all highly disrespectful. I am SHOCKED.
Why not describe them respectfully and with proper admiration for their Expertise on Injya? Indologists, that's what they are!

Or call them Kafilas

With islamic name like Kafila , they want to control and teach Sanatan Dharam ?

[Varoon Shekhar]

Kafila talks about free speech, so long as it fits in with their agenda of being essentially anti-Hindu, particularly anti-Hindutva. They have very mild criticism, and rarely at that, of anything Moslems or Christians do.

[sanjaykumar]

I have a somewhat contrarian theory about why NYT, Globe and Mail etc have appointed themselves judges of Indian misdeeds, real or otherwise.

They recognise the threat that is India. From a dhoti clad little man dismantling the British empire and diminishing the Christian narcissim to meditation to non proslytisation to vegetarianism.

The last is particularly galling for it it quietly but pointedly demonstrtes a cultural short coming. Hence the suppression of information on exactly how animals are created, farmed, tortured and slaughtered.

We need not enter into Indian contributions to the sciences for their readership has no knowledge and less interest in the matters that challenge the racial narrative.


The above are gifts from the India giver. They are a heritage of all humans just as western developments in science and post religious society are.

Of course, there is not much excitement over Kazakh child marriage because unlike India it is irrelevant to the consumers of such media.

[UlanBatori]

Frankly, I do not see any merit in attaching labels to people just because one is not happy with what they write or say. Maybe there is some truth in what they say, but they do not tell the whole truth. There is certainly some possibility that people write with the expectation of being perceived to be "of the right XXXXX" (fill in party, faith, patriotism, economic views, cricket team loyalty, pakiness*). Or they may be writing on command performance. In any event, going down a path of labeling people and putting them in columns is not of any particular merit.

*: some things are unique, and pakiness has been studied and defined in the BENIS dhaga for many saal.

I don't have a problem with developing lists saying: These are the people who attacked DK/tried to score cheap points... Or on other issues. Just say: these are people who stated these sorts of views. History can prove whether they were right or wrong. And they should perhaps not be allowed to forget. For instance, Dr. Stephen Cohen, vaunted expert on South Asia, had a big blurb on his website/profile at the Brookings Institution, on how he was the person instrumental in convincing the US Govt to side with Dictator Pervez Musharraf. Nowadays that is gone, I believe, but I don't think he should be allowed to forget that. If he is proud of it, fine. If he is ashamed of it, he should either come out with an equally honest statement saying "I was wrong" Or he should not be allowed to forget, and his future advice should be tempered with a caveat that he gave this advice before.

Likewise, the past actions/words of many writers here should be properly researched and tabulated. Then reference can be made to that table. But WITHOUT any personal judgements on their patriotism etc etc.

**********************************OK, End Sanity Break, Back To Regular Programming*******
I think the Pakistani term "Lifafa" says it all.

[KLNMurthy]

Bhura-Ghulam

You need an idiom that Indians are familar with.

What is the word for the Palace hijadas like Malik Kafur/malik Amber /Malik what not etc that were the power behind the Muslim sultanates?

They are powerless by themselves but are all powerful on their masters' behalf.

OR sarkari/videshi hijadas.

Indo-communist writings used the phrase "comprador bourgeoisie". Meaning middlemen for the colonists. Slips right off the tongue.

[MurthyB]

From @MediaCrooks: Scumbaginis and Presstitutes.

[Varoon Shekhar]

"I have a somewhat contrarian theory about why NYT, Globe and Mail etc have appointed themselves judges of Indian misdeeds, real or otherwise.

They recognise the threat that is India. From a dhoti clad little man dismantling the British empire and diminishing the Christian narcissim to meditation to non proslytisation to vegetarianism.

The last is particularly galling for it it quietly but pointedly demonstrtes a cultural short coming. Hence the suppression of information on exactly how animals are created, farmed, tortured and slaughtered.

We need not enter into Indian contributions to the sciences for their readership has no knowledge and less interest in the matters that challenge the racial narrative."

That's right, and in addition, there's the real presence of a fairly large ethnic Indian population in Canada and the US. But there's a large and growing, Filipino ethnic population in Canada, and probably the US, and yet, we don't see those hard edged, visceral kind of articles and reportage from the Philippines, that we do from India. Why is that?

Philippines was first a Spanish, then an American colony. There was a very bloody engagement between Americans and Filipinos during the Spanish American war( 1898-1902), where between 600,000 and 1 million Filipinos were killed. There must be all kinds of memories, views, perceptions, controversies, and most of all strong emotions about that time. Why don't we *ever*( as in not a one!) read or hear about them, except in the most peripheral journals, like "Race and Class"?

Indonesia was a Dutch colony for well over a century. There must be a whole range of strong, complex, conflicting emotions and perceptions about that period from the Indonesian side mostly, but also from the Dutch side. We know about the British-Indian relationship from "Gandhi", "Jewel In the Crown", "The Raj Quartet" and a slew of other works and lots of articles, but what about the Dutch-Indonesian dynamic? In 25 years of reading newspapers and magazines, I can't recall a single article dealing with the subject. Is this one simply a matter of living either in the Netherlands or in Indonesia, where there would be a huge number of resources dealing with that epoch, or is there something more to it. Are there Dutch equivalents of "Jewel in the Crown"( and how were those received in Indonesia) and Indonesian anti-colonial films and books, but living in the Anglosphere, we don't have exposure to them?

I suspect that it is not simply a matter of geography, and the real issue is the absence of integrity in the mainstream Anglo-American media.

[A_Gupta]

http://blog.shunya.net/shunyas_blog/201 ... ymple.html

I often think that we, the globalized Indian elites, haven't decolonized our minds enough. Sixty years after political independence, we still carry an inferiority complex about our literary culture. Our English language literati, chronically insecure and hungry for external validation, pursue British publishing venues and accolades over Indian ones. Yes, target markets and economics explain many things but there is more—it is as if we accord a higher caste to the British and subconsciously elevate and mimic their literary culture. It is one thing to admire and be inspired by other literary cultures, but our attitude here is one of deference, lacking the self-confidence of equals. Nothing like Bookers and Oscars, or reviews, endorsements, and fat book deals in Britain (also increasingly in the U.S.) to turn our heads. Indian novels that "make it" in the Anglophone West are then taken seriously in India—not vice-versa. Do we ever grant the same cachet to books that win Sahitya Akademi and other awards in India? Or crave translations of our best non-English books?

[shiv]

http://blog.shunya.net/shunyas_blog/201 ... ymple.html

I often think that we, the globalized Indian elites, haven't decolonized our minds enough. Sixty years after political independence, we still carry an inferiority complex about our literary culture. Our English language literati, chronically insecure and hungry for external validation, pursue British publishing venues and accolades over Indian ones. Yes, target markets and economics explain many things but there is more—it is as if we accord a higher caste to the British and subconsciously elevate and mimic their literary culture. It is one thing to admire and be inspired by other literary cultures, but our attitude here is one of deference, lacking the self-confidence of equals. Nothing like Bookers and Oscars, or reviews, endorsements, and fat book deals in Britain (also increasingly in the U.S.) to turn our heads. Indian novels that "make it" in the Anglophone West are then taken seriously in India—not vice-versa. Do we ever grant the same cachet to books that win Sahitya Akademi and other awards in India? Or crave translations of our best non-English books?

What a fantastic and true passage. I wish I had written it.

[UlanBatori]

The Eye Pee Ell has turned all that upside down, hain? At least the $$$$ are in India onlee. I hope to win the Indian PeeArefBostor-e-Obnokshiosi Prize, posthumously, (because it won't be set up for the next hajaar karod saal). The trick is to set up a prize, fund it with whatever pennies, and then make a huuuuuge hue and cry about the winner. Then everyone lines up to get it. This is the formula followed in Ulan Bator World Championship Wrestling, for example. The Championship matches go on every din on TV, the contestants are all Ulan Bator residents, but it is called "World" championship and ppl from all over the Duniya tune in to watch the bogus "fights" as if it were the Olympics.

[shiv]

The Eye Pee Ell has turned all that upside down, hain? At least the $$$$ are in India onlee. I hope to win the Indian PeeArefBostor-e-Obnokshiosi Prize, posthumously, (because it won't be set up for the next hajaar karod saal). The trick is to set up a prize, fund it with whatever pennies, and then make a huuuuuge hue and cry about the winner. Then everyone lines up to get it. This is the formula followed in Ulan Bator World Championship Wrestling, for example. The Championship matches go on every din on TV, the contestants are all Ulan Bator residents, but it is called "World" championship and ppl from all over the Duniya tune in to watch the bogus "fights" as if it were the Olympics.

Agree.

In phact I had suggested to my Mediacal colleegueues that they need not wallow after getting publication phrom phoren journal. Just set up our own journal we are perfectly capable of peer reviewing. And producing good work. In medicinene this can work.

Set up a prize and make a hue and cry and make it popular even if it takes hajaar karod saal for sepoys to wipe off their withering sneers about a desi entity.

[ramana]

http://blog.shunya.net/shunyas_blog/201 ... ymple.html

I often think that we, the globalized Indian elites, haven't decolonized our minds enough. Sixty years after political independence, we still carry an inferiority complex about our literary culture. Our English language literati, chronically insecure and hungry for external validation, pursue British publishing venues and accolades over Indian ones. Yes, target markets and economics explain many things but there is more—it is as if we accord a higher caste to the British and subconsciously elevate and mimic their literary culture. It is one thing to admire and be inspired by other literary cultures, but our attitude here is one of deference, lacking the self-confidence of equals. Nothing like Bookers and Oscars, or reviews, endorsements, and fat book deals in Britain (also increasingly in the U.S.) to turn our heads. Indian novels that "make it" in the Anglophone West are then taken seriously in India—not vice-versa. Do we ever grant the same cachet to books that win Sahitya Akademi and other awards in India? Or crave translations of our best non-English books?

Finally repudiation of Fractal Recursivity. A first step in decolonizing the mind.

[chetak]

http://blog.shunya.net/shunyas_blog/201 ... ymple.html

{quote} I often think that we, the globalized Indian elites, haven't decolonized our minds enough. Sixty years after political independence, we still carry an inferiority complex about our literary culture. Our English language literati, chronically insecure and hungry for external validation, pursue British publishing venues and accolades over Indian ones. Yes, target markets and economics explain many things but there is more—it is as if we accord a higher caste to the British and subconsciously elevate and mimic their literary culture. It is one thing to admire and be inspired by other literary cultures, but our attitude here is one of deference, lacking the self-confidence of equals. Nothing like Bookers and Oscars, or reviews, endorsements, and fat book deals in Britain (also increasingly in the U.S.) to turn our heads. Indian novels that "make it" in the Anglophone West are then taken seriously in India—not vice-versa. Do we ever grant the same cachet to books that win Sahitya Akademi and other awards in India? Or crave translations of our best non-English books?{/quote}

What a fantastic and true passage. I wish I had written it.

Fear not, Hakim ji.

With your intellect and writing, you will easily top this.

[shiv]

Finally repudiation of Fractal Recursivity. A first step in decolonizing the mind.

The language used is exactly correct in identifying fractal recursivity

the attitudes of us Indian elites, the language/culture hierarchies we subscribe

[ramana]

Exactly he is identifying the elements of fractal recursivity and wants to change that.

[Yayavar]

"I have a somewhat contrarian theory about why NYT, Globe and Mail etc have appointed themselves judges of Indian misdeeds, real or otherwise.

They recognise the threat that is India. From a dhoti clad little man dismantling the British empire and diminishing the Christian narcissim to meditation to non proslytisation to vegetarianism.

The last is particularly galling for it it quietly but pointedly demonstrtes a cultural short coming. Hence the suppression of information on exactly how animals are created, farmed, tortured and slaughtered.

We need not enter into Indian contributions to the sciences for their readership has no knowledge and less interest in the matters that challenge the racial narrative."

That's right, and in addition, there's the real presence of a fairly large ethnic Indian population in Canada and the US. But there's a large and growing, Filipino ethnic population in Canada, and probably the US, and yet, we don't see those hard edged, visceral kind of articles and reportage from the Philippines, that we do from India. Why is that?

Philippines was first a Spanish, then an American colony. There was a very bloody engagement between Americans and Filipinos during the Spanish American war( 1898-1902), where between 600,000 and 1 million Filipinos were killed. There must be all kinds of memories, views, perceptions, controversies, and most of all strong emotions about that time. Why don't we *ever*( as in not a one!) read or hear about them, except in the most peripheral journals, like "Race and Class"?

Indonesia was a Dutch colony for well over a century. There must be a whole range of strong, complex, conflicting emotions and perceptions about that period from the Indonesian side mostly, but also from the Dutch side. We know about the British-Indian relationship from "Gandhi", "Jewel In the Crown", "The Raj Quartet" and a slew of other works and lots of articles, but what about the Dutch-Indonesian dynamic? In 25 years of reading newspapers and magazines, I can't recall a single article dealing with the subject. Is this one simply a matter of living either in the Netherlands or in Indonesia, where there would be a huge number of resources dealing with that epoch, or is there something more to it. Are there Dutch equivalents of "Jewel in the Crown"( and how were those received in Indonesia) and Indonesian anti-colonial films and books, but living in the Anglosphere, we don't have exposure to them?

I suspect that it is not simply a matter of geography, and the real issue is the absence of integrity in the mainstream Anglo-American media.

A small nit - you do see examples of above but possibly in non-English languages. I've seen a couple of movies when in France on Indonesia, and on Phillipine-USA interactions. But overall the Indian impact and reaction is greater.

[arshyam]

I suspect that it is not simply a matter of geography, and the real issue is the absence of integrity in the mainstream Anglo-American media.

Sir, my thoughts are very abstract, please bear with me as I try to convey my point:

1. None of these countries (Indonesia, Phillipines, Nigeria, etc.) speak English to the level India does, nor do they have India's heft in most things.

2. Second, English is used by the largest world power today. Theoretically, one day, the message from this largest world power could be supplanted by and broadcasted from New Delhi instead. Since the language is the same, the audience will be the same and be receptive to the message since they understand it.

3. Unlike the NAM era, we could rise up in the next twenty years and offer a truly multipolar alternative to the world, where countries look after their interests, trade with each other, and try to treat each other as equals, and with respect. This is at variance with the Graeco-Roman-esque theory of take all, give none, kill the messenger, mine is bigger than yours nonsense peddled WW today.

4. As Sanjay Kumarji wrote earlier, India has given a lot of gifts to the world, which is unacknowledged and unknown to most people WW (Arabic numerals (duh!)....all the way to our pharma industry today). If these details start gaining ground, there is a real threat to the current Anglophone world order their sense of superiority.

5. Unknown to most, India as a concept has survived in essence through the ages - a feat not replicated by many countries around the world. Japan and China are probably exceptions. Greece rose and fell, today has no resemblance to her past, same with Egypt, Rome, Mesopotamia, etc. No reason why we won't be around in our essence another 1000 years, but now, with a potential to reach out to more people directly.

My point is, the western media knows some or all of the above, and they are not sure what to make of it. Unlike China, which is definitely a hefty power, India fascinates and scares them because we can speak back and folks will listen. China has other issues like language barriers, totalitarian regime, communism, bullying, etc. that make people discount whatever they say. Contrast this with India, a democracy, plural, and inclusive. If India speaks, it would be hard to close one's ears.

Since India has the potential to be disruptive to the current order, India gets more than its share of negative press, so that the audience can be prepared to discount future messages from India.

Sadly, the western anglophone media gets a helping hand from some elements in our own, since our greatest asset in communication is also our greatest liability, as our anglophone media tries to insert the western, rather than Indic tag on itself.

Sorry for the rather long post, and if I didn't clearly explain myself, but wanted to get this off my mind.

[UlanBatori]

AoA! Give us a break! Where is TSJ when one needs him?

Most Americans don't know nothing about India except that it is a 3rd world country inhabited by SDRE ppl, who eat lots of curry, except most don't have nuthin to eat, but do lots of outsourced / BPO work and talk English very fast but not loudly. The South Asia Experts know better: they have seen a couple of Bollywood movies, have studied Indian History (meaning they have heard about Gandy) and International Studies (i.e., India was part of the Warsaw Pact) and is near indiapakistan, which is somewhere near East Africa.

India is the land where The Heathen Rage, full of sheep whose Souls are waiting to Be Saved So they Can Be Born Again. It is also full of 711s, Dairy Queens and Patel Motels. And oh! Elephants. And Fakirs with cobras. And Towels around their heads. Just like Osammy bin Laden Sad-Am Hoossein O-Bummer. And they memorize the whole D1ck-shinnary to win dem Spelling Bees while the rest of us were playing True All-American Sports like Touch Football and Cow-Wrestling.

BUT... some Injuns are sort-of half-civilized. ALMOST "regular" ppl. Drink beer, the chicks are sort-of "EZ", and hey, they are NOT like them other dirty SDREs, though they ARE SDRE themselves. They speak with phony British-like accents, because they must have been kids/grandkids of slaves of the British, and so have some idea of the superiority of Western Civilization. And they are always so pathetically eager to please the Real Americans, they write those hilarious books and articles. We give them BookWorm Prizes, Hooker Prizes, and they strut around like they were those silly PeacCocks or Pea-hens that they have in dem 3rd world countries. And they write all that trash about their own relijjun, and are the most pathetically loyal supporters when we write ***** about their religion, their ancestors, their parents, their culture, everything.

[Varoon Shekhar]

Arshyam, excellent! That does explain a lot, in terms of the coverage India receives vis-a-vis Indonesia, the Philippines and Nigeria. And it does confirm the absence of integrity of the Anglo-American media in relation to the world, where they only report from and criticise( directly or indirectly) certain countries, like India, based on their threat perception of that country. Not on any intrinsic values like freedom, democracy, pluralism, serious historical issues and the diversity of voices on those issues. Indians, with their communication skills in English, can tell off the Western media about their absence of honesty and integrity in reporting different countries. We can remind them, that it wasn't just the British in India, it was the Dutch in Indonesia, the Belgians in the Congo, and the Americans in the Philippines. And that their coverage of those historical realities has been awful bordering on disgusting.

As a side note, most Filipinos speak English, yet you don't see letters to the editor, or general expressions of anti-imperial sentiment, including of the Spanish and American periods in Filipino history. Indians do tend to make their voices heard, on the matter of historical colonialism in India.

[chandrasekhar.m]

Um, on the topic of criticising Indian media for writing headlines like

Indian Foreign Minister meets ...

instead of simply writing

Foreign Minister meets ...

I just noticed that even this thread is titled "India Media role ...".
There are many other threads also titled this way in the other forums too, like "Indian Navy ..." etc.

Not sure if this post is halal, if not, will delete.

[shiv]

Um, on the topic of criticising Indian media for writing headlines like

Indian Foreign Minister meets ...

instead of simply writing

Foreign Minister meets ...

I just noticed that even this thread is titled "India Media role ...".
There are many other threads also titled this way in the other forums too, like "Indian Navy ..." etc.

Not sure if this post is halal, if not, will delete.

Perfectly halal and a valid point.

Different reasons for the titles in different fora.

In the military forum the title was to restrict the topic to the Indian Navy or Indian armed forces. On this thread my intention was to stick to Indian media.

I think the situation is different for an Indian news portal. Instead of saying "Manmohan Singh meets US President" the report often is "Indian PM to meet Obama". This is like some reporter who is either reporting for Americans, or some third party nation observing Indian events.

[UlanBatori]

some third party nation observing Indian events.

There is a reason for this. Most Indian-media stories about other nations do not come from someone writing with an Indian perspective (OK, Chidanand Rajghatta...then again.. not getting into that right now). Those stories are straight copied from AFP or Reuters or AP feed, written entirely from a western perspective. So these writers writing in India are just trying to be Truly World-Class: also write from a western perspective, in the hope that AP or AFP or Reuters or some other western outlet might pick it up. They do have to earn their feed...

How would one change this?
1) The stories appearing in the western media about India from a western perspective, have to be exposed as garbage. A very hard climb, that, since the letters that express that pov may be 3 against the 100 from the pov that TSJ explains here (I am NOT saying that this is TSJ's pov, that is the error many make here).
2) The writers in India should grow some spine. They will only do that if rebutted in the Indian media and by comparison to OTHER writers who give a balanced (meaning agreeing with my pov ) perspective. This is even harder, because if you try reading the Comments in REDIFF or TOI or HINDU or INDIAN EXPRESS or HUNDISTAN CRIMES, you wonder about Darwinappa Singh's Fallacy Of Evolution.
3) BRFees can rant and rave and chest-thump, but that at best informs a few lurkers on BRF. Pretty low ROI.

I am lost for alternatives, like the slave in the hold of the Cruise Ship coming from West Africa in the 1800s:

I once was lost.. but now ah'm even more lost..

[shiv]

cross post from US strat thread

Hindu nationalists are gaining power in India - and silencing enemies along the way

Hindu fundamentalism, also called Hindutva, is driven by a trio of organisations in India called the Sangh Parivar – the family.

There you go. Hindutva, or the state of being Hindu is fundamentalism. If you admit to being Hindu, you are a fundamentalist.