In continuation of my mail , just wish to know what discretionary control or veto power , the moderators are ascribing to themselves on circulation / dissemination of mails.
JP Sharma
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Janardan Sharma <contactjps@gmail.com> wrote:
Fully agree that the quality and tenor of the discussions have deteriorated tremendously. Inclusion of the same set of people ,particularly from the political arena,who have no track record of any worthwhile achievements or path breaking vision but are mere spokesman on lease, is sheer wastage of air time.They only fan negativity and display lesser standards of public debate and elocution than in an average level High School . In particular the congress spokesman , bereft of any ideas and and being defensive from the word go , perform in a pathetic manner. Surely there is no dearth of eminent scholars and performers whose every word will educate and inspire us and spread message of hope.One can only hope that Media will do introspection and put in efforts to improve the quality of deliberations and discussions rather than give visibility to unworthy and irelevant people who need to be faded out so that the PM Modi and his Govt' efforts is given due recognition and acknowledgementOn Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Atish Sharma <atish2810@gmail.com> wrote:I fully agree with the observations regarding the news channel debates.Atleast one of the drawbacks mentioned can be set aside immediately by controlling the volumes of the speakers so that only one person only is allowed to be heard clearly while others can be heard with much reduced volume. This option may be controlled by the anchor on the basis of the time allotted to each speaker.It will be upto the speaker if he wishes to utilise the allotted time meaningfully towards the basic issue or waste the time aimlessly towards unwanted shouting.Public is not receptive to high db bickering.-aksOn 23 January 2015 at 12:17, SD Windlesh <sdwindlesh@gmail.com> wrote:I fully agree with you. The purpose of these debate is something else and not the critical examination of the subject matter.The anchor want the reply according to the policy of the channel owners and spread the same among the public to mold their thinking.On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Brigadier Gopal <brigadiergopal@gmail.com> wrote:so well said !!brig h r gopalOn 21 January 2015 at 20:11, Venkatraman Ns <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"ToIndia Against Corruption
PAIN OF LISTENING TO ENGLISH NEWS T V MEDIA ANCHORS
Obviously, the anchors in English news TV media who conduct the debates have no in depth knowledge or specialisation in any field. However, they seem to think that they can talk on any subject whether it is economics, politics, science and technology, crime investigation, culture, foreign policy, sports, and what not. It is not an exaggeration to say that their knowledge is half baked , which is there for all to see but these anchors do not seem to know.
They seem to have a set of people who are called to participate in debates and they seem to be available all the time at their beck and call. With many participants , most of whom are directly or indirectly involved in politics and not in any way better than the anchors in their analytical ability, the debate is marked by lung power rather than substance. The anchor often matches the participants in the lung power, showing no mercy for the viewers. Certainly, intelligent people with facts and figures, who want to observe decorum ,cannot have their say in full in these debates, which viewers may be eager to listen.Most of the viewers helplessly watch these debates and keep on changing from one channel to another, wondering whether one channel would be better than the other. This rarely happens.
Fortunately, only a fraction of Indian citizens understand English communication and amongst those who know English, only a small segment have the patience to watch entire debates but the anchors do not care. They seem to whimsically assume that the helpless viewers will watch anything and everything.Of course, the worst of the anchors in English news TV media are Arnab Goswami and Karan Thapar, who want to dominate the debate and assume that they know everything and exhibit streaks of arrogance and impoliteness. They put questions and when the participants respond, they cut them and put more questions and shout so much that no one can hear what the participants say. These anchors do not seem to realise that they are so uncivilised in their behaviour.With Indians putting up with several inconvenience in day today life, the pain of watching English TV debates is one more pain that they have to endure .N.S.VenkataramanNandini Voice For The Deprivedtwitter : @nsvchennai
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in--SD WindleshAdvocatePh: 9811169203Check the group: Hinduism at Stake:Twitter: https://twitter.com/sdwindlesh
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
No comments:
Post a Comment