Monday, February 29, 2016

Re: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

When politicians who have ruled or are ruling the country  distort stories, how we can blame only the Press !
  Secondary reactions are only reflection of primary events.
R.N.Malhotra
Former Chairman Railway Board


From: Purobi Ghosh Mohan <cgsi09@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 9:39 AM
Subject: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
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/

at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?

Please read my blog 'RTI Act-Shailesh Gandhi and Schopenhauer's Law of Entropy' at 

ravi

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:

It is quite revealing how the selection of Information Commissioners are made.

Selection of S. Sailesh Gandhi was an exception. Te rule being appointment of former Civil servants-mostly IAS or IPS officers. The qualifications laid down are favourble to them and so is the composition of Selection Committee.As a result these posts have become tools to favour the favourites of Govt.

From the Civil Society there is little pressure to change the status quo because the RTI activists themselves are a divided lot.

Now more than a decade has passed since the RTI was passed. During this time surely some activists have developed the

requisite expertise and should lay a serious claim to be appointed Information Commissioners both at Central and Sate level. If I remember correctly S. Roy had applied for selection. Let us go by his experience also for not being slected.

Regds

JKGaur



From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Rakesh <rakeshbhma@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 6:30 PM
To: Rakesh B
Subject: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?
 
Hi,
Pls. refer to the following hyperlink:-

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/how-india-must-select-information-commissioners/20160223.htm
There is a great need to introduce a transparent process to select information commissioners, who are expected to oversee transparency, says former Central ...



CHEERS!
Bangalore Raju Venkatesh Prasanna

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



--
Veteran Major P M Ravindran
 
You may also like to visit:
'Judiciary Watch' at www.vigilonline.com 
at No comments:

RE: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Perfectly correct. Add to this, the unseemly sight of TV channel discussions
becoming indecipherable due to cacophony of the participants. In 90%
discussions, the remark of one member is shouted down by some member or the
other & views of both are lost on the viewers while the Anchor remains a
mute spectator ! There is no effort by the Channels to rectify this serious
fault in telecast, and the whole episode becomes sham.

KN



From the Desk of :
Justice Kamleshwar Nath
Former
:
Up-Lokayukta ( Karnataka ),
Vice Chairman - C.A.T ( Allahabad ),
Judge - High Court ( Lucknow & Allahabad )
Address
:
`Gunjan', C - 105, Niralanagar, Lucknow : 226 020. Uttar Pradesh, India
Phone(s)
:
Landline : +91-522-2789033.
Mobile : +91-9415010746



-----Original Message-----
From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
[mailto:indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net] On Behalf Of Purobi Ghosh
Mohan
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 9:40 AM
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research
to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many
other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are
heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private
interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those
with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians,
judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a
private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a
legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books
(PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the
authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
at No comments:

Sunday, February 28, 2016

Re: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

We journos like most of the politicians do not do homework before writing. Journos are always in a hurry like politicians . Journos are after TRP and for sensationalising events as politicians are hungry for remaining in news and photopps. Very often ,they speak without any knowledge about the subjects on camera. I know some parliamentarians who do homework before speaking but they are shunned by media.
I had heard george fernandes, madhu dandavate, advani ,atalji and some congress MPs who would speak with facts and figures.
You are right that some  journalists have disappointed us

On 28-Feb-2016 10:50 PM, "Purobi Ghosh Mohan" <cgsi09@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
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
at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?

Dear Readers,
There are two aspects to CIC appointment. First, what concerned law has provided for. Second, what government has done - was it within the law or whether Govt. has violated law. The section 12 (2) of Right to Information Act 2005 has made provision for CIC as follow: The CIC shall consists of (a) the CIC; and (b) ten Members of CIC. In the section 12(3) the process of selection has prescribe by stating that: (3) CIC and Info Commissioners has be appointed by the President of India on the recommendation of a committee consisting of (I) PM as Chairman, (ii) Leader of Opposition Party, and (iii) Union Cabinet Minister to be nominated by the PM. The only qualification CIC as per RTI Act is that as per Section 12(5) the CICI and Info Commissioners has be persons of eminence in the public life with wide knowledge and experience in law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media or administration and governance. As per Section 12(6) there is bar on seating MPs, MLAs, or hold on office of profit, carry on business of profit, or hold political party office. That means, the retired officers of government like IAS, IPS, Indian Info services, etc. are eligible to hold office if they have or had in been good books of ruling party. Because of three members of selection committee there are two from ruling government and only one from opposition party who can only raise objection or walk out in case of major difference in selection criteria. As fas as Mr. Bassi is concerned different people have different views about his good or bad handling of situation he was to handle in official capacity. As long as he is not guilty of any major corruption, atrocities on the public at large during demonstration etc. he could be considered along with 5 or 6 officers based on his past 5 years' performance. Benefits of doubts goes in favour of candidates. Hope this clarifies issue!    

Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  




From: Trap Rti <rtitrap@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net; gaurjk@hotmail.com
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?

There is a procedure named SEARCH AND SELECTION COMMITTEE 
for selecting candidatee  for the post which does not come under preview of UPSC
The detail procedures can be seen at the website of DOPT 

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
It is quite revealing how the selection of Information Commissioners are made.
Selection of S. Sailesh Gandhi was an exception. Te rule being appointment of former Civil servants-mostly IAS or IPS officers. The qualifications laid down are favourble to them and so is the composition of Selection Committee.As a result these posts have become tools to favour the favourites of Govt.
From the Civil Society there is little pressure to change the status quo because the RTI activists themselves are a divided lot.
Now more than a decade has passed since the RTI was passed. During this time surely some activists have developed the
requisite expertise and should lay a serious claim to be appointed Information Commissioners both at Central and Sate level. If I remember correctly S. Roy had applied for selection. Let us go by his experience also for not being slected.
Regds
JKGaur


From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Rakesh <rakeshbhma@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 6:30 PM
To: Rakesh B
Subject: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?
 
Hi,
Pls. refer to the following hyperlink:-

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/how-india-must-select-information-commissioners/20160223.htm
There is a great need to introduce a transparent process to select information commissioners, who are expected to oversee transparency, says former Central ...



CHEERS!
Bangalore Raju Venkatesh Prasanna

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/




at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Dear Purobi
I agree with you. In the name of news they are spreading the view, false reviews and spreading misinformation to people which not only divert attention from main issue but also make people believe on falsehood. Most of so called reporters are misguided and always infer and construe the things far from reality. There is poverty of both knowledge, poverty in journalism, lack of basic knowledge about issue even use the wrong words in reporting. This perhaps suits the ruling party.  
 
Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  




From: Purobi Ghosh Mohan <cgsi09@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 9:39 AM
Subject: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
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/

at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?

Sir in namit Sharma case S C had passed judgment for at least half the commissioners to be from judicial but over active Rights activists made such a hue and cry that S C reversed its judgment so we are left with government trash and government sycophants journalists . Judges would have been thousand times better and unafraid of high ranking officers who appear before them.

On 27 Feb 2016 12:40, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> It is quite revealing how the selection of Information Commissioners are made.
>
> Selection of S. Sailesh Gandhi was an exception. Te rule being appointment of former Civil servants-mostly IAS or IPS officers. The qualifications laid down are favourble to them and so is the composition of Selection Committee.As a result these posts have become tools to favour the favourites of Govt.
>
> From the Civil Society there is little pressure to change the status quo because the RTI activists themselves are a divided lot.
>
> Now more than a decade has passed since the RTI was passed. During this time surely some activists have developed the
>
> requisite expertise and should lay a serious claim to be appointed Information Commissioners both at Central and Sate level. If I remember correctly S. Roy had applied for selection. Let us go by his experience also for not being slected.
>
> Regds
>
> JKGaur
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Rakesh <rakeshbhma@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 6:30 PM
> To: Rakesh B
> Subject: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?
>  
> Hi,
> Pls. refer to the following hyperlink:-
>
> http://www.rediff.com/news/column/how-india-must-select-information-commissioners/20160223.htm
> How India must select information commissioners - Rediff ...
> www.rediff.com
> There is a great need to introduce a transparent process to select information commissioners, who are expected to oversee transparency, says former Central ...
>
>
>
> CHEERS!
> Bangalore Raju Venkatesh Prasanna

at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Purobi Ghosh Mohan is highly commendable in saying that our national press corps and media have lost their sense of proportion and objectivity in reporting the news. One has to grope in the dark struggling to sift the news from views which are highly slanted and opinionated amounting to subversion even. It's utterly uncalled for in a democracy of our type. It falls to the lot of the responsible civil society to stem the rot, if the government tends to look the other way. Let there be a discussion and consensus for a plan of action in this regard. Best.  







Regards,
D.S.Ranga Rao
8379813275
9969 069 144



On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:09 PM, Purobi Ghosh Mohan <cgsi09@gmail.com> wrote:
Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (cgsi09@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
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


at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Purabi Ghosh Mohan Ji,

Right you are, all the way. 
Research or unbiased processes in reporting are hardly attempted.
Most of them, if not all, apparently, follow the goals and biases set by their owners. One wishes it was otherwise.

Tragically our own media controlled by the GOI is no better....!
Its all like the saying ..."a people/citizens get the Govt. or media they deserve..."

Peace
dev chopra in gurgaon
UN retiree
***  

On 28 February 2016 at 09:39, Purobi Ghosh Mohan <cgsi09@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
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

at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Hi to all,

Mr. Purobi Goshi is right, please treat it is a serious matter to the country.It is ashamed to watch the T.V chaneels, News papers now a days, really wasting time and money for such. There should be some regulatory body to monirtor.

Regards

Hari


On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Purobi Ghosh Mohan <cgsi09@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
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

at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee

I don't understand why you people cry in the wilderness on matters beyond your control. At best, change the channel, let his TRP fall and the channel wind up. All TV channels are servants of some political party or the other. If public is gullible, a tea master can be the king. The trouble starts with US. We have taken elected leaders to be versatile prodigies. Unfortunately, the leaders also believe themselves to be so. Unless and until we make a degree ( in any discipline, except in Bihar ) as the basic requirement for a people's representatives and make attendance compulsory for all sessions, ' no work no pay ' as the rule, they will not come to o their senses. A politician rejected by his own constituency becomes a central minister, state governor or planning commission chairman. Little do they reflect that they would not have got the job of a chaprasi with their qualifications. Time to show who the boss in a democracy.

Ratnakar Gedam <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:

Dear Ms. Seema

Thanks for email.

Normally I do not react or post comments on other's write up. But somehow recent developments are too much disturbing to keep silence.

Indeed it was your article of Zee's Subhas Chandra, self styled leader, self eulogist, self admirer and claimant of supremacy. Zee TV's Sudhir Chaudhary and Rihit Sardana are often make most undesirable comments. In fact, zee TV new channel is anti-congress, as well as against all parties. Subhas Chandra is blind supporter of Narendra Modi and not others in  BJP. News Channels are supposed to report news impartially but they broadcast less news and impose their views, as well as violate all norms of media reporting. In their views other than NaMo none has right to exist. Had it been possible for them they would like to kill all those oppose to NaMo which is tendency found in only dictators. Zee tv does not believe in democracy but only in nepotism, dictatorship, and anarchy.   

Your observations in the write up of "From A to X to Zee", (and prior to that your article on 14 Points of Fascism, I liked most as it was most timely) has made me to write in support of your views as well as respond to others who reacted to both your article as well as commented on my observations.

Surely, welcome to be in touch and share views on matters of recent development too. . I am retired government employee and have to keep busy, so I keep reading. Best wishes, and regards!

Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  




From: seema mustafa <seemamustafa@gmail.com>
To: Ranjit Rai <ranjitrai123@gmail.com>
Cc: Ratnakar Gedam <rgedam@yahoo.com>; "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee

What have you said Sir is extremely interesting. And confirms a lot
Hope to be in touch
Warm regards
Seema 

Seema Mustafa
thecitizen.in

On 23-Feb-2016, at 8:21 am, Ranjit Rai <ranjitrai123@gmail.com> wrote:

There is a procedure named SEARCH AND SELECTION COMMITTEE 
for selecting candidatee  for the post which does not come under preview of UPSC
The detail procedures can be seen at the website of DOPT 

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:

It is quite revealing how the selection of Information Commissioners are made.

Selection of S. Sailesh Gandhi was an exception. Te rule being appointment of former Civil servants-mostly IAS or IPS officers. The qualifications laid down are favourble to them and so is the composition of Selection Committee.As a result these posts have become tools to favour the favourites of Govt.

From the Civil Society there is little pressure to change the status quo because the RTI activists themselves are a divided lot.

Now more than a decade has passed since the RTI was passed. During this time surely some activists have developed the

requisite expertise and should lay a serious claim to be appointed Information Commissioners both at Central and Sate level. If I remember correctly S. Roy had applied for selection. Let us go by his experience also for not being slected.

Regds

JKGaur



From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Rakesh <rakeshbhma@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 6:30 PM
To: Rakesh B
Subject: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?
 
Hi,
Pls. refer to the following hyperlink:-

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/how-india-must-select-information-commissioners/20160223.htm
There is a great need to introduce a transparent process to select information commissioners, who are expected to oversee transparency, says former Central ...



CHEERS!
Bangalore Raju Venkatesh Prasanna

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

at No comments:

[IAC#RG] Sorry state of media in India

Dear friends,

I read and watch with unease the state of media in our country today.

Most of those from the fraternity opine, don't report, with scant research to back them up. They are driven by a herd mentality.

Senior journalists write/speak on issues at random and keep silent on many other critical stories which they should be writing/speaking on. Some are heavily dictated by their publication/channel leanings or their private interests.

The media creates hype at will, distorts stories and gives a handle to those with vested interests. The partisan news and views influence politicians, judiciary and legislating bodies.

I understand that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) is a private body and not a legal entity. The Press Club of India (PCI) is a legal body and but yet to widen scope. The new Press Registration and Books (PRB) Act, also, is yet to be passed. It still runs on the 1867 Act.

Such a situation poses immense threat to the nation and to the populace.

It is necessary to raise our voices against this situation and bring the authenticity of news to an even keel. Something needs to be done.

Regards

Purobi Ghosh Mohan

Sent from my iPad
at No comments:

Friday, February 26, 2016

Re: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?

It is quite revealing how the selection of Information Commissioners are made.

Selection of S. Sailesh Gandhi was an exception. Te rule being appointment of former Civil servants-mostly IAS or IPS officers. The qualifications laid down are favourble to them and so is the composition of Selection Committee.As a result these posts have become tools to favour the favourites of Govt.

From the Civil Society there is little pressure to change the status quo because the RTI activists themselves are a divided lot.

Now more than a decade has passed since the RTI was passed. During this time surely some activists have developed the

requisite expertise and should lay a serious claim to be appointed Information Commissioners both at Central and Sate level. If I remember correctly S. Roy had applied for selection. Let us go by his experience also for not being slected.

Regds

JKGaur



From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Rakesh <rakeshbhma@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 6:30 PM
To: Rakesh B
Subject: [IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?
 
Hi,
Pls. refer to the following hyperlink:-

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/how-india-must-select-information-commissioners/20160223.htm
www.rediff.com
There is a great need to introduce a transparent process to select information commissioners, who are expected to oversee transparency, says former Central ...



CHEERS!
Bangalore Raju Venkatesh Prasanna
at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee

26/2/16


ZEE and JINDAL two industrialists families of WesternHaryana. Jindal supported by Congress created problem for ZEE. Now with change of guard ZEE is paying back.

 all media houses are either controlled by Marwari industrialists or foreigners Rupert M. of Star or US CNN.

No wonder people are reverting to DD news now. Other private channels have lost credibility with fake debates and paid news.

Regds JK gaur



From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of globaltrustparty <globaltrustparty@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 8:05 AM
To: basant_rajput@yahoo.com
Cc: rgedam@yahoo.com; ravindra malhotra
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee
 

Many thanks for your views.

This is precisely what happens when rice trader turns media Mogul.

We in India have jugglers instead of journalists.

SURJANA S MEHTA

On Feb 24, 2016 1:12 AM, "Rajput Basant" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:
After reading this mail chain, I am amused that the writers did not notice the same phenomenon in much bigger scale when UPA was ruling at the Center. This reminds me of the saying ' what is good for the goose is good for the gander'!!!

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad

On Feb 22, 2016, 5:52:18 PM, Ratnakar Gedam wrote:
Dear Ms. Seema

I tried to post following comments but something went wrong. My comments are as follows, you may advice to your editor to get publish it along with your article. Have a nice time!
Good Analysis! I am inclined to agree with you, but needs placing some points in right the perspective to be neutral per se, i.e. neutral in terms of men and matter, putting matters first than men in politics, policies over politics or nationalism (pseudo versus in reality) versus anarchy.
There are at least three points that this article articulates which draw attention to.
Firstly, media's role in supporting each and every thing that NaMo as Pm does. Indeed, observations are very correct. Subash Chandra's Zee is anti, Congress and Pro-NaMo not pro-BJP. When Jairam Ramesh said toilets as more important than temples, Zee started non-tireless campaign against him. But when same issue raised by NaMo, zee tv has mad all praise for him, as if NaMo was first to invent, forgetting the facts that Jairam was talking about Total Sanitation Campaign which was one of 16 flagship projects of INC then in power. That is, Zee has blind support to NaMo as PM; certainly for aspirations for gains, recognitions of Padma awards, positions as well as profit motive, without tax evasion charges or dragging his empire into tax evasion net. Zee Tv and its all anchors wore pro-Namo spectacles. Therefore, one must expect impartial reporting or DNA from Zee.
Second, each of tv channels have political orientation and support to the one or other political party, therefore almost all channels are not impartial or neutral to any issue or debate. Last general elections to Lok Sabha were not won by NaMo alone by his so called miracle speeches (which indeed lack substance and knowledge of subject he often spoke of) but it was winning of mass media of both digital and print media that unleashed anti-Congress and anti-NaMo parties through 24x7 propaganda. There was debates not on the subjects but pro-NaMo praise. Those who were oppose to NaMo were subject to verbal attack as well as use of abusive. This trend is continued till today and may continue till next general elections. This is bad for democracy and anti-ethical reporting. Media must impartially put forward neutral view and not impose upon the viewers channels' views through their anchors.
Finally, freedom of speech granted under Article 19(1) is not an absolute right but is subjected to "reasonable restriction". Nationalism and patriotism have blurred boundaries but are inculcated since the childhood and requires it to be cherished. The nationalism means irrespective its good or bad aspects. Both nationalism and patriotism does not requires certifications either from ruling party or opposition parties, or justification or denounces from anyone, least at least from tv channels owners or anchors who are paid employees of tv owners and re bound to do, say or argue as their bosses wants them, for the sake of continue earning salary. Students are bound to be distracted to ideologies unless are students at formative age are taught as to what is rights from wrong otherwise it would lead to indoctrination of thoughts or ideologies, as could one see in terrorist, criminals, anti-nationals, etc. People ought to differ as no two are identical or no two ideologies are same but neither this is not a time nor universities a place of experiment. No nationalist or patriotic person would accept others' point of view. Also studies and debates of ideologies over tv channels about religions, nationalism, pro-religions differ from crime as defined under the laws of land. The punishment according to law need evidence and it is the duty entrusted to police, certainly media trial and passing judgment on nationalism at least pseudo-nationalism as seen since last few years is nothing but as imposing views of tv channel owners over all others. As do politicians have their own agenda so have tv channels, as well anti-nationals which do try to infiltrate to institutions where youth in large number are easily found and are treated like a reserve army to proliferate ideologies and tap their talent and energy for furtherance of their intentions.



Dr. Ratnakar Gedam





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
at No comments:

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee

Dear Ms. Seema

Thanks for email.

Normally I do not react or post comments on other's write up. But somehow recent developments are too much disturbing to keep silence.

Indeed it was your article of Zee's Subhas Chandra, self styled leader, self eulogist, self admirer and claimant of supremacy. Zee TV's Sudhir Chaudhary and Rihit Sardana are often make most undesirable comments. In fact, zee TV new channel is anti-congress, as well as against all parties. Subhas Chandra is blind supporter of Narendra Modi and not others in  BJP. News Channels are supposed to report news impartially but they broadcast less news and impose their views, as well as violate all norms of media reporting. In their views other than NaMo none has right to exist. Had it been possible for them they would like to kill all those oppose to NaMo which is tendency found in only dictators. Zee tv does not believe in democracy but only in nepotism, dictatorship, and anarchy.   

Your observations in the write up of "From A to X to Zee", (and prior to that your article on 14 Points of Fascism, I liked most as it was most timely) has made me to write in support of your views as well as respond to others who reacted to both your article as well as commented on my observations.

Surely, welcome to be in touch and share views on matters of recent development too. . I am retired government employee and have to keep busy, so I keep reading. Best wishes, and regards!

Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  




From: seema mustafa <seemamustafa@gmail.com>
To: Ranjit Rai <ranjitrai123@gmail.com>
Cc: Ratnakar Gedam <rgedam@yahoo.com>; "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee

What have you said Sir is extremely interesting. And confirms a lot
Hope to be in touch
Warm regards
Seema 

Seema Mustafa
thecitizen.in

On 23-Feb-2016, at 8:21 am, Ranjit Rai <ranjitrai123@gmail.com> wrote:



FOR MODERATOR 

WILL RESEND  FULL TEXT WITH BOOK REVIEW SO DO NOT CIRCULATE THE EMAIL BELOW AS IT WENT OFF BY ACCIDENT 

Cmde(R) Ranjit B Rai MBIM(UK)
 Ex Vice President Indian Maritime Foundation
International Correspondent India Strategic & SEAGULL  & B'Caster
C 443 Defence Colony New Delhi 110024
www.indiadefenceforum.com
24335654 +9810066172
 



On 23 February 2016 at 08:12, Ranjit Rai <ranjitrai123@gmail.com> wrote:
By chance I saw these exchanges and have only read MJ and Seema regularly and MJ's book how he is a Muslim from a Hindu ancestoey froim Congress to BJP and his association with Lso have never known them but feel knows them and their leanings but that is neither here or there. 

This is a former Naval Officer but now a researcher,  author,  Radio TV commentator and have never met this man SUBHASH CHANDRA but after reading his book  THE Z FACTOR  ( for which he needs CONGRATULATIONS  to show he is very pro BJP ) he shows how he corrupted DHIRENDRA BRAMACHARI AND OTHERS IN PMO WITH FIRST 50 LACS in cash in the 1980s  to BRAMACHARI  and got contracts to export basmati to the Soviet Union from Rajiv Gandhi's office  through Vijay Dhar and V George   along with an Anil Channa ....the Doons and made CRORES ......He writes openly ........He was investigated by CBI but Intelligence in India is another story I can write volumes as I was Director of Naval Intelligence and lips must remained sealed !                                                                                                                                                                    

Cmde(R) Ranjit B Rai MBIM(UK)
 Ex Vice President Indian Maritime Foundation
International Correspondent India Strategic & SEAGULL  & B'Caster
C 443 Defence Colony New Delhi 110024
www.indiadefenceforum.com
24335654 +9810066172
 



On 23 February 2016 at 07:22, Ratnakar Gedam <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:
Dear Ms. Seema

I tried to post following comments but something went wrong. My comments are as follows, you may advice to your editor to get publish it along with your article. Have a nice time!
Good Analysis! I am inclined to agree with you, but needs placing some points in right the perspective to be neutral per se, i.e. neutral in terms of men and matter, putting matters first than men in politics, policies over politics or nationalism (pseudo versus in reality) versus anarchy.
  
There are at least three points that this article articulates which draw attention to.
 
Firstly, media's role in supporting each and every thing that NaMo as Pm does. Indeed, observations are very correct. Subash Chandra's Zee is anti, Congress and Pro-NaMo not pro-BJP. When Jairam Ramesh said toilets as more important than temples, Zee started non-tireless campaign against him. But when same issue raised by NaMo, zee tv has mad all praise for him, as if NaMo was first to invent, forgetting the facts that Jairam was talking about Total Sanitation Campaign which was one of 16 flagship projects of INC then in power. That is, Zee has blind support to NaMo as PM; certainly for aspirations for gains, recognitions of Padma awards, positions as well as profit motive, without tax evasion charges or dragging his empire into tax evasion net. Zee Tv and its all anchors wore pro-Namo spectacles. Therefore, one must expect impartial reporting or DNA from Zee.   
 
Second, each of tv channels have political orientation and support to the one or other political party, therefore almost all channels are not impartial or neutral to any issue or debate. Last general elections to Lok Sabha were not won by NaMo alone by his so called miracle speeches (which indeed lack substance and knowledge of subject he often spoke of) but it was winning of mass media of both digital and print media that unleashed anti-Congress and anti-NaMo parties through 24x7 propaganda. There was debates not on the subjects but pro-NaMo praise. Those who were oppose to NaMo were subject to verbal attack as well as use of abusive. This trend is continued till today and may continue till next general elections. This is bad for democracy and anti-ethical reporting. Media must impartially put forward neutral view and not impose upon the viewers channels' views through their anchors.
 
Finally, freedom of speech granted under Article 19(1) is not an absolute right but is subjected to "reasonable restriction". Nationalism and patriotism have blurred boundaries but are inculcated since the childhood and requires it to be cherished. The nationalism means irrespective its good or bad aspects. Both nationalism and patriotism does not requires certifications either from ruling party or opposition parties, or justification or denounces from anyone, least at least from tv channels owners or anchors who are paid employees of tv owners and re bound to do, say or argue as their bosses wants them, for the sake of continue earning salary. Students are bound to be distracted to ideologies unless are students at formative age are taught as to what is rights from wrong otherwise it would lead to indoctrination of thoughts or ideologies, as could one see in terrorist, criminals, anti-nationals, etc. People ought to differ as no two are identical or no two ideologies are same but neither this is not a time nor universities a place of experiment. No nationalist or patriotic person would accept others' point of view. Also studies and debates of ideologies over tv channels about religions, nationalism, pro-religions differ from crime as defined under the laws of land. The punishment according to law need evidence and it is the duty entrusted to police, certainly media trial and passing judgment on nationalism at least pseudo-nationalism as seen since last few years is nothing but as imposing views of tv channel owners over all others. As do politicians have their own agenda so have tv channels, as well anti-nationals which do try to infiltrate to institutions where youth in large number are easily found and are treated like a reserve army to proliferate ideologies and tap their talent and energy for furtherance of their intentions.  



 
Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  





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/





at No comments:

[IAC#RG] How India must select information commissioners?

Hi,
Pls. refer to the following hyperlink:-

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/how-india-must-select-information-commissioners/20160223.htm

CHEERS!
Bangalore Raju Venkatesh Prasanna
at No comments:

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Re: [IAC#RG] from a to x to zee

Many thanks for your views.

This is precisely what happens when rice trader turns media Mogul.

We in India have jugglers instead of journalists.

SURJANA S MEHTA

On Feb 24, 2016 1:12 AM, "Rajput Basant" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:
After reading this mail chain, I am amused that the writers did not notice the same phenomenon in much bigger scale when UPA was ruling at the Center. This reminds me of the saying ' what is good for the goose is good for the gander'!!!

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad

On Feb 22, 2016, 5:52:18 PM, Ratnakar Gedam wrote:
Dear Ms. Seema

I tried to post following comments but something went wrong. My comments are as follows, you may advice to your editor to get publish it along with your article. Have a nice time!
Good Analysis! I am inclined to agree with you, but needs placing some points in right the perspective to be neutral per se, i.e. neutral in terms of men and matter, putting matters first than men in politics, policies over politics or nationalism (pseudo versus in reality) versus anarchy.
There are at least three points that this article articulates which draw attention to.
Firstly, media's role in supporting each and every thing that NaMo as Pm does. Indeed, observations are very correct. Subash Chandra's Zee is anti, Congress and Pro-NaMo not pro-BJP. When Jairam Ramesh said toilets as more important than temples, Zee started non-tireless campaign against him. But when same issue raised by NaMo, zee tv has mad all praise for him, as if NaMo was first to invent, forgetting the facts that Jairam was talking about Total Sanitation Campaign which was one of 16 flagship projects of INC then in power. That is, Zee has blind support to NaMo as PM; certainly for aspirations for gains, recognitions of Padma awards, positions as well as profit motive, without tax evasion charges or dragging his empire into tax evasion net. Zee Tv and its all anchors wore pro-Namo spectacles. Therefore, one must expect impartial reporting or DNA from Zee.
Second, each of tv channels have political orientation and support to the one or other political party, therefore almost all channels are not impartial or neutral to any issue or debate. Last general elections to Lok Sabha were not won by NaMo alone by his so called miracle speeches (which indeed lack substance and knowledge of subject he often spoke of) but it was winning of mass media of both digital and print media that unleashed anti-Congress and anti-NaMo parties through 24x7 propaganda. There was debates not on the subjects but pro-NaMo praise. Those who were oppose to NaMo were subject to verbal attack as well as use of abusive. This trend is continued till today and may continue till next general elections. This is bad for democracy and anti-ethical reporting. Media must impartially put forward neutral view and not impose upon the viewers channels' views through their anchors.
Finally, freedom of speech granted under Article 19(1) is not an absolute right but is subjected to "reasonable restriction". Nationalism and patriotism have blurred boundaries but are inculcated since the childhood and requires it to be cherished. The nationalism means irrespective its good or bad aspects. Both nationalism and patriotism does not requires certifications either from ruling party or opposition parties, or justification or denounces from anyone, least at least from tv channels owners or anchors who are paid employees of tv owners and re bound to do, say or argue as their bosses wants them, for the sake of continue earning salary. Students are bound to be distracted to ideologies unless are students at formative age are taught as to what is rights from wrong otherwise it would lead to indoctrination of thoughts or ideologies, as could one see in terrorist, criminals, anti-nationals, etc. People ought to differ as no two are identical or no two ideologies are same but neither this is not a time nor universities a place of experiment. No nationalist or patriotic person would accept others' point of view. Also studies and debates of ideologies over tv channels about religions, nationalism, pro-religions differ from crime as defined under the laws of land. The punishment according to law need evidence and it is the duty entrusted to police, certainly media trial and passing judgment on nationalism at least pseudo-nationalism as seen since last few years is nothing but as imposing views of tv channel owners over all others. As do politicians have their own agenda so have tv channels, as well anti-nationals which do try to infiltrate to institutions where youth in large number are easily found and are treated like a reserve army to proliferate ideologies and tap their talent and energy for furtherance of their intentions.



Dr. Ratnakar Gedam





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
at No comments: