Modern World Hub is one of the Quadri-hubs (Women's Power Hub- Web Promotion Hub- Modern World Hub- Sports Power Hub) of Dr K N Bastola, reflecting his encyclopedic work 'Women's Power: Its Past, Its Present, Its Future: Femocracy' that discusses about the past, present and future of mankind, in a single volume containing 150 subjects.
Follow @WomensPowerBook Follow @WomensPowerCen Follow @revolutionscen Follow @FutureWorldCen Follow @ModernWorldCen Follow @FaithAtheismNub Follow @TopMostShop
Sunday, 1 June 2014
Why do Indians Resent The Coverage of Modi by The Western Media Houses Like CNN, The Economist, BBC et al?
The Free Speech And The Anger
With the Internet, and therefore freedom of speech not quite well developed or developed in the controlled print alone, Indian English media feasted on stories criticising Modi for more than 10 years. Although as an episode, 2002 Gujarat riots dint go unnoticed in the West during the cyberspace's infancy, coinciding with it becoming an adult and as surprising as a socialist bud blossoming in the capitalist space, the feast metamorphosed into a 'starter' in the West when Modi started his ascent for the PMs office.
Get out of the "Fear of the Unknown". This article is a pure junk as the west is envious of India now. Says Latha Reacting to Sunni Handal's post on CNN
It is completely biased and INSULT to people of India Screams Virat
'..such crap' says VR to There's A Dark Side To The Prime Minister Who Just Won India's Election By A Huge Landslide
Another says 'Stop peddling this trashy lies CNN' to Will Modi be India's Putin?
But Why Are The Indians Angry?
Unexplained by racism (Many reporters are of Indian origin); what makes them vilify these internationally recognised depended media houses? Are these just emotional outbursts or have the Western media houses crossed the mark offered by media ethics and freedom of expression?
Almost aired by the overcrowding of UK airways by the English non trusting non-English state's TVs (Al Jajeera, RT, French TV etc.) that have chosen to offer their own perspectives, the ideal of neutral journalism is yet to be achieved. In the Indian/BJP context, this is said because of the following reasons.
With all inferences relying on data and data on source, intentional or unintentional choice of wrong source or disregard of the right source gives a wrong conclusion. Sadly this seems to be the case with the Western media, at least in relation to its recent reporting on Modi/BJP/India.
Showing trust on some people's views but not on Indian judiciary, all articles harp on Modi's guilt on 2002 Gujarat riots. As if the goal was to create fear, the main mantra appears to be 'Modi will divide India'. The scaremongering thus initiated, almost like a Hollywood plot, its substantiation alone is made a goal. While anything that boosts this is given credence, anything that doesn't is either disregarded or modified to fit in. Untouched by irrelevance, 'Let's move on' or 'Let bygones be bygones' history is excavated and modified as necessary. Even 'mythology' is dragged in.
With them being used as a vote bank, changing demography and causing local resentment that at times bursts into riots, Illegal immigration is a greater problem for India than for UK and USA. With Hindus being persecuted and even being grossly reduced in numbers in Bangladesh and Pakistan, it accepts them as refugees. Far from being anti-Muslim, having a tradition of accepting persecuted groups like Jews and Zoroastrians, tradition tracing BJP will accept the persecuted Pakistani Ahmadiyya Muslims, and even add 'Guest is like a deity'. Disregarding that fact but twisting Modi's anti-illegal immigrant election rhetoric into anti-Muslim view, the scribe tries to substantiate the goal mantra.
And when Modi shows a pro Muslims stance by touching the feet of 104 years old Muslim, almost as a win by any means, David Danelo of CNN accuses him of aligning with Netaji - the feared Indian revolutionary!! The man quoting and praising Gandhi is disregarded. To substantiate the mantra by maligning RSS, he digs into what he, possibly, considers mythology, and brings in erroneous historical facts about Gandhi and the Mahabharata. Coming back to the present, he commits the same mistake as The Economist does with the 'puppy' remark of Modi. As if showing a desperate move, merging past and present, he even drags today's businessman's view on history's Netaji.
And when a virtually unknown BJP member said something about sending Pakistan backed Modi opposing Muslims who regard Pakistan as 'holy' to Pakistan, it was misquoted as him saying 'Modi opposing Muslims should go to Pakistan'.
The list goes on ..
What is Not Seen
But then, what they don't see are these clearly discernable facts
The detachment is such that lacking self reflection, these reporters fail to see the Western ideals oozing out of Mr Modi. While his rise from a humble beginning to the present is akin to that of Abraham Lincoln - let alone the rags to riches American dream- his oratory power is as mesmerising as that of Obama - with whom he happens to share social discrimination. While going beyond protestant work ethics he hasn't taken leave since the last 12 years, going beyond a householder wish, he has offered his salary to the poor. Despite vilification, he has shown love for freedom of expression and offered praise to the Indian media for making him prominent.
Despite being called divisive and media pointedly dragging him into religion, he has consistently refused to see electorate on any line other than on development. In fact, done earlier only by a sympathy wave (Mrs. Gandhi's death), his message of development has created history by making voters transcend faith, ethnicity, language and cast. Even Muslims, who are supposed to fear him, voted for him. Despite making a feast of politician's mistress scandals in the West, him sacrificing his wife for the sake of the country is not seen. Also not seen is his love of freedom of speech. His use of 3D technology not done in USA or UK is awaiting record recognition. After victory, almost as a statesman, through Twitter he has asked some oppositions party stalwarts to work together for the sake of the country. Continuing statesmanship, while he sees every citizen important, seeing neighbours as important he has invited all SAARC leaders.
Even if the scary Hindutwa is invoked to scare Muslims, its core belief, amazingly, is respect for all religions!
With the educated and optimistic Muslims, who voted for him not sharing the reporters' apprehension, this scaremongering itself becomes an insult to their intelligence. Furthermore, like Ms Clinton not finding Modi's mass graves, they will not find their views proven in the future.
And finally, though Indians have shown anger against the misguided reporters, unlike them, the man who has also been called Nero despite having the deepest regard for his mother, will rather praise them for making him prominent! This is exactly what he did to the Indian media people, who feasted on criticising him for more than 10 years. This should bring the vive of Gandhi, whom he respects so much.