This is the link to the "The Nobel Lecture given by The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 2007, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), represented by R K Pachauri, Chairman
(Oslo, December 10, 2007)"
http://nobelpeaceprize.org/eng_lect_2007b.html
And this link is to the "The Nobel Lecture given by The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 2007, Al Gore (Oslo, December 10, 2007)"
http://nobelpeaceprize.org/eng_lect_2007c.html
Monday, December 10, 2007
INDIAN MEDIA
In a democratic setup like India, media is widely acknowledged as the fourth pillar of the constitution, the three being legislation, executive and judiciary. It is also expected to play a role of a watchdog, if you read between the lines it would mean that even if a situation arises where the three pillars of constitution are corrupt and rotten to the core, media has to don the role of a crusader and take the nation to the safety and protect its citizens.
If media has to play be the sole crusader of the democracy then it needs to distant itself from any ideology(read as political party), which might be easy in theory and hard to practice.
We can easily name the print media organizations and the political parties which are hand in glove,
thus we find the magazines being almost reduced to the role of party newsletter, my question is why has the journalism reached such abysmal lows? One doesn't need to be an avid reader of the magazines or newspapers to conclude my statement, even if s/he picks a random issue/copy of any magazine one can notice a visible tilt towards whatever ideology they subscribe to, in their reporting/ editorial. This ideological tilt is especially very high during the election times.
Now comes the electronic media, where they have made a dirty habit of glorifying violence, carrying out sting operations whenever the ad revenue dips or 'TRP' has fallen below the rival channel. Why do they do this? Yes I agree to the popular view of most editors that they are 'here to make business and not to do some charity', but business at the cost of what? Has the audience ever asked them to show everything, they are currently showing to fill up their airtime.
Who is to be blamed for this ruckus?
If media has to play be the sole crusader of the democracy then it needs to distant itself from any ideology(read as political party), which might be easy in theory and hard to practice.
We can easily name the print media organizations and the political parties which are hand in glove,
thus we find the magazines being almost reduced to the role of party newsletter, my question is why has the journalism reached such abysmal lows? One doesn't need to be an avid reader of the magazines or newspapers to conclude my statement, even if s/he picks a random issue/copy of any magazine one can notice a visible tilt towards whatever ideology they subscribe to, in their reporting/ editorial. This ideological tilt is especially very high during the election times.
Now comes the electronic media, where they have made a dirty habit of glorifying violence, carrying out sting operations whenever the ad revenue dips or 'TRP' has fallen below the rival channel. Why do they do this? Yes I agree to the popular view of most editors that they are 'here to make business and not to do some charity', but business at the cost of what? Has the audience ever asked them to show everything, they are currently showing to fill up their airtime.
Who is to be blamed for this ruckus?
Greats and The Not So Greats
Life is always full of anomalies. There have been greats and the not so greats in various aspects of life, viz. sports, entertainment, commerce, academics or for that matter any field one can think of. Let me warn you before you continue reading this piece, this is not a cynical piece of writing, just a comparison of different personalties of life.
Greats are obviously those people who have always captured people's imagination from the time they would have first set foot on their playing field. Then they go on to become heroes and stars in their domain and always remain kings and queens and invariably they retain their position against all odds. If you look closely at those people you would come across a 'Godfather' who would have been instrumental in getting that person to the position he/she would have attained, before you shout from your rooftop that my argument will not hold good against the 'Self Made Man', let me tell you that there is nobody who can be really called 'Self Made Man', all these who have seen glory, more often than not would have been at the right place at the right time, so now how do you call them as self made. Yes these people might have faced a lot of hardship, but luck does favor them.
And then the not so greats are those people who after making a grand debut, fade away. These prodigies often cannot live upto their own expectations after some time, and slowly these children of God fade away from limelight. This phenomenon of these extremely talented kids(kids because even before they become into full grown adults of their field of work, they are brushed aside) has always remained an enigma to me. The problem with these kids is they showcase all their talent in the first show itself, obviously the fickle minded public expects the same every show, and to deliver that performance day in and out becomes humanly impossible. The public is sometimes so impatient that they call that elusive first performance as 'fluke', well now you people have to define fluke for me, because I cannot agree a person's performance as a mere by chance, because whatever job one does needs some kind of a talent. Unfortunately there will be no Godfather for that person to get him another chance. This is mainly a case of Too much too early.
Dear reader, you would have found this writing very vague, but to keep away from all the uninvited controversies I have not used any names, now do me a favor, think of two people of a same field, who fit into my story and compare their lives, to your surprise you would agree with me.
Greats are obviously those people who have always captured people's imagination from the time they would have first set foot on their playing field. Then they go on to become heroes and stars in their domain and always remain kings and queens and invariably they retain their position against all odds. If you look closely at those people you would come across a 'Godfather' who would have been instrumental in getting that person to the position he/she would have attained, before you shout from your rooftop that my argument will not hold good against the 'Self Made Man', let me tell you that there is nobody who can be really called 'Self Made Man', all these who have seen glory, more often than not would have been at the right place at the right time, so now how do you call them as self made. Yes these people might have faced a lot of hardship, but luck does favor them.
And then the not so greats are those people who after making a grand debut, fade away. These prodigies often cannot live upto their own expectations after some time, and slowly these children of God fade away from limelight. This phenomenon of these extremely talented kids(kids because even before they become into full grown adults of their field of work, they are brushed aside) has always remained an enigma to me. The problem with these kids is they showcase all their talent in the first show itself, obviously the fickle minded public expects the same every show, and to deliver that performance day in and out becomes humanly impossible. The public is sometimes so impatient that they call that elusive first performance as 'fluke', well now you people have to define fluke for me, because I cannot agree a person's performance as a mere by chance, because whatever job one does needs some kind of a talent. Unfortunately there will be no Godfather for that person to get him another chance. This is mainly a case of Too much too early.
Dear reader, you would have found this writing very vague, but to keep away from all the uninvited controversies I have not used any names, now do me a favor, think of two people of a same field, who fit into my story and compare their lives, to your surprise you would agree with me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
