BBC lied, 16 years old boy pressed BBC, BBC apologized but didn't know how to
[url=http://club.backchina.com/main/viewthread.php?tid=658040]http://club.backchina.com/main/viewthread.php?tid=658040[/url]16岁成都少年迫使BBC向中国道歉，使其颜面殆尽！
[b]A 16 years old boy in Singapore[/b], with a netname called "Singapore Big Panda", decided to expose BBC's lie to the whole world with his excellent youtube videos after he had watched the BBC lied in its news. In the news, BBC accused the China tried to cover-up the disruptions of the Olympic torch relay in London. Here is the 16 years old boy's excellent youtube videos:
[b]James Reynolds, BBC Correspondent in Beijing, has no brain ![/b]
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZBuAau9VFA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZBuAau9VFA[/url]
[b]Who's James Reynolds ? No more than a BBC journalist or not ??[/b]
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNu3QGKyd-0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNu3QGKyd-0[/url]
Immediately, the videos sent a shockwave throughout the internet.
[b]The shockwave has forced BBC to issue an apology[/b] in its "The Editors" webpage:
[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/04/between_times.html]http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/04/between_times.html[/url]
The Editors
[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/04/between_times.html]Between times[/url]
[list][*][url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/jon_williams/]Jon Williams[/url][*]16 Apr 08, 10:08 AM[/list]
Two weeks ago, during our coverage of the Olympic Torch relay protests in London, the BBC broadcast a report from Beijing, suggesting there had been no coverage of the protests, in China. Like much of the coverage associated with the recent trouble in Tibet, it has provoked a lot of discussion in China and on video sites like [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZBuAau9VFA]YouTube[/url].
While James Reynolds's report (which you can [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/homepage/int/news/-/mediaselector/check/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi?redirect=fs.stm&nbram=1&bbram=1&nbwm=1&bbwm=1&news=1&nol_storyid=7333734]watch here[/url]) was first broadcast on Sunday 6 April at 1900 BST, the items featured on YouTube were transmitted the following day - so the video is disingenuous. However, while it is true that at the time James's report was compiled no Chinese media had reported the protests, between the item being recorded and the report being broadcast, we now understand that some Chinese media did report the protests - although not the main channel, CCTV1, featured in James's report. It was wrong of us to suggest that the Chinese authorities tried to keep news of the protests off the air. When we make a mistake, we need to apologise. I'm happy to do so.
[i]Jon Williams
[/i]
[i]is the BBC's world news editor[/i]
After reading the BBC's apology article in "The Editors" webpage, the 16 years old boy is so disappointed with the BBC, so he has decided to make another youtube video to [b]expose again BBC's disguised apology to the whole world[/b]:
[b]BBC DOES NOT KNOW WHAT AN APOLOGY IS !!![/b]
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EClLliEdfiM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EClLliEdfiM[/url]
[[i] Last edited by anticnnloginid at 5-5-2008 21:34 [/i]] Hello Singapore Big Panda,
Ha.....ha....ha...... great job, BBC should be responsible to the westerner public, making them a fool, ha...ha..ha.....! Ironic, isn't it?
We opened the door to welcome him, yet he seized the chance to bash us. We really had let a wolf in. Despite all, I do believe there's still hope. Let's work harder and let the world hear us. We just have to work harder
I talked to an American who sat next to me on the train today and I engaged him in a conversation. As we saw many Mets fans squeeze into the train, he sighed about how expensive the ticket for the baseball game is getting. 80 dollars for the ticket, 13 dollars for a small cup of beer, the ever-shrinking hot dogs, and all that. Then we lamented about how much President Bush spent on the Iraq war. And he told me how stupid of America to enter the war, killing both Iraqis and Americans (he means American soldiers). Then I started lamenting about how they try to separate Tibet from China and how biased the media are. He told me that no one country is perfect, no one government is perfect, simply put, no one is perfect in this world. The western governments should mind their own businesses. What he concerns most now is the rising prices for foods and everything else. He thinks the government should pay more attention to that rather than other affairs.
Finally, I asked him whether many people around him thought that China is an evil, poor country, as wrongly portrayed by the media. He thought a moment, nodding that indeed he only saw negative news about China from the media.
Another moment later, he waived the Wall Street Journal in his hand in front of me and said, you see, this is what they wrote and you read it, but whether you wanna believe it or not, we have to USE OUR HEAD. I'm just so glad to hear that. Witty people won't get brainwashed by the media. So let's continue our work and bring the news to more kind-hearted western friends. it alreally explained that why western jouralist banned! I don't know, how many Chinese James Reynolds has interviewed to find the few who seens did not know much about the Tibet riot,he really did put effort in it. By the way, his translation for the Chinese interviewee are not very good either. Maybe BBC should really find someone who knows how to report :lol
[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 27-4-2008 22:45 [/i]] Now BBC learns at least that it is NOT easy to cheat Chinese.
Strong fake news VS. weak apologize
BBC fake news: brocasting on air + video pictures+ interview + fake commentingBBC apologize: small announcement on website + more excuse than apologize + done by editor, not the fake news reporter.
The battle between BBC and itself, the fake news won!! Again :(
[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 30-4-2008 21:47 [/i]] I think James Reynald has to go back the school, learning again about media!! Shame on him, shame on BBC!! i know him......:$ [quote]Original posted by [i]loveworld[/i] at 30-4-2008 06:35 [url=http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=9840&ptid=1311][img]http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
i know him......:$ [/quote]
:lol Many Chinese know him now, his very 'famous' in China now. is there ANYONE working for BBC in China? Shame on those Chinese.... the trouble with western media is that they are following the US led belief that because China, like Iran, Palestine, North Korea amongst others are "different" they always look for and jump upon any negative and ignore positives......to understand requires intelligence, empathy and research but to use a country as a convenient punchbag is all to easy for a lazy, self-indulgent media (following their sometime morally corrupt leaders at times)
when I look at the human rights abuses in the West I would just as well take my chances with China than the likes of Amerikkka
[url]http://tonybrookes.squarespace.com[/url] :)
[[i] Last edited by toast99 at 30-4-2008 15:25 [/i]]
BBC AND BRITISH MEDIA ARE EVIL'S PROPAGANDA MACHINE
31st jan.2007.it is very important to realize and understand the trickery of....... in manipulating USA to wage wars on behalf of britain which gains most from iraq war and any war that usa imposes on the third world and even on europe.
here are some of the writings done years ago to give a global picture of what is REALLY happening in the world and by WHOSE agency.
please read thse if u get some time
thanks
yours sicnerely
avatar singh.
=================================================================
=======================================
========================================
Global Realignment and the Decline of the Superpower
By MIKE WHITNEY
Mar 11, 2007, 16:54
"
But what if Bush’s plans had succeeded? What if his dark vision of "victory" had been realized and the US was able to subjugate the Iraqi people, control their resources, and create an "Arab façade" through which the administration could carry out its policies?
Is there any doubt that Bush would quickly march on Tehran and Damascus? Is there any doubt that Guantanamo and other CIA "black sites" around the world would increase in number and size? Is there any doubt that global warming, peak oil, nuclear non proliferation, poverty, hunger and AIDS would continue to be brushed aside by Washington’s corporatists and banking elites?
Is there any doubt that success in Iraq would further strengthen a tyrannical system that limits the decision-making on all the issues of global importance, even the very survival of the planet, to a small fraternity of well-heeled plutocrats and gangsters?
The "new world order" promises despotism not democracy.
Many people believe that America has undergone a silent coup and has been taken over by a cabal of political fantasists and war-mongers. But this is only partially true. The US has a long history of covert activity, black-ops, and other clear violations to international law. Perhaps, we are reluctant to accept the truth because it’s easier to stick our heads in the sand and let the marauding continue.
The truth is there’s a straight line from the founding of this country to the killing fields of Baghdad. That line may be interrupted by periods of enlightenment and peace, but it is still an unbroken stripe from the Continental Congress to Abu Ghraib, from Bunker Hill to Falluja, from Valley Forge to Guantanamo Bay. It all grows from the same root.
The United States now faces mounting resistance from all corners of the earth. Russia, China, and the Central Asian countries have joined together in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to fend off US-NATO influence in the region. And in Latin America, an alliance of leftist governments has formed (Mercosur) under the leadership of Hugo Chavez. Africa still remains politically fragmented and open to western exploitation, although ham-fisted interventions in Somalia, Nigeria and Sudan suggest that the empire will face escalating resistance there as well.
These new coalitions are an indication of the massive geopolitical changes that are already underway. The world is realigning in reaction to Washington’s aggression. We can expect to see these groups continue to strengthen as the administration pursues its resource war through force of arms. That means that the "old order"--the United Nations, NATO and the transatlantic Alliance--will come under greater and greater strain until relations are eventually cut off.
The UN has already become irrelevant through its blind support of US policy in the Middle East. Its silence during Israel’s destructive rampage through Lebanon, as well as its failure to acknowledge Iran’s "inalienable rights" under the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) has exposed the UN as a "rubber stamp" for US-Israeli belligerence. An attack on Iran will be the end of the UN, an institution that held great promise for the world, but now merely provides cover for an elite-western agenda. On balance, the UN facilitates more wars than it stops. It won’t be missed."
[u][color=Red]To avatar: Kukkaukkonen has deleted some of your Racism argument against 'the english race'. Warning racism is not allowed in this forum!![/color][/u]
[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 5-5-2008 21:47 [/i]]
TAKE ON THE ANGLOAMERICAN PARASITES EVRYWHERE.
DOES RUSSIA NOT REALIZE THAT IF EVER IRAN IS ATTACKED AND DEFEATED BY USA THEN RUSSIA WILL LOSE ALL STATUS AND PRESTIGE OF EVEN THIRD RATE POWER IN THE WORLD AND THEN NO COUNTRY WILL BE WIILING TO BE ON SIDE OF RUSSIABECAUSE EVERYONE WANTS TO BE WITH A STRONG COUNTRY WHO CAN ORDER AND MANAGE THE AGENDA AS AMERICA IS TRYING TO DO AND THEN RUSSIA WILL BE =DESTROYED AS IS THE VERY INTENTIONH OF BRITIAN AND AMERICA. OF USA? THE SAME GOES FOR CHINA?WHY HAVE THEY ALLOWED RESOLUTIONS AGASINT IRAN OR EVEN IRAQ TO GO THROUGH KNWOING FULLY WELL THAT UNLESS ANGLOAMERICAN BACKBONE IS SMASHED THE WORLD AND THIER OWN COUNTRY IS NOT SAFE NOW?RUSSIA MUST NOT LET USA SCORE ANY MORE POINT ANYWHERE LET ALONE IN IRAN OTHERWISE RUSSIA IS FINISHED EVEN AS A COUNTRY .
BESIDES EVRY PERSON AND NATION MUST SUPPORT IRAQI INDEPDENCE MOVEMENT AGASINT THE AMERICAN OCCUPATION AND GIVE ARMS AMRAMNETR AND PEOPLE TO FIGHT BRITISH AND KILL THE ANGLOAMERICAN PARASITES EVERYWHERE.
iF AMERICA DARES TALK ABOUT ATTACKING IRAN ON GROUND OF IRANI SUPPORT FOR FIGHTERS RAQI INDEPDENCE FIGHTERS THEN ALL NATIONS MUST UNITE TO THEN AMERICA AND BRITIAN MSUT BE DESTROYED NOW.WAKE UP CHINA AND RUSSIA -DONTO BE STUPID ENOUGH TO ALLOW THESE xxxxxxxxxxxxx GHET AWAY WITH WAR CRIMES.
[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 5-5-2008 22:17 [/i]]
human right organisation is a propaganda department of xxxxxxx
CND and amnesty International-british agents for british interests- -- You remember that at the height of cold war in mid 80's there was a lot of activities of C.N.D. You would expect that with so called cold war finished, this C.N.D. would be asking to the british peoples to leave the nuclear weapons given to her, out of pity and filial relationship , by the United states. But exactly opposite happened. C.N.D. has been defunct since than. It is as if that was a front of the british govt. to show by way of propaganda that that country had some moral voice. In other words, C.N.D. was a sham created by the british to give them respectability. Of course when a xxxxxxx country could perfect their nuclear weapon, as France rightly did (in 1995), then there would be a lot of hue and cry by the xxxxxxxx' media. France and china are right in strengthening their independent military power. The real danger to world comes from england and her xxxxxx agents. France understand that and Germany was a fool in not supporting France in Nato meeting this Summer. Just as CND has been proved a sham of british propaganda, more so is the sham which goes by the name of amnesty international. It is interesting that as soon Falkland war started, within a few weeks this amnesty international presented a dozier on Argentina. In the same way as soon gulf war started (soon after Iraqi’s intervention in Kuwait) the same amnesty international presented a dozier and report on Iraqi’s atrocities. an fact many of the amnesty allegations were just a copy of what british media was saying and which later on proved to be fabrication and great big lies. But this did not dent the reputation of amnesty international. british propaganda ensured that. IN '88 when Dalai lama, at the height of Tibetan disturbances, visited west, the then british prime minister refused to meet Him. Later on with the demise of Russia and usefulness of China gone and with manipulation to keep power in Hong Kong somehow intact, the same british media and government ,like dog, started barking at China. It is interesting that amnesty international selectively targets those very countries( as it did china after cold war) who are out of favour (because they would not be a british stooge) of the british media and govt. This is not surprising as amnesty international is the creation of british govt, and british media. england with the most appalling record of human rights in last 200 years of her evil rule, needed some organisation to keep the others from charging england off her past and current evil practices. In other words it went for aggressive posture in propaganda war so that others can be demoralized and stopped from pointing out the real evil which is england. That is why amnesty international is one armour of the british lies to exploit the rest of the world. Amnesty international must be ignored and an independent human watchdog (which england will simply ignore) created. One purpose of amnesty international is to create an atmosphere for hatred towards the would be victims of british exploitation so that a victim could be blamed to have deserved the consequences. That is why ,now amnesty international sometimes threatens China, sometimes India and etc. India because India needs to be cowed down and also so that India does not make nuclear weapon and thus feel free from future american (read english and anglo saxon) aggression. This is all to create an atmosphere of misinformation. The other countries are also responsible (out of sheer inferiority complex) for giving these instruments of british propaganda so much importance. If they simply ignore and then the british lies and then themselves go in offensive (they can do it-no problem) against british exploitation and propaganda then those countries would not in such dire strait as they are now. Think, this deterioration has happened in only last 20 years( though the british have been at this game for a long time but they were not always successful when others have been vigilant).Ignoring and fighting all this xxxxxxx propaganda, the other xxxxxx(yes it comes to that) must unite and support each other against this common enemy england. ........,collaborate on it and ignoring this xxxxxxxx they must be prepared for war which then would be prevented otherwise it would come inevitably. The other nations need to arm themselves to protect themselves from xxxxxxx. Thinking any other way is simply kidding oneself. And it can be done and will be done.[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 5-5-2008 22:09 [/i]]
tibet during 1988 and british response then
. IN '88 when Dalai lama, at the height of Tibetan disturbances, visited west, the then british prime minister refused to meet Him. Later on with the demise of Russia and usefulness of China gone and with manipulation to keep power in Hong Kong somehow intact, the same british media and government ,like dog, started barking at China. It is interesting that amnesty international selectively targets those very countries( as it did china after cold war) who are out of favour (because they would not be a british stooge) of the british media and govt. This is not surprising as amnesty international is the creation of british govt, and british media. england with the most appalling record of human rights in last 200 years of her evil rule, needed some organisation to keep the others from charging england off her past and current evil practices. In other words it went for aggressive posture in propaganda war so that others can be demoralized and stopped from pointing out the real evil which is england. That is why amnesty international is one armour of the british lies to exploit the rest of the world. Amnesty international must be ignored and an independent human watchdog (which england will simply ignore) created. One purpose of amnesty international is to create an atmosphere for hatred towards the would be victims of british exploitation so that a victim could be blamed to have deserved the consequences. That is why ,now amnesty international sometimes threatens China, sometimes India and etc. India because India needs to be cowed down and also so that India does not make nuclear weapon and thus feel free from future american (read english and anglo saxon) aggression. This is all to create an atmosphere of misinformation. The other countries are also responsible (out of sheer inferiority complex) for giving these instruments of british propaganda so much importance. If they simply ignore and then the british lies and then themselves go in offensive (they can do it-no problem) against british exploitation and propaganda then those countries would not in such dire strait as they are now. Think, this deterioration has happened in only last 20 years( though the british have been at this game for a long time but they were not always successful when others have been vigilant).tibet druing 1988 and BBc respose then(-they really give a damn about tibet-)
. IN '88 when Dalai lama, at the height of Tibetan disturbances, visited west, the then british prime minister refused to meet Him. Later on with the demise of Russia and usefulness of China gone and with manipulation to keep power in Hong Kong somehow intact, the same british media and government ,like dog, started barking at China. It is interesting that amnesty international selectively targets those very countries( as it did china after cold war) who are out of favour (because they would not be a british stooge) of the british media and govt. This is not surprising as amnesty international is the creation of british govt, and british media. england with the most appalling record of human rights in last 200 years of her evil rule, needed some organisation to keep the others from charging england off her past and current evil practices. In other words it went for aggressive posture in propaganda war so that others can be demoralized and stopped from pointing out the real evil which is england. That is why amnesty international is one armour of the british lies to exploit the rest of the world. Amnesty international must be ignored and an independent human watchdog (which england will simply ignore) created. One purpose of amnesty international is to create an atmosphere for hatred towards the would be victims of british exploitation so that a victim could be blamed to have deserved the consequences. That is why ,now amnesty international sometimes threatens China, sometimes India and etc. India because India needs to be cowed down and also so that India does not make nuclear weapon and thus feel free from future american (read english and anglo saxon) aggression. This is all to create an atmosphere of misinformation. The other countries are also responsible (out of sheer inferiority complex) for giving these instruments of british propaganda so much importance. If they simply ignore and then the british lies and then themselves go in offensive (they can do it-no problem) against british exploitation and propaganda then those countries would not in such dire strait as they are now. Think, this deterioration has happened in only last 20 years( though the british have been at this game for a long time but they were not always successful when others have been vigilant).how BBc was mouthing agasint israel in 1982(rich arabs then?)
How Britain was mouthing venom against Israel in 1981 and ‘82.Why should Iraq not have weapons as he desires? in 1981, when the Israelis had bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor (a few days before going critical) it was britain) govt, and british media) who had vehemently opposed Israeli daring action and did a lot of anti-Jewish propaganda. At least Begin had a reason to fear from the Arab enemy of Israel. even in '82 Lebanon war it was britain which was most vociferous in criticizing Israeli military action at the same time minimizing the Israeli Air force’s achievement in destroying Bacca’s valley missiles through high tech method. Read any paper from June 81 till June ‘83 and see how britain -both government and media was anti Israeli and was for Lebanon to be free from Israeli but not Syrian influence-in fact british advocated Syrian interference in Lebanon. And british media (BBC) was very enthusiastic in minimizing the military achievement of Israeli ) in that war) In fact What americans did in gulf war was what Israeli had achieved way back in '82 in Lebanon war and America obtained that military know-how from Israelis after Lebanon war. But gulf war is justifiable on basis of military superiority but not Lebanon war. In fact when an american general said that america learned a lot from Israelis' achievement then the american defence minister Weinberg said that America learned not from Israeli but from British. Of course we all know that Weinberg was (awarded sir) more of a british defence minister than american one. He was pro-british and anti-Jewish (and anti Russian and all others as well). In fact in Lebanon war the american foreign secretary was changed because the british did not like Hague's attitude. This much britain exercises influence in american affairs. Now having installed all the stooges in Arab world britain has discarded her sham veil of Arabists and openly insults( through america of course because on own britain is not even a fourth grade power) the Arab world. Talking about the stooge, have you wondered why these days even Yeltsin's bad health no longer makes any headline news in anglo saxon world? Before any cold that Yeltsin had was noticed and still before that any peon from Russia had a headline news ' material. The reason is simple. Britain has installed in Russia not only a mad man likes yelstin but also a second line of stooge successor to him. After Yelstin usefulness is over then he will be replaced by those second line of british stooge who at the moment are already controlling Russia and destroying her everyday. Democracy ,as understood today, basically means any system which gives free hand to britain to exploit other xxxxxx. If their is one example of what an evil this so called capitalism is and what a saviour communism (britain does not dislike communism, she dislikes other's prosperity and independence whether it comes from communism, nationalism or what ever) is: this ruinous example of Russia is the real lesson. China is right to hold on to her nationalistic pursuit. It really is a war between anglo-saxons and the rest of the world. ........ Sooner the rest of the world realizes that better it would be and this danger would be sorted out.
[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 5-5-2008 22:13 [/i]] ................
""
In any modern country the Press is the fourth estate that is after the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary. But in India it acts as the fifth column ie spies working for foreign powers. After Cold War there is only one power and group they work for- US and West.
Brilliantly said. And during my brief stint on that squalid organization called SAJA, I made precisely this point. Sure, in the west, particularly USA, the media is 'free'. But if you watch the media in action, it is essentially the fourth branch seeking out the interests of US. Just watch the Sunday morning noise in major US media outlets. Its nothing but republican Vs democrat circus with the media also divided along the same lines. Watching Tim Russert for example, you can't tell whether he is part of the govt or outside; the thinking and supremacy of US interests is right and center stage (and nothing wrong with that from USA's PoV). The 'debate' if there is any such is tantamount to this: should we kill 1000 Iraqis a month in order to loot their oil (liberal opinion), or should we kill 1005 Iraqis a month (the Ann Coulter type conservative opinion). And adding diversity color to this 'debate' will be feminists, gays, 'South Asians', assortment of blacks/hispanics you name it, everyone who wants to join US mainstream, will be take one side or the other and parrot the dominant viewpoint of the side they are on.
If the media were indeed free as all the reams and reams of journalistic literature talk about in general terms, a key issue that ought to be debated center stage is whether to try those responsible for the Iraq loot for war crimes (and not negotiating honorable million $ vacation packages after leaving world bank). In stark contrast, the English language media in India, the dhuppata-led brigade will only be too happy to talk about trying Indian army for 'human rights abuses' in Kashmir and how India keeping Kashmir is against all 'established norms of democracy'. And for this loyal display, the Dhuppata types will be awarded the international John B Olden bla bla Bolden bla bla Solden bla bla prize for 'journalistic integrity' by 'freedom house' or Columbia university in NY. Of course, the same achievement by an American against his govt will relegate him to writing for the obscure Nation or some other obscure rag.""
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cultural Cold War
The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters by Frances Stonor Saunders
This book describes all the dirty tricks used by the CIA and other agencies all over the world to change countries and to bring chaos in those countries. It is well known that the CIA funded right-wing intellectuals after World War II; fewer know that it also courted individuals from the center and the left in an effort to turn the intelligentsia away from communism and toward an acceptance of "the American way." Frances Stonor Saunders sifts through the history of the covert Congress for Cultural Freedom in The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters. The book centers on the career of Michael Josselson, the principal intellectual figure in the operation, and his eventual betrayal by people who scapegoat him. Sanders demonstrates that, in the early days, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and the emergent CIA were less dominated by the far right than they later became (including the Christian right), and that the idea of helping out progressive moderates--rather than being Machiavellian--actually appealed to the men at the top.
David Frawley writes: The Indian English media dictates against the government as if it should be the real political decision-making body in the country. (Because it is urged and influenced by other foreign agencies and academic institutions such as U Berkeley/U Columbia) It deems itself capable of taking the place of legal institutions as well, printing its allegations as truth even if these have never been entered into much less proved in any court of law. It has vested itself with an almost religious authority to determine what is right and wrong, good and evil, and who in the country should be honored or punished.( This is called manufacturing consent) Like an almost theocratic institution, it does not tolerate dissent or allow its dogmas to be questioned.( It creates groupthink, manufactures 'dissent' forcing everybody to fall in line and creates an old boys network)
In the name of editorial policy, it pontificates, promoting slogans, denigrations and articles of faith in the guise of critical policy review. (This is called brainwashing under freedom)
The media doesn't aim at reporting the news; it tries to create the news, imposing its view of the news upon everyone as the final truth. The media doesn't objectively cover elections, it tries to influence voters to vote in a specific manner, demonizing those it disagrees with and excusing those it supports, however bad or incompetent their behavior. We saw this particularly during the recent Gujarat elections in which the media went so far as to print the type of election results it wanted to see as the likely outcome, though voters proved it to be totally wrong.
Where is the Media's Mandate?
The question therefore arises as to what affords the media such a sweeping authority that can override legitimately elected and appointed bodies? What sort of mandate has the media been given to justify its actions? Clearly the media has never been elected to any political post and does not undergo any scrutiny like that of candidates in an election. It does not represent any appointed post in the government. It has no accountability to any outside agency. The media's authority is largely self-appointed and, not surprisingly, self-serving. Hence media has become a tool of foreign powers who would like a particular outcome of an election or policy making inside India or image creation.
The sources behind the media's operation and where they get their money is also not revealed. We are not informed as to how prominent reporters and editorial writers derive their income, including how much may come from outside sources. But clearly they are getting a lot of money from somewhere that they are not in any hurry to disclose. Though the media likes to expose the improprieties, financial, sexual and otherwise, of those its dislikes, which it often exaggerates, if not invents, if you examine how the media people live, you certainly wouldn't want them as., role models for your children!
Nor are we certain who the media really represents. Certain groups, not only inside but also outside India, are using this English media as a vested interest to promote their own agenda, which is generally anti-Hindu and often appears to be anti-India as well. Negative news is portrayed more than positive news. President APJ Abdul Kalam asks: “Why is the media here so negative? Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognize our own strengths, our achievements? We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse to acknowledge them. Why? Is there an agenda to reduce the achievements of India?” The only reason for the negative news is to reduce the self confidence of Hindus and their place in the world. This is a campaign on a world scale probably never done anywhere. Is this really possible and is this really happening.
======================================================================================
[url]http://www.india-forum.com/articles/132/1/MEDIA-IN-INDIA[/url]
[[i] Last edited by kukkaukkonen at 5-5-2008 22:16 [/i]]