Confusing contradictions

IN Media Watch Briefs | 11/06/2015

Was the Indian Army's action against NE rebels a 'hot pursuit' or not? A minister said it wasn't because "We contacted Burma authorities before the attack". On the same page in The Times of India, another story is about, Why India did not keep Myanmar in the loop, using unnamed sources to explain that Indian security establishment has "deep distrust of the Myanmar Army" because they get "protection money" from the rebels". Yet two more stories on the next page refer to "hot pursuit". How come the newspaper did not think it fit to decide if it was or not instead of leading the page with "How India crossed the line"? To top it all, a statement from Myanmar denied it was inside Myanmar at all. Reminds of Mark Twain's view of newspapers: don't read them and you are not informed; read them, and you are misinformed. In this case, at least confused.

TAGS

Indian Army North East Myanmar

Subscribe To The Newsletter

Media Watch Briefs

Amazon resisting voluntary censorship

The new term for self censorship is voluntary censorship, as proposed by companies like Netflix and Hotstar. ET reports that streaming video service Amazon Prime is opposing a move by its peers to adopt a voluntary censorship code in anticipation of the Indian government coming up with its own rules. Amazon is resisting because it fears that it may alienate paying subscribers.

Let the games begin

Clearly, the run to the 2019 elections is on. A journalist received a call from someone saying they were from Aajtak channel and were conducting a survey, asking whom she was going to vote for in 2019. On being told that her vote was secret, the caller assumed she wasn't going to vote for 'Modiji'. The caller, a woman, also didn't identify herself. A month or two earlier the same journalist received a call, this time from a man, asking if she was going to vote for the BSP.