Editorial hypocrisy

BY Darius Nakhoonwala| IN Opinion | 11/05/2007
Depending on how far they were from the scene of action, newspapers took different stands on DMK succession battle.

 

 

 

You don`t say!

Darius Nakhoonwala  

 

Proximity has two equal and opposite effects: it lends clarity to vision; and it distorts. This proposition was in clear evidence in the edits written on the DMK business in Tamil Nadu.

 

The Hindu edit, a double edit, was by far the most important. But it showed up the dilemmas of a regional base. To start with the paper decided to treat it as only a law and order problem. "The arson, looting, and murder... raise serious questions about law and order — and freedom of the press in Tamil Nadu."

 

Contrast this with the others said.

 

The Telegraph: Irrationality seems to have a special place in Tamil Nadu`s politics. Shocking as Wednesday`s violence in Madurai is, it also brings to light the dark side of a political culture. Tamil Nadu is not the only state in India where ugly sides of dynastic politics result in bloody street battles.

 

Indian Express: India`s political parties — the crucial mediators between government and the people — remain internally undemocratic. They are mostly family enterprises, ruled by the Leader`s diktat, periodically held hostage by succession battles in the Family.

 

Asian Age: Dynasties have grown around the power centre, with the violence in Madurai serving as a tragic reminder of how deep-rooted the malaise is. Sibling rivalry is not unknown in the political world, but the deliberate attack on Dinakaran and Sun TV offices, in which three persons were killed, is definitely a first.

 

Then the Hindu took sides. It said "Mr. Azhagiri, who is involved in one murder case, has a truly unsavoury track record: in 2000, when Mr. Karunanidhi disowned him politically, he instigated violence and forced a compromise within the family." It wanted the chief minister to "not vacillate on what needs to be done…setting aside personal considerations and subjective feelings, he must ensure that the law takes its course… investigating the role of Mr Azhagiri… Now he urgently needs to make an example of his delinquent son if his government`s stock is not to weaken."

 

The other papers didn`t. Thus:

 

The Telegraph: The problem for Mr Karunanidhi is that he… is both a creator and a victim of this culture… The worst aspect of the violence is that the sibling rivalry resulted in an attack on a newspaper and the loss of three innocent lives. Tamil Nadu`s politics of hero-worship, always a potential threat to rational choices, is clearly facing a new crisis."

 

The Indian Express: When war broke out between the two sons of… Mr Karunanidhi, there were no impersonal norms, no institutional restraints to blunt the hostilities. The strife between the heir apparent and heir not-so-apparent could play itself out and take its toll, unchecked and unhindered by settled procedure or convention.

 

The Asian Age: This "shoot the messenger" attitude that runs through all political parties has to be confronted. Apologies will not be sufficient, as three persons have died. The manner in which the armed gang, with local politicians, took law into its own hands to suppress the media through violence does not do well for democracy.

 

The Pioneer didn`t write and the Hindustan Times gloated, quietly overlooking the fact that all this sort of thing was started by a major political figure of the Congress party, the late Sanjay Gandhi. But its take on dynastic politics was hilarious:

"There is nothing logical about dynastic politics, with its belief that there is a special quality that is passed down the `blood line`. But, at the same time, there is no logical reason to suppose that the son or daughter of a politician should not be allowed to follow his or her parents profession."

Hahahahah!

 

Darius.nakhoonwala@gmail.com