Pages

Saturday, January 12, 2013

Open letter to The Hindu


Dear Mr.Editor,

Just wanted to remind myself that I am writing to the paper that is currently not under the editorship of either Shri.Kasturi or Shri.Narasimhan. Having reminded myself of this, let me proceed further.

Having been hurt at the falling editorial standards and the sad yet steady decline of editorial integrity, I am pained to say that ‘The Hindu’ has stopped behaving as ‘India’s National News Paper’ – that is how you call yourself in your by-line.

My thoughts and language were shaped by ‘The Hindu’ of the past – 1980 through 1994. That I am able to write something that conveys meaning is because of the “Know Your English” section of Mr.Subramaniam of CIEFL, Hyderabad. My Sundays were made by the articles of Mr.Gangadhar by his “Slice of Life” columns. There used to be times when there was a rush in the family to read the editorial section first – actually two families as we used to share the newspaper with our neighbour for around 25 years. Sunday editions were usually preserved for posterity. And your daily columns on “Religion” contained a recount of the different discourses happening in the state. Friday features were often cherished.

The current editions are also good in terms of content excepting for the Editorial piece and the Op-Ed columns that seem to signify and espouse only the left leaning ideology. You might claim immunity declaring your ‘editorial freedom’ ( euphemism for CPI-M membership ) but you have the overwhelming responsibility of shaping the opinion of the reading class – especially the middle class and the young readers that need un-biased opinion.

There used to be a time when the paper used to be the benchmark against which decisions would be validated at home. It was a belief that if that was not in The Hindu, then it probably wasn’t true. The corollary was that if that had already come in The Hindu then why should we argue about it. Those were the 80s and the 90s until 1997.Thereafter the scene changed to,” if that is in The Hindu, then refer another paper to validate it once”. That was probably the time when N.Ram took over.

So when the BJP govt was downed by Jayalalithaa by one vote, The Hindu wrote a front page editorial on the lines of good riddance and communalism defeated etc. The paper usually wrote front page editorials only in the rarest of rare cases. And what a sense of relief the editorial signified ?

When the nuclear test was conducted by India, the paper opposed it . When China commissioned nuclear plants, there were articles congratulating that.

When Sitaram Yechuri or Prakash Karat spoke in a remote corner of India, you made them appear in the front page. But when Modi or Advani spoke on an issue of national importance, they either got the 5th page or none at all.

When Singur happened while the communists ruled West Bengal, you painted a different picture even when the then governor Gopal Krishna Gandhi wondered if Singur was still a part of India.  The whole of the country's press criticized the WB govt while you stood out in painting a picture of peace in Singur. There was a flurry of letters to you and then you said that this was the editorial boards choice - freedom etc.

When the Buddhadeb won in the last election, there was an one page interview and your compliments on land reforms. But similar courtesy was not shown to Mamta Banerjee.

Despite the communists becoming irrelevant, you cling on to them and impose their ideology in the name of editorial freedom?

When Nakkeean published a wholly unpalatable article about Jayalalitaa you translated the entire contents into English so that the non Tamil people should read that and gain “knowledge”.

Recent spate of anti- Modi propaganda material - no other paper would have published. You stood out in that too. You also said that the prospect of Modis' victory was scary. How could  a democratically elected persons' victory be scary?

When Modi won for the third time you wrote an article that it was not a novelty and that Jyoti Basu and Navin Patnaik had done before. Don't these point to a deep sense of malaise in your team that effectively makes it instantly and eminently biased ?


How is it that you never spoke of the nepotism during the time of the DMK? When the 2G case emerged, still you published an awkward interview with A. Raja.

Of late there have been these apologies that you have had to make. The first ever first page apology in the 125 years that you have been existing was on a matter relating to Gujarat. In your over enthusiasm to project Modi in bad light you jumped at the first opportunity and published a letter by a Gujarat cadre officer. When it was proved to be false you had to apologize in the front page.

Then came this apology on swami Vivekananda. What a fall Mr.Editor ?

Being progressive does not mean always adopting a contrarian view however wrong it might be. Your views on capital punishment are of that category. When Kasab came to India to be martyred, why should he be not hanged even after the SC had confirmed his sentence ?

Retd Justice Markdey Katju nowadays writes in your paper about anything that would provide him a ‘progressive’ image. Why have you not commissioned him to write on the death sentence to Kasab ?

Your editorials on   Pakistan and the need for India to remain passive even under such conditions has become so repetitive that we are able to predict the editorial them before they get written.


You are regularly alarmed at the prospect of India, Japan, US and Australia forging a quadrilateral alliance thus singling out China. You were opposing this alliance in 2007 as much as you do now soon after Shinzo Abe took over as the PM of Japan. How does your editorial board come to the conclusion that India's national interests are not worthy of consideration everytime China is sought to be alienated ? Not a word about China's hegemonic intentions in the South China sea area. China has problem with every country in the region yet India should not align with the other democratic countries because China would be isolated ! What nationalism this ?

How is it that Ms. Arundati Roy and the group of left oriented authors appear with articles when there is an operation in progress on the Naxals and go underground once the headlines die down ?


How is it that M.F.Hussain required his 'freedom' of expression to paint the Hindu Goddesses naked while he never required that 'freedom' to paint the Islamic saints ( and you never took it upon yourself to fight for his Islamic right as much as you fought for his right to insult Hindu Goddesses ? ). And you want us to believe that that to be a progressive thought ?

How is it that there were a series of articles opposing Modi and debunking Gujarat’s economic and social development from JNU type ‘scholars’ just prior to Gujarat elections and nothing is seen now-a-days? Have the social and economic development happened in Gujarat after the elections so that the paper is satisfied with the progress in the state?

Here is a small compilation of the some letters that I had written to you, having been hurt at the fantastically biased nature of your editorials and articles. These are not necessarily in any order. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Sir,
This has refererence to the editorial condemning Sarah Palin of her opposition to a mosque at ground zero.

This editorial is a perfect example of 'stockholm syndrome' and nothing more than that. Any sane thinking person would naturally ask what was the need to build a mosque on the very site that reminds one of the atrocious act of the practitioners of Islam in the name of Islam.
If a mosque would indeed be built, it would serve as a long standing reminder, for times to come, of the heinous crime that the followers of that particular religion committed at that particular site. That would indeed alienate the American public and people at large from the Islamic faith and induce them to view Islam and its practitioners with suspicion.
It would be tantamount to building a mosque at the railway station in Godra where many hindu pilgrims were burnt alive by Muslim mobs and also a hindu temple in the place where Best Bakery once stood.

Acts such as these that are meant to appease one community smack of a complete lack of logical reasoning to resolve problems by meeting them head on.
If at all Sarah Palin has said something meaningful in her life time so far, then this is the one.

----------------------------------------------

This has reference to the editorial "Competitive Intolerance" dated 05-Dec-2007, lambasting the curtailment of freedom of speech and expression, a fundamental right enshrined in the preamble of the constitution.

The editorial contained the right message that has long been invisible in the mainstream media.

But there were some factually incorrect information as well as 'intentional' omission of certain facts.

Firstly, the protests against Mr.Karunanidhi were not because he disputed the existence of the bridge between India and Srilanka. The protests were because he denied the existence of Lord Ram and then progressively tried to denigrate the personality of Lord Ram with incremental verbal insinuations. The moot question here is whether the Chief Minister would choose to mount such verbal assaults on the leading deities of other religions as well ? He resorted to typical character assassination of one of the foremost dieties of India. For that he chose to mis-interpret 'Valmiki Ramayana' and the like. This does not constitute the right to freedom of expression at all. Hence this reference to Mr.Karunanidhi does not appear to be in sync with the spirit of the editorial.

Surprisingly the editorial has also chosen to keep mum on the subsequent violence unleashed by the cadre of the DMK on the offices of the BJP. Does that violence constitute freedom of expression as well ? 'The Hindu' did not mention about the violence even during an earlier editorial as well. Is this 'considered' omission part of a greater design ?

Secondly, the issue pertaining to M.F.Hussein. Let us look at some of the paintings of M.F.Hussein . I have attached a file containing some of the paintings of M.F.Hussein.

  1. Sita, who is naked, sits on the tail of Hanuman. She has her legs spread. Sita is shown holding the tail of Hanuman close to her breasts.
  2. Lord Hanuman in meditation with his private part in erection, and naked Sita held by some one naked from behind
  3. Naked Parvati mixed up with Nandi, with Shiva watching
  4. Shiva and Parvati with Shiva holding her breast
  5. Ganga and Yamuna both naked
  6. Goddess Durga sitting naked
  7. Bharat Mata also naked

( Ref : An earlier article by S.Gurumurthy from 'The Indian Express', dated 01-June-2007)

If these depictions should have to be treated as 'freedom of expression' then there is nothing that restrains one from painting ones's spouses and siblings naked and conduct exhibitions of the same, in the name of freedom of expression.

The question is also sa to why does Mr.Hussein not paint the Prophet Mohammad leave alone, in the nude ? Why should the freedom of expression be restricted to Hindu deities alone ?

Lastly, the West Bengal Government had only made Taslima move out of West Bengal, with the CPI(M) Leader Biman Bose making flip flops regarding the writer. While it is understandable that the 'good samaritan' role played by the Rajasthan Government in lodging Taslima has not been mentioned in the editorial, it is surprising that there is no reference to the 'excellent' treatment meted out by the West Bengal government.


---------------------------

That the President has not accepted the recommendations of the CEC and has enabled Mr.Chawla to become the CEC later, does not have any element of suspense or surprise. It was on expected lines.

What is also not surprising is the fact that the President has, without any compunctions, accepted the 'recommendation' of the cabinet and has resorted to this decision to reward 'loyalty'.

But the President's action leaves some questions un-answered. Prior to taking oath as the President, she had declared and was also reported with much fanfare that she would not be a 'rubber-stamp' President. But what is seen in this action of the President is that she has just proved to be one, by rejecting a well-meaning recommendation of the CEC.

Let us look at this issue rather objectively. Let us for a moment forget the CECs' recommendation too. Does the President also reject the other circumstantial evidences ( the whole lots of minutes of meetings appended by the CEC to his recommendation) as also Mr.Chawla's connection with the MPs from the Congress party by way of accepting donations for his NGO ? Does she also reject the other recommendations such as making it not possible for Election Commissioners to assume political offices for a period of 10 years post retirement from the Commission ?

As the saying goes, 'Caesar's wife should not only be above suspicion but should also appear to be so'. Even a small element of doubt, that could erode the respectability of such sacrosanct institutions as the Election Commission, should be erased and the same conveyed to the general public at large, more so because one of the greatest democratic processes in the world is about to begin in a few weeks from now. Whichever political formation gets to power in Delhi has the onerous responsibility of taking the country forward in such troubled times. Hence, for international respectability for India's stand in the comity of nations and for her voice to be heard, the next government should be elected in a free and fair manner without any element of suspicion. For that to happen, a free and fair Election Commission is the need of the hour. It is a matter of great sorrow that the President has failed to act with this end in mind.

---------------------------------------

This has reference to your editorial 'Israeli aggression against Gaza' dtd 30-Dec-2008.
While the editorial make the politically correct statements in line with the editorial policy of the paper, what has conveniently been forgotten is the unrelenting rocket attacks by Hamas on Israel that has provoked Israel into this action.

Whether this action by Israel could be termed an act of aggression is itself a question that needs to be introspected. Israel has not tried to attack the Hamas stronghold on its own but it was compelled to act, in its own defence, when the Hamas backed militia started firing rockets into Israel. Whether there has been any human casualty in Israel due to this attack or not is a not a point to be discussed. Any sovereign nation has the right to defend itself against external attack. Whether the act of defence is proportionate or disproportionate to the provoking action is a judgement that the victim of attack needs to make and not unconcerned parties like India.
Does the editorial board believe that Israel and other countries who are victims of terror should keep quiet and watch in a state of disbelief and in-action like India when its state and people are attacked time and again with impunity by terrorist elements ? What is the message that would go to the terrorists once a state keeps quiet when attacked ?
The recent speech by Arun Shourie, in the Indian Parliament, that 'a jaw for a tooth and both the eyes for one eye' should be the response of sovereign states in defence of its people and statehood should be followed by any welfare state that cares for its citizens.
The only message that the terrorists understand is the message that they themselves espouse - terror. Ideals such as "Ahimsa Paramo Dharmaha" would have worked in Mahatma's Gandhi's times probably because it was directed against a more civilized group of colonisers called the British. But the current situation is not the same as the one during the Mahatma's times.
Thanks and Regards

------------------------------------------

This has reference to the editorial 'Election Commission at 60' dtd 29-jan-2010.

While the editorial is right in congratulating the commission on the establishing the model conduct rules that resulted in making the most difficult democratic process in the world as fair and transparent  as is practically possible, it is not right to condemn the recommendation of the previous CEC to remove Mr.Navin Chawla as the Election commissioner as 'baseless' and 'subjective'.

It is a matter of surprise to me to as to how the recommendation could be termed as 'baseless'. Let us not sidestep the fact that the former CEC had added annexures that detailed the Minutes of Meetings of the various election commisison meetings in which Mr.Chawla had taken part apart from the other documentary logs.

It is rather amusing to note that your editorial has termed the very act of sending the recommendation as wrong. Does the editor think that the former CEC does not have the basic right to send in his recommendation if it is not in line with dominant political line of thought at that time ? Does it mean that such recommendations should always be politically correct and in line with the expectations of the government ?

Let us not forget the fact that the Shah Commission that had inquired into the excesses during the time of emergency had this to say about Mr.Navin Chawla-" "He is unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others". Hence shall we discard the Shah Commission report as yet another 'baseless and subjective' recommendation as well ?

As the saying goes, 'Caesar's wife should not only be above suspicion but should also appear to be so'. Even a small element of doubt, that could erode the respectability of such sacrosanct institutions as the Election Commission, should be erased and the same conveyed to the general public at large. Therefore the former CEC's recommendation regarding Mr.Chawla in addition to the other recommendations such as prohibitting the CECs from occupying political offices for a period of 10 years after retirement should have been accepted by the President who had proclaimed ceremoniously that she would not be a 'rubber-stamp' president while assuming office.

Additionally there is this very important aspect of the election process that has been missed in the editorial- that is the adaptaion of the electronic Voting Machines and the Voter ID Cards. But for the EVMs the once famous act of 'Booth Capturing' would have continued even now.

-------------------------------

The article "The humbug called Gujarat model statecraft" dtd 02-Feb-2008 by Harish Khare should deserve a point by point rebuttal had it contained some points on which the author has sought to portray, in bad light, the Gujarat model of governance. As there are no points elaborated on in the article, it would be a waste of effort to 'excavate' some points on which the rebuttal could be based.

Nevertheless, I would like to center my rebuttal on the one and only phrase that has been used many a time in the article – "The Gujarat Model".

The author seems to be rattled to the core that the Gujarat model has resulted in landslide victories to the BJP and hence if they continue the winning streak in the imminent Lok Sabha elections, then that would result in the BJP's returning to power. The author has taken great pains to cast he Gujarat model in great disrepute so that the same does not enthuse the BJP to emulate the same in the other states.

Let us briefly look at what this 'Gujarat-model' is:

The Gujarat model of governance comprises mainly of the following schemes enacted by the Modi government. They are :

  1. Swagat Online Program : An innovative program in which the ordinary citizen of the state could seek the interference of the Chief Minister for issue resolution in case the same doesn't get resolved through normal channels. The Chief Minister directly interacts with the public and the government officials concerned via video conferencing and ensures that the issues logged as addressed.
  2. Jyoti Gram Schema : An innovative scheme that separates the agricultural feeders from consumer feeders thus ensuring 24 hours of high quality uninterrupted electricity to the 18,065 villages of Gujarat. It is a record that 100% of the villages of Gujarat have been provided electricity connection – a never before feat in the history of Indian democracy.
  3. Chiranjeevi Yojana Scheme: An innovative scheme that was conceived and implemented with public-private participation wherein private hospitals were enlisted to provide free treatment to poor pregnant women with the government compensating the private hospitals for the services rendered.
  4. Maatru Vandana Scheme : Yet another innovative scheme where the antenatal women from the poorer sections of the people were taken care of by private gynaecologists. The government took care of the private gynaecologists and currently 1000 such doctors are part of the Maatru Vandana scheme.
  5. Evening Courts : For the first time in the history of the nation, a state government chose to increase the working time of the courts in the state and also initiated action to have courts in the evening hours for speedy disposal of cases.

The 'Vibrant Gujarat ' summits held have generated investments to the tune of USD 102 billion. Speaker after speaker in the said summit have praised the governance model with Ratan Tata saying that it would be stupid if one is not present in Gujarat.

All the above initiatives coupled with impeccable implementation have resulted in praises for the government from all un-expected quarters.

The Wall Street Journal and the Singapore Economic Board have awarded the "Asian Innovation Award" to the "Chiranjeevi Scheme" saying that "the scheme  has drastically reduced maternal and infant deaths through a partnership with private gynaecologists.".

- Ref: The Buisness Line, Nov 06, 2006.

Even the Union Health Minister Dr.Anbumani Ramadoss had appreciated this scheme and had said that the same could be implemented in other states as well.
- Ref: Gujarat Government Website

The Planning Commission of India ( a non-saffron organization, as the author might have known ) had appreciated the Gujarat government for its revenue surplus budget despite the government giving tax concession to the people of Gujarat to the tune of INR 400 crores.
- Ref : The Hindustan Times, April 02, 2007.

The Rajiv Gandhi Foundation ( the foundation that is chaired by Smt. Sonia Gandhi )had conducted a study on "The Economic Freedom of States in India". It defined a KPI ( Key Performance Indicator) called Economic Freedom Index and defined it thus : "absence of government coercion or constraint in the production, distribution or consumption of goods and services beyond the extent necessary for citizens to protect and maintain liberty by itself". On this basis and study on the same, the Foundation has declared Gujarat, under Modi, to be the number one state as far as Economic Freedom Index is concerned.  That meant that individual liberty to perform a manufacturing function, a business function or any other economic activity was not at stake in the state of Gujarat – contrary to what the English media has often tried to portray the government under Modi to be.

The report further states that "In Gujarat, the least number of mandays are lost as a result of strikes and lockouts as a ratio of total industrial workers in the state." The report also says that Gujarat has performed very well in the field of economic management and disinvestment.

The report further states that Gujarat is where there has been minimum corruption, small in terms of size of the government and the like.

- Ref:  The Economic Times, May 21, 2005

In terms of Agriculture, eminent Agricultural Scientist M.S.Swaminathan has praised the Modi government for implementing innovative schemes for the development of agriculture like Soil Report Card, Krishi Mahotsave etc and thus save the farmers of Gujarat from suicides ( famous in Maharashtra, a Congress ruled state). I hope the author would not mean to say that Dr.M.S.Swaminathan is a 'saffron' figure though.
- Ref  Rediff Money Special, June 07, 2007.

Now that the 'gujarat-model' has been the centre of attraction in the article, let us see what the 'Gujarat-Model' has achieved.

When the whole of India had attracted an investment of USD 69 billion in the year 2006-2007, Gujarat alone had accounted for an investment of USD 17.8 billion - that is 25.5% of the total investment made in India has been made in Gujarat.

When India's GDP was 9%, that of the state of Gujarat has been 13 %. This is no mean feat, as people who are numerate enough could understand.

The people of any state expect some basic attributes from its leader : personal integrity, honesty and transparency and a will to work in the genuine interest of the people.

If this is the 'Gujarat-Model' that the BJP wants to emulate in all parts of India, as a true Indian, we should welcome this model.

Who would not want the TN CM to hold such Swagat Online meetings with the people of the state of Tamil Nadu ? Don't the villages of Tamil Nadu or UP need 3 phase electrical power that is reliable and available 100% of the time ? Don't the people of the state of Tamil Nadu in particular and all states in general need good primary health care centers on the lines of the Chiranjeevi Scheme or Maatru Vandana Scheme ( for the sake of 'rationalism' we could even call the same 'Anna Scheme' or 'Periyar Scheme', who bothers )? Don't the girl children of Tamil Nadu deserve the kind of attention the Gujarat government gives to its girl children in terms of education ? In Tamil Nadu, the politicians talk of free Television schemes where as the primary schools are in a continuous state of disrepair.

If this is the 'Gujarat-model' that has resulted in all round growth of the state, then what is wrong in emulating the said model not only when the BJP comes to power but also at the present juncture ?

We have seen the Tamil Nadu legislature that discussed the minimum attire for female actors ( probably that is what is called 'Common Minimum Program'). When questions are not raised as to why the legislative time should be spent discussing the inner wear of female lead actors, it is a pity that the Gujarat model is being scorned at by 'elite-secular' authors.

I have a simple question : Would The Hindu publish a comparative report on the Gujarat Model of Governance and the Tamil Nadu Model of Governance with comparative revenue, performance and social  metrics side by side ?  This would probably enlighten the general populace on the 'model' to follow.

Your Readers’ Editor mentioned me in an article when Singur happened. I had sent a rather longish letter on your Singur reporting.



No comments:

Post a Comment