Sunday, January 23, 2011

how to name it

there is an issue. a third party  gave its opinion. one of the involved parties took this to be the gospel truth as it is beneficial to its fortunes. the matter is then brought before the highest judging authority. in the meanwhile, the other involved party states its stand. this statement by way of explanation has been termed egregious folly by the hindu.

how can this be described or understood? the minister of telecom s statement should be evaluated and analysed and then merited for the value contained in it. instead, that the minister of telecom spoke has been made the issue. even now, there is not a single credible media house in our country which can give a balanced view on the 2g issue to the people. all are happy with just targeting personalities and having a bit of the spotlight. why are our media folk so afraid that a minister's statement by way of explanation will derail the case. if there is wrongdoing, it is bound to come out. are they not confident about that? is that all they know about the system in our country. 

so, in a democracy, the government should be a wounded bystander, as all and sundry level all kinds of abuse and misinterpretations. this is what the editor of the hindu wants, the democratically elected government should keep its mouth shut on a matter involving itself, because the opposition, the media and the courts are seized of the matter. then, why have a government. such a patently illogical advice is tendered by a newspaper that can be called among the best in our country.

No comments: