The HUGE Media Scandal that Could Rock India but Wouldn't

NOTE: I'm not here to pass judgment on the journalists personally. I'm posting the article here with my comments because of its extreme serious nature. I've rarely seen such a directly exposed breach of journalistic ethics.

Photo Source: The Pioneer.

__________

Dear Friends:

Here's my two cents and an article on: The HUGE Media Scandal that Could Rock India but Wouldn't.

Since graduating from Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism (and going through the pro-status-quo, pro-establishment climate there), I took special interest to expose corporate media's role as a propaganda wing of corrupt, repressive and undemocratic governments across the world, and I emphasized on USA and India because of my personal knowledge and experience with both systems. For ten years, I ran a mailing list called J4TEAM (Journalists for Truth, Ethics and Awareness in Media), and then found a more effective platform on Facebook; I shut the list down.

I continue the mission because of its relevance now more than ever before. I hope you also join in on the cause and expose big media's political agenda, bias and complete lack of objectivity. In that world now, only profit matters vis-a-vis We the People.

India media is now, with exceptions, following the U.S. corporate media model where journalistic objectivity and ethics have taken a far-behind back seat. Media have relinquished its democracy-torchbearer role and purposefully decided to create a world of mass confusion, distortions and half truths. People like us who want to take our democracy back for the ordinary, working people and families need to appreciate the gravity of the situation. The Indian media story has direct relevance to the U.S. media scenario today.

Why this HUGE scandal would not rock India now? As The Hindu put it, "Perhaps because of the large number of journalists involved in the controversy, most Indian newspapers and TV channels have not covered [it]." Same could be said about the U.S.

Please read and take action. Comments and feedback would be much welcome.

Partha

P.S. -- I'm also posting a link here to my Outlook India oped last year on this very subject. It's at http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?240578 . I'm glad that Outlook India is still on it.

___________________

From: The Hindu, India.

Published: November 24, 2010 02:59 IST | Updated: November 24, 2010 15:20 IST November 24, 2010

The spotlight is on the media now

by Priscilla Jebaraj

The Hindu MEDIA FOCUS: "Perhaps because of the large number of journalists involved in the controversy, most Indian newspapers and TV channels have not covered the Radia tapes at all."

The Niira Radia episode raises questions about the boundary between legitimate news gathering, lobbying and influence peddling.

The publication of taped conversations between Niira Radia — a lobbyist for [billionaire business magnets] Mukesh Ambani and Ratan Tata with a keen interest in the allocation of ministerial portfolios — and editors, reporters, industrialists and politicians has shone a harsh and even unwelcome light on the web of connections which exist between the worlds of business, politics and journalism.

The transcripts — drawn from 104 phone conversations recorded between May and July 2009 when the [India Prime Minister] Manmohan Singh government was in the process of beginning its second innings — also raise questions about the boundary between legitimate news gathering, lobbying and influence peddling. Even as the journalists involved have strongly defended their conduct, others in the media are divided with some believing the boundary was transgressed.

The transcripts were published last week by Open and Outlook magazines, which sourced them to audio recordings submitted recently to the Supreme Court by advocate Prashant Bhushan as part of a PIL on the 2G scam [a telecommunication bribery deal involving billions of dollars and national politicians and govt ministers]. The magazines claim the recordings were made by the Income Tax department as part of its ongoing surveillance of Ms Radia. The recordings are believed to be part of a wider set of phone taps, though who leaked this particular selection and why is not known.

In the tapes, NDTV Group Editor Barkha Dutt and Hindustan Times' Advisory Editorial Director Vir Sanghvi [two celebrity journalists] both appear to be offering to use their connections and influence with [ruling] Congress leaders to pass on messages from Ms Radia, who seemed to be representing a section of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam [a Tamil political party] interests. Other senior business journalists have discussions with Ms Radia about the gas pricing dispute between the Ambani brothers, mostly regarding favourable coverage for Mukesh Ambani. Prabhu Chawla, India Today's editor of language publications, appears to be offering her “advice” on how to pursue an appeal in the Supreme Court.

On the political front, in multiple conversations, both Ms Dutt and Mr. Sanghvi offer to mediate between the Congress and the DMK, and even help to set up meetings, in order to dispel misgivings between them on the specific role of Dayanidhi Maran and the allocation of portfolios more generally. In what seems to be an ongoing conversation during the stalemate between the Congress and the DMK over Cabinet berths, Ms Dutt asks Ms Radia what she should tell her Congress contacts. “Oh God. So now what? What should I tell them? Tell me what should I tell them?” she asks.

After listening to Ms Radia's instructions, she promises to speak to Congress leaders. “OK, let me talk to them again,” she says. In a later conversation, she says, “That's not a problem, I'll talk to [Congress leader Ghulam Nabi] Azad —I'll talk to Azad right after I get out of RCR [which has been read as Race Course Road, where the Prime Minister lives].” In separate conversations with A. Raja and Atal Bihari Vajpayee's foster son-in-law, Ranjan Bhattacharya — who also, surprisingly, appears to be playing the role of a conduit to the Congress — Ms Radia speaks of Ms Dutt's help. “I made Barkha call up Congress and get a statement,” she tells Mr. Bhattacharya. In response to questions on Twitter, however, Ms Dutt has categorically denied acting on any promise to pass on messages to the Congress.

In his conversations with Ms Radia on the Cabinet issue, Mr. Sanghvi claims to be passing on information from Congress leader Ahmed Patel. “I spoke to Ahmed … Ahmed is the key figure. Ahmed says, ‘We told him, we told Maran also that we'll deal with Karunanidhi, so he has gone back',” he tells Ms Radia. Later, she asks him to pass on the message that the Congress must deal directly with DMK chief M. Karunanidhi. “I was supposed to meet Sonia today but I've been stuck here. So, now it's becoming tomorrow. I've been meeting with Rahul, but tell me ... So, who should they talk to?” When she replies, “They need to talk directly to Karunanidhi,” Mr. Sanghvi's response is: “Let me try and get through to Ahmed.”

On his part, Mr. Sanghvi has indignantly denied any wrong-doing. “When there's a fast moving story like the formation of government, you talk to all kinds of sources. Most of the time, they're quite busy doing whatever they want and they don't actually give you the information unless you string them along,” he told The Hindu. “It just seemed easier to say, ‘Yeah, yeah, I'll do it' and then forget about it.” He insisted that he had never acted on Ms Radia's requests to call Mr. Patel or anyone else in the Congress “as anyone in the government will know.” However, even if he had called Mr. Patel as promised, it would not have been unethical if it was not privileged or secretly communicated information, he felt.

Ms Dutt declined to answer The Hindu's questions, citing legal concerns, but she has been freely offering answers to similar queries on her Twitter account over the past few days. “Let's put it like this, unless we only cover news based on bland press conferences, we have to talk to all sorts, good and bad,” she said in one tweet. “I think there is nothing wrong in stringing along a source for info… I think EVERY journo has the right to engage a source, its NO CRIME … as a matter of record, I never passed the message. But info sharing per se is not immoral in a fluid news situation,” she tweeted.

In an official response to the publication of Ms Dutt's conversations in Open magazine, NDTV said it was “preposterous” to “caricature the professional sourcing of information as ‘lobbying'.”

Other senior journalists are not so sure about the appropriateness of the conversations but admitted there are growing gray areas in the ethics of journalism. “Cultivating a source, giving him a sense of comfort, that you are not antagonistic, massaging his ego — all that is fine. But acting as an intermediary is inappropriate,” said one senior television journalist who asked not to be named. The same editor felt that increased competition led to today's journalists being in more constant and informal touch with their sources, and he admitted that misusing this legitimate proximity was now easier than ever. But he hastened to add that political reporters often make tall claims or promises to get their sources to part with information.

The same argument is echoed by Diptosh Mazumdar, national editor of CNN-IBN, who endorsed Ms Dutt's insistence that she had done nothing wrong. “Regarding Nira Radia tapes, let me say that accessing info is a difficult job and ur promises to ur source is often a ploy to get more info,” he said on Twitter. “When there are fast moving Cabinet formation stories, you make every possible move to get the info out, those promises mean nothing …” Rajdeep Sardesai, IBN's editor-in-chief tweeted in response to the Open story: “Conversation between source and journo is legitimate. If quid pro quo is shown, expose it. Else, don't destroy hard earned reputations.”

Apart from the portfolio-related recordings, many of Ms Radia's conversations dealt with the tussle between the Ambani brothers over gas pricing. She is heard berating financial journalists for the poor placement of stories she had passed on. In one conversation, Mr. Sanghvi asks Ms Radia — who represents Mukesh Ambani — what kind of story she wants him to do on the gas dispute between the two Ambani brothers. Ms Radia talks of gas being a national resource and that the younger brother should have no right to insist that “a family MoU” he signed with her client be placed above “national interest.” Mr. Sanghvi's column in the Hindustan Times the next day makes precisely the same argument. His defence is that this was genuinely his own view, and that the conversation with Ms Radia was only one of multiple inputs for his column.

In another conversation, India Today's Prabhu Chawla advises Ms Radia on Mukesh Ambani's strategy in appealing the apex court against the Bombay High Court ruling in the gas pricing case. “You should convey to Mukesh that the way he is going about the Supreme Court is not the right way,” he tells her.

However, Mr. Chawla insists he was not giving any advice regarding the case. Instead, he told The Hindu that he was indulging in “social chit chat” with a source who called him, and merely giving his opinion that the Ambani brothers should come together since “when the brothers fight, the nation suffers.”

Perhaps because of the large number of journalists involved in the controversy, most Indian newspapers and TV channels have not covered the Radia tapes at all, even though they include conversations with Mr. Raja himself and Ratan Tata, head of the Tata group. This despite foreign newspapers like Wall Street Journal and Washington Post taking note of them and none of the protagonists denying the genuineness of the recorded conversations.

Though the blogosphere has been filled with outrage over the seemingly cosy relationship between the media and corporate lobbyists (one website has spoken sarcastically of ‘All India Radia'), questions have also been raised about privacy issues, especially since some of the conversations seem to be personal, with no direct news linkage. “I don't agree that tapes of private individuals not breaking law should be aired,” Ms Dutt said on Twitter.

Outlook editor-in-chief Vinod Mehta defended his publication of the tapes, but declined to comment on the recorded conversations or answer further questions. “We printed the story because it was hugely in the public interest,” he told The Hindu. “Our purpose is not to pass judgment, but to put information in the public domain.”

Keywords: 2G spectrum scam

###



A Quick Midterm "Day-After"

Related analysis: Media Misreading Midterms. Link at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4190 .

November 3, 2010

So, yesterday, in the 2010 midterm elections, Republicans with support from far right Tea Party got a big victory; Democrats lost the House and state governorships, but kept the Senate.

Many compared 2010 with the midterm elections of 1994 when far right Newt Gingrich, Pat Buchanan and their so-called Contract with America swept Republicans to huge Congressional victories. I see some differences between the two; I see some similarities as well.

Let's find the differences first. In 1994, Republicans captured both the House of Representatives and the Senate. In 2010, Republicans got the House taking back 60-odd seats across the country; but they failed to capture the Senate. In fact, in some bellwether Senate seats, Democrats fought off well-oiled, big-funded Tea Party candidates: Senate majority leader Harry Reid defeated a fiercely right wing Sharron Angle by a not-so-narrow five percent points; in California, Ebay CEO billionaire Meg Whitman got defeated in the governor's election; in West Virginia, Joe Manchin won over another Tea Party resurgent.

The one single, primary factor in this election was the state of the economy: many call 2010 a "Great Depression 2" year (more "popularly" called the Great Recession) with huge unemployment for the ordinary people, with no end in sight. In contrast, years preceding the 1994 midterm elections were not so catastrophic, although economic hardship returned with the beginning of the first Iraq war and the resulting spike in oil prices, which in turn increased inflation and for the next several years, high unemployment, massive government budgetary deficits, and slow GDP growth. Contrary to the economic disaster now that caused a global havoc, in 1994, the rest of the world was less affected.

But because of a strange, exclusive way corporate media reported the economic crisis and the measures Obama government took to try to bring the down economy back to life, the ordinary electorate never understood it; my personal experience to work with thousands of labor union workers over the past three years has been that even some of the more politically savvy and informed workers did not understand some of the primary causes the meltdown happened (years of deregulation, lobbying and financial law overturns, and extreme inequality), or the basic, pro-people actions Obama implemented that actually stopped the U.S. economy from completely imploding. One of the measures was the $787 billion-plus economic stimulus package that brought back many individuals and small businesses from the brink of death; yet, media’s portrayal of the stimulus was indifferent if not negative, compared to how they covered Bush government’s historic $1.3 trillion bailout money with which many financial giants gave themselves big bonuses.There was no comprehensive discussion at all as to the root causes of the crisis.

But, going back to comparing the two elections four midterms apart, there were certain similarities too between 1994 and 2010. Just like Contract with America, the forces of Tea Party were propelled to national limelight with backdoor support of mega corporations and super-rich individuals such as the Koch brothers, and not-so-secret support from avidly pro-Wall Street, anti-labor media behemoths such as Murdoch's Fox Network. In fact, Fox political commentator Glenn Beck, with help from far right "star" politicians like Sarah Palin, was able to put together a major rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, on the anniversary of Rev. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. That was ominous. Ilks of Rush Limbaugh and their right-wing radio shows created knee-jerk paranoia about Obama’s “socialist” and “big government,” "high tax" measures – an allegation never refuted or analyzed by other so-called objective media organizations, some of them having dubious connections with Wall Street and with perennial disdain for the labor movement. They conveniently forgot to mention that the big bank bailout was also big government, or the $1 trillion-plus deficit-exploding Iraq-Afghanistan warfare was also big government (pushed by war and oil industries). They used a double standard to report and analyze facts; worse, they didn't analyze them. They never reminded today's voters that FDR and his America-transforming New Deal were also labeled socialist back in the forties.

There’s one other important similarity. After the Republican landslide of 1994, it was the elite, centrist Democrats that pushed Bill Clinton to drastically get rid of pro-people laws and reforms to make compromises with the Republicans. The threat to pull political support out of Clinton was real: the day after the election results came in, Alabama’s senator Richard Shelby quit his Democratic Party and joined Republicans. The rest of his first term, Clinton complied, passed anti-labor NAFTA that broke the backs of workers both in Mexico and the U.S., and accelerated Reagan's mantra of shipping jobs out of the U.S. Under pressure from the right wing, he also “reformed” welfare for the American poor. His Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) replaced a 60-year-old program initiated during the New Deal-entitled Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). What Republicans couldn’t do since the New Deal, Clinton did it in 1994, and corporate America loved it. In two years, Clinton got re-elected, trouncing Republican Bob Dole.

Now, 2010 on, corporate America is determined to do the same with Obama, with help from their people in Congress; not just the Republicans, status-quo centrist Democrats will join hands with them, just the same way they did it almost two decades ago. Two of the major victims on their chopping block would perhaps be the health care reform and financial sector reform; in all likelihood, they will push for drastic reversals on both fronts, turning the clock back on America’s working people and families. In all likelihood, pro-labor Employee Free Choice Act would now be forced to be put on the back burner, or else, pushed into oblivion. A meaningful immigration reform would perhaps be shelved for a long time to come, keeping millions of enslaved immigrants underground.

Corporate America and its media want it. If Obama shows guts to resist their red eyes, in two years, they’ll find a complying president – Republican or Democrat. The selection process will begin soon. Just watch out.

And a post script: why was Hillary Clinton MIA during the campaign of such a critically important election, especially when her husband was stomping for his favored candidates? Who did her followers vote for this time?

Media wouldn’t discuss it either. We the ordinary, working Americans must find out.

###

This November 2010, I'm voting for Barack Obama

This November 2010, I'm voting for Barack Obama





Yes, you've heard it right!

On Tuesday, November 2, 2010, I'm going to vote for Barack Obama even though he's not a candidate. Here's my small endorsement for him even though he's not running.

I'm going to vote for his politics and principles, which I believe have been major, positive departures from eight fascist years of Bush, Cheney and Rove, and eight neoliberal years of Clinton. I know Clinton is campaigning for centrist-Dem candidates (Boeing's Patty Murray and anti-immigrant Heath "Tancredo" Shuler included), and drawing big crowds. Good for him. But my vote is for Obama and not for Clinton.

Am I happy that Obama is still continuing the brutal Afghanistan war, and seeking help from Washington insiders and Wall Street operatives to resolve the disastrous economic crisis? No. I wish he'd completely moved away from them. When I worked for his victory in November, 2008, I voted for a peace candidate. When I campaigned hard for him, I did it to support his pro-working-people, futuristic politics. That's why I chose Obama and not Hillary. To me, Obama was future, and Hillary was past. Obama was progressive, and Hillary was status quo.

I know Obama's handicaps. But I'm still supporting him because I've seen things happening in these two years that I haven't seen in twenty five years -- since 1985 -- when I came to America waking up to the nightmare of Ronald Reagan. The nightmare continued. When Obama became the president, in spite of my deep reservation for the deeply-entrenched Republocrat system, I knew that I was able to breathe freely, for the first time ever, when nobody was going to choke me anymore.

I wrote and spoke in various forums about the urgency to build solidarity across the working-class spectrum -- the sane and moderate majority I call the Second Circle. After decades of working at the grassroots level, first with the right and then with the left, I've moved away from the divisive left-right boxed politics, because I believe that the divide is artificial and destructive for the ordinary working people and families. There are many more overlaps than differences across the working class. I shunned the far right. I shunned the far left. And I shunned the iron-walled, elite center.

In my opinion, Bush-Cheney-Rove-Rumsfeld-Sarah Palin-Glenn Beck-Tea Party is a dark, Jim Crow force that our young generation -- black, white and brown -- has rejected once and for all. In my opinion, the Clintons and their centrist cronies are symbols of an inaccessible, elite status quo that our young generation has decided not to return to. Even the Clinton remnants we've seen damaging the progressive, pro-ordinary-people Obama agenda have been bad enough; I'm glad Obama is slowly but surely doing away with them. With strong support from labor unions, grassroots constituencies and young people that made an impossible Obama presidency possible, in the coming years, a re-charged Obama administration will be able to do much more to get America moving -- up and not down, forward and not backward.

I'm sure of it.

Let's quickly highlight some of the measures Barack Obama has accomplished, against all odds. They are (1) overturning of Bush-era limits of accessibility on federal documents; (2) ending of Bush-era practice of circumventing established FDA rules for political reasons; (3) announcing intentions to close Guantanamo prison camp; (4) negotiating deal with Swiss Bank to permit U.S. government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals; (5) beginning of phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq; (6) authorizing the U.S. auto industry rescue plan; (7) authorizing the housing rescue plan and new FHA residential housing guarantees; (8) authorizing $787 billion economic stimulus package with one-third in tax cuts for working-class families; (9) authorizing the Cash for Clunkers program removing polluting cars; (10) extending unemployment benefits for millions of workers; (11) instituting enforcements for equal pay for women; and of course, (12) signing a historic health care reform bill.

And that's only a small, partial list.

Obviously, corporate media have not been truthful to tell the story clearly and candidly. They won't do it because of their vested interest in crony capitalism; moreover, American big media survive on Nielsen ratings that in turn thrive on keeping people fearful, and on edge -- whether it's war, terrorism, bird flu, stimulus package, or health care. Remember just two years ago, when we all knew McCain-Palin was a lost ticket, yet CNN, etc. kept turning in close poll predictions? And we're not even talking about the Foxy, Rushy filth.

We don't need big media to tell us the truth. We have our own knowledge. We have our own analysis. We may have lack of money and power, but we have no lack of intelligence and experience.

This November 2, 2010, I'm going to use some of that knowledge and insight. I ask you to make up your mind, come out and do the same. Too much is at stake -- for us and our children.

Support Obama. Endorse a pro-people politics. Reject profit and profiteers. Embrace the future. Reject the past.



###

Courtesy: Obama accomplishment list from IBEW Local 3's newsletter Union World, October 22, 2010. Graph from Pew Center, 2009.

The Brave Chilean Miners

October 13, 2010

(revised October 14)




On reaching freedom, Mario Sepulveda, or “Super Mario” as a British newspaper dubbed him, lived up to his reputation with a jubilant display. All the thirty-three trapped miners in the Copiapo San Jose copper mine in Chile are now safely out. They're all rejoicing.


We are, too.


During the post-rescue press conference, Sepulveda gave a powerful statement. He said, “I met God. I met the devil. God won.” Despite his flair on-camera, Sepulveda went on to say he was not a showbiz icon.


He said, “I’d like you to treat me like I am, a miner.”


He then also said something the U.S. media completely excluded from their reports (I've checked the New York Times, CNN and Associated Press). However, Reuters and Euronews reported it. He said: "I think that this country has to understand once and for all that we have to change the way we work. The working world needs lots of changes. We, the miners, we won’t let it rest.”


Talking about changes, I'm sure, two of the things that were on his mind were the mining corporation's complete disregard for the labor union's repeated warnings and protests about the unsafe working conditions and possible danger; I'm sure he was also talking about the no-pay the thirty-three miners and their families went through during the 70-day nightmarish ordeal.


U.S. media excluded that discussion too in their usual "fair and objective journalism."


It's the strength of the workers that charged me the most. What courage, what resilience, what organization and optimism even against the most extreme adversities! Miracle? Sure, we all know that; we'd say the same thing if one of our family members had experienced the situation. But it's also much more than that. It's the fighting spirit of the working people. It's their solidarity.


We must not forget this chapter -- in my opinion, one of the most important episodes of human history. I'm glad and grateful I've been able to witness it in my lifetime. American homes for the first time in a long time got a glimpse of what workers' rights and solidarity are really all about, however difficult the circumstances have been. This episode unfolding in a distant corner of the world forced corporate media to tell the story to us all, as is, even though they did their best to censor some important points. It is now our role to fill people in with the missing information and analysis.


For the first time in a long time, ordinary workers and their families across the world felt strong and vindicated, because of the solidarity action of the Chilean miners.


"Chi-Chi-Chi...Le-Le-Le." Workers of the world, this is our time!


###

The Un-Common Wealth Games Begin

Incredible India, It Stinks

Homeless Indians sleeping on flyover renovated for the Games

Jim Yardley writes in New York Times today: As Global Games Begin, India Hopes for Chance to Save National Pride. Wrong title, Mr. Yardley. India doesn't hope to save national pride: it's the violent, corrupt and inefficient people on top who're trying to save their national power, with help from corporate media -- Indian and international. It's shameful.

This is a quick summary of the so-called Commonwealth Games, 2010. (1) Rounding up and jailing of poor people with their children off Delhi's streets; (2) massive corruption of the ruling Congress leaders who allegedly stole millions of dollars by doling out big corporate contracts with outrageously inflated prices; (3) major failing to meet important deadlines causing international derision; (4) paying 15-20 cents or less per hour (and working them 12-14 hours a day) to the thousands of workers, and falsely promising them housing, health care, child care, education, etc.; (5) creating an oppressive and unsafe work climate where at least 40 workers have died from on-the-job injuries, etc. while working on the Games sites; (6) organizers rampantly used child labor; (7) the govt. shut down schools, colleges and govt. offices for the games with no make-up time for lost studies or work -- unprecedented in modern world history; (8) major construction debacles including the road bridge collapse in Delhi last week; (9) historic number of international athletes pulling out of the games; (10) massive arrogance of the Congress govt, International Olympic Committee and Commonwealth Games executives who took millions of dollars, yet didn't deliver.

Other than some no-name, local, grassroots groups, international human rights bodies or the United Nations did not produce any audible screams against such rights and justice violations (bizarre, because the big-name groups in particular wouldn't miss any opportunity to raise hell on other politically expedient lapses in select places across the globe.)

The entire cost that has nothing to do with welfare of the ordinary people (totaling billions of dollars) has been and will be dumped on the broken backs of the average and poor Indian citizens who couldn't care less about the Games; their lives will not change a bit after the fiasco is all over. Mr. Yardley, you might challenge the status quo the Games' sponsor corporations and their trustee governments are perpetuating. That's the real problem big media need to address.

And we're not even talking about the painful and pathetic legacy of the Commonwealth hegemony. As if two hundred years of looting a once-prosperous country and leaving a torn, bloody, violent and impoverished three pieces of land with carefully chosen cronies weren't enough.

If anything, the British Queen and her administration owe a long-overdue apology with major reparation to the one billion-plus people they tyrannized in South Asia. That would be a real good start. Everything else falls short.

Second Circle: the Middle Majority of Working People

Updated on August 4, 2010







Second Circle: the Middle Majority of Working People



A Simple Spin Wheel Model to Build Alliance and Power across the Soft “Left and Right”



(Because the divide is artificial: sane working people have more in common than difference)


By Partha Banerjee



Short Description: There are more overlaps than divides among the moderate “left and right” working people. Creating broad-based alliance and synergy across this democracy, equality and justice spectrum is critical today.


Long Description: Working people who consider themselves moderate "left" or 'right" have more overlaps than differences. Below are a few examples -- the moderate working people feel similarly and strongly about the following:

1. Economic disparity and frustrations on social mobility: living wages, unpredictable workplace, loss of health care, education costs for children, loss of home and savings, and consequent psychological trauma and depression are major issues.

2. Feeling of being left out: not being a part of the election-time promises to be included in democratic processes.

3. Discontent on lack of peace, right, justice and human dignity issues: state repression, global warfare and poverty issues hit the average home.

4. Helplessness on destruction of the earth and environment: the BP disaster, Hurricane Katrina, Afghanistan and Iraq wars are examples.

5. Fast-worsening stability and security situation for the children: terrorism and violence are all-time high.

Can the poor, working man and woman strengthen themselves to a position of power? Can we empower the Middle Majority -- which I call the Second Circle -- driven by coalition building across the working class, political education, and will power, in a non-violent way? What are the obstacles?

I propose a simple "spin wheel" model to create cooperation and collaboration across the moderate left and right working class spectrum, eventually empowering the Second Circle middle majority, and through the process, disempowering the iron-walled elite center and separatist and violent far right and far left. I believe that with evolving action plans (including but not limited to elections), moderate working people will win and assume power.

The artificial left-right divide is deliberately created by the forces in power aided by corporate media; it's been detrimental for the working class people and families. It's time we go beyond the archaic box and come together.

Obama and FDR -- Revisiting American History (quickly)

Obama and FDR -- Revisiting American History (quickly)

March 27, 2010



Now, this is a serious historical discussion that should be done by serious historians. I'm not one of them. My little knowledge about American history and society comes from a twenty-five years of first-generation immigrant existence in this country, and that too, an existence of struggle, spending valuable time on unmemorable, mundane events. Still, as a student of political history as well as an unflappable cheerleader of human spirit, I find urge to chronicle history of this land where I spent half of my life, as it's been unfolding my way. Hope is, friends are gracious enough to forgive any possible impudence.

About Barack Obama, the man who made history. However much I want to support him (and I do, still) and however much time and energy I'd put in for an Obama victory, I'm skeptical about the way he's doing business. This is after I threw in all my support for this health care reform bill, irking my three and a half admirers worldwide.

This is a very important discussion, and I hope we continue it. Briefly, I just came back from an annual conference of my college where a paper was read about the Obama vision of "One America." The young, vibrant, erudite historian quoted many Obama speeches to show how he's been able to create a sense of race harmony and futuristic vision for America through his enviable eloquence. Sure, I love the Obama eloquence, but not sure if I'm totally sold on the liberal, centrist theme. If anything, I said during the questionnaire that Obama has said things that new-generation, educated or otherwise privileged Americans want to hear, without ever addressing the issue of class, corporatism or globalized, neo-colonization and economic-cultural enslavement a la Monsanto, Union Carbide, McDonald's, IBM, MTV or Hollywood. That's not the vision of One America that other leaders such as MLK or even FDR or Lincoln had stood for.

[Of course, young America has matured a bit (and their election of Obama over dark-age, divisive forces is greatly reassuring), but has it gotten the difference between a liberal, individualistic concept of glossed-over diversity and one from a grassroots, working America pov? Not sure at all. I'd ask the same question for the country where I spent the other half of my life: India.]

In fact, in this extreme economic downturn caused by corporate America and its crony Republocrats (the JoeLieb ilk), one might take a lesson or two from FDR and his New Deal: how he tried to take on the Wall Street criminals in 1930's and how his administration passed pro-people, pro-labor laws (Wagner, Norris-LaGuardia, WPA...), curtailing the power of corporate America and their massive deregulation and out-of-control profiteering -- shockingly similar chain of events that caused the 1929 stock market crash, mortgage and banking collapse and the subsequent Great Depression.

Obama, surrounded by some sinister characters, has failed to replicate FDR. The crony Republocrats would not let him do it; in fact, the health care reform that finally passed with a razon-thin, heart-stopping margin passed after many concessions and carrots to corporate lobbyists: insurance companies themselves are big beneficiaries. It's a far cry from any serious reform. Still, we have no choice but to take it because the alternative is horrific.

American working people, courtesy big media, do not understand the centrist, elitist, entrenched status-quo politics, other than what they read, hear or watch at their living rooms -- "analysis" thrown at them by self-styled experts and media celebrities. But they do understand history, they do remember FDR, and millions of Americans (some of whom I work with on a daily basis) understand the hypocrisy of the Obama government (not necessarily himself) to bail out with a $1.5 trillion historic reward the same people who should've been put behind bars. These are ordinary, hard-working, family Americans some of whom, with the lack of an honest political analysis -- again courtesy big media and corporations -- now throw their support behind the Tea Party thugs. We can certainly blast them for joining hands with bigots, but we cannot and must not criticize the reasons of their frustration; after all, countless are out of work while blessed bank bullies keep giving themselves big bonuses.

This is a critical time in history, and in a few months come November, we'll know whether health care reform would make or break Obama once and for all. It could be that we're going to see a repeat of the 1994 New Gingrich far right takeover of Congress, given how money keeps pouring in to Republocrats' election coffers.

Instead of perpetuating and falling victims of the so-called left-right divide that distorts history of the American people, we need to find overlaps between the moderate working class -- the so-called left of center and right of center vast majority that share many commonalities -- and build alliance so that we gradually assume power for ourselves and slowly disempower the extremists, and more importantly, the centrist JoeLieb power of status quo.

I call it my Second Circle model: the large, majority concentric ring of honest, sincere, yet powerless, vulnerable people taken advantage of by the center circle of power, as well as people targeted by an outermost circle of fringe, violent forces. I hope to talk more about this model in the coming days.

Here's a diagram of the model. We'll expand more.







Thanks for the opportunity to share my two cents. Much appreciate comments, and if it's any worth, a circulation.

In solidarity (and hope for a united future),

Partha

Brooklyn, New York

The Real Slumdog Story: India's Ghastly Commonwealth Cleanup

Courtesy: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/all-aboard-delhis-beggar-express-1914922.html

(See more related links at the bottom of this post.)

I'm deeply troubled. Very deeply troubled.

An inconspicuous report in British paper Independent shows how the Delhi administration in India is sweeping up hundreds of thousands of poorest of the poor -- men, women and children -- from the city's streets and jailing them randomly. I heard they are doing it because of the upcoming Commonwealth Games in October when sports personalities, politicians, dignitaries and most importantly, corporate businesses will come to our once-colonized land and spend their royal time and money to celebrate another round of the so-called global fraternity. Oh yes, some of them will run, jump and play ball too.

And Indian middle class will cheer.

So, in order to make the city look clean, the streets beggar-free, and the country wear a First World image, Delhi and India governments have taken on an urgent mission, with a religious zeal, to pick up the countless, hapless, half-naked, starving Indians -- men, women and children -- and are indefinitely putting them in India's dreaded jails before they're shipped out to somewhere across the country. What will happen to these God-forsaken millions and their lives, livelihoods, social connections and dignities? I'm sure they'll let us know when the celebrities and business houses check out after the Games. Normally, in India, middle class don't query on social connections or education of street children.

We've seen such grotesque acts of violence in India many times over the past, particularly since India graduated from its mediocre non-alignment, "socialist" days to a glitzy-globalized "democracy" days. We've seen numerous, bloody communal riots, barbaric genocide of the poor in the name of religion and caste, and international terrorism. We've also seen a massive change of government with transition of power from a so-called right wing dark force to a so-called centrist liberal enlightened. The new leaders of India are not the zealots and bigots, but internationally known economists and academics, United Nations celebrities, and of course, the Gandhi Dynasty -- I'm sure they have certain qualifications too.

In 2002, when a barbaric carnage took place in Gandhi's state of Gujarat when thousands of poor Muslims were slaughtered by a bigoted chief minister and his bigoted administration, there was international uproar: the New York Times, BBC, CNN, PBS, NPR and all other big-name media organizations gave us the ignorant a thorough coverage and insider information on the ghastly violence. In 2008, when a group of Pakistan-based terrorists snuck in to the five-star Taj International in the Indian Wall Street city of Mumbai and killed hundreds of hotel residents, there was another series of media uproar; CNN provided unprecedented, round-the-clock, "ticker-tape" coverage of the terrorism. We were delighted to see the extent of responsibility corporate media displaying to unearth major events happening on the other side of the world.

I'll make it short. This time around, however, when another major act of violence is happening in the capital of West-blessed India, I see no outrage -- barring a few small news blips here and there -- either by the mighty human rights groups and their liberal followers, or by the mighty media that spent so much of their precious time and money to uncover Gujarat or Mumbai. I'm sad and disappointed, but not truly surprised.

The liberal outrage -- either of the international rights and justice groups or of corporate media -- is selective, and media keeps manufacturing peoples' consent for or against a social, political or economic event. If the Gujarat (or the 1992 Babri Mosque) carnage is ghastly (and they are), then the Delhi clean-up of the begging destitute is equally grotesque. In the former, poor people die immediately; in the latter, poor people die a slow but sure death because of police torture, forced displacement, starvation, hunger, poverty and depression. In case of the latter, women and children suffer the most. In both cases, the brutality leaves lifelong, negative impacts on the surviving children who'd spare no time to act back against the repressive system with their own acts of violence.

I hope ordinary people both in India and the West (and perhaps some conscientious media people) pick up on this new fascism of the India government, and force them to stop this state-sponsored violence and brutality.

Again, I'm deeply troubled -- to see the inaction and lack of outrage, especially of the elite liberal that screamed their lungs off before. You can't have a double standard to denounce hate.

Thank you for reading my quickly drafted note.

Partha Banerjee
Brooklyn, New York
March 14, 2010


###

Post Script.

Prof. Noam Chomsky wrote back today: "Very ugly story. I saw it on a smaller scale in New Delhi in 70's, when I was there as a Nehru lecturer. At that time, in downtown Delhi (I think Connaught Square) there were about 50,000 people in tents or no protection at all. We drove by every day on the way to talks. One day, it was empty. I asked the driver what had happened, and he said, casually, that the city had to be cleaned up for some Asian fair. I asked what happened to the people. He said they were loaded into trucks and dumped somewhere in the countryside. All very casual. No one seemed to care. I saw the same in Barcelona before the Olympics, though there it was not on the same horrendous scale.

Noam

###

Follow-up articles:

Commonwealth clean up targets Delhi’s beggars

Ratnabai Kale was picked up at the start of the drive in September, along with her daughter Aarti, 16, and her sister Shobha, 30. "They said, 'You're not going on that bus. Get on to this one.' I asked why; they said because we were beggars. I said, 'First of all, we're not beggars, we're honest labourers', But the police didn't listen,” she said. “They told us we'd be given a four-year sentence in jail if we didn't go along."

http://www.soschildrensvillages.org.uk/charity-news/commonwealth-clean-up-targets-delhi2019s-beggars

Have A Budget For Beggars

Delhi’s notoriously rough and inefficient mobile anti-begging squads are already in battle formation. (It is well known that to keep their jobs the squads habitually pick up anyone in rags, even though s/he may not be begging). In recent months these units have rounded up 224 alleged beggars, and locked up 124 of them in one of 12 homes for the destitute — all of which are bursting at their seams. A 13th home is being planned for transgenders and eunuchs. By April the beautifiers also expect to have a 24-hour toll-free Beggar Hotline in place — for the city that a survey last week pronounced as the country’s most livable.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main44.asp?filename=Bu200310have_a.asp

Delhi to banish beggars ahead of Commonwealth Games

"Before the 2010 Commonwealth Games, we want to finish the problem of beggary from Delhi."

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/delhi-to-banish-beggars-ahead-of-commonwealth-games/100424-3.html

Govt to ask for NGO help in rehabilitating city's beggars

"With space for only 2,100 beggars in its homes, no rehabilitation plan in place"

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Govt-to-ask-for-NGO-help-in-rehabilitating-citys-beggars/articleshow/5677900.cms


Related articles:

Delhi NGOs, Cops Lock Horns over Beggars

NGO representatives at the workshop said beggars were a distressed lot, compelled to migrate to this city from other states in search of a living. Said Sanjay Gupta, an activist with Childhood Enhancement through Training and Action (Chetna): "Begging is one of the responses of acute poverty. People are not born beggars and do not become so by taking alms, but are victims of lack of employment opportunities in rural and urban areas. "They are often incapable of working because of old age and physical handicap. Before beginning to solve this problem with strict anti-poverty laws, the government should modify its policies and schemes."

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/176/32007.html

Please beggar off

(An Indian middle class response to the problem)

"Slumdog Millionaire was embarrassing enough for many people. But their discomfort on finding beggars tugging on foreigners’ sleeves, pleading non-Indians in beggar-English for money during the 15 days when the land that has an economy more powerful than Mother Teresa’s love plays host to an international sporting event will be acute. It’s one thing to cope with a harmless bed-wetting 30-year-old cousin and quite another if he comes out in his underwear while you’re hosting a party in your living room."

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Please-beggar-off/H1-Article1-515993.aspx


###

India's IMF Budget

Note: I acknowledge a few sections used from online articles and blogs.


opinion
The Khaas Aadmi Budget
It’s time people got—or took—direct charge of budget-making

Partha Banerjee

http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?264559

In a euphoric moment, when the country was celebrating Sachin Tendulkar’s double century in ODIs, Pranab Mukherjee, finance minister and International Monetary Fund’s governor-designate for India, presented his budget. And we might say, “It’s not cricket!”

In a non-election, no-risk year, he announced the following important news for his fellow countrymen. (1) Rich Indians will get Rs 26,000 crore of tax break in 2010-11; (2) food subsidy for the poor will be decreased by Rs 424 crore; (3) fertiliser subsidy for low-income farmers will be pared by Rs 3,000 crore; and (4) real estate magnates and hotel owners will get huge tax concessions. Then, he announced even more important news. In an already high-inflation situation, petrol and diesel prices will be increased. Everyone knows what that would do to the urban/rural poor and lower middle class.

Major corporate media, following a new-found, ‘successful’ US model, praised the budget. They said that following the announcements, India’s stockmarkets jumped. “The market lapped it up and the Bombay Stock Exchange benchmark Sensex boomed,” a Financial Times article said. Big NRI businessmen too made positive statements.

But wait a minute. I’m an NRI too, living in the US for 25 years. I teach blue-collar American labourers coming back to get a college education. I see how corporations here are laying off these workers in thousands and yet getting themselves millions of dollars in bonuses using the Obama government’s bailout money. I see how American media is completely bypassing the suffering poor workers. And now I see how a section of Indian media houses is following the footsteps of their American mentors, and suppressing the real stories around this major, extremely skewed budget. I find it unbelievable that nobody is questioning and challenging the so-called democratic government of Pranab babu, Manmohan Singh and the Gandhi dynasty on how the 80 per cent poor—rural and urban—would now be able to find food or kerosene for their families, pay rent, or get healthcare for ageing parents. Does anybody really care?

Let’s look at the history of Indian budgets since the so-called post-Soviet, post-non-alignment, liberalisation days. Since then, the series of policy measures launched by the Indian government are part of the so-called structural adjustment programmes (SAP). Indian governments have since taken up the following IMF-World Bank-dictated measures to implement SAP: (a) Massive devaluation of rupee; (b) new industrial policy allowing more foreign investments, thereby destroying traditional Indian businesses; (c) rampant disinvestment of government equity in profitable public sector enterprises; (d) ‘reforms’ of the financial sector by allowing in private banks; (e) cuts in social spending to reduce fiscal deficit; (f) market-friendly approach and less government intervention; and (g) liberalisation of the banking system.

Twenty years ago, the World Bank secretly submitted the above SAP elements to the government; we now know that the group of senior officials in the finance ministry—all ex-World Bank/IMF employees—who were involved with this memorandum did not disclose it to the then PM, Chandra Shekhar. Have we heard about this from Pranab babu or his predecessors P. Chidambaram or Manmohan Singh?

Clearly, the focus of the new budget is to provide more help to the corporate sector and the rich, with an illusion that the new growth would percolate down to the downtrodden—what is called “trickle-down economics” in the US. It has now crashed the US economy, and it’s going to crash India and its vast middle class in the coming days.

If Indian leaders were not so indebted to Western institutions, they’d have come up with a people’s budget following the successful model of Brazil’s Lula De Silva: a transparent economic blueprint where ordinary people have open access to create and modify it based on their own national, regional or local needs.

In a truly democratic, transparent, people’s budget that India should have developed over the recurrent, five-year plans, we’d see serious investment in small-scale industry, agriculture, education, healthcare, land/water reform, training for unskilled workers, incentive for poor women’s entrepreneurial efforts and ‘Grameen’-type banking, development of a sustainable environment and sports for young Indians with tangible goals. On that list, we’d now definitely add disaster preparedness and evacuation strategies, given what we’ve just seen in Haiti and Chile. I shudder even to think of the extent of possible destruction in the event of a large earthquake in Calcutta, Delhi, Mumbai or Bangalore.

Pranab babu’s IMF budget has no clue on any of the above. Who can answer correctly? Soniaji, or maybe, the next media-predicted prime minister—Rahul Gandhi?

(Partha Banerjee is a New York-based human rights activist.)

The New Jingo Bells

The New Jingo Bells

By Partha Banerjee

Published in Outlook India, March 1, 2010.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?264313

A brutal war and killing spree just resurged in Afghanistan—a sudden and rapid escalation of violence. The ostensibly objective and liberal New York Times announced: “Thousands of American, Afghan and British troops attacked the watery Taliban fortress of Marjah early Saturday...to destroy the insurgency’s largest haven and begin a campaign to reassert the dominance of the Afghan government across a large arc of southern Afghanistan.” Gallant, indeed.

The huge surge of military assault, as well as the NYT’s reporting, were eerie reminders of what we experienced when, in 2003, George Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld began the “shock and awe” offensive in Iraq. We remember how Judith Miller of the NYT had at that time written non-stop columns on how Saddam Hussein had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction—stories supported by a single, dubious Iraqi insider source named Ahmed Chalabi—stories that had later proved to be fake. Politically conscious Indians laughed.

Seven years went by. A new Obama administration took office, after winning a historic, landslide election on a much-touted peace platform. In fact, the singular factor that separated Barack Obama from his formidable rival for presidency, Hillary Clinton, was his anti-war position. How times have changed! Even people like us, who worked like crazy for an Obama victory, are stunned by the way his administration is mirroring the war years of Bush and Clinton. But why this sudden escalation in Afghanistan? And, how huge is it?

The National Public Radio, also considered objective and liberal, echoed the NYT: “The long-awaited assault on Marjah is the biggest offensive since the 2001 US-led invasion of Afghanistan and is a major test of a new NATO strategy focused on protecting civilians.”

Protecting civilians? The last time we checked, even long after the initial blanket-bombing of Kabul and Kandahar that killed thousands of innocents—of which pictures were self-censored by the US media—missiles from drones killed hundreds of Afghans at wedding celebrations and family gatherings. A new NATO strategy? Since when?

What’s the guarantee that this so-called new strategy would work now, and civilians would not be slaughtered? There are reports that innocent Afghans have been massacred on Valentine’s Day, of which an NYT report said, “a rocket went astray during operations..., killing 12 civilians”. Valentine’s love gods did not particularly have a field day in Marjah; the new bloodshed in Pune rejected them too.

We’re very disturbed. We did not work for another four years of Bush genocide under a different name.

But that’s only one half of the problem. The other half is: Why now, and where’s the urgency?

Here’s why. The Obama government’s credibility is in serious jeopardy. With the catastrophic economic crisis of historic proportions, the American public is raging. Labour unions and the far-right Sarah Palin Tea Party gang are bringing on unprecedented mass resistance to Washington. Obama’s bad-choice insiders are getting exposed daily.

The 2010 congressional elections are not far away. These people at the elite centre of power need a serious diversion, and a desperate “victory”—maybe, a “big prize” —to stay on top. The anti-Iran rhetoric didn’t go very far; after all, even the geography-inadequate American main street now knows the similarity between Iraq and Iran, and the US politics around them. No, the election thing didn’t go very far in Iran, sadly.

The new Afghan drumbeat, blown up by media mouthpieces, is a last-straw effort by war industry profiteers and Wall Street puppeteers alike to divert attention from the simple facts—that Obama’s healthcare reform efforts are now all but dead; that, in most states, unemployment is at a Great Depression-level high; big banks and their bigger CEOs are still getting themselves millions of dollars in bonuses; and overall, the American people are not in a Valentine’s Day mood. Therefore, the new escalation in, on and around poor Afghanistan. Therefore, the new jingo bells.

Ironically, the NYT story got some not-so-rave reviews from its own readers. Here’s one: “You invade one of the poorest, most battle-scarred corners of the planet and spin it as some sort of lofty stand against the greatest threat to the security of mankind since the Third Reich.” Another reader quoted from George Orwell’s 1984: “The war isn’t meant to be won; it’s meant to be continuous.”

A continuous treachery against humankind, that is. That’s the real name of the game.

(The writer is a rights activist based in New York.)

###

$9 million "Goldman Chief's Bonus...Show of Restraint." - NYTimes

Courtesy: The Independent

"Goldman Chief’s Bonus Seen by Some as Show of Restraint." - New York Times story, February 6, 2010.

Visit link at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/business/06bonus.html?hp

I almost cried that the GS chief got only $9 million bonus. I'm like: How could you?

(Of course, who am I to say it? New York Times did not interview a single person on the street or any member of the labor community to react on the bonuses. I'm sure, otherwise, they would've showed similar sympathy I did. Maybe, more. Times missed that opportunity. Times also, notably, didn't have a Readers' Comments section on the story.)
____

Excerpt from the Times story:

"The timing, too, seemed deft: hours earlier, JPMorgan Chase had announced that its chief executive, Jamie Dimon, would receive a $16.6 million bonus and $1 million in salary. For once, Goldman, known for its big paydays, had grabbed the high ground by paying its chief executive less money. At the top, John G. Stumpf, chief of Wells Fargo, was paid $18.4 million in cash and stock for 2009 though he runs a less complex company."

Free Idiots and Born Into Brothels: The Lie Saga is On

Free Idiots: An Indian Amir's New Stooges (Also read below reposted insider exposé on Born Into Brothels, the Osca-rated documentary)





(Caution: Don't spend your time, money or patience on it. Believe me. I just did. By default, I'm now a free idiot.)


Is the new-generation India so painfully dumb that it can't understand the difference between truth and make-believe, reality and dream, or even fun and pain? Or, it's way too complicated when it's a new-wave Bollywood version of entertainment-awareness-social-change-cocktail served by Coke messiah Amir Khan?

When truth is layered-in with a fake cake in such a cumbersome way that you don't really know which one to choose: cheap fun or grim reality? You want to be a part, if not protagonist, of the desperately-needed social change, but you know that something's dead wrong in the messaging, and yet, you can't quite figure out where the problem is. But you paid handsomely at the box office to get in, and you don't want to come home not laughing or not crying. However hard you need to force yourself to do it, like a bad gas that simply wouldn't pass. (Sorry, but Khan used the element plenty.)

Three hours of non-stop Hindi Blitzkrieg of dialoguing, monologuing, dancing, donkeying, monkeying, stomping, romping, jumping, kissing, pissing, sciencing, philosophizing, teaching, testing, teasing, cheating, beating, stealing, healing, sobbing, crying, tear-jerking, gate-crashing, driving, dying and birthing...you name it...just to drive on one message...like that bad gas...that it's time the Indian supercolonial academia change...and free itself of learning by rote...and enter an era of free thinking!

Wow!

Unfortunately, every bit of masala Amir Khan and his idiots uses to cook up the story is straight from the dingiest Bollywood kitsch kitchen, where the entire purpose of filming is done around the known theme of profit by making the dumb dumber, and the dumber the dumbest. And when so many idiots are employed, free and licensed to teach free thinking to new-generation India, it's no more a dream. It's a nightmare.

It's a nightmare just to sit through the three endless hours of plotting, subplotting, sub-subplotting, flashbacking and backflashing. It's three hours of a very painful trial. Trial of your civility, social skills and patience. When completely disgusted after an hour and a half into the show, you just want to stand up, scream, kick the back of the front seat in the darkness of the theater, and leave. But you can't. After all, you're not really free to do that. Even an idiot wouldn't do it.

My readers, friends, supporters and especially my critics always want to know what my problem is: why can't I simply get some fun and be happy with fun and happy stuff? Why do I always have to be such a naysayer and badmouther at every Bollywood benchmark? After all, what's so cool about always blasting big media and thereby making myself depressed, even more so than ever before? I did that with notable, famed and prospered big-ticket items such as Born Into Brothels and Slumdog Millionaire; I'm now web-spewing the same, predictable criticism of another big blockbuster that's taking Indian families by storm -- both in India and abroad! Why can't I make some peace with reality, and learn to live with it?

Yeah, that's a serious mental case, indeed.

Now, people are so tired of rave reviews, critiques and eulogies that 3 Idiots (I'm sure you've long figured it out) got, it wouldn't be wise to do a shot-by-shot, sequence-by-sequence post-mortem, although one would be tempted to do it, just for the "fun." I'd rather select a handful only for a hindsight.

1. The opening sequence of idiot Farhan's faked illness on a just-took-off Air India plane. (Please don't try it. You'll be quickly arrested, beat up and jailed, maybe, even on terrorism charges). The once-wildlife-photographer-aspirant, father-forced engineering student, who's now suddenly an accomplished photographer with a number of books out, gets a call from one Rancho, his face turns green, as if scared to death. But Rancho, they later tell us, is only his pal, his soul brother he met ten years ago -- calling from some unknown place for some unknown reason. But to answer him, Farhan decides to feign a heart attack on board, and forces the pilots to turn around for an emergency landing. He then walks out of his wheelchair with a simple comic gesture, and dissolves into the street crowd.

(My critic: "But didn't you get the fun, you wet blanket? Oh, it was so funny! Loved it.")

2. Rancho straps himself with idiot Raju's critically ill, paralyzed father on a scooter, and drives him to hospital for a save, thereby meeting his doctor girlfriend Pia who was also, as it turns out, daughter of the Hitler-ish college director. (Please don't try this method to save a patient. You'll kill them; and law will quickly get back to you. Unless you're an Indian Amir or a member of his now-famous idiot club). In my time I've seen quite a few Bollywood insanities, and this one would definitely make a short list. And it's so inhumane to the point of cruelty, only to match with Raju's poor mother scratching his bed-ridden husband's eczema with a roller pin and then using it to make rotis for her son and his invited friends.

(Critic: "Ha ha, was it funny! Laugh laugh laugh...giggle giggle giggle...")

3. A climax-subclimax drama of idiot Rancho and his idiot Indian engineering gang delivering Pia's sister Mona's baby at the college, taking online-video instructions from Pia. (Please don't try it, period). Other than the totally ludicrous and nonsense drama of the pingpong-tabletop-childbirthing under Rancho's stewardship and collective laboring, the corniness is simply absurd and truly unbearable. I've never seen so many otherwise healthy-looking men crying so much, so pathetically.

(Critic: "You just don't get it. It was a metaphor, a symbol, a dream scenario. Like, this is how it should be. It's an Amir utopia. He's making the young generation think. Love it.")

I have another metaphor in my mind. In ten years the movie spans, no one idiot grows up. Telling, the globalized Indian generation considered. We might say, not ten, it's twenty.

I have a feeling had one looked carefully, they could even find those idiots wearing the same stars-and-stripes underpants they wore ten years ago. The ones they flashed globally. That was "balatkar" indeed.

Ah..."All Izz Well."


###

Born Into Brothels Kids Sue Filmmakers!!??

(But it doesn't matter: once a lie is always a lie)

News source at http://www.anandabazar.com/archive/1080807/7cal4.htm

(in Bengali; gist below)

On August 7, 2008, Ananda Bazar Patrika (ABP), a major daily newspaper in Calcutta, India (the location of the documentary) broke news that some children portrayed in the film brought a breach of promise lawsuit against the filmmakers. They did it on the ground that those including the much-publicized children who were promised that they'd share in some of the huge profit the film made did not receive any money after all.

I have a feeling the lawsuit may also have included the fact that the children's names were publicized across the globe, while the filmmakers had promised that their identities would be safeguarded. One of the featured kids also alleged that he didn't even know he was being filmed and interviewed for the purpose of making a documentary. In fact, that was an allegation frequently made by the sex workers themselves, and corroborated by the sex workers' union Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee (DMSC) -- I've personally met with some of the leaders of the organization.

In my original letter to Hollywood AMPAS, I'd questioned whether the sex worker mothers' permissions had ever been obtained by the filmmakers when they'd intruded deeply into their personal lives. I subsequently found out by talking to these women that indeed, no such permission had ever been secured; as I mentioned above, DMSC told me that they were never informed that the filmmakers were filming them for this purpose.

(Additionally, Born Into Brothels directors copiously used Satyajit Ray's Apu Trilogy music, when the copyright holders for Ray films had specifically asked them not to do it. It's plain plagiarism.)

I translated about one hundred tapes full of such gross violation of privacy and intrusion into sex workers' personal lives and professions; and I did not get to translate many more. I know what was on the tapes I'd translated -- the large majority of which was never used in the documentary; I also know what came out as the final, edited product. In my opinion, it's scandalous, full of egregious lies, and purposefully biased against Calcutta (now called Kolkata), India and some of its less-fortunate people.

(Zana Briski told me a number of times that she hated Kolkata and would never want to go back: great gesture considering what she got out of exploiting its people and how the poor sex workers had protected her from any harms!)

I must tell you that even though as a media and human rights activist, I'm totally aware of big media's lies and craving for sensationalism (I frequently write about it -- read my blogs), in this case, the ABP journalist who broke this important story did a great job. I spoke with her on this too.

The fact is, the filmmakers' attempt to show off in the U.S. one of the featured kids named Avijit as the poster boy of their "successful mission" is outrageous. This now-pompous teenager also phoned me in New York and forced a long, rough argument with me. (How he got my phone number is anybody's guess.)

The fact that a happy and jovial girl like Puja (who was greatly exploited by the filmmakers) is now a disclosed-identity sex worker at this very young age, and the other children featured on the film are hopeless and lost (not to mention the sex worker mothers who now feel cheated and violated) is enough reason for bringing any breach of promise lawsuit against the filmmakers.

Nobody has approached me on this lawsuit and I don't know what the real motive is behind it, but if anyone asks me to testify to narrate my insight and experience, I'd be more than happy to do it.

I have no sympathy for self-aggrandizement and Hollywood-blessed lies, and that too, at the expense of poor peoples' privacy and misery. I believe that AMPAS revisit the issue, and revoke the Oscars it awarded to Born Into Brothels, on plagiarism and violation of ethics charges.

Thanks for your attention and action.

-Partha