[Show all top banners]

gaule_hero
Replies to this thread:

More by gaule_hero
What people are reading
Subscribers
:: Subscribe
Back to: Kurakani General Refresh page to view new replies
 Letter to BBC - Very disappointed with Rabindra Mishra & Jitendra Raut...

[Please view other pages to see the rest of the postings. Total posts: 25]
PAGE: <<  1 2  
[VIEWED 8279 TIMES]
SAVE! for ease of future access.
The postings in this thread span 2 pages, go to PAGE 1.

This page is only showing last 20 replies
Posted on 11-20-05 5:46 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Hello -
I am a regular listener of BBC Nepali service over the Internet. I have been listening to 2 radio-series "Tapai Ko Sansar" and "Nepal Sandrava" for sometime. I applaud the tough questions Mr. Mishra and Mr. Raut ask politicians of the mainstream parties. But their questions to government officials appear too obsequious. They show unnecessary deference to current ministers [is there a hidden agenda there?]. Mr. Mishra gave free pass to Tanka Dhakal and Nirjanjan Thapa. For instance, when Mr. Thapa said FMs should not be allowed to broadcast national news, I had 100s of follow-up questions I could have asked but Mr. Mishra just let it go. But when he interviewed Mr. Ram Chandra Poudel, he gave him a lot of heat for NOT participating in the local election.

It seems, or rather gives me an impression that BBC Nepali service is operating under the assumption that whatever the current regime in Nepal is doing is legal and constitutional. But we all know that it is not. Thus, the first question I would ask any government official is which section/sub-section/paragraph of the constitution are they working under? If their position/function is NOT legal/constitutional, whatever they do WON?T be either. Where does it say that the King can rule the country without a parliament and with no accountability whatsoever? Where does it say that council of ministers can have 2 vice-chairmen?

I have said in my earlier e-mail about Mr. Mishra's pro-monarchy bend. He wrote an article after Feb 1 event that things in Nepal have turned for the better ((http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4502455.stm). I told him, he was wrong [had no idea where he had gotten his information from] and the subsequent events have proven me right.

In the U.S. the Fox network, owned by the famed right-winger Robert Murdoch, calls its news program "Fair and Balanced". That is a first class misnomer because it is always propounding right-wing agenda. It seems to be that BBC Nepali service is broadcasting its pro-monarchy agenda instead of being truly fair and balanced [I would rather have the news announcers call King G, just "raja Gynendra" instead of "bada maha raja diraj" - that's so unnecessary]. Just to let you know, I am waiting for BBC Nepali service [Mr. Mishra and Mr. Raut in particular] to commit a faux pas and then I am going to start a letter writing campaign against them to straighten the matter.

Please understand that I am not affiliated with any political parties. I probably hate Girija, Deupa and Nepal as much as Gyanendra [much more the former two]. I was as disappointed as anyone with the multi-party experience in the past 15 years, but be as it may, the solution to Nepal's long-term economic problem is political stability and not intercine war [political and military] and democratic process it the best way to achieve it. Sure there are flaws especially regarding political and personal corruption, as businessmen like Kethan pointed out in a BBC interview, but there are remedies for them within the democratic system.

To say Nepalese are not ready for democracy is to insult the intellect of Nepali people. Now that's the question Mr. Mishra and Mr. Raut can ask government ministers, the next time they get a chance.

Cheers.

 
The postings in this thread span 2 pages, go to PAGE 1.

This page is only showing last 20 replies
Posted on 11-20-05 11:36 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

And we have every right to refute or even stop listening if BBC does not fulfill your exectations and I also know, BBC can't make every body happy. :-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phewww, someone needs to do a media study. To be honest i never was a fan of BBC but the suggestion to switch off rather then complaning for correction sounds childish. Small professional mishapes by few people from small divisions, can cost the public faith and popularity of the whole BBC.
 
Posted on 11-20-05 12:05 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

I too have felt that BBC nepali service at times tends to remain biased more towards monarchy. While more media and channels have emerged over the past few years now with better news presentation techniques and more neutral and relaiable stuffs, BBC nepai radio service somehow tends to have lost that edge that it used to have in the past over other media and channels in bringing new, challenging and reliable stuffs.

Change with regards to time is indeed necessary for all media to sustain and more importantly win the hearts of millions of quality audiences these days. Who would know this thing better than the prestigious news channel like BBC itself so I hope changes are inevitable sooner or later as far as nepali BBC is concerned. Lets hope for better if not the best.
 
Posted on 11-20-05 1:33 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

If BBC Nepali service is to stop, King Gyanendra will be the happiest person in the world. However, that does not mean individuals working in BBC do not display monarchy friendly attitude and bias, at least occasionally.

Nevertheless, I feel BBC Nepali service has broadly assumed a distinct pro-democracy compose since 2/1 event.

The old generation of BBC Nepali service grew up revering Nepali monarch. The new generation is unsure about discontinuing the tradition.

Individual variability in professionalism, intellect and creativity is a normal thing in any organization. However, it appears little too much in case of BBC Nepali service. Or is it only my impression ?

A media person establishes his/her CREDIBILITY through CONSISTENCY in digging up and in presentation of the stories. Consistency appears to be something presenters working in BBC Nepali Service are yet to master.

 
Posted on 11-20-05 2:20 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Matrixrose

whether it sounds childish or not, I literally do not watch FOX. Simply I can't stand them.

I personally think, BBC is the platform for oppsition when they can't speak their minds through Nepalese media.

.
 
Posted on 11-20-05 2:34 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

True but not true, BBC lets the opposition to be heard, but to what extend?
 
Posted on 11-20-05 4:10 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

There are very few interviews with the people associated with government. Why? Because the people in the government do not want to talk to the media for the fear of grilling.

The air time for/of the people in oppsition is the most in BBC and the opposition is getting chance to put forward their cause. Does BBC has hidden agenda ?

If ,BBC is pro-king, why would they take interviews like that of Gagan Thapa to promote his agenda? Why would they interview Madhav Kumar Nepal and Girija Prasad Koirala to be heard ?

If BBC was pro-king why would they air news about the mass meetings against the king?

If BBC lobbys for pro-king then why would the leaders of opposition do consent to be interviewed by BBC?

If BBC is a pro-king agency why would the the government try to ban its transmission in Nepal ?

More questions to follow !

 
Posted on 11-21-05 2:58 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

The audience has every right to complain on the output of the BBC whether they are monarchist or democrats even the monarchist have published propagandas against BBC Nepali. But the question here is not about labeling BBC Nepali as being biased towards certain group of people. When the audience complains, the institution, well researched and their friends have to contemplate seriously and review their programs to identify where the mistakes have been made. It is wise to take the audiences feedback in a positive note rather than defending and claiming that everything being done is perfect.

By the way, giving one and sundry examples is even more naive. The media is supposed to represent the perspective of the wider mass rather than few dozens of people in the Government. The media in question has given the impression that its targeted audience is council of ministers rather than the Nepalese public. People working there might not have particular political agenda but they are supposed to be responsible for their output if it is seen as biased by the wider audience. They have responsibility to give a reasonable answer to the dissatisfied group of audience. To suggest them to switch to other channel is utterly unprofessional and irresponsible.



 
Posted on 11-21-05 6:45 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

matrixrose wrote
The media in question has given the impression that its targeted audience is council of ministers rather than the Nepalese public.

Well, I respect your knowledge of media (which I lack) but did not expect such comments from you. I believe the Nepali listeners tune to the frequencies of BBC to know what is the truth and the workers try their best to bring out the truth without being biased and grilling only one side of the aisle. The council of ministers have been very careful by being not involved with such dialogues, hence, given less chance to be grilled. When given chance like by Niranjan Thapa, BBC has taken advantage.

Matrixrose wrote
To suggest them to switch to other channel is utterly unprofessional and irresponsible.

I do admit it is unprofessional, childish and irresponsible.
Still, I would not switch to the channels that increases my diastolic and systolic bloodpressure and cut my life span short. I will still use this tactic and not watch channel 41 (Fox) in my area and reading Gorkhapatra or Rising Nepal, as long as I have other resources that probably gives me some endorphines, in this competetive world. Isn't it a human nature ?

Keep rolling
 
Posted on 11-21-05 7:19 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Remeber it was BBC that reported on Weapons of Mass Destruction(the Main Source).
Goes back to the age old saying DO NOT BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR ! (unless you see it for yourself)...he he
 
Posted on 11-21-05 7:55 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

The major news organizations that dominate the global air whether it be from American towers or the British are the same.If we let our conscience controlled by the media,the problem lies on us not them.
None of the major news channel serves public with the facts of ground zero of world's affairs today.Do you think what fox expounds gets any where close to Al-jazeera?An independent viewer/listener draws his/her own conclusion after the news gets delivered.
Medias are biased to ceratin extent and that universal.If we want medias to play tunes that we like to hear,I think that lands us where we should question our own biasness?
 
Posted on 11-21-05 8:14 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

I am not talking about our personal interest but about BBC which belongs as much to me as to you. Well as a listener I have every rights to critically analyze what they broadcast.

But good to see someone admitting his mistake I hope BBC will do the same. :)

izen that was not the purpose of this debate but you are right in that point.

 
Posted on 11-21-05 8:33 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Biasness is the virtue in this world But Morally a news media shouldn't be biased I think!!!...They effect lots of their listeners and listeners have each and every right to complain against them is they feel so...
Now MR U seem to have swallowed a book in Media study...I smell professionalism here..:D..



 
Posted on 11-21-05 8:57 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Biasness with no firm standing is more dangerous than biasness itself.Biasness has evolved into plain blindedness.The war that looked imminent two springs back smells like a dead rat for most of the medias with an exception of some right-wing propagandist ones starting with the fox(the fair and balanced).Yeah right!!!
I have not heard BBC Nepali after the present King of Nepal orchastrated the blood holi since 2001.So I donot know.
It wouldn't be surprise if BBC nepali or whichever media speaks whatever language serving certain political groups.If media isn't fair in a so called fair balanced society how would it be fair in serving the most unfair society like ours.My two cents on media experiences.
 
Posted on 11-21-05 8:59 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Bottom line on this issue is that you should read news(any news) at your own discretion. If you look at any news organiztion, they all tend to tilt somewhere. We are all humans, and we all make mistakes(fact of life). But if they are purposely favoring one or the other, its up to you to make that adjustment. I don't think people are that gullible to take everything at face value.
 
Posted on 11-21-05 12:12 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Shirish,

I think the people here are talking about unpremeditated rather than premeditated or, at least, what can be called a SUBTLE bias. The points you made earlier are, therefore, not quite corresponding to the allegations made.

As far as Rabindra Mishra's article cited by the original poster is concerned, the concluding line of the following statement made by Rabindra is not even a bias or bending. It's somebody's pure imagination.

Rabindra's concluding para:
>The king has been repeatedly emphasising that
>the people and the international community must
>choose either him or the rebels, whom he always
>refers to as criminals.

>And, it seems, many are ready to choose him -
>despite the conditions attached.

Many are ready to choose the King ????

No, I am not questioning Rabindra's speculation. I mean he is entitled to his speculations. What is disturbing here is an implied assumption that King's case (me or the Maoists) has been bought/validated by public.

I have never heard any report (by BBC correspondence or any media) in which even a single person, forget about the whole public, buying King's "either me or them" case.

So the assertion that "many are ready to choose the King" is not originating from an objective reality. And whether the assertion is right or wrong, I will leave this to the readers themselves.

Nepe
 
Posted on 11-21-05 5:28 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Nepe ji

Nepe talks 'sense'. I admire and salute you for your very logical, balanced and descent views. Any journalistic writing in question (which is time bound and instigated by situation then), or for that matter any piece of writing (except some poetry which can be timeless), should be read in the context in which it was written.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4502455.stm

Rabindra Mishra wrote that article on 30th April 2005. At the time that article was written, definitely many (not all) including me, were ready to give the king the benefit of the doubt, things have changed now, but still he has not lost total control, but will change soon.

There are other articles I found Rabindra Mishra wrote and see the difference:


For king and country
The advocates of active monarchy need to closely examine why the past year has been a failure.


http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue165/opinion.htm


May 2002
What next? By CK Lal
http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue92/stateofthestate.htm

But there are some Nepalis abroad who think otherwise. Writing in Nepal, Rabindra Mishra of the BBC Nepali Service outlines four options for Nepali society:
(1) Apply pressure on our leadership to mend its ways;
(2) Submit to the direct rule of the king;
(3) Continue with the current apathy and lack of commitment; or
(4) Abjectly surrender to the demonic forces of Prachanda.

Check out option number 2


When asked:
What do you attribute the people?s trust in the BBC?s content to?
The BBC has always been a trusted source of impartial and factual reporting in Nepal. We believe it is important for consumers to have choices and a plurality of views on offer but at this time we are the only Nepali language station offering independent news and analysis on Nepal and as such we are striving to report the news as quickly, accurately and impartially as possible.
http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue238/radio.htm

 
Posted on 11-21-05 7:45 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Shirish,

Thanks a lot for your kind word and for bringing interesting discussion and materials.

As I said way up there, in my first posting, I feel BBC Nepali service as a whole has composed a distinct pro-democracy pose since Feb 1. So I am pretty happy with BBC, should I say, with it's favoring (instead of remaining neutral to !) with democratic kitta in Nepal.

As for Rabindrajee, I see him getting better and better everyday. I like his grilling. Although in one case (interview with Baburam Bhattarai), I share Paramendra Bhagat's sentiment (that it wasn't that professional).

And as for the line from the article mentioned, I am aware of the time it was written and I am also aware that the King was not without support.

There were traditional supporters. And there were some who offered reverse support to him (being pissed off with the political parties for reasons all too familiar) and some probably gave a genuine benefit of doubt to him, although I tend to believe that it was more of an abandon ("what the heck !" type) than giving a benefit of doubt ("you never know !" type).

In any case, I don't think the support other than the traditional one was too much. Even if it was too much, that's not what Rabindra's concluding line means.

The straightforward meaning of Rabindra's line is this- There are many people who are seeing that the choice is indeed between the King and the Maoists (as explained by the King) and they are taking the king's side.

My point was, nope, nobody is buying the King's argument. Those who were/are supporting the King are supporting him for other reasons.

How big was the support is a different question. I can argue about the implied assertion made in the article, but that's not my point. My point is that nobody, even those who supported the King, were buying King's silly argument. The choice for the supporters was 'political parties or the King' and not 'the Maoists or the King'.

That's all.


 
Posted on 11-22-05 10:54 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Nepe wrote:
As for Rabindrajee, I see him getting better and better everyday. I like his grilling. Although in one case (interview with Baburam Bhattarai), I share Paramendra Bhagat's sentiment (that it wasn't that professional).

I thought this interview taking business is like making hindi masala movies. The interviewer has to understand the sentiment of the GENERAL population (majority) to pass on the information rather than keeping in mind of the intellectuals and analysts like you or Parmendra.

I am beginnig to sound like a MOUTH-PIECE of RAbindra Mishra jee. Here is my last post on this with Rabindra Mishra's latest article.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4456036.stm

India's key role in Nepal affairs
By Rabindra Mishra
BBC Nepali service

Nepal politicians want a common front with rebels against the king
Recent clandestine meetings in India between leading Nepalese politicians and Maoist leaders have once again highlighted the crucial role India continues to play in Nepal's internal affairs.
Nepalese leaders have denied any face-to-face meeting with rebel leaders in India, let alone in a government guest house where talks are believed to have taken place.

For its part, India denies knowledge of any Maoist leaders on its soil and has declared them "terrorists". But it has been a long established fact that some top Maoist leaders do reside in India.

Since the 1 February royal coup, Nepalese leaders have regularly visited Delhi, but last week saw an unprecedented jamboree in the Indian capital.

Delhi 'check-ups'

What surprised many was the sudden visit of a leader of the Communist Party of Nepal (UML), Madhav Kumar Nepal, to Delhi.

It is very common for Nepalese political actors to maintain silence if the involvement of India helps them - and curse it if it does not


Mr Nepal's visit took place less than a week after he had returned from an extended three-week tour of India, during which he met several Indian leaders, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

As soon as he returned home, he had a series of meetings in Kathmandu with British Ambassador Keith Bloomfield, American ambassador James Moriarty and Indian Ambassador Shiv Shankar Mukherjee, as efforts to find a solution to Nepal's political impasse continued.

Mr Nepal then headed off to Delhi again after the meetings. Mr Moriarty, who has remained active in co-ordinating a uniform international approach towards Nepal, was already there.

Mr Nepal insisted he had gone for a "heart check-up", while Mr Moriarty said his was a regular visit for consultations with Indian officials.

Meanwhile, Nepali Congress president and former Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala was in Delhi too, also for a "health check-up".

And a leader of a smaller partner in Nepal's seven-party opposition alliance had gone there for his "son's health check-up". There were other leaders too.

Crucial time

What baffles many is the role Delhi is suspected to have played in all these movements.

Last week, the Indian foreign ministry denied any information about the latest meetings.


Politicians say they are trying to persuade Maoists to give up violence

However, some say it is difficult to believe that the movement of top Nepali leaders in the heart of Delhi and meetings with rebel leaders declared terrorists at a politically crucial time could have gone unnoticed by the Indian authorities or intelligence officials.

General Ashok Mehta, a leading Indian security expert, believes that Indian intelligence established links with the Nepalese Maoists at least two years ago.

Speaking to the BBC, he once said "in circumstances as that of the Maoists, government strategy is implemented through intelligence agencies and not the official channels".

However, Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran tries to avoid any direct reference to an alleged link between the Indian establishment and the rebels.

He said the Indian government was engaged in dialogue with all key political actors of Nepal, but did not mention the Maoists by name.

India was the first country to call the Maoists "terrorists" in September 2001, even before Nepal did so. At that time the Nepalese government was engaged in peace talks with the rebels.

Ironically, leading Maoist negotiator Krishna Bahadur Mahara travelled to Kathmandu from Delhi to participate in peace talks in November that year.

'Anti-nationalist'

India's role has been crucial in every major political change and the sustenance of such changes that Nepal has witnessed since the late 1940s.

After late King Mahendra sacked the elected government and took control of state power in 1960, the then Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, made his displeasure public.


Manmohan Singh (right) has urged King Gyanendra to restore democracy

However, within six months, his government had signed four aid agreements with Nepal and normal friendship resumed.

Many believe that the self-serving change in Indian attitude helped the continuation of the monarchy's rule for 30 years.

Similarly, many believe India played a crucial role in the collapse of the royal regime in 1990.

Supporters of the current king have been trying to portray Delhi-rushing leaders as "anti-nationalist".

However, it is very common for Nepalese political actors to maintain silence if the involvement of India helps them - and curse it if it does not.

The latest Delhi saga is only likely to strengthen the belief of many Nepalese that Kathmandu remains a hostage of Indian national interest, which they say, has led India to constantly manipulate the politics of its tiny, land-locked neighbour.





 
Posted on 11-22-05 1:38 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Guys did you listen todays [22/11/2005] BBC chautari . Rabindra Misra has taken interview with KP Oli.
 
Posted on 11-22-05 5:42 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Shirish,

Taking interview is indeed an art. Art of getting more and interesting information from the interviewee. In case of the interview with Baburam Bhattarai, Rabindra, at some point, was wasting precious time by getting his own emotion out rather than getting more information out of Bhattarai. Hence the allegation of unprofessionalism.

On the latest article, some of Rabindrajee's remarks remind me of his graduate thesis (I had read the article form of that somewhere, however I can not locate it now).

In that, as far as I remember, Rabindrajee was trying to make, through a long list of "evidences" of India's inconsistent policies towards the insurgency, a case of the role of India in proliferating Maoist insurgecy.

The fundamental flaw in that thesis (I mean the case, not the whole thesis) was to take INCONSISTENCY for CONSISTENCY.

Inconsistency is inconsistency. Inconsistency does not prove anything, it only points to something-- something beyond the reference of the current knowledge. For anything to be proved, it has to be consistent. Only consistency proves. Nothing else does.

Now about India's INCONSISTENT policies towards the Maoists. What do they mean ?

Well, that has remained a million dollar question to so many of us.

To me, India's inconsistent policies towards Nepali Maoists for past several years reflected, in part, the undeclared difference between India's understanding of democracy and Nepal's official notion of democracy which Rabindrajee also appeared taking it for granted in the past.

Failure to think about it at least as an alternative explanation to the inconsistent policies of India was a major flaw in Rabindra's thesis or so I think.

However, as I said, I am saying all this from my fading memory of what I read years ago.
___
 



PAGE: <<  1 2  
Please Log in! to be able to reply! If you don't have a login, please register here.

YOU CAN ALSO



IN ORDER TO POST!




Within last 7 days
Recommended Popular Threads Controvertial Threads
TPS Work Permit/How long your took?
मन भित्र को पत्रै पत्र!
Another Song Playing In My Mind
Does the 180 day auto extension apply for TPS?
Travelling to Nepal - TPS AP- PASSPORT
NOTE: The opinions here represent the opinions of the individual posters, and not of Sajha.com. It is not possible for sajha.com to monitor all the postings, since sajha.com merely seeks to provide a cyber location for discussing ideas and concerns related to Nepal and the Nepalis. Please send an email to admin@sajha.com using a valid email address if you want any posting to be considered for deletion. Your request will be handled on a one to one basis. Sajha.com is a service please don't abuse it. - Thanks.

Sajha.com Privacy Policy

Like us in Facebook!

↑ Back to Top
free counters