Loading...

Sunday, June 24, 2012

'Internet Hindus' Culprits or Victims???






It is a real achievement to get a fairly apolitical neo-Platonist who cares more about the Roman Empire than any present political entity to be annoyed about the spate of articles about “internet Hindus,” “trolls,” and the “Right wing.” But first, it was that Raman piece about NaMo and his trolls, and then a piece in the Hindustan Times, and now Global Post’s latest article, Meet the Internet Hindus.” To be fair, this third piece is describing the phenomenon, and is far more objective than most twitter comments or the other two articles. In any case, let me make a few points clear to you moderns:  “Just for the Record”  Has more than fittingly dealt with this article by Mr. Jason Overdorf.

My take on this article is lacking on three counts 1.) Research 2.) Victims presented are the actual culprits  3.) Evidence presented has been ignored. 

Media in India is largely left leaning and has arrogated to itself many labels and rights including that of outrage. Moment we peel off one label we encounter another, its like the onion as you peel a skin the next one is there to contend with, only difference it’s not the viewer who has tears in his eyes, it’s the media which is whining while it wipes it’s tears. 

Deficiency of research is a major shortcoming in this article, not just this but maybe he is also unaware Indian media may probably be the only one in the world, which is in a state of conflict with its consumers. Ironic as it may seems it’s a hard fact. Print and Electronic media published comments convenient to them, edited some and totally ignored those which were critical as per the narrow definition of the media houses. This has been happening for over 10years. Blogs and Twitter have provided that section of the society a platform to air their views whose voice had been effectively throttled by the media houses.

Natural corollary is breaking down of the established secure order so enjoyed by all the media and its population. Blog and Twitter have exposed them to a counter narrative which has totally benumbed them all and hence the victim hood is the favored route.

Three individuals that Mr. Overdorf presents as victims are in fact the culprits. Sagarika Ghose, Barkha Dutt and Namita Bhandare are the ultimate ASS no don’t get your heckles up, all it means is “Attention Seeking Syndrome.”  

Lets deal with each of the victims so presented by the author.

Sagarika Ghose who proudly claims to have coined this term Internet Hindu is a typical case of a juvenile mind housed in an adult. How many of us have either experienced this or seen it happen, younger sibling who provokes the elder sibling get a whack in return and goes weeping to momma complaining about the elder sibling. The screen shots will prove that beyond doubt she provokes to attract attention.  These 10 screenshots were available to the author did he confront this so called victim. Why was the Tweet about Lord Ram a Divine Encroacher deleted by her. Lacks of conviction, courage or plain simple mischief making.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
If she coins a name its but natural a counter will be there to it and she is the Media Jehadi, who lacks patience and ability to engage in a debate. Twisting Tweets and using fake interviews of Sri Sri Ravi Shanker are some other feathers in her cap. On the basis of this evidence doubt it if she can stake a claim to being a victim, on the contrary she is the Culprit who should have been removed from the organization for her unacceptable conduct. The issue is not just of this individual, but also the channel. She would have been sacked for her indiscretions which are a plenty in any other organization. Here she is protected due to her marital ties. 
 
Barkha Dutta has a serious problem of credibility ever since her role has been exposed by Radia Tapes. Her belief that public memory is short is just not holding true. Longer she stay higher is the degree of disgust with her. These screen shots will more than establish that she indulges in use of unacceptable language and if she get paid in full measure in return how can she claim to be victim. Inciting others who support her to indulge in abuse is also her way of life on Twitter. Calling those tweeters as guttersnipe who do not agree with her is definitely civil by her standards. Here again the issue is not just individual but the channel also.
 
 
    
 
Namita Bhandare is some one who had followed me on Twitter sometime last month, at the very outset I had informed her about my disposition towards the so called Journalists and forwarded to her the link to an article which was a rejoinder to her post in Hindustan Time, response was prompt unfollowing by her, not that it made any difference to me. The screen shots are self explanatory need one say who is abusive and who is the victim.
Here again the issue is that the publication and it’s personnel are biased and anti majority.
 
 
 
I have been on Twitter for over two and half years with over 104000 Tweet not one has been abusive or has been deleted because it was unacceptable. I am yet to encounter abusive Tweeters, do not contest the claims that there are abusive tweeters also, one has to deliberately invite them and this is what your so called victims have been indulging in.

Did these individuals present any evidence or their word was enough to classify them as victims. Did they describe what in their scheme of things was Liberalism? How they had the right to be called Liberal? While the only thing liberal about them that comes through is abusive and provocative language and actions.

Mr. Jason Overdorf cannot deny that @Sureshnakhua during the course of the interview with author did provide the evidence collated in the article  “Twitter a case of Fatal attraction or twitter a case of a sting in the tale (not tail)?"  Why it was overlooked is best explained by the man himself?


In conclusion wish a more thorough research had been done before writing the article. Finally as a tweeter 
@barbarindian has aptly stated “Media is a crime scene always take a screen shot.” 



Latest update on 17th Aug 2013
What particularly disturbs me is the way in which sections of the mainstream media and others in positions of power use the worst of what happens online to condemn all that happens online. One manifestation of this is the way in which the word “troll” has been appropriated by sections of the mainstream and redefined.  



Latest update on 27th Nov 2012
Latest update on 11th Nov 2012
 Latest update on 01st July 2012
 
I welcome a debate and discussion on this…As always, please keep your tone civil, your language polite…no sweeping generalisations please and no personal abuse.  Thank you.