Anchor: Welcome back to GBTV’s continual coverage of the Dhoni-Rawat marriage or as we call it The Dawat, perhaps the most significant media event after the Abhishek Bachchan-Aishwarya Rai marriage, which again was the most significant media event after the Lord Rama-Sita wedding. In light of the gravity of the occasion, we have in our studios,  cricket expert and part-time ramp model Rameez Sivaramakrishnan Lal, who has been our chief correspondent for all Dhoni-related news.

RSL: Thanks for having me here.

Anchor: So for our viewers please, set the context for this historical event.

RSL: Gladly. It has been well known for many years now, MSD’s success as a bachelor is matched only by his inability to pass it. He has been linked to Laxmi (who said among other things that Dhoni is affectionate ), Deepika,  Asin and numerous other principally South Indian hotties. Not just that, there have been headlines like “Dhoni holidays with Rudra Pratap in Mussourie” (with Star News Hindi even carried a special news item about RP and Dhoni to the romantic lyrics of “Aja mein haowaon beethake le chaloon” [Must see video]) . Considering the fact that yet another Sri Lanka tour is coming up, a time that many Indian cricketers lapse into depression due to sheer boredom, it became imperative that MSD got hitched immediately.

Anchor: Interesting. So tell us more about Sakshi Singh Rawat, whose name many people have pointed out does contain “Rakhi Sawant” in it.

RSL: Well it is difficult to know something about someone who does not have a Twitter account nowadays since that’s basically where we source our news from. We did discover her Facebook profile and from that we know that she likes “Desperate Housewives” and “Likes” the Rahul Gandhi page. We know she has a cocker spaniel named Joey and that she  has watched Robert Pattinson’s “Twilight” at least ten times…

Anchor: So since she likes vampires, I am sure she will fit right into the Indian cricket administrative community….

RSL: Well we do know for sure she is not much into cricket. Where things do get fuzzy is her age which is reported variously as twenty-three or twenty-one. This is very interesting as according to some versions……

Anchor: Sorry to interrupt you but we have breaking news that a Peshawar court (yes they exist !) has ruled that having intimate relation with Afridi will be statutory rape, since he is still below the legal age of consent.

RSL (irritated at being disturbed) As according to some versions, they fell in love with each other in high school. Considering Dhoni is 29 and she is 21, that would mean he played out a lot of dot balls in school.

Anchor: So what were the controversies? Who did not make the invitation list?

RSL: Well of course there was some heartburn regarding the invitations. For instance, Charu Sharma, under the impression that people even remembered who he was, expressed some personal sadness by saying “I have not been invited, but what I can say is that Ms Rawat is truly a lucky girl” [Link]. Yuvraj Singh was once again not selected for an invitation, reportedly because Dhoni was afraid he would over-eat and add two more inches to his waist, and Sehwag perhaps once again developed a shoulder injury at an appropriate time.

There was also some confusion in the media as to what color sherwani Dhoni wore. Some reported it as green [NDTV], some as blue [Economic Times] and some as black [Hindu]. There is conjecture that he wore all three sherwanis, none of which were yellow, to show different IPL franchises that he was available for a transfer out of Chennai. Some also speculated whether Raina’s dance at the wedding was the “Mere yaar ki shaadi hai” type or the “Raja ki aayegi baraat magan main nachoongi” type.

Anchor: Any feel good stories?

RSL:  Well I would say this:

Ashish, the man who got the mare that Dhoni rode to the wedding, was ecstatic at having the Indian skipper as a client. Said he, “Dhoni asked me the name of the mare. I told him it had two names, Rani and Bobby. He liked the second better. At the end of the ride, he gave me Rs 5,001.”

What many dont know is that Ashish’s mare went “Neeeehhhraaaa” all throughout.

Anchor: Oh from the mention of the word “Bobby”, I was thinking of some other fast bowler.

Anchor: Finally, reactions from the man in the street?

RSL: Well, there has been the predictable “Why not me, Mahi” , a slogan originally used by Amit Mishra after his omission from the team, outcry from women all over, including perhaps from well-lighted areas where he is known to make stops.

My home is just a few kilometres away from Dhoni’s, but now he seems further away,” says Sumedha Sinha, a die-hard ‘lover’ from the cricketer’s hometown in Jharkhand. Her family is now ruing for “not sending the rishta on right time.” “Why her (Sakshi)? Oh God,” laments Sumedha. “Couldn’t Mahi have waited for some more time? Sakshi is 21, after all,” tweeted ManishaT.

This year I’ll no longer be sending him birthday wishes on Facebook, not to a married man, of course,” says DU student Shalini Raj. Incidentally, Dhoni will be celebrating his 29th birthday on Wednesday.

But there have been positive reactions like this wherein the art of keeping is related to the art of being a husband—–which makes sense because in both you are supposed to be patient and relaxed and most importantly, well-balanced. [Link]

Dhoni’s former Central Coalfields Limited (CCL) team captain and a serving official in the public sector, Adil Hussain, said, “He knows what system works for him. He keeps well behind the wickets. He will also do well as a husband

Anchor: Well it’s time for our commercial break. Before we go, we would like to thank RSL….any closing comments.

RSL: Well, some great captains first get married to someone from Kolkata and then try their luck down South. While some other great captains first try their luck down South and then get married to someone from Kolkata. But ultimately all that counts is the legacy they leave behind in the trophy cabinet.

Anchor: Err…..yes that’s very profound. Join us in a little while as we continue with our breaking news coverage of the Harbhajan Geeta Basra breakup and the exclusive Gibbs-Payal hook-up in our segment “You just dropped the World Cup”. Till then, India keep watching.

[Acknowledgments to @prempanicker and @sidvee and many others on twitter for giving me some of these links]

Recently I’ve become increasingly convinced that I’m not an Indian. After all, it is possible that someone did a baby switch at Breach Candy Hospital where I was born, or that my parents have carefully hidden the truth about me for 40 years.

Quick proof that I’m not Indian? I have no furious loyalties to the Baganapalli or Alphonso. In fact, I can think of at least six fruits that I prefer to the mango. I have never eaten an entire paan or a pot of mishti doi (though I have tried both) and I don’t spit in public or private (except for that one time I tried a meetha paan).

I don’t understand that other national obsession, cricket, either. White is not my favourite skin colour. I don’t read Chetan Bhagat or Paulo Coelho. I feel depressed every time I wear a salwar-kameez. No sir, I will not discuss my private life with a stranger on a train journey. And I don’t think I’ve ever begun a conversation with: “You’ve lost/gained so much weight!”

I don’t like (or understand) a single Indian soap currently on air. I never talk loudly to my maid, stockbroker or random friend during a movie. I always wait to let people exit an elevator before I enter. I don’t believe that Mumbai’s moviegoers should be forced to stand to attention every time they want to see Shrek (or anyone else) on the big screen. I don’t feel pride—only impatience that my popcorn’s getting cold—when I’m forced to listen to Lata/Asha do a slow-mo version of the national anthem before every single movie I watch in the city of my birth.

Is being “uncouth”, as manifested through acts of varying degrees of distastefulness (spitting, liking Paulo Coelho, remarking about other people’s weight), synonymous with being Indian, as if being one necessarily implies the other? If that be the case, Bullah ki jaana main kaun?

I love cricket, have a genuine appreciation for subaltern music videos of the “Eh Buchi bolo seal kaha tuthi” type and do not feel bad that my popcorn is getting cold when I am asked to make a gesture, however symbolic, in honor of those people who have made it possible for me to sit in an AC multiplex and enjoy a movie. Which possibly means I am Indian.

But at the same time, I do not spit in public, do not inquire about people’s weights (purely to avoid any reference to mine), do not talk loudly to anyone, find Paulo Coelho grossly over-rated and do not refer to domestic help as “maids”.

So who am I? If you ask me to settle the issue, I would say I am unabashedly and proudly, yes proudly, Indian.

The confusion regarding identity is even more confounded when I think of my father, a former professor of Indian Institute of Management Calcutta and an intellectual legend in his time. He does not appreciate any of the lowbrow things I so admire and neither does he spit in public, nor does poke his nose in other people’s affairs. He also does not raise his voice.  By definition then, he should not be Indian.

But he refers to himself as an Indian.

So if I take him at face value (i.e. of being Indian) , does that mean he is automatically not “serious scholar” enough (Gurucharan Das is quoted as saying ““Basically, after independence we did not produce any serious scholars,”)?

Even more disturbing, has he been secretly reading Chetan Bhagat?

Today, when I was going to the airport from a client meeting,  I saw the driver, a non-South Asian true-blue son of the Pennsylvanian soil, spitting out from the driver’s seat onto the road. Should I have been convinced then that he was Indian and asked for a des-wala bhai discount? When I got stuck, a few weeks before, right behind two other pure red-white-and-blues who got out of their cars mouthing obscenities in a raised voice after a fender-bender in front of a College Park shopping plaza, should I have tried talking to them in Hindi?

I just don’t get it.

What I do get is this. And I agree whole-heartedly .

I don’t think we’re the greatest people on earth

Absolutely we are not. No country is. Yet everyone says they are. If I had a dollar every time someone on US TV, including intellectual powerhouses like Obama and columnists of the best newspapers in the world (and no I am not referring to Fox News anchors), say “There is no doubt that America is the greatest nation of all” and similar hyperbole,  I would have been able to buy myself a ticket in a major party to contest an Indian election.

Similarly outrageous is the chest-thumping  desi patriotism that makes us go “Ooh Aaah India” during a cricket match, a feel-good buzz as empty as the calories of the products of the companies who sponsor such slogans.

No doubt that.

However being proud of one’s country does not imply a belief in its “bestness” and its infallibility. As a matter of fact, patriotism lies in accepting our faults (and we have many, a few of which Ms. Ramani mentions). But that should not be taken to an extreme because then we lose sight of what it is we have got right. And once that happens, we stop working to safeguard it.

When I say I am proud of being an Indian, I mean I am proud of its culture of plurality and its intrinsic tolerance of contrarianism. This is why in a major newspaper someone can say this below, without any fatwa for boycotting of the paper or dire consequences of the Danish kind.

Personally, I’ve always believed Ram was a loser and I have no idea why Sita didn’t leave him many years before he threw a tantrum that resulted in her walking through fire. The first time I heard some goon in the Bharatiya Janata Party use the words Ram Rajya, I wanted to vomit. Vomit, not spit, I said.

As an example, in the US, when Sinead O’Connor tore up a picture of the Pope (mind you not Jesus Christ), NBC was fined by the Federal Communications Commission for USD 2.5 million dollars and the reaction of other stars, like Sinatra and Joe Pesci to her act, might be interesting to read. [Link]. The only time in which anything against the Pope or Christ would be allowed in the US on public fora would be if there was a humorous context and only when the comedian is an “equal opportunities offender” (i.e. skewers all holy cows). But the above paragraph, as far as I understand, was not one written in jest or with a creative purpose.

The Indian spirit of acceptance is something that is often not in evidence in some of the “freest countries of the world”. USA is a country that prides itself (and this is to a large extent justified) on its inherent egalitarianism. But still many people have a problem with Hillary Clinton becoming a President just because she is a woman.  When the Republican smear machine rakes up Obama’s Muslim origins, the Democrats say “He is not Muslim. No no not at all” rather than saying “So what if he is a Muslim? Why should that it be a problem?” South-Asian origin politicians like Nicky Haley and  Bobby Jindal have hit big-time only after converting and strongly advertising their Christian faith. And by the way, the US is not a Christian nation. [Link and Link] so there is no constitutional reason why there should be no realistic chance of a non-Christian/non-Jewish person holding positions of high authority.

In contrast, we in India have been far more accepting of our religious minorities and of women being represented in the highest offices of power. Can you imagine, a foreign-born woman having as her religion one not held by the majority and who speaks the native language in a very tentative way, becoming the most powerful person in any other land? I cannot.

However in today’s India it is this tolerance which is under the most attack. Violent gangs, of for-hire goons, under the guise of “taking offense” are terrorizing people who express their opinions or lead lifestyles “not acceptable”—-attacking pubs, raising fatwas and pouring invective on the Net. Books are being banned, offices are being destroyed in the conflagration of “spontaneous displays of anger”.  There is a justification for this too—”For far too long, we have taken insults lying down. Can so-and-so say the same thing in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan about their God without any kind of repercussion?”

Here is when I want to say in response—-”Yes but that’s why we are not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan”. And I intend for my country to stay that way. No politician, even if they born outside the country, should be deprived of their right to exploit and misrule the country. No speech, no matter how hurtful, should be met with threats of violence or crude language.

Unfortunately, we are marching fast down a path of competitive intolerance, one that will lead to us to become a mirror of Pakistan, characterized by bigotry of the worst kind.

When and if that comes to pass, then yes I am going to raise questions about my identity as an Indian.

But till that happens, it is vital, at least for me, to not only recognize what ails us but also what does not, to stay grounded between the extremes of self-flagellation and gratuitous back-slapping.

[Link] Full URL: http://www.mid-day.com/entertainment/2010/jan/120110-shah-rukh-wishes-bipasha.htm (screenshot taken on Jan 12th around 11 am EST)

Today’s theorem: If your last name is Basu and you wear red, you can only be Bipasa Basu.

Get well soon.

[Update: Blogging infrequently due to final draft of book.]

As the year comes to a close, it is time to give out the annual Howitzer Awards instituted by RTDM to recognize excellence in news reporting and honor all those inveterate media outlets who have brought to us news as it should be presented, in its pristine pure form, bereft of all sensationalism and falsehoods, presented with the help of beautiful rigid prose and aesthetic visuals.

This award once used to be almost the exclusive monopoly of the entertainment section of Indiadaily whose reporters-at-large Pam Bhandari and Lala Larani went everywhere,  bringing news no one else would dare to—chronicling topless fights of Bollywood celebs in nightclubs, use of unwashed underwear and other personal hygiene issues of celebrities, and lesbian domino effects in Mumbai [A detailed analysis of the site here]

However all good things come to an end and Indiadaily’s entertainment section is very infrequently updated nowadays, which some conjecture may have been due to the collapse of  investment banks like “Bares and Stares” and “Titigrope” . Though nice headlines like “Kareena goes wild on Sardar Saif” and “Priyanka Shahid stare at each other” with balle balle prose like “she went wild and nuts when she saw Sardar Saif. Kareena says she cannot resist her passion for Saif when she him in Sardar dress” can still be found, they are nothing close to the dizzying standards set in previous years.

So here are this year’s awards, presented in a new way.

Howitzer for Photo-journalism: Goes to this amazing series of photos taken of Amisha Patel at Shilpa Shetty’s wedding. Not only does the photographer,  in the best traditions of wild-life photography, catch Amisha Patel at vital moments keeping in mind exactly what the average reader (male) would like to see and not only makes a subtle suggestion of Picasso’s blue period but he also layers in the kind of genius that we at the Howitzer committee so love. Namely lovely captions like “Yeh dhai kilo ka haath” extolling the femininity of her Sunny forearms and “Yeh andar ki baat hain“  when the actress’s inner beauty is revealed.

Howitzer for Politically Correct Reporting: In a charming piece of politically correct reporting, this awardee article had the following headline “How Deepika Padukone got her Chinki eyes” which was changed, for reasons unknown (perhaps the Chinese government objected to it, like they have objected to India building railroads and dams inside its own territory and also to Badshah snack corner near Shyambajar in Kolkata calling its oily concoction “chow mein”) to “Secret behind Deepika’s Chinese look revealed!” . For proof of the original headline, google “How Deepika Padukone got her Chinki eyes” for mirrors of the original article like the one here and here.

Howitzer for Use of Old World English:  Goes to this headline which simply says “Priyanka Chopra’s Still Gay”.

Howitzer For Most Stinking Headline: Goes to this headline which again simply says “Gas is not Ambanis’ private property: Govt”

Howitzer For Best Celebrity Wedding Coverage: Goes to Zoom “Isko dekho” TV for their breaking of (with sound effects) the story wherein Akshay Kumar’s ghost was sighted in different forms at Shilpa Shetty’s wedding [Video] (Shilpa Shetty having some “history” with Akshay Kumar, being part of an exclusive set of Akkites that consist of about 37% of India’s female population)

Howitzer For Patriotic Reporting: While our government, in perhaps a bit of misplaced honesty, tells the world how vulnerable we are to terror in the process making us even more terrified than we already are, trust India TV to assure us that we are as safe and snug as a politician under Z++ category. In yet another example of great investigative reporting [Video], it tells us of a magical machine that the Indian government possesses, whose code name is “Osama ka baap, Dawood ka Dada, Headley ka chacha” ,  a machine which is so magical that if you just place your hand on it then it can say if you are a terrorist or not.

Howitzer for Best Scientific Reporting: This one was the toughest. Would it be “Himalaya main kyon baar baar ate hain Aliens”, India TV’s expose on cross-terrestrial infiltration? [Video] Would it be the exclusive story of four year old child Happy who in his previous birth used to be a man called Sukhvinder and wants to now stay with the parents from his previous birth [Video]? Would it be the elaborately researched story which tells the shocked audience that “Insaan ka satta ka THE END” is imminent with  “Robot Raaj” round the corner and where visual proof being provided by actual footage from documentaries like Terminator and I Robot? Would it be the “not even the X Files had this one” story of the udan tastari that was sighted, the one with the most dangerous aliens known to man—-”Nimboo” (Lemon) Aliens led by presumably their leader Lime and Lemony Limca [Video] ? Would it be the startling revelation that many millions of years ago a metor hit near Mumbai and it was this one single meteor responsible for the extermination of the dinosaurs (“Mumbai mein mahavinash aaya tha”) because evidently “Mumbai dinosauron ka adda tha“, a revelation that becomes a soon-to-be-realized prophecy of obsolescence  if you replace “dinosauron” with the word “Bihariyon” and the “M-ahavi-N-a-S-hkari meteor” with the letters that stand boldly capital [Video]?

This one is a tie.

Howitzeron Ka Howitzer:  The best of the best. India TV wins it for answering the most important question of them all, the one whose answer the entire nation wants. And what is that?

Simple.

“Kiske paas hai Katrina ki pant?” (Who has Katrina’s pants?)[Video]

Watch it and worship.

[And yes if you want to give an award to the Howitzer committee, then please vote for Random Thoughts of a Demented Mind  in Category 1 and Category 5 at the Indibloggies. ] (More details about the Indibloggies awards here)

[Acknowledgments for India TV video uploads: Aseem Chandaver]

Titled descriptively as “Nirlajj Ne Nashe Main Luti Kutiya Ki Izzat” this piece informed us of a horrific act of man-beast interaction that cannot be described in English, an act that led to the dog refusing to eat or drink and ending with the police assuring concerned citizens that the said kutiya will not be produced in court.

Now I would normally just kept it at this tweet and filed it away in a corner of mind, to use this as a cautionary tale to people who are drinking too much, but then thanks to Gaurav‘s Facebook status messages I stumbled across two priceless videos on this incident brought to you by the fearless reporters at Mid Day, the newspaper eulogized in the song   “Suraaj Hua Madhyam”, two videos that so impressed me that I felt I needed to make my point in more than 140 characters.

So what was it about the videos that so moved me? Simply the dedication of the newspaper  in covering the story from all angles. First of all, in the first video, the heroic lady who saved the dog from the man’s amorous advances is asked to give a blow-by-blow or more precisely ungli-by-ungli account of what she saw, all for the purpose of a higher truth.

And then in an even greater Pulitzer-worthy (or at least Howitzer-worthy) bit of journalism (must watch video), the brave crime reporter goes to the police and asks them not only hard-hitting perceptive questions like whether the policeman saw the perp’s trousers unzipped (” Trouser wouser…… kahe rahe ki zip khuli hui thi. Sir kya aap ne khud ne aapne aaankhon se dekha hai?“) but also tries to get into the mind of the criminal. For instance she asks the police officer whether the man’s canine-love act can be explained by the fact that he was missing his wife who was away in the village delivering a baby ( to mere khayal se woh miss kar raha hoga usko yeh ek wajaah ho sakti hain) and tries to investigate whether some movie inspired him to do it (ek do din pahele kuch phillim dekhi thi kya) and lastly asks whether the man was a “psychic” (“yeh pyschic hain kya kuch dimaagi problem“) —-in the process giving a 360 perspective of a story so lacking nowadays.

Since I am not a psychic (nor for that matter a psycho), I wont be able to say whether the bitch triggered off some remembrance of things past or whether the man can read minds or see the future but I may conjecture that he might have seen the movie “Chingari” (review) starring Prabhuji as Bhuvan Panda, the lustful priest where he repeatedly refers to Sushmita Sen (playing his paramour) as a “manoranjak kutiya” before consorting with her in the most bizarre ways possible.

In any case, this has been an incident most foul and all one can do is sum it up with that line from Kaminey “Yeh duniya badi kutti cheez hai”

–A Few Good Men

Yes we cannot. I agree with the honorable MPs from Samajwadi Party and the BJP and the MLAs from Madhya Pradesh that “truth” is against Indian culture.

Indeed the very concept should be banned.

And so should “Sach Ka Samna” since it claims to be based on the truth.

This is why I so much love our politicians.  At a time when the nation is under attack from multiple agents ranging from Pakistan to Rakhi Sawant, they still remember to use their time in Parliament to do things that truly matter, insulating us  from influences that seek to corrupt and defile us.

Because “Sach Ka Samna” is an abomination. Khulbushan Kharbanda’s character in Gupt said “Kuch baatein gupt raheni chahiye”.  Some things are best kept secret. For instance, I think the nation needed to be protected from recurring mental images of Vinod Kambli running naked for 100 metres  on a dare from Sachin,  of Urvashi Dholakia, famous for her role in the “sleeper” (literally) international hit , the innovately titled “Chumban the Kiss”  doing soo-soo in swimming pool and of a desperately old cad confessing to stealing bedsheets from a hotel.

Another thing that I personally need to be protected from is the realization that we as a nation are as bad as the worst of them when it comes to totally debasing ourselves for a few seconds in the limelight. In 1999, when I came to the US one of the things I truly enjoyed, before going for my 9:30 morning class on Formal Languages and Automata Theory was to watch “Jerry Springer” over a bowl of Raisin Bran. For those of you who have not yet had the delight of experiencing “Jerry Springer” it is a “reality talk” show where guests come on and reveal their most intimate secrets to their loved ones. Secrets like a woman confessing to her husband of five years that she really is a man (don’t ask) or a man telling his wife on the show that he has been sleeping not only with the wife’s sister but with also her brother. The audience of course was most sympathetic, usually goading the participants to throw chairs at each other or shouting in unison “take it off” if any of the woman guests caught their fancy (there were even two stripper poles kept next to the stage just in case). And yes the guests usually obliged the audience chants.

“Jerry Springer” was a guilty pleasure. For one, it was good to know that there existed a group of people whose life was even more screwed up than mine was. Second it gave me a fuzzy “feel-good”  that publicity-seeking mad-men who would bring out their worst secrets on national TV for the 15 seconds of fame it afforded them could only be found in the  “West” and that in India no one would be as crazy as to voluntarily come on TV to discover things like who his real father on live TV or who actually impregnated his wife or to find out his grandpa’s darkest secret (namely that he does midget adult movies)

Well not any more.

Now thanks to reality TV like “Sach Ka Samna” we are forced to accept as fact what we have slowly come to suspect over the past few years— that average Indian is as much taken with the idea of infamy as their brethren across the ocean, as willing to besmirch their names in front of the world as anyone else (Remember that “truth” is often not owned by just the person revealing it—there may be other people associated with the shocking truth whose reputations are also being ripped on TV without them having any say in the matter)

This is why, in order to keep up appearances of decency and to suppress the truth about ourselves, that I demand (like our most wise politicians) that  “Sach Ka Samna”  be banned.

Till that happens though, I will keep tuning in. Cause it’s jolly good fun.

For those, who like the Magna-mainaak (submerged Mainaak mountain) have been hiding underneath the ocean for thousands of years and have no idea of what I am talking about, a brief re-cap.

Urvashi is the most famous “item girl” in the universe (or as we call her round here “apsara”) who became supposedly “irresistible” after being granted several boons by the God of Plastic Surgery, Implanta-karma.  She initially made her name by doing provocative dance numbers like “Mohabbat Hain Chili” and managing numerous other small-time little-clothed appearances in several Indrasabha programs. However she catapulted into universal limelight only after being kissed by Mika-asura (famous for setting fire to the rains), in full view of Trinayana (television cameras). This was followed by another explosive appearance on a reality show “Bada Boss”. Since then Urvashi has been controversy’s child, forever in the media with her opinions being sought on cricket, terrorism and even on whether Mahishasura needs a deodorant.

A few months ago, after a failed relationship with male-apsara, mega-nautanki-baaz Abhi-Shake and after much nationally-televised drama, Urvashi floated a universal tender for herself and decided to get married in front of the Trinayana (the television cameras) with the three worlds as witnesses. Thus was born “Urvashi Ka Swayamvar” as sixteen worthies, representing Dev Danav and Manav came from the far reaches of the galaxies to win her fair hand.

Vidur: And now only a handful remain and the excitement everywhere is palpable.

Narada: You don’t say. How is this for appreciation? A viewer, a God in fact by the name of Aranya Dev writes in —-”Urvashi Ka Swayamvar is  must-watch evening viewing. I have always been intrigued by how Lord Mahadeva bore Halahala (the Great Poison) in his neck during the Great Churning Of the Ocean (Samudra Manthan). Watching “Urvashi Ka Swayamvar” gives me some sense of what he went through as I feel my body turn blue every evening.

Vidur: That’s extreme. But amazing. Or as Urvashi says “Amaaaaaaizing”. What I find so appealing about Urvashi, besides her saying “mother-in-low” and “father-in-low” and “Shock ho gayee” and “Woh off ho gya” (to denote someone’s death) and “Aap mere liye thande hain” (I find you cool) and  “Tank You”,  is her honesty or as the Danavs call it “Bind-Ass-ness”. Take for example her age. Whenever any of the contestants tell her his age, she is always concerned that she is six years elder to him. So as the contestant’s ages vary, so does hers in a wide spread.

Narada: Most astute. After all, age like bra size is just a number.

Vidur: Aha you betray your bachelorhood. A bra-size is actually alpha-numeric.

Narada: Whatever. But you bring up an interesting point. Bachelor parties. Urvashi very openly makes a clean breast of her bachelor-party dancing past though of course she remarks that no touching was involved. Ever.

Vidur: Yes. Good you mention that. It was indeed bravely honest of her to lay bare in front of all how her father abandoned her, how her mother and sister and brother and boyfriend all exploited her and how she, like a blameless all-sacrificing martyr who makes even Jesus-Dev look ordinary, worked herself to death for them. Most people would not talk about their pasts, even when it makes the halos round their heads brighter at the cost of others.

Narada: Of course I should mention there was some controversy regarding that. Some people believed that Urvashi’s hammering of her family on universal TV was rather unfair and poor form (especially since she eliminated a contestant for not being respectful of his mother) since those being vilified were not there to give their side of their story. But then again Urvashi has never shied away from controversy and neither would the channel want her to for that matter.

Vidur:  The biggest controversy in my mind of course was Urvashi eliminating a contestant who dared ask her about her past. The nerve of that guy ! Not only was he very probing in general but he also had the gall to inquire whether she has engaged in a physical relationship with her ex. Critics of Urvashi said it was hypocritical for her to get so angry at being asked genuine questions people encounter before getting married, especially since Urvashi who makes such a show of bind-ass-ness had asked her prospective grooms to ask her anything they wanted.

Narada: What bull. Even a bachelor like me knows that when a woman says “Ask me everything” she means exactly the opposite.  Every husband knows when wifey puts on a dress and asks “How do I look darling? Please be honest” you don’t say “You look like a blue whale wearing a circus tent”. No. You say “You look delicious. I could eat you right now”.

I mean every other contestant knew that. Given the opportunity to ask Urvashi  questions, they waxed eloquent about how ethereal she looked, how heavenly she was and how they wanted to spend eternity looking at her emmm eyes. Why did that guy have to ask her “those questions”?

Vidur: Right. When Ganga-ji married King Shantanu she laid down the rule that he was not to ask her any questions. He didnt utter a word when she started drowning her new-borns. The day he said something, we all know what happened. Didn’t that manav learn a lesson from this story? Did King Pandu ever ask Queen Kunti why Arjun and Bheema look nothing like him? If he did, then perhaps we would not have gotten the greatest warriors of all time but instead merely a few Pandu Havaldars. Hah !

Narada: Point. Point. To me what’s most appealing is Urvashi’s “child-woman” appeal—-her babylike innocence, her “cho chweet” smile, her closed eyes, her making faces at the camera in the style of Sree Devi, her desire to have a wedding like Plastic-Arya Rai (she even got the same designer Langda Lulla who designed Plastic’s wedding ensemble to do hers) , the Yash Chopra “Mere Khawabon Main Jo Aaye” “Pativrata Indian nari “thing she has going (note how she takes ghunghat in one of the prospective groom’s parents house but does not forget to show some cleavage and navel), the fresh lady of indeterminate age awakening to love and romance, a love she feels for many contestants, in the best traditions of Draupadi.

Vidur: Aaah. Some asshole Danavs of course run her down saying that this whole show is all about Urvashi playing out a gigantic Hindi movie fantasy—– repeating cliched filmi dialog (like how despite having a line of multi-billionaires behind her she wants a simple honest boy), pretending to be the typical solaah-saal heroine, getting pampered obscenely and being showered with gifts every second, having dates amidst carefully constructed sets in the best traditions of the Johar-Chopra genre with songs of the Great God SRK playing in the background. This is of course framed in the context of a larger complaint—that the show is fake and scripted.  And that the ending is fixed and will involve no marriage.

Narada: I could make an epistemological point about truth and maaya here. But such high philosophy will be lost on the average Urvashi Ka Swayamvar viewer. If you are really interested in “Sach” I ask you to watch “Satya Ke Aage” on our competing channel where Hardy Kambli weeps under a lie-detector saying Laurel Tendulkar should have done more for his weight problem.

So for now I will just say “What ! You think the program is scripted !” I cannot imagine how anyone can find anything remotely fake about the show. I understand that her “elder brother” isnt really her elder brother and her “mai ka” have no connection with her and her “friends” are hired professionals and that sometimes even when Urvashi knows exactly which surprise “relation” will show up, she feigns surprise and happiness.

But just look at the contestants. What can be fake about such a group and their expressions of mad love for Urvashi, a love for which they jump on burning coals, bend rods with their chest, debase themselves in every episode, try to outdo each other with the most over-the-top expressions of passion possible? Indeed. When I look at these fine group of Manav, Danav and  Dev like Ilish (Hilsa) the Fish King from NRI-land I don’t see a bunch of star-crazed small-town halfwits or fame-hungry sharks out to out-Urvashi Urvashi at her own game or “trophy-wife seekers”. No sir. I see a bunch of people, madly in love, out to catch that comet debris in the sky, the cosmic matter that their Mamas always told them they could not touch, in the process giving hope to people all over the universe that the pin-up doll you have in your bedroom can one day be yours. If you want her that much and if you are willing to forsake totally your self-respect. Yes you can.

Vidur: Excellent. Let me read out a note I got from an anonymous viewer. She writes.

“Call it what you will. Fake. Scripted. I don’t know. And I don’t care. But being a woman who has gone through the humiliation of an arranged marriage, of being paraded in front of prospective grooms like a goat at a country fair , some of whom are eager for the laddoos from the plate and some eager to measure the other laddoos they like to think they are “getting” through shameless stares, and then finally of being rejected like a piece of furniture I just love the way Urvashi turns the tables. For once it is men who have to show their wares, dance and sing, brag about their cooking skills. It is the man’s family who have to go out of the way to be nice and complaisant. And most importantly it is the men who now have to put up with a public rejection. People will now be pointing and smirking “There goes the guy Urvashi rejected despite his best attempts”. Not that it changes matters much but at least it will be a pleasant change from the whispers I often heard: “She is getting so old. Why doesn’t anyone marry her?” Go Urvashi go. Give it to them.”

Narada (coughing): Yes. Indeed. Very interesting. Well before we go to the program, there is just time for one more viewer mail, where from the millions we get, we select one at random. And here it is. We have no idea as to what’s written here. We will read it together with you viewers.

“  There is just one winner here. Urvashi. She gets to live her fantasies. She gets to blast whom she wants. She gets pampered. She gets paid. For those people scoffing at her and using the word “loser” , here is what I think. There are losers. Sure. The contestants for one. But they are nothing compared to the biggest losers—- those who watch the program. Every day of the week. Wait. I take that back. The biggest losers are those that watch the show and then comment, email, discuss and blog about it. ”

Uncomfortable silence…

Narada: Moving on……let us now go to Freddie Flintstone, our man in the Swayamvar as he takes over….

Freddie Flintstone Kapoor (trying hard to prevent himself from laughing out loud at the ridiculousness of it all): Urvashi Ka Swayamvar mein aap ka swagaat hain……

————————————————————-

[Event: A Kolkata blog meet, which I think can be better characterized as a small blogcamp, is being organized by some enthusiasts in the city . Here is the link for the event]

In a piece of journalism that deserves the Pulitzer or at least an immediate Howitzer , New York Times comes up with a totally serious, dripping with analysis feature on the “Mere Paas Maa Hain”  Nirupa Roy syndrome in the charming Slumdog Millionaire “Chamma Chamma” reporting style that we so admire, with the only criticism one can make of it being that it was published on April 3,  2 days too late for All Fool’s Day.

There are nuggets of wholesome “teri ungli pakadke chala” motherly goodness everywhere in this article that exposes India’s infamous mama’s boys (I am not one of them however and this my mother assures me). Yes those mama’s boys that call their mother in India (gasp) everyday and those who even though they may be on the wrong side of 40 consider (double gasp) their mother to be their favorite person. Happens only in India.

However the most glittering insight into the bizarre “Maaa main tera laadlaaa” national obsession may be the one below.

The veneration of the mother in India has a long history, rooted in part in Hinduism’s powerful female gods. The country is often referred to as Mother India. Nearly every Bollywood movie features a strong mother character in a leading role.

And one of India’s largest suppliers of milk and cheese is Mother Dairy

True. As the song from Aakhri Raasta, which I am sure Heather Timmons has listened to as part of her research, goes: “Tu ne mera doodh pia hain tu bilkool mere jaisa hain……

Surely a movie/documentary made by non-Indians with India as the subject winning equates to India conquering the Oscars. Just like if the “March of the Penguins” would have swept the Academy Awards, it would have been a glorious achievement of Antarctica and a proud day for all penguins.

[Update: Why Anil Kapoor or Raja Sen? According to the TOI, the Congress is now claiming credit for Slumdog (I hope they have seen the movie to be sure about what exactly they are claiming credit for). Baila Baila ! (link courtesy Rohit) ]

The fact that Slumdog did so well on Sunday should have surprised none. At least not me, I knew it the moment I stepped out of the DC theatre in December.

For one, Slumdog Millionaire very deliberately and very effectively strikes many of the chords that Academy judges have been known to have a soft spot for . In order to ace an exam, you do not necessarily have to be the best —even an average person can excel if he/she can understand the “system” and do exactly what is expected. Slumdog Millionaire does that admirably.

The other angle we need to take in order to understand Slumdog’s sweep is to look at the Academy Awards itself, the alarming decline in its popularity and the threat to its existence as a publicly broadcast spectacle. Last year, the Oscars had its lowest viewership ever and though there was a partial rebound this year (third poorest ever), the fact remains that the awards ceremony, as a sustaining money making enterprise, is in jeopardy. The movies that make it to the nomination list, being of the “art-house” variety, usually have limited releases in select theaters which means that most people have not seen or heard of them and have no emotional connect with its fate. The profile of the people attending are not the ones who appeal to the teen/brainless/celebrity-obsessed demographic in the way MTV Awards do. Finally the presentation style remains roughly the same year after year.

Critics of the Academy complain that the jury has an irrationally pig-headed aversion for commercially successful movies . No matter how good a movie is , if it commercially successful and popular, it is invariably rejected by the elitists on the committee. The only exceptions to this in recent years has been Titanic (which fit into the “grand historical tragedy on an epic scale” formula popular with the jury) and the Return of the King (which was just way too spectacular to be ignored) with the years in which these movies swept the night were those when the Oscar show showed record viewership. [Many old-timers still find it tough to get over the time the Oscars passed over crowd -favorite ET in favor what was perceived as an over-long, preachy hagiography "Gandhi" in 1982]

Faced with the tension between “popularizing” (“dumbing down”) the awards (let’s have “You got Served” and “Spiderman” as nominees) and making it into a “nobody cares” snoozefest like the Tony’s, the Academy finds movies like “Slumdog Millionaire” God-given get out of jail cards. Shamelessly feelgood with its underdog story, cloying romance and the “This is the third world. Look at how sub-humanly they stay in their own country” subtext “Slumdog” is intellectually untaxing, visually spectacular, full of “human interest” and unabashedly “exotic”.

In short a movie normal people can connect with.

At the same time, it is sufficiently “low-budget”, “non-franchised” and “non-summer-blockbuster” for the Academy to not think that they have compromised the awards by giving it all to Slumdog. [ Had Ledger not died and this not become so "sentimental", I am sure the Oscar committee would have ignored the Dark Knight totally. It surely deserved a nomination for Best Director and Best Movie but then being a summer blockbuster, a definite "No No"]

No wonder then that it won. And big.

If there were any people I felt good for on Sunday night it was for Resul Pookutty and for the man they called Rackman. Coming from the Indian movie industry where technical people are sometimes treated as second class contributors in the film-making process, it was gratifying to see someone from the fraternity getting his time in the limelight.

And what to say about the Rackman or AR Rehman. One of India’s cultural icons of the modern era, he has consistently given music that is, to put it as modestly as possible, world-class. While it may be argued that Slumdog is by no means his best work, it sure was better than his competition (the other nominees) and I would go so far as to say that a significant part of Slumdog’s “feel good” effect would have been lost had it not been for the thumping “Jai Ho” at the end, a song that almost compels you to get out of your seat and clap. At the very least, Rehman deserved some kind of universal acclaim for albums like “Dil Se” and “Bombay” and “Roja” and seeing him on the podium (wish Gulzar could have been there with him) was definitely an emotional moment for me.

Finally the real “worm-has-turned” feel-good instant was when Anil Kapoor leapt onto stage and just went berserk. Who would have thought that the man flailing his arms as if in the throes of an epileptic fit while singing “Aaa jee O Jeee” in “Ram Lakhan”, the man bustling Juhi Chawla with a “maalgadi tu dhakka laga” and a “tirchi nazar main hain jadoo”, the man swinging punches with his wrist on fire in “Rakhawala”, the man crooning “Vatata Vada”, “Hungama Ho Jaye Hungama” and “Bo Eee Bo Eeee Bum Ba Ba Bum Bo Eee”, the hairy back moving up and down in “Parinda” —Mr. Bechara, Mr. Azad, Mr. India would one day be holding aloft an Oscar.

Who would have thought?

Egged on by two of the biggest names in the business, Sir David Frost and US talkshow giant Larry King, the 50-year old actor says he’s considering taking up full-time TV presenting.

“I’ve been encouraged by Larry King and David Frost,” he told the Independent. “Both said my television presenting skills were second-to-none. When such icons of the form give you a compliment like that you simply cannot ignore it. David said I could go on to be one of the great television hosts of our time so it is something I’m seriously looking into.” He adds. “Perhaps I could front my own show here. I’ll rule nothing out.” [Link]

Always charming, self-effacing and modest, I cannot think of one other person from Bollywood who deserved to be where they are today other than Anil Kapoor.

Khelta ja khelta ja baaziyon pe baaziyaan.

In my series of blogposts on the Mumbai massacres of November, I have so far avoided dealing explicitly with one issue that has otherwise got a lot of attention, mostly negative, in the blogosphere and in discussion boards and online communities——the coverage of the tragic incidents provided by the Indian television media.

The most common criticisms of the Indian television media coverage of 26/11 may be summarized as follows:

1. By showing live footage of commandos going in and in focusing attention on that hotel guest one can see on the ninth floor, they compromised the security of hostages and of the entire operation.

2. The channels fell over themselves trying to get exclusives, stooping to the level of harrying already distraught victims for their “reactions”.

3. The spotlight was entirely on the Taj and the Oberoi and not on Victoria Terminus because the victims at VT were, to put it bluntly, “low class” in contrast to the glitterati and foreigners at the 5-star hotels.

4. Other important events like the death of VP Singh were ignored in the midst of the 24/7 media brouhaha.

Barkha Dutt, the primary target of public criticism, struck back with an article defending herself and her profession. This in turn led to another series of silly counter-criticisms and impassioned Barkha-baiting postings on “Can you please take Barkha off air” type Facebook communities.

Now most regular readers here at RTDM would know, that like most people, I am not really a big fan of the Indian television media. Far from it. I detest the ceaseless melodrama that NDTV, CNN-IBN and the others garnish every news item with. This includes their staple ominous background music, the hyper-emotional tremulous anchors (think Sagarika Ghosh), their obsession with “celebrities” (a discussion of 26/11 included such intellectual giants as Kunal Kohli, director of “Hum Tum” and “Fanaa” [which did handle terrorism] and Simi Garewal, a female Gandalf the White and Luke Kenny, a cast member of “Rock On”. In passing did you know that Ranbir Kapoor says that noone should live in fear?) and the overall presentation which seems to be less about reporting the news and more about selling it (This is an exclusive ! You will see this footage only on this channel !) with the hard-sell often so in-your-face that the only word I can think of in this context is “sleazy”.

Of course the only honorable exception are the vernacular news channels which with its delicious headlines like “Team India ne Kangarayoon par liya baadla, Dhoni ne dikhaya kamaal aur Veeru ne kar diya dhamaal” and “Antarjateek survey main Asia ke sabse sexy ladki hain Katrina Kaif. Peechle saal ke winner Bipasa Basu is saal doosre sthaan pe” have officially crossed the line from even quasi-serious reporting to comic surrealism and thus provides a different kind of exhilaration, a feeling akin to watching Shakti Kapoor as “Genda Singh” in Kanti Shah’s debut film “Aag ka Toofan”.

What however makes Indian media channels frequently insufferable are the personalities and the attitudes of the superstar anchors. While not cutting off people in mid-sentence or bullying guests or imposing their own opinions on others or getting in the way or repeating how these scenes are being brought live only by so-and-so-channel, these media superstars are usually found at the scene of every high-visibility news event, thrusting themselves into the center stage rather than just reporting the god-damned thing. Lest this sound like a criticism of only Indian anchors this ego-centrism has been a standard criticism of most world super-star anchors—-from legends like Dan Rather to unalloyed gasbags like Bill O’Reilly—each of these media figures have been accused of getting so caught up in their own mystique that the focus of their stories end up becoming just one thing—- themselves.

Even in this article we have some trademark Dutt touches—-like how she refers to communities critical of the media’s handling of 26/11 as “hate communities” (she seems to have little idea of what real “hate” on the Net is) and how, even while carrying the standard of the Indian media, she cannot resist getting in a word about people personally victimizing her (Im told that “hate” groups are trying to compete with “fan” communities on social networking sites like Facebook and Orkut. The Internet apparently is buzzing with vitriol and we, in the media in general, and sometimes, me in particular, are being targeted with a venom that is startling).

But once I can get beyond the “Oh here she goes again”, I do accept that she does have some basis for her argument. Not perhaps in the way she lays it out but otherwise.

Let me explain.

With respect to the accusation that the media compromised operational details, Ms. Dutt says that the press respected the security cordon and did nothing that was illegal (i.e. did not try to sneak past security). Now some people would not buy that excuse and insist that as responsible news outlets, it was contingent on NDTV, IBN and the others to voluntarily stay back, not divulge details of where hostages were hiding or when the commandos were entering the building. This is where I am prepared to cut Barkha and her ilk some slack. These people work in the competitive cable market and considering the high financial stakes involved, no channel can realistically be expected to voluntarily back off from reporting explosive events when there is no assurance that their competitors will exercise similar good judgment. And if they decide to hold back and their competitors don’t, then people are going to change channels and the channel has to answer to its advertisers and financial backers.

This is not to say that the fact that critical operational details and hostage locations were telecast is not alarming. However the responsibility for this lies at the doorstep of those dealing with the 26/11 emergency. It should have been their policy to remove all cameras and all bystanders to a range from which they would not be able observe an ongoing commando operation. Forget the press. There is a high chance that terrorists had “eyes” in the assembled crowd who were relaying to those inside what they could see from outside —these people did not need to watch an NDTV feed; they were standing just a few meters away from where the action was taking place and could themselves observe commando movements or prospective hostages/victims appearing in the windows.

All this was symptomatic of a much larger malaise for which the press should not be blamed. That being the totally unprofessional attitude of law-enforcement authorities with regard to protecting the sanctity of crime scenes. In one of the bomb blast incidents in 2008, I saw a picture of the site where a bomb had been exploded marked by a jacket that had been thrown there. That’s right. The crime scene had not been cordoned off, there was no police official. Just a jacket marking the spot, assuming no reporter or by-stander had not already shifted the jacket in their eagerness. Here too at the Taj and the Oberoi, politicians and their guests were allowed VIP access to crime scenes and after all this we still wonder why we are never able to get terrorists convicted in a court of law and why clever lawyers can always create reasonable doubt.

In response to criticism number 2 about news channels thrusting mikes in people’s faces and taking advantage of distraught people to boost their viewership, the press is on less firm ground. I am sure all of us have seen many times how intrusive and aggressive reporters can be in order to get a “reaction”. However there do exist victims who on their own accord want to come on camera and share the most intimate details of their grief. I blogged about this a long time ago:

What totally confounded me was an item a TV channel ran after 9/11. One of the unfortunate people who had been trapped inside the Twin Towers sent a voice message (which his family later got) on their answering machine in which he basically says goodbye to them.

I was intensely moved by the story——–but I also wondered why did the family give the TV channel these tapes? Werent the last words of a father and a husband something private meant for his wife and daughter ONLY? Why were his wife and daughter on TV allowing themselves to be subject to the questions of an intrusive reporter who kept on asking them “How they felt knowing that Mr so-and-so would never come back?” I understand the reporter was looking to increase the channel’s TRPs by playing on the grief of this bereavement but why was the family letting their genuine grief be made a public spectacle of ?

Sharing relieves grief. Accepted. But does it really help to do it in this very public, voyeuristic fashion?

Perhaps this is something I am unable to understand. However it is true that this very public sharing of grief is something that some people do voluntarily. Whether it is as prevalent as Ms. Dutt says it is however I am less willing to believe.

Dutt accepts the third allegation as to VT being given less attention in comparison to the five-star hotels. However I suspect that the only way to defend this would have been to say what I believe the true reason was, a reason that Ms. Dutt would not be caught dead saying— a hostage situation that is happening live is much more dramatic, much more terrifying and by extension much more eyeball-catching than an act of urban violence that had already happened, an act that resembles in its effect the bomb blasts that take place every alternate month in India which through their regularity (and inevitability) have become such a part of our national life that people don’t really care about them anymore (an apathy that is euphemistically referred to as “resilience”).

The fourth allegation regarding not giving attention to other news items is not addressed by Barkha but the logic for that is same as that above. Not enough eyeballs. Though of course in a world where social justice had been implemented, VP Singh’s death would have had 49.5% of air time.

At the heart of each justification provided by the popular media is that old chestnut. The media provides us what the market demands. The fact that the wedding of Abhishek Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai is bigger news than farmer’s suicides is a reflection of public taste and that the channels merely service a demand. After all, they point out that once upon a time there was the baap of all channels, Doordarshan that provides news free of all commercial considerations in a sedate, non-dramatic way and viewers ran away from it at the first choice offered to them.

While there is more than a grain of truth in this argument, what is required is balance. The principal problem with Doordarshan was not that that their news did not have background music but that it itself lacked balance being in essence a government propaganda outlet, with the channel being reduced at one point of time to a kind of visual Twitter for Rajiv Gandhi, with the evening news running down the daily engagements and speeches of the great Prime Minister. Private channels came with the promise of independent reporting and more professional presentation. This was why people moved away from DD.

But then again, somewhere down the line, and in the middle of the millions of investment dollars, the private news media themselves became unbalanced, sacrificing plain and simple common sense, basic journalistic ethics and media responsibility at the altar of the TRP devi. And its not as if the channels are extremely independent either, almost all of them have their political biases and agendas.

The sobering truth is that with increased competition, the commercialization of news (which includes sensationalism and the obscene rush for “exclusives”) is only going to get worse. If one wants to look at what the Indian media landscape will be a few years hence, then the state of the US television media as it is today serves as a fairly accurate crystal ball. The cable news revolution began in the US during the Gulf war of 1991 where CNN brought to American viewers the first “war on prime time” where an entire generation sat down to steak and potatoes and watched with rapt attention Patriots and Tomhawks raining down on the enemy. The line between news and entertainment was blurred forever and viewership of the classical news anchors like Tom Brokaw, Ted Koppell, Dan Rather were eaten into by the louder, more opinionated, shallower hosts on cable news. (One of these, a certain Geraldo Riviera, a cable media celebrity of questionable grey matter once did a Barkha during the 2nd Iraq war by drawing on the sand troop positions, in the process divulging operational plans of the US Army).

Over the years, a new paradigm of market-driven audience-targeting became the driving factor for cable news in the US, a trend that will, in all probability, be replicated in India in the coming years. For example, CNN executives have identified a niche market in Americans bitter about immigration and outsourcing and for that they have one dedicated host, a certain Lou Dobbs, whose single point agenda is to pour vitriol on India, China and Mexico onto the airwaves, every week night. Fox News is well known for being a Republican mouthpiece. But even here, different anchors target different parts of the American right political spectrum—-while Bill O’Reilly panders those right wing Americans who think of themselves as independent (which is why Bill O wears a mask of impartiality and occasionally and very mildly chides the Republicans), hosts like Sean Hannitty play upto a more rabid crowd, throwing all pretense of objectivity to the wind. A similar trend is shown by MSNBC except that they go for the liberal end of the spectrum with obnoxiously full-of-himself host Keith Olbermann (he does have a good sense of humor) pulling in the extreme liberals while gentler, kinder and far hotter Rachel Maddow brings in the more balanced.

The only saving grace for US cable news— they do not play “Maa” as background music while reporting on the murder of a child and their reporters do not address a politician who has committed bigamy in the following manner:

“Kya aap maante hain ki aap ka jo amar prem hain …yeh to aitihaseek kadam aap ne liye hain…..”

Yet.

[Mercifully, there was no background music of "Is duniya main prem granth jab likha jaayega tera mere naam sabse upar aayega" or "ik taraf hain gharwali, ik taraf baharwali" during the bigamy story. But then again I did not catch this on Zee News.]

In conclusion, the sensationalism and intrusiveness that we saw on 26/11 is, to a large extent, an inevitable outcome of the “war for news” and the amount of money that rides on every minute of telecast time. Harking back to simpler days when Prannoy Ray would quietly summarize world events after an ad for Vicco Vajradanti is a futile exercise in park-bench reminiscence as those times are not coming back.

And while some outrage at the coverage dished out is inevitable and desirable, if we were indeed to compile a list of all the agencies of independent India who dropped the ball on 26/11, the television media should not be very high on that list.