Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amd.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!amd!suresh From: suresh@amd.UUCP (P. Srisuresh) Newsgroups: net.nlang.india Subject: Re: Re: India and the Media Message-ID: <1048@amd.UUCP> Date: Fri, 8-Mar-85 16:50:37 EST Article-I.D.: amd.1048 Posted: Fri Mar 8 16:50:37 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 8-Mar-85 20:21:21 EST References: <2440@hplabsc.UUCP> <197@gitpyr.UUCP> <> Reply-To: suresh@amd.UUCP (P. Srisuresh) Organization: AMD Applications, Santa Clara, CA Lines: 92 Summary: In article <> prasad@cavell.UUCP (Prasad Srirangapatna) writes: >> > [Kumar @ HP Labs] >> > India as a country does not figure too prominently in the news >> > media in the United States, but when it does, it is more often >> > depicted as a poor, hot, overcrowded, undernourished, ex-British >> > colony, rather than the new, emerging nation that it is. >> >> Sounds unsubstantiated to me. American media does not exactly kiss the feet >> of India, but then again why should they. In general they are quite truthful >> and more objective than Indian media is of America. >> >Sub: Western Media coverage of Indian Events. > >On the one hand, it is clearly true that a country geographically as large, >politically as important, and technologically as rich in manpower as India, >does not get the kind of western media attention that it deserves. Even much >smaller and apparently less "significant" countries seem to get much wider and >more importantly, more frequent coverage. Examples include Korea, Vietnam and >Cambodia and Afghanistan (in Asia), Israel, Lebanon, Syria and Iran (in the >Middle East) and Nicaragua, El Salvador etc. (in Central America). There are >............ so on. The above letter from Prasad pretty much summarizes why India gets the coverage it gets today. I guess, any story gets a media coverge only when there is a point of internal or international interest to the pub- lic as whole or in part. By points of internal interest, I mean issues like serial murders, muggings, latest foods, execise programs, money earning tips and so on. The main issues of international interest are political, military, economical and technological events. There has to be some- thing sensational or something different from usual for the media to cover it. No wonder, Lebanon, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Afghanisthan gains more coverage than most other third world contries including India does. As far as the first and second worlds go, their issues and events stand to gain high priority within the Americans, perhaps as much as for themselves, since they have high vested interest in those countries. Talking about them is almost like talking about themselves. Competing with them is almost like competing internally within themselves. Hence the second and third worlds are looked upon more as internal than otherwise. Third world is merely a scale by which to compare and feel good about themselves or to know that there does exist some part of the world that doesn't concern them that much. Well, may be I am rambling a little here. The point is that India is non-aligned. At worse, soviet oriented. No great technological breakthrough. Nei- ther is there much to talk about economical progress. There was some sensational political news with the raid of the Sikh temple and Indira Gandhi's assasination following that. Then, there was Bhopal disaater. I am sure most of you agree with me that India had it's share of media coverage during that period. India has been very sluggish and dormant for quite a long time. People are as sluggish as the govt. they elect to govern themselves. Only now, we hear some news about the govt. taking some active role and begining to give a boost to the technological and economical fronts. I am sure, we will get more and more prominent coverage as the days go by. India has been on the news much more frequently now a days than before. This is a neat prelude to the trend that is likely to follow. You are right. American press is not the only way to communicate with the people. I do not deny that it is possi- ble to communicate through other means like movies, commer- cials etc.. Sure, commercials too. if Saudu Arabia could do it, why can't we? One way to make the American public Understand India as much as they do of the McDonalds burgers is to flash lots of commercials. As for coverage through movies, we don't have many movies about India made outside India. So, people like to listen and watch what the intel- lectuals in India have to say. Take people like Satyajit Ray or Mrinal Sen. Most of their themes circle around the poor and their state of affairs. I am not complaining about that. Poverty-it is topmost problem of India. But, we do not have many movies throwing light on the other side of India. How- ever, we do get some balanced coverage from Indian press, I believe. But that doesn't help that much. Another means of media education is possible via Indi- ans abroad. What can we do to bring up the image? If it is not snobbish to do so, we could probaably start a nationwide press, make some movies(English) and above all, impart tech- nology we earned to India, to make some good news. Hope you enjoyed reading the article. In case you didn't you'll be glad to know that I am stopping here. -- suresh