Mrs. Gandhi and Indian Media change your attitudes !

                                                When I analyze ‘Indian Journalism’ as a media studies student, I find “one trait that has become a tradition is not to criticize ‘Nehru-Gandhi Parivar”.  The stature we have provided to this family is inimitable. When we see the world scenario we cannot locate this sort of phenomenon in any country to any other family.

I would be very precise, if I weigh against the royal family of Britain. But there the tradition has changed to an extend now. The  newspapers prints personal photographs of the princess and the Royal Family.

But in India, I have never read or seen a criticism on Sonia and Rahul Gandhi’s decision of not giving interviews to journalists. What does this show? Is this decision right?

India is the biggest democracy of the world, and we know that any person in public life in a democracy cannot keep their mouth shut, they are public faces and the citizens have all the rights to know about them . Therefore not coming forward and denying to give the interviews is a step which is completely wrong. But I haven’t read or seen  any story on this.

Democracy gives the power to the commoners to ask questions to their leaders. Former American President has precisely said - ‘ Whichever leader cannot digest the warmth of politics can merely move out of the kitchen’. But in our country Nehru-Gandhi family designs their own rule and regulation. So from the time Sonia Gandhi entered politics, she has not given interviews and his son Rahul is following her footsteps.

When last year Sonia Gandhi was ill, this story was kept as a secret. She silently went abroad for her treatment. Nobody inquired why not in d treatment took place in India? And till now no one knows in which hospital she had her treatment? From where the money for the treatment was paid?

Moreover when last week Gujrat Chief Minister Narendra Modi in a public meeting gave the figure of 1880 crore rupees, he was criticized by the Media. Our media fraternity has forgotten that this is a democratic system and people have right to raise questions like this. If Indian government was not paying for the treatment of Mrs. Gandhi, then who was doing it? How much money has been spent till now? Therefore if these bills were paid by Congress Party then why it is afraid to tell the facts and figures?

Everyone desires that the most important leader of this country is healthy. But transparency is certainly required. What would have happened If it was Narendra Modi and not Sonia Gandhi? If he has not answered this question there would definitely be a ruckus like 2g and Coal-Gate.

Media has a right to raise questions like these. If she finds these questions wrong then the time has arrived to move out of the kitchen. Indian Media should change its attitude like Britain Media did. Hence lastly, Mrs. Gandhi and Indian Media both should change their respective attitudes. 

         

Prateek Pathak 

Student

B.A in Media Studies

University of Allahabad 

BEING A WINNER

“Whoever said, it’s not winning or loosing that counts, probably lost”. The moment I went through this quote given by ‘Martina Navratilova’, it forced me to ponder over the fact that… Yes, it is quite important to win.

However we have been thought that participation is equally important. Even if we don’t win it does not matter… because at least we tried your best and were among the competitors.

But contrary to it, this quote states that winning has to be our ultimate aim. It reminds me of Henry Russell Sanders (football coach), who in 1950, at a Cal Poly San Luis Obispo physical education workshop told his group “Men, I’ll be honest, Winning isn’t Everything” then following a long pause “Men, it’s the only thing”.

Do we remember one who looses? No, we onlystandby the winners, cheer for them and the one who looses is nowhere in the lights. Winners are the one who grab the gold and their laurels are sung high. Winners are the ones who are recognized, remembered and adored.

So, each one us should aim to win. But it does not mean that we can apply any method good or bad. Unfair means to attain victory can never be appreciated.

Hence be optimistic, pull up your socks, strive hard and put your 100% effort to grab the gold and feel the power of being a WINNER.

Richa Tiwari 
Student
B.A in Media Studies
University of  Allahabad

RESERVATION IN PROMOTION

This article relates to the discussions on the show “LAW OF THE LAND” telecasted on RSTV on September 25^Th, 2012 regarding the proposed 117^Th constitutional amendment which seeks reservation for sc/st’s in promotion in public offices. Quite clearly it seems that the parliament is in the process to secede the judicial system of the country and impose ‘Supremacy of the Parliament’ instead of ‘Supremacy of the Constitution’. The legislature through this amendment seeks to override Supreme Court’s verdict on NAGARAJ Vs UNION OF INDIA case. The legislature finds it a cumbersome process to follow the three major guidelines issued by the apex court in order to provide reservation in promotion. These are:

1.      To prove the backwardness of the candidate based on quantifiable terms.

2.      To prove the lack of appropriate representation of the particular class and

3.      To see that the efficiency of the public administration is maintained.

The above three points are to be verified in case of every single candidate which definitely without any doubt is difficult task. On the other hand the government is not sure of the methodology to be adopted to sort out the ones eligible for reservation.

An another aspect of the bill is that the reservations should come into retrospective affect from June 17^th, 1995 which will on one hand will raise controversies among the retired as well as working employees and on the other hand will put an additional financial burden on the exchequer.

On one hand where this aspect has popped up a debate on the issue, legal experts also fail to understand and suggest a way through which this problem could be sorted out. According to a legal expert and a senior supreme court judge, this problem denies any logical solution. And even after this if the government goes on with the passing of the bill, that government is not fit to govern, he further adds.

I personally think that providing reservations to the sc’s and st’s was an urgently required move in order to bring them at par with the forward/general class socially, educationally and economically and to do away with the inferiority complex that they have been suffering from since ages, but to provide reservation in promotion is a foolish one. What the government is trying to say is that a guy without merit would be promoted to the next level on the cost of another who deserves it, but is deprived only because he belongs to the general category. Even then the government is determined to achieve 8% economic growth. How is that possible? Such a move of the government will undoubtedly affect the efficiency and the internal environment of the department. There is no escape to such a situation which is bound to arise and which in turn will affect the whole functioning. No empirical study is required to establish this. And once such a situation arises, the employees will not be able to contribute with their maximum potential. Another thing which I want to put forward is that in case an employee belonging to the so called down trodden class performs well and better than other employees, he/she must not be denied promotion either. But this should not be done going against the merit. Once the candidate gets a job through quota, they are expected to perform and prove their worth. The government shall rather fix standards or targets to be achieved to be eligible for promotion and such targets must be equal for all candidates without taking into consideration the class or caste. Otherwise it will kill talent and ultimately development.

Another very important aspect that the UPA government is doing away with,  is the fundamental right of EQUALITY. Agreed that the government wants to uplift the down trodden people with adequate representation in higher bureaucracy and in other government offices but what if RIGHT TO EQUALITY is brought into account.

Article 14 of the constitution provides that- ‘the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.’

It is thus a declaration of equality of all persons within the territory of India, implying thereby the absence of any privilege in favour of any individual. It means that no man is above the law of the land and that every person, whatever be his rank or status is subject to the ordinary law and amenable to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals.

Does the legislature comply with the above quoted law as enshrined in the constitution?

It is left for the citizens to decide which includes Honourable Members of Parliament as well.

Pragya Mishra

Student

B.A in Media Studies

University of Allahabad