7 ms·

a big chunk of the mainstream traditional media in India is pro-establishment and pro-government. Digital news organizations were predominantly anti-establishm

a big chunk of the mainstream traditional media in India is pro-establishment and pro-government. Digital news organizations were predominantly anti-establishment, thus the efforts by the government to toe the organizations to its line. First it introduced the FDI regulations for foreign media as mentioned in the article. Second they have recently proposed to bring Digital news organizations and streaming platforms under regulation of the central government https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/11/india-to-regulate-netflix-and-amazon-streaming-content https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/11/india-to-regul... They brought FCRA for NGOs and civil societies which is considered a death kneel for civil societies in India. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/fcra-bill-virtually-makes-it-impossible-for-ngos-to-function/article32664359.ece https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/fcra-bill-virtually-m... and have been harassing Amnesty International India for years now, which recently concluded to AII shutting down India operations https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/29/amnesty-to-halt-work-in-india-due-to-government-witch-hunt https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/29/amnesty-to-hal...

threw234342543 6y ago
So Indian govt. bad, foreign unaccountable govt./orgs good ? Gee... I wonder why India was colonized for close to a millennia.
AntiImperialist 6y ago
a big chunk of the mainstream traditional media in India is pro-establishment and pro-government And? Why would you not be pro your own government? Should the media be against the government that people elect and which protects people's rights? Should the media be pro foreign governments and agencies?
- ponker 6y ago
  Ask nicely and Modi might give you a courtesy tap.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  A good level of skepticism is a healthy check on corruption. People (for now) in the minority opposition should have some voice, it'd be odd if there weren't opposition outlets to say anything contrary. The powers that be protects people's rights, until they don't, and you don't want to be the proverbial frog in the pot coming to a boil.
  - AntiImperialist 6y ago
    I agree. However, I don't think we have a choice. At this point, the only two choices seem to be either to be governed by a tyrannical government fueled by national interests or a tyrannical government controlled by foreign interests. I believe in decentralization of power, a structure where the governed are closer to those who govern them. I think this leads to people in power having more skin in the game.
    - newswasboring 6y ago
      We are a parliamentary democracy, we already have decentralization. We willingly let go because of the false dichotomy you present.
- mulmen 6y ago
  I interpret pro-government as "supports the current administration's agenda". You seem to be interpreting it as "anti-anarchy" or at least 'pro-democracy". But a free (to be critical of the government's policies!) and independent press is crucial to the functioning of a democracy.
  - AntiImperialist 6y ago
    Well, in practice, there is not much difference. The same freedom that allows the media to criticize legitimate concerns when it comes to the government also allows hostile foreign interests to amplify minor issues or manufacture fake ones to take down the government and install one that they can control from the outside, often to the detriment of the country and the citizens. So, my theory is that the countries that will succeed over the next decades are the ones which can protect themselves from foreign influence, by kicking out foreign interest groups, "aid" agencies, investments, apps, "news" sites etc. which India is doing. The obvious side effect will be that legitimate concerns and legitimate organizations which are detrimental to the establishment will also be suppressed. But I don't think there is a way to not do that.
    - mulmen 6y ago
      Didn't the WHO literally do a house call to the entire country of India in their ultimately successful quest to eradicate smallpox? I wouldn't rush to condemn international aid. You put scare quotes around both aid and news. Neither of these things are inherently bad. Misinformation is the threat, not simply foreign information. Government control of media is not a remedy to misinformation. In fact it is frequently a source. You seem to be espousing an isolationist strategy but the genie is out of the bottle. Any country that tries to pull back from the rest of the world will suffer in comparison.
      - AntiImperialist 6y ago
        Any country that tries to pull back from the rest of the world will suffer in comparison. Well, China has greatly benefited from doing exactly that. They greatly regulate and control foreign influence while they exert their influence every where they can. India is a big rival and they have been funding everything from the Naxalites (the underground Indian communist organization) to mainstream parties, organizations, media, universities... whatever they can which gives them political advantage.
- amitheonlyone 6y ago
  No, the media should not be pro government. Yes, the media should be against the government first and should criticize and be sceptical on whatever the government is doing. And if after checking the facts, the government seems to be doing good, it's okay to compliment. But media should never be pro government.
amriksohata 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Amnesty_International https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Amnesty_Internati...
- square_usual 6y ago
  So, if something can be criticized, it should not exist?
- ashleshbiradar 6y ago
  if you would care to notice, most of the criticism comes from authoritarian countries or countries that have a known history of violating human rights. Israel( issues related to Palestine) China( I dont think I need to mention anything) US( Guantánamo Bay ) Russia (again, authoritarian)

threw234342543 6y ago

So Indian govt. bad, foreign unaccountable govt./orgs good ? Gee... I wonder why India was colonized for close to a millennia.

AntiImperialist 6y ago

a big chunk of the mainstream traditional media in India is pro-establishment and pro-government And? Why would you not be pro your own government? Should the media be against the government that people elect and which protects people's rights? Should the media be pro foreign governments and agencies?

ponker 6y ago
Ask nicely and Modi might give you a courtesy tap.
bobthepanda 6y ago
A good level of skepticism is a healthy check on corruption. People (for now) in the minority opposition should have some voice, it'd be odd if there weren't opposition outlets to say anything contrary. The powers that be protects people's rights, until they don't, and you don't want to be the proverbial frog in the pot coming to a boil.
- AntiImperialist 6y ago
  I agree. However, I don't think we have a choice. At this point, the only two choices seem to be either to be governed by a tyrannical government fueled by national interests or a tyrannical government controlled by foreign interests. I believe in decentralization of power, a structure where the governed are closer to those who govern them. I think this leads to people in power having more skin in the game.
  - newswasboring 6y ago
    We are a parliamentary democracy, we already have decentralization. We willingly let go because of the false dichotomy you present.
mulmen 6y ago
I interpret pro-government as "supports the current administration's agenda". You seem to be interpreting it as "anti-anarchy" or at least 'pro-democracy". But a free (to be critical of the government's policies!) and independent press is crucial to the functioning of a democracy.
- AntiImperialist 6y ago
  Well, in practice, there is not much difference. The same freedom that allows the media to criticize legitimate concerns when it comes to the government also allows hostile foreign interests to amplify minor issues or manufacture fake ones to take down the government and install one that they can control from the outside, often to the detriment of the country and the citizens. So, my theory is that the countries that will succeed over the next decades are the ones which can protect themselves from foreign influence, by kicking out foreign interest groups, "aid" agencies, investments, apps, "news" sites etc. which India is doing. The obvious side effect will be that legitimate concerns and legitimate organizations which are detrimental to the establishment will also be suppressed. But I don't think there is a way to not do that.
  - mulmen 6y ago
    Didn't the WHO literally do a house call to the entire country of India in their ultimately successful quest to eradicate smallpox? I wouldn't rush to condemn international aid. You put scare quotes around both aid and news. Neither of these things are inherently bad. Misinformation is the threat, not simply foreign information. Government control of media is not a remedy to misinformation. In fact it is frequently a source. You seem to be espousing an isolationist strategy but the genie is out of the bottle. Any country that tries to pull back from the rest of the world will suffer in comparison.
    - AntiImperialist 6y ago
      Any country that tries to pull back from the rest of the world will suffer in comparison. Well, China has greatly benefited from doing exactly that. They greatly regulate and control foreign influence while they exert their influence every where they can. India is a big rival and they have been funding everything from the Naxalites (the underground Indian communist organization) to mainstream parties, organizations, media, universities... whatever they can which gives them political advantage.
amitheonlyone 6y ago
No, the media should not be pro government. Yes, the media should be against the government first and should criticize and be sceptical on whatever the government is doing. And if after checking the facts, the government seems to be doing good, it's okay to compliment. But media should never be pro government.

amriksohata 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Amnesty_International https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Amnesty_Internati...

square_usual 6y ago
So, if something can be criticized, it should not exist?
ashleshbiradar 6y ago
if you would care to notice, most of the criticism comes from authoritarian countries or countries that have a known history of violating human rights. Israel( issues related to Palestine) China( I dont think I need to mention anything) US( Guantánamo Bay ) Russia (again, authoritarian)