| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 03-Nov-01 02:38 PM
A new English daily newspaper is going to be launched in Kathmandu soon.
It's owned by some investors from India with local Nepali partners.
Mr. Ram Pradhan, a veteran Nepali editor, is the chief editor.
Technically, it's NOT illegal for investors from India to be invesing their money for a business (i.e. newspaper business) in Nepal. And runing a newspaper is just another business -- dependent on the vagaries of the market forces. If Pradhan and the Team fail to collect the required ad money and subscribers in Nepal, their newspaper will not float. It's as simple as that.
But the members of the Nepali press -- with the refreshing exceptions of the Dixit brothers (of Himal, Nepali Times) and the sensible historian Pratyoush Onta -- are already crying foul - for all the usual, 'patriotic' reasons.
For these breast-beating angry patriots, any media business, owned by the hated Indians, to be operating in Nepal is, well, tantamount to, well, attacks on Nepal's pride, sovereignty and the rest.
I mean, come on!!
Take Khagendra Sangraula, the noted and well-respected Marxist writer for instance: In Today's Kantipur, his piece is nothing more than a personal attack
on Ram Pradhan . . .and Khagendra Dai attacks Pradhan for accepting a
full-time editorial job with the newspaper!! How low can you get?
[Disclosure: I do NOT know Ram Pradhan. But I do know Khagendra Dai well enough to declare that if I can, in the next three years, turn himad some of my Marxist friends into a free market advocate who can use reason, logic and NON-doctrinaire/non-rigid thinking in his arguments, then, I would consider my life complete and die happily!!].
Anyway, with all due sincerest respects, I found it odd that Khagendra Dai thought it was all right for him to compare in public someone else's career choice
to that of a traitor! This, I felt, was going too far for a respectable, if -- sigh!-- Marxist, Nepali public intellecual.
Sorry, I am too tired to go on right now . . . I will write more on this in
coming days. For now, my argument is: All things being equal, I -- as a consumer of media -- am for more investment on the Nepali media sectors from those with money from Russia, India, the US, Canada . . . wherever else!!
As a Nepali, I'd rather have a newspaper in Nepal that reports the well-evidenced truth than prints silly, patriotic bhajans.
Feel free to disagree. More later.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| concerned |
Posted
on 03-Nov-01 03:47 PM
ashu, I think you are missing a point. Just because Dixit Bros and Mr. Onta support foreign investment in media does not mean that we should also follow them. As many commentators have suggested, I think media should be under the nepalese people, especially when you consider the role the media can play.Ashu,I just wanted to ak you a question: Will you protest if India (or some other country, for that matter) takes over Nepal provided that you (not Nepal) will gain enormously. I have been following some of your arguments lately and this question props us everytime I read your comments.
I think a person like you should take every factor into consideration when you make a point.
|
| nobody |
Posted
on 03-Nov-01 05:28 PM
Personal gains I will receive because Nepal is taken over by some other country is no different from personal benefits I am enjoying right now in US, from a moral standpoint. So should I feel guilty about it? On other hand I would rather be in Nepal and enjoy those benefits, if I could, than here. Should we be protecting nationalism in the traditional sense in this age of globalisation. 51 of the world largest economies are corporations and remaining 49 are countries! Should every foreign investment be treated as suspect? GNP of the world has quadrupled in the last quarter of the century and Nepal's GNP is still unmeasured and unknown! And our only achievement is that we were number a part of any empire! When do we stop living in the past? Bravo Gurkhas!!!(I blame a lot on our parent's generation for where we are now and present plight, because all the world economies were at similar condition when they had their chance.)
India definitely benefited more from the British Raaj than if it was left to its own means. Isn't progress more important than national pride? Why the paranoia that India is out to hurt us? Is it patriotism or jingoism? To what end? Most of us seem to want to enjoy the "worldly" comforts available outside Nepal and protect the sovereignty of Nepal at the same time.
Shouldn't we be more apprehensive about pseudo-intellectuals in Nepal mis-informing us than these newspaper spreading some propoganda? Are Nepalese so dumb that they will subscribe to all the thoughts of this newspaper even if they are against their grain or can they show disagreement?
Freedom of speech for the newspaper, freedom of choice and freedom to disagree for the audience...
|
| nobody |
Posted
on 03-Nov-01 05:29 PM
read number = never
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 03-Nov-01 10:48 PM
Dear Ashu:
I support the foreign investments.
But have you ever remembered Times Of India writing any pro-Nepal article? Do
you remember how they were lashing out at us when we were in long queue to
get one litre of kerosene oil? Most, if not all, of their articles are biased against
Nepal, and are designed to promote the south block's policy.It's not that we don't
have friendly papers in India. Outlook is a lot friendly to us.The past policy of
Time of India regarding Nepal has been to disregard our sovereign status, and to
promote colonialist conservative Indian view. To provide such company a free
access to a sensitive media sector without any proper thought, and against
a broad array of popular forces (political parties,media etc) will not be a discreet
idea.
At least, we need to have some kind of reciprocal treaty with India before we
give such facility. I particularly want to mention the latest agreement between
AOL/Time Warner Cable and Chinese TV. The agreement provides AOL/Time
Warner access to lucrative Chinese market, but only with the condition that AOL
cable include Chinese TV chanel(CCTV) in its North American venture.
Just like America prevents unfriendly companies from doing business in USA, China
threatens such companies of getting least preferential treatment in business, we
can do same. Times of India? No.Unless they change their anti-Nepal attitude.
|
| diwas k |
Posted
on 04-Nov-01 01:11 AM
If media or other business (with significant NEPALI capital and intellectual investment) cannot promote and participate in a healthy competition, then those investors should pull their money out of those businesses and take somewhere else. Rule # 1 of business and investment, and hence CAPITALISM, is COMPETITION...
What if CNN wants to set up a bureau in Nepal, with its own money, and ruin RSS business...? Its all fair...
diwas_k
|
| BP |
Posted
on 04-Nov-01 03:06 AM
In this global economy, I think as long as the companies create jobs for the local people and do not merely drive local businesses out, I have no problems with foreign investments. Participate, don't just stand there holding up the banner of nationalism. Capitalism is good for everybody who goes out and tries. Especially international media like CNN. How nice would it be if they had an office in Nepal? It would bring a sense of importance to the region. And let us stop being afraid of India shall we? It's the only other Hindu country for God's sake, if we insist on defining ourselves by such criteria.
|
| BP |
Posted
on 04-Nov-01 03:17 AM
Ashuji, I hope you will run for office some day and become a netaji. You are extremely well-spoken and make your points in a very articulate manner, while at the same being self-deprecating enough to acknowledge that you are posting your opinions and others are welcome to pontificate and retaliate. I have read some posts that are quite critical of you, but the truth is, this site retains its "mature" grade mostly because you frequent this site. It stimulates other people to think deeper thoughts. Note that the last several days you did not visit this site, the number of "What do girls really want?" topics spread like widlfire. I rest my case here, for fear that some of your detractors will send hate mail my way accusing me of trying to "kiss your ass."
|
| Janajati |
Posted
on 04-Nov-01 12:15 PM
My take on this is that the foreign ownership (full or partial) is not necessarily a bad thing. As long as the Rising Nepal and Gorkhapartra continue to use the valuable space reporting on exchange of greetings from the head of the state and presentation of credentials by the ambassadors and put these under our throat, we have no option but to go elsewhere. Similarly, the Radio Nepal just wastes its airtime in annoucing these formalities in their prime news. Wake up, Radio Nepal, TRN and Gorkhapatra; they still carry a hangover from the Panchayat regime.
Initially, I was so glad to see the Kantipur surpassing the ciruculation way over the Gorkhapatra's. However,this joy was short lived as I read the papers over a period of time. The Kantipur is still a biased newspaper. It appears it stands ready to serve the interest of a certain group or a political party. Look at the fortnightly vernacular publication of the Kantiplur Publications, NEPAL. It does not make any effort to reach to all sections of the people when it comes to ethnicity. On religion, it is very Hindu biased, as if other religions do not exist. The Kantipur daily seems too keen to publish more of the negativism on the ethnic groups. It is quick to put a label on a certain ethnic group when it comes to flesh trade and crime without going into the root causes that are compelling the people to take that path. They hardly give a well thought out vent of the ethnic groups on the ills. It is no small accusation from a regular reader of the newspapers. I undestand they have to go after what is newsworthy but a newspapers also has an extremely important role to play in informing the country of the potential problems/issues.
In the final analysis, what difference does it make to a janajati whether it is a foreign owned/locally run, locally owend/run or whatever? I know, at least, Ram Pradhaan, from his days of the Independent Weekly, presents a well balanced and factual reporting, unbiased of any ethnicity. In any case, why make an issue over the ownership of the newspapers? We serve in the army of two foreign countries and that does not seem to be an issue. We place our begging bowl to the world and fight over the loot. We have one of the lowest per capita. That has not been made an issue. Then what's the issue? Nothing. Just goff-sop and move into next.
sj nepali
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 04-Nov-01 01:32 PM
>The Kantipur is still a biased newspaper. It appears it stands ready to serve the
>interest of a certain group or a political party. Look at the fortnightly vernacular
>publication of the Kantiplur Publications, NEPAL. It does not make any effort to
>reach to all sections of the people when it comes to ethnicity. On religion, it is
>very Hindu biased, as if other religions do not exist. The Kantipur daily seems too
>keen to publish more of the negativism on the ethnic groups. It is quick to put a
>label on a certain ethnic group when it comes to flesh trade and crime without
>going into the root causes that are compelling the people to take that path
Janajatiji:
I respect your opinion. But I wish you had given some example to prove your points.
Kantipur is Hindu biased is probably correct. But as long as it is not opposing any
other religion, favoring Hinduism shouldn't be any problem.I have never seen
Kantipur writing any communal report so far.
I used to read pro-Janajaati articles in left, and ultra left papers years before. I
think "Jhilko" (Edited by Dr Babu Ram Bhattarai in 80s, early 90s) was a real good
paper to read leftist perspective in economy and even in Janajaati issues. But for
us who are not enamored with leftism, and who are wary of opportunist brand of
pro-janajati idealogy of leftists, articles in Kantipur are a major source of
knowledge of the views of janajaati intellectuals.
Kantipur has a lot of weaknesses, but its commitment to democracy and racial
harmony rarely seems so dubious as you mentioned.
|
