| Username |
Post |
| Mabi Singh |
Posted
on 06-May-00 10:08 AM
There is a news on "Saptahik", Friday May 05, 2000, Baisakh 23, 2057 who basically broke the deals done with Sagarmatha Television of Washington DC regarding shows of "Karodpati" and "Nepali Babu" in the US.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 06-May-00 09:22 PM
Three things. Mabi.
First, when business disputes arise, it's a standard practice to first go for arbitration than to courts or to
newspapers.
Sagarmatha Television, an organization, seems professionally immature NOT to realize
this simple fact of doing business.
Second, Sagarmatha Television does NOT speak for all Nepalis living in the US or anywhere. Just because its particular business dealing with
Mr. KC went bad does not mean that the ENTIRE Nepali communities in the US are somehow against Mr. KC and for Sagarmatha
Television.
That is why, Mr. Kharel of Sagarmatha TV should take his TV station seriously, but not so seriously that he thinks STV is
THE VOICE opf Nepalis in America.
It is not.
One can only hope that members of our various Nepali communities are intelligent enough to withhold judgement against Mr. KC on account of STV's version of story alone.
Third, OK, Bhuwan KC may have done something
wrong. But as a Nepali citizen, I am more disturbed by the one-sided, sensational
press coverage (which reinforces my suspicion
that Nepali tabloid journalists, including those of Kantipur ko Saptahik, are among
the worst in their field in terms of professional competence and a sense of fairness) than by KC's alleged act of doing something wrong.
I mean, if you read the report, it's clear that it carries ONLY STV's version in loaded terms, and quotes nothing from the other side. What kind of stupid reporting is this?
Why whould we be fed biased reporting? Are we that stupid?
Finally, I do not know Bhuwan KC personally,
not am I his fan (in fact, I dislike his films). Nor too am I going to gain anything by defending him here.
My main point is that: Disputes are facts of life in any business.
An organization like STV, if it believes
it is the wronged party, should retain
the services of a lawyer, and deal with
matters in a professional way, and NOT
in a cry-baby, sensationalistic manner by
using the press as an "tar.sau.nay" shield.
oohi
"civil libertarian"
ashu
|
| MABI |
Posted
on 07-May-00 02:31 PM
I AGREE, THAT WAS AN ONE SIDED NEWS COVERAGE PUBLISHED, PROBABLY BECAUSE OF SOME CONNECTIONS OF THE STV OFFICIALS WITH THE SAPTAHIK NEWS(?) MAKERS. EXPLANATIONS FROM KC TOO, WOULD HAVE BALANCED THE NEWS. ANY WAY, THAT WAS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF TYPE OF PRACICE OF JOURNALISM, "TO CREATE SENSATIONS THAN FINDING FACTS."
YES, YOU WERE RIGHT IN POINTING OUT THAT STV SHOULD HAVE GONE TO COURT INSTEAD OF GOING TO NEWS PAPERS AND REQUESTING THE US EMBASSY NOT TO ISSUE ANY VISA TO HIM. IT WOULD BE INTERESTING IF THE US EMBASSY LISTENS TO STV'S REQUEST. i WONDER IF STV ALSO HAS MADE THIS AS THEIR NEWS PIECE.
I DO NOT KNOW THE DEAL BETWEEN STV AND MR. KC.
I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE AN INTERESTING PIECE SINCE THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS POSTED ON THIS BOARD REGARDING THE MOVIE SHOW.
MABI
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 07-May-00 05:33 PM
When Sagarmatha Television cannot enforce
its own contract (I assume, there was one between them and KC!), and seems to find no further way to cover damages,if any, then its threatening KC with "the US Embassy action" does not put it in good light.
I mean, think about this: What has Madeline Albright's Department got to do with the break-off of any 'agreement' between KC and STV?
Nothing.
In business, you do not, like the Mafia, issue threats to others. You do so at
your own professional risk.
In business, what you do is collect
damages.
STV needs to let go of its 'gorkhali'
attitude, and learn to do deals in terms
of strategies and finesse, without suffering, what I see now, a Public Relations disaster.
BTW, in 1998, noted Nepali musician Ambar Gurung too had disregarded his "contract" with STV. How come STV never filed anything (in the press) against Gurung? Is KC an easier target to be hit below the belt in the press than Gurung? I think so.
Finally, I must make it clear that as a strong supporter of community television in general and of STV in particular, I am only taking STV as an organization that I beleive wants to stick to best business practices even when its contracts are not honored.
oohi
ashu
oohi
ashu
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 08-May-00 12:06 PM
This "Bhuwan KC and STV" episode teaches our community several lessons:
First, NOT to believe only one side of any story. People say things about others to advance their own agenda. Unless you want
to participate in someone's agenda, there's no reason for anyone to reach any conclusion about anyone from what one-sided stories.
And second, when you hear the same stuff against
one person or against an institution from one person or a from a group of closely related people all the time, even you as otherwise good people start losing your sense of judgment and start forming biased opinions -- which, of course, is stupid.
oohi
ashu
|
