| Username |
Post |
| Paschim |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 06:19 AM
I am proud that a quality paper like "The Nepali Times" is being produced in Nepal. Don't know how many people read it given the price and the level of angrezi, but it's really good. And thanks to designers called "Rasbury", their presence on the Web is also neat. And they surely have well-known writers like CK Lal. Because of his early disappointments, I largely ignored him, but lately I've regularly read him. Of course they read well, but I find them inconsistent in quality. His column last week was really disappointing, and I wrote a letter to the editor. They did NOT publish it. The quality of my feedback obviously didn't meet their liberal and linguistic standards, so I've decided to share this letter with my fellow Sajha.com visitors instead.
I'd appreciate if people who read CK Lal's "Do Our Banners Yet Wave" column in last week's NT, kindly told me if my following comments were justified, or is it that I've just gone crazy again over-reacting? I'd value your feedback.
--------------
To: The Editor, Nepali Times, Kathmandu.
From: Paschim.
When Poets Interpret Statistical Maladies
Mr. Editor,
I wonder if your columnists can be sued for abusing the English language, taking charlatanism to pretentious heights, and masquerading as holy pundits
in issues their illiteracy misleads interpretation of facts. C.K. Lal writes well, like a poet. On occasions, his pieces are informed, and often expressing in English what Kaangress activists banter in Nepali at Baneshwor teashops, his pieces do convey unoriginal insightfulness. But isn’t there a limit to stretching this license to passing judgment on absolutely anything? Can you really retrogressively clone W.H. Auden with David Ricardo?
Mr. Lal thinks after early help post-1947, US retracted its traditional warmth to Nepal. That this retreat has facilitated, by design, the growth of the
“other axis of evil” whose “free market ideology and privatization” have not only “devastated” the political economy of poor countries, but also allowed
a Madam Chang to meddle in Nepali corridors of power. That “precise” empiricism was needed to establish certain “correspondences”, but whatever these
“precise” studies would produce, of course “correspondences” clearly existed among “structural adjustment”, “privatization of national economies” and
“the rise of insurgency” among other unfortunate consequences. That the “fortress in Panipokhari” has now re-fashioned itself from a beacon of hope for Nepal that helped “modernize Nepali society” to being a patron that “insists on market liberalization” which incidentally has “failed” to “purify” Nepali politics, but “succeeded exceedingly” in “ruining our society”. And oh, Michael Malinowski is probably a nice guy, by the way. So, all literate people of the world let’s unite to throw away the “unholy triumvirate” of...get ready for the wisdom of the century...“liberalization,
privatization, globalization.”
Never have I yawned so painfully after reading a piece by a graduate who has punctured his credibility in so few a words by molesting a readership with such an incoherent tapestry of clichés. How reckless can one be in one's choice of words? As a person who is paid to write, Mr. Lal owes it to us to do better than
this. The least he could have done is thrown a few numbers around, and pretended that he knew what he was taking about. I could rip his piece apart sentence by sentence, but such an affront is this piece to all people who know their history, politics, and economics reasonably well that I want to refrain from giving the writer undue prominence. But, I just did, didn’t I? Anyway, by re-reading the second paragraph above, I hope the writer will see his ridiculous claims mirrored back at him, which will, I pray, trigger self-improvement. If it works, this should be a sufficient rebuttal. Since Mr. Lal seems to have heard of words like empirical evidence, allow me, Mr. Editor, to part by humbly urging him to read what 18 year-old college students in economics learn in their first econometrics classes these days: you can’t
quantify qualitative variables to draw causal inferences because the degree of association is scientifically indeterminate. That there is no such thing as “correspondences” between two ambiguous variables in a specification that should nonetheless build in more than two variables to minimize “upward
or downward biases”. And most importantly, correlation is not causality.
To learn to express strong opinions without belittling facts, your columnists could well read the very syndicated columns that you loyally reproduce in your
paper. And you don’t exactly do justice to anti-plagiarism efforts when some ideas are seen to cleverly resemble, by sheer accident of course, inconspicuous phrases that Joe Nye, Jr. coins for The Economist or Foreign Affairs. Please urge writers on your payroll to restrain from being overt charlatans so that the trust of readers in your product stays intact.
Paschim.
|
| sun |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 10:24 AM
I guess the editor did not want to "expose" C.K.Lal by publishing your comments which was slightly long. Instead, he might have forwarded the letter to C.K.Lal. Besides, the American who responded to that article also had similar thing to say (it was short!).
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 09:49 PM
Thanks Sun, your feedback is reassuring. Mr. Troutman is 100% right in asking Nepali elites (rightly including CK Lal though he pretentiously and unconvincingly disavows allegiance every single time he preaches to the rest) to look at internal causes, TOO. Reminds me of these Latin American leftists in the 70s who, led by Cardoso, were propounding these fancy "dependency" theories, where all ills in that continent were argued to be of external origin. Cardoso went on to become the Brazilian president in 1994, and the first thing he did was write a love letter to the IMF, "Can't do without you, honey, when will you be home?"
Also reminds of a good friend who was asking the other day for tips on his MBA application that asked: "Everybody talks about changing the world but nobody talks about changing himself or herself. Please comment."
Anyway, on Lal's writing, he is very good, and because he is good, he has the potential to influence and have people listen to him. Different from Troutman's response, I also wanted to draw their attention - with evidence - to an opinion of mine that it'd be a pity to see one of our good writers trade his credibility for tabloidism, because of i) laziness, ii) indifference, iii) complacency, and iv) plain editorial oversight.
I remain a well-wisher of Mr. CK Lal.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 29-Apr-02 10:11 PM
Paschim,
I was on the phone with CK Lal last night.
I had called him up to inquire about the evidence behind his surprising (to me anyway) assertion (26 April-2 May, The Nepali Times) that "in the US, no company is allowed to control both print media and TV in one territory."
C K Lal was using that assertion to argue that Kantipur Publications, which already has a few newspapers should NOT have been given a license to start a terrestrial TV station.
CK Lal did NOT give me a convincing answer, but he promised to send me a fax
or an email soon detailing where he had read about such US media laws.
I think he is just wrong and does not want to admit it, but there's no harm in waiting for him to send in the evidence. I could be wrong too.
On another note, the truth is: Lal is a wonderful guy with a hearty laugh: I, for one, genuinely like him as a person.
But, intellectually, more and more, given the HIGHLY INCONSISTENT streams
of arguments/thoughts he brings forth (which you also have noticed), often without convincing evidence and logical arguments, I have come to
appreciate him as an articulate comedian, and let that be that.
Then again, as that Web site -- satirewire.com -- has shown us, comedy too can be an aspect of journalism :-)
If CK Dai is reading this, well, CK Dai, let's have chiya-siya and do some guff-suff soon.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| SR |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 04:02 AM
Paschim ji,
I have found most of your postings on sajha.com insightful, logical and convincing, and sometimes amusing too. But this one (on CK Lal), I find very much un-paschimed in all respects- in tone, content and style. After reading your unpublished letter-to-editor, I re-read CK Lal's column. I would still vote for his not-so-scientific article (anyway he does not need to claim that his article does pass the "scientific regor" of the "dismal science") rather than buy your seemingly emotional reactions.
SR
-----------------------------------------------
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 04:55 AM
SR ji
I guess, I caught you. You are neither paschim nor purba
just at the center of Nepal. If you are not SR-* ji
forgive me.
Oohi tapako chhimeki
hGxP
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 05:06 AM
Thank you SR-ji. I solicited feedback like yours, and thus greatly appreciate it. Yes, in hindsight I myself thought I was perhaps a bit carried away. But I now owe an historical explanation that perhaps *partly* justifies my outburst. I remember confronting Mr. Lal at a Martin Chautari talk 3 years ago on a VERY SIMILAR TOPIC for FACTS to back up his wild claims. I'd called his statements then "atiranjit". Addressing a largely Nepali college crowd that seemed awestruck at Lal's articulate foray into donor conspiracies to "devastate" and "ruin" Nepal, I'd simply given HIM some numbers to add them up to project ruin.
That was when CK Lal was still an underpaid government engineer struggling with 2 columns a week in papers like the Himalaya Times that didn't sell. Three years on, he's become a successful columnist on a handsome payroll with a well-known publishing house (I'm assuming that the Dixits preach what they practice and don't exploit their workers). But he doesn't seem to have mended his way of making claims that can't be factually backed.
I'm not asking him to run regressions, but I had to bring up the issue of rigor because he does acknowledge that empirical studies were needed to determine "precision". What he then goes on to claim proves that his preceding statement is dishonest. And I only responded because this was a topic I closely watch myself in Nepal. Don't know how researched or exaggerated his claims are in the other topics that he writes about. I wouldn't know.
There are so few writers of his caliber that I really want to see him stay on top, and not degenerate because readers are saying "wah wah" to anything that he writes, the check from the editors is arriving regardless, and that Lal of promise becomes the next victim of complacency in a land where to challenge someone is always interpreted personally. Thank god, I don't know him at all, so I can assure him and others that my response was written in good faith with full honesty as a well-wisher. I really want to read him regularly, but won't if he churns out similar outputs again.
And Ashu, you say Lal enjoys laughter in person. But his writings that I've read so far have no sense of humor. So, does the pagari of "articulate comedian" refer to Lal the person or Lal the writer? I suppose reference to the former would be very flattering, and the latter would be very insulting - like Pradip Giri telling Girija that he was very impressed by his president's "reading habits" and "love for books" :) Giri claimed (over many glasses of beer hence suspect credibility) that he said this at the Congress Central Committee meeting in February. I wonder if it's been noted in the official minutes. It surely would be Nepal's BEST POLITICAL JOKE EVER if Giri's claim has indeed been officially recorded :)
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 12:47 PM
Mostly, I like CK Lal. I haven't tested the validity of his numbers, so it is
very unpleasant news for me that he is not very careful about numbers he
provides. But I liked his articles very much in the past. I particularly remember
one about his excursion to a hilly region which was also a Maoist Bastion, and also
liked his travel piece on Tikapur.
I don't agree with his anti-American vituperation,however, but I enjoy reading
them too:-) Part of the problem is in Neplitimes, he is among few good writers. I
have a particular dislike for Kunda's column. In his last " 'sup dudes"(I don't read
them regularly, but it looks like whichever I read were very disagreeable !), he
even fantasizes himself as being the subject of talks of kids in internet chat. Oh,
come on,he probably likes to see himself and his column as such 'household'
phenomenon, but I don't think that is more than self-aggrandizement.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 30-Apr-02 09:50 PM
Writing a column in a newspaper (or for that matter, posting stuff on a Web site) is an act of public trust.
The public has a right to demand that your numbers add up correctly,
that your use of evidence is sound, that your logic is valid, and that if you make
factual mistakes, you own up to them publicly.
Else, why bother writing opinion pieces?
(Sure, some people may still disagree with your conclusions, but at least
they will see HOW you arrive at your conclusions -- that's what good, vigorous non-fiction writing is all about.)
Viewed this way -- and as much I like CK Lal as a person, and I do really like
him -- I, for one, remain ambivalent about the importance/relevance of his columns, largely because, yes:
a) his numbers rarely add up;
b) he is more interested in asserting conclusions than developing verifiably true arguments that support those conclusions;
c) he makes sweeping generalizatons based on isolated examples,
d) and, for someone trained as a civil engineer, he seems not to know that correlation is different from causation.
Look, you can use the smoothest of expressions, and your sentences may flow
like the waters of Kali Gandaki, but if the element of truth is not there -- not once, not twice, but consistently -- then you've failed as a columnist.
Who cares how well you can write?
Writers at National Inquirer write well too.
Does that mean anything?
No.
A few week ago, to cite another example, C K Lal asserted in his column that Narayan Gopal was once a taxi-driver.
NG's wife Pemala Gurubacharya herself disputed that claim in The Nepali Times, saying something to the effect that NG never went near the steerng wheel of a car, let alone ever drove taxis for living.
As a fan of NG myself, I have since informally talked with four senior musicians
so far (all NG's contemporaries, including Bacchu Kailash dai), and all of
them have NO recollection whatsoever of NG's ever being a taxi driver.
I mean, I WANT to believe CK Lal.
But with hard-to-verify assertions like that, I really don't know what to say.
And when examples like this add up . . . well, you know.
I can't call him a liar, that sounds too harsh, so I am willing to settle something
borrowed and twisted from m favorite comedian: Mr. Woody Allen.
Good comedy equals
= suspenson of logic followed by exaggerations, caricatures, non sequiters, sweeing generalizaions and so on.
Finally, I do NOT believe that CK Dai, at the grand old age of 40-something is going to mend his ways as Paschm seems to hope.
The antidote is to hope that more and more younger/vgorous writers will start becoming columnists for Nepali newspapers and provide ALTERNATIVE ways of making valid arguments in public.
Thay way, CK Lal will have his space; but so will others who write differently
from him -- and the readers can decide for themselves what kind of writing
they like better.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 01-May-02 11:12 AM
Paschim:
You could have gotten serious consideration for publication if you had not started so blatantly critical. It sounds like you are actually insulting their main columnist, which is never a good strategy. One can be respectful and point out the weakness. Just my two cents from editorial experiences.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 01-May-02 04:46 PM
Thanks to Florida's SS-ji's informative email, a bit of digging up shows that Rupert Murdoch's company -- News Corporation -- owns, among its various holdings,
both TV stations and a newspaper in New York City.
This evidence is taken from:
http://www.cjr.org/owners/newscorp.asp
As per the Web link above, Murdoch's News Corporation owns:
WNYW (TV) in New York City
WWOR (TV) in New York City
and the newspaper
New York Post
http://www.nypost.com/
There you have it: one company, and an Australian company at that, with cross-ownership of both broadcast and print media in one locality that's New York City.
So much for the validity of CK Lal's sweeping assertion!!
****************
Though it IS true that US ko Federal Communications Commision (FCC) did
have rules prohibiting cross-ownership of broadcast and print media in a
locality, it appears that in recent years, due to the changing nature of media businesses, that prohibition itself has been under intense debates/discussions
and up for modifications.
[More on this when Mr. P Thapa, a very helpful reference librarian at Kathmandu's American Cener provides more details on FCC's rules, regulations and recent changes.]
For our purposes now, with the counter-example above intact, it's now safe to say that reading CK Lal's essay (The Nepali Times, April 26-May 2 2002), one would get a blatantly SELECTIVE, distorted and unnuanced picture of the
truth re: the latest stuff on media ownership in the US.
I don't know what one calls such a practice, but -- having discerned this sort of disturbing, truth-fudging pattern in many of his essays -- I would now call it: The art of misleading one's unsuspecting readers with half-truths and lies -- and that's a charge I, as a mere reader, am increasingly more comfortable flinging at CK Lal.
That said, does anyone know how one can verify whether, as asserted by
C K Lal in one of his columns, the famous singer Narayan Gopal was once a taxi-driver?
My contention is that NG was never a taxi-driver, and I suspect that CK Lal just made that "fact" up to spice up his column -- but I would be more than happy
to be proven wrong!!
See, the thing is, in Nepal, it's very difficult and even dangerous to:
a) like someone as a person; and
b) criticize (with unemotional facts and cold reasons, and with a touch of diplomacy) that person's public work in public in an attempt to get to
the shards of truth.
But, ke garne, one takes risks and lives and learns, to a not-always happy conclusion. :-)
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Balbhadra |
Posted
on 01-May-02 05:47 PM
Also for information sake, News Corp. ( Media Moghul ) owns Sky tv in britain and The Times newspaper in Britain.
|
| Balbhadra |
Posted
on 01-May-02 05:52 PM
Sorry for the last post. It was incomplete. Its should have been Rupert Murdoch ( Media Moghul owner of News Corp ) owns the tv station Sky and also the biggest paper in Britain, The Times.
|
| business consolidation |
Posted
on 01-May-02 06:56 PM
AOL Time Warner is organized around its core growth drivers—subscription services, advertising and commerce, and content—to maximize the value of the company's unique combination of brands and other assets and to drive the next wave of growth that will transform the landscape of media and communications.
Our Companies
America Online
AOL Time Warner Interactive Video
Turner Broadcasting
Home Box Office
AOL Time Warner Book Group
Time Inc.
Warner Bros.
New Line Cinema
Warner Music Group
Time Warner Cable
|
| U2 |
Posted
on 01-May-02 07:44 PM
Reading CK Lal's several writings, I have noticed that he is
- pro Girija and,
- anti Kantipur publications
But, no problem with that.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 01-May-02 08:21 PM
Siwalik, thanks a lot. Will have to keep that in mind when I go berserk next time over somebody else's writing :)
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 01-May-02 09:53 PM
Hi all,
CK Lal, the columnist, is entitled to his biases, prejudices and opinions.
That is why, as a reader, I would think that it is perfectly all right for him
to be anti-America, or pro-Girija or anti-Kantipur or whatever, as long as
he is CONSISTENT within those molds.
That's fine.
But when he asserts something in public, when he makes arguments in public, when he reaches conclusions about anything in public, he'd better back up
those assertions, conclusions and arguments with:
VERIFIABLy true evidence and
with solid homework, and
NOT give us readers doses of half-truths, vague statements,
misleading sentences and so on.
We the Nepali readers are not idiots and we deserve better.
And column writing IS a very tough job.
I make all these comments as a well-wisher of CK Lal's writing career, and also as someone who genuinely likes CK Lal as a person.
If he takes my (and Paschim's comments) personally and negatively, well, that'll
make an interesting irony, for CK Lal the prolific writer is also on record for
writing something to the effect that critical questioning of one another's work
is urgently needed in Nepal.
He, BTW, is always welcome to challenge my assertions, conclusions and arguments.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 01-May-02 09:56 PM
Hi all,
CK Lal, the columnist, is entitled to his biases, prejudices and opinions.
That is why, as a reader, I would think that it is perfectly all right for him
to be anti-America, or pro-Girija or anti-Kantipur or whatever, as long as
he is CONSISTENT within those molds.
That's fine.
But when he asserts something in public, when he makes arguments in public, when he reaches conclusions about anything in public, he'd better back up
those assertions, conclusions and arguments with:
VERIFIABLy true evidence and
with solid homework, and
NOT give us readers doses of half-truths, vague statements,
misleading sentences and so on.
We the Nepali readers are not idiots and we deserve better.
And column writing IS a very tough job.
I make all these comments as a well-wisher of CK Lal's writing career, and also as someone who genuinely likes CK Lal as a person.
If he takes my (and Paschim's comments) personally and negatively, well, that'll
make an interesting irony, for CK Lal the prolific writer is also on record for
writing something to the effect that critical questioning of one another's work
is urgently needed in Nepal.
He, BTW, is always welcome to challenge my assertions, conclusions and arguments. Questioning one another remains the best way to learn new
things and ideas.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| id |
Posted
on 01-May-02 10:02 PM
>>I make all these comments as a well-wisher of CK Lal's writing career, and also >>as someone who genuinely likes CK Lal as a person.
If it is indeed so, I guess you will send a copy of your posting to CK lal personally.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 01-May-02 10:27 PM
Ashu, familiar and convincing, as always. When is YOUR column beginning? I will look for that Alternative style you mentioned when you begin your stint as a young columnist. Keep us posted.
Biswo, the point was not that Mr. Lal is just careless with numbers, but that he rarely provides any. So it's not that he is "economical" with the truth, but "bankrupt" with it AT TIMES. And bankruptcy is universally unpleasant (I'm told, it's even worse than being dumped by a girl without warning).
But you are right about some of his notable columns. The ones I have particularly liked are his OPINIONATED pieces against Maoist terror, and against these arm-chair rights activists...he's good at highlighting hypocrisies that need plain observations, not an emprical study for assertions, such as talking about people who, say, participate in an anti child labor rally during the afternoon to return home to drink tea made by an unpaid and exploited nine-year-old girl worker from Dolakha in the evening. But I'd expect some numbers and hard facts when he talks about the "devastating" and "ruining" consequences of a few MINOR policy changes. That's all. Not a great deal to ask really.
|
| genX |
Posted
on 02-May-02 05:29 PM
I am not much into politics nor I care too much about it. Cause its so frustrating and I don't owe anything to it. But my point is I like ashu's style of writing. And he /she should write on a paper. Or are you already columnist in some newspaper?..Please let me know. I am surprised with the contrast of a thread "bahun haters" and these kind of "chintans" from all these intellectual people.This site is awesome. Please keep writing. Someday, I would hope to come up with a decent topic to discuss from all your inspiration.
p.s. I watch MTV.
|
| waiwai |
Posted
on 02-May-02 05:58 PM
I read CK Lals columns not for the statistical interpretations, but rather for his opinion. So I as a reader, although at times in disagreements with his opinion, was not bothered by the fact that his column did not have any concrete data or (whatever is needed) to make it a masterpiece of journalism. In fact it would have bored me to see such things in HIS columns. He is not an economist by profession (maybe he is, i don't know) and he is not writing in that capacity. If he can write opinion pieces on Maoism without providing (again, whatever is needed to prove whatever), and people like it, why is it a big deal when he asserts some things about US- Nepal relationship with the help of some sloganistic (is that a word) words.
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 02-May-02 09:10 PM
Waiwai-ji, I understand your point. But if you kindly referred to that last paragraph of my last posting above, I express MY OPINION on when and what kind of topics can do with "informed opinions" and what kind are better with "hard facts". I have appreciated Mr. Lal for the former, found him wanting on the latter. If the latter is not his forte, it would be good for his reputation to avoid writing on them WITHOUT some homework. So that readers like Ashu don't ALMOST reach a point to call him a "liar", and readers like myself don't brand him an occasional "charlatan". Tyetti ho. If you don't agree, let's leave the issue at this. Thanks.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 03-May-02 12:01 AM
Why should we be statistical and with proofs?
There are two categories of peoples one of
classical peoples who usually write things based on
their intution and a lot of self guessed data generation.
One of them is Khagendra Sangroula in Nepal's current
news media, mostly liked by UML or leftist cadres, who
blindly take his write ups without asking for proofs, because
he use sentimental language and his readers are either
young or less educated peoples like Driver and khalasi
class, who can be enjoyed be things and who don't need
or seek validity, and their preference is usually psychological
writings and Communists are very good in such write ups.
Such writings are temporary and can be overwritten by
another good writer with good writing skills, its like
boxers in the ring, and in every new series a new boxer
comes with replaces the old hero.
The other class of peoples are not interested with fact less
but, sentimental write ups. When they read things, they,
take sentimental writing style as just a presentation method,
but, they consider the writing style is secondary, but,
primary requirement in a write up is VALIDITY of the contents.
They are primarily concerned with the contents, and it
should be reproducible i.e. the conclusion should be such
that if others follow the same procedure they should arrive
at the same destination. This is the demand of time.
Such conclusions are not temporary, and therefore, very
hard to be arrived. In this case, you are asked to take
responsibility, and produce proofs.
Well, this can realized through the BRB's write up in June 4 at
Kantipur, which is fully profanity run by BRB, which had no
proofs and finally, his writing was equivalently put in garbage.
Well, BRB fans will keep on reading his writings and they also
keep on enjoying for a short range of time, and they never
go and dig whether previous and current writing has contradictory
contents. One of them in BRB's writing was, he praised Birendra
and praised PNShah.... and wanted to enjoy public mood, and I heard
he later criticized himself. His writings were targetted to the
common peoples, who like to read "so called great writers", but,
never bother about the data and its validity. CK Lal seems to have
developed himself to the publicly accepted writer from this method,
because he had good presentation style, but, when some one
comes to this level, the peoples who are more interested in data
and real contents, less interested in style of presentation, start
reviewing his write ups and their validity. When the writers with
such publicity, try to enter into the circle of the writers who
are more interested in data based writing over excellent presentation
targetted to common peoples, will not accept him so easily and
ask the new entrants to validate his/her writings. Thus, the lack
of his/her ability on research oriented (data) writings, will feel
in-secured and will not bother to answer the questions raised by
the 2nd category of writers who write things based on data.
Now, CK Lal is not accepted by Paschim, or Ashu or ... peoples
because CK Lal does not have idea or he does not have interest
or his majority of readers are not interested in data based writings.
Thus, he does not have to be accountable from validity point of
view (data / statistical reasoning). This is the border line between
scholar writers and classical intution based writers. This difference
will continue. The 2nd category writers need a lot of effort and time
while first category needs no time, just a few hour fresh silent
room is enough .......... and the readership also does not last long too.
CK Lal if he thinks him self as a new brand, then, he should be accountable
and move to producing data to validate his reasonings. Otherwise,
the peer reviewers from 2nd category of writers will never accept him
as a real accountable writer. Its something like a big branded electronic
goods produce vs a cheap brandless-brand (this is new brand in Japan,
banner less banner, that runs around KTM main roads .. .), or take a small
coffiee house to MC Donald's coffiee. Will the small coffiee house be
punished like 600,000US dollars for not informing an old woman that
the coffiee she received is hot (180deg. F), the way McDonald was
fined a few years back? No. Similarly, if CK Lal, has to remain as
a good writer and survive the peer reviews on him that will start
flooding after certain time. Otherwise, he will start finding himself
downward, when the peer reviewers start pouring asking him to
spend sometime on data. Its time for him to select which way he
wants to go ahead. If he selects data based writings, probably,
he can be in the ring for long time, like Myke tyson, or Mohamad Ali,
otherwise, the peer reviews on him will bring awareness on his
readers (a sectoin) and he will be confined to a small section of
readers like Khagendra Sangroula now enjoys the young
communist minds.
hGxP
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 03-May-02 01:06 AM
Paschim et al,
Will keep you posted re: when my column debuts. Just spending some time, reading some background stuff and talking to relevant people and gathering materials, and so on.
Unlike CK Lal, I will be confining my writings to issues affecting the relations
among Nepal's nascent private sector (my area of work), the government
and the public at large. Will look forward to your and others' critical comments/feedbacks so that more peer-to-peer learning comes
about for us all.
Hahoo-ji is right: Khagendra Sangraula, who I also know quite well through
Martin Chautari ko network, is another writer whose seductively-smooth
writing style allows him to say some of the most outrageous and dishonest
things, and GET AWAY.
Consider two of these glaring examples:
a) Right after that shameful hritik roshan episode (in which some innocent people were killed) in December 2000, Khagendra Dai published an article praising the actions of hooligans who wanted to burn down Gopi Krishna Cinema Hall in Chabel. He called the owner of that cinema hall -- Mr. Uddhav Poudel -- a traitor and argued that he deserved what he got from the angry masses . . . for showing, well, Hindi movies.
My question: Regardless of what you think of Hindi movies and of Uddhav Poudel, since when has it been acceptable, for a writer no less, to publicly praise vandalism and destruction of other people's property?
b) When Mr. Ram Pradhan, a veteran Nepali journalist, accepted the top job
with The Himalayan Times English daily newspaper, which has both Nepali and
Indian investors, Khagendra Dai wrote another blistering (with support from Kantipur's cowardly management) branding Ram Pradhan as a "bideshi dalal"
who should be boycotted.
My question: Whatever one thinks of Ram Pradhan or of the Himalayan
Times, since when has it been acceptable, for a writer, to pass damning,
public judgement on other Nepali's career choices?
***********
I could go on, giving you MORE examples of Khagendra's Dai's well-written
but sentimentally seductive and ill-argued conspiracy theories
re: the Palace Massacre (he thinks, without offering any evidence to support
his claim, that Dipendra was framed, and because some people believe him, he takes that to mean that he is the only one person speaking the TRUTH on this matter!),
re: the US ko war on terrorism (his muddled comments show how he suffers
from the ideologically doctrinaire of his die-hard Marxist-Leninist days)
re: his on and off support of the Maoists (he thinks Maoism without violence
is OK. My point: Maoism IS violence and let's not kid ourselves by thinking
otherwise.)
CK Lal (Nepali Congress) and Khagendra Sangraula (the Nepali Left) -- both excellent writers -- have been getting away with all their assertions and
hard-to-be-believe claims because few of us have asked them: "Hey, wait a
moment. What's the source of your this, this and that claims? What's your
back-up evidence?"
It's so easy to get "wah, wah" in Nepal, and it's so easy to let, after some time, that get to one's head, and stop doing really good work.
And so, it's time we the readers started asking those questions to these and
other Nepali writers.
We have to ask those questions and more, NOT because we want to diss
these writers for nothing, but because we the readers want them to do
even better by keeping them on their toes.
That's so because, to borrow the NBA player Charles Barkeley's words from another context, "anything less, would be uncivilized."
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| gorkhali student |
Posted
on 03-May-02 03:20 AM
good analysis ! only readers of self-conscience like you will direct the writers to move in the right path. Our country needs more and more readers like you. Keep it up ! Alas ! when will more nepali people have such ability to understand speeches and writings of so called leaders and intellectuals ? when peoples of remote areas will also have that ability, then there will be no chance of borning new baburam and prachanda; no such articles will mislead the simple minded nepali poeple.At that time, our democracy will be really strong.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 03-May-02 10:55 AM
Quality and nature of writings will be, in most part, determined by the quality of readership. If the readers are not careful and critical, then the writers will be encouraged to get away with murder. That is not a good path to follow. So we should be vigilant and take actions to hold these writers accountable for their assertions! Me thinks!
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 03-May-02 11:14 AM
Siwalikji:
Tara khai these writers have shown willingness to amend themselves?
See, Khagendra Sangraula I like him for his other works, writing style, for his some
of those very precise observation. I discount his political articles, they are
platitudinous, and predictable!
Accusations on CK Lal disturbed me. I wish he would be more careful on numbers.
Re Narayan Gopal, I don't think he meant to dupe people. May be he was thinking
a guy to be Narayan Gopal while he wasn't.
Harm has been done to CK Lal almost irreparably. It may take sometimes for him to
realise this,however. I realised this a couple of days ago, when I was reading his
one article in Himal (Nepali) (see http://www.nepalihimal.com/baisakh1-15-2059/tippani.htm ).
Found that he was translating Feckless Plularism as Laxyashunya Bahulbaad. May
be he is right, but I think the appropriate translation for that is 'Anuttardaayi
Bahulbaad'. And I was surprised that now I have started to doubt the veracity of
his articles, like others here!
|
| ananta |
Posted
on 03-May-02 12:02 PM
Bishowji, Deng Xiao Ping said that persons of 60% good can be taken as good person. For CK lal's article also, we can comment in the same way. Let's hope that these writers will also correct their false assumptions and mistakes in their next articles. Now nepeli writers should understand that nepali readers are also becoming more informative and have more analytical ability to judge their articles
|
| from gorakha |
Posted
on 03-May-02 12:04 PM
Bishowji, Deng Xiao Ping said that persons of 60% good can be taken as good person. For CK lal's article also, we can comment in the same way. Let's hope that these writers will also correct their false assumptions and mistakes in their next articles. I am also one of the regular reader of CK lal and Khagendra Sangaraula. Now nepeli writers should be aware that nepali readers are also becoming more informative and have more analytical ability to judge their articles.
|
| from gorakha |
Posted
on 03-May-02 12:05 PM
Bishowji, Deng Xiao Ping said that persons of 60% good can be taken as good person. For CK lal's article also, we can comment in the same way. Let's hope that these writers will also correct their false assumptions and mistakes in their next articles. I am also one of the regular reader of CK lal and Khagendra Sangaraula. Now nepeli writers should be aware that nepali readers are also becoming more informative and have more analytical ability to judge their articles.
|
| waiwai |
Posted
on 03-May-02 06:37 PM
I have to admit that i am in agreement with the contention that we must hold journalist to a higher degree of scrutiny on the issues they report on, and that empirical and verifiable evidences should be used to support their arguments. I do see that lacking not only in CK lals columns but in a lot of other colums in Nepali times in general (maybe becase i only have access to the online version).
On a related note, I have found that the stories/ articles on Spotlight weekly are a lot better at this. They seem to tackle a wider range of issues which i find refreshing. Check out this story about population
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/contents/englishweekly/spotlight/2002/may/may03/coverstory.htm
what are your thoughts
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 07-May-02 08:15 PM
Ok, better late than never.
Glad to see that my unpublished letter to the editor to NT has been published in an edited form this week. I don't know if it just took one more week to torture and hack my letter or it simply joined a long queue, or that they were influenced by strong comments on this board, whatever the reason, I am glad they published the letter in the end.
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/ntimes/issue92/letters.htm#4
I thank the editor of Nepali Times for this gesture.
|
