| Username |
Post |
| Biswo |
Posted
on 17-May-01 10:29 PM
Sorry for being out of the discussion for sometimes, as I was
spending my time out of electronic world (except once) in the
southern part of USA (around Mississipi and Florida).
First of all, I was both happy and dismayed at Suman Pradhan's
response. That Suman came to this website is a great news, and
I want to thank him for this. However, the response was not
great. He appears unwilling to do anything against his collegue.
Such kind of cronyism is the same disease Suman and his paper
is alleging Mr Girija Koirala of being suffering from. I think
he should make his punishment public, so that people know about
such punishment and don't ever try to repeat such deeds. If
Madhupark can make such punishment public, why not TKP? (Well,
may be because TKP is not run by public fund, is it?)
Professor Aiken of Cal Berkeley invented Moss Technology which
is used by professors to detect plagiarism in schools.It is pretty
new technology, and please visit his website (he is faculty
of computer science at Berkeley) for info about that tool. It
compares different files. If Sumanji is serious about investing
a few rupees, he can ask a university professor in Kathmandu to
make software tool that can check all the articles to the
available articles in websites. (I don't know if some professors
already made such tools!)Moss tools are freely distributed to
universities.(A rich organization like Kantipur Publication is
surely not averse to funding a small research project in TU
or in KU, I guess.)
Kantipur Publication is known more for its monolithic presence
in the fourth state of Nepal. Its omnipotency was a subject of
this discussion site once before also. It is also famous for
earning money like nobodyelse did before. Certainly its knack
for getting business is praiseworthy. Its knack for getting
things done is commendable. Its presence in electronic media is
making it a formidable microsoftic presence in Nepal. It will not
be long before the publication will be advertised in every village
of Nepal , parallelling small ubiquitous boards of Coca cola.
Such a big company shouldn't appear pussilanimous in front of
those perpertrators who want to make it foolish by printing
derived articles. I am not a friend of kantipur publication, but
I know its effect among Nepali populace,and I want it to be
veracious and a morally sound organization, at least until
another better publication house outclasses it.
Finally, Diwas Khati deserves kudos for his vigilance.Great job,
man.
|
| suman |
Posted
on 18-May-01 04:26 AM
Biswoji,
maybe you have heard of something called the due process of law. That's what we are in the midst of right now at the Post. Yes, the charges of plagiarism appears to be true, and we have accepted it has such. But we still have our own enquiry going on. we are not going to speak about it until the enquiry is over. then maybe, just maybe, we could make it public. but for the moment, that's it.
we also reject your charges of croynism. pls back it up with evidence. as for your diatribe about kantipur publications and what a monolithic presence it has been in Nepal, well we can't help it. if people want to read kantipur, then they will. the success of kantipur hasn't led to the suppression of other voices here, now has it? if that were the cas, then it would be worrying indeed. but nepal's media scene is famously diverse.
your info about the softwar tool sounds interesting. we'll check it out.
regards,
suman
the kathmandu post
>Sorry for being out of the discussion for
>sometimes, as I was
>spending my time out of electronic world (
>except once) in the
>southern part of USA (around Mississipi and
>Florida).
>
>First of all, I was both happy and dismayed
>at Suman Pradhan's
>response. That Suman came to this website is
>a great news, and
>I want to thank him for this. However, the
>response was not
>great. He appears unwilling to do anything
>against his collegue.
>Such kind of cronyism is the same disease
>Suman and his paper
>is alleging Mr Girija Koirala of being
>suffering from. I think
>he should make his punishment public, so
>that people know about
>such punishment and don't ever try to repeat
>such deeds. If
>Madhupark can make such punishment public,
>why not TKP? (Well,
>may be because TKP is not run by public fund,
> is it?)
>
>Professor Aiken of Cal Berkeley invented
>Moss Technology which
>is used by professors to detect plagiarism
>in schools.It is pretty
>new technology, and please visit his website
>(he is faculty
>of computer science at Berkeley) for info
>about that tool. It
>compares different files. If Sumanji is
>serious about investing
>a few rupees, he can ask a university
>professor in Kathmandu to
>make software tool that can check all the
>articles to the
>available articles in websites. (I don't
>know if some professors
>already made such tools!)Moss tools are
>freely distributed to
>universities.(A rich organization like
>Kantipur Publication is
>surely not averse to funding a small
>research project in TU
>or in KU, I guess.)
>
>Kantipur Publication is known more for its
>monolithic presence
>in the fourth state of Nepal. Its
>omnipotency was a subject of
>this discussion site once before also. It is
>also famous for
>earning money like nobodyelse did before.
>Certainly its knack
>for getting business is praiseworthy. Its
>knack for getting
>things done is commendable. Its presence in
>electronic media is
>making it a formidable microsoftic presence
>in Nepal. It will not
>be long before the publication will be
>advertised in every village
>of Nepal , parallelling small ubiquitous
>boards of Coca cola.
>Such a big company shouldn't appear
>pussilanimous in front of
>those perpertrators who want to make it
>foolish by printing
>derived articles. I am not a friend of
>kantipur publication, but
>I know its effect among Nepali populace,and
>I want it to be
>veracious and a morally sound organization,
>at least until
>another better publication house outclasses
>it.
>
>Finally, Diwas Khati deserves kudos for his
>vigilance.Great job,
>man.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 18-May-01 01:46 PM
Dear Sumanji:
To begin with, let me reaffirm my belief on your integrity. Your
readiness to field questions raised in this site has only
reinforced my belief. You are one of those persons quoted
with respect here. However, all things being equal, let me
go over your posting:
>maybe you have heard of something called the due process of law.
>That's what we are in the midst of right now at the Post. Yes,
>the charges of plagiarism appears to be true, and we have
>accepted it has such. But we still have our own enquiry going on.
>we are not going to speak about it until the enquiry is over.
>then maybe, just maybe, we could make it public. but for the
>moment, that's it.
Here, you write about the 'probability' of making the action
against those people public. Great. My charge stemmed from
your previous posting where you have written this way:
1. You intend to black list outsider writer.
2. You don't want to tell us what you will do against insiders.
Insiders or your collegue or your friend or your crony. Let's
go over your previous posting from "From The Kathmandu Post: re
plagiarism charges ":
" We are certainly taking steps to black-list outside contributors
who have managed to publish plagiarised articles in the Post. "
"As for our in-house staff who have committed this glaring error
of judgement, we are very serious about that too, indeed more so.
How we deal with the situation is entirely up to us and we don't
intend to make that public."
Why this two forms of justice for the same crime?
I am sure you have noted the inconsistency of your response in
these two posting. In the first posting, you don't even intend to
make the dealing with the in-house writer public.
Sumanji, plagiarism is an infinite phenomenon in the fourth
state of Nepal.Quite a few Nepali newspapers don't bother to
attribute the pictures taken and published from foreign
newspapers/magazine. We grew up looking at such pictures in
Bimarsha, Dristi and other private papers(viewspapers). But
plagiarising an entire article is a different matter. Madhupark
has been routinely a victim of such writers. In the past, writers
like Indra Narayan Shrestha,Ram Bikram Sijapati, Kushal Mishra
were charged with such practice. Law,of course, has its own due
process. But law and its process need to be transparent. We
,at least, know what Madhupark did to those writers.
>we also reject your charges of croynism. pls back it up with
>evidence.
My evidence is stated above. Your posting tells us there are
two forms of justice for the same crime: softer for in-house
reporter, and tougher for out-house reporter.
As a boss of one of the most respected newspapers of Nepal, you
are in an unique and covetous position of becoming a marksman of
the fourth state against all these corrupt practices. It is of
course up to you to decide how to respond to such expectations
from readers like me.
>as for your diatribe about kantipur publications and what
>monolithic presence it has been in Nepal, well we can't help it.
>if people want to read kantipur, then they will.
My diatribe? Sorry Sumanji. Criticisms are not diatribes.
As for its monolithic presence, we all know how ubiquitous
Kantipur publication is.we are talking about obvious fact here.
There were a few discussions about the power of Kantipur
publication in this website already (please refer to thread
titled "Novel Kishore Rai" written by "by way of Sachit Rajbanshi"
of last post" 08/15/00" and titled "A reply to bishwa-ji" by
"ashu" last posted on "08/22/00" )so I don't want to repeat it
here.
I read Kantipur. I have published my own stories in
Kantipur Koseli a few years ago. It is powerful, but I am not
charging it of abusing its power. What I am afraid of is it
is capable of abusing its power.As a reader, I want a healthy
competition between a few nongovernment publication houses, which
is helpful to establish a democratic Nepal and conscious Nepali
society. Girija Koirala is an inept and corrupt PM, but I think
he is somewhat correct in his infamous saying about tycoonism in
nepali media.
> the success of kantipur hasn't led to the suppression of other
> voices here, now has it? if that were the cas, then it would be
> worrying indeed. but nepal's media scene is famously diverse.
Yes, sir. I didn't mean to imply suppresion of other media by KP.&
I am very glad to hear that your organization will not be indulged
in such practice in the future also. We all want KP to be
as responsible as it is today, while simultaneously we readers
all know that power infamously mollycoddles the puissants.
We have quoted publications of KP here regularly. When we
criticize TKP or KP, we criticize it for the wellbeing of the
society and KP itself.Minor mistakes like factual
misrepresentation (Kantipur once wrote France was heading European
Council while Sweden was heading at the time/see the posting
"kantipuronline sucks") are presented just for info. I believe
that the case of plagiarism has caused public uproar here, because
that was the case of ultimate violation of our belief.
>your info about the softwar tool sounds interesting. we'll check
>it out.
> regards,
> suman
> the kathmandu post
Thank you very much. The information is a public property.
|
| suman |
Posted
on 19-May-01 12:40 AM
Dear Biswoji,
You talk of double standards in the Post's dealing with the plagiarists. If it appears as such, then I must say it was unintended. We are not using any double standards here. We are in the midst of an enquiry regarding both the cases.
If our enquiry also concludes what you all have concluded, then we will be taking action as warranted. Obviously we can't sack an outside contributor or even reprimand him/her. we can however ensure that the writer is black-listed.
As for in-house staff, we can take the ultimate action, or decide on less severe ones. What we decide depends very much on what we find through a formal enquiry, and of course the answers given by the accused, whether he/she committed the error knowingly, or whether the sub-editor who edited the peice chucked out the relevant portions from the article. So there's no question of a different yardstick here.
What we all are concerned about is the drubbing the Post has gotten from its readers because of these two incidents. We value your criticism, and thank you all for that. Otherwise we would not have replied to your concerns (which has now become our prime concerns here.)
Regarding your criticism about Kantipur's monolothic presence, I cannot agree with it. If you are a reader of all of Kantipur's journals, including kantipur, ktm post, nepal, saptahik and sarvottam, as well as listen and browse kantipuronline and kantipur fm, you will see that the editorial policies of these various publications do not even converge. on many issues, they are not even one voice. the post might be supporting a particular government policy, but kantipur will be blasting that just as well.
What I'm saying is that, even discounting Nepal's diverse media scene, even inside Kantipur publications itself there are a plethora of different voices that get aired in print, air and the web.
But that's not too say we don't get your concerns. in the US too, major conglomerates control major media outlets (just look at the AOL time warner group, or westinghouse which controls CBS, or GE which has a controlling stake in NBC, or how ABC's investigative peice about tobacco got derailed by its corporate bosses at Disney). This is a worldwide phenomena and the debate too is global. we are also just beginning to grapple with it over here.
I agree that one way to address this would be through a healthy competition between publications. That it hasn't happened probably tells a lot about the lack of journalistic and business skills of our competitors rather than the lack of opportunities. but things seem to be changing now. there's Himal media as well as Space Time goup which are establishing themselves, and Kamana publications is also becoming more professional. we welcome the competition and hope that it helps keep us on our toes.
regards
suman
>Sorry for being out of the discussion for
>sometimes, as I was
>spending my time out of electronic world (
>except once) in the
>southern part of USA (around Mississipi and
>Florida).
>
>First of all, I was both happy and dismayed
>at Suman Pradhan's
>response. That Suman came to this website is
>a great news, and
>I want to thank him for this. However, the
>response was not
>great. He appears unwilling to do anything
>against his collegue.
>Such kind of cronyism is the same disease
>Suman and his paper
>is alleging Mr Girija Koirala of being
>suffering from. I think
>he should make his punishment public, so
>that people know about
>such punishment and don't ever try to repeat
>such deeds. If
>Madhupark can make such punishment public,
>why not TKP? (Well,
>may be because TKP is not run by public fund,
> is it?)
>
>Professor Aiken of Cal Berkeley invented
>Moss Technology which
>is used by professors to detect plagiarism
>in schools.It is pretty
>new technology, and please visit his website
>(he is faculty
>of computer science at Berkeley) for info
>about that tool. It
>compares different files. If Sumanji is
>serious about investing
>a few rupees, he can ask a university
>professor in Kathmandu to
>make software tool that can check all the
>articles to the
>available articles in websites. (I don't
>know if some professors
>already made such tools!)Moss tools are
>freely distributed to
>universities.(A rich organization like
>Kantipur Publication is
>surely not averse to funding a small
>research project in TU
>or in KU, I guess.)
>
>Kantipur Publication is known more for its
>monolithic presence
>in the fourth state of Nepal. Its
>omnipotency was a subject of
>this discussion site once before also. It is
>also famous for
>earning money like nobodyelse did before.
>Certainly its knack
>for getting business is praiseworthy. Its
>knack for getting
>things done is commendable. Its presence in
>electronic media is
>making it a formidable microsoftic presence
>in Nepal. It will not
>be long before the publication will be
>advertised in every village
>of Nepal , parallelling small ubiquitous
>boards of Coca cola.
>Such a big company shouldn't appear
>pussilanimous in front of
>those perpertrators who want to make it
>foolish by printing
>derived articles. I am not a friend of
>kantipur publication, but
>I know its effect among Nepali populace,and
>I want it to be
>veracious and a morally sound organization,
>at least until
>another better publication house outclasses
>it.
>
>Finally, Diwas Khati deserves kudos for his
>vigilance.Great job,
>man.
|
| suman |
Posted
on 19-May-01 12:40 AM
Dear Biswoji,
You talk of double standards in the Post's dealing with the plagiarists. If it appears as such, then I must say it was unintended. We are not using any double standards here. We are in the midst of an enquiry regarding both the cases.
If our enquiry also concludes what you all have concluded, then we will be taking action as warranted. Obviously we can't sack an outside contributor or even reprimand him/her. we can however ensure that the writer is black-listed.
As for in-house staff, we can take the ultimate action, or decide on less severe ones. What we decide depends very much on what we find through a formal enquiry, and of course the answers given by the accused, whether he/she committed the error knowingly, or whether the sub-editor who edited the peice chucked out the relevant portions from the article. So there's no question of a different yardstick here.
What we all are concerned about is the drubbing the Post has gotten from its readers because of these two incidents. We value your criticism, and thank you all for that. Otherwise we would not have replied to your concerns (which has now become our prime concerns here.)
Regarding your criticism about Kantipur's monolothic presence, I cannot agree with it. If you are a reader of all of Kantipur's journals, including kantipur, ktm post, nepal, saptahik and sarvottam, as well as listen and browse kantipuronline and kantipur fm, you will see that the editorial policies of these various publications do not even converge. on many issues, they are not even one voice. the post might be supporting a particular government policy, but kantipur will be blasting that just as well.
What I'm saying is that, even discounting Nepal's diverse media scene, even inside Kantipur publications itself there are a plethora of different voices that get aired in print, air and the web.
But that's not too say we don't get your concerns. in the US too, major conglomerates control major media outlets (just look at the AOL time warner group, or westinghouse which controls CBS, or GE which has a controlling stake in NBC, or how ABC's investigative peice about tobacco got derailed by its corporate bosses at Disney). This is a worldwide phenomena and the debate too is global. we are also just beginning to grapple with it over here.
I agree that one way to address this would be through a healthy competition between publications. That it hasn't happened probably tells a lot about the lack of journalistic and business skills of our competitors rather than the lack of opportunities. but things seem to be changing now. there's Himal media as well as Space Time goup which are establishing themselves, and Kamana publications is also becoming more professional. we welcome the competition and hope that it helps keep us on our toes.
regards
suman
>Sorry for being out of the discussion for
>sometimes, as I was
>spending my time out of electronic world (
>except once) in the
>southern part of USA (around Mississipi and
>Florida).
>
>First of all, I was both happy and dismayed
>at Suman Pradhan's
>response. That Suman came to this website is
>a great news, and
>I want to thank him for this. However, the
>response was not
>great. He appears unwilling to do anything
>against his collegue.
>Such kind of cronyism is the same disease
>Suman and his paper
>is alleging Mr Girija Koirala of being
>suffering from. I think
>he should make his punishment public, so
>that people know about
>such punishment and don't ever try to repeat
>such deeds. If
>Madhupark can make such punishment public,
>why not TKP? (Well,
>may be because TKP is not run by public fund,
> is it?)
>
>Professor Aiken of Cal Berkeley invented
>Moss Technology which
>is used by professors to detect plagiarism
>in schools.It is pretty
>new technology, and please visit his website
>(he is faculty
>of computer science at Berkeley) for info
>about that tool. It
>compares different files. If Sumanji is
>serious about investing
>a few rupees, he can ask a university
>professor in Kathmandu to
>make software tool that can check all the
>articles to the
>available articles in websites. (I don't
>know if some professors
>already made such tools!)Moss tools are
>freely distributed to
>universities.(A rich organization like
>Kantipur Publication is
>surely not averse to funding a small
>research project in TU
>or in KU, I guess.)
>
>Kantipur Publication is known more for its
>monolithic presence
>in the fourth state of Nepal. Its
>omnipotency was a subject of
>this discussion site once before also. It is
>also famous for
>earning money like nobodyelse did before.
>Certainly its knack
>for getting business is praiseworthy. Its
>knack for getting
>things done is commendable. Its presence in
>electronic media is
>making it a formidable microsoftic presence
>in Nepal. It will not
>be long before the publication will be
>advertised in every village
>of Nepal , parallelling small ubiquitous
>boards of Coca cola.
>Such a big company shouldn't appear
>pussilanimous in front of
>those perpertrators who want to make it
>foolish by printing
>derived articles. I am not a friend of
>kantipur publication, but
>I know its effect among Nepali populace,and
>I want it to be
>veracious and a morally sound organization,
>at least until
>another better publication house outclasses
>it.
>
>Finally, Diwas Khati deserves kudos for his
>vigilance.Great job,
>man.
|
| Diwas Khati |
Posted
on 19-May-01 02:46 AM
>Dear Biswoji,
>
>You talk of double standards in the Post's
>dealing with the plagiarists. If it appears
>as such, then I must say it was unintended.
>We are not using any double standards here.
>We are in the midst of an enquiry regarding
>both the cases.
>
>If our enquiry also concludes what you all
>have concluded, then we will be taking
>action as warranted. Obviously we can't sack
>an outside contributor or even reprimand him/
>her. we can however ensure that the writer
>is black-listed.
>
>As for in-house staff, we can take the
>ultimate action, or decide on less severe
>ones. What we decide depends very much on
>what we find through a formal enquiry, and
>of course the answers given by the accused,
>whether he/she committed the error knowingly,
> or whether the sub-editor who edited the
>peice chucked out the relevant portions from
>the article. So there's no question of a
>different yardstick here.
>
>What we all are concerned about is the
>drubbing the Post has gotten from its
>readers because of these two incidents. We
>value your criticism, and thank you all for
>that. Otherwise we would not have replied to
>your concerns (which has now become our
>prime concerns here.)
>
Suman ji,
Let me help you with your "formal enquiry"...
You talk about "formal enquiry" taking place within, and what actions you will take will depend on the "findings" of that formal enquiry.
In a case of plagiarism, the only way to prove/disprove it is with evidence. Intent is not the question, rather the act is. With the evidence that has been laid out in front of you, these three were acts of plagiarism. Proven beyond any reasonable doubt.. hence proven guilty as charged....
I am wondering what "findings" you are looking for. These are not simple matters of baseless accusations, like Hritik Roshan thing that you would need a full blown enquiry. When the evidence is at hand, the best course is to take action right away, before readers/contributors (like those here at GBNC.org) move to a competing newspaper.
The insider/outsider contributors situation is a different question altogether.
Ya, you might take comfort in that these things hardly make any difference in Nepal. You might be tempted to do nothing, or keep your "enquiry" and "findings" and "actions" confidential. That is entirely up to you. But a smart person like you should be able to see the opportunity here to be a true leader in journalism... or should I question your abilities.....
cheers..
-diwas khati
|
| suman |
Posted
on 19-May-01 09:49 AM
Dear Diwasji,
First of all, thank you for identifying this unfortunate incident of plagiarism and in helping to bring it to our notice. We value your effort and everyone else'who's raised this issue.
By reading your message, I get a feeling that you have already decided that the enquiry we are conducting here is not going to be fair, that we will try to protect the person in question. since you say, the evidence is already available, what's the delay for?
But let me repeat what I wrote to Biswoji again. We are as serious as you are in weeding out this corrupt practice of plagiarism. But there are procedures to follow.
Personally speaking, yes, to me it does appear to be a plagiarized peice (the articles in question.) But I would rather let the enquiry come to that conclusion first before deciding what action to take. We are in a position of not only having to act fair, but also appear to be fair. This incident, in some ways,is helping us put in place a framework to deal with such cases in the future (let's hope there won't be any). Beleive me, in the the eight years of the Post's existence, we are dealing with this issue for the first time here.
You want the action to be made public. And the arguments you give are very plausible indeed. I am not disagreeing with your arguments for making public the action. But again, we feel that to discuss that at this stage would be premature.
cheers
suman
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 19-May-01 02:52 PM
I'm satisfied with the last response of Sumanji. While I agree
with Diwasji that evidence is at hand, I also think that we are
merely plaintiffs, and a chance should be given to defendants.
The editors and readers all are entitled to listen to the reply
of the defendants.And it takes a definite time span.
Again, since TKP is dealing with such incident for the first time,
it has right to elaborate on what sentence to mete out.We are
readers, and we felt betrayed at the situation. But,we have to
wait for the sentence.TKP may want to make stricter sentence given
its paramount position in Nepal,or TKP may want to be lenient: it
is all upto the publication itself.
Given the integrity and stature of Sumanji, it is unfair to
think that the enquiry will be a cover-up. We surely hope
that these procedures will be transparent. But making them
transparent or not is also right of the organization itself. Of
course, the organization is bound to lose its credibility if
it wants to make dealings/outcome opaque.
As for the monolithic presence of KP, I standby my assertion.I
have noticed the divergent views of different publications of KP,
but the divergence is also becoming a mean to reach every nook and
corner of ideology and nation, thus reinforcing the cumulative
effect of Kantipur Publication. I was in Nepal almost two years
ago,and KP seemed to be so formiddable presence out there,the only
alternative respectable paper was Himal fortnightly(KP didn't
have any fortnightly, I guess), and my primary assertion was that
the only serious challenge to KP can come from the
editors/journalists of KP themselves.
Finally, thank you very much for giving your valuable time for
us, Sumanji. It is a great experience interacting with you.
|
| akhilesh upadhyay |
Posted
on 19-May-01 03:02 PM
>If Sumanji is serious about investing
a few rupees...A rich organization like Kantipur Publication is
surely not averse to funding a small research project in TU
or in KU, I guess.>
in the fourth state of Nepal.>
I don't agree with all the things that you say, but I like your arguments.
While to some extent it's understandable when others look at Kantipur Publications as having "monolithic presence", I sincerely hope people don't mistake Kantipur as a monolith. I have been involved with the publications right from its inception and watched the whole mystery unfold right in front of my eyes (except since last August when took a sabbatical for my masters at New York University). Yes, the publications has made a meteoric rise over the years, but I for one will never forget our humble beginning. The little rented house at Thapathali where some two dozen people from diverse backgrounds had gathered to make sense of our future. They were uncertain times, indeed. (we were not sure whether sanchar mantri would be kind enough to allow anyone outside Gorkhpatra, Radio Nepal and NTV to have cables laid out for teleprinters, without which the papers that we had in mind were unimaginable). Mind you, Shyam Goenka had no plans for kantipur then; he only wanted an English-language newspaper. But that's a different story.
Much has been said about the smart marketing of our papers, and how we owe our success to an enterprising distributors, or rich color displays and so on (The underlying argument: Kantipur is anything but editorial success.) While our publishers have been careful to introduce timely innovations, perhaps it's now time for the outside world--including Kathmandu's media elite--to give some recognition to a small group of editors who have refused to given in to the status quo. Narayan Wagle and Suman Pradhan--the current News Editors of Kantipur and The Kathmandu Post--immediately come to my mind.
I know its effect among Nepali populace, and I want it to be
veracious and a morally sound organization, at least until
another better publication house outclasses it.>
Anything that grows as fast as we have is bound to have - it had better have - some critics. Critics like you will give us direction. Many of us at the Publications will be very pleased to have competitors. One, our stocks in the market can't grow without competitors. Two, we will die a slow death without them - both collectively and personally.
<...I know its effect among the Nepali populace, and I want it to be...morally sound organization>
Can't agree with you more. I suggest that we try and nuture the moral fabric in arguably the most influential media house in Nepal. That may ential recognizing pockets of morality (endangered species in are kept in the protected list!) within the institution and protecting them against poachers.
man.>
I don't know Diwasji personally. But he's done a great service. Thanks a lot.
akhilesh upadhyay
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 19-May-01 05:54 PM
Dear Akhileshji:
>Much has been said about the smart marketing of our papers, and
>how we owe our success to an enterprising distributors, or rich
>color displays and so on (The underlying argument: Kantipur
>is anything but editorial success.)
Thanks for informing all of us about the problems of early days.
A few people may have attributed the success of Kantipur to its
monetary resources and technological savviness, but they are
the ones who don't want to realize that journalism is about
professional and academical acumen, and is a serious business.
Such criticisms may also stem from jealousy,and thus merit less
attention than what you are giving them.
I remember Janamanch weekly of around 2048. I don't know if it is
still being published. Janamanch is older than Kantipur, and it
had an excellent distribution channel.It was cheap, and was really
a good weekly run by a former editor-in-chief of Gorkhapatra
(Baa.de.paa). It seemed somewhat inclusive also. In those days,
a neutrality of a writer was assessed by whether he was attacking
both NC and UML or not.(If you are writing against NC in one
paragraph, you were supposed to write against UML in another
paragraph to demonstrate your impartiality!) Anyway, Janamanch
was somewhat inclusive of all ideologies in the time when
initial euphoria of freedom had begun to wear off, and people
were becoming more committed to a particular party, and resentment
among party activists was acute and high.
Even with all resources, and distribution acumen, Janamanch was
eventually a failure.It gave up its disinterestedness as the
election approached, and actively advocated Girijaview. Its
prediction in 2048 election (all five seats of KTM to be won
by NC) was so wrong, I stopped buying the paper afterward.
I have no doubt that honesty, talent and perseverance are the most
necessary traits for being successful.I don't doubt that Kantipur
is a successful enterprise, because of all these traits.
I also remember the initial days of Kantipur, when people guessed
about the resources it was getting from, & about the party it was
affiliated with, and I also remember the hullaballo when one
supposedly left journalist was expelled from KP.It was a great
achievement that you guys cruised through those pale of suspicion
to the fame of these days.[Now among the regular writers of
Kantipur are Modnath Prashrit and Baburam Bhattarai!]
******** ---------- ********* ------- *******
In a response to my charge of being a monolith,Sumanji says the
different papers have different views on the same issues. In
the same time, he accepts that big corporations are prone to
misuse the power they have by giving example of Disney's scuttling
of tobacco programs. It is obvious to us readers that like Disney,
KP also has such power.Thus, It is disconcerting to think that KP
is capable of molding the mind of common citizens and to some
extent beaurocrats in the way perhaps no media in Nepal was ever
capable of. Without impugning the intent of the journalists of KP,
I sincerely hope that we get another group of journalists who can
check the power of KP if such need arises. I have some doubt about
Space Time papers, Kamana publication papers are too frivolous
to be taken seriously(may be old Kamana comes to our mind all
the time), so It looks more conceivable that sooner or later,
Himal is going to compete with Kantipur.
>I don't know Diwasji personally. But he's done a great service. >Thanks a lot.
I also don't know Diwasji personally. But it doesn't matter, haina?
|
| akhilesh |
Posted
on 19-May-01 08:35 PM
I sincerely hope that we get another group of journalists who can
check the power of KP if such need arises. I have some doubt about
Space Time papers, Kamana publication papers are too frivolous
to be taken seriously(may be old Kamana comes to our mind all
the time), so It looks more conceivable that sooner or later,
Himal is going to compete with Kantipur.>
biswoji:
sure. more the merrier. The Himal group definitely has the potential, and personally i have a very high regard for dixit brothers. they have all the makings of great publisher-editors...now let them deliver.
I have my doubts about Space Time too. But then people said all kinds of nasty things about Kantipur too, didn't they? I would give them benefit of doubt. Kantipur and Himal are going to be two key players in Nepal's media. But I hope others prove me wrong.
|
| Diwas Khati |
Posted
on 20-May-01 02:36 PM
>By reading your message, I get a feeling
>that you have already decided that the
>enquiry we are conducting here is not going
>to be fair, that we will try to protect the
>person in question. since you say, the
>evidence is already available, what's the
>delay for?
>
>But let me repeat what I wrote to Biswoji
>again. We are as serious as you are in
>weeding out this corrupt practice of
>plagiarism. But there are procedures to
>follow.
>
>Personally speaking, yes, to me it does
>appear to be a plagiarized peice (the
>articles in question.) But I would rather
>let the enquiry come to that conclusion
>first before deciding what action to take.
>We are in a position of not only having to
>act fair, but also appear to be fair. This
>incident, in some ways,is helping us put in
>place a framework to deal with such cases in
>the future (let's hope there won't be any).
>Beleive me, in the the eight years of the
>Post's existence, we are dealing with this
>issue for the first time here.
>
>You want the action to be made public. And
>the arguments you give are very plausible
>indeed. I am not disagreeing with your
>arguments for making public the action. But
>again, we feel that to discuss that at this
>stage would be premature.
>
>cheers
>suman
Suman ji,
In your earlier post/reply you said "...If our enquiry also concludes what you all have concluded, then we will be taking action as warranted. Obviously we can't sack an outside contributor or even reprimand him/her. we can however ensure that the writer is black-listed.
As for in-house staff, we can take the ultimate action, or decide on less severe ones. What we decide depends very much on what we find through a formal enquiry, and of course the answers given by the accused, whether he/she committed the error knowingly, or whether the sub-editor who edited the peice chucked out the relevant portions from the article. So there's no question of a different yardstick here. ..." And again you asked me "...By reading your message, I get a feeling that you have already decided that the enquiry we are conducting here is not going to be fair, that we will try to protect the person in question. since you say, the evidence is already available, what's the delay for? ..."
It does not matter, for the purpose of your enquiry, what I think of it, since your much talked about enquiry is, as you put, will be OBJECTIVE. What I am afraid of is that YOU have decided on punishments on the crime before you are done with the enquiry. You will not accept any further articles from Kuldip Karki (assuming he is an outsider) while you MIGHT still accept articles from Binaj Gurubacharya (assuming he is the insider). Talk about a fair enquiry .....
hey, I am just a spectator.. I don't call plays.. but I can tell which are definitely unethical and dirty plays....
-diwas
|
| suman |
Posted
on 22-May-01 01:49 AM
Hello Diwasji,
It pains me to see someone like you, who's done more than most to bring this issue up, failing to distinguish between decisions and an attempt to lay out options.
cheers
suman
|
| diwaskhati |
Posted
on 22-May-01 09:17 AM
Does it matter....?
Just waiting for what kind of action you and your org. will take..
cheers-diwas
|
| SGTA |
Posted
on 22-May-01 11:15 AM
Hi Diwas,
It will be interesting to see if they take any action against the "in house" plagiarist reporter, at the most, they will warn the guy, not to do the same again. It would be yet another interesting thing if someone can search for his previous articles for plagiarism.
He seems to have lots of right and big connections within the publication than calibre. He, inspite of being young and junior in the institution, I have noticed him getting to report the big "breaking news".
What I don't understand is the relation between the AP and KP and TKP! Can the person reporting for TKP report the same for AP also and make dollars?
Just Curious
SGTA
|
| sally |
Posted
on 22-May-01 12:14 PM
As I understand it, when a reporter works for a paper that's affiliated with a press service--such as AP, Gannett News Service, Agence France Press, etc.--that article may then be sent to the press service by the newspaper. If the Post runs AP articles, then it's AP-affiliated. In that case, you'd first see the Post story, bylined "by Whoever/Kathmandu Post." Later you'd see the same article in New Delhi or Guam or New York or wherever, bylined "by Whoever/Associated Press." The reporter would not be paid extra.
On the other hand, there could be an AP stringer in KTM. If his/her stories appear FIRST for AP, and then are rewritten for the Post, that could run into ethical problems.
|
