Hi guys, lay off Symmo, okay? He is totally sober and witty and so-right. And McCullum, don't get mad at me for saying Symmo is so-right. You are, what? Real Cow!
"I, Chyetanya Kunte, hereby tender an unconditional apology to Ms. Barkha Dutt, Managing Editor, English News, NDTV Limited and to NDTV Limited, for the defamatory statements I made regarding Ms. Barkha Dutt and NDTV Limited, in my post titled 'Shoddy Journalism,' dated November 27th 2008, on my weblog at www.ckunte.com."
It seems NDTV has got an unconditional apology from a blogger for making defamatory remarks. How's that?
Next time you see The Big Fight of something, would it be a good idea to sue NDTV for anything anyone said- if you think it is unsubstantiated, may be you think it right to accuse them of lack of ethics, responsibility and professionalism in that they went ahead and aired it without verifying it all. But don't even think about that. NDTV is Hundred Per Cent Patriotic.
Have you seen all those Jawan shows with film stars and all? That is how Patriotic they are and you have to appreciate that they uphold democratic values like equality, freedom of speech etc (you think they admire men in uniforms for their uniforms? Don't even think of it, no sir, censorship and dictatorship would never cross their mind, what do you think they are- Mushy?)
Read about it all with plenty of links at Desipundit
Oh...why didn't my earlier detailed comment appear?
ReplyDeleteWell, the gist is 1) I do not watch NDTV (at least 3 years now) 2) BD gives me a headache 3) goondaism exist in the media world as well.
Balahji, rules are there for everything. But how can we impose ethics? It has to be inborne.
ReplyDeleteNDTV and the likes is widely known to sensationalise almost any news. They almost always ignore the victim's feelings (Even rights sometimes) in a rush to be 'exclusively on NDTV' and 'breaking news'. Is NDTV ethically deserving to sue and claim such an apology? That is what the blame is for.
Guys please read my comment again. If something is considered defamatory then person concerned has every right to sue. It's for the court to decide the merit of the case. On the other hand if other party comes forward to compromise then I don't see how on earth the suitor can be blamed.
ReplyDeleteIf one can prove defamation in a court of law then it doesn't matter whether it was at the tea shop or in 'We the people' or something appearing as a 'breaking news'.
Do you think a blogger can afford to go to court over this? Is it worth that much for an individual?
ReplyDeleteI am sure the law will say that the blogger defamed Burkha Dutt. But need NDTV have sued him?
My point is, if people with power are going to sue people with mere lung power, silence is all you will hear.
I suppose that is freedom.
You are just being legalistic; there is something called justice.
Does anybody have a copy of Chyetanya Kunte's story on Barkha Dutt?
ReplyDeleteThanks Kartikey for asking the most important question- it did not occur to me to look at his post. I visited the blog, but found it was deleted.
ReplyDeleteHowever, we can come to a fair judgment of this if you read the following links:
google cache
Optimistic Cynic, where there is a discussion of what kunte posted, the wikipedia article that kunte cited, and the Hindu article which was given as source in wikipedia.
Nanopolitican, much of the same stuff.
Barkha Dutt, where you will find the stuff that landed Kunte in trouble.
From Barkha Dutt's Desk, where she explains her situation and replies to criticism of media coverage
The Hindu, The Hindu article where you find this: "Three soldiers died and the Colonel, who yielded to a woman reporter’s entreaty to fire the gun for the camera’s benefit was dismissed from service." But Kunte unfortunately, unthinkingly gave a name to what The Hindu, wisely and cannily referred to as a woman reporter.
I don't think NDTV will bother to sue me for giving links to what is essentially found in the public domain.
But the fact that such anxiety could be aroused for as innocuous an act as providing links is what is so wrong in all this.
I think we should discuss this without fear, because free speech can be lost through timidity.
I think Kunte should not have named Burkha Dutt (in the interests of his own safety), especially when there is a rejoinder from her in the very next sentence, but that is there in Wikipedia.
I think an apology would have been okay; but going to the extent of deleting the incriminating document appears high-handed and autocratic (Because we know it is the autocratic regimes that erase history).
If Kunte had been made to say, look I am sorry I said this and this, and we are allowed to look at the original entry and judge for ourselves, that would be fair and just, I think.
Hope we can discuss this.