Bollywood sues Navika, Arnab and gang - Page 33

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZzhxlzQZTo&feature=emb_rel_end

" Inko darna chahiye " . How can u allow filing a case? . I m wondering what kind of a nation do these people think we are.

https://twitter.com/NehaT1923/status/1315662367116599296

Frankly, this should have been against every media channel and not some selected media channels.

It doesn’t make much sense now as it seems to be a targetted Attack on few channels the Akhtars don’t like.

And I wish there is a law against the misinformation campaigns run by various news channels. If that happened we would instantly get rid of false protests against CAA, Farmers Bill, NPR etc.

Originally posted by: monu_tan

Frankly, this should have been against every media channel and not some selected media channels.

It doesn’t make much sense now as it seems to be a targetted Attack on few channels the Akhtars don’t like.

And I wish there is a law against the misinformation campaigns run by various news channels. If that happened we would instantly get rid of false protests against CAA, Farmers Bill, NPR etc.

They won't.. They will target only those who are against them just like how ab ordinary citizen does ... Even though they proclaim themselves as high priest of righteousness, we all know they aren't... Why would they target misinformation campaign when they themselves have been guilty of it.

Mahesh bhatt was a guest at a book release event where a conspiracy theory on 26/11 being a rss job was released... Now if that was freedom of expression then why was the book on alternative perspective to Delhi riots blocked.. Why was Bloomsbury bullied into dropping the book? Why did the authors have to Garuda Prakashan? It does show how things work.

When Barkha can get away with 'error of judgement' defense why can't.. Didn't her reporting during kargil, terrorist attacks lead to loss of lives.. How responsible where the right leaning media then? They were also irresponsible.. Riots coverage is never done sensitively.. We all know how death toll is released just to sensationalise.. It is in their interests to keep the pot boiling. Didn't even Ravish Kumar identify Jafrabad shooter as Anurag Mishra and not mohd Shahrukh.. Didn't the original anurag mishra-a guy with political leanings get into trouble because of it... No one can give out names willy nilly..why identify in the first place? And that too with due diligence . This is as insidious as the right wing's naxal bhabhi narrative.. Both would for ent trouble. I don't believe that any of top journos heart is in the right place.. Manipulation is all that do.

What apologies will be tendered to people wrongly accused of crimes.. Jasleen kaur case, Rohtak sisters case? Weren't the whole of the media involved.. Now it is a very grey area on what to report or not.. Media sometimes can't wait till the resolution of a case to report on it.

Just think about Sudeeksha bhati case - the girl had won a scholarship and was studying in the US.. Had come to bulandshahar for holidays and died in a road accident.. Her family alleged eve teasing.. Media took it up.. Two innocents were arrested and shamed.. A lot of people were mocked.. What happened in the end? The SIT acquitted the accused based on CCTV evidence. The cousin driving the vehicle was underage and didn't have a DL... Was the media wrong in taking up the case? How can anyone know prima facie who is lying.. While eve teasing is frequent in India, accusing innocents of it is also a crime.. What recourse do the innocents have? People know about the case but not about the clean chit..I read about the progress of the case on India today and was shocked

I am not telling that Rhea deserves what she got.. But what I am telling is that media outlets of all hues run vilification campaign on the ordinary citizens with the flimsiest of evidence.

It is just not republic but all news channels are guilty of it. I don't expect bollywood as a group to target others because even I would have done the same. What bothers me however is that they assume to be the conscience keeper of the nation.. Holier than thou attitude..

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-sudiksha-bhatis-death-case-police-say-no-evidence-of-harassment/358774

What would have happened if there was no CCTV..?

The same logic also goes for cases were the culprits destroy evidence and the victim can't prove the case.. Media should take up their case... But how can anyone judge who is the victim in the first place.. Reporting is pretty tricky

Originally posted by: Veni-Vidi-Vici

They won't.. They will target only those who are against them just like how ab ordinary citizen does ... Even though they proclaim themselves as high priest of righteousness, we all know they aren't... Why would they target misinformation campaign when they themselves have been guilty of it.

Mahesh bhatt was a guest at a book release event where a conspiracy theory on 26/11 being a rss job was released... Now if that was freedom of expression then why was the book on alternative perspective to Delhi riots blocked.. Why was Bloomsbury bullied into dropping the book? Why did the authors have to Garuda Prakashan? It does show how things work.

When Barkha can get away with 'error of judgement' defense why can't.. Didn't her reporting during kargil, terrorist attacks lead to loss of lives.. How responsible where the right leaning media then? They were also irresponsible.. Riots coverage is never done sensitively.. We all know how death toll is released just to sensationalise.. It is in their interests to keep the pot boiling. Didn't even Ravish Kumar identify Jafrabad shooter as Anurag Mishra and not mohd Shahrukh.. Didn't the original anurag mishra-a guy with political leanings get into trouble because of it... No one can give out names willy nilly..why identify in the first place? And that too with due diligence . This is as insidious as the right wing's naxal bhabhi narrative.. Both would for ent trouble. I don't believe that any of top journos heart is in the right place.. Manipulation is all that do.

What apologies will be tendered to people wrongly accused of crimes.. Jasleen kaur case, Rohtak sisters case? Weren't the whole of the media involved.. Now it is a very grey area on what to report or not.. Media sometimes can't wait till the resolution of a case to report on it.

Just think about Sudeeksha bhati case - the girl had won a scholarship and was studying in the US.. Had come to bulandshahar for holidays and died in a road accident.. Her family alleged eve teasing.. Media took it up.. Two innocents were arrested and shamed.. A lot of people were mocked.. What happened in the end? The SIT acquitted the accused based on CCTV evidence. The cousin driving the vehicle was underage and didn't have a DL... Was the media wrong in taking up the case? How can anyone know prima facie who is lying.. While eve teasing is frequent in India, accusing innocents of it is also a crime.. What recourse do the innocents have? People know about the case but not about the clean chit..I read about the progress of the case on India today and was shocked

I am not telling that Rhea deserves what she got.. But what I am telling is that media outlets of all hues run vilification campaign on the ordinary citizens with the flimsiest of evidence.

It is just not republic but all news channels are guilty of it. I don't expect bollywood as a group to target others because even I would have done the same. What bothers me however is that they assume to be the conscience keeper of the nation.. Holier than thou attitude..

@bold No,he didn't

The issue of sub-judice also needs to be considered. Today, the print media and electronic media are freely commenting on pending matters, seeking to influence the judges and public perception. This is causing great damage to the institution", the AG told a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar.

https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/media-comments-on-pending-matters-causing-great-damage-to-institution-attorney-general-tells-sc-164372

Ideologies aside, do understand that government will come and go, our institutions will remain the same, don't work too hard to defame your institutions

If media trial and Mob justice is what you want for your future then think about what will happen to you and people you love once media and public does what you are doing to them

Let the law decide

Originally posted by: Sunflower234

@bold No,he didn't

https://youtu.be/D9QAYyukjMI

After 24 minutes and a few seconds

It was rather cleverly done.. If he didn't know the name for sure then he shouldn't have taken either names... Why did he drag Anurag Mishra? .. Quoting Delhi police is one thing and social media something else.. Anything can be attributed to social media that way and it would have been ethical to not speak like this in a volatile situation . Yeh social media ke aad mein kehna is playing very smart.. It is a blanket term which can also include family WhatsApp group , the gun incident was a rather big incident in the series of incidents, Ravish is a senior journalist, he knew what he was saying could vitiate the environment ... How is it different from the blinds of Arnab or Navika or someone else.. They were careless too.. Is refinement the sole criteria for what is ethical and what isn't.. Why is Masand vilified.. Other blind writers called names.. Even they are quoting somebody

If their insinuation can destroy lives then so can his..

It is activism by the media that brings things to fore... Scams, news of harassment etc.. . And sometimes it results in irreparable damage to the innocents..

Media coverage is like that.. It explores all angles as no one knows the truth at first.. Lot of things depend on perception too

Take the coverage of batla House encounter for example

How can one be sure of ethics.. Fake encounters happen.. Politicians talked rubbish.. Credibility of police was questioned.. The force was demoralised.. Mohan chand Sharma's family was deeply hurt.. A lot of things happened which shouldn't have happened.. 'leading lights' screamed foul.. It took the courts years to decide about the legality, NHRC's findings too corroborated the police theory but was it any good, a martyr's legacy was tarnished forever.

What lessons are to be drawn from that? Should the media desist from talking about the people who have been encountered? Should questions not be raised on the veracity of encounters? What lines shouldn't be crossed while reporting? Who shouldn't be invited for discussions?

Everything differs from case to case.. Whether something was witch hunt or activism can be concluded only after the investigation is complete..

An action can be constructed as throttling dissent or stopping the spread of propaganda, everything depends on which side of the fence you are on.. And the side of fence also keeps changing.

Regulating media is like wading in muddy water.. Should Ambani, adani, jindals sue media for insinuating that they are involved in shady practices? What if it is true but can't be conclusively proven in a court of law? Will the action taken by the corporates seen as arm twisting? What about promoters of companies who are morally liable but not legally?

What about people exonerated in corruption scandals?

How will you prove nazism and fascism in court? Or should the speakers say early days of nazism? What is the golden definition of hinduphobia, islamophobia xeno phobia, feminism etc? Should every show by a presenter come with a disclaimer?

Originally posted by: Veni-Vidi-Vici

It is activism by the media that brings things to fore... Scams, news of harassment etc.. . And sometimes it results in irreparable damage to the innocents..

Media coverage is like that.. It explores all angles as no one knows the truth at first.. Lot of things depend on perception too

Take the coverage of batla House encounter for example

How can one be sure of ethics.. Fake encounters happen.. Politicians talked rubbish.. Credibility of police was questioned.. The force was demoralised.. Mohan chand Sharma's family was deeply hurt.. A lot of things happened which shouldn't have happened.. 'leading lights' screamed foul.. It took the courts years to decide about the legality, NHRC's findings too corroborated the police theory but was it any good, a martyr's legacy was tarnished forever.

What lessons are to be drawn from that? Should the media desist from talking about the people who have been encountered? Should questions not be raised on the veracity of encounters? What lines shouldn't be crossed while reporting? Who shouldn't be invited for discussions?

Everything differs from case to case.. Whether something was witch hunt or activism can be concluded only after the investigation is complete..

An action can be constructed as throttling dissent or stopping the spread of propaganda, everything depends on which side of the fence you are on.. And the side of fence also keeps changing.

Regulating media is like wading in muddy water.. Should Ambani, adani, jindals sue media for insinuating that they are involved in shady practices? What if it is true but can't be conclusively proven in a court of law? Will the action taken by the corporates seen as arm twisting? What about promoters of companies who are morally liable but not legally?

What about people exonerated in corruption scandals?

How will you prove nazism and fascism in court? Or should the speakers say early days of nazism? What is the golden definition of hinduphobia, islamophobia xeno phobia, feminism etc? Should every show by a presenter come with a disclaimer?

Yes but the problem is the media is becoming more corrupt than these institutions.

They need to know that they are not above the law. If they are going to act like goons, they will be tried as one.