Archives: Insensitivity

Did you know one plus one can make zero? You didn't, you say? OK, take these two gospel truths: i) The Northeast does not quite make news in the Indian mainstream media ii) Media owners are loathe to disseminate news items about journalists through their outlets. Now take an incident which has these two incontrovertible truths as the background: the offices of many newspapers in Manipur and the state's only television channel were shut down on March 21 after threats to four journalists from an Islamist militant outfit. No points for guessing, even if you are just Paanchvi Paas, that the coverage of this incident in the our country's venerable mainstream media was a mere zero. The news did trickle out from this landlocked state in the form of an Asia News International (ANI) creed. That was all. No one seems to have carried it. No media coverage.

The Times of India has issued an apology. That's good news. The bad news is that the apology has been buried in the 20th page of Sunday's edition. The info comes to me courtesy Utpal. Here's what the paper had to say: "An article in TimesLife ('Spa With a Difference', March 2) had an inadvertent mention that has upset our friends from the northeast. We clarify here that we have the utmost regard for them and their contribution to the country. We apologise for upsetting any feelings and wish to state that there was no intention to hurt any sentiments."

Those of us who have more than a soft corner for the Northeast have been crying wolf since the day we stepped into journalism. We have been crying ourselves hoarse over the stepmotherly attitude of the Centre towards the region. And we have also been mincing no words about what we think of how the news media itself has been handling the Northeast. Over the last few years the news media has shown some interest in the region. For whatever reason. Maybe people have matured. Maybe they have inculcated a sense of sensitivity over time. Maybe political correctness has rubbed on to the journalistic fraternity in the metropolitcan cities from the scores from the region who are now working in the big media. Or perhaps it is a reason I am not aware of. Just when one thought that things were getting better, comes a slur. Oh, quite a slur it is.

After the former editor of the Times of India, Sham Lal, died, I closely followed most stories about this "literary journalist", as he was hailed by many. So, when I read through this one about another former editor paying tribute to the columnist, I couldn't but help notice this bloomer (February 23, 2007): We spotted Sham Lal there, having a drink too. This was a rare sight. A lady I knew walked up to me and said she wanted to get introduced to him. Sham Lal spoke to her very courteously, but after a while, he started to look disinterested in the conversation. No, not disinterested; the word should have been uninterested. Disinterested means impartial, while uninterested means to lack interest. The same mistake was there in the Telegraph too earlier last month (February 6, 2007):