Without the right to communicate and democratisation of communication, the right to life, justice, freedom of speech and expression is meaningless. Since 2004 MediaVigil attempts to keep track of traditional offline and digital media that faces the onslaught of monopolistic tendencies and is wary of regressive localisation of media. MediaVigil invites narratives and write-ups on truth about covid19. E-mail: email@example.com For Details: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mediavigil/info
Note: Indeed Open magazine has no business to apologise on behalf of Vinod Mehta and Hartosh Singh Bal without either speaking to them or taking consent from Manu Joseph, the then editor of Open. Was the magazine forced to apologise?
Mehta and Bal on Open magazine's "regret"
Following the item carried on the Hoot – “Vindication?” -- about Open
magazine's “regret” regarding an interview it carried in 2012, Vinod
Mehta and Hartosh Bal have asked that we carry this letter they have
written to the editor of Open.
April 1, 2014
This is with regards to the ‘clarification’ published in the last issue of Open Magazine expressing regret at the hurt caused to The Indian Express by an interview of Vinod Mehta that referred to a report in The Indian Express on Army troop movements towards Delhi.
the undersigned Vinod Mehta, editorial chairman of the Outlook Group
who was interviewed and Hartosh Singh Bal, who conducted the interview
and Manu Joseph, the then editor of Open who in his words “fully endorses this letter”, are bemused by the claim in the clarification that “Open was aware, at the time of publication of that conversation, that The Indian Express had stood by its report. Open
published Mehta’s description of the report as a ‘mistake’ even though
it had no independent confirmation of any factual error in it. Also, it
did not contact The Indian Express for its version.”
Since neither of the three was contacted by Open before publishing this clarification, there is no way for Open
to make the claims it does in the clarification. The new editor S.
Prasannarajan is in no position to make this assertion, but even more to
the point the clarification indicates a basic ignorance of journalistic
Mr Mehta’s criticism of the story is his opinion of what was stated in The Indian Express
and how it was presented by the newspaper. The Indian Express itself
publishes editorials which often talk up cudgels against statements and
claims made in public, as far as we know it never contacts anyone for
their version before going ahead with the editorials.
Even more pertinently, Shekhar Gupta, editor of The Indian Express regularly interviews people on television and The Indian Express
then published these transcripts in the newspaper. In an interview with
Mark Lynas, once an anti-GM campaigner, the following exchange occurs:
“But (Vandana) Shiva is well meaning. Why is she doing it? She is not an enemy of India or Indian farmers.
I think she is…”
comments from Shiva are included along with the interview. Such
instances can be multiplied but we think this suffices in revealing the
hypocrisy behind The Indian Express’ demand for an apology and the opportunism displayed by the Open Management in succumbing to it without any regards for journalistic norms.
the undersigned continue to defend the publication of the interview and
see no reason to express any clarifications for having carried it in
the magazine. To put the record straight we urge you to publish this
letter and give it the same prominence as the wrongly termed
clarification you have published in the magazine.
Statement to the Supreme Court and to the Public of India at large.
We, the below named, practicing members of the bar in India, have noted with dismay, the judgment of the Supreme Court, in Mr. Prashant Bhushan's contempt case. An independent judiciary consisting of independent judges and lawyers, is the basis of the rule of law in a Constitutional democracy. Mutual respect and the absence of coercion, are the hallmarks of a harmonious relationship between the bar and bench. Any tilting of the balance, one way or the other, is deleterious both to the institution and the nation. An independent judiciary does not mean that judges are immune from scrutiny and comment. It is the duty of lawyers to freely bring any shortcomings to the notice of bar, bench and the public at large. While some of us may have divergent views on the advisability and content of Mr. Prashant Bhushan's two tweets, we are unanimously of the view that no contempt of court was intended or committed especially …
In every step where an attempt is made to unravel the conspirators behind the assassinations and killing, there is an attempt to subvert it and suppress it. By the way will CPI-ML and others tell how often have the Commission's unearthed the truth? Why is CPI-ML and other political parties interested in the lies or half truths which Commission's give birth to? Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose continues to be in news 60 years after his disputed death. A BBC poll named Netaji the third most popular leader in South Asia after Jinnah and Gandhi. Netaji is supposed to have died at the end of Second World War. Netaji went missing while waging war for India's freedom and in heart of hearts all Indians wish to know what happened to him. Nehru did institute the Shah Nawaz Khan Committee in 1956 after the Indian newspapers broke the news (based on agancy reports) on August 25, 1945 that Netaji had died in a freak plane crash in Taipei (Taihoku) on August 18th, 1945. Nehru's promptness …
Supreme Court is due to hear the matter of SS Norway (Blue Lady)on 22nd January 2007. There are two clarification applications pending before the court in the wake of the September 6 and September 11, 2007 order by the Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice S H Kapadia bench.
The Supreme Court had also directed Government of India to constitute a new Committee consisting of MoEF, GPCB, GMB, AERB that shall verify all the documents before ship is allowed for breaking. This committee is yet to be formed.
European and Norwegian silence in the matter especially in the aftermath of Le Clemenceau precedent is deafening.
On 7th January, 2008, UN delegates visited Alang and took pictures of SS Norway (Blue Lady) and proved both international and national media that had misreported that the ship has been dismantled wrong. Some 30 ships await permission from the apex court.
Also Le Clemenceau has not been dismantled yet. It might get permission until the end of 2008. In Brest, the French Defe…