Trysts with MSM - Part 21: "thats not what i say"

MSM stands for Main Stream Media

This will be a short post. I am placing it here just to document, even if the conversation was a short one. Yesterday, I tweeted this: 

The Congress will choose between Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee and Vice-President Hamid Ansari. says @sunetrac http://is.gd/ifk1AW

And below is the snapshot of the conversation that followed.

All I did was to quote what she wrote in her article. Now, I am confused why bother having text in a report if we are to not take it seriously anyway! 

Update: The above snapshot is from yesterday afternoon. I just checked the link again. The wording has been changed to:

Tryst with MSM - Part 20 "Through BJP blinkers"

So I asked Rajdeep Sardesai this morning:

@sardesairajdeep Would like to understand something. If "indictment" of a person is major news, y is the subsequent quashing of case not?

He replied back to me through a Direct Message ( for those who are new to this terminology - I asked him the question on a public timeline. He replied back only to me.)

It was a headline. But remember, it's only one case. don't see every story through Bjp blinkers

So what is it that we are talking about?

This front page report of The Hindu today will give you a good summary.

High Court quashes FIR against Yeddyurappa

The quashing of this FIR is big news, primarily because the filing of this FIR was big news. The filing of this FIR was big news because the report on which this FIR was filed was even  bigger news.

The FIR was filed because the Lokayukta of Karnataka declared that Yeddyurappa was guilty of corruption and recommended criminal proceedings against him. Based on this report, Yeddyurappa resigned as the Chief Minister of Karnataka.

The Karnataka High Court admonished the Lokayukta.  For example:

Further, there is no material produced by the Lokayukta to establish that the petitioner has done any favour to any of the alleged companies during the period 2007 to 2010.

No proof. The Lokayukta report was "leaked". These same TV channels discussed this day in and day out. They ran debates. They even questioned team Anna and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar why they are not campaigning in Karnataka as part of their anti-corruption plank. The entire news for about a day or two centered around this very report. Now the High Court says there is no case at all.

And when asked why the quashing is not as big a news as the indictment is - what do we get?

It was a headline. But remember, it's only one case. don't see every story through Bjp blinkers

For the record - The Hindu front paged this story and also mentioned that there are still other corruption cases pending against Yeddyurappa. Then why is it so difficult for these news channels to do the same? IBNlive.com does not even have a news item right now.

PS: Rajdeep Sardesai responded. Friends at NDTV didn't even bother! 

Trysts with MSM - Part 19: Debate and participation!

MSM stands from Main Stream Media. 

CEO of NDTV, Vikram Chandra tweets this in the morning - 

On Big Fight this week -- the SIT report and what that means for Narendra Modi. Send in your comments!

And follows it up with - 

Also, would any of you tweeple who consider Modi the greatest ever like to come to the studio to speak about him?

I ask him back -

But do you have the report? If not, what SIT report will you discuss? @vikramchandra Simple Question. 

He replies back - 

@ssudhirkumar the various versions of what the report apparently contains?? Come - fly to delhi today!

He asks me to fly to Delhi "today"! 

I decline, saying this: 

@vikramchandra thanks for the invite. I find the debate patterns on english TV very distracting. thanks, but no thanks!

And I thought that settled the issue. Some well meaning folks have advised to me saying this might be a good chance to put a point across, but since this is a format, against which I wrote a detailed blog just last week, I was not too much inclined. 

Things changed by evening. At 4:06pm and 4:10 pm, Vikram Chandra asks me:

@ssudhirkumar Sudhir? Tell me? can you come to sudio in hyderabad if not in delhi? 5.30 pm today?? 

I was still not keen, plus less than 90 minutes to prepare for a debate is too short a time for me. He further taunts me asking: 

@ssudhirkumar why do you need to "think and prepare" on the SIT and Narendra Modi? I thought you normally have LOTS to say??

The taunting continued after I said that I do have lots to say, but need to organize thoughts coherently to speak in 1-2 minutes:

@ssudhirkumar so normally your thoughts are NOT coherently organized? Disappointed. Will miss you.

Again some well meaning folks advised it would be a good idea to put a point across, and even I thought that if this opportunity is let go, the taunting of "we gave you an opportunity, you didn't utilise it" will continue. So despite my strong thoughts on the format of the debate, I agreed to part of the debate. 

But since the notice was too short, I couldn't make it to the studio. I am in office, and was willing to be connected through skype etc. 

Here, Vikram Chandra insisted that I have to come to studio. I told him that I am at work and cannot possibly make it to the studio. But he insisted. 

@ssudhirkumar has to be studio! how can i do it on the phone? someone will give you the address

And so I let go. However, he continues: 

@ssudhirkumar btw, you have put out 57 tweets in the last 3 hours! While at work! Surely you could have found time for the debate?!

I did not expect that he will resort to such cheap shots. I was ready to debate, but not from the studio given the short time. I was willing to participate, but NDTV did not have the technical know-how of organising one other than their studio - how on earth was it my fault? I was told to fly to Delhi in the morning, and in the evening to drive to a studio? 

Upon hindsight - the debate had the following participants: 

@ssudhirkumar format is big fight.. you have to come to studio.. panellists are manish, nirmala, sanjiv bhatt, teesta, ashok malik etc

Maybe it is a good thing, I couldn't get onto the debate :D 

On a more serious note, some folks have accused me of chickening out, running away etc. I do not get the logic at all ! Twitter interactions are as direct as they get - why is participating in a TV debate the sole barrier of "daring"ness? 

We never shied away from any debate, only that we wanted a meaningful format for it. Despite strong thoughts, I did intend to participate given the fact that we live with what we have! Such short time to discuss modalities, and yet somehow I am at fault? 

Anyways, I asked Vikram Chandra to organise a debate on media and told him I will fly down to Delhi then! 

Also, he asked some other folks also to join in - but insisted that it had to be in the studio... so this discussion is not exclusive to me alone! Somehow though, he did find the time to count my tweets! 

Trysts with MSM - Part 18 - CAG and 2G scam

MSM stands for Main Stream Media

The series returns back after a long time :) The delay is not because I have stopped asking them questions. The delay is because they have stopped responding to those questions!

CNN-IBN's National Bureau Chief, Bhupendra Chaubey tweeted about his show on Ra.One and said that he was getting lots of feedback. So I asked him if he ever responded to feedback. He replied this:

@ssudhirkumar I used to respond a lot to u, then stopped because u started indulging in destructive criticism, m all for constructive points

The "destructive criticism" he was talking about is here. Anyways, about the same time he also tweets about this "breaking story"

Breaking at 6: CAG's can of worms, its getting murkier, fresh details accessed by me show that there was no consensus on the 2G report

So I ask him back :

Was there ALWAYS consensus at your work place on what to report? @bhupendrachaube ofcourse, you wont answer this Q.

To which he replies:

@ssudhirkumar lack bof consensus if different from allegations of coersion, of course u won't understand this

What he meant was "lack of consensus is different from allegations of coercion, of course u won't understand this"

Well, he first said "lack of consensus" and my question was based on that observation. He then changes the point to "allegations of coercion". I asked him back about this inconsistency. Ofcourse, no reply.

Let's take a quick look at his "breaking news". Here is the report on IBN website - http://ibnlive.in.com/news/2g-losses-letter-exposes-divide-within-cag/197058-3.html

First off, Bhupendra fails to mention that CAG gave a total of 4 estimates of losses. The range is Rs. 57,000 crore to Rs. 1,76,000 crore. Check this report of the CAG available on their website. The last page of the "Executive Summary" section (just before Introduction) gives us the the table of how the 4 estimates were arrived at. And the entire report explains in detail how the numbers were arrived at. But our news channels are content with just mentioning the upper limit.

The scoop by Bhupendra Chaube is that the Deputy CAG has written to the lead auditor, R.P.Singh (who signed the above report) saying that they are not happy with the way the audit is being conducted. The lead auditor replied back in a 2-page note (quite interestingly, the full letter is not yet available to the viewer. I asked them, but as usual no reply). What we have is only a quote from that letter wherein the lead auditor is hurt at the accusation that he is not properly auditing.

Nowhere in the whole report by Bhupendra, is there one proof of the lead auditor being told to toe the CAG line. Nowhere in the letter is it shown that the lead auditor was asked to sign off on the Rs.1,76,000 crore amount. But then, for our national news channels, these facts matter little. There has been a disagreement, and therefore that is huge news for them. In which institution are there no disagreements? How many times have we disagreed with our bosses?

Now here comes the interesting part. "Ex-CAG babu stands by 2G loss figure" in the Times of India. The lead auditor wrote to the Public Accounts Committee of the Parliament of India, saying he did sign the final document.

"While indicating that he did not intend to support attempts to question the CAG findings, Singh told the panel he had signed the final report. He has denied reports quoting him as questioning Rai's decision to go ahead with assessing presumptive losses ranging from Rs 65,000 crore to Rs 1.76 lakh crore"

Read that full report. Now guess which channel didn't report this rebuttal by the lead Auditor. CNN-IBN !

Trysts with MSM - Part 17: When Rahul Gandhi became a "martyr"

MSM stands for Main Stream Media

So there was this farmers agitation in UP. As has been the trend across many parts of the country, farmers and poor people are fighting it out for their land. Governments are coming up SEZs etc etc on fertile lands, and naturally there is outrage.

As has happened in many states, police resorted to firing in UP too. Unfortunately, four farmers were killed in this firing. Now, if it is UP and there is a disaster, will Rahul Gandhi be far behind? It has become too routine for him to show up occasionally in UP, demeaning the Mayawati government.

And as always, he comes up with a gem. He says, he is "ashamed of being an Indian" by looking at the problems farmers are facing in UP. Never mind that farmers have been killed in Congress ruled states! The english TV media never dared to question this. They just went gaga over the fact that Rahul went on a bike to join the protesting farmers. They were thrilled that their paymaster was participating in a dharna.

Uttar Pradesh arrested Rahul Gandhi. And all hell broke lose. No, not at the place where he was arrested, but in English TV studios! NDTV CEO had this to say, to fellow tweeter i_panchajanya :

@i_panchajanya the point, which no doubt you are dumb to get, is that this whole drama makes rahul gandhi a hero and martyr.

You read it right, folks. Arresting Rahul Gandhi will make him a martyr. The definition of martyr is this : A martyr is somebody who suffers persecution and death for refusing to renounce a belief or cause

Not long ago, I was given a lesson on English 101 by this same Vikram Chandra. And today, he thinks that a mere arrest (that is just formal in nature) will make Rahul Gandhi a martyr. This is the depth to which our media can plunge.

I took the liberty to ask him this:

@vikramchandra Maybe I am "dumb" but could you mind explaining how Rahul became a "martyr"?

And he replies back:

@ssudhirkumar now, Rahul becomes the person "arrested for farmers". Which of the two do you think he would prefer?

Confused - I ask him back:

@vikramchandra so how does that make him "martyr"? plus why is the media not asking why he was silent when the same thing happened in AP?

And ofcourse, not reply after this.

Many politicians across the country court arrest, and they are immediately released on bail. This is a routine drama. What new did Rahul Gandhi do? More importantly, where on earth was Rahul Gandhi when the EXACT same situation happened, not once but twice, in Andhra Pradesh (which is ruled by Congress party, for which he is the general secretary)? Why does the media just forget these important facts while praising him to levels not seen or imagined before? Or maybe I am asking too much ...

Trysts with MSM - Part 16: "Spewing Venom"

MSM stands for Main Stream Media. If you are new to this series, I recommend that you read the other 15 parts (scroll down that link) too :)

Part 16 began with this tweet of mine:

I can't believe this!! "Is stone throwing a valid form of protest?" asks NDTV!! :O :O :O @BDUTT http://bit.ly/g2CfiC

And the subsequent tweet:

Really? Twitter "abuse" is abominal etc etc, but actual stone throwing that causes damage, pain and at time death is "debatable"? @BDUTT

Alert friends on tweeple quickly pointed out to me that the discussion was on "shoe" throwing and not "stone" throwing.

I corrected myself but the question was still valid though. When media stars consider "abuse" on twitter so disgusting, why on earth do they want to debate on something like "shoe throwing"?

And then she replies:

@ssudhirkumar please explain what you want to achieve with your relentless snideness? wont it be easier for you to unfollow me?

Baffled at the response, I ask back:

@BDUTT wait. You sayin, you don't wish to answer questions? I don't abuse, I present facts and ask - so why the reluctance to answer?

@BDUTT Why should I not follow you, and hold you to the "exact same standards" you think public personlaties should be held to?

To which she responds back:

@ssudhirkumar because all you do is spew venom. and beyond a point thats a waste of everyones time. but as you like.

This time, I ask back:

@BDUTT see. that's rhetoric again. Can you give me 1, just one example, of me "spewing venom"? Let's take the latest example if you wish

@BDUTT infact, I have documented many instances of how I was labeled and abused just for relentless qns. I guess u wouldn't be interested.

As usual - no reply.

So the same script plays out again. Don't answer questions. Wait for some time. Label the questioners. Scare them away. Base arguments on rhetoric. Same strategy followed by all NDTV journos. They are journalists - yet we should not question them on their coverage. Why should they NOT be questioned "relentlessly. Barkha mentions "beyond a point". Beyond what point? When did you ever answer any of my queries that you feel "beyong a point" it is a waste of time? Why should I not question relentlessly? Is there some kind of protocol that needs to be followed? Ask 2 hard questions, praise 5 times, then ask 2 more questions - something like this? "Unfollow me" is not an option. The day you open up for scrutiny is when you meet the "exact same standards" with which you scrutinize politicians on your shows.

Trysts with MSM - Part 15: The Hindu & China

MSM stands for Main Stream Media.

Every year, The Hindu has editorials on ALL Nobel Prize winners. Every year. On all 6 categories. This year, it did not have an editorial for the Nobel Peace Prize winner.

This year, the prize was awarded to imprisoned Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo "for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China". The absence of any editorial on this man was very mysterious. So, on twitter, I set about asking three people from The Hindu.

One is their China correspondent - Ananth Krishnan, who hasn't responded to my query as to why there was no editorial. When fellow bloggers at CBCNN asked him ( on lack of coverage I guess), he provided them with three links of his coverage. And that coverage did give us information on who this man is, what he did etc. However, that still never answered why there was no editorial in the newspaper.

Second one was Siddarth Varadarajan, Associate Editor of The Hindu.

On November 4, he replies like this (supposed humour!): @ssudhirkumar I wrote another edit in liu of him! [on why I didn't write anything on the Nobel peace prize winner 2010]

However, the question was never why "he" did not write anything on Liu. The question was why there was no editorial. And so I persisted with the question :)

On Dec.11 (a day after Liu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, though he was not physically present to receive it), Siddarth replies to me:

@ssudhirkumar FYI Hindu leads with Liu Nobel today

He was referring to their front page coverage of the award ceremony. Well, that still did not answer the question as why there was no editorial on it ! Asked him again, but never got an answer. The attempt to wash away the actual question with sundry replies did not come as a surprise though.

The third person is the Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu, N.Ram. The same question was being asked, whenever he came online :) And late last week, he sends a

Direct Message (a DM is not seen on a public timeline. I don't know why he had to send this as a private message):

Because we're not all-knowing and don't/can't write editorials on every subject; and our edit writers didn't know enough of the background.

Yes - you read it right folks. The Editor in Chief of The Hindu says that they don't/can't write editorials on every subject! And they didn't know enough of background, when their own correspondent dished out three articles on this subject !! Worse, The Hindu did not deem it fit to even condemn the total lack of coverage in the Chinese media. It did not find it fit enough to condemn the Chinese government's decision to black out all international channels that were broadcasting the news.

That The Hindu is Left leaning is no secret (and this is not some silly bloggers talking - even Rajdeep Sardesai recently challenged N.Ram to write an anti-left piece!). Such actions only serve as proof!

Trysts with MSM - Part 14: Basic Grammar 101

MSM stands for Main Stream Media.

In response to this question/demand/request to Vikram Chandra from me :

btw, @vikramchandra pls change the name of the program "India decides at 9". You/NDTV don't wholly represent India.

Vikram Chandra replies:

@ssudhirkumar and you do?

Now, at no stage did I say I do. Nor was the question framed as "India is asking you to change the name". It was just asking him to change the name of the program he anchors.

For those responses, he replies next day:

@ssudhirkumar of all your rants, this one takes the cake! "India Decides @ 9" doesn't mean decides on THIS show. Basic grammar 101

@ssudhirkumar 9 pm just happens to be one of the most watched slot. Across channels.

@ssudhirkumar having said that, i don't personally think it is the catchiest of titles so, for once, you may well get your wish..

I guess I have to indebted to NDTV for teaching me English. Once upon a time, Nidhi Razdan declared that I do not know English and today Vikram Chandra teaches me Grammar 101.

My apologies to you Vikram, for being dumb enough to think that "India Decides at 9" means exactly that and not the contrary.

Update on May18:

http://twitter.com/#!/vikramchandra/status/70135454908952577

They have decided to change the name of the program :)

Trysts with MSM - Part 13

The Mediagate scandal just refuses to die! Barkha's award winning performance on TV did not just shock the viewers, but many journalists too. Amidst discussion many such points, Bhupendra Chaube (National Bureau Chief of CNN-IBN) had this to say to a former colleague of his.

@diptosh the issue now clearly is not about corruption but violation of thin red line?If I was in barkha's shoes, I would have done the same

That response was in reply to this point by Diptosh -

@BDUTT It's really strange that ppl who have never done journalism are telling us to rewrite the grammar of reporting.

Anyways, I got curious, and asked Bhupen :

@bhupendrachaube didn't get the context of ur "would have done the same". What would u have done the same?

For which he replied : @ssudhirkumar not report on corporate pr angle

And now I got more curious :)

@bhupendrachaube ohh ok. now I am more curious. why? Isn't that a story to be told? :)

He replies: @ssudhirkumar u need to be a hardcore political journalist to understand why u wouldn't report on it! How can u make a pr agent a story? (cont)

@ssudhirkumar u r not sure of what the person is saying, the person is one of several people whom u r speaking to in an evolving situation

My question -

@bhupendrachaube look at it from the viewer perspective. we dont have indepth understanding, but we blindly trust what's on TV

@bhupendrachaube and when something like this happens - all we are told is that this is how it works so get back to work...

And here comes the killer line!

@ssudhirkumar mayb 2 decades back, it would have been reported. dynamics have changed now.In 24 hour cycle,u make& break rules all the time

I asked back what right does he (as in not individually, but the media as a whole) have to pontificate to us, if rules are broken "all the time"! However, this statement by Bhupen

@BDUTT @diptosh but what this has done, is that its making reporters question how to deal with sources. Best stories always come from crooks

elicited this response from auldtimer , that just about sums up the whole mood.

So journos expect us to trust them because they trust crooks RT @bhupendrachaube Best stories always come from crooks.

Trysts with MSM - Part 12

MSM stands for Main Stream Media.

#Mediamafia #barkhagate were two most trending topics on Twitter since about 10 days after "Mediagate" broke. After 10 days, The Associate Editor of The Hindu comes on twitter and says this:

Those curious about view of the Hindu on Radia tapes and journalism, see N.Ram on Karan Thapar's show at 10 pm on CNN-IBN tonight

For which, I ask back:

@svaradarajan why not write in the newspaper instead of talking on some channel?

And this got him all worked up!

@ssudhirkumar Grrrrr If he writes, y'all whine itna late kyon likha, yeh kyon nahin bola, voh klyon nahin bola. Learn to be happy sir.

I don't get it - What is so unreasonable in expecting the Editor of a newspaper to write his views in the paper rather than speaking on TV (which quite obviously all his readers will not watch)? And why should I be content with 'something is better than nothing' logic? Is the Editor really not writing in the paper because he is worried readers like me may not like it? Is that how the standards have fallen down now?

Also, CNN-IBN's Bhupendra Chaube also has been tweeting on this topic, asking how such smear campaign is ok. One such example:

U put pics of individuals on cover, then say let's deal with larger public issue at a seminar,what else will this be considered if not smear

I ask back:

So @bhupendrachaube those specific conversations r not the issue? Their publishing is?

He replies back:

@ssudhirkumar I am on the specific point of the manner in which they were presented. Design of the story is what I am debating.

When asked how the design matters, when the larger issue of betrayal by distinguished journos and their defeaning silence , he says there is a valid point and they need to come clean.

@ssudhirkumar precisely, frankly the key actors have a lot to answer for and I do agree that their silence is deafenin

Exactly our point! It really doesn't matter to us why there was selective leaking, or what professional "jealousy" (as termed by Sagarika Ghose) has led to these publications of the tapes. Those who don't miss out on an opportunity to lecture us on morality have betrayed us, and they need to answer. Period.

Trysts with MSM - Part 11

MSM stands for Main Stream Media.

Can't help but note these. National Bureau Chief of IBN, Bhupendra Chaube tweets this on Nov. 6th

Air force one has arrived, excitement as if a bridegroom has come for a wedding

Upon multiple people questioning him about this undue hype, he replies saying this:

@KanchanGupta i was being sarcastic, a dig at media's hype

So now, one would expect more sensible tweets to come from him, in the following days. Sample some of them over the course of the next 3 days :

PM obama dinner menu : chingara jammu prawns, fish and green-chilly lamb, kakori kababs, mughlai chicken, gobi, dal dampukht, rice pulao

Highlights of obama's address: several mps including mani shankar,anu tandon,jyoti mirdha left standing as parliaments central hall was full

Highlights of obama's addres:10 trinamool cong mps sat on the same bench,which was actually meant for 5.Space created for mamataa there only (asked him how where each MP sat is a highlight of the address - no answer!)

As obama came in, while rahul was doing namaste to him, obama extended his hand shake,had shared dinner table too with him last night at PMs

Gursharan kaur and sonia gandhi were wearing a similar colour saree, a sort of red colour (most important news, hence the emphasis by me :D)

A raja, sitting just before rahul G, tried his best to catch his eye, rahul didn't look towards him even once,upa still can't sack raja

There are some more like this. Ofcourse, he has also tweeted a couple of times of some substantial issues but these much more important news items outnumbered them. And Bhupendra Chaube was not alone in this. Almost all channels went over the top (even that description doesn't capture the true picture of the depths to which they plunged) during the period of this visit. Believe it or not, no other news was covered for even like 5 minutes !! They dedicated only about a min every now and then, for "other news" in the country. Well, what else would you expect if the National Bureau Chief of a major channel talks about the colour of the sarees of Sonia Gandhi and the PM's wife.

PS: Bhupendra Chaube also had this to say:

Ironical that obama is wooing captains of an india that's shining to shore up his prospects back home, while here in india, rahul Gandhi continues to reach out to an india that's still in darkness. So r we really a country that's shining? Or have we simply closed Our eyes to an india that's also hoping for someone to lift it from its deprivation. What a day to question the idea of india! Good night

I asked him:

@bhupendrachaube why do you always have to bring in that "two Indias" crap? Really, India is so simple that you can just classify in 2 ways?

He says: @ssudhirkumar imp to remind ourselves of challenges bac home too

I ask back - @bhupendrachaube but why do u get reminded of it only when jobs get created? Why not celebrate that fact?

For which he replies - @ssudhirkumar celebrate successes for sure, but don't turn a blind eye to challenges back home, honeywell, GE wooing us is one side of story

Further questions on how he keeps reiterating the same point, and make the tax paying citizenry look like some kind of cheap souls, did not result in any answers. Also, asked him to list out 3 things that changed as a result of Rahul Gandhi "reaching out" to an India that's "still in darkness" - no answer.

Trysts with MSM - Part 10

MSM stands for Main Stream Media

It all began when fellow alert tweeter, Venkat Gopal bought this issue to the forefront:

NDTV picks this report from PTI : http://bit.ly/9JoCqd and adds a line http://bit.ly/crAD0E @BDUTT

This report is about a hand hacking incident in Kerala, wherein the hand of a 24 year old man was severed by goons for questoning them about teasing his sister. The line in contention was this:

In the PTI (Press Trust of India) report: Police dismissed political motive behind the crime.
NDTV (which attributes the report to PTI): Some of the men, who attacked Abhilash were RSS-BJP workers but police dismissed political motive behind the crime.

Now, why would NDTV add that line when the actual PTI report does not have it? This was the question we posed.

And then Shri Siddarth Varadarajan (who by the way is an editor in The Hindu and not NDTV :D) comes and tweets this:

Kerala man's hand cut off for taking on eveteasers: 'Some of the attackers were RSS-BJP workers'. No howls of outrage? http://bit.ly/awmuP5

No prizes for guessing which link he tweeted - the NDTV one! Couple of folks (including me) have asked him separately (pasting below my queries) :

LOLL @svaradarajan ... hope you had a look at the original PTI report. http://bit.ly/9JoCqd .. would you like to clarify now?
Also @svaradarajan look at how they killed basic english sentences too ! if anything, the howling must come from journos!!

After a while, Sidd replies back:

@Vengdu @kvsarmaj @visaraj @ssudhirkumar The NDTV one is the FULL pti story. PTI free site has redacted version for nonsubscrbrs like you

Now, we are further confused!

@svaradarajan non subscribers get better english and neatly edited reports? while subscribers dont? @Vengdu @kvsarmaj @visaraj
@svaradarajan plus also why have IBN, IE, carried the "redacted" version? They are non-subscribers like us? @vengdu @KVSarmaJ @visaraj

To which, he replies:

@Vengdu NDTV link clearly says PTI. @ssudhirkumar Subscribers free to edit but not add. That's the way it works world over with wires.

Now, more confusion!

@svaradarajan so you are saying, PTI edited it's own report, cleared it of the shoddy english, deleted RSS-BJP, while NDTV didnt?

More. NDTV says story first published at 13:36 IST. Updated 16:27 IST. PTI says 14:21. IE says 15:45.

@svaradarajan Indian Express: http://bit.ly/ayHbvJ CNN-IBN: http://bit.ly/antUOv ... exact same as the "redacted" PTI version.

In the meanwhile, fellow tweeter, KiranKS pulls up reports in other publications.

PTI: http://bit.ly/9JoCqd Indian Express: http://bit.ly/ayHbvJ CNN-IBN: http://bit.ly/antUOv but @NDTV adds RSS-BJP!! http://bit.ly/ahNd35

Other fellow tweeters pull up links too, while Sidd pulls up a link on the "original PTI story on Mangalam!

Later in the evening, Kanchan Gupta gives us these facts:

PTI 1.05 pm take says "RSS-BJP workers"; removed in 2nd take at 1.40 pm. NDTV should have corrected. @BDUTT

So the point is very simple now - why is NDTV carrying out a story that the original soure PTI itself has made changes to? While all other newspapers, channels are picking up the latest vesion of the feed, why has NDTV not done it? And guess what - no clarification has come from Barkha, Vikram Chandra or Nidhi. A mail has been sent to feedback@ndtv.com , but as usual no reply yet! Thanks to all fellow tweeters for pushing the question and participating in the discussions yesterday.