The English Press has lost touch with the real India, and in the process, its credibility. Half-truths are the most dangerous lies. The Indian Journalists, of the English variety, have made a career out of them. From quoting out of context to publishing unconfirmed reports to giving the news their own slant to writing holier-than-thou editorials, they have done them all.

Before I proceed further, let me say this. I don't think one form of fundamentalism is better than the other. Killing innocent Muslims is as heinous as burning Karsevaks alive. I don't say this rhetorically; I mean it. A democracy can survive only if law and order are maintained.

That said, the English Press has been a miserable failure in projecting both sides of the story.

• It's front-page news when 'Hindu extremists' rape a Christian nun; but it gets mentioned only on page sixteen, when the same nun retracts her statement.
• The massacre of the Hindu Pilgrims on an Amarnath Yatra is played down. (Actually, it's news when they aren't killed.) Every single human rights violation by Indian soldiers though, is immediately noticed and shouted from the rooftops.
• You will find a hundred interviews with the Post-Godhra Muslim riot victims for every single interview with the families of the Karsevaks who were burnt alive. Apparently, the Karsevaks deserved it, because they were the original rabble-rousers, weren't they? May be it's not said in so many words, but the message is clear.
• Free and fair elections in Kashmir are not touted as a BJP achievement. Rather, it is the "triumph of the people's will." When Gujarat burns, of course, it's the fascist BJP that needs to be blamed.
• Nothing ever gets written on the good deeds done by the Sangh Parivar (like generally being the first group to aid people in case of emergencies and natural calamities). I am sure the English Media feels that would "dilute" the message, so they won't do it.

On and on it goes, this covering up, this blasphemous obfuscation, this attitude that "every thing wrong with India today is because of the emergence of the BJP as a political power." Things have reached such a nauseating crescendo that one is afraid to mention Vandemataram, lest one be considered a BJP inspired Hindu chauvinist.

The following seems to be the "method behind the madness" of the English Media.

This attitude is wrong not just morally, but practically too. Let's say, a riot happens and the media reports it as, "two communities clashed with each other and 50 people were injured." In the new millennium, word gets around fast. If the media doesn't want to cover a certain event, people will get hold of that information in some other manner. And they might just get another colored version of it. This opens new wounds, not heal the old. Truth, when suppressed or given a twist, as in "Aurangazeb is secular," bites back even harder.

I am not a card-carrying member of the BJP. In fact, I hated them with every shred of my soul, when they let those three terrorists walk away in exchange for the release of the hijacked passengers. But bad-mouthing BJP conveniently for every thing it does wrong, and keeping silent whenever it gets something right, and worse, keeping mum about other unscrupulous politicians, doesn't exactly win you credibility. (And you always thought it's the BJP who has a hidden agenda.)

Frankly, I think Laloo Prasad Yadav has done more harm than hundred Narendra Modis. But the English Media treats him with kid gloves. At best, he's a messiah. At worst, he's a well-meaning buffoon. (I am pretty sure about the buffoon part, but I don't think he means well.)

Sure. In an ideal world, one doesn't have to prove anything. But, even according to the English Media, it's not an ideal world. (How can it be, as long as BJP is at the helm?) If it's considered sensible advice in business to maintain good rapport with people, why can't the same be practiced in real life? Moreover, when the Muslim intelligentsia criticizes only the "Hindu atrocities," and keeps enigmatically silent when Hindus are mistreated, it raises a flag. (Consider the case of Mr. Bukhari saying he won't pray for an Indian victory in Kargil, because the Indian soldiers were fighting against the Mujahidien.)

These are the more 'eminent' journalists in the English Media - the jokers of the pack.

These are the more 'eminent' journalists in the English Media - the jokers of the pack.

1. Kuldip Nayar: This man went to Wagah, with a candle in his hand, hoping to attract like-minded people in Pakistan to do the same, from the other side of the border. Need I say more?
2. N.Ram: The man who controls "The Hindu," but is essentially very anti-Hindu.
3. Dilip D'souza: The crybaby of the Indian English Media. He finds something to feel sad about, even in the happiest moments.
4. Praful Bidwai: He is so irrational, it defies logic (pun intended).

The people you must read to get the other perspective.

1. Arun Shourie
2. Rajeev Srinivasan

Today, Hindus don't trust the English Media. The Internet polls, the people I talk to, and the opinions on the news sites, confirm this. Every vote that was cast for the B.J.P in the Gujarat Elections is a slap in the face of the English Media.

More articles by Murali Chari

1. The Importance of Law and Order...
2. Do we need a movie on Bhagat Singh?
3. Raja and Rani visit Timbuktu!
4. Worshipping False Heroes
5. The English Media bites the dust
6. "Where We Indians Got it Wrong...."
7. "All this for the rest of us!"
8. Do we deserve the movies we get?
9. The 'friends' you need to dump
10. Raja and Rani visit Timbuktu!
11. "Where we Indians got it wrong….."
12. "When 98 is greater than hundred"
13. "How Easy It is...."