After much goading I found myself at Turquoise Cottage on Friday night, as usual the place was filled with tone-deaf idiots - I've never figured out why people who claim to be DJ's can't maintain a tempo and maintain the same style of music through the night. Forget new music - you do not put Linkin Park and The Beatles back to back, you can certainly play them in the same set if you want to play around with the tempo and know what the hell you are doing. But back-to-back? Sheesh!
Anyway, back to the topic. Lately there has been a lot of gossip, but mainly concerning one channel, rather one network. A very senior editor/producer who was caught el flagrante with a senior anchor, you would say big deal. But, a few days ago I hear the same guy was asked to proceed on long leave after he propositioned (well, a version I heard had some elements of fondling in a lift - but I wouldn't know anything about that) a younger anchor. What is even more peculiar, is that this 'younger' anchor is supposedly 'famous' in the industry for all the wrong reasons. And people get upset when I shout obscenities at my delightfully slow computer at office. Anyway, all I do know is at this network all sorts of strange things have been happening - and I wouldn't say the network is imploding. No, unlike another network they don't have people who don't read the newspapers and carry four-month old news leading their more senior reporters holding their heads in their hands, but it is crazy. And evidence of that happened at the english channel a couple of months ago.
Coming back to news, this entire 'Q Business', I've been looking at coverage and I must say, coverage in The Hindu has been quite peculiar. Imagine how they must feel, because after all, that newspaper was the reason Bofors was brought into the public realm. Anyway, despite everything and my own right-leaning tendencies, I would the matter to be buried and forgotten. It happened in a different time and a different era, but every 12-18 months something happens and we hear of the story again. I guess some of you would think differently, but think of Bofors thing like an old flame we can't get over, you can't let it hold back your life - read Murakami's Norwegian Wood if old flames are your thing.
However, some things haven't changed. I know a lot of people who make their living selling arms and ammunition to the government and seeing how they live and party (rather their children/grandchildren). I don't think we have improved the arms buying and distribution system, there is still a lot of money to be made, even after the Tehelka expose. From what I believe, AK Anthony is 'clean' (now, with politicians this is always a relative term) but he tends to procrastinate. And middlemen still thrive and continue to make a lot of money and have gigantic parties in Chattarpur. Oh well!
5 comments:
aha. i second u on bofors. now its just boring. shucks.
The whole defence business is sordid no matter where you look. In the US, defence contracts are controlled by an elaborate old boys network of ex-military officers.
These guys either start their own companies or are appointed to senior positions in weapon companies simply because of their proximity to military top brass.
I personally know of contracts given to extremely incompetent companies because of these connections.
"Q" factor is not important only for the 'single' reason that bribes were paid and accepted.I personally believe that 'commissions' are a legitimate and accepted part of a deal for the 'facilitators'.So refusing to admit that commissions were paid were 'stupid' to start with.Having said this what makes "Q" factor more important is the way He was allowed to fled,then the accounts frozen were unfreeze and Now "Q" detention and "Her Majesty's Government's" injudicious move to fool the nation and even the Supreme Court,are matter of important concern for all right thinking Indians.
i am reading your blog for a few days. It would behove you to post names rather than insinuating whatever. An average person, like me has no idea which channel or which anchor you are talking about.
@Rishi: You won't be able to tell who are being referred to in this blog unless you are associated with the Indian media. Nor can I. I suppose K can't make their identities public or else he'll get into deep shit because I think guys know who he is. And he's obviously part of the media; otherwise he wouldn't be getting the juice. So if you don't belong to the Indian media, I'm afraid this blog isn't for you. Or me. Perhaps K should tell us which is his signed blog - that, presumably, will deal with stuff which can be put up upfront.
Post a Comment