In a country of a billion, even exceptions run into millions. So some millions did want to know about the Birth. You and I weren't interested; quite likely at least a million were.
Salil Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -----Original Message----- From: "." <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:53:20 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [silk] Freedom of Speech On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 16:49, Salil Tripathi <[email protected]> wrote: > Some responses, interspersed. > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> > They promote salacious content because readers want them. Entertaining > ageneral traction for these topics have an > reader is not a bad function. I don't think it is dereliction of duty > either. Most stories that people say "matter" more, are being written. If > people at large don't want to read them, or do something about what they've > read, how is it the media's fault? "because readers want them"? Hmm.... I dont want to read about BigB, BahuB, BetaB or BabyB -- Yet, a month ago, that was the most important news flash each time I switched any TV news channel on any Indian network. I, and many others like me, certainly didnt ask for a 24x7 update on BahuB's pregnancy but I doubt if any news channel or media outlet cared about the viewers point of view. No sir, they were far too busy pontificating whether BabyB would be a C-section or a normal delivery on 11/11/11. NIMN* please -- can we not blame the viewer and/or reader for insipid and boring content, especially when this viewer has zero control over the so-called "salacious" content being broadcast in their name. Its not called an idiot box without reason. * Not In My Name please. -- .
