Hillary Clinton and India

[desicad]

...... In North America the spotlight people are always asked what they have learned from their mistakes after their acknowledgement, specially if their behavior targeted a community. May be not so in India.

Only India .....strange......atleast you could have been fair here. But then its fine.

It is not when journalists ask flattering questions that implies appeasement policy. It's when they don't ask tough questions and try to avoid them that imply appeasement policy.

I explained ealier, but may be you didn't get it. So called tough questions were asked, but because of a different level of relationship or whatever, they don't seem that hostile and grab headlines. And you fancy that as appeasment policy.

 

[sher_khan]

...... In North America the spotlight people are always asked what they have learned from their mistakes after their acknowledgement, specially if their behavior targeted a community. May be not so in India.

Only India .....strange......atleast you could have been fair here. But then its fine.
[quote="sher_khan":27f7bfmj]
It is not when journalists ask flattering questions that implies appeasement policy. It's when they don't ask tough questions and try to avoid them that imply appeasement policy.

Thats what I am tring to say that tough questions were asked, but because of a different level of relationship or whatever, they don't seem that hostile and grab headlines and you fancy that as appeasment policy.[/quote:27f7bfmj]


1. Since we were talking about the behavior of the indian anchors therefore I referred to India. Also, I think that you are implying that the same thing happens in Pakistan. It is unfortunate that majority of the world sees pakistan with a lens which is 20 or 30 years old. Pakistan has evolved significantly and very rapidly. An average Pakistani is very well informed. That is why that the news shows get very high ratings. A political party or a person which targets a specific community has no chance of success in today's pakistan. Any bias gets confronted by the media. The confrontation may not be absolutely effective but is there.

2. Well, you may have a point there. My exposure to the Indian anchors' questions asked off Hillary could be limited. I may have not seen all the interviews. The ones that I saw asked the flattering questions and the tough questions were relating to what US is doing with reference to Pakistan. There were no tough questions directly relating to US.
My general impression is that India is constantly trying to impress US. But I have been wrong before.

However, I don't understand why the stereotyping related issue was never raised in india to deter any such recurrence in future. This issue did not have to be raised while Hillary was in India but could have been highlighted when incident actually took place. The indian media did not keep its viewers/readers informed. To whom it is responsible. If headlines can be made on Gilchrist's comments on Tendulakr then stereotyping by a political leader of US is a huge issue. The only conclusion that I can draw is that it was intentionally avoided.

BTW you have not answered my question. Did you know about this joke prior to my post?

 

[desicad]

Frankly no, was not aware of this. Don't know when it happened and wheather it was reported in the Indian media as I am not in India and it all depends upon time and circumstances as to how closely can follow the news. It surely must have been reported, may be not that hyped and I personally feel that ignoring such one off comments is the best way forward. A person can get carried away in the heat of the moment, may not have any bad ideas and may regret later.