What's new

India, China growth race 'silly', says Nobel winner

Yes but that is for Indian ppl to decide themselves. We cant have outsiders trying to teach us broadcasting standards, right?

Precisely now you can owe up to crap you put on and stop saying "oh yah free media, ad revenue etc"
 
. .
The day you have more than 300 CHinese channels (excluding foreign ones) vying for public attention and advertising money, you will see a Chinese ICBM missile launch and a nuclear explosion in Washington.

I would like to tell you of that I tell other Chinese members. Do not compare private Indian cable channels with your state sponsored channel.

If you want to compare then you must compare Indian state sponsored channel Doordarshan with your govt channels.

Sure, don't compare private media with state media.

What about private media in the mainland?

What about Hong Kong media? HK is a Chinese city within the PRC, that has a constitutional guarantee to free media, and a fiercely profit driven media sector.

Funny how they don't launch hate campaigns against other countries.
 
.
Sure, don't compare private media with state media.

What about private media in the mainland?

What about Hong Kong media? HK is a Chinese city within the PRC, that has a constitutional guarantee to free media, and a fiercely profit driven media sector.

I would say do not compare at all.

Indians like sensational news and this is what attracts audience to their channels and they have no problems in showing that to increase their revenue by generating more advertising.

Cant blame anybody. Its Bollywood efftect.
 
.
The day you have more than 300 CHinese channels (excluding foreign ones) vying for public attention and advertising money, you will see a Chinese ICBM missile launch and a nuclear explosion in Washington.

I would like to tell you of that I tell other Chinese members. Do not compare private Indian cable channels with your state sponsored channel.

If you want to compare then you must compare Indian state sponsored channel Doordarshan with your govt channels.

So you are okay with private Chinese media showing images of Bhopal and Chinese chemical weapons tests? This type of "yellow journalism" is okay with you?
 
.
So you are okay with private Chinese media showing images of Bhopal and Chinese chemical weapons tests? This type of "yellow journalism" is okay with you?

Dude, no one in India watches any CHinese news channel, I am not sure if they are even available.

I will not even mind if you show naked Indian bureaucrats and politicians running helter skelter like rats.
 
.
Dude, no one in India watches any CHinese news channel, I am not sure if they are even available.

I will not even mind if you show naked Indian bureaucrats and politicians running helter skelter like rats.

dude there is not even single Chinese channel in whole India....
Let alone movies...
 
.
Great! Since you won't watch it, we'll just show animations of missiles bombing New Delhi and run photos of Indian Army surrendering in 1962 and say "In 1962, the GDPs of India and China were similar. In 2011, China's GDP is 4x that of India." You don't watch it anyways so it doesn't matter.
 
.
Great! Since you won't watch it, we'll just show animations of missiles bombing New Delhi and run photos of Indian Army surrendering in 1962 and say "In 1962, the GDPs of India and China were similar. In 2011, China's GDP is 4x that of India." You don't watch it anyways so it doesn't matter.

Go ahead,by the way who cares for chinese media..
we don't even care of wat u show in ur world map,coz only chineese use it :lol:

U can even show chinese pilots flying F-22...:rofl:
 
. .
Yesterday I suddenly saw General V. K. Singh, COAS, being interviewed by Major General Ashoke Mehta (retd.) on a programme called Defence Watch. The General explained the border "incursions" in the simplest possible manner. He pointed out that there was a disputed border. He explained that there was a line of actual control, but it wasn't very helpful, because it had been done by the Chinese side on a 1:1,000,000 map; on the ground, there were wide variations. As a result, the Chinese side had its perception of where the line was, the Indian side too had its perceptions. Both sides with the full knowledge of the other patrolled up to the point perceived by it. These were, therefore, not intrusions but transgressions; neither side took notice of it, recorded it or felt particularly tensed by it.

It was certainly a clear and logical explanation.


Here I have found an official statement to support our views.

In reply to a volley of questions on reported transgressions along Sino-Indian border, Choundary said, "It is a matter of perception.

"The border line with China is not fully demarcated and both the countries have their own perceptions of the border line and so the troops of the respective countries patrol the border line according to it," he said.

Army 'alert' to situation on borders with Pak, China - Hindustan Times
 
.
The problem here is the difference in work values too i think. Our media houses try to put up any kind of story to earn money and with the 1962 angle and present Chinese economic and military success it is the biggest story that would sell. For a bit educated this material does not hold good for sure. I think the Chinese are worried about the gullible may be??
 
.
The problem here is the difference in work values too i think. Our media houses try to put up any kind of story to earn money and with the 1962 angle and present Chinese economic and military success it is the biggest story that would sell. For a bit educated this material does not hold good for sure. I think the Chinese are worried about the gullible may be??

Yes and very few people buy my argument that incursions occur because the borders are not fully demarcated.
 
.
One economist comes up with a speech good for China,Chinese people love him,be the person is Indian!But when several come up with speeches good for India and not too for China,then Indians become wet dreamers and the economists become useless.

Hypocrisy.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom