Indian government should hang its head in shame: BBC filmmaker

[NKVD]

But the HC now made clear, that she has every right to do so, while the government has no right to stop her from doing it, since stating a different opinion is not anti national!

Govt Do What its Find Appropriate on Reports by various Intel Agencies.Its Within its Executive Rights To Act its there in Constitution.So Govt ha no fault in it they Took Action on on the Merits And Power Granted to them By Constitution.

 

[Bang Galore]

Well it shows that India is taking a worrisome path and what's even worse is, that this is the result of the voter of the biggest democracy in the world giving a party a clear mandate to govern. I highly doubt that any NDA voter actually voted for restrictions of the right to express your opinion, to travel, to see the movies / docus or even to possess the food you might like.

I don't see it that way. Just think the government is being foolish in a few things. The ban on the documentary has wide, across the political board support, not like stupidity is limited to one party. Thankfully the only mess here is the egg on the government's face, this government's stupidity has not yet cost money. I much prefer a clear mandate to a party than the fractured mandate that cost the UPA government to cause losses in figures that are ridiculous (even the CAG's extraordinary figures seem to be on the lower side). There is no loss here except a loss of face and a well deserved one.

Govt Do What its Find Appropriate on Reports by various Intel Agencies.Its Within its Executive Rights To Act its there in Constitution.So Govt ha no fault in it they Took Action on on the Merits And Power Granted to them By Constitution.

Governments are supposed to apply their mind, otherwise we can just have the "intelligence" organisations running the country. You have little idea how badly they have got smacked down, essentially they have been made to look like chumps and they made some obscure person into a national celebrity and gave her cause immense publicity..

 

[sancho]

I don't see it that way. Just think the government is being foolish in a few things. The ban on the documentary has wide, across the political board support, not like stupidity is limited to one party.

With the same argument though, that it's damages India's image! In both cases, it wasn't the law of the land that was not followed than therefor resulted into these cases, but the government making up these weired theories. And the fact that so many people even here in these threads are talking more about the image problem, rather than the actual content of the docu shows the problem when the government bases their policies on emotions rather than facts.

I much prefer a clear mandate to a party than the fractured mandate that cost the UPA government to cause losses in figures that are ridiculous.

I prefer a clear mandate too, but this mandate was given to push reforms that were not possible in a coalition government, not to be backward and damage the image of India as being an open and emerging country right? So it's about what you do with the power the Indian voter gave you and these restrictions and bans surely are the wrong way.

 

[nair]

Too little mate, because the discussion is not about the docu, it's content or what we can do to prevent such things happen again, but about conspiracy theories and hurt feelings about foreigners making a docu in India.

Well this is one of the worst handled issue....... Be it Centre, state or other agencies........

 

[jaatram]

Yup she claimed something and she was right. Great.

There is nothing insulting in the documentary about our constitution. There was no false evidence in it, unless you can prove that she paid the rapist to say those words. Btw you should know that if you want an interview of Bill Clinton, for example, you have to pay him. The rapist does not seem to be coerced or trained to say those words at all. Just watch bits of the documentary where he says its the girl's fault.


Ohh please. Restraining order on a film is a ban.

The film maker claimed that she got the permission for the interview, which seems to be true from other independent reports. The interview does not violate the judicial process per se. If you have belief in our judges, with faith in their not getting affected by public knowledge like the documentary, that is. It would have violated the judicial process in countries where a jury decides whether a guy is guilty or not.

The only technicality on which the ban was imposed is that the documentary is supposed to be for educational/informational purposes and that somehow airing it on BBC violates this undertaking. I don't see any such clauses in the permission letter the film maker put out. It says interview is permitted if she got a written permission from the people in jail to be interviewed.

The second technicality which the government did not even bother with, which would have made some sense, is that the name of the victim was revealed in the documentary. Btw an Indian media agency already did this mistake once earlier. I don't see them in jail.

There is no falsifying of evidence. She reported whatever she recorded from the people around the incident, in good faith. For some reason, she missed interviewing Nirbhaya's friend. And this did not change the story a lot, except which movie the guy wanted to watch.

And just notice what the minister is claiming the documentary to be. If there were really nationalist and worried that it would defame India, they shouldn't have provided free publicity to it with a ban. It is not like they can ban every documentary about India in other countries. We cannot afford to have people who are both ultra-nationalist and stupid.

 

[rubyjackass]

Yup she claimed something and she was right. Great.

You can check the document in youtube. It was shown in news also.

 

[jaatram]

You can check the document in youtube. It was shown in news also.

All she showed was the permission given to her, not the terms and conditions which she violated.

 

[Star Wars]

With the same argument though, that it's damages India's image! In both cases, it wasn't the law of the land that was not followed than therefor resulted into these cases, but the government making up these weired theories. And the fact that so many people even here in these threads are talking more about the image problem, rather than the actual content of the docu shows the problem when the government bases their policies on emotions rather than facts.

Actual content of the documentary pretty much gives the perception that "All Indians are Rapists" . Its has been made to monetize on the issue and stereotype Indian men. Which is pretty much the problem. There is a difference between accepting one's faults and excessive self flagellation which is favorite among liberals.

I prefer a clear mandate too, but this mandate was given to push reforms that were not possible in a coalition government, not to be backward and damage the image of India as being an open and emerging country right? So it's about what you do with the power the Indian voter gave you and these restrictions and bans surely are the wrong way.

Should we allow documentaries which were produced and released without the permission of the govt. ? A documentary according to the original witness shows incorrect content and is hell bent on stereotyping Indians. And actually interviews a rapist and then stereotypes his views as of those of men in India ? Even the co producer of the documentary has spoken against it. Screw the laws in this country i guess.

Problem is people like your self will shamelessly support anything which shows India in a bad light even if its contents and its assertions are factually incorrect. Seriously .... stop worshiping westerners so much.

Deception, Lies Behind Making of India’s Daughter -The New Indian Express

@rubyjackass


"While Udwin, owner of Assassin Films, last week appeared on all major TV channels crying foul over the ban and hogging the international limelight, Bhushan through whom Udwin got permission to shoot inside Tihar is missing from the film’s credits."

"The government rules state that a foreign filmmaker is not allowed entry inside an Indian prison. A Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) official, probing any violation of contract in the filming of the documentary claims Udwin partnered an Indian co-producer to circumvent the rule and gain access to the jail premises."

"The Home Minister had stated in Parliament that the No Objection Certificate (NoC) was given to Udwin and Bhushan, but the latter’s name is missing from the documentary shown on BBC, prompting the MHA officials to call for all the records pertaining to the documentary shoot from Tihar Jail authorities."

"Worldview’ funded ‘India’s Daughter’ and listed Bhushan as the original co-producer of the documentary. However, after it was released, her name is missing from not only the credits, but also from the web page of the Italian distributor Berta Film and Denmark-based DR Sale, which hold the rights to distribute the documentary."

"Investigators are also surprised at‘Tathagat Films’ popping up as the co-producer in the credits of the documentary. They said it appears to be a fraudulent entity created at Udwin’s behest. “Tathagat films is not mentioned in the official papers submitted by the original makers of the documentary which means a mirage was created to hide something on the UK joint venture."

"‘Apricot Sky Entertainment’ owned by Bhushan, which was originally mentioned in the papers is now missing from the official credit list. All these complications raise suspicion over the working of the British film maker,” the official said."

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has no records of Tathagat Films, but there are at least three production houses that operate under the same name in Mumbai and Delhi. Arvind Marchande, owner of Mumbai-based ‘Tathagat Films’ refused any association with Udwin or Assassin Films saying he never worked on the documentary. He also told Express that he has never met Udwin. The phone numbers of the two Delhi-based ‘Tathagat Films’ were found to be incorrect.

For a producer, who claimed on TV that she herself was raped once and that she wanted the documentary to be a tribute to Indian women, officials said that strangely she was not even present during the week-long shoot inside Tihar.

“A crew of four to five people interviewed convicts inside their cells. Meanwhile, one of the cameramen quit after a couple of days of shooting and a new person was drafted into the crew. Why a new cameraman came into the scene as shown in the records is yet to be ascertained,” said an official. He also said that the interviewed convict, Mukesh was not comfortable talking to the TV crew, though, he had given a consent letter to the film makers, including Bhushan. When they started, they noticed that nothing much would be forthcoming from Mukesh since he was only replying in monosyllables - ‘yes’ and ‘no’. They crew decided to resort to the ‘sting strategy’.

It is learnt that a cameraperson was asked to roll the camera but pretended that it was switched off. The rapist was inveigled into an informal chat. Unaware that he was being shot, his ugly, unrepentant mindset came to the fore and Udwin could get the sensational quotes, which were used in the film. “He was not speaking, so it was decided to do a sting and use the entire set up to look like a proper interview. It was a long informal interview in which he had mentioned so many things. The crew also interviewed a few other convicts, but till that time Tihar authorities did not know the contents of Mukesh’s bytes. They saw it last year and raised objections,” said an official privy to the developments in the ongoing probe. The official also pointed out that the clothes Mukesh wore during the interview indicated that rules were violated. “If he had been convicted, he would have been wearing prison clothes,” points out a Tihar Jail official.

The MHA had given its NOC to the documentary makers on July 24, 2013. But the consent letter signed by Mukesh is dated October 7, 2013. The shoot duration is still under probe to ascertain whether the four rape accused, who were convicted by the court on September 10, 2013, were facing trial or had been sentenced.

“In both situations, Tihar authorities were responsible for violation of rules,” the official said.

Mystery Deepens

There is also element of secrecy as the film maker’s application is generic in nature. It just seeks interviews of convicts for study and research purposes, while the consent letter (written in English for a convict who doesn’t understand any language other than Hindi) mentions that the consent was for “a documentary cantered on the December 16 Delhi gangrape case”.

Udwin has left India fearing arrest after Delhi Police registered an FIR. She has claimed that she spent two years working on the documentary. The ongoing inquiry contradicts her claim.

“We are examining her travel details to check whether she had obtained a Film maker’s visa or came to India on a tourist visa. Our initial findings suggest that shooting in India was a limited affair and she did not spend two years in India as she had claimed to international TV channels. The entry, stay and exit of foreigners into and from India are governed by the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920, and the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992. Documentary filmmakers are issued journalist visas valid for up to six months.

The undertaking to the MEA clearly states that the film maker will have to show the film to a representative of the government, If so required, at least two weeks before final telecast and will work constructively with the government representatives to remove deviations, If any, from the approved scripts of the film. Investigators have asked the MEA and the Bureau of Immigration under the MHA to share the details filed by Udwin while applying for her visa.

Tricking the System

“In most of the cases, foreign filmmakers circumvent the rules by getting a co-producer on the board. They generally come on tourist visas and subsequently hire a production house to do the job. We have asked our London Mission to probe whether Udwin had submitted a synopsis of the documentary while applying for the visa,” a source said adding that so far they have not received any response.

Udwin in her earlier television interviews had denied violating any rules. She had even told some channels that she possessed all the required clearances and perhaps the Home Minister was misinformed.

After the ban of film, Udwin appeared on several International TV channels saying the film was her ‘gift to India’ and she only tried to expose the mindset of rapists and wanted to highlight the country’s zeal to fight crimes against women.

But, an official involved in the probe who is aware of the funding pattern of ‘India’s Daughter’ and knows the filmmaker said Udwin had successfully sold the film to distributors branding “Delhi as rape capital of the world” and “India as society where brutality against women is widespread” as has appeared on their websites.

He also said besides grants received before filming the project, Udwin also successfully marketed the film with the help of distributors. Besides BBC, the film is also slated for release on Passionate Eye, a Canadian documentary TV series, which airs on CBC News Network of Canada.

“Udwin was obliged to come to India for the documentary’s publicity campaign because the agreement with Tribeca. Another one is due in New York,” an MHA official said.

Who is Leslee Udwin?

■ Little known in India before the India’s Daughter controversy, 58-year-old Leslee Udwin produced two feature films East is East and its sequel West is West. According to her LinkedIn profile, Leslee was awarded the London Critics Producer of the Year Award and also won “BAFTA” (British Academy Award) for best British film. She specialises in producing feature films and lecturing on film and film production. According to UK Companies Directory, Leslee floated Assassin Films Limited in 1992.

■ The Home Ministry had alleged that Leslee did not clearly indicate the reason behind the Tihar interview and kept the authorities in the dark. However, Leslee refuted the charges claiming she followed the rules.

■ Currently, Leslee holds three appointments at three active companies—West is West Distribution Ltd, Assassin Films (the One & Only ) Limited and Assassin Films. Earlier she held directorship in five companies that are no longer active.

HOW FOREIGN FILMMAKERS CIRCUMVENT LAW

Months before Home Ministry ordered a probe against Leslee Udwin for violating rules, a look-out circular was issued against two French filmmakers for shooting Jarwa tribe for a documentary film in October 2014 without permission. Andman Police had filed FIR against French director Alexandre Dereims and producer Claire Beilvert after they came know through a feature on Facebook, promoting a documentary “Organic Jarawa”.


---------------------------



Didn't break any laws ? lol bootlickers

 

[Tshering22]

Actual content of the documentary pretty much gives the perception that "All Indians are Rapists" . Its has been made to monetize on the issue and stereotype Indian men. Which is pretty much the problem. There is a difference between accepting one's faults and excessive self flagellation which is favorite among liberals.




Should we allow documentaries which were produced and released without the permission of the govt. ? A documentary according to the original witness shows incorrect content and is hell bent on stereotyping Indians. And actually interviews a rapist and then stereotypes his views as of those of men in India ? Even the co producer of the documentary has spoken against it. Screw the laws in this country i guess.

Problem is people like your self will shamelessly support anything which shows India in a bad light even if its contents and its assertions are factually incorrect. Seriously .... stop worshiping westerners so much.

Deception, Lies Behind Making of India’s Daughter -The New Indian Express

@rubyjackass


"While Udwin, owner of Assassin Films, last week appeared on all major TV channels crying foul over the ban and hogging the international limelight, Bhushan through whom Udwin got permission to shoot inside Tihar is missing from the film’s credits."

"The government rules state that a foreign filmmaker is not allowed entry inside an Indian prison. A Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) official, probing any violation of contract in the filming of the documentary claims Udwin partnered an Indian co-producer to circumvent the rule and gain access to the jail premises."

"The Home Minister had stated in Parliament that the No Objection Certificate (NoC) was given to Udwin and Bhushan, but the latter’s name is missing from the documentary shown on BBC, prompting the MHA officials to call for all the records pertaining to the documentary shoot from Tihar Jail authorities."

"Worldview’ funded ‘India’s Daughter’ and listed Bhushan as the original co-producer of the documentary. However, after it was released, her name is missing from not only the credits, but also from the web page of the Italian distributor Berta Film and Denmark-based DR Sale, which hold the rights to distribute the documentary."

"Investigators are also surprised at‘Tathagat Films’ popping up as the co-producer in the credits of the documentary. They said it appears to be a fraudulent entity created at Udwin’s behest. “Tathagat films is not mentioned in the official papers submitted by the original makers of the documentary which means a mirage was created to hide something on the UK joint venture."

"‘Apricot Sky Entertainment’ owned by Bhushan, which was originally mentioned in the papers is now missing from the official credit list. All these complications raise suspicion over the working of the British film maker,” the official said."

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has no records of Tathagat Films, but there are at least three production houses that operate under the same name in Mumbai and Delhi. Arvind Marchande, owner of Mumbai-based ‘Tathagat Films’ refused any association with Udwin or Assassin Films saying he never worked on the documentary. He also told Express that he has never met Udwin. The phone numbers of the two Delhi-based ‘Tathagat Films’ were found to be incorrect.

For a producer, who claimed on TV that she herself was raped once and that she wanted the documentary to be a tribute to Indian women, officials said that strangely she was not even present during the week-long shoot inside Tihar.

“A crew of four to five people interviewed convicts inside their cells. Meanwhile, one of the cameramen quit after a couple of days of shooting and a new person was drafted into the crew. Why a new cameraman came into the scene as shown in the records is yet to be ascertained,” said an official. He also said that the interviewed convict, Mukesh was not comfortable talking to the TV crew, though, he had given a consent letter to the film makers, including Bhushan. When they started, they noticed that nothing much would be forthcoming from Mukesh since he was only replying in monosyllables - ‘yes’ and ‘no’. They crew decided to resort to the ‘sting strategy’.

It is learnt that a cameraperson was asked to roll the camera but pretended that it was switched off. The rapist was inveigled into an informal chat. Unaware that he was being shot, his ugly, unrepentant mindset came to the fore and Udwin could get the sensational quotes, which were used in the film. “He was not speaking, so it was decided to do a sting and use the entire set up to look like a proper interview. It was a long informal interview in which he had mentioned so many things. The crew also interviewed a few other convicts, but till that time Tihar authorities did not know the contents of Mukesh’s bytes. They saw it last year and raised objections,” said an official privy to the developments in the ongoing probe. The official also pointed out that the clothes Mukesh wore during the interview indicated that rules were violated. “If he had been convicted, he would have been wearing prison clothes,” points out a Tihar Jail official.

The MHA had given its NOC to the documentary makers on July 24, 2013. But the consent letter signed by Mukesh is dated October 7, 2013. The shoot duration is still under probe to ascertain whether the four rape accused, who were convicted by the court on September 10, 2013, were facing trial or had been sentenced.

“In both situations, Tihar authorities were responsible for violation of rules,” the official said.

Mystery Deepens

There is also element of secrecy as the film maker’s application is generic in nature. It just seeks interviews of convicts for study and research purposes, while the consent letter (written in English for a convict who doesn’t understand any language other than Hindi) mentions that the consent was for “a documentary cantered on the December 16 Delhi gangrape case”.

Udwin has left India fearing arrest after Delhi Police registered an FIR. She has claimed that she spent two years working on the documentary. The ongoing inquiry contradicts her claim.

“We are examining her travel details to check whether she had obtained a Film maker’s visa or came to India on a tourist visa. Our initial findings suggest that shooting in India was a limited affair and she did not spend two years in India as she had claimed to international TV channels. The entry, stay and exit of foreigners into and from India are governed by the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920, and the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992. Documentary filmmakers are issued journalist visas valid for up to six months.

The undertaking to the MEA clearly states that the film maker will have to show the film to a representative of the government, If so required, at least two weeks before final telecast and will work constructively with the government representatives to remove deviations, If any, from the approved scripts of the film. Investigators have asked the MEA and the Bureau of Immigration under the MHA to share the details filed by Udwin while applying for her visa.

Tricking the System

“In most of the cases, foreign filmmakers circumvent the rules by getting a co-producer on the board. They generally come on tourist visas and subsequently hire a production house to do the job. We have asked our London Mission to probe whether Udwin had submitted a synopsis of the documentary while applying for the visa,” a source said adding that so far they have not received any response.

Udwin in her earlier television interviews had denied violating any rules. She had even told some channels that she possessed all the required clearances and perhaps the Home Minister was misinformed.

After the ban of film, Udwin appeared on several International TV channels saying the film was her ‘gift to India’ and she only tried to expose the mindset of rapists and wanted to highlight the country’s zeal to fight crimes against women.

But, an official involved in the probe who is aware of the funding pattern of ‘India’s Daughter’ and knows the filmmaker said Udwin had successfully sold the film to distributors branding “Delhi as rape capital of the world” and “India as society where brutality against women is widespread” as has appeared on their websites.

He also said besides grants received before filming the project, Udwin also successfully marketed the film with the help of distributors. Besides BBC, the film is also slated for release on Passionate Eye, a Canadian documentary TV series, which airs on CBC News Network of Canada.

“Udwin was obliged to come to India for the documentary’s publicity campaign because the agreement with Tribeca. Another one is due in New York,” an MHA official said.

Who is Leslee Udwin?

■ Little known in India before the India’s Daughter controversy, 58-year-old Leslee Udwin produced two feature films East is East and its sequel West is West. According to her LinkedIn profile, Leslee was awarded the London Critics Producer of the Year Award and also won “BAFTA” (British Academy Award) for best British film. She specialises in producing feature films and lecturing on film and film production. According to UK Companies Directory, Leslee floated Assassin Films Limited in 1992.

■ The Home Ministry had alleged that Leslee did not clearly indicate the reason behind the Tihar interview and kept the authorities in the dark. However, Leslee refuted the charges claiming she followed the rules.

■ Currently, Leslee holds three appointments at three active companies—West is West Distribution Ltd, Assassin Films (the One & Only ) Limited and Assassin Films. Earlier she held directorship in five companies that are no longer active.

HOW FOREIGN FILMMAKERS CIRCUMVENT LAW

Months before Home Ministry ordered a probe against Leslee Udwin for violating rules, a look-out circular was issued against two French filmmakers for shooting Jarwa tribe for a documentary film in October 2014 without permission. Andman Police had filed FIR against French director Alexandre Dereims and producer Claire Beilvert after they came know through a feature on Facebook, promoting a documentary “Organic Jarawa”.


---------------------------



Didn't break any laws ? lol bootlickers

Killer response with fact.

There was a response documentary made called United Kingdom's daughters and has gone viral in India.

UK needlessly started this nonsense.

 

[Bitter Melon]

What values you talk about? Indian values? Who decides those values. These so called values are a joke. Didnt you hear the comments the defense lawyers made? If women in our society held higher grounds, we would never have heard cases of honor killings, rapes, dowry deaths, demands for dowries, female infanticide etc, and I am talking only about the Hindu societies, let alone others. So please spare us this malarkey that Indian society has values.
As for western societies, equality means respect. Whats wrong with that? If you dont respect another human being as equal, you are showing your bigotry and sexist nature. Holding women on 'higher grounds' smacks of sexism.
Instead of values, why not talk about respect to women? Why not humanity?

Are you an Indian? If so were you brought up according to Indian culture or some other culture? If so, how many women have you raped until now? How much dowry have you taken? What about female infanticide and honor killings? If you have done all this due to your upbringing then you must blame Indian culture. If not, STFU.

 

[jamahir]

All she showed was the permission given to her, not the terms and conditions which she violated.

@rubyjackass @The_Showstopper

the sanghis here are using technical/legal excuses to suppress the showing of reality... they are declaring time and again "no, there are no problems in india"... it is such people who for the last 67 years have kept india backward and its culture, generally anti-human.

it is only when citizens recognize faults in their traditions/culture that they can remove them and progress... every society has had some revolution in one way or another, except india... it is time for one.

Are you an Indian? If so were you brought up according to Indian culture or some other culture? If so, how many women have you raped until now? How much dowry have you taken? What about female infanticide and honor killings? If you have done all this due to your upbringing then you must blame Indian culture. If not, STFU.

this is a prime example of excusing away of problems.

equal rights are constitutional,

stop using the word "constitution" to pull a blanket over the sickness in indian society.

 

[sancho]

Actual content of the documentary pretty much gives the perception that "All Indians are Rapists" .

If that would be true, they would have generalized the issue and docu would focus on the offender, Indian men, the fact that many rapes in India are gang rapes (which infact is pretty specific to India)...
That however is not the case, since the docu is limited to this specific case, shows the offender only as one part of the case and even tries to show his background and what might effected him personally...and most importantly, the fact that the docu shows young Indian men and women protesting together against this rape case, shows exactly the opposite, since it shows the protest in India itself, that there are men and women that are standing up against this problem and the old mindsets.

Should we allow documentaries which were produced and released without the permission of the govt. ?

Which is factually wrong, since they had the permission, one can only complain about the former home ministry, that they gave the permission. But even here, there is no legal base to not allow docus or bar foreigners from doing them in India. The problematic issue about the permission was (and that's what Indian women groups also complain about), that the permission was given although the case was an ongoing one and that this could effect the convitction at the end.
So the docu was legal from what we know so far and most of the people who actually saw it, can't complain about the content, but only about the timing and that's what I said earlier too, but that doesn't change the content of the docu.

 

[Screambowl]

@rubyjackass @The_Showstopper

stop using the word "constitution" to pull a blanket over the sickness in indian society.

tujhe maloom bhi hai ki meiny bola kya hai?

I said equal rights are constitution.. keeping your thought high for women are Morals. samjah nahi aya toh gharwalo se puch.

 

[jamahir]

tujhe maloom bhi hai ki meiny bola kya hai?

I said equal rights are constitution.. keeping your thought high for women are Morals. samjah nahi aya toh gharwalo se puch.

no, you will have to simplfy, with examples, if not too much trouble.

 

[Screambowl]

no, you will have to simplfy, with examples, if not too much trouble.

for that you should have read my very next post to that post.

any ways.. There is a difference between Morals and Equal rights.
Equal rights are constitutional, you can read what are those rights

Morals are, when you are aware how to differentiate between your sister, mother and wife, some one's wife, some one's daughter. Equal rights are given to all of them, but the level of respect is different.