justanobserver
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- Messages
- 2,192
- Reaction score
- 0
The Times of India: red at the top
In increasingly liberal India, *** sells and no one is profiting more than the owners of the Times of India
Wading through my friends' blogs, I stumbled into a discussion on obscenity in Indian media. Reading divergent positions on the issue, I found that the harshest barbs by some participants were directed at the Times of India for practising what they called soft-**** journalism.
Intrigued, I raised the subject with some of my friends in India. Two of them, both journalists and fiercely liberal-minded, said they had stopped subscribing to the paper because it was a bad influence on their children. A colleague, who had previously worked with the paper in India, summed it up: "I know readers who have stopped buying the paper for this reason and those who buy it for the same."
My experience, when I took a closer look, was enough to make me think of recommending the paper to those who are seeking to re-energise their *** life. In the section "other top news stories" on the paper's website, I found "Sensual massage for great ***", along with "Your best position for ***" and "Why women like to cuddle after ***" of which the latter two were classified as the "most popular" stories.
Two items in "Latest news" were very revealing: "Why girls kiss girls" and "Oral *** enough for women". I also had glimpses of models and actresses posing semi-naked, actresses in bed with so-and-so, stars baring all, etc.
This should suffice to explain why many readers feel turned off. They don't expect a family newspaper to indulge in such excesses. No other mainstream English-language newspaper in the country pushes quite so hard at the boundaries of what is acceptable.
As the oldest English-language daily in India (and now, with a circulation of 4m, the world's largest-selling English newspaper), the Times is a goliath in Indian journalism and commands great respect. It has set national agendas, and some of the country's most celebrated journalists have walked its corridors. The paper is a torchbearer of modern values, with an agenda of pluralism and social equity.
Why should such a hallowed brand pander to voyeurism? The answer lies in the changing sexual mores of the country, and more importantly, in the crushing competition in the media sector.
True, Indian sexuality has been breaking loose, egged on by the internet and visual media. We have regular reports and surveys on how sexual permissiveness has progressed each year; articles on Bollywood actors locked in steamy kisses; and sexy pictures of models in revealing clothes splashed even on the front pages. Many boundaries have been broken.
If the Times has drawn ire, it's not because the change is too tardy, but because the paper has been pushing too hard. To many, haste, in matters of ***, is repulsive. Remember that ours is a country where *** education, even as an idea, is yet to be fully conceived.
The Indian media scene has been remarkably vibrant in the past few years, with leading English dailies launching new editions in a spree of expansion. Whenever the Times has emerged from its lair in Mumbai and stomped into a new city, its competitors have watched in fear. The paper is known for its fiery marketing strategies, and has an uncanny knack of bulldozing its way to the top. "Soft **** journalism" is a weapon it has employed with stunning impact in this marketing war primarily targeting young people, especially university students, who are discovering their sexuality.
The paper has learned that both *** and news sell well but, together, form a potent mix that is unmatched. It is a formula that its competitors are loth to try.
It is rumoured that this erotic journalism is not the choice of its editors, but management policy. The Times' co-owner, Samir Jain, once announced with uncharacteristic insouciance that editors are dispensable and treated them accordingly. Indian journalists seethed, but the Times's roaring success hasn't yet given them a chance for revenge.
Despite the moral brouhaha, the Old Lady of Bori Bunder, as the paper is nicknamed, will continue to have enormous sensuous appeal. After all, she is operating in the land of the Kama Sutra, and if kama becomes its marketing sutra, we can only blame that on the insatiable desire to *** up profits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys please take this seriously (no this isn't a joke like like my recent threads).
ToI especially with their supplements (like Delhi Times) have really been pushing it, are we going to see more Bajrang Dal types?
In increasingly liberal India, *** sells and no one is profiting more than the owners of the Times of India
Wading through my friends' blogs, I stumbled into a discussion on obscenity in Indian media. Reading divergent positions on the issue, I found that the harshest barbs by some participants were directed at the Times of India for practising what they called soft-**** journalism.
Intrigued, I raised the subject with some of my friends in India. Two of them, both journalists and fiercely liberal-minded, said they had stopped subscribing to the paper because it was a bad influence on their children. A colleague, who had previously worked with the paper in India, summed it up: "I know readers who have stopped buying the paper for this reason and those who buy it for the same."
My experience, when I took a closer look, was enough to make me think of recommending the paper to those who are seeking to re-energise their *** life. In the section "other top news stories" on the paper's website, I found "Sensual massage for great ***", along with "Your best position for ***" and "Why women like to cuddle after ***" of which the latter two were classified as the "most popular" stories.
Two items in "Latest news" were very revealing: "Why girls kiss girls" and "Oral *** enough for women". I also had glimpses of models and actresses posing semi-naked, actresses in bed with so-and-so, stars baring all, etc.
This should suffice to explain why many readers feel turned off. They don't expect a family newspaper to indulge in such excesses. No other mainstream English-language newspaper in the country pushes quite so hard at the boundaries of what is acceptable.
As the oldest English-language daily in India (and now, with a circulation of 4m, the world's largest-selling English newspaper), the Times is a goliath in Indian journalism and commands great respect. It has set national agendas, and some of the country's most celebrated journalists have walked its corridors. The paper is a torchbearer of modern values, with an agenda of pluralism and social equity.
Why should such a hallowed brand pander to voyeurism? The answer lies in the changing sexual mores of the country, and more importantly, in the crushing competition in the media sector.
True, Indian sexuality has been breaking loose, egged on by the internet and visual media. We have regular reports and surveys on how sexual permissiveness has progressed each year; articles on Bollywood actors locked in steamy kisses; and sexy pictures of models in revealing clothes splashed even on the front pages. Many boundaries have been broken.
If the Times has drawn ire, it's not because the change is too tardy, but because the paper has been pushing too hard. To many, haste, in matters of ***, is repulsive. Remember that ours is a country where *** education, even as an idea, is yet to be fully conceived.
The Indian media scene has been remarkably vibrant in the past few years, with leading English dailies launching new editions in a spree of expansion. Whenever the Times has emerged from its lair in Mumbai and stomped into a new city, its competitors have watched in fear. The paper is known for its fiery marketing strategies, and has an uncanny knack of bulldozing its way to the top. "Soft **** journalism" is a weapon it has employed with stunning impact in this marketing war primarily targeting young people, especially university students, who are discovering their sexuality.
The paper has learned that both *** and news sell well but, together, form a potent mix that is unmatched. It is a formula that its competitors are loth to try.
It is rumoured that this erotic journalism is not the choice of its editors, but management policy. The Times' co-owner, Samir Jain, once announced with uncharacteristic insouciance that editors are dispensable and treated them accordingly. Indian journalists seethed, but the Times's roaring success hasn't yet given them a chance for revenge.
Despite the moral brouhaha, the Old Lady of Bori Bunder, as the paper is nicknamed, will continue to have enormous sensuous appeal. After all, she is operating in the land of the Kama Sutra, and if kama becomes its marketing sutra, we can only blame that on the insatiable desire to *** up profits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys please take this seriously (no this isn't a joke like like my recent threads).
ToI especially with their supplements (like Delhi Times) have really been pushing it, are we going to see more Bajrang Dal types?
Maybe that's why you have those 'fenquins' (or whatever you call them)
