New York Times Headstrong Announcement to Hire India-Based Business Correspondent Raises Concern | Indiafleurit
New Delhi / New York: Known for its virulent anti-Indian stance since the Modi government came to power, the iconic American daily New York Times (NYT) has drawn criticism after an ad it ran for the recruiting a New Delhi-based ‘South Asia Correspondent’ “used the word” drama “to describe the deadly clash between India and China that claimed the lives of many Indian soldiers. The announcement also portrayed the Indian prime minister as a proponent of “self-sufficient and muscular nationalism centered on the country’s Hindu majority”.
The semantics of the ad describing today’s India and its prime minister and its border dispute with China reeked of inherent bias, according to many media watchers who felt the US publication had abandoned all semblance of neutrality by reporting India with even its advertising to hire a prejudiced correspondent.
The ad reads: “India will soon overtake China in population, if not already, and has the ambition to gain a greater voice on the world stage. Under Narendra Modi, her charismatic Premier Minister, India has become the economic and economic rival of China. political weight in Asia, a drama take place along their tense border and in the region’s national capitals.
“Nationally, India is a melting pot of people and languages grappling with difficult questions of class disparity and wealth. It has a well-educated and aspiring middle class coveted by Amazon, Walmart, and other major global corporations. A new class of Indian business tycoons. won over enthusiastic audiences on Wall Street and London. Yet hundreds of millions of people are struggling for a better life for their children, and India’s rapidly growing economy is showing signs of slowing down.
“India’s future is now at a crossroads. Mr. Modi advocates a self-sufficient and muscular centered nationalism on the Hindu majority of the country. This vision puts him at odds with the interfaith and multicultural goals of the founders of modern India. The government’s growing efforts to control online speech and media speech have raised difficult questions about the balance between issues of security and privacy with free speech. Technology is both a help and a hindrance. “
The NYT’s stance includes coverage of neighboring countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and the Maldives, each with their own rich history and complicated relationships with their huge neighbor, he adds. .
the @NY Times has abandoned all pretense of impartiality with this job offer for a correspondent in South Asia. They are clearly looking to hire an anti-Modi activist who can also stir up anti-Indian sentiments in our neighborhood. With this, the newspaper qualifies as an NGO with foreign funding. pic.twitter.com/hw3QIRqjzn
– Kanchan Gupta (@KanchanGupta) July 2, 2021
The New York Times had published what many called an outrageous article a few years ago in which it called the Indian sari a symbol of Hindu nationalism. The article says the promotion of the sari is an effort to align “the party’s broader political agenda: projecting multi-faith India, a country of over 1.3 billion people, as a Hindu nation.”
The article, which media experts said had nothing to corroborate the central idea, drew widespread condemnation and many called the effort to tie traditional Indian clothing for women to the policy of a far-fetched attempt to push a story against the Hindu nationalist BJP that has ruled the country since 2014.
An opinion writer for the New York Times resigned last year because of a liberal bias in the newspaper.
Bari Weiss was the Times opinion writer who had left the resignation in which she declares that “a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps above all in this newspaper: this truth is not a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to a few enlightened whose work is d. ‘inform everyone. “
Bari wrote in his resignation letter from the NYT posted on his blog: “My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the object of constant intimidation from colleagues who disagree with my opinions. They called me a Nazi and a racist; I learned to get rid of it. comments on how I write about Jews again.
“Several coworkers perceived to be friendly to me have been harassed by coworkers. My job and my character are openly humiliated on company-wide Slack channels where editors regularly pop in. There some coworkers insist. fact that I must be kicked out if this company is to be truly “inclusive,” while others display ax emojis next to my name. Other New York Times employees publicly label me a liar and fanatic on Twitter without worrying that the harassment will translate into appropriate action. They never are. “