On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Lahar Appaiah <thew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> They used to have decent cricket coverage... > Lahar, you gotta be kidding me. I vividly remember one of their well-known cricket writers sidling up to me at the Bangalore press box a few years ago, during an India-Pakistan Test, and asking, "Amit, tell me, how many hyphens are there in 'nevertheless'." I had to restrain myself from saying, 'Three." (I was covering that series for the Guardian.) That incident is representative, in my view. The Hindu's reputation, in my mind, is sort of a peer-driven meme. At some point it became fashionable to say that they're an awesome paper, and it became fashionable to say that their cricket writing is good. Both are rubbish. It's been a crap paper for as long as I can remember, and a mouthpiece of the party in question, as Suresh complains, ever since I could read. Comparisons with the ToI aren't fair, because anything will shine in comparison. The paper that's setting the standards these days, to my mind, is HT. At least their Mumbai edition rocks, from news coverage to design to features, and so on. Do you guys get HT in Bangalore and Chennai? -- Amit Varma http://www.indiauncut.com http://www.twitter.com/amitvarma
