You are not an average reader of the ToI, any more than the average ToI
reader is going to read your literary criticism, post modern subaltern
studies, feminism etc type books
. [12/12/11 16:53 +0000]:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 16:49, Salil Tripathi <sali...@gmail.com> wrote:
Some responses, interspersed.
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan <che...@gmail.com>
wrote:
They promote salacious content because readers want them. Entertaining ageneral
traction for these topics have an
reader is not a bad function. I don't think it is dereliction of duty
either. Most stories that people say "matter" more, are being written. If
people at large don't want to read them, or do something about what they've
read, how is it the media's fault?
"because readers want them"? Hmm.... I dont want to read about BigB,
BahuB, BetaB or BabyB -- Yet, a month ago, that was the most important
news flash each time I switched any TV news channel on any Indian
network. I, and many others like me, certainly didnt ask for a 24x7
update on BahuB's pregnancy but I doubt if any news channel or media
outlet cared about the viewers point of view. No sir, they were far
too busy pontificating whether BabyB would be a C-section or a normal
delivery on 11/11/11. NIMN* please -- can we not blame the viewer
and/or reader for insipid and boring content, especially when this
viewer has zero control over the so-called "salacious" content being
broadcast in their name. Its not called an idiot box without reason.
* Not In My Name please.
--
.
