Every body say that they have not done any thing after doing every thing. It happened with Sanjay Dutt, Salman khan and all other celebrities who did wrongs.
in my view now days journlism wants hot hot scope. daily 100 accidents on raod but no coverage. if salman khan do or any famouts person whose name sells its news.
if todgidya distructes trishul its news why too much coverage if u we will cover these type story where will be politician like togediya.
same case for shipla shetty father's case. only time will tell truth but if he do is not father of shilpa r u going to write abtout him may be a single line story. thats all
"But first, Shilpa should pin blame where it is due, and not hit at a safe target." Since when did the media become a safe target? The Police were ALWAYS the safe target...had she said "Police Concocted the Evidence" and the Country would have believed it in NO TIME, as the Police have a reputation of being unprofessional. But Since when did the Media become a safe target? How many people have attacked the media and got away with it? When EVER was the media a target at all? To My Understanding, the Media has always been a Loose, Uncontrolled, Irresponsible Monster...NEVER a target, leave alone safe. Karthik
"Who stopped Shilpa from giving her side of the story even from Sun City or Cannes? The communication system works fine in India most of the time." So, Tomorrow, I, as a police officer,call a press conference and say that Dr Adbul Kalam Swindled some of the nation's money...UNTIL and UNLESS Abdul Kalam takes the effort to deny it, with a press conference or whatever, you will treat the matter as news, and publish it?You will not take the effort to contact Dr Abdul Kalam and PROACTIVELY try get the counter from him? But Of Course, Abdul Kalam is different...You Decide Before Hand that he is Innocent...so you will Make the effort to get his side of the story...and the Shetty's are Guilty, before Hand, you decide...so THEY have to make the effort to communicate their counter...right? And Till Then, you can publish Any Kind of "Evidence" in favor of their guilt, right? Because, after all, "News is News".
"Since this was fact, according to the police, and not just opinion, there was no need to suppress it" Then, why have courts at all?Let the Police decide today that something is fact...it is no longer an opinion, right?Once the police says something, it isnt an opinion any more...so why not convict people based on what the police says, at once? The Matter WAS subjudice, and you guys made the bloody mistake of casting judgement, BEFORE the courts did.And now,conveniently trying to put the blame for that on the police: The Police say so, it is STILL opinion, not fact, and you had no business to call it FACT. "Nobody can stop news from hitting the headlines." Isnt that tantamount to saying "we will write what we want to write, nobody can stop that"...doesnt that show the extent of Responsibility that the media shows in use of its power? Continued
"News is news, no matter whom it involves" What Of Privacy?Is the above a blanket statement that there is no such thing as privacy? Isnt this more a sheer statement of power, that it is WE, the media, who will decide whether something is news or not, no matter whom it is about, and what it is? "Ironically, that very media gave space to her ill-considered fulminations." So, you consider this a big favor done by the media, to Shilpa, reporting her "Letter of Anguish" with "ill considered fulminations"? Who decides that these are Ill considered?You The Media, yourself, decide that her Complaints against you are Ill Considered? "From all accounts, Shilpa was not in the country when the unfortunate episode occurred. It is not possible the press did not try to reach her." So, EVERY member of the Media reports this "News', EVERY newspaper,website etc...and it is sufficient if 1(or Few) member(s) of the Media try to reach her? Is it no incumbent on EVERY one of the media to make an effort to reach her? Or is that a "business decision" that by the time you make efforts to reach her, the news is old, so you have to report it ASAP,even without making attempts to reach her? More Follows
I am in agreement with the press that it is responsible in presenting what is provided to it after taking due diligence measures. And in this case, there seems to be no reason why Shipa Shetty needs to holler about.
Bad press hurts a celebrity more than a common man, agreed. But then, doesn't the saying go thus - the higher you go, the greater the fall.
I think Shilpa should be advised to keep quiet and eliminate the chances for further bad press due to her rantlings.
First this worthless actress must do her acting on the screen not infront of public! Second media is not the place to request for justice. Throw couple of millions, they will immediately support your cause. Otherwise, just kill couple of innocent Hindus they will support your cause! Who is defending whome?!
>>If and when the case is proved false, the press will undoubtedly report it with equal prominence<< No, it won't. One thing is guaranteed: It will say, "I TOLD YOU SO".
>>Follow-ups are rarely done when ordinary people are involved. Shilpa should be glad she is a celebrity; it will ensure fairness in the media<< Ah, truths coming out one after another. Now you know why the media is blamed.
