Additionally, foreign news organizations hire from the elite upper crust of India who are often educated from elite Indian liberal arts schools. It is no secret that the elites of India have flourished under the patronage of 60 yrs of Gandhi rule and that universities created in this era were prescriptively moulded in the ideology of the Congress at the time. IE. Socialist & Pseudo-secular. Almost all the heads of major media houses in the country rose to power after the 'blessings' of a Gandhi. Do you think any of them would be capable of doing
At the risk of hurling an ad hominem, I genuinely find the intellectual quality of the traditional liberal arts elites of India to be rather low. It is not surprising, given that no self respecting parent in India would doom their intelligent child to a career (or absence there-of) in media, the most nepotistic of all industries in the country.
> sources in India, in many cases from quasi media organizations
Did you actually just call ThePrint a quasi-news-org ? That's hilarious given the extent to which they go to appear bi-partisan, follow high standards of reporting and do primary journalism. It is headed by the most acclaimed journalist in India, who has previously been the editor of some of the biggest media institutions in the country. He has recieved acclaim from Indians (Padma Bhushan) and International actors [1] alike.
On top of that, they are explicitly liberal and employ experts from every side of the spectrum (Yogendra Yadav to Abhijit Iyer Mithra). To maintain journalistic integrity they have adopted a subscription based model, so they don't sell their soul to ads and one of the few media houses that send real boots on the ground to war zones for 1st party reports.
> Times Of India is a great media source compared to the others
That's even more hilarious, because the times of India is easily the worst of the lot, when it comes to major english newspapers. This isn't just me saying it, almost every Indian knows it. We used to jokingly call it the prostitute, because it sells out whichever party is in power at that time. In my entire life in India, I have never heard anyone call TOI reliable. Not a single time.
> YouTube channel by a dude who makes his own podcast
It was a long form discussion by a community that the national media ignores. How would I find an institutional interview of someone the institutions have abandoned ? There was a reason I linked 2 other sources for you to go off of if the podcast was not of sufficient veracity for you.
> have no factual merit or sources and are sensationalized. One incident doesn't make a pattern or a trend or redemption.
Can you please link to an exact link that has factually false information or where the damages were sensationalized ? I purposely linked to 2 events that have occured within the last week to highlight the frequency of such events. These there were dozens of people killed and their houses burned. Anywhere else, it would have been called a pogrom or a genocide. This same week we have seen hindus lynched on the Punjab border and an outspoken hindu advocating for Kashmiri unity being lynched by Jihadis in Kashmir.
The American left has time and again turned a deaf ear to muslim fundamentalism over the last few decades. I am not sure if that is due to guilt from middle eastern wars or a perception of muslims lying at the bottom of the privilege hierarchy as viewed from the woke lens. However, these mappings fall flat the second you look away from the west. Ashraf muslims were the invaders and historic oppressors, rulers of princely states and are incredibly well represented in positions of power in institutions. On top of that, India institutes special provisions for all minorities, in a manner that no other country does. IMO, India is the most pro-minority country on planet earth and to some degree it is time for Hindus to finally get the same rights in the country as minorities have been enjoying for 60 years. (Mostly due to Nehru's naivete and electoral minority based politics)
For ex, minorities get to fully control their own religious institutions, educational institutions, civil courts, special affirmative action and reservations, and their respective funding sources without needing any transparency. On the other hand, Hindus get none of these accommodations and all their institutions are controlled by the Govt. and sorely underfunded (because the Govt. is poor). Any criticism of a minority religion is considered 'bigotry' but criticism of hinduism is considered progressivism. The hypocrisy is practically dripping from the pens as western sources write about India.
India has always been a country of indic cultures and traditions. Those traditions are carried forward by hindus in an explicit sense, but is also reflected in the unique nature of islam and christianity in the subcontinent. Indians have provided refuge to Parsis, fleeing political refugees, Tibetans and many other communities over the last few centuries. THe people who took them in and allowed them to freely practise their beliefs and traditions were hindus. I am not worried about India's secularism, because secularism is core value of Hinduism. [2][3]
That being said, the wierdly India-specific interpretation of secularism practised by the Gandhi family is one I completely oppose and abhor.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhar_Gupta: Under his leadership, The Indian Express won the Vienna-based International Press Institute's Award for Outstanding Journalism in the Public Interest thrice
[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/29/key-finding...
