Follow– Sudhanshu Karkala
As soon as I read news report (Feb 6) on Togadia’s rant, a response to Akbaruddin Owaisi’s speech, I thought the prime channels of the nation would pick that up for debate that day. 
Instead, the channels were busy covering Narendra Modi’s speech in a school in Delhi. (Of course, the topic he was asked to speak was “Emerging Business Model in the Global Scenario”. I wonder if he came anywhere near it!)
I was disappointed, of course, not surprised. The coverage he attracted gave an impression that he was presenting the country’s next budget. Through the day the channels played promos of evening ‘national debate’ sessions on his speech. The channels, in fact, took the Togadia issue on Thursday for discussion. However, the attention it attracted or the screen-space it received was meagre in comparison to Modi’s speech.
While Owaisi, in his speech, wanted the police be silent to finish Hindus, Togadia went on to state that whenever police had stood aside silent Hindus had the advantage. Togadia made it clear the police stood aside when Muslims were massacred during the incidents of Nelli (Assam), Bhagalpur (Bihar) and Gujarat in 2002.
Owaisi has been behind bars after a case was filed against him in Hyderabad. 
His brother Asaduddin Owaisi tried to fool the country by insisting the TV anchors to report it as ‘his alleged speech’, raising doubts on the video clips. However, so far Togadia has not done that. In fact, he defended his speech saying that he was just referring to instances of past.
The anger Owaisi attracted for his speech is absent in case of Togadia. Maharashtra government did not register the case until the Centre insisted it to book one. In both the cases more disturbing than the speeches were lusty cheers of the gatherings. The cheers inspired the speakers to spew more venom and spread the message of hatred in
strong words.
The people who hailed the speakers in both the cases lack humanity and have least respect for idea of ‘secular state’. These are the ones who have supported the electoral-politics rooted in communalism. Such people are everywhere and that is the reason why TV channels offer space on their prime-time news debates to such ‘hate speakers’.
If you recall who spent considerable time in studios of 
Kannada TV channel in the recent time the list would go with Go. Madhusudan, BJP MLC, Pramod Mutalik of Srirama Sene, Dr. Chidananda Murthy, a noted scholar among a few others.
TV crew prefer Pramod Mutalik or Madhusudan, despite knowing the fact very well that they are against to a particular community and hard-core communalists. Janashri News channel telecast the debate on Pramod Mutalik’s threat not to allow Indo-Pak cricket match in Bangalore repeatedly (at least thrice), knowing very well that the government would not allow his men barge into the stadium. The TV channels air such debates, because primarily their business is to ‘playing to the galleries’, which is filled with lusty cheer-leaders.
ಅಲ್ಪಸಂಖ್ಯಾತರು ಪ್ರಚೋದನಾತ್ಮಕ ಭಾಷಣ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಮಾತ್ರ ಅದು ಅಪರಾಧ, ಬಹುಸಂಖ್ಯಾತರು ಪ್ರಚೋದನಾತ್ಮಕ ಭಾಷಣ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಅದು ಅಪರಾಧ ಆಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂಬುದು ಈ ದೇಶದ ಅಲಿಖಿತ ಕಾನೂನು. ಈ ಮನ:ಸ್ಥಿತಿಯಿಂದ ಭಾರತದ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಧೀಶರುಗಳೂ ಹೊರತಲ್ಲ. ಸಂವಿಧಾನವನ್ನು ಎತ್ತಿ ಹಿಡಿಯಬೇಕಾದ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಧೀಶರುಗಳೂ ಬಹುಸಂಖ್ಯಾತರ ಪಿತೂರಿ, ಸಂಚನ್ನು ಹಾಗೂ ಪ್ರಚೋದನಾತ್ಮಕ ಭಾಷಣಗಳನ್ನು ಕಡೆಗಣಿಸಿ ನ್ಯಾಯದ ಕಗ್ಗೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಿರುವುದು ಈ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ನಡೆಯುತ್ತಾ ಇದೆ. ಈ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ಹೇಳುವವರು, ಕೇಳುವವರು ಯಾರೂ ಇಲ್ಲ. ಹೀಗಾಗಿ ಜೈಲಿನೊಳಗೆ ಇರಬೇಕಾದ ಬಹುಸಂಖ್ಯಾತ ಮೂಲಭೂತವಾದಿಗಳು ಸಮಾಜದ ನೆಮ್ಮದಿಯನ್ನು ಕೆಡಿಸುತ್ತಾ ರಾಜಾರೋಷವಾಗಿ ತಮ್ಮ ಹರಕುಬಾಯಿಯನ್ನು ತೆರೆದು ದಕ್ಕಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತ ಅಧಿಕಾರದ ಗದ್ದುಗೆ ಏರುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರೆ.
I feel pity for the writer. His theory of neutrality woke-up the moment media ignored Togadia! The fact is more you ignore such elements more you defuse their fire. By making the Owaisi speech a national importance our media made him worldwide popular prime time. It seems the writer wanted media to project such image to Togadia also which our media ignored and wanted a tit for tat whcih would have resulted in more damage than gain so that this writer can write another essay on it.
Its evident from the mention that writer is uncomfortable with rising popularity of Modi. Its evident when he said “a school” to a College. that too not any xyz college, but one of the this country’s capitals prestigious college. And the speaker is not any ordinary CM, he is said to be next PM-in-waiting. So its natural to have attention and listen to the person who is aspiring to be next PM.
When a VP of a political party spoke pre-written speech with full of ironies of his legacy media termed it as path-breaking-forward thinking …. speech by “Yuvraj”. Then nobody questioned why the country’s media giving attention to a speech made by a VP of one of the 100+ political parties of this country. So cant we give attention to what another person with the possibility of ruling us in future says, what are his views etc?
It seems Naveen H has the rare talent of diverting the issue cleverly and take a dig at the writers for opinions, unacceptable to him. Any layman could understand the issue of the article was the hate-speeches and the response of public and media to such hate speeches. He does not want to address the issue, rather he is interested to glorify Narendra Modi.
Naveen, going by his words, wants that media should ignore hate-mongers and their speeches. That is what echoed in the final part of the article with examples of Pramod Mutalik and others. However, in case of Praveen Togadia and Owaisi the issue is far more serious for the fact the former is international head of a parishat and latter a people’s representatives.
Their words, particularly hate-speeches – carry the potential to reach larger masses. Media should exhibit its responsibility by airing such issues and with that put pressure on the administration to take stern action against them. Let’s not forget only after media raised the issue a case was booked against Owaisi and later arrested. The writer of this article expected the similar role by the media in case of Togadia.
There is no difference to Togadia & Owaisi. Both deserve the same treatment as they both talk rubbish. Togadia should have been under the bars long back for all the public nonsense he has been creating. Why congress ruled Maharsatra is not taking any action?.
I just didn’t understand why Modi was bought in this article? He got due coverage as he was selected to deliver key note by one of the finest Indian institute and students opted him and he delivered the same. It is not Naveen, it is author who tried to mix to totally different topics here.
Yes my dear friend Sudhanshu. We should ignore hate mongers. If you ignore their outburst limited to those thousand attended that too max for a day or at max for a week. If you make it prime time debate you will end up making them national icon.
We can see the result. By ignoring Togadia now his issue died in second day itself as you also mentioned. Did you expect it to blow and make a weeklong issue? that is what exactly they want!!
Please read a blog written by Rajdeep Sardesai on the same today itself:
http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/rajdeepsardesai/1/64305/making-sense-of-sensationalist-tv-journalism.html
Thanks,
Naveen
ಎಲ್ಲೋ ಓದಿದ ನೆನಪು: ಹಿಂದೂ ಮೂಲಭೂತವಾದಿಗಳಾದ ತೊಗಾಡಿಯಾ, ಮುತಾಲಿಕ್ ಚುನಾವಣೆಗೆ ನಿಂತರೆ, ಠೇವಣಿಯನ್ನೇ ಕಳೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಹೀನಾಯ ಸೋಲು ಅವರಿಗೆ ಕಟ್ಟಿಟ್ಟ ಬುತ್ತಿ. ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಹಿಂದೂ ಮತದಾರರು ಅವರ ಯೋಗ್ಯತೆಯನ್ನು ನಿರ್ಧರಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಆದರೆ ಮುಸ್ಲಿಂ ಮೂಲಭೂತವಾದಿಗಳಾದ ಓವೈಸಿ ಮತ್ತು ಆತನ ಸಂತಾನ ಚುನಾವಣೆಗೆ ನಿಂತರೆ, ಉಳಿದವರು ಠೇವಣಿ ಕಳೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಾರೆ ! ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಮುಸ್ಲಿಮರು ಓವೈಸಿಯನ್ನು ಗೆಲ್ಲಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಅಂತೆಯೇ- ಓವೈಸಿಯಂಥ ಮತಾಂಧ ಮೂರ್ಖತನದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಸೊಲ್ಲು ಬಿಚ್ಚದವರು, ತೊಗಾಡಿಯಾಗಾಗಿ ಕಾದು ಕುಳಿತಿರುತ್ತಾರೆ. (ತೊಗಾಡಿಯ ಸಂತಾನವನ್ನು ಮಾಧ್ಯಮಗಳೇಕೆ ಟೀಕಿಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂದು ಪ್ರಶ್ನಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ) ಇದೇನೆ ಇರಲಿ, ಹಿಂದೂ ಮತಾಂಧರನ್ನು ಸದಾ ಟೀಕಿಸುವ ಮಂದಿಯೇ ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಹಿಂದೂಗಳನ್ನು ಜಾತ್ಯತೀತರನ್ನಾಗಿ ಇಟ್ಟಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಅಂತೆಯೇ ಮುಸ್ಲಿಂ ಮತಾಂಧರನ್ನು ಟೀಕಿಸದೇ ಬಾಯಿ ಮುಚ್ಚಿಕೊಂಡು ಕುಳಿತು, ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಮುಸ್ಲಿಂರನ್ನು ಮತಾಂಧತೆಯ ಕತ್ತಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಇಟ್ಟಿರುತ್ತಾರೆ.
– ಸುಹಾಸ್, ಬೆಂಗಳೂರು
Mr Bonte,
– Your question is mine too. Why Maharashtra govt is not taking action? The Cong govt there deserves strong condemnation.
– You have raised reservations for referring to Modi in the article. Modi’s speech was widely covered on the day, when this author was expecting debate on Togadia’s rant. I wish, you understand Modi is not topic of the article.
Mr. Naveen,
– No thanks for the link to Sardesai’s article. I have already read it. The very fact that Sardesai preferred the topic for his column rather than debate in his studios clearly states that he can’t practice what he preaches.
– What Owaisi and Togadia have committed are criminal acts, punishable under Indian laws. Being hard-core Indian, you should uphold law of the land.
– In your first response, you had expressed disappointment for using the word ‘school’. I used the word school, presuming that the institute is no less than London School of Economics or Delhi School of Economics. You are right the institute whose students preferred Modi, who failed to maintain law and order in his state in 2002, does not deserve the word ‘school’ of the standard I referred to. I don’t have objections to call it a college.
ತೊಗಾಡಿಯಾ ನಂತವರು ಈ ದೇಶದ ನಿಜವಾದ ಶತ್ರುಗಳು. ಈ ಬಿಜೆಪಿ, ಸಂಘ ಪರಿವಾರದ ಜನಗಳಿಗೆ ಅನ್ಯ ಧಮದ ವಿರುದ್ಧ ವಿಷಕಾರುವುದನ್ನು ಬಿಟ್ಟು ಮಾಡಲು ಏನಯ ಕೆಲಸವಿಲ್ಲ. ಇವರನ್ನು ತಿರಸ್ಕರಿಸದಿದ್ದರೆ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶ ನಾಶವಾಗುವದರಲ್ಲಿ ಯಾವುದೇ ಅನುಮಾನವಿಲ್ಲ.
ವರ್ತಮಾನ ಬಳಗದವರೇ, ಸಾಧ್ಯವಾದರೆ ಇದನ್ನು ದಯವಿಟ್ಟು ಕನ್ನಡದಲ್ಲಿ ಪ್ರಕಟಿಸಿ. ಕೇವಲ ಕನ್ನಡವನ್ನಷ್ಟೇ ಓದಲು ಬರುವವರಿಗೆ ಸುಧಾಂಶುರವರ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯಗಳನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಸಹಾಯವಾಗಬಹುದು.