[Reader-list] PUBLIC INTEREST ALERT: Delhi Times promotes pornography & alcoholism

[Shuddhabrata Sengupta]

Dear all, 

Here is a list of a few other things that I personally feel depraves and 
corrupts young minds in every newspaper that I see in India, I also think 
that they do violence to my sensibilities as a human being, they disgust me 
and make me angry. I  don't think that these issues are less serious than the 
sexualised representation of men or women.in fact I think that the sexualised 
representation of men or women is several degrees healthier than what i am 
listing below, this is my personal opinion, and i really feel concerned about 
the millions of young people fed patriotic bilge in the media, and I am 
worried about what these young people are going to grow up into. So here is 
the list - 

1. DAVP (govt. of India's department of advertising and visual publicity) 
paid for ads that advertise the Indian state's militarist prowess for 
occasions like republic day

2. The entire sports page (commodification of bodies on a scale that is 
unquestioned and unimagined, and a cult of competetive success)

4. every matrimonial page in every newspaper ( for something that really 
continues to justify casteist, racist, classist, and sexist prejudices, read 
any matrimonial ad spread))

5. the horoscope section (which promotes the view that young people really 
have no control over their own destinies)

6. every piece of paranoia about terrorism and illegal aliens that makes 
young peoples minds sick with fear (see a series of ads by the Delhi Police 
instructing people how to identify 'suspicious persons', of which more in 
some other posting)


7. ads promoting careers in the armed forces, the indian administrative 
services and the police force (inducements to serve the state - an 
institution I find deeply offensive to my dignity and to the dignity of young 
impressionable readers)

8) unquestioning obeisance to the cult of expertise, be it in science, 
religion or social questions

9) generally unrestrained homophobia

I think however, that all of the above, reflect realities that exist in our 
social life, and i for one, notwithstanding my concern for the sanity of 
young people, would not like to live in a world where they do not have the 
opportunity to make up their minds about what they read, see and hear. My 
anger about the above does not make me jump to the high moral ground from 
which I can call for censorship. If I am really offended (as I have been by 
the Times of India's generally third rate journalism which really rips me off 
for the money I am asked to pay for the newspaper, I switch to a somewhat 
less worse option, in another paper, or look for news and analysis in forums 
and platforms that I feel assure me of better quality.)

I would totally agree here with what Menso has to say, if you (Lehar) feel 
offended, or if you feel that you don't want your children to be exposed to 
this kind of material, or to be exposed to it uncritically, then the onus is 
on you, to either read something else, or, to annotate the reading of the 
children around you with your criticism of what they read, see and hear, so 
that they, as intelligent young people, can balance what they get from the 
media that you find offensive, with the views that you hold, and make up 
their own minds about what they want and endorse.

On the occasions when I have come across young people I know reading or being 
exposed to patriotic propaganda which offends me (or any of the 9 kinds of 
representation i have listed above) as much as the sexualised depiction of 
men and women offends you, this is what I have chosen to do. Then it is up to 
the young person concerned to make their own judgement. This is what I 
remember doing as a child and as a teenager and this is what I hope every 
young person can have the confidence and the freedom to do for himself or 
herself.

Finally, I find Lehar's comments about sex work offensive. While the 
circumstances under which a large number of women,children or men enter the 
sex industry may indeed be deeply exploitative and violent, I see no reason 
to believe that this is more so than any other form of work. Forced or 
violent agricultural labour is just as abhorrent as the kind of sex work 
which denies ther sex worker their basic rights to a safe working 
environment, health check ups and lack of control over their bodies or the 
wealth generated from their labour. I find the kind of agriculural or 
industrial labour that denies human beings their dignity and does violence to 
their bodies offensive, but it would be somewhat absurd to take a position 
against industrial or agricultural work per se,  on the grounds that is work 
that involves agricultural or industrial materials, similarly the violence 
done to people in vast swathes of the sex industry is indeed offensive, but 
it somehow seems quite natural for people to take a position against sex work 
per se, on the basis that it is work with and about one's sex. A position 
that questions the commodification of human labour power would have to take a 
stand against that form of commodification no matter in what context, or 
which form of human activity it were to occur. Why should sex work be 
considered worse, or better, than any other form of labour.

If some of us are concerned about what young people read, see and hear, it 
may be worth our while to produce the kind of cultural content that we feel 
can actually attract their attention,  and work hard at producing contexts in 
which these efforts do not become meaningless or futile because of their self 
absorbed marginality.

regards

Shuddha