Thoroughly impressed by "The Hindu's aggressive ads in paper and TV taking on the likes of "The Times of India". The ad aims to take a direct potshot at Times of India - for feeding readers with mindless drivel on pageants and gossips and page-3 profiles and not giving them stuff thats relevant, useful or rooted in Indian heritage. During my journalism college days, we had an ebullient editor one Mr Jagadeesan who was holding out "The Hindu" newspaper and pointed out everything they do right editorially (though may not always have the content you like to see). The quality of reporting, the neutral stands on most mattters, the vibrant letters page, the many supplements that only keep getting added everyday of the week, the way the stories on page 1 are laid out - no story has a "runner" (like, say, turn to page 12 for more and so on), uncluttered reportage and layout, fonts that keep changing with the times (pun unintended), emphasis on developmental journalism and narrative panache, the group that brought out Businessline - my favorite business newspaper.
Mr Jagadeesan was right in 1992 - there will be no interference by Advterising Divion into editorial matters and there is almost always a "Kaizen" of sorts happening - continuous improvements in printing quality, supplements, new insights, features like "Reader's Editor", "Literary Review", "Cinema Plus", etc. Of course some legendary analysts like KK Katyal or GK Reddy are not there anymore but the paper never compromised on ethics. The staffers still get humble but inflation-adjusted paypackets, the ladies get a Kancheevaram saree every Diwali and the gents get a Pattu Pancha. Every employee of "The Hindu" group gets lifetime subscripiton of the newspaper besides Sportstar, Frontline etc.
Way back in 1978 itself, when it completed 100 years of existence, the newspaper was voted as one of the six great newspapers of the world on line with the likes of Manchester Guardian, La Monde, Times London, and New York Times. Amongst the initial bunch of pre-1900 newspapers which grew from strength to strength - "The Hindu" alone has created a respectable tag for its stories, reporting and associate publications. Not "The Statesman" (which shrank after CR Irani and SK Datta Ray), not the ToI as they have commercialised news, legalised page 3 as another celebrity league, and vandalised local news into coteries serving different interests. Of course, "Hindu's family feuds even though a strict Iyengar secret keeps getting out into the open and gives some salicious salvation to newbies like "the Mint" to comment on their goings-on. The newspaper is also disliked by many for it's haughty views on the Sri Lankan issue, BJP, communist shortcomings, secularism and love-hate relationship with the politicians in Tamil Nadu but the paper is very clear for what it wants its readers to notice it for - conservative but egalitarian. It is in that sense very Nehruvian in its views - Nehru always believed that the ruling majority must encourage and respect the minorities else the minorities can feel threatened to air their views or assert their cultures otherwise. "The Hindu" follows this in publications - they may not appease the "Hindus" but they never isolate the "minorities". Ethics wise also, they deserve a pat. Who else but "The Hindu" could have sacked the great cricket journalist - R.Mohan. It is interesting how the Times will respond to the changing times.
Mr Jagadeesan was right in 1992 - there will be no interference by Advterising Divion into editorial matters and there is almost always a "Kaizen" of sorts happening - continuous improvements in printing quality, supplements, new insights, features like "Reader's Editor", "Literary Review", "Cinema Plus", etc. Of course some legendary analysts like KK Katyal or GK Reddy are not there anymore but the paper never compromised on ethics. The staffers still get humble but inflation-adjusted paypackets, the ladies get a Kancheevaram saree every Diwali and the gents get a Pattu Pancha. Every employee of "The Hindu" group gets lifetime subscripiton of the newspaper besides Sportstar, Frontline etc.
Way back in 1978 itself, when it completed 100 years of existence, the newspaper was voted as one of the six great newspapers of the world on line with the likes of Manchester Guardian, La Monde, Times London, and New York Times. Amongst the initial bunch of pre-1900 newspapers which grew from strength to strength - "The Hindu" alone has created a respectable tag for its stories, reporting and associate publications. Not "The Statesman" (which shrank after CR Irani and SK Datta Ray), not the ToI as they have commercialised news, legalised page 3 as another celebrity league, and vandalised local news into coteries serving different interests. Of course, "Hindu's family feuds even though a strict Iyengar secret keeps getting out into the open and gives some salicious salvation to newbies like "the Mint" to comment on their goings-on. The newspaper is also disliked by many for it's haughty views on the Sri Lankan issue, BJP, communist shortcomings, secularism and love-hate relationship with the politicians in Tamil Nadu but the paper is very clear for what it wants its readers to notice it for - conservative but egalitarian. It is in that sense very Nehruvian in its views - Nehru always believed that the ruling majority must encourage and respect the minorities else the minorities can feel threatened to air their views or assert their cultures otherwise. "The Hindu" follows this in publications - they may not appease the "Hindus" but they never isolate the "minorities". Ethics wise also, they deserve a pat. Who else but "The Hindu" could have sacked the great cricket journalist - R.Mohan. It is interesting how the Times will respond to the changing times.
