Sunday, 28 June 2009

Mixed up confusion

This is to bring to the notice of the reader a queer situation I came across. (Sad pun, you shall realize later). Two news sources, both respectable, have interpreted the Hon'ble law minister's words in diagonally opposite ways here and here. Should teach me to read more than just the headlines. Or when I don't have time for the details, not to take headlines for face value.

BTW, I got some gossip on the law minister from his time as G.S. Achar's junior at the High Court. Since this blog is a rumour free zone, it shall not go up here.


vikramhegde said...

Oh. And one of the news sources thinks S 377 prohibits "carnal intercourse" saying it is against the order of nature . Do these people realize what they are writing? Youtube has a function where the comments can be read out to you. If only the I&B ministry could make it mandatory that the journos have to read what they write before publishing.

a fan said...

I think it's the difference between sensationalizing the news and publishing the news.

While Sify tries the former by having a totally wrong article including the title with the word "Article", Hindu has gone for the later case.

(I almost never read Sify or Rediff news)

Divya said...

Significantly, I am unable to open the Sify link.

vikramhegde said...

@ a fan
Agree. I don't know what category I can put into today's news channels going gaga over Michael Jackson's ghost sighting. Shall follow your example and blacklist Sify for future reference.

@ Divi
It does seem to be working fine from college at least. It is basically saying Moily said 377 will be repealed soon. Don't worry you're not missing much (apart from a good laugh) not opening it.

You wuz here