Talk:The Hindu/Archive 1

message: Ok, Mr Birbal from Bangalore, or whoever you are, you're very clever for being able to do a reverse DNS look up, and I salute your wisdom. And, I am not really interested in wasting my time with endless reverts as you seem to be. However, without prejudice and bias (to prove it, I do concede that you have indeed made the page seem less like a virulent personal attack), may I submit to you that I question whether the following inserted by you is true:
"Consequent to the change in its politics, The Hindu has lost much of its earlier reputation of being a stickler for truth. Its cult status of being tradition is on the wane too. Ironically, though, for a newspaper committed to Marxist politics, The Hindu owes success to the monopoly status (in the Madras market) that its founders built, and is still thriving in the capitalistic and fiercely competitive Indian media market".
It is at least disputable, you must agree, that something so paramount as "The Hindu's reputation of being a stickler for the truth" cannot be thrown in there without some concrete evidence such as the results of an opinion poll or survey about the paper. If you can find something like that and put it in here I would be happy to let your statement remain (If you notice I have anyway let it remain- not deleted it- but just added a POV tag to voice my dissent). I would say a similar thing about its' "cult status" and the cause of its success being its monopoly position (is there a counterfactual for this- i.e. some way of showing that IF some other paper like the TOI came into Tamil Nadu The Hindu would DEFINITELY suffer?)- could you please provide more evidence to back up these opinion?
Again, I am putting these questions to you purely for the sake of making this page look factual- any personal views of mine that coloured my initial reactions are regretted.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.143.22.19 (talk • contribs)  
[Reply]
If you want this page to look factual, please read The Hindu. Following the turmoil of 2003 at the paper's helm, there was much comment in the media on how its politics was getting the better of its journalism. Here is a sample: .
I can give hundreds of examples from The Hindu itself showing its rank opportunism, its lack of ethics and absence of commitment to consistency of principle. In fact, I gave one here recently: When Bihar Assembly is dissolved The Hindu hails the move as constitutionally proper, because the CPIM was in favour of it. When eventually the supreme court rules that the dissolution was unconstitutional, the Hindu follows suit cocnurring with the court, thereby setting a new record in eating one's own words. When Hindus protest an MF Husain painting showing a naked Sita in the company of a naked Hanuman, the Hindu spews venom against them, sets itself up as a barometer of Hindu sensibilities and declares that there was nothing to take offence at all. But when Islamists (not, note, Muslims) rage against a few cartoons, The Hindu decalres that offence was indeed given because non-Muslims failed to respect Islamic taboos on pictures!!
I can put all these examples in the Wiki entry, with references to each and every of them. When you juxtapose,say, The Hindu's first editorial on Bihar assembly dissolution, next to its second one following Supreme Court's judgement, the contrast is nothing short of dramatic. And many of the examples I can cite with references to content from The Hindu itself, I promise, will be no less dramatic. 
But Wiki entry on The Hindu is not a research paper. It is a summary of what the paper is and what the public perception about it is. If you want to insist  that The Hindu is a newspaper of truth, integrity and ethics, please give what you are pretty good at demanding of others: the results of an opinion poll or survey. LIkewise, how about that bit about other papers not giving space to critques of neo-liberal policies etc ... any evidence in the form of an opinion poll or survey, or is it merely your exalted opinion? Moreover, why is it a requirement of any newspaper that it should criticize these so-called neo-liberal policies? Does The Hindu criticize Marxist fanaticism? There is an irony, dude, in living in UK enjoying the fruits of capitalism and dictating to Indians what economic policies they should follow. An irony as sweet as the Iyengar family that runs The Hindu getting richer by the day plugging Marxism even as their riches come from the advertising revenue made possible by "neo-liberal" policies. From Pepsi to Coke to Ford to General Motors,  nary a business representative of the Great Satan goes unrepresented in The Hindu's  pages.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyameva jayate (talk • contribs) 
[Reply]
well, since i am trying to look at our debate with an unbiased eye it seems to me that what we are arguing over is definitely YOUR exalted opinion against mine. i admit, i may not be able to find an opinion poll that says that the hindu reflects truth, integrity and ethics, but its popularity in south india and indeed other parts of the country to me reflect that. but that again you put down to its monopoly position, and as i said that cannot be proven or disproved since there is no counterfactual. again, maybe it is my opinion, but i believe that in a country where 26% or more of the population is below the poverty line, and muslims as a minority were constantly beseiged by the fundamentalist Sangh Parivar and the BJP government, there IS a need for a critique of neo-liberalism which does nothing more for the poor other than the debatable 'trickle down' and there IS a need for critiquing mainstream Hindutva politics that can climax in horrible pogroms like gujarat and if anything less, outrages such as ayodhya. this again, i would call accepted fact, but you would call opinion.
having said this, i do agree with you that there have been inconsistencies such as the bihar episode, but i think you find these with any indian paper. i mean if you ask me, there are far worse crimes in the mainstream media today, such as the Times of India selling even editorial space for a price. so, is this a reason for singling out the hindu for critique? i am not sure. your criticism about the leftist tilt is relatively more valid, in my view. such a tilt by newspapers towards ANY party is contrary to its theoretical position as one of the non-partisan pillars of democratic society. however, i think it is reasonable  to suggest that if The Hindu seems pro-left it may only be because it is pro-poor in its opinionating, and there is nothing wrong with that considering India is the country with the most poor people in the world, and they live a life of utter indignity. and secondly, as you pointed out, bias towards left parties in particular makes a strange bedfellow with dependence on ad revenues from goods that cater purely to the middle and upper classes. so what do you suggest, that The Hindu stop accepting advertisements? perhaps that is indeed what you mean, for then it would imply that the paper perish entirely, an outcome, i am sure, that would make you happy.
one more thing you do need to take note of, however is that at least i have had the decency (since my last entry addressed to you), to keep the personal stuff out of it, which you haven't. i refuse, for the record, to agree that my right to comment on Indian politics is in any way compromised because i am writing from the UK, not only because i am indian, live in india and am just abroad temporarily, but more because your assumption that you have a greater moral authority to comment on this matter reeks of continued prejudice.
and as a last word, since i feel Mr Bangalore and I are reaching an 'agree-to-disagree-position' (at least in my view, since i believe we are now down to the brass tacks of one person's opinion against another's), I STILL APPEAL TO WIKIPEDIA EDITORS TO LOOK INTO MY VIEW THAT THIS ARTICLE IS BIASED (not saying they should agree with my view), based on scholarly as well as public opinion on what reputation The Hindu enjoys today.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.185.82 (talk • contribs) [also edited from ip  
how is the hindu 'progressive'? whose definition of progress is this? we are told that to remove astrology column is progressive! if its only as simple as that. yesterday in an editorial hindu said that european newspapers should not have published the cartoons in deference to quranic injunctions against pictures. now that is crazy, for a newspaper to argue that other newspapers should bend and crawl before religious dictats (just like it does). far from being progressive, the hindu is a reactionary, regressive and revanchist newspaper.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.49.169.66 (talk • contribs)  
How does gently reminding the free press of its responsibilites constitute any sort of attack on the right to freedom of expression? The aforementioned editorial in no way implied that newspapers in Denmark or anywhere else do not have this RIGHT. It seems in no way partisan to point out that this right also comes with reasonable SELF-MODERATION (I wouldn't even call it censorship) responsibilities. The Hindu is not isolated within the mainstream media in expressing this opinion.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.99.54 (talk • contribs) 
[re to]"having said this, i do agree with you that there have been inconsistencies such as the bihar episode, but i think you find these with any indian paper" 
all newspapers? you must be kidding. yea! inconsistency is probably a part of media reporting. But what appears in Hindu is one sided reporting. The glaring fact is that, you find no alternative column, atleast say once in a fortnight, no once in a month, written by a rightist, im sorry, atleast by a maoderate columnist. if this trend of the hindu were to continue, im afraid it will be nothing but a competitor of people's democracy.
If we are gonna get into the debate of different points of view, then, we are in the process of questioning everything in the article..who said hindu is fair, just, true and holds on to integrity n truth? In the issue of danish cartoons - "The aforementioned editorial in no way implied that newspapers in Denmark or anywhere else do not have this RIGHT. It seems in no way partisan to point out that this right also comes with reasonable SELF-MODERATION (I wouldn't even call it censorship) responsibilities. The Hindu is not isolated within the mainstream media in expressing this opinion." -again, almost every single piece of journalism in media, carried atleast one opinion which condemned the barbaric behaviour of the extremists but not the Hindu. i say, Hindu is isolated in the mainstream media.
i wish to inform you as a fourth generation reader of Hindu in my family, i dared to stop the subscription, opposed to the view of family, which reads hindu just because its been read for decades in our family. the same has been adopted in our neighbourhood and in our town too, so the point of view that Hindu is losing its traditional base is true. If you are searching for statistics to disvrove it - i will turn a leftist now- to say they are nothing but "merely manipulated numbers".
The article needs to be expanded, agreed. but for sure, it represents the right (correct!) view point and is not biased! - arjun 08:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 8th Feb '06 

message: Seeing the above discussion,I believe the article as of now needs to undergo a POV check.--Sahodaran 08:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Check 

message: Whoever is trying to put POV checks, better explain why you are doing it. Else, I am going to remove them. I have already seen the previous reasons and they are hardly satisfying or relevant in the light of some subsequent changes made. 
And, by the way, if you think there is a personal diatribe against N Ram or Communists, you need to point out where it is. 
- Guest  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.186.232.42 (talk • contribs) 
:Dear anonymous user.  I restore the POV tags because it appears to me that the current page does not meet the guidelines of NPOV.  I think my opinion is shared by a number of editors.  I currently do not have the time to argue with all the POV pushers who guard this page.  However, I will continue to maintain a POV tag. Also, when adding comments to a talk page, please add them at the end, not at the top.  --BostonMA 18:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The Hindu is seen by some as the unofficial mouthpiece of one of India's communist parties, the CPIM".
This is highly POV and no source has been provided. --BostonMA 19:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: "some people" is  classic WP:WEASEL William M. Connolley 19:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag 

message: Removed reference to N Ram being awarded Sri Lanka Rathna from Controversies section. I couldn't find any reference to a Sri Lanka Ratnam award, let alone N Ram being awarded the same.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.56.27 (talk) 04:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sri Lanka Rathna? 

message: A number of citation links that described the history of the newspaper, at significant points of its existence, had been removed in an edit, citing WP:SPAM.
The article is about a newspaper. Most of the citations would tend to be from news sources, or from mainstream literature. These links cannot be considered spam, I feel.
Besides, If Iam correct, wiki links are of the rel:nofollow markup. I don't see a genuine problem.
Please discuss on the discussion ( talk ) page, before deleting a significant chink of the article.
Abhishekupadhya (talk) 15:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of citation links 

message: The following paragraphe entitled "Criticisms" have been removed on claim it is "POV pushing not backed up by reliable sources". The sources are : www.friendsoftibet.org (Friends of Tibet association), article by Jamyang Norbu, article by :nl:Tenzin Sonam in Himal Southasian. Any comments on the sources? --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 09:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all www.friendsoftibet.org cannot be treated as an independent and reliable source when discussing on the Hindu's stance on Tibet. Secondly, it is not justified having a whole section of criticisms solely on the Hindu's stance on Tibet that is based on an article supposed to be published by the Hindu. If you can show that the Hindu has been consistently publishing article related to Tibet, it may be justified to include Hindu's viewpoint in the article. But I cannot see any such thing here (I have been reading the Hindu for past 25 years). Finally, blogs are never considered to be reliable sources.Salih (talk) 11:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, but apparently, it is not only www.friendsoftibet.org and a blog, but also Jamyang Norbu and :nl:Tenzin Sonam in Himal Southasian at least (see also here : ). Then, concerning blogs, there are several others such as : . Therefore, I do not think it is a good idea to suppress all these informations. To respond to your request about the articles in The Hindu, the issue is not new, back in 2000 (at least) : TIBET - A REALITY CHECK, and some responses from the readers . I will come up with a proposition later. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 01:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

text: I have added some actual criticism from groups like the South Asia Analysis Group and prominent analysts like David Jeyaraj. Redacteur's work may or may not meet RS, I'll reserve judgment on that, but removing all criticism from the page smacks of censorship.Pectoretalk 23:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms 

message: All of the proposed mergers need to be done, none of those subarticles are notable enough for their own page. -Falcon8765 (talk) 21:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mergers 

message: I have changed the list of Managing Directors to Partial list of directors. For instance, it is unlikely that the paper had a "managing director" before 1905, because of ownership pattern. Also, N. Ram is editor-in-chief of the publications of the company and N. Murali is the managing director. N. Murali's predecessor was S. Rangarajan.
Journman, 18.29 hrs, sept 2, 2009.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Journman (talk • contribs) 13:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  list of managing directors changed to partial list of directors 

message: Removed uncited claims and review which gives The Hindu itself as a source and the link not working based on reviews in 1965  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tintin456 (talk • contribs) 08:22, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This deletion  was improper. A news source is not required to be online for a valid citation. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited 

message: The current ownership of the paper should be described. Also there are references early in the text to 'younger members of the family' and other references to family kinship on the managing board or senior staff, this should be placed in suitable context. Imc (talk) 08:46, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership and 'the family'

message: Can anyone fill in the history of this paper for this time period? Maybe divide up the history into subsection dealing with different editors and/or major editorial policy shifts?  -- 14.97.222.211 (talk) 22:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History from the paper 1895 to 1980+ 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Hindu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20041124154440/http://www.hinduonnet.com:80/th125/stories/2003091300830500.htm to http://www.hinduonnet.com/th125/stories/2003091300830500.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100613132939/http://southasiaanalysis.org/papers34/paper3360.html to http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers34%5Cpaper3360.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:49, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: the claim about the reviews is unverified and undue.Tintin456 (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraphs in the Reviews section are sourced. You removed them claiming that they were not, and then again claiming that the links do not work. Both those removals were incorrect statements. It is mid-evening here and I am not planning on doing any heavy stuff on Wikipedia until tomorrow. The statements can stay until then and I will read the sources. - Sitush (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Please go though them cannot find a single word about the review   and is  a dead link Tintin456 (talk) 20:44, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea what you were doing but this clearly contains the information about what The Times said. I've added a citation of the actual issue of The Times, since I have access to their digital archive. - Sitush (talk) 03:30, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Given the above and various archived online sources such as this, it appears that the section (and The Hindu cited source) is correct. While we really should use an independent source, there isn't actually a problem here. That research took me about five minutes, by the way. - Sitush (talk) 03:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

text: It is cited. I've just verified it. Now please drop this. - Sitush (talk) 03:54, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review Section 

message: His opinion is relevant.That quote was made by N. Murali one of the Directors of The Hindu and written that farewell letter here as well and also here and this in addition to the The Times of India. N. Murali one of the Directors of The Hindu has clearly stated here rich tradition of credibility, objectivity, balance and editorial primacy had of late been compromised as per The Times of India ,I do not get why you are removing sourced information form  Times of India here  a reliable source .I stop from editing this articles ,I have no connection with any newspaper.Please do not remove sourced information .The same letter has also been published in other media outlets given above.Tintin456 (talk) 02:26, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[N. Murali]] is a Director of the [[The Hindu]] 

message: Deccan Chronicle  also says Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited (DCHL) publishes the largest circulated English newspaper in South India  as per there Website Further The Hindu is not largest circulated English newspaper in Karnataka Times of India has a larger circulation than them and in andhra and Telegahna  Deccan Chronicle  has a higher circualtion.Even the claim of highest circulation in South India needs a third party cite.Normsynge (talk) 00:40, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The information is available here but is members-only. We need to find a member because I do not trust the newspapers to get it right. I may contact the ABC to ask whether they could make an exception to their membership requirement and email me the list (or even an annotated version of it that could be uploaded at Commons). There are various reasons why they might refuse, not the least of which is copyright. - Sitush (talk) 04:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume that I can access the list but will take a day or so.... ~ Winged BladesGodric  05:27, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. I see that they have figures up to December and those include state-wise stats. It is the state-wise stuff that seems to be the bone of contention here. - Sitush (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

text: I have emailed them anyway. Ideally, we would like them to publish it in an open-access area of their website. - Sitush (talk) 10:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

text: Sitush is right here .We need The information of which newspaper is the largest circulated in South India.
* Further the infro of which is the English newspaper per state if possible.Normsynge (talk) 06:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  incorrect info