I don't know who wrote the strange comment from this "media house", which is based in New York, and claims to "hold sway not only among the masses but also within global corridors of power, influencing esteemed politicians and shaping international diplomacy, especially evident during pivotal events like the ongoing crisis in Ukraine."
As a newsperson, I always thought that it's not the media job to either "hold sway among the masses" or "within global corridors of power, influencing esteemed politicians." That's the job of lobbyists, I thought. But it seems that this media house seems to believes lobbying is more important than hard news.
Be that as it may, there is a common practice adopted by some sections who cannot argue out reasonably: if you don't agree with someone, start calling names, that's what they do. The commentator also has sought to do the same thing.
The comment starts off by stating, "We write to express our observations, grounded in personal experience, that there are no longer any saints in India." I don't understand what does it mean. Is it an effort to belittle anything Indian? It appeared to me, at least.
Then, it accuses my blog for its rhetorical dissemination of "pro-Russian propaganda", suggesting "an unmistakable alignment with interests that seem far from impartial."
In fact, it goes so far as to "conclude" that I have been "recruited by the KGB" the moment I "arrived in Russia." Perhaps the commentator thinks I was recruited by KGB in 1986, when I was posted in Moscow as the daily Patriot correspondent.
On reading this, I was flattered. Did I ever matter so much that a superpower intelligence agency would recruit me?
I left the collapsed Soviet Union in 1993 after a seven year stint reporting on rise and fall of Mikhail Gorbachev for daily Patriot and weekly Link and other events that took place during his period in the country, including Indo-Soviet relations.
Like other citizens, My family suffered terrible scarcities in Moscow in 1991-93 following the collapse, one reason why unlike other Indians we decided to return to India. On my return I joined the Times of India, and I continued working with the view that the newsperson's basic job is to bring to light what the establishment doesn't want printed.
The commentator goes on to defend the Time article by Prof Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, whom I have quote in my blog, and his prediction that the Russian economy is likely to implode very soon because of Russia's war on Ukraine.
 |
| Lyubyanka |
"Contrary to your claims, Professor Sonnenfeld’s analyses have proven accurate time and again", the commentator tells me, adding. "Moreover, you appear to dismiss not only his expertise but also the relentless efforts of the dedicated Yale team that works tirelessly alongside him."
It concludes by stating, "Let us clarify the record: by your logic, you alone are correct, while everyone else, including seasoned professionals, is mistaken. Pray, who instilled such misguided confidence in you? Was it the tutelage of the KGB’s infamous Lyubyanka operatives?"
Ironical though it may seem, despite my stint in Moscow from 1986 to 1993, I had no knowledge of what is (or war) Lyubyanka (see photo) and who could be its operatives. I searched net to find out how it looks! Call it my ignorance, or whatever, but I must thank this commentator to believe why I am so important. Indeed, I am flattered.
Let me clarify, my job in writing the blog was not to support (or oppose) Putin, but bring to light something that's not sought to be highlighted in media: that there are experts in the west who say, Russian economy is not going to collapse immediately.
My original source of information is a veteran Canadian journalist settled in Moscow, Fred Weir, who in a Facebook post offers links to the articles which state why those who think the Russian economy would collapse soon may be wrong.
Comments