[luuurker]

It seems that "these days" every criticism is propaganda. It doesn't matter if the points are valid or not or if they're describing something that it's happening. "Propaganda!"

It's very sad to see people everywhere turning off their brains just because their government was criticised.

[sjnonweb]

When you choose to show only one side of the story then it fails to be categorised as criticism, its called propaganda.

[luuurker]

What's the other side of the story here? Are they being raided or not? Does the Indian state likes to start investigations after someone criticises them or not? And was the documentary so wrong to the point where it had to be censored?

[sjnonweb]

Well two things!

1. BBC was sent a notice for tax evasion 2 months before this documentary was released - the fact that they are being raided now could be a reaction to the doc or maybe just a coincidence. No org is above the law, so being raided for tax evasion is business as usual.

2. The documentary doesn't cover the reason as to why the riots happened, it'll take nuance and understanding of the past 800 years history of islamic invasions to realise that it was not a one off incident.

[luuurker]

1. The problem is not being raided for tax evasion. The problem is them and others being investigated/raided after criticising the government. It's the usual "we'll ignore things if you keep things quiet and make your life hard if you don't". No one is above the law, but the application of the law is very selective... Any journalist or org will get the message.

2. You want a 2 hour documentary that covers who did what, who did it first, back it all with believable proof, and also cover 800 years of nuance, interpretations, opinions... yeah, good luck with that. It's not going to happen.

There are indications of what happened and how some didn't do anything to stop it from happening. Pointing this out isn't an attack on India or Indians (there's a difference between you and the government/politicians). It is what it is, no need to be so defensive.

The funny thing is that no one really cared about this until the Indian government decided to censor it (why?) and presented it as an external attack (well, now I'm interested!). They decided to make a big deal out of something than only they actually cared. Now apparently the BBC is the "most corrupt organisation in the world" (to quote a BJP spokesperson) and raids are needed because, of course, "no one is above the law".

Be it India or another country, this is bad and shouldn't be defended or encouraged.

[sjnonweb]

Its absurd to claim that nothing was done to stop it from happening, if that was the case then thing would have been much worse. It was brought under control as effectively as it is possible when the riots are happening at communal level.

Have you not seen riots happen in London few years ago, or the black lives matter, or so many others in the past. To use you own argument, why did they not stop it immediately? Because it takes some time and effort to control it when large populations are involved.

And nobody is asking to cover all the history, Nuance can be covered with small hints and by giving little bit of background. Otherwise People who dont know India's history only see what they see in the documentary and go on making up their mind.

Plus BBC is funded by UK government's so its essentially a mouthpiece for them. So Independent journalism is not really expected from them anyways.

[luuurker]

I didn't claim that nothing was done to stop it from happening. Please re-read my comment.

I was living in London in 2011 when the riots happened. There was no parties/movements inciting anyone to kill/expel/hate a different group. The police killed one guy and that was the outcome: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Mark_Duggan . Of course you can't stop this immediately, but you can stop people from spreading hate and stop yourself from associating with said people.

The documentary... honestly, no one cared about it. Maybe many Indians did care, but Indians should know that background. No one made a big deal outside India because usually people don't care that much about happened on the other part of the world (do you?). Anyway, how do you go from this to censor the content?

Most of BBC funding comes from a TV license paid by people with TVs, not from the government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_Un...

Now, I'm not going to say that they're the most independent and serious source in the world, but they went after the Tony Blair government (centre-left) in the 2000s, criticised the following conservative governments, and as you can see, the government doesn't like them that much: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jan/17/governments-at...

In any case, I really don't like media censorship or governments that go after people who criticise them or selectively apply laws. For me it's wrong.