Time and again I have been baffled by daijiworld's style of reporting on the controversial MSEZ. It appears as though the daijiworld is blind to the excesses, read abuses/highhandedness, of MSEZ. If not, how else would one explain the selective reporting on the MSEZ that (so easily and frequently!) gets squeezed into daijiworld's pages?
Let me elaborate. Lets take for example the very recent public audit of the MSEZ. This was indeed 'newsworthy' for Deccan Herald and mangalorean.com among others and not for daijiworld, even when people like Aruna Roy and Medha Patkar were part of the programme! But strangely (or selectively) daijiworld reported the disrtribution of property title deeds just a day prior to this public audit. Its not that this didn't deserve publicity. But my point is why daijiworld attempted to be selective in its reporting on the MSEZ? Now if daijiworld were to be fair and unbiased in its reporting, what prevented it from reporting on the public audit of MSEZ? Is it because the audit took place on a sunday (read holiday) and therefore daijiworld didnt have men/women to cover the event?
When we dig deeper into the pages of daijiworld, the extensive reporting on MSEZ becomes all the more evident. Thanks to Ms Florine Roche, MSEZ has made it to the pages of daijiworld in diverse ways- interview with the MD and Chief Executive Officer, interview with the Cheif Opearating Officer , report on the R and R colony and many others. At the same time, one wonders why daijiworld has not carried any report on the farmers' struggles/protests, or interviews with the farmers? Even NDTV carried a report on an illustrious farmer from Kalavaru, Mr Gregory Patrao, who has proved to be a real threat for the MSEZ expansion.
Well, it is said that a problem/issue has three sides- the victor's side, victim's side and the right side! Hasn't daijiworld's loyalty to the MSEZ deprived the legitimate space for the other two sides?
