One just can't ignore Amir Khan's interview in Tehelka. The sight of Khan's men mistreating journalists at his marriage was still fresh in my mind and at first glance I though he is acting smart. (Though I believe journos should not try to intrude private parties without invitation).
But then I read the intrview thoroughly today. He has raised serious questions. It is interesting, eye opening and shows mirror to the news channels and papers. Media ought to be a watchdog not a lap dog, he says and cites glaring errors of newspapers. Amir charged Times of India with publishing wrong stories, HT with printing false news of his marriage twice, Channel 7 of airing his conversation without talking to him (it was someone else's voice says Amir) etc etc.
The interview with Shoma Chaudhury is spread on three pages. Amir says that he reads just Hindu, Express and watches only DD for news.
On the investigative prowess of journalists who do stings like sex life of an actor, Amir has spoken a lot. Particularly, the shooting of militants soon after any terrorist attack.
'I realise that somehow authorities very conveniently find one or two people within hours or days of the attack (like Varanasi blasts) and kill them in shootout. What I want to know is why can't they do that before. is it so easy to find a criminal? If it is so easy why can't we nab them before the act? And in this, I want to comment on the role o fmedia, where they conveniently take it on face value and say phalana dhimka from phalana dhimka group has in fact done this. We know that somebody has been killed. We can see the dead body there, but we don't know who he is. No body knows who planted a bomb in the temple. Today a temple, tomorrow it can be a mosque or market. The job of authorities is to find out those behind the act and the job of press I feel is to investigate whethere the authorities are telling the truth".