I totally agree with you viewpoint.

Why should they bother anyway? Who cares if whether the US observes a momment of silence or not? Why is US media attention so important? May be it’s important for you. Not for those of us who live in India.

SP,
Appreciate it.

Chacko,
The point being whether the blast victims be from Mumbai, London, Madrid or Bali, they should be afforded the same treatment by the MSM, I think you missed the point completely. But don’t let reasoning interrupt your rant.

Why this obsession with the US press? Here is a more interesting question: how much help has been given the families who lost people and those who were injured? Has there any systematic effort to help the people?

Just getting an article in some newspaper doesnt add upto much.

how much help has been given the families who lost people and those who were injured? Has there any systematic effort to help the people?

Good point. Any solid information/links UberDesi readers can provide on above questions would be well appreciated and I’m not speaking cheesy stories like this one.

I think it’s more important for American desis to see the land of their ancestors given the same amount of coverage and significance in the American MSM as the ancestral land of white Americans because it is a part of acknowledging that they are a fabric of American life. Indians in India couldn’t care less because they are not affected by the lack of coverage and that is perfectly understandable.

Also, has anyone else seen the Q&A with Brian Williams on the SAJA website in the week following the bombings. He apologizes and makes up some pretty crappy excuses for the lack of coverage.

Maybe, the U.S. or MSM did not report this terrorist act because it may not have anything to do with Al Quaeda, etc. Maybe, it has more to do with the conflicts ‘in house’ meaning within India between its Hindu and Muslim communities. Aren’t Muslims within India treated like second class citizens who were victimized heavily in communal riots? Are they not exacting revenge on Hindus just like the Bombay Blasts of 1993? It is not justifiable, but understandable? Please clarify If I am wrong?

Let’s stop ignoring the elephant the room… the Mumbai bombings didn’t get as much attention because of the nationality and race of the victims. Had the victims been white, as they were in London, Madrid and Bali, it would have been all over the media. If the the Bali bombing had killed only Indonesians and no Australians, would it have gotten as much coverage? I think not. Somehow, the deaths of 187 brown people is not tragic enough to those in the media.

Mita: Normally, I stay away from all kinds of communal discussions, but I had to step in here.

Let’s speculate for a minute that the blasts were solely because a victimized minority rose up with great vengeance to exact revenge upon the majority. The blasts are believed (not just by Indian authorities) to have been carried out by the Students Islamic Movement of India, whose mission statement, for the last 20 years has been “liberation of India from western materialistic cultural influence and to convert it into an Islamic society.” For example, Google turned up a Time magazine article about hte blasts from where i quote -

But a leader of the outlawed Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) met TIME in Bombay two months ago and spoke plainly of his group’s intentions to target the city.

Now that article also mentions the same oppression angle, but I dont believe that angle at all.
Wikipedia says that in 1986 SIMI organized a national convention under the slogan “liberation of India through Islam”. 1986, if you remember predates the Babri Masjid demolition and the first Bombay blasts by a good half a decade. So I think the speculation of a oppressed ethnic group exacting revenge can be disproved. And where are these people getting their resources from. I believe that no self respecting Muslim who is a citizen of India will indulge in the type of carnage unleashed last year without being brainwashed by mischievous elements. And if these mischievous elements are not Indian, who are they? You tell me.
BTW, SIMI’s ideology seems to owe its origins to the same source as the Taliban (the Deobandi movement).

(P.S: All information contained in this comment are from Wikipedia and from here

Santosh,
I’m a bit disappointed with your response. Which MSM are you talking about? The American MSM? Why should they give the same coverage to the Mumbai train bombings?

Do you think the Indian MSN gives the same coverage to Bali and the London bombings?

I think you are playing the victim card a little too much here.

May be it’s important for you. Not for those of us who live in India.

Chacko: I think it is important for Indians in many levels.

The most important of them being the fact that unless India is covered, its status as an important country in the world is not established.

In my opinion this gauges how much big a deal you are.

Karthik, how much a big deal I am (or not) is not the reason I’m here trying to debate with you.

If you visit ibnlive.com or ndtv.com can you find any of the top stories not related to India?

Why do we then want CNN or BBC to cover India? How can you say that if India is not covered in the American or British media our ’status’ as an important country will not be established?

Chako,
The argument is simple, I’m not sure which part you don’t get. Britain, Spain, Indonesia and India are 4 different countries not named USA. In USA, the incidents in India were treated like they never happened. Staying in the US it is important to me that if bomb blasts happen in 4 different countries including India, the Indian incident should at least be afforded the same treatment. If that is playing the victim card, so be it. In a similar manner immigration is also an important issue to me. I’m sure most people in India don’t care about it. But nevertheless it will be covered on here.
As an addendum, also read Lena’s response.

Since, we’re talking CNN and BBC, BBC had a much better coverage than CNN. But then again I dont stay in the UK so I wont comment on their media.

In my opinion this gauges how much big a deal you are.

Was meant to read,

This gauges how much of a big deal India is.

I was not talking about you. Sorry for the confusion.

If you visit ibnlive.com or ndtv.com can you find any of the top stories not related to India?

I do not expect them to have top stories of the world. But atleast in their shows on TV they talk about the world right? Dont we have a seperate segment devoted to that?

Why do we then want CNN or BBC to cover India? How can you say that if India is not covered in the American or British media our ’status’ as an important country will not be established?

Ok, I am not sure on how much you understand about economics, but I am going to assume that your knowledge is limited.

The US besides being a super power is an important country because everything is traded against the dollar. So when bad things happen in the US it affects the world economy and believe it or not, it trickles down to the common man.

Any such important country whose stability will affect things in the world will find itself in the news.

India is getting to be an important country but there is a disconnect between being important and it getting enough coverage.

Does that make sense?

I’m sorry guys, I still don’t get it. I must be my limited knowledge.
Anyway, thank you for your time in accommodating my thoughts.

Chacko,
You’re welcome. We love to hear junta’s opinion. If you dont feel like discussing on here, you can always email one or all of us.

The comments by Mita and Chacko are incredibly naive or silly. When nearly *200* people get killed in a series of bomb attacks and the attacks are very similar to ones in London and Madrid, why should they not get covered and remembered? And what is this stupidity about “Al Qaeda” anyway? “Al Qaeda” is just a catch-all for Islamic terrorism, and India has positively been a major victim, perhaps the single biggest democratic victim.

[...] I asked this question earlier “Are Mumbai blast victims not that important?“. [...]