Is this really news? I mean, how could ANYONE (i refer here to the reporters) be so daft? I mean, who is stupider? The reporters or the French Government who apologised?
The Tmes Of India, a few weeks ago had on their first page a solemn report of some 200 odd deaths in a blast. On the right column they had a headline "Balle Balle at Galle" praising Harbhajan's greatness. Apart from the fact that the headline does NOT rhyme (no it's not pronounced that way), it seems a little insensitive. Below the fold on the same page, they had something about Shah Rukh's ankle getting sprained when he slipped on a diamond which had fallen off his wall, while he was exiting his Phantom. Why on earth is the news so irrelevant?
Coming to Page 3, as shown in the movie brilliantly, what's the point? Who the hell cares what parties happen and who attended? It irks me to no end to read all this gossip about all these stars. But I still do. Personally, I think it's just us looking for cranks, holes or mistakes in the celebrities so we can always say, "Oh, they're human, too". Just lucky, compared to us. Why do we derive so much pleasure in others faults?
Personally, I have no qualms gossiping or 'sliming', or being slimed for that matter. In law school, it is taken to an extreme, but I never have had any issues with it. Sometimes it gets upsetting, but most of the time, it is just humour. The fact that my slime is heard by the party being slimed, has never concerned me. Such 'sliming', and I use the term as used in law school, is not done with any malice and is not meant to be secret.
But there is one sort of 'sliming', a kind that disgusts me. It is when things are reported which have never been said, or never happened, without making it abs clear that it is a joke, with an intent to deceive or knowing that it is likely to deceive. This is something I just cannot stand. There is a thin line between such 'bitching' (as i term it) and 'sliming'. For me, the latter is perfectly acceptable.
I think the test lies in whether you mind if the party concerned happens to be standing behind you, as you speak. If you do, then it's best not said, for it shows you lack the courage to say it to the person's face. In such a case, it's best to keep quiet and not 'slime' or 'bitch'.
Some ppl of course make no distinction between the two. It's all the same to them. It is to these ppl that I would like to point out that ANY talk about another person, when the person is not around, positive or negative, can be regarded as 'sliming', as per their own definition. I am also confident that these ppl who complain about how slimy law school is, are actually the slimiest of them all. For not only do they slime, they also claim to abhor it.
The funniest aspect of all this is that I've been called a 'slime' so many times that it ceases to affect me. I take pride nowadays in being called a 'slime'. I wonder, would calling me a 'slime', in itself, also amount to 'sliming'?
2 comments:
should be pointed out that it's in the Oddly Enough segment of Reuters, which is great fun.
everyone seems to tread carefully when it comes to Israel/Iran, so they were probably just covering their bases.
law school (or even outside of) - i think the main problem arises when people start buying into the slime/bitched report and then judge the person being slimed/bitched about.
wasn refering to reuters. was refering to the Israeli newspaper. They were covering their bases by dignifying a remark in an Israeli paper that said a country could 'gobble up' another? Somehow that just seems absurd.
People start buying into the slime only when it deceives. which is what i said. if ppl buy into slime which is clearly meant to be purely humour, then the 'slimer' cannot be blamed.
Post a Comment