news details |
|
|
| JU rebukes, rebuts, rejects; refuses to correct even 'trivial' wrongs | | |
Syed Junaid Hashmi
Early Times Report
JAMMU, Jan 16: Vice-Chancellor's secretariat, which should have acted as bridge between Jammu university and the outside world has off-late taken up job of rebuking, rebutting and rejecting all voices of dissent seeking to uncover malignancy and earnestly desiring to see this grows as one of the country's premier institute.
If the past was all about rebutting allegations and suspicions, now the PRO's office has taken up the cause of rebuking even the eyewitness account. The intent ostensibly seems to ensure that no voice of dissent points to anything detrimental to the image of university in the outside world. "You remain silent. Rest, we will ensure that the participants in the 30th North Zone Youth Festival return home satiated with praise for Jammu University on their lips," seems what the university want to convey in its handout issued late on the Friday evening.
The handout has referred to news item titled "JU North Zone Youth fest begins on clumsy note - Guv's bang-on-time entry sends organizers in tizzy, acting VC perplexed" published by Early Times in its edition of January 16, 2015. Despite knowing well, where the news item has been published, the university has desisted from naming the newspaper for the reasons best known to it. Then it has given an account of its analysis of the news item, which Early Times values and would ensure that such mistakes are not repeated.
Yet none seems to have told the analysts of the news item that contradiction is defined as rebuking and rebutting your own statement, which is not the case. The analysts have seemingly poor understanding of English language. News reporter has not contradicted anything in the story but concluded it by referring to what Governor N.N.Vohra said in his inaugural speech. This is exactly what professional ethics demand.
For any analysts, eyewitness account and statement of Governor have no connection. Then the JU authorities have said that the issues highlighted were trivial in nature. One gets amazed at the intellectual worth of those writing these handouts. An auditorium which was constructed after spending crores of rupees and which university claims as its crown, is in mess and the authorities want us not to talk about curtain, whose cost is in several lakhs not working to the satisfaction of those whose hard-earned money has been spent on it.
Then comes another statement in which the university wants our readers to believe that they were well aware of the arrival schedule of the Governor and accordingly, he was received as per the standard protocol by the vice-Chancellor and other members of the reception committee. If this was so, then there should have been no reason for the participants to stand in the way of Governor's cavalcade. Cameras if at all installed could help the authorities to know the truth.
The handout further says that as Governor entered the auditorium, everyone rose for the national anthem and if your reporter found it chaotic, then it is unfortunate. The analysts of JU have failed to read the news item properly and tried to make an idiotic attempt to link up singing of National Anthem with chaos. Again, since the reporter was present at the venue, chaos was very much visible as those who were supposed to sit on the stage were seen running to take their place.
The university has in its concluding words given job satisfaction certificate to its cultural officer Ifra Kak. This is of no significance since the news report is aimed at telling the story of the event to our esteemed readers and not delivering judgements. This job satisfaction certificate should have been given to Kak in private and not made public since APRs are confidential documents. And if there was any urgency of making it public; a separate handout should have been issued.
Then the authorities have reminded the reporter about the responsibility of not denigrating the university and confirming even the eye-witness account from the university without mentioning the name of the officer to be contacted. This is inversely telling the reporter to ask the university about the line to be taken while writing a news story. This is unethical and happens nowhere. No school of Journalism teaches you to verify eye-witness account.
The university has advised the reporter in the concluding Paras to desist from maligning the image of university over trivial issues. Nowhere in the world is any institution allowed to dictate an independent newspaper the language it should speak. It is the responsibility of the institution to ensure that all negatives are taken care of and duty of reporters to report even if a tap is running without any reason and grass has not been cut in the university ground. It is trivial and minor issues which have tendency to boomerang and damage reputation of an institution. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
