April 30, 2007

The slingers

The current issue of Tehelka carries an essay I wrote on Web abuse (Webuse? Wabuse?). I called it "Sing Hey! for the Mud-Slinging Braveheart", which, looking back, was far too long and clumsy a title. It appears under the moniker "Spite@Infinity", here.

Your thoughts welcome.

5 comments:

Truman said...

I think people like these are (only?) tempted by the fact that they can simply say what they want, when they want. And since one can get away with it, one tends to be more offensive than what s/he'd be in real life. The more getting away with it, the more offensive and it, by then, becomes a part of the so-called Internet Identity. But does it end there? I doubt it. I think it goes on to affect one's personality in more ways than one. A majority of these people don't even appreciate (or probably realise) the fact that here is a communication medium which can be probably the best way to have a healthy discussion. I don't think it ever crosses their minds.

Oh, just my two cents.

Anonymous said...

Dilip,

Agree overall. Hope you may know why I comment anon. and havent found my comments abusive/ cowardly. I comment under my ID on all other blogs.

1. I dont know anything about any of the others, but wish to take a stand here for 'confused' known IRL as Rohit Pradhan to those who read his blog.

2. He may have indulged in some of the activity you mentioned but except those listed below I have found him quite above board and nowhere close to Kilroy.

3. "Kill \prominent TV anchor\ bxstxrd"
This statement of his appears to be the main problem. I found it to be execrable but was more exercised by the 'bxstxrd' than the kill call- never took it as real.

I wish he had regretted/ apologized for it but this one strike doesnt get him into the kilroy class?

--> By way of example, Annie Zaidi recently wrote:
" Hang all of Khairlanji and Priyanka will not be avenged".

How many of us parse grammar on this and read an 'even if' there and allow it. How many, like me, understand what she said and that she didnt really intend for all the villagers of Khairlanji to be killed.


2. Some timing sequence of '92 riots, he appeared to have a genuine mistake and corrected it.

This doesnt even count as a strike?

3. General abuse.
He very rarely if ever uses abusive terms on his blog.

--> by way of example, "curious gawker" and "bombay addict"
- blog anonymously
- occasionally use F words and other abuse terms.

regards,
Jai

PS- I read and like the blogs of AZ,CG and BA and have no problems with any of the stuff from their blogs I highlighted above.

Dilip D'Souza said...

Jai, Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your stand for confused.

zap said...

This has been nagging me for a while now. On rediff, you can see bulletin boards under articles about filmstar weddings, indian cricket, southindian films, 5 hottest women in the world, india launches italian satellite etc splitting at the seams with madness about indian culture, religion, ethnicity, modesty and every other extreme thought!

NoGod save us all.

How have you been?

- Z

Anonymous said...

Dilip..must commend you on your essay. You have voiced what quite a few have been disgusted with on the blogosphere.

Whoever that Jai is ( most probably 'confused' himself) needs to get his facts right. 'Confused' aka Rohit Pradhan is a highly irresponsible, vicious, vitriolic blogger who resorts to invectives as a matter of policy. Trying his best to white wash his past history will not help. Words come back to haunt and his always will.

Bloggers like him have played it clever by 'buying' off weak kneed 'Patrixes'. Truth however remains undiminished.

Once again.. good work Dilip.