Wednesday, December 03, 2008

A quick musing!!!

Why does it need to be tagged "the 9/11 of India"?
Why can't it be "26/11 of India"?
Do we really need this comparison? Is the fact, that this was a heinous act of crime in its own right not sufficient?

6 comments:

  1. Guess we all do... its just a term coined by the media to get higher TRPs....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ihad the same thot and i was even arguing over it with sumone.. We could also compare it with the 1992 blasts in Mumbai .. but no we have to ape them only..i wonder why

    ReplyDelete
  3. I guess one reason for such comparision is that we need a standard, a measure of how great a horror the event is... and nothing is measurable in isolation...

    its not enough so say that the event was horrifying, for so was the sight of a dead dog on the street.. we need to say how horrifying.. more than the dead dog, more than a road crash.. may be as much as the 9/11...

    but then, may be im trying to discover a meaning where none exists...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shuchi,

    Terror cannot be quantified. comparing this to a 9/11 in the US of A, and not comparring a tourist getting gunned down by a terrorist in Kashmir to anything...... Why does the media not say this was the XYZ of India then ....

    Its just a question that has been with me ever since I heard the term being coined on the indian media. Where has our originality gone ????

    ReplyDelete