Mass love to mass hate - Shah Rukh Khan

He said rather cheekily in a media interview “So guys let the hate mails come my way, it will keep me and my team motivated to come together and help us win the trophy”. Please note the ‘I, me, myself” always leads with SRK!

Just because he owns KKR does the team have to jump when he says jump, play a six and they do a DLF maximum ? When does ‘bidding from the master’ stop and when does the game/sport take over independent of the master?! Am quite quite quite sic of this mans reactions, overbearing arrogance and loudness! I think he certainly needs to rein it in before he loses face further and loses his appeal altogether because of his loud mouth antics!

If sportsmen could start hamming like the great entertainer, then swapping roles could become so lucrative! By strutting your stuff you can win audiences in cinema theaters and who’d know this better than King Khan. But maybe he has bitten more than he can chew by owning a cricket team? Cricket is part luck and part pure play- or did he never understand that basic rule? His magic wand works in cinema well and he should look to retain its shine and polish there, lest it dims, because of his negative attitude on the playing field!

It’s the cricketers who have to strut their stuff on the ground; this sport doesn’t work on SRK’s bidding! Arrogance works universally provided you know your stuff- does SRK know his cricket thoroughly? Honestly a more basic question begs an answer here- does SRK understand human psychology and what politics and pressure can do to a team’s morale? Does false bravado and self charm make him the undisputed winner of the cup before the tournament has begun? I think for Mr. Khan, winning the IPL is less important, than self deification! By trading blows with ex cricketer legend he once again showed himself in poor light, a bad loser, whose cheap headline grabbing tactics made him look pitiable and cut a sorry figure! Not befitting his brilliant cinema image at all!

Last year, the nation saw the anti-climax when loud-mouthed and arrogant Shahrukh Khan saw KKR emerge as the last or second last team in the list. His colossal budget on campaigning and advertising proved phony and the star-studded gloss faded out easily with disastrous results. Arrogant Shahrukh Khan (am sad to admit this) has become the biggest villain of Indian cricketing scenario when he openly bashed up legendary Sourav Ganguly by allowing a loser manager to take the most stoopid decision regarding 4 captains in a team! Or by openly speaking about selling a team because of non performance! Does he know the meaning of nurturing talent, allowing the team to come into its own, making sure all politics is far removed from the playing hands and leading from the front by not just paying lip service to the bigness and greatness of Dada but by backing him with action and giving him the captaincy and not selling his soul to a has- been loser Australian manager coach who the Ozzies hate themselves! My heart goes out to 2 guys there on the field - seeing Brendon McCullum looking cheerless and forlorn while leading a defeated team on field and Dada who is valiantly doing his best to make a win happen despite Shah Rukh Khan and that mercenary coach/manager!

I ask myself this question repeatedly - What can Shahrukh Khan do best now, to avert all controversies and failures? Hmmm... maybe launch a Fifth Captain…


Coming to you 'Live', 'on your channel', we bring it to you 'as we see it' - the 4th estate

Some stats:
50,000+ print media
375+ broadcast media
200+ news channels
45.3 million active internet users
Explosive growth in new media (including mobilephones)
Advertising revenues growing at a healthy pace
So who sets the agenda for the content and information that we are subject to 24x7?

Do you feel todays media is 'tabloidised' more than ever before? I remember one channel head briefing me to sell 'news' as entertainment. Well, it is:) And it also is the primary conveyor of information, news and views in our society.

Media plays the role of watchdog over society, overlooking proceedings. So why does it resent a watchdog to overlook proceedings over itself?

Guess the owners and the Editors are a powerful community. We live in times of conflict and turmoil, and I wonder if that makes some, above scrutiny? Is a watchdog over media an abstract notion in journalism?! Now there is a thought...

When everything is breaking news, and all stories are sensationalized and dramatized then how do we sift between reality and drama? Do we even understand as public what journalism must stand for today?

The state has made repeated attempts to regulate the functioning of the media. Barring Emergency, our media has vociferously resisted these attempts. Journalists and media owners came together to resist any regulation.

Am all for democracy and responsibility. It would be great if all things true and powerful could conduct themselves with vibrancy and rigour and self policing and righteousness to ensure no need for a regulatory body ever! Only if we humans were infalliable, could this utopian situation exist!

The widespread criticism and condemnation of the broadcast media's coverage of the November 26 attacks in Bombay was an interesting example of the face-off between the media, the state and the public - a rare instance where all three agencies were in disagreement with one another. The media contention that the government was unprepared and the absence of a central agency to give out official information resulted in a free-for-all. The government responded by seeking curbs on media coverage in instances of terror attacks. SO when will media show its social responsibility and own up its excesses- the rights/wrongs?

Sure the internet is becoming a powerful medium to carry clout but nowhere near powerful yet.

In today's fractured media environment, where competition to grab the media market is more intense than ever before, ethics are the obstacles in the race. Different sections of the media are governed by vested interests - economic and political.

When media refuses self-scrutiny or fails to acknowledge its mistakes they cannot even agree to disagree. So how can the media be made accountable?