Read a summary of arguments made during the hearing here: https://t.co/UNknYxor8k
[PILs AGAINST MEDIA TRIAL VERDICT]
#BombayHighCourt will pronounce its verdict in a batch of PILs filed against #mediatrials in the wake of reportage relating to the death of Bollywood actor #SushanthSinghRajput at 11 am today.
Read a summary of arguments made during the hearing here: https://t.co/UNknYxor8k
Has media coverage in the present case amounts to criminal contempt?
Some reporting by republic TV and times Now we found contemptuous but we have refrained from passing any orders on it,
In death by suicide to depict the victim as weak would create aspersions on the investigation.
Publishing statements in the investigation.
Findings are for the purpose of adjudication of this writ petitions not on the subject matter.
Media trial an interference in criminal probe: Bombay High Court issues slew of directions to be followed by media; PCI guidelines to apply to TV
#mediatrial #SushantSinghRajput #BombayHighCourt
https://t.co/hnNywbhALU
Reportage "in brazen disregard of rule of law the edifice on which country's Constitution rest," the High Court said.
#mediatrial
#SushantSinghRajput #mediatrial #BombayHighCourt
@TimesNow @republic
#BombayHighCourt #SushanthSinghRajput #mediatrial
@DGPMaharashtra @MumbaiPolice
#SushantSinghRajput
More from Bar & Bench
More from India
Some readers have been asking what #India2030 is all about.
Here’s a chapter-by-chapter thread on the 20 forecasts by 20 thought leaders on 20 themes that will define India in the 2020s.
1/n
Chapter 20 of #India2030 by @davidfrawleyved talks about how the Civilizational Resurgence of India will reconnect its ancient past to ride into a dharmic future
2/n
Chapter 19 of #India2030 by @devdip tells us what the new idea of Nationalism in the 2020s will be — an integral union of the nation with the self
3/n
Chapter 18 of #India2030 by @sandipanthedeb examines how ideologies and technologies will intrude into and redefine Friendships
4/n
Chapter 17 of #India2030 by @authoramish studies the Soft Power of India and says its global influence will be through the confluence of materialism and spiritualism
5/n
Here’s a chapter-by-chapter thread on the 20 forecasts by 20 thought leaders on 20 themes that will define India in the 2020s.
1/n
Delighted to announce the forthcoming release of my fifth book \u2014 #India2030: The Rise of a Rajasic Nation.
— Gautam Chikermane (@gchikermane) January 13, 2021
It hits the bookstores on 25 January.
Gratitude to my contributors and @PenguinIndia for partnering this adventure. pic.twitter.com/I0SdQk19JG
Chapter 20 of #India2030 by @davidfrawleyved talks about how the Civilizational Resurgence of India will reconnect its ancient past to ride into a dharmic future
2/n
Chapter 19 of #India2030 by @devdip tells us what the new idea of Nationalism in the 2020s will be — an integral union of the nation with the self
3/n
Chapter 18 of #India2030 by @sandipanthedeb examines how ideologies and technologies will intrude into and redefine Friendships
4/n
Chapter 17 of #India2030 by @authoramish studies the Soft Power of India and says its global influence will be through the confluence of materialism and spiritualism
5/n
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
