Image via WikipediaThe idea and practice of being politically correct, is perhaps, as old as well, politics itself. Today the phrase has come to mean different things to different people and subject to each unique context. In a political arena, being politically correct is as good as dodging dodgy issues and uncomfortable questions. The end game seems to be treading the well-beaten path, sitting on the fence or awaiting the next move.
Political gurus are known to make their candidates not only toe that line but make them walk the talk with an agenda in hand and political weapons of correctness in the other.
Spin-doctors on the campaign trail are a notorious lot.
Conversely, there is the politically incorrect bunch. Bill Maher, a talk show host on the ABC network, had a popular segment by that name. The comedian-host would leave no stone unturned. He could afford to be blunt, funny and in the end, honest. He achieved this through the format. It’s like proclaiming to the world where your preferences lie and then being honest about it. But when sentiments run high there is a risk too – being overly honest and brutally blunt about emotional scars aren’t easy to forget or forgive. When the twin towers were attacked, he was the one syndicated talk show host who dared to ask the tough questions, to the extent that perhaps it was America’s fault that such an horrendous attack took place in the first place. He was sacked. Today he’s been vindicated by the blunders the two Bush terms brought upon the Middle East.
He now hosts a program called Real Time with Bill Maher on cable TV. And both the bite and the bark are still as strong, unapologetic and politically incorrect to the P. This editorial would like to touch upon the frozen scene on the BBS telly as the National Council sessions take their tea/coffee/snacks and toilet breaks. The other day, as the members left the house, there were still audible sounds in the air. It was two members making small talk as they prepared to join their colleagues for the high noon break. You wondered who would leave the microphones on? Yesterday the same noon break was on as the scene went ‘still’ and a rigsar composition played in the background.
It happens at nights too – there are scenes of a roomful of TVs screens flickering. There is an air of eerie quality about it, something akin to dull CCTV coverage. There is nothing to rebroadcast. Your only hope is a sudden Santa giving you a stand-up dressed in black. The question is, to put it politically incorrectly, “why is the NC session broadcast and the NA deliberations left out of the picture?”
Some of the more sensible reason cited, among a host of ludicrous lot, all of the politically correct variety, was the gem that a closed-door session was more realistic and committal on the part of the MPs. That they were given and prone to superfluous acting when the cameras are switched on. The national network has been lambasted for “inadequate” broadcasting by the MoIC. Even as the winter session, one of the most defining in terms of the nature of the discussion, is in full swing, all the viewer can get is a live rendition of Bhutan Star. If the MoIC really intends the network to go national and report national affairs, it must begin from within the house. As long as that is blacked out, the politically incorrect answer is “Thank you, but no thank you.”
For if a non-media intrusive CCTV session is also ruled out, then really, we’d rather watch the Champions League. And here’s a live broadcast - Real Madrid to end the nine-year draught come 28.5.11 at Wembley, mark that and stay up.