TLDR: Modi

Is the newly elected Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, good for India? The short answer is no, and here's why. He is a right wing religious (Hindu) conservative nationalist who has an ugly history with Muslims dating back to his days serving as the state's chief minister in Gujarat, that resulted in the slaughter of approximately a thousand people, mostly Muslim. This is the approximate equivalent to Bill Clinton presiding over riots and slaughter of African Americans in his home state of Arkansas prior to winning the presidential election.

That said, I hate that The New York Times chose such an inappropriate image of Modi on their front page coverage of his win; it reeks of the "Inscrutable Oriental".

Foreign Coverage?

From a series at Salon.com described as "The latest installment of a continuing series in which American events are described using the tropes and tone normally employed by the American media to describe events in other countries" comes the following analysis of the NY Times/Abramson firing debacle:

"Once considered a regional media outlet for the city whose name it still anachronistically bears, the New York Times has long been a national force, though it is primarily consumed by the economic elites who cluster in the coastal metropolitan areas of this economically stratified country...Reports have since emerged that Abramson may have been paid less than her male predecessor, and that some in the paper’s leadership may have resented her aggressive style. While the laws of this rapidly modernizing country outlaw gender discrimination in compliance with international norms, inequalities rooted in centuries-old patriarchal practices still persist, even in elite institutions, and those who challenge these unwritten rules can face severe backlash." - Josh Keating via Slate

That's right folks! "Inequalities rooted in centuries-old patriarchal practices still persist, even in elite institutions..." and we should all be ashamed. #Pushy.

#Pushy

Abramson Fired

A prominent New York media observer wrote in a recent post, Why Jill Abramson Was Fired, that former NY Times editor Jill Abramson was fired, in part, because she inquired as to pay discrepancies between her remuneration and that of her male predecessor:

"...Abramson discovered that her pay and her pension benefits as both executive editor and, before that, as managing editor were considerably less than the pay and pension benefits of Bill Keller, the male editor whom she replaced in both jobs. “She confronted the top brass,” one close associate said, and this may have fed into the management’s narrative that she was “pushy,” a characterization that, for many, has an inescapably gendered aspect." 

I will wait to hear from Ms. Abramson herself before tearing the NYT a new one. In the Twitter feed of Solange Knowles (I know, right?) lies this gem: "Yo. I don't believe in violence but I almost beat someone's ass tonight. Lot a bit of Martin, but a lot a bit of Malcom" (via Huffington Post). As white as I am, I know the feeling well.