Listen to the full episode of Hafta here.

Dear NL Team,

I’ve just finished listening to HAFTA 222 and RWO-64.

This was the WORST Hafta episode in the four years that I’ve been a regular listener.

It’s okay to be nice to certain people, but don’t take it to a level where you end up changing the subscriber-base demographic! The guest referred to himself as “a (not an) author”, blatantly refused to take the hint to leave; and Abhinandan started sounding like him by the end of the episode.

Please don’t do this again!!

And now to RWO. The team did an excellent job! Cherry and her entire team kept my attention very well! Keep up the good work. You guys are amazing.

Okay thanks and Jai Hind!

Jonathan Benjamin

***

Hi Abhinandan,

Keeping it short: as you had sent your reporters across the country to cover the elections, how about getting all of them on the NL Hafta just before the results are announced? It will be a good way to bring all the knowledge and experience together.

Also, please try and get Saurabh Dwivedi for an on-ground point of view. He and his team have done some really good work this elections.

Thanks,

Naman Mishra

***

Hello dear NL team,

Please consider if you can add “chapters” to all the long podcasts (sorry Kartik, more work for you).

The topic being discussed can be the chapter name.

Most good podcasts players allow navigating to next previous chapters, or show an index of all chapters to directly jump to a specific chapter.

If a listener wants to revisit an any discussion, it is very cumbersome to find the exact timestamp within an episode. Chapters will allow listeners to directly jump to the desired discussion.

I love longer podcasts, but listeners who have been requesting “shorter” Hafta episodes, can skip over the topics they are not interested in. Anyway, thank you and, keep up the good work.

Swapnil Luktuke

***

Hi Abhinandan,

I recently became a subscriber and super excited about that! My email is going to be a bit long, so please do bear with me.

I’m a freelance journalist so I often watch NL podcasts/videos from a journalist’s point of view. I have some comments from the last NL Hafta.

It’s about the discussion regarding journalists being “elite” and “left-liberal”. Now I don’t know about the elite aspect, but I think it’s often very easy and common for journos to be somewhere on the Left spectrum (not necessarily communist or even socialist). I believe that journalism’s core itself is based in leftist and liberal discourse.

What are two most common and important things that journos do? First is holding the government accountable, the second is covering and giving voice to the marginalised and oppressed people. Isn’t the former part of liberalism (which includes government transparency), and the latter straight out of Leftist discourse?

If you’re not critical of the government, then you’re not doing a good job at being a journalist. And if you’re ignoring the plight of oppressed people, then you’re really an indecent human being. This is why I often think about “Right-wing journalism”, and wonder if it’s actually an oxymoron.

Would love to hear your thoughts on this.

Sania Aziz Rahman

***

Dear All,

I would also like to add a comment about your discussion on burqa ban in Sri Lanka. I have two points to add:

1. I am not sure why people discussing the burqa ban took in face value the claim that burqas somehow cause terrorist attacks. Is there a basis to believe that banning burqa reduces attacks? I would further postulate that imposing laws on a minority based on stereotypes only helps increase threats of radicalism. Overall, while I like your coverage, I find your understanding of Muslim culture quite terrible and ignorant. The ease with which each one of the contributors dismissed the want of a woman to cover herself in a manner she likes. Let me give you an example you guys could discuss. If tomorrow a rule is made that because men were carrying bombs in their underwear, men from now on, have to roam the streets/attend school naked from the waist below. Would that be okay? Would you be ready to humiliate yourself for the appearance of national safety? In times of terror and fear, you can try and justify a lot of extremely oppressive rules in the name of national security. That is how during World War 2, America rounded up Japanese Americans and German Americans and shoved them for half a decade into concentration camps. It did not start off with the camps, it started off incrementally, with small changes to the way Japanese Americans could live, but in an age of fear, primal urges took the better of an otherwise rational nation. In other words, it starts with a burqa ban and ends with a slow march to segregated camps.

2. Your panel had no Muslims. None. No Muslim women. Do you think that is concerning? Do you think it’s fine to have a discussion of a ban that affects Muslim women without listening to their voices?

Please be more cognizant of Muslims and their humanity. Women can choose to wear/dress/think however they want and to take that agency away from them, you need a far greater justification than “it might help national security” You can not start stripping people in the middle of the street just because you are scared.

Vaibhav Dwivedi

***

Dear Newslaundry,

I wanted to weigh in briefly on the debate in the last hafta on political centrism. The French president Mitterand (मितेराँ) once remarked that centrism meant “neither left, nor left”. The focus on incremental change, which can seem like the hallmark of centrist politics, is still an investment in the status quo. It puts faith in the system’s ability to reform itself. The left, which views politics as agnostic and riven by class conflict, is understandably skeptical of this reasoning. Centrist politics has retreated worldwide because centrist politicians are seen as handmaidens to an unjust order. The 2008 financial crisis and its aftermath brought this into an even starker light. In the present conjuncture, the only way I can make sense of political centrism is as a kind of non-authoritarian, not overtly identitarian right. The Congress party in India, appears to fit this bill, as do a great many, so-called left of center parties. Having said that, I would still say the Congress has my vote this time, because a) its manifesto’s promises on health and education and b) it still seems to believe in democracy, which is more than I can say of the present regime.

Love your work, and been a subscriber for well over a year now!

Thank you,

Nachiket Joshi

***

RH here again. Quick suggestion on the signing off for The Daily Dose. In the show, the “message” (have a good day or good night) is followed up by the “logic” (depending on where you are listening from) where as I would recommend that you flip it.

“etc etc.. and depending on where you are listening from have a good day or good night” to sign off. Much like the famous sign off in The Truman Show.

Also, the panels comments that my appreciation of the Newslaundry team’s state of affairs with late payments and smiling through the struggle being categorised as “character” does not come from a place of comfort or the security of someone who has plenty in the bank. In sports like football we seen season after season go by with payments delayed by 2-6 months and at times regular payments, bonuses etc being skipped all together.

It was amazing how the collective efforts found a way to get the team to grind their teeth, train hard and put in great performances that showcased rare character traits in today’s world. Tough to explain what it is that holds everyone together, though I am certain that it applies to you all as well. Purists doing their bit to keep journalism at it’s best. Not selling out.

Awful and Awesome continues to be top notch and since I have been travelling, my wife and I discuss the episodes over the phone. The show is perfect. Don’t read too much into the ratings.

***

Hi all,

This is regarding the discussion about centrism in the last two Haftas.

I wasn’t satisfied with any definition of centrism presented in the Hafta.

The diametric opposite of a Centrist, in my opinion is a Radical. The difference between Centrists and Radicals arises in the process of advocating change. Centrists want to work within the system and nudge it towards their ideal. They favor bipartisanship, negotiations and coalition-building. Obama and Hillary are considered centrists in the US, because both of them have never advocated rapid change. In 2008, Obama was publicly against gay marriage, I have no doubt that privately he wasn’t. If support of same-sex marriage made Obama unelectable, I would gladly let him lie to the public, and then get elected, and change system from within. That makes me a centrist. Many Bernie Sanders supporters would consider this wrong.

The same could be said about Abraham Lincoln and John Brown, both of whom were abolitionist, but the latter wanted to violently overthrow the slave-owning government.

I have argued with Leftists who opine that we should destroy Indian public institutions and rebuild them so that they are free of casteism, sexism, and imperialism. My opposition to this makes me a centrist in their eyes. I believe that permanent progress requires both the radicals and the centrists. Radicals help change the opinions and push the social norms. Centrists use their pragmatism to mould these ideas into laws.

Thanks and regards

Shoor Veer Singh