Editorial Viewpoint
Media manners
An agreement on the housing allotments to 104 Parsis/Iranis and a keen electoral tussle for the seventh trusteeship seat of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) both appear as distinct possibilities as the BPP trustees complete their fourth month in office.
Following the Press Conference called by the Alert Zoroastrians Association (AZA) on February 9, 2009, the dissenting trio of Kersi Randeria, Percy Patel and Zeree Jehangirji appeared on the RKB show on Sahara Samay television. A week later the six trustees of the BPP made an appearance on the same show denying the allegations made against them and stating their case.
While it made for entertaining viewing, many observers must have shared the sentiments of one non-Parsi onlooker who felt a respectable community should resolve matters within itself rather than create a public spectacle.
But in an era of 24-hour news channels, reality shows, political debates, talk programs there is no reason why the community should be shielded from media scrutiny.
The broadcast underlined the total inability of the community’s leadership to resolve what was a minor issue. Who to allocate what is a matter for discussion, opinion, reason and compromise. But faced with an adamant opposition and an equally determined board of trustees, the flat apportionment took a disproportionate public hue.
In a telling moment in the broadcast the host, Rajive K. Bajaj, asked the BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta whether he would sit and hammer out a compromise rather than pursue the matter in court. Mehta asked BPP trustee Khojeste Mistree to respond. The abdication of responsibility indicated that Mehta himself was not the decision maker.
Even on other public occasions when Mehta had been asked to speak he would often turn to his erstwhile supporter and BPP trustee, the late Rustom Tirandaz. In his absence it is now Mistree.
And perhaps it has been Mehta more than the AZA who caused the issue to snowball into the public domain. Even when the trustees’ session was over on the show and the host asked them to join the discussion with a lay gathering [consisting largely of AZA, the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) and BPP trustee partisans] five of them refused believing it would end in a slanging match. Only Noshir Dadrawala, the dissenting trustee was present. Half way into the program Mehta’s son Viraf told the host that some of the trustees were waiting outside and should be called in. Then Mehta, Mistree and Jimmy Mistry walked in.
When the host talked about the dwindling numbers of the community and the closed door policy to conversion Jimmy Mistry replied the community would never die out, that it had survived 1,200 years in India and it would continue to exist. Suitable rhetoric for an election meet but surely not the appropriate response for a general viewership, many of whom are puzzled at the death wish of the community. A reasoned answer stating why he and his co-trustees held that point of view would have been more in keeping with the requirement. Khojeste Mistree claimed that Bajaj was recommending conversion as an alternative to dwindling numbers to which Bajaj rightly stated he never voiced opinions, only asked questions.
The BPP trustees and the audience in general, several of whom were ignorant of the facts and included one lady who refused to answer a simple question as to whether she had been allocated a flat or not, were apparently ungroomed in the art of public television appearances.
One goes on television to sell an idea or a point of view. It is a visual media where every word, action and thought is on public display. It is not an extension of the BPP boardroom or a baug election meet.
The trustees squabbling among themselves, the charges of agendas not being circulated on time, of information being leaked to the public are not subjects of a television show. Did the trustees and the guests misunderstand the media? Did they appear on the show only in response to AZA’s earlier appearance? Were they reacting instead of setting the pace themselves? Did they forget media pundit Marshall McLuhan’s maxim: The media is the message. They came like gang members to a street fight. They should have appeared as statesmen, people who set an example of decorum and reason.
Even at the condolence meeting for Tirandaz at Dadar, the speakers’ tone and tenor were all of an election rally or a maidan gathering. Tirandaz no doubt would have loved it: the meet started half an hour late (Tirandaz was notorious for not keeping time), some of the erroneous facts stated such as the age of the universe being 400 billion years instead of 13.6 billion (Tirandaz never bothered about correct facts and figures), sentimental outbursts... When an emotional Dadar social worker Mithoo Jesia apologized for not campaigning for Tirandaz when he lost his trustee reelection bid, one wondered why. Tirandaz’s first seven-year BPP trusteeship term was a disaster. He spent the time speaking out of turn, saying whatever came to his mind and seldom studying the papers before meetings.
On his second chance at office his contribution may have been a more positive one. He had once again risen to the top through perseverance, skill, understanding and the gift of the gab. He would not have let all that go to waste easily.
His wife Armaity on the face of it would possibly make a better trustee than Rustom ever was. She is sober, caring, humane, soft spoken and thoughtful. But many in the community are skeptical of family members of public figures occupying elective office. With four of the present trustees — Mehta, Khojeste Mistree, Jimmy Mistry and Yazdi Desai — supporting her candidature she has a better than average chance of winning.
At the time of going to press, former BPP trustee Maneck Engineer was stated to be willing to contest against Armaity Tirandaz. Engineer had fought and lost the last election on the Adult Franchise for Progress (AFP) ticket. A contest, if it takes place, is bound to be fiercely fought.
Once the election and the allotment fiasco are over, the new trustees will have to set about repairing the damage done to their image. One way of doing so would be to behave and function like akabars.
Following the Press Conference called by the Alert Zoroastrians Association (AZA) on February 9, 2009, the dissenting trio of Kersi Randeria, Percy Patel and Zeree Jehangirji appeared on the RKB show on Sahara Samay television. A week later the six trustees of the BPP made an appearance on the same show denying the allegations made against them and stating their case.
While it made for entertaining viewing, many observers must have shared the sentiments of one non-Parsi onlooker who felt a respectable community should resolve matters within itself rather than create a public spectacle.
But in an era of 24-hour news channels, reality shows, political debates, talk programs there is no reason why the community should be shielded from media scrutiny.
The broadcast underlined the total inability of the community’s leadership to resolve what was a minor issue. Who to allocate what is a matter for discussion, opinion, reason and compromise. But faced with an adamant opposition and an equally determined board of trustees, the flat apportionment took a disproportionate public hue.
In a telling moment in the broadcast the host, Rajive K. Bajaj, asked the BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta whether he would sit and hammer out a compromise rather than pursue the matter in court. Mehta asked BPP trustee Khojeste Mistree to respond. The abdication of responsibility indicated that Mehta himself was not the decision maker.
Even on other public occasions when Mehta had been asked to speak he would often turn to his erstwhile supporter and BPP trustee, the late Rustom Tirandaz. In his absence it is now Mistree.
And perhaps it has been Mehta more than the AZA who caused the issue to snowball into the public domain. Even when the trustees’ session was over on the show and the host asked them to join the discussion with a lay gathering [consisting largely of AZA, the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) and BPP trustee partisans] five of them refused believing it would end in a slanging match. Only Noshir Dadrawala, the dissenting trustee was present. Half way into the program Mehta’s son Viraf told the host that some of the trustees were waiting outside and should be called in. Then Mehta, Mistree and Jimmy Mistry walked in.
When the host talked about the dwindling numbers of the community and the closed door policy to conversion Jimmy Mistry replied the community would never die out, that it had survived 1,200 years in India and it would continue to exist. Suitable rhetoric for an election meet but surely not the appropriate response for a general viewership, many of whom are puzzled at the death wish of the community. A reasoned answer stating why he and his co-trustees held that point of view would have been more in keeping with the requirement. Khojeste Mistree claimed that Bajaj was recommending conversion as an alternative to dwindling numbers to which Bajaj rightly stated he never voiced opinions, only asked questions.
The BPP trustees and the audience in general, several of whom were ignorant of the facts and included one lady who refused to answer a simple question as to whether she had been allocated a flat or not, were apparently ungroomed in the art of public television appearances.
One goes on television to sell an idea or a point of view. It is a visual media where every word, action and thought is on public display. It is not an extension of the BPP boardroom or a baug election meet.
The trustees squabbling among themselves, the charges of agendas not being circulated on time, of information being leaked to the public are not subjects of a television show. Did the trustees and the guests misunderstand the media? Did they appear on the show only in response to AZA’s earlier appearance? Were they reacting instead of setting the pace themselves? Did they forget media pundit Marshall McLuhan’s maxim: The media is the message. They came like gang members to a street fight. They should have appeared as statesmen, people who set an example of decorum and reason.
Even at the condolence meeting for Tirandaz at Dadar, the speakers’ tone and tenor were all of an election rally or a maidan gathering. Tirandaz no doubt would have loved it: the meet started half an hour late (Tirandaz was notorious for not keeping time), some of the erroneous facts stated such as the age of the universe being 400 billion years instead of 13.6 billion (Tirandaz never bothered about correct facts and figures), sentimental outbursts... When an emotional Dadar social worker Mithoo Jesia apologized for not campaigning for Tirandaz when he lost his trustee reelection bid, one wondered why. Tirandaz’s first seven-year BPP trusteeship term was a disaster. He spent the time speaking out of turn, saying whatever came to his mind and seldom studying the papers before meetings.
On his second chance at office his contribution may have been a more positive one. He had once again risen to the top through perseverance, skill, understanding and the gift of the gab. He would not have let all that go to waste easily.
His wife Armaity on the face of it would possibly make a better trustee than Rustom ever was. She is sober, caring, humane, soft spoken and thoughtful. But many in the community are skeptical of family members of public figures occupying elective office. With four of the present trustees — Mehta, Khojeste Mistree, Jimmy Mistry and Yazdi Desai — supporting her candidature she has a better than average chance of winning.
At the time of going to press, former BPP trustee Maneck Engineer was stated to be willing to contest against Armaity Tirandaz. Engineer had fought and lost the last election on the Adult Franchise for Progress (AFP) ticket. A contest, if it takes place, is bound to be fiercely fought.
Once the election and the allotment fiasco are over, the new trustees will have to set about repairing the damage done to their image. One way of doing so would be to behave and function like akabars.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive