Ok. i hate to admit it … but i kind of like the DNA. and i have liked reading it from the first day it came out. (i hate admitting it because i loathed their campaign and my reading DNA was despite the campaign, not because of it).
What do i like about it ….. the fact that it is fairly unpretentious in its news and analysis. There isn’t too much moral high horse pontificating – which rest of the MSM do.
Their language is easy – sometimes flawed – and fairly desi (they have a section called evolutions:) (i always thought that the word worked in the singular).No complicated, complex sentances for them. But that’s cool – the way they use English is as an Indian language not a 60 year old relic of the Raj. In that respect the Hindu, if it really wants to survive should take a leaf out of the DNA language book. (Aside, KD and i were talking about the Hindu last week. He said it is the best f***ing paper. I agreed. But, my problem, as always, was that that the Hindu is a newspaper whose TG is dying out. It needs evolutions. :).
And DNA seem to have caught the pulse.
When you look at it the first time- there is something familiar about it.They have probably cogged the design and layout of half a dozen news papers that we are all familiar with. But, the content is more or less original. And more than half decent. Reminds of the Independent (the Brit version, not the Indian paper with the same name) when it first came out. Tho’ the independent did pontificate a whole lot more.
Why didn’t i say all this earlier. Inertia. Laziness. DNA didn’t have a site, and i didn’t want to scan, or type out whole chunks. Have a dekho here.
It is my first read of the day. I still read the IE for news and pontification. btw, do you think that Mani Shankar Iyer leaked the story of the Congress appointees to the IE. It all seems too pat to be good journalism.