A few things continue to intrigue (may be read as irritate) me. Till today i can't figure out the media's notion of what the regional and national is. While reporting the 54 National Film Awards winners atleast one TV news channel screamed 'The Regional becomes the National". What did they really mean by that God only knows.
In India, very often the term 'Indian cinema' is used, especially by the media to refer to Hindi cinema. Utterly foolish! Logically and ideally all films made in India, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari whether from the north, south, east or west of the country should come under 'Indian cinema'. On what basis do we make the distinction between the national and the regional? Is it distinction or discrimination? In today's context is there any thing that could be considered purely 'regional' or for that matter 'national'? Ironically there is also that subtle and invisible note of condescension or inferiority attached to the term regional when used alongside national. Isn't it time remedial actions are seriosly thought of? Of course some popular film actors have raised such concerns already. But despite their best efforts to set right this wrong nothing much has happened. Perhaps the media must come forward to effect this change - they must change their mindest first - instead of blindly following practices of the past, learn to report with a critical, realistic eye / perspective of the changing Present .
