180 million public sector workers are currently on strike in India - Why don't we know about it?

[OnlinePoker]

Millions of Indian workers strike for better wages
Thousands of state-run banks, government offices and factories shut as workers rally against Modi's economic policies.

Tens of millions of public sector workers have gone on a day-long strike across India, protesting against Prime Minister Narendra Modi's economic policies, particularly his plans to push for greater privatisation.

Thousands of state-run banks, government offices and factories were closed on Friday, and public transport disrupted, in the strike called by 10 trade unions.

"This strike is against the central government, this strike is for the cause of the working people," said Ramen Pandey, of the Indian National Trade Union Congress.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/09/millions-indian-workers-strike-wages-160902131706206.html

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Because Misanthropic Sycophant Monsters do support the TPP .

[malaise]

2. Particularly on a Labor Day weekend

Go India!!!
BBC and Canadian TV both carried this

[Hortensis]

11. Here's yesterday's WaPo article, Malaise.

Workers strike across India to protest economic reforms
?uuid=eUoL0HEHEeaZP3PGk6iYIA

Indian workers participate in a rally during a nationwide strike called by trade unions in Hyderabad, India, Friday, Sept. 2, 2016. The strike has been called against government’s alleged anti labor policies. Activists also demanded higher minimum wages and provision of social security for workers from unorganized sectors. (Mahesh Kumar A./Associated Press)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/workers-strike-across-india-to-protest-economic-reforms/2016/09/02/06035d18-70fb-11e6-993f-73c693a89820_story.html

[malaise]

12. But is it on TV - network or cable

May have been but I sure didn't see it anywhere but BBC and CBC

[Hortensis]

13. Almost NO American news is on TV, and you guys

are complaining that it doesn't cover India?

"TV news" has become almost literally an oxymoron. Public TV provides, of course, almost the only exception, and its time to do it is severely limited. Cable shows almost no news -- viewers' choice.

In an imaginary better world, even if TV cut back the commercials and tried to provide more varied planet-wide coverage, how would they do a proper job, providing at least a tiny bit of the depth and context needed to start developing understanding, in the perhaps max 20 and 40 minutes available?

But WRITTEN news sources do cover international affairs extensively. They have to or lose large numbers of people who need to make decisions for business and other organizations. They always, though, have a wide range of intellectually curious readers who want to know what's happening in the big world they're interested in.

In that, their customers are extremely unlike those who are satisfied with the few, water-slick-shallow little segments between the commercial blocks on TV. And that's why, even if we "fix" things, TV news will always be geared to those whose interests are mostly limited to their own personal worlds. Weather, traffic, crime, and a few pieces to make them feel they "know" what's happening beyond their personal sphere of care, but nothing beyond the scope and attention span of modest interest at best.

[Warpy]

3. International news sucks in the US

BBC's got the story, also. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37253462

If you watch US "news" media, you are uninformed.

[Hortensis]

6. And seemingly also if you do not.

Last edited Sat Sep 3, 2016, 11:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Surely none of us considers only watching TV "news" informative? Quite the contrary?

It's one thing to disagree with coverage, but to refuse to be informed and then claim you're not?
"I know nothing, and it's all their fault!"

[Hortensis]

4. Both the NY Times and WaPo reported on it yesterday.

ABC News reported. BBC reported. Where were you looking?

Fwiw, the Times' world news is broken into subsections. The report I read is in the Asian Pacific section. There may be something in business, but I didn't look.

Btw, reportedly the one-day strike didn't have any great immediate effect in New Delhi or Mumbai, apparently more in areas we don't usually hear much about. Since significant economic events in India affect us, and especially business, no doubt more analyses will be coming over the next year if this latest iteration of labor unrest in India produces change.

[madokie]

5. tRump

[Odin2005]

7. Because US "news" prefers to pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.

[Hortensis]

9. News is reported in written form. Read and you'll

discover your notion is very wrong.

Only the deluded imagine the stuff they see on TV is "the news," although public TV does try to get viewers' toes wet within the short time it has.

[AngryAmish]

8. Because it is in India

[Hortensis]

10. Here's one for you. Suggest googling the "news"

tab if you use Google, whatever does the same for other search engines. It'll bring up more news reports than just a general search.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/09/02/world/asia/ap-as-india-strike.html