Now, Anupam Kher has spoken against this practice of the writers very openly. Yesterday, there was a discussion on TOI Newshour, Kher was present and writers too. The writers were not ready to listen to the opinion of the other side and one said that they were creative people so they show their protest in different ways. Thus, this time they chose to return their award without any political agenda to back.

Dr. Vishwanath  Prasad Tiwari, President Of Sahitya academy, questions, if the writers oppose the Government, what has Sahitya Akademi  what has the Sahitya Akademi got to do with it ?

He firmly says that Sahitya Akademi is an autonomous body, writers should oppose the Government in a different way, but not by returning the Awards.

http://www.rediff.com/news/interview/sahitya-akademi-president-why-are-writers-returning-awards/20151013.htm

The way writers are being hounded by specific channels for returning their awards clearly shows that their protest has touched a raw nerve in the political establishment. Anupam Kher questioning writers was comical He as a Kashmiri repeatedly asked how many writers returned their awards when Pandits were being hounded out of J&K. Fair question but may he tell us how he protested by sacrificing his awards or contributing his earnings or sitting on dharnas or visiting refugee camps in Jammu. So what is he trying to achieve. The writers have a right to protest the way they deem fit. Armchair critics will only pass judgments. @ Shampa did you notice that when Kher was asked the above question by the lady writer he not only did not answer but Arnab also came to his rescue by changing the topic or moving to another participant. So when everyone has an agenda why point 'pen's at each other. You reap as you sow.

The issue will provide a platform many to voice their opinions and some of them would be impractical and ridiculous ..But some would feel that they had a raw deal when similar things happened with them. Taslima Nasreen has put it aptly when she tweeted that Politicians are the root cause of all problems and by appeasing Muslims they make Hindus angry..

http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/most-secular-liberals-in-india-are-pro-muslim-anti-hindu-taslima-nasreen_1811269.html

vijay wrote:

The way writers are being hounded by specific channels for returning their awards clearly shows that their protest has touched a raw nerve in the political establishment. Anupam Kher questioning writers was comical He as a Kashmiri repeatedly asked how many writers returned their awards when Pandits were being hounded out of J&K. Fair question but may he tell us how he protested by sacrificing his awards or contributing his earnings or sitting on dharnas or visiting refugee camps in Jammu. So what is he trying to achieve. The writers have a right to protest the way they deem fit. Armchair critics will only pass judgments. @ Shampa did you notice that when Kher was asked the above question by the lady writer he not only did not answer but Arnab also came to his rescue by changing the topic or moving to another participant. So when everyone has an agenda why point 'pen's at each other. You reap as you sow.

You referred tothe anchor Arnab Goswami. I have noticed that he speaks more than the guests inhis programme and interferes so much that gusts cannot speak at all. I saw him disturbing Ex JusticeKatju so much on Subhash Chandra issue. No self respecting and sensible person may like to be guestin his programme unless his agenda is same as that of Goswami. 

Listening to TV debates is total waste of time. One day they say it's too cold (in January) next time you can hear them complaining- it's too hot (in June) and in August the either say it's too much of rain or No rain at all. 

Same is the case- one day the debate about Dadri accusing government for not taking any action, next day the matter of debate is what action the government is planning on cow murderers and smugglers. Their debates invariably end up with no results but a charged up anchor and panelists in the end. 

Taslima rightly said the so-called secularists are nothing but cashing on the sentiments of Muslims at the cost of Hindus. When something goes wrong with Hindus no secularist comes forward and raises the issue.

TV debates manya times are geared in one direction depending on what the anchor wants to portray ..Just to see the loopholes it is fun to watch Arnab Goswami's debate .But , all said he is a very intelligent , sharp and knowledgeable person which is evident by the way he comes up witnhsome of his arguments.The problem with him is , he too loud ! 

Taslima must be feeling let down because the way Indian writers and politicians treated her..

TV debates manya times are geared in one direction depending on what the anchor wants to portray ..Just to see the loopholes it is fun to watch Arnab Goswami's debate .But , all said he is a very intelligent , sharp and knowledgeable person which is evident by the way he comes up witnhsome of his arguments.The problem with him is , he too loud ! 

Taslima must be feeling let down because the way Indian writers and politicians treated her..

usha manohar wrote:

TV debates manya times are geared in one direction depending on what the anchor wants to portray ..Just to see the loopholes it is fun to watch Arnab Goswami's debate .But , all said he is a very intelligent , sharp and knowledgeable person which is evident by the way he comes up witnhsome of his arguments.The problem with him is , he too loud ! 

Taslima must be feeling let down because the way Indian writers and politicians treated her..

We do not doubtthe knowledge of theanchorson any topic. But what is the function of anchor. we are more interested in listening to the guests rather than the anchor. The anchor is supposed to mediate and give due opportunity to all guests. The anchor's own opinion does not matter so much. In case he is partial towards some and prejudiced against others, he has no role. Better the anchor be guest and some other person be host/ anchor. 

In Arnab's program the best line is when he requests the participants to let him also speak. His verbal diarrhea  induces verbal  constipation in his guests. Manya guest have stopped participating in his programs. He is sharp, intelligent but instead of an anchor becomes the 90% participant. Time he was moderated by his employers. Soon hev may run out of guests. After listening two debates on the writers returning awards I am only aware of his questions and not answers from participants who hardly got to open their mouths.