Categories
The Editor's Desk

Mailbag

In defense of Bhatia

In response to “Gay basher gets time” [The Week, December 14], I must say that your publication is giving a good and honest man a bad rap.

 I have worked with Sanjiv Bhatia for almost two years and known him for even longer, and never in this period have I ever witnessed him discriminate against anyone in any form.

 Mr. Bhatia came to this country as a student from India many years ago and first attended school in the deep South (in Louisiana I believe), and I know for a fact that he understands what it is like to be discriminated against. He would never in good conscience contribute to another feeling such humiliating degradation.

 I admit that his political views are somewhat of the conservative flavor, a source of frequent debate between us, but never in any of these discussions has he EVER insulted me in any way.

 Mr. Bhatia is a brilliant and sophisticated man with a level of personal integrity that few of you will ever fathom. Not only is he a noteworthy and responsible father and incredible person to work with beside, but I can in all honesty refer to him as a true friend.

 There is no chance that he would ever behave in such a crude and unrefined manner as he is accused of.

 I have been an avid reader of your publication since first discovering it many years ago while studying at UVA as an undergraduate. I chose to read C-VILLE because it seemed to break the mold of traditional, run-of-the-mill worthless media material I had become accustomed to. The fact that you would print such an article while an appeal is in process and while Mr. Bhatia has three young daughters who could be drastically affected by such a fallacy has made me lose all respect I once had for your paper. I will never read your newspaper again and will do my best to convince all of my friends and associates that the C-VILLE is more concerned with flashy headlines than the truth of matters.

 

Huan-Tai Hsu

Tai@eisfund.com

 

 

War of the words

While reading the most recent edition of your paper, in the 7 Days section I came across what I consider to be a gross misrepresentation of a person whom I happen to know. The article was shamefully one-sided, calling the person a gay basher, and printing the testimony of the accuser in what seems almost a factual light. Now, my personal opinions on the specifics of the incident in question aside, with an appeal pending, it is my belief that the words chosen for this piece should have been a little more tasteful and a little less like the person who wrote it was there and witnessed the event first-hand. Although the original decision went against the defendant, the case is by no means closed.  I encourage everyone to read this travesty of journalism and then sit and think for a minute. What if the man wins the appeal? What then? Will that be printed in the same way, will we then mock the outrageous claims of the accuser as farcical and perhaps even disturbing? Or will it be mentioned briefly in the fine print somewhere out of view where no one will ever know the error of what was originally stated?

 Until this matter is resolved and all sides had their complete and total say, this seems like an insensitive report that assumes far too much and is in fact no better than libel. This is a person’s good name we are talking about here, perhaps even his future, and I would assume it is the responsibility of any good publication to hold these things in the highest regard no matter what the circumstances.

 

Josh Anderson

janderson_79@hotmail.com

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *