A journalist named Stanley Pignal was criticised for remarks on Narendra Modi’s headgear choices. The journalist called Modi’s appetite for wearing ‘outlandish’ headgear was laudable in an apparently sarcastic tone and ended up insulting the traditional headgear that was worn by Modi at the time. Stanley Pignal is a journalist with ‘The Economist’.
Whatever anyone thinks of Narendra Modi, his appetite for wearing outlandish headgear is laudable. Hands down the most daring global leader in this respect. pic.twitter.com/AVqNNFAmm0
— Stanley Pignal (@spignal) February 28, 2018
Reactions to the Pignal’s remarks criticised the journalist on Twitter
Hey India, I just met you. And this is crazy. Regardless, here is my opinion on the traditions of North East, which I call outlandish. https://t.co/vLxb1KRSLJ
— Aashish Chandorkar (@c_aashish) February 28, 2018
Stanley, respect your views. And I never speak on politics. But your comment borders on bigotry. This is not outlandish headgear. They are what many communities in India wear. You forget that most of us Indians still follow ancient pagan ways. https://t.co/d4plPgsjmr
— Amish Tripathi (@authoramish) February 28, 2018
In anything Mr. @spignal, your Tweet is outlandish. Three of the four pictures are from the Northeast, where the headgear is a part of the local customs. Shed your elitism and understand the country you cover slightly better. https://t.co/hn9O3M7vHR
— Maheish Girri (@MaheishGirri) February 28, 2018
What you call ‘outlandish headgear’ are cultural traditions in many parts of India you ignoramus, whatever happened to sensitivity to diversity of cultures? https://t.co/hk6hwAjUIa
— Shefali Vaidya (@ShefVaidya) February 28, 2018
Says the one wearing a coat with a long chaddi in his DP https://t.co/weJlPMvuJG
— दिव्या (@divya_16_) February 28, 2018
In spite of the criticism against him, Stanley has refused to apologise and stood by his remarks. He described the criticism against him as a synthetic outrage.
The response to this tweet show just how much synthetic outrage can be generated if you put your heart into it. A genuinely limitless source of energy. But you have to start by arguing a hat *with a bird in it* is in no way outlandish, which some people might find difficult. https://t.co/GovA4QjW0w
— Stanley Pignal (@spignal) February 28, 2018
It is quite clear that the journalist is not capable of accepting diversity or introspecting on his own loose comments.
