Racism in India: Why Indian news channels don't have dark complexioned anchors, news readers?

The mob attack on a girl from Tanzania and the alleged misbehaviour with her, has once again led to a debate over racism in India.

We may not acknowledge but racism--colour prejudice is deeply ingrained in our minds.

So deep is the prejudice against dark skin--ironically, in a country where majority is brown, that we don't even realise, while practicing it ourselves.


The first thing that people talk about while fixing a marriage is about the complexion--is the girl or boy fair? Words like 'fair and very fair' are commonly used in matrimonial advertisements.

Comments on looks on common in households, on streets and everywhere. People who are dark are mocked at, 'in jest', and these comments are taken as 'humour', not as racism.

It is common knowledge that fair people have advantage in getting jobs. And, there are certain fields where ONLY THE FAIR get a chance. Imagine, this happening in the country that is not perceived as a land of 'Whites' or 'Fair-skinned'.

So not just caste, religion, linguistic, gender and other sectarian forms of discrimination that are prevalent widely in our country, we also practice this form of apartheid, which is--'discrimination on the basis of skin complexion'.

WHY RARE TO FIND DARK COMPLEXIONED ANCHORS IN INDIAN MEDIA?

Tune in foreign news channels and you will find people from diverse backgrounds as news readers and anchors.

Not just US that has 14% blacks, a country like UK that has far less population of the blacks, it is common to see anchors of all nationalities. However, in a country of 'browns', it is difficult to find a person with dark complexion on our screens.

Of course, there are dark complexioned reporters but isn't it a discrimination that they are not the ANCHORS! Why dark skinned people are not chosen as news-readers. It's a big question for Indian media.

DISCRIMINATION WITH DALITS, TRIBALS EVEN MORE RAMPANT

As we all know, Dalits and Tribals also have NIL representation in Indian media. While there are reporters who are dark complexioned, Dalits and Tribals are nowhere even in the newsrooms.

Repeated surveys have shown how it is just the forward castes and some historically privileged and dominant castes that have representation in Indian media.

In US, the newsroom audit

FIRST WE MUST ACCEPT THAT RACISM, DISCRIMINATION ARE PREVALENT

After the Tanzanian girl was attacked by a mob in Bengaluru, TV channels were shouting--is our society racist? There were panelists who termed it just as an isolated incident, despite the fact that Africans are attacked repeatedly.

Students from Africa face harassment, abuse and have difficulty in finding houses on rent. The incident in Bangalore was just another example. We have seen such incidents in Delhi and other cities in the recent past.

People from North East face similar discrimination. Clearly, we practice racism and don't want to acknowledge that we are Racists. A problem can be solved when we first accept that it exists. Ostrich-like attitude won't help. 

Here are 6 crazy things Israel has done to maintain racial purity

Israel bills itself as the Middle East�s only democracy, but it is increasingly clear that this label depends a lot on how you define the Middle East, and how you define democracy. Perhaps the sharpest dissonance between the description of Israel as a liberal democracy and its actual policies is the drive for racial purity.

Israel insists on being the historic homeland for the world�s Jews, something few would disagree with. But it also insists on being a Jewish-majority country, at all costs. In order to maintain its Jewish majority, it must demonize non-Jews, particularly Muslims and Christian Arabs, as �demographic threats.�

Here are six crazy things the Israeli government or the Israeli people have done to maintain this racial makeup.

1. No-Sex Contracts: In 2003, an Israeli company importing Chinese workers required them to sign a contract agreeing not to marry or have sex with any Israelis. No legal action was taken against the company, as Israel has no laws protecting workers from such demands.

2. Birth Control Without Consent: For years, the Israeli government was injecting Ethiopian Jewish immigrants with birth control, �often without their knowledge or consent.� When the practice was exposed in 2013, it was ordered to be halted.

3. Deporting Non-Jews: Anyone in the world with Jewish lineage can move to Israel and claim citizenship. But if you�re not Jewish, things can be dicey. Many refugees from African conflicts have fled to Israel to claim asylum. Israel has locked many of them into massive camps in the desert. It has granted asylum to 0.07% of those seeking it, deporting many others. NPR recently did a story on some refugees who were deported, only to be slain by ISIS.

4. Stripping Palestinians of Land Rights: The Israeli Supreme Court recently laid out two decisions essentially allowing Israel the right to demolish Palestinian communities within Israel itself�not the Occupied Territories�to clear land for Jewish Israelis.

5. Discriminatory Marriage Laws: In the United States, marriage is one of the ways a spouse can gain legal entry through a green card and citizenship. Israel prohibits its citizens from marrying Palestinians in the territories, by refusing to recognize their spouses as citizens. Israel also has no civil marriage law, leaving the institution in the hands of religious clerics who work to prevent interracial marriage.

6. Right Of Return, For Jews Only: The most systematic policy designed to maintain a Jewish majority is the Law of Return. Under this law, Jews can come to Israel from anywhere in the world and claim citizenship, but Palestinians expelled after various wars from homes that were in Israel cannot. The double standard was expressed by Ghada Karmi and Ellen Siegel, a Palestinian woman and a Jewish woman who met in London in the early 1970s. They have posed multiple times with these signs over the years:

These laws, norms, and practices form a matrix with one goal: to maintain a Jewish majority in Israel. (In the case of the birth control given to Ethiopian Jews, it was also an example of trying to maintain a certain type of Jewish majority.)

Source

Women attending the Masjid

 

The virtues of attending the Masjid

Abu Huraira narrates the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) as saying, �Shall I not tell you about that which will obliterate your mistakes and bring your near to Allah?� They replied, � Yes! Surely O Messenger.� He said, �it is to perform the ablution properly in difficult circumstances. A lot of foot steps to the Masjid and waiting for the next prayer after performing one that is the Ribat. That indeed is Ribat� (Muslim).

In the Muslim community the Masjid is the centre of Islamic activities. It is a place of worship and learning, a place for meditation, devotion, service and remembrance of Allah. In the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him) it even had the role of the supreme court where the Chief Justice (peace be upon him) would issue his legal injunctions. It was also the military headquarters where the Messenger (peace be upon him) would plan the Jihad against the forces of unbelief. This Hadith directs us to the Masjid in order to have our minor sins erased and spiritual station raised, the Prophet (peace be upon him) orders us to do the wudu properly too. �The wudu is the key to the prayer and the prayer is the key to the heavens� (Hadith).

This state of physical purification is a prerequisite for a state of spiritual purification. After offering his devotion and humble prayer he sits in the Masjid waiting for the next prayer, this is spiritual vigilance, in Allah�s house absorbed in His thought. He is far from the temptations of the devil, the whispers of the uncouthed self and the lures of the glittering world. �This is Ribat, indeed the Ribat�, says the Prophet (peace be upon him). Ribat is the fort from where the soldiers use to keep a watch. The blessed Messenger (peace be upon him) equates this Ribat to the sitting in the Masjid waiting for the next prayer.

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is recommending a perfect method for self-purification and defining the limits of Islamic asceticism, i.e. solitude and austerity. Not to abandon life, home, family and friends but to live amongst them, yet find time for solitude and communion with Allah. The one who attends the Masjid regularly has been praised by the Mustafa (peace be upon him) in these words:

�Whoever you see coming and going to and from the Masjid, you must give testimony of his faith being complete�. He then recited, �surely the one who builds the masjid is the one who has faith in Allah, the hereafter and fears no one except Him. They are the one who are rightly guided� (Tirmidhi).

In another tradition narrated by Abu Haraira he (peace be upon him) says: �Whoever attends the Masjid, Allah prepares a special hospitality for him� (Muslim).

Praying with the Congregation

Abu Darda says he heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saying, �When there are three people in a village or in the desert and they do not pray as a group the devil takes control of them. You must be with the group. Surely the wolf attacks the sheep that is alone and separate from the flock� (Abu Dawud).

We have already read that the prayer is one of the most important qualities of the believer. It is the flavour of faith, the food of the soul and gives peace of mind. It is a personal devotion but should be offered in a congregation. This Hadith is emphasising this group aspect of the prayer.

How valuable it is to offer the prayer in congregation is explained by the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he said, �the group prayer is twenty seven times superior than the individual prayer� (Muslim).

The Hadith under discussion instructs that even when there are only three people they should pray together as a group rather than pray separately. The Prophet (peace be upon him) then gives the similitude of the lone sheep cut off from the flock. The devil who is depicted here as the wolf attacks the lone wanderers, those who are not with the Muslim community or those who live only at its peripheries not taking active part in its affairs.

The congregational prayer has many benefits such as; fostering love and compassion for fellow Muslims, thus strengthening the bonds of brotherhood, equality, since everyone stands humbly together whether he is a pauper or wealthy, big or small. Prayer gives training in being punctual and regular in ones daily affairs. Congregational prayer is one of outstanding features of Islam, the row upon row of believers standing humbly, bowing in unison and then prostrating together, it is a moving experience for any onlooker. The congregational prayer also teaches obedience to a leader (Imam) and gives the sense of belonging to the community.

From Bukhari and Ibn Hajar

Chapter 162- Women going to the Masjids at night and darkness

Abdullah ibn Umar narrates the messenger (peace be upon him) said �When your women seek your permission to attend the Masjid at night then give them permission� (Hadith no. 865).

Ibn Hajar Asqalani (d.761 AH) is perhaps one of the greatest commentators of Bukhari. Here is a summary of his commentary on this topic:

1. The permission to attend the Masjid hints to the fact that it is not compulsory, since if it was there would be no need to seek husbands permission.

2. He quotes another Hadith from Muslim. Abdullah ibn Umar narrates the Messenger (peace be upon him) said �don�t stop women from getting their share of the Masjid when they seek your permission�. Bilal (his son) said �By God we certainly will stop them�. According to Tabarani Bilal said �I will not let my wife and whoever wishes can let his wife do as she likes�.

3. According to the narration in Muslim, when Bilal said this to his father Abdullah ibn Umar, he was furious at him, he turned to him and cursed him three times and thereafter never spoke to his son until he died.

4. Ibn Hajar comments on this �father and son fight� by saying that �Bilal saw mischief in some women of his time and that made him react in that way to protect his sense of honour and self respect and Abdullah disapproved because he was clearly opposing the Prophetic tradition�.

Chapter 164- Women�s prayer standing behind men

Umm Salma said �when the Prophet (peace be upon him) finished his prayer by saying salaam the women would get up and leave. He would stay for a while in his place. This was done so that women could leave before the men could see them�.

Anas said, �The Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed in Umm Sulaim�s house, I and an orphan stood behind him and Umm Sulaim behind us� (Hadith no.874).

Chapter 165- The quick departure of women after Morning Prayer and their short stay in the Masjid

Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said �the Prophet (peace be upon him) used to pray morning prayer in darkness, Muslim women used to come and go without being recognised in the dark� (Hadith no. 872).

Abdullah Ibn Umar said �There was a woman who used to attend the Morning and night prayer with the congregation in the Masjid. It was said to her why do you come yet you know that Umar does not like that. She said he has not stopped me! She said the Prophet (peace be upon him) said �Don�t stop God�s maids from attending the Masjids� (Hadith no. 900).

Commenting on these two Ahadith Ibn Hajar says �if women are permitted to attend Masjids at night despite that night is time of suspicion, the permission during daytime is even foremost�.

Full Article

No discrimination between man and woman?

"Islam is the religion which gives woman highest level of priority in her life which she actually deserves. There is no discrimination of man and woman in Islam.

And their Lord responded to them, "Never will I allow to be lost the work of [any] worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another. [3:195]

This verse clearly shows no discrimination between man and woman. But regretfully the leader of Islamic society who are known as scholars are contributing in such concepts which only oppress a woman from her real rights which is given by Allah and never be un-declared by Prophet Muhammad. 

Some Hadith source might show you women were oppressed like woman beating or slave sex concept where 1st wife would have to see her husband�s romance with slave without marriage or the polygamy concept where no special condition is necessary or the concept of wife can�t refuse her man�s call for intercourse in anyway (even she is sick too or passing in bad mode too) or women are source of fitna etc. Can you believe these are authentic hadith proclaimed by Prophet Muhammad? No other words beside Quran could be authentic in 100 %. These are all fabricated hadith where really a woman is oppressed!! After Prophet�s death People who were in support of woman oppression (as it is a law of society) mixed their own words with his noble words and made this hadith where a man is shown as superior to woman.

But if you really look in Quran word�s (direct translation of the verses) nowhere you will find such conditions. Allah says in verse 2:228 that man and woman have similar rights over them. 
What is less from man a woman is only the physical structure, woman are weaker than man. This weakness is only for the pleasure of carnal relationship between man and woman. For the strength of man which more than woman, Allah also gives the man more trials than us in the same verse �But the men have a degree over them, women� which means man are responsible for financial activity and also for giving their wives pleasure in every possible way and also they will be protector of their women in verse 4;34.

Now some Islamic website and scholars held their opinion basing on some fabricated hadith and by some wrong interpretation of quranic words in chance of woman persecution, that Polygamy can be practiced for lust only by offering it to a younger woman. Which is the wrong concept of islam they are delivering to people. Allah in Quran 4:3 told �With respect to marrying widows, if you are afraid of not being able to maintain justice with her children, marry another woman of your choice or two or three or four (who have no children). If you cannot maintain equality with more than one wife, marry only one or your slave-girl. This keeps you from acting against justice�. Where it is clear plural marriage can be practiced only then when a man will be able to sacrifice his boundless love for his 1st wife because of humanity to give protection another woman who is widow and has orphan child. If he can�t take care of her orphan child then he should marry that woman who has no child. Now, the possibility of childless woman only goes to a woman who is widow or divorced not a younger wife. Or he can marry his slaves (for giving her freedom). So, all of the points for polygamy are only for humanity, not for lust. And also about permission of 1st wife Allah clearly denotes in 4:19 not to make any difficulty in his wife�s life to those services which he can deliver her. The service is not only confined in mahr but also in love/sex/passion. Now if a man gets married 2nd time without 1st wife�s permission will not it create difficulty in her life? 

And also For loving 1st wife more than other wives whom they marry for humanity, they will not be accused in Allah�s eye as per the verse 4:129, only they need to serve them equally in other services except love which will only be for the 1st wife whom he married for love or sexual desire.

And also on slave sex which is proclaimed by Islamic mollahs are also a wrongful or lustful thought by contributing themselves in a belief man need more than 4 women in their life, so they are permitted to take infinite number of women in bed as concubines from slaves. This is the most hateful speech of them which conflict with quran. But in Quran verse 23:5-6 Allah told by noble word �right hand possess� to those female slaves who are attached to you wedlock or who are legally your wives from your slaves.
According to their thought Allah prepared beautiful hoor only for them, men in jannah as their lust is infinite or they are not satisfied with the number of women whom they get in duniya (including 4 wives and many concubines), But women will not get any hoor in jannah. Do u really think allah can discriminate in giving gifts to the believers (men and women) who will get jannah?? Or Allah can grow the attitude in man�s mind not to be chaste-full but to be lustful?
What actually quran says hoor is both for man and woman. Al-Ahzab verse 35,

�Surely the men who submit and the women who submit, and the believing men and the believing women, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and the truthful women, and the patient men and the patient women, and the humble men and he humble women, and the charitable men and the charitable women, and the fasting men and the fasting women, and the men who guard their chastity and women who guard their chastity, and the men who remember Allah much and the women who remember � Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a mighty reward.�
And also in quran 2:282 Allah told for adding 1 man with two women in case of financial witness. Here Allah doesn�t show woman are less intelligent/less dutiful. But here Allah told to guard those women from any danger by adding a man with them, from which they will not be able to protect as they are physically weaker than men. 
And also about the inheritance woman also have the right to get equal property as man in some circumstances too. 

(http://www.quran-islam.org/articles/part_3/writing_a_will_(P1413).html)
And also about beating wife: Quran never uses word for beating wife. 
(http://quransmessage.com/articles/a%20deeper%20look%20at%20the%20word%20dharaba%20FM3.htm)

- Farhana Hossain (Bangladesh)"

Taken from Muslim Feminists page on Facebook  

For  full comment pls see http://muslimfeminist587.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/islam-feminist.html
 

Our intolerance towards 'Outsiders': We are elated when fellow Indians grab top positions abroad but can't tolerate 'foreigners' or even those from other states

The moment an Indian reaches a top position in a foreign country, there is euphoria in the media, as well as in the society.

But isn't it in sharp contrast with our attitude towards foreigners. We love to see Satya Nadella or Indira Nooyi heading big corporate groups in the West.

We are ecstatic when a first generation Indian becomes a governor in a state in America or a second or third generation migrant from UP or Bihar becomes president in Fiji or Mauritius.

In some cases, those rising to high positions, don't even want to acknowledge their Indian connection, but we  still love these success stories.

We are proud and our media does its best to present it in such a manner that Indians are conquering the world. Now what is our attitude towards foreigners excelling in India?

Forget the opposition to Sonia Gandhi who hadn't come to India to become a politician and who lived decades here, also losing her husband, before entering into politics. She had seen the opposition and decided not to take up the post.

PART-I

But this opposition to 'outsider' permeates every section of our society. In fact, we don't even tolerate people from other states excelling in our region. If a leader provokes us, we can go out beating fellow Indians from other regions, on the streets. The anger about Biharis growing in numbers is not limited to Maharashtra alone. 

There are conversations on the streets and in offices about how 'outsiders' are taking our jobs. This is visible in Assam as also in Delhi.

Even within states, people don't like if people from a particular region or district are more in proportion in an organisation or office.

In a private company, the moment there was talk about a foreigner, being hired for a senior position, there was unrest. 'Hindustani mar gaye hain kya', was the line heard repeatedly. The double standards are visible at all levels. 

Its not about the white skinned foreigners alone who come here from Britain, Germany, Japan, China or Vietnam. 

Further, do you think that our immediate neighbours--a Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or Nepali have it easy in India? [Let's not talk about Pakistan]. The idea is perhaps that foreigner are good as long as they come for a tip, visit a few places, and go away.

We watch movies but our 'khaps' and even 'educated classes' disapprove marriages outside castes [and religions].

Though we are a nation of dark complexioned people but Africans face the worst racial prejudice in India. The treatment with domestic helps is another form of apartheid, which has social sanction.

In Delhi, the person from North East gets discriminated. In Bangalore, the North Indian is seen as someone who is snatching the jobs and who is behind the inflation because of them earning in software, BPOs and other new sectors.

There are prejudices and discrimination with every outsider.We are so proud of our talent when we leave the shores of India and become CEOs in multinational companies or top executives in Silicon Valley.

How come Americans digest the fact that foreigners [Indians and people from other countries] are grabbing top positions and doing well in their country, taking away local jobs?

Are they more large-hearted than us? Are we more parochial than them? Truly, there is need for a serious INTROSPECTION. But is our society in a mood to discuss it?

PART-II

SPREADING PREJUDICES: Role of media in shaping public opinion in India

The role of media is critical as it shapes popular opinion. Unfortunately, the TV channels and newspapers amplify the biases in the society, rather than enlightening the viewer (and reader).

In any city in India, when there is a spate of crime, the first trend is to do reports on how 'outsiders' are involved in crimes. It then goes to how youngsters from other states who stay in rented accommodations are committing crimes and how outsiders settled in slums are affecting the crime scene.

The cops too parrot the same line. This happens even though the person writing the nonsense may have come to the city barely two to five years back. The belief is that the culture was great till a few years ago and our place was a paradise. 

Take the example of the city I live in. Those who came here 10-20 years back, feel that they are local. They blame the current stream of outsiders from certain states. In fact, the majority is now those who are settled here for 30-50 years.

Who is the original inhabitant or the native? In the region I live, a section of self-styled locals are those who are living here for 100-250 years. But before them, there were tribals in this area, and they now have no say and aren't considered as locals at all.

But the 'anger against outsider' suits everybody. Media, especially, the vernacular newspapers and local channels, love blaming the 'immigrants'.

Reports on how 'our culture' is being spoiled are common to see.
Media fuels the xenophobia. This helps them answer the reason for soaring crime.

Rather than simply accepting that there is tremendous violence in the society and that growth in population will naturally lead to more crime, we tend to put the blame on others. We don't want to accept that problems lie with us.

The truth is that we need to be more open, large-hearted and must learn to accept diversity. Media should have helped create such a society. But the kind of public discourse that is needed, doesn't take place. Isn't it sad?

Aung San Suu Kyi's Comments on Muslims Expose Endemic Anti-Muslim Prejudice

I admired this woman since I was a child now I'm horrified by her. :(

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's interview with the BBC during her visit to the UK, has shocked many of her admirers. Despite being repeatedly pressed to do so, she repeatedly avoided giving a clear unequivocal condemnation of the anti-Muslim violence that is engulfing Burma.

Given the opportunity to clearly condemn attacks against Muslims, she repeatedly refused to do so. Instead she generalised by saying she condemned all violence and hatred. She has moral authority like no other person in Burma. When she speaks, people listen. If she strongly condemned attacks on Muslims it would make a difference. It could calm the situation. But she didn't. Instead, she went beyond just trying to explain why the violence was taking place, and sounded like she was making excuses for it. First she did this by saying it was because Buddhists were also living in fear. How can this be true? Buddhists are by far the biggest majority in Burma. Secondly she talked about Buddhists also being subjected to violence and having to flee Burma. The overwhelming majority of violence has been Buddhists attacking Muslims, not the other way around. No Buddhists have fled Burma because of attacks by Muslims. They fled because of repression by the Buddhist led dictatorship. Even if there was real fear as she claims, that doesn't justify people taking to the streets and burning alive their Muslim neighbours.

In the past 16 months alone, 140,000 Rohingya Muslims have been forced to flee to squalid temporary camps. This compares to less than five thousand Rakhine Buddhists who fled homes after tit-for-tat attacks when violence against Rohingya began in June last year. Why is Aung San Suu Kyi trying to portray this as two sides suffering equally, when the facts prove this is not the case?

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi also started talking about global Muslim power, as if this is some kind of threat to Burma? To hear a Nobel Peace Prize winner talking in the same way about Islam as bigots and racists is very disappointing. There are conspiracy theories about a global Muslim conspiracy to take over Burma, but these kind of things are spread by crazy people on Facebook. It is not what you expect from a University educated leader of a democracy movement. Instead of dismissing these claims as the dangerous nonsense they are, she gave them credibility in the eyes of many Burmese.

When Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was asked about the Monk Wirathu, who incites hatred and violence against Muslims, she also avoided criticising him, again just using generalisations saying she condemns hate of any kind. This hasn't gone unnoticed in Burma.

Perhaps one of her most revealing comments was when she talking about Muslims integrating. She was not only talking about the Rohingya. She was talking about Muslims generally. How and why do people who are native to Burma, having lived there countless centuries, need to integrate? They are Burmese, and unlike most Rohingya Muslims, they have Burmese citizenship. Most have never even travelled abroad, and nor have any of their ancestors. But Aung San Suu Kyi doesn't seem to see them that way. She sees them as different and needing to integrate. Seeing as the only difference is their religion, does she share the common view among many Buddhists in Burma that Muslims are not real Burmese?

Full article:

Female students in Indonesia may be forced to undergo 'virginity tests'

What a disgrace!! I will never understand this obsession so many men have with viginity, its truly disgusting!

Education chief Muhammad Rasyid, of Prabumulih district in south Sumatra put forward the idea, describing it as "an accurate way to protect children from prostitution and free sex". He said he would use the city budget to begin tests early next year if MPs approved the proposal.

"This is for their own good," Rasyid said. "Every woman has the right to virginity � we expect students not to commit negative acts."

The test would require female senior school students aged 16 to 19 to have their hymen examined every year until graduation. Boys, however, would undergo no investigation into whether they had had sex.

The plan has met with some support from local politicians, who said the test would help cut down on "rampant" promiscuity in the district.

"Virginity is sacred, thus it's a disgrace for a [female] student to lose her virginity before getting married," Hasrul Azwar of the Islamist Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) told the Jakarta Post.

The proposal seems to be in response to increasing cases of premarital sex, local website Kompas reported, including the recent arrest of six senior high school students for alleged prostitution.

It is the third plan of its kind in Muslim-majority Indonesia, where similar drafts were proposed in West Java in 2007, and again in Sumatra in 2010, but dropped after a public outcry.

Local and national MPs, activists, rights groups and even the local Islamic advisory council have all denounced Rasyid's plan as potentially denying female students the universal right to education, in addition to targeting girls for an act that may not have even been consensual, such as sexual assault.

 Full article: