This debate is relevant to us, because we have been discussing lit fests,
the profile of writers being invited/privileged etc... Not only on the
basis of content, but also on the basis of age, looks, etc [
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/28/books.booksnews]
Sometime in 2013, I started a Wikipedia page on *Goa Today*. As everyone
reading this knows, this is Goa's oldest monthly, started way back in the
1960s, and has played an influential role in the literary life of the
State. The discussions earlier today between Ben and Peter Nazareth only
underline this point. And this is truth both when it was owned by Lambert
Mascarenhas (jointly, if not mistaken, with Printwell owner FD Dantas, the
father of our late much-respected journo colleague Norman Dantas; and
ex-Speaker Machado) and also when owned by the Salgaocars.
As most would know, *Goa Today *has a significant expat audience, but
hasn't been very active with its own web presence online. The logic
probably being that if they had a website, people would prefer to read
their magazine online and not subscribe to it. I know of a number of expats
who subscribe to the monthly and read it eagerly each month.
What happens is that its lack of online visibility today gets translated
(almost) into non-notability:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Goa_Today
See the debate above, which is telling! I've earlier disagreed with
Wikipedians and pointed out that as long as their definition of notability
is based on someone's (or some institution's) web presence, in English...
this is going to be an unfair world for perhaps the majority on the planet!
FN
--
P +91-832-2409490 M 9822122436 Twitter: @fn Facebook: fredericknoronha
Latest from Goa,1556:
http://goa1556.in/book/goa-in-sepia-tinted-postcards/
<http://goa1556.in>