MOTHER TERESA based her order in Calcutta and for seven decades, helped the impoverished of that city of 14 million people.
And as the media traveled to Calcutta to do stories about Mother Teresa, who passed away ten years ago today, the media helped perpetuate the notion of Calcutta (if not all of India) as being a dangerous place infested by poverty.
As Calcutta native Chitrita Banerji writes in the New York Times today, "The reports on the funeral portrayed a city filled with starving orphans, wretched slums and dying people abandoned on the streets, except for the fortunate ones rescued by Mother Teresa. They described a city I didn’t recognize."
A small percentage of the world will actually visit Calcutta. For the rest, they rely upon the media to inform them and educate them about the place.
Did the media make Calcutta seem more poor so that Mother Teresa's work seemed so much more powerful? Did they exaggerate the details to make a better story?
Is the legend of Mother Teresa a creation of the media?
Or is this writer only showing her own biases?
11 months ago