I would have given Rishi Dhamala credit if he had really tried things out of the box. He seemed to be more of the type who would force himself to be in the photograph with anyone who is important at any cost. I don’t see anything journalistic or out of the box thinking in that. That is cheap publicity. Here in Nepal, there is a wrong notion among some people that anyone who can write can be a journalist. There is a wrong notion that anyone who can manage to interview a bigwig is a journalist. After scanning some of the vernacular as well as English newspapers and electronic media, it seems as if anyone can be a journalist and you do not have to have a basic standard for it. The worst example of journalism is reflected all over in the People’s Review weekly. They have a columnist who writes as if he were writing the editorial of the Rising Nepal in the complex style of two decades back. There is more English than the news or analysis of the news. The editor’s photo is prominently published. The letter to the editor is nothing less than a blog. I agree that it will be nice to see someone breaking away from monotonous and stereotype style of reporting. There are so many topics on human interest stories for which the readers may take keen interest, but almost all journalists rush for reporting on political happenings and thus readers are made to read only what they write whether you like it or not. You don't need to create a news as a journalist but do need to find going deep into it and report it. The investigative journalism almost does not exist except in rare cases. Even the established publications do not seem to go after it, perhaps due to resources constraints or lack of interest?? After one or two follow up, a story is left to forgotten for ever unless it surfaces back on its own later. Isn’t it a reporter’s job to report an event the way it is seen, fully in its entirety and with a follow up? Does one must colour it with negativism just to make it newsworthy? Most of the times you find more NEWS in the different blogs than in the mainstream newspapers. Then we have our Vijay Kumar who seems to place himself much above his interviewee. I used to like his interview but no longer. I was quite amazed to hear the way the journalists placed their questions to those who came to the Rayamajhi Commission. I can understand the journalists wanting to ask some provocative questions. I wish they had maintained some decorum while putting forward their questions to the handlers of the regressive regime of the Royal government so that they send the message showing differences between the two governments, pre and post Janadolan II. Back to Dhamala, what I see on him is display of chameleon behaviour. I don’t think we can call that as an out of the box act since we have so many following the same act. I think Dhamala’s educational credential is irrelevant if his coverage or reporting met a certain standard expected of a journalist. The question is, did it? I would judge a journalist not by his photo on the front page but on the basis of the news, views or analysis of the news presented for the readers. If a journalist is often on the headline news, I would think it is because of the reports he or she presented to the readers. I think what Dhamala is good is at sticking is head in just before the click of a camera. May be some day soon when the politician bug in Dhamala moves him to devote full time politics, then the Nepali journalism will get a respite to look back and see where it is. These are just my rambling thoughts.