'Militant sect, Hindu warrior': NY Times Adityanath article sparks fury on Twitter

International media publication The New York Times on Thursday faced a backlash on social media sites for calling Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath as the head of a "militant" Hindu temple. 

New York Times' South Asia bureau chief Ellen Barry has written an article on the rise of Yogi Adityanath. The headline of the story posted on Twitter reads - "Head of militant Hindu temple ascends India's political ladder". However the original headline now seems to have changed to, "Firebrand Hindu Cleric Ascends India’s Political Ladder."

"A Hindu warrior-priest has been chosen to rule India’s most populous state," reads the first line of the article.

"As leader of a temple known for its militant Hindu supremacist tradition, he built an army of youths intent on avenging historic wrongs by Muslims, whom he has called “a crop of two-legged animals that has to be stopped," the article said.

The article also said that the "Gorakhnath Temple had a tradition of militancy: Digvijay Nath, the head priest until 1969, was arrested for exhorting Hindu militants to kill Mahatma Gandhi days before he was shot." 

Although The New York Times has not issued any official reaction, the writer clarified the use of the word 'militant' while replying to angry Twitter users.

"Militant" as an adjective is quite general, meaning "aggressive" or "forceful," and has no association with terrorism

— Ellen Barry (@EllenBarryNYT) July 13, 2017

"Militant" as a noun is usually understood to refer to insurgents, fighters, guerrillas, or terrorists. So that is the semantic gap I think

— Ellen Barry (@EllenBarryNYT) July 13, 2017

Many Twitter users also pointed out that using just the word 'militant' was incorrect in the context of the recent terrorist attack on the Amarnath Yatra.

i think the use of the word 'militants' is incorrect in the case of the amarnath yatris attack

— Puja Mehra (@pujamehra) July 13, 2017

Ellen Barry replied, "Why? This is by the way a very live debate w/in newspapers and I have an open mind about it. In general we avoid "terrorist" but not always.

Why? This is by the way a very live debate w/in newspapers and I have an open mind about it. In general we avoid "terrorist" but not always

— Ellen Barry (@EllenBarryNYT) July 13, 2017

So writing on deadline I think it makes sense to be conservative. But I'm going to take this question up w an editor. It's worth discussing

— Ellen Barry (@EllenBarryNYT) July 13, 2017

 Here are some angry reactions on Twitter. 

From where do u get so much venom inside u , Modi doesn't need your advice to run india ! He should cancel your visa & kick you out

— voice of truth (@namo_namah23) July 12, 2017

@Uppolice is our CM a militant ??

— (@ambuj_patel) July 12, 2017

Those who can't differentiate btwn militant & terrorist are branding everybody militant w/o any knowledge. Typical American liberal BS.

— Indranil (@max_indra_007) July 13, 2017

Yogi is a tireless social worker & now proving to be a good administrator. He will be an ideal candidate to succeed Modi. Good for democracy

—  (@r_m1_1) July 13, 2017

Yogi Adityanath has been the member of parliament since 1998*-even b4 Modi bcame a CM..Btw -a standing ovation frm 1 f my finger4 u r artcle

— AKHIL .T. PILLAI (@atp2112) July 12, 2017

@nytimes Now you proved that your news are far from truth. And yes, you must dedicate half your space for writing apologies. FAKE NEWS.

— Vineet Kumar Singh (@Vineet_Kr_Singh) July 12, 2017

Keep writing and endorsing. Fire need to be burning and Hindu unity grows stronger. Time for all Hindus to unite and fight. Yogi 2024 - 2034

— (@TheHinduVK) July 13, 2017