At a time when the country is suffering from multiple crises, we didn't need the distraction of yet another street fight, one that pits rival media houses in a knockout tournament. The losers are Nepali readers who have come to expect much more professionalism than was displayed on the front pages of the national broadsheets this last week.

We can analyse the dispute on several levels. The first is content: the coverage of this media war was itself an indication of how easily media owners dumped journalistic ethics and independence to employ their column inches shamelessly for a partisan cause. The separation of news and opinion went out the window: inflammatory headlines, provocative intros, incendiary pictures and text was no different than the role of the arsonists on the streets. Contrast this with the way the BBC covered the aftermath of the Hutton Report this week that saw the resignation of its director. And let's not hear any of those 'we are Third World so we can be third rate' excuses.

Essentially, this is a circulation war gone crazy. One side took the irresponsible step of piggybacking on an ongoing political student unrest to hurt its rival by igniting jingoism and pseudo-nationalism. Better examples of shooting oneself in the foot are hard to come by, even in this day and age.

So far, we have been fortunate that the unrest did not spread like a bush fire across Nepal's tinder-dry polity. Even without the experience of the Hrithik Roshan riots, such tactics would have been termed rash. But knowing what happened then, it was a decision of incredible recklessness.

Having said that, one can have a rational debate about the pros and cons of foreign direct investment in media. Some countries have no problems with it, others feel they need restrictions. But it is clear that in an age of economic globalisation and satellite media, the days of national control are numbered.

One can argue that since television's transboundary footprint puts it beyond national regulation, at least print media should be protected from foreign ownership. Fair enough. But that is for our law makers to decide, not mobs in patriotic frenzy over an outdated wire service news item on Lumbini.

Even so, are we so weak and vulnerable that we feel threatened by a couple of foreign owned newspapers? Canada has taken on and beat the next-door US media juggernaut-not by shutting it out, but by being better and more relevant. The way to beat foreign ownership is to be more professional, more credible and more independent.