Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said the Maoist violence was the outcome of poverty in “certain tribal regions of the country”, and added that poverty and lack of development had alienated tribals from the mainstream. Golden words from the top boss. Very mature and responsible bytes. But aren’t these words coming in late, very late.
Home minister, P. Chidambaram, too, made an offer for talks with the Maoists after a request from former Lok Sabha Speaker, Rabi Ray, and other members of the civil society, working under the banner of Citizens’ Initiative for Peace. The forum had requested the government to stop the offensive against Naxalites in some states. Till then, our home minister had been talking about additional forces to rein in the Naxalites. The fact is that each time the Naxals have struck, the official response has been to tackle the “menace with an iron hand”.
The Naxalite groups intensified their strikes. They have been striking at regular intervals, the most recent one being the “trainjacking”. Our government responses have become staid and sometimes so confusing that it leads one to doubt that there is any sound political will to understand and analyse the situation. The strategy seems to be seeing the Naxalite movement as a “threat” to law and order. Why is it that the state machinery deliberately ignores the harsh reality of the marginalized tribals facing severe economic and social backwardness?
There have been social activists trying to sensitise the media and the government to “listen” to those displaced and marginalized. Then an Arundhati Roy spoke. Many columnists, too, joined the issue, advocating a sympathetic handling of the problem. In fact, the media has so far not been too sympathetic to the plight of tribals. It has been focusing on violence and casualties, laced with a message that this “terror” had to be crushed.
Now this new wave of media sympathy towards the marginalized sections of society seems to have dilated the vision of the government, prompting the Prime Minister to acknowledge that development was not really reaching tribals, who remain the poorest of the poor and asking for handling the Maoist violence “holistically”.
It remains to be seen whether the state can follow up the Prime Minister’s message with a concerted action plan to address the issue. The government could first invite the Naxalite groups for talks. They could then fix a time-frame to implement development programmes in areas, overlooked till now.
Of course, this sounds very simplistic, and the push-pull dynamics of Naxal strongholds may frustrate sincere efforts. But there are three factors that will certainly slow down or even thwart such ambitious benevolence. First is Corruption, that dangerous virus corroding our political system, blocking the vision of our leaders and paralyzing their will to serve the nation. The second is Nexus, a charming word in the political lexicon that promises to bring in billions to personal coffers. And, the third is Police brutality on villagers in the guise of targeting Naxal sympathizers.
If at least a handful of our political leaders recognize the reason behind the violence unleashed by the Naxalites, the battle is almost won. Taking it from there will be easier. Otherwise our Prime Minister’s observation and solutions with remain just interesting sound bytes.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Maha'raj'shtra
The Marathi manoos have given a thumbs up to their “saviour”. At least the few who came to vote. Though the 2009 Assembly elections have been a Congress-NCP show, Raj Thackeray’s parochial rhetoric has managed to discolour the state’s saffron flag-bearers, the Shiv Sena and BJP. In fact, the Raj phenomena seems to be slowly edging out the Sena spell.
In India, parties fight political battles using the deadliest of communal, caste and class weapons. But Raj Thackeray’s overdose of native spices seems to have cast a spell on the Marathi manoos, instilling fear and alienating “migrants”, specially from North India (read Bihar and Uttar Pradesh).
The Thackeray raj is here to stay. First, it was Balasaheb Thackeray whose claim to fame was the campaign against non-Maharashtrians for “usurping” jobs and opportunities from natives. Then Balasaheb wore saffron on his sleeve and widened his hate-campaign to include Muslims, who he felt were mostly from Bangladesh. By this, his Mumbai progressively destroyed the spirit of Bombay. Simultaneously, his scorching hate-Muslim speeches wrested the excitement of his Marathi manoos campaign.
But his estranged nephew, Raj Thackeray, wasted no time in bringing the Marathi manoos back on track, derailing the aspirations and chances of the Shiv Sena-BJP combine. Raj is here. His Maharashtra Navnirman Sena’s boisterous rise has tamed the Sena tigers.
Raj’s sena went about wielding hate weapons at the north Indian working class, generating fear psychosis. The targets have been daily wagers, labourers, taxi drivers and roadside vendors. And his focus is Mumbai. But Mumbai is also home to giant corporate houses and super-rich entrepreneurs, most of them non-Maharashtrians. And, of course, the multi-crore Hindi film industry, run by Chopras, Kapoors, Khans and "the" Bachchans (of course none of them Marathis!) But the new Thackeray is not really serious about “evicting” this cash-rich class. A simple sorry and replacing Bombay with Mumbai in a movie dialogue is enough to massage his ego.
He has, instead, instilled this fear into the minds of the less fortunate. Raj’s sena has been blatantly encashing this post-dated Marathi votebank cheque, undersigning it with threat and violence. Or worse, he uses his ATM (any time Marathi) rhetoric. Raj’s cousin, the “original Shiv” scion, Udhav Thackeray, after his post-poll introspection, has said his Sena will back the old faithful Hindutva horse. Now the warring Senas have left the Marathi manoos confused and in a severe identity crisis.
In any case, the Indian voter stands confused and, therefore, exhausted and cynical. The Indian politician, in this custom-made democratic puzzle, has divided people along caste, religion and language, multiplied their vested interests, added multiple dimensions to their votebank and subtracted issues.
But the two Senas have left their Marathi manoos even more baffled. Earlier, he voted as a Hindu or a Muslim or as a caste member. Now the linguistic dimension has magnified his dilemma.
Leaders are reaching heady heights with empty rhetoric and loud parochial chest-thumping, distracting voters with superficial grandiloquence. And our politically illiterate and poor voter is being taken for a ride either on a communal saddle or on a linguistic one. Some horsing around this is.
In India, parties fight political battles using the deadliest of communal, caste and class weapons. But Raj Thackeray’s overdose of native spices seems to have cast a spell on the Marathi manoos, instilling fear and alienating “migrants”, specially from North India (read Bihar and Uttar Pradesh).
The Thackeray raj is here to stay. First, it was Balasaheb Thackeray whose claim to fame was the campaign against non-Maharashtrians for “usurping” jobs and opportunities from natives. Then Balasaheb wore saffron on his sleeve and widened his hate-campaign to include Muslims, who he felt were mostly from Bangladesh. By this, his Mumbai progressively destroyed the spirit of Bombay. Simultaneously, his scorching hate-Muslim speeches wrested the excitement of his Marathi manoos campaign.
But his estranged nephew, Raj Thackeray, wasted no time in bringing the Marathi manoos back on track, derailing the aspirations and chances of the Shiv Sena-BJP combine. Raj is here. His Maharashtra Navnirman Sena’s boisterous rise has tamed the Sena tigers.
Raj’s sena went about wielding hate weapons at the north Indian working class, generating fear psychosis. The targets have been daily wagers, labourers, taxi drivers and roadside vendors. And his focus is Mumbai. But Mumbai is also home to giant corporate houses and super-rich entrepreneurs, most of them non-Maharashtrians. And, of course, the multi-crore Hindi film industry, run by Chopras, Kapoors, Khans and "the" Bachchans (of course none of them Marathis!) But the new Thackeray is not really serious about “evicting” this cash-rich class. A simple sorry and replacing Bombay with Mumbai in a movie dialogue is enough to massage his ego.
He has, instead, instilled this fear into the minds of the less fortunate. Raj’s sena has been blatantly encashing this post-dated Marathi votebank cheque, undersigning it with threat and violence. Or worse, he uses his ATM (any time Marathi) rhetoric. Raj’s cousin, the “original Shiv” scion, Udhav Thackeray, after his post-poll introspection, has said his Sena will back the old faithful Hindutva horse. Now the warring Senas have left the Marathi manoos confused and in a severe identity crisis.
In any case, the Indian voter stands confused and, therefore, exhausted and cynical. The Indian politician, in this custom-made democratic puzzle, has divided people along caste, religion and language, multiplied their vested interests, added multiple dimensions to their votebank and subtracted issues.
But the two Senas have left their Marathi manoos even more baffled. Earlier, he voted as a Hindu or a Muslim or as a caste member. Now the linguistic dimension has magnified his dilemma.
Leaders are reaching heady heights with empty rhetoric and loud parochial chest-thumping, distracting voters with superficial grandiloquence. And our politically illiterate and poor voter is being taken for a ride either on a communal saddle or on a linguistic one. Some horsing around this is.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Mahayudh
Tomorrow is a big day in Maharashtra. It is not Ganapati, the other big day for the state. The voting machines will spell out the verdict of the battle at the hustings. It has been a bitter battle with blatant parochialism replacing real issues. Anyway, the media, both electronic and print, has been harping on this election being fought on a hollow plank. This, despite a severe power shortage, failed monsoons, Bt cotton and farmers’ suicide, the swelling urban slums, and a Gharchiroli emerging from the grossly under-developed belts in the cash-rich state.
The Election Commission and the state government did not want an abysmal turnout recorded in the Lok Sabha elections, and therefore, had declared October 13, the poll day, as a holiday. The day was a Tuesday, and just right for a tempting long-weekend with a casual leave on Monday.NGO campaigns, urging citizens to step out worked…they all stepped out of the cities. So toll plazas registered maximum vehicle entries on highways linking getaways. They all got away from this poll tamasha, flaunting the deadliest weapon to crush democracy: Apathy.
Those in cars never cared. So the definite target audience was those struggling to keep themselves from sinking further into the poverty line quagmire. In fact, a domestic help was ruing the fact that she was not home to collect the monetary “gift” from political parties. She lost Rs 800 that day (The break up was Rs 500 and Rs 300 from two different parties). That was a lot of money, especially during the Diwali week.
Lack of political will has made most citizens nonchalant, and they have repeatedly flashed their indolence by keeping away from the poll process. There is a reluctance on the part of the political class to focus on real issues as there is a temptation to fall back on hysteria generated so easily by regionalism and communism.
Maharashtra is getting painted in all hues. The surge of saffron fundamentalists is vying for attention with the red struggle in Ghadchiroli. To complete this communal and parochial warp and weft in the political fabric of Maharashtra is Raj Thackeray’s high-decibel call for the beleaguered Marathi manoos to snatch the jobs and respect earned by the non-Marathas in this land of Shivaji. Raj Thackeray’s campaign slogans has discoloured the original Maratha manoos sloganeers, the Shiv Sena. The Congress hopes to cash in on this split in native loyalties.
This battle might not spell out a clear winner, and suitcase politics might just take over. Alas! Democracy, the sacred river, is forced to flow into our country’s political sewer. And that stinks.
The Election Commission and the state government did not want an abysmal turnout recorded in the Lok Sabha elections, and therefore, had declared October 13, the poll day, as a holiday. The day was a Tuesday, and just right for a tempting long-weekend with a casual leave on Monday.NGO campaigns, urging citizens to step out worked…they all stepped out of the cities. So toll plazas registered maximum vehicle entries on highways linking getaways. They all got away from this poll tamasha, flaunting the deadliest weapon to crush democracy: Apathy.
Those in cars never cared. So the definite target audience was those struggling to keep themselves from sinking further into the poverty line quagmire. In fact, a domestic help was ruing the fact that she was not home to collect the monetary “gift” from political parties. She lost Rs 800 that day (The break up was Rs 500 and Rs 300 from two different parties). That was a lot of money, especially during the Diwali week.
Lack of political will has made most citizens nonchalant, and they have repeatedly flashed their indolence by keeping away from the poll process. There is a reluctance on the part of the political class to focus on real issues as there is a temptation to fall back on hysteria generated so easily by regionalism and communism.
Maharashtra is getting painted in all hues. The surge of saffron fundamentalists is vying for attention with the red struggle in Ghadchiroli. To complete this communal and parochial warp and weft in the political fabric of Maharashtra is Raj Thackeray’s high-decibel call for the beleaguered Marathi manoos to snatch the jobs and respect earned by the non-Marathas in this land of Shivaji. Raj Thackeray’s campaign slogans has discoloured the original Maratha manoos sloganeers, the Shiv Sena. The Congress hopes to cash in on this split in native loyalties.
This battle might not spell out a clear winner, and suitcase politics might just take over. Alas! Democracy, the sacred river, is forced to flow into our country’s political sewer. And that stinks.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
No 'Nobel' intentions
This year, an Indian American is part of the trio which has bagged the Nobel Prize for Chemistry. The Indian is Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, who has shared the Prize with fellow American Thomas Steitz and Israeli Ada Yonath for mapping ribosomes, the protein producing factories within cells at the atomic level.
I did not understand what this research is all about. But I do understand a message that comes loud and clear year after year. Indian researchers shine outside the country. Scientists, economists, litterateurs there are so many Indian-origin experts. But most of them have been seen shining from foreign soil. Why is it that the Indian brain functions better when it is in American laboratories? What is it in Indian laboratories that do not fuel that same brain to become Nobel achievers?
The answer clearly lies in the Indian government’s apathy towards indigenous research and development. In fact, last year, Kapil Sibal as Science and technology minister admitted in Parliament that the number of core researchers was 1.5 lakh as compared to 8-10 lakh in China. He said in Scandinavian countries, there were 7,000 researchers per million people, in the US, there were 4,700 researchers per million people, while in India, there were 156 researchers per million people. (Source: The Financial Express, 2008).
Many Indian brains leave the country to pursue higher studies abroad, especially to the US. We Indians keep complaining about this drain of brain. But we never seem to stop and think that these brains dump our country because of its underprivileged and undernourished universities, and, instead, choose to enrich the research laboratories of the West.
Take the case of the 2009 Nobel winner, Mr Venkatraman Ramakrishnan. His place of birth is Chidambaram, a town in Tamil Nadu. His hall of fame: the US.
But we Indians excel in gushing about the Indian connections of these achievers, without contributing towards their success. In fact, the media has already started brazenly gloating about this “Indian” who won the 2009 Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Soon, there will be sound bytes and print columns dedicated to this “Indian” who “battled all odds to bag this prestigious prize”. The government will probably honour him, and even host him for a Rashtrapati Bhavan dinner.
Drawing an analogy, this attitude is like a mother who has no time for the baby, and gets a nanny to do a proxy. Bu the mother conveniently walks away with the credit when the child becomes an achiever, without having contributed her time, effort and patience.
Will the Indian government ever wake up to recognize and tap local research talent stemming from local universities to produce an indigenous Nobel achiever? Can our mother take care of us? Or is India happy with one C.V. Raman, an indigenous Nobel laureate?
I did not understand what this research is all about. But I do understand a message that comes loud and clear year after year. Indian researchers shine outside the country. Scientists, economists, litterateurs there are so many Indian-origin experts. But most of them have been seen shining from foreign soil. Why is it that the Indian brain functions better when it is in American laboratories? What is it in Indian laboratories that do not fuel that same brain to become Nobel achievers?
The answer clearly lies in the Indian government’s apathy towards indigenous research and development. In fact, last year, Kapil Sibal as Science and technology minister admitted in Parliament that the number of core researchers was 1.5 lakh as compared to 8-10 lakh in China. He said in Scandinavian countries, there were 7,000 researchers per million people, in the US, there were 4,700 researchers per million people, while in India, there were 156 researchers per million people. (Source: The Financial Express, 2008).
Many Indian brains leave the country to pursue higher studies abroad, especially to the US. We Indians keep complaining about this drain of brain. But we never seem to stop and think that these brains dump our country because of its underprivileged and undernourished universities, and, instead, choose to enrich the research laboratories of the West.
Take the case of the 2009 Nobel winner, Mr Venkatraman Ramakrishnan. His place of birth is Chidambaram, a town in Tamil Nadu. His hall of fame: the US.
But we Indians excel in gushing about the Indian connections of these achievers, without contributing towards their success. In fact, the media has already started brazenly gloating about this “Indian” who won the 2009 Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Soon, there will be sound bytes and print columns dedicated to this “Indian” who “battled all odds to bag this prestigious prize”. The government will probably honour him, and even host him for a Rashtrapati Bhavan dinner.
Drawing an analogy, this attitude is like a mother who has no time for the baby, and gets a nanny to do a proxy. Bu the mother conveniently walks away with the credit when the child becomes an achiever, without having contributed her time, effort and patience.
Will the Indian government ever wake up to recognize and tap local research talent stemming from local universities to produce an indigenous Nobel achiever? Can our mother take care of us? Or is India happy with one C.V. Raman, an indigenous Nobel laureate?
Sunday, October 4, 2009
'Vulgar' tokenism
The government has now trained its austerity gun on the chief executive officers. First, it got ministers to travel “cattle class”. When the ministers were asked to travel by budget airlines, at first glance, it seemed a welcome decision. But it was soon reduced to another political tokenism, frustrating the entire exercise. The area surrounding these heavily cashed cows travelling this cattle class was cordoned off, milking the exchequer even more than what the executive class would have done. When Rahul Gandhi decided to travel by Shatabdi, it was splashed all over the media, electronic and print. However, few read the fine print: Three coaches accompanying this political scion were “booked” for security reasons.
Now minister of state for corporate affairs Salman Khursheed has requested corporates to refrain from paying “vulgar” salaries to CEOs. This move has been blindly borrowed from the West, which has been taking steps to trim CEO pay packets to counter the economic downturn. Of course, Khursheed has added a dash of desi byte to spice up his austerity funda by saying: “I don’t think anyone in India today, in politics or outside politics... has reached the level of liberalism where vulgarity is also a fundamental right,” he has said. “We are moving away from control to regulation. But it does not mean that you are going to be completely free.”
The minister also feels the time is to discourage conspicuous consumption. He has supplemented his comment with figures: the annual pay of at least one CEO works out to over Rs 50 crore — more than 12,500 times the per capita income in the country.
Pearls of wisdom, and very well put. Thank you, minister.
I agree, the enriched corporate world has not really been socially responsible. But, can the government please stop playing this politics of tokenism time and again?
Let me start with the assets of politicians. Maharashtra is going to polls next week. Every day, the newspapers focus on a constituency, listing those who are in the fray and their assets. These “declared” assets run into several thousand crores for most aspirants. Agreed, Maharashtra (housing the infamous suicide belt) is the nation’s cash cow. Let us not be naïve about the multiple benami land holdings, luxury farmhouses and other assets these ministerial aspirants possess. Where is austerity?
In a country like India, festivals and wedding dry up most of the household resources. With this festive season, news space on every newspaper has shrunk, giving way to advertisements from clothes and jewellery, to exotic sweets and even designer diyas. And, whatever the social strata, Indians will spend a chunk of their income on these. Where is austerity?
Indian weddings are just getting fatter. In 2007, it was Rs 1.25 trillion. It is expected to jump by 25 per cent this year. The size of Indian weddings of course is directly proportional to the income group. So the haves will obviously say: have it, will spend it. But even the poorest families will beg, borrow or steal (to use a cliché) to buy the groom a gold chain and cycle, or even a motorcycle. And, the middle class, caught between the top and bottom, is always struggling to keep pace with the haves. Where is austerity?
The government’s austerity drive is hollow. It is like an antibiotic, trying to suppress the pain, and always ignoring the long-term agony. Will we ever get serious on serious issues and not get stuck with this political tokenism? Let us, instead, talk about reaching education, healthcare and sanitation to the every nook. Shall we stop talking about austerity and concentrate on the austere needs of this country?
Now minister of state for corporate affairs Salman Khursheed has requested corporates to refrain from paying “vulgar” salaries to CEOs. This move has been blindly borrowed from the West, which has been taking steps to trim CEO pay packets to counter the economic downturn. Of course, Khursheed has added a dash of desi byte to spice up his austerity funda by saying: “I don’t think anyone in India today, in politics or outside politics... has reached the level of liberalism where vulgarity is also a fundamental right,” he has said. “We are moving away from control to regulation. But it does not mean that you are going to be completely free.”
The minister also feels the time is to discourage conspicuous consumption. He has supplemented his comment with figures: the annual pay of at least one CEO works out to over Rs 50 crore — more than 12,500 times the per capita income in the country.
Pearls of wisdom, and very well put. Thank you, minister.
I agree, the enriched corporate world has not really been socially responsible. But, can the government please stop playing this politics of tokenism time and again?
Let me start with the assets of politicians. Maharashtra is going to polls next week. Every day, the newspapers focus on a constituency, listing those who are in the fray and their assets. These “declared” assets run into several thousand crores for most aspirants. Agreed, Maharashtra (housing the infamous suicide belt) is the nation’s cash cow. Let us not be naïve about the multiple benami land holdings, luxury farmhouses and other assets these ministerial aspirants possess. Where is austerity?
In a country like India, festivals and wedding dry up most of the household resources. With this festive season, news space on every newspaper has shrunk, giving way to advertisements from clothes and jewellery, to exotic sweets and even designer diyas. And, whatever the social strata, Indians will spend a chunk of their income on these. Where is austerity?
Indian weddings are just getting fatter. In 2007, it was Rs 1.25 trillion. It is expected to jump by 25 per cent this year. The size of Indian weddings of course is directly proportional to the income group. So the haves will obviously say: have it, will spend it. But even the poorest families will beg, borrow or steal (to use a cliché) to buy the groom a gold chain and cycle, or even a motorcycle. And, the middle class, caught between the top and bottom, is always struggling to keep pace with the haves. Where is austerity?
The government’s austerity drive is hollow. It is like an antibiotic, trying to suppress the pain, and always ignoring the long-term agony. Will we ever get serious on serious issues and not get stuck with this political tokenism? Let us, instead, talk about reaching education, healthcare and sanitation to the every nook. Shall we stop talking about austerity and concentrate on the austere needs of this country?
Saturday, October 3, 2009
No kidding!
Channel-surfing, admittedly a colossal waste of time, got me too see Rakhi Sawant trying to silence a wailing infant for a reality show, Pati, Patni aur Woh. Did I see a baby she was trying to manage? My doubt was cleared after two days when I read a news story that a child rights group has petitioned the information and broadcasting minister to stop telecast of Pati, Patni aur Woh, citing health hazards to newborns and toddlers who feature in it.
So baby it was. But what was the baby doing on the show? The show, I read, was about parenting, tracing the journey of five celebrity couples from the eighth month of pregnancy to taking care of an infant, toddler and a teenager.
This Indian version of the BBC show, Baby Borrowers, has, thankfully hit the roadblock. How else can one explain this blatant exploitation of infants? The channel producers are, of course, claiming that the real parents of these infants will be monitoring the babies on a closed-circuit television. But what of the infants, who are throw into unknown arms and have no idea where their parents are and for how long they are to endure this surrogate parenting?
This is reality television show at its worst. Reality shows have become the biggest money spinners for channels. First, it started with singing competitions. Then it went on to dance performances. Now every language channel has these talent shows, with fat prize money and big sponsors. These shows were initially confined to adults or teen-adults. But once the kid versions began, aspiring parents, desperate to see their children on television and, win prizes, are in a tizzy. This spurt in reality talent shows on television has got parents to dream big. Once on television, these children are exposed to very stiff and insensitive judges, which could be detrimental to their psyche. Comparisons and competition, which fan negativity among children, are what get these shows their TRPs.
Even residential gated communities, organizing small-scale festival programmes, have special prizes for best dressed male child and female child! Why? Most parents dress up the child with an eye on the prize, however uncomfortable the clothes are for their children. Another example is the fancy dress competitions organized by schools. Children are made to wear the most complicated outfits to look as weird and fancy as possible to catch the judges’ attention.
Indian parenting has become a high-pressure area. Showcase pressure on parents, and performance pressure on children. There is pressure on parents to showcase their children’s talent. Parents push their aspirations onto children, and goad them into becoming toppers. This pressure has robbed the children off their innocence, making them puppets on parents’ hands. So, after school, they are pushed into tuitions for the top grades in school. Then into various hobby classes, where they are expected to perform well.
It is certainly necessary for children to pursue a few hobbies, be it music or dance or a sport. Parents, in fact, must expose kids into various activities. But then the children have the right to decide what they want to pursue.
So what is the next reality in store for children? Is it Fear Factor/Khatron ke Khiladi for kids between 5-15 years? You never know!
So baby it was. But what was the baby doing on the show? The show, I read, was about parenting, tracing the journey of five celebrity couples from the eighth month of pregnancy to taking care of an infant, toddler and a teenager.
This Indian version of the BBC show, Baby Borrowers, has, thankfully hit the roadblock. How else can one explain this blatant exploitation of infants? The channel producers are, of course, claiming that the real parents of these infants will be monitoring the babies on a closed-circuit television. But what of the infants, who are throw into unknown arms and have no idea where their parents are and for how long they are to endure this surrogate parenting?
This is reality television show at its worst. Reality shows have become the biggest money spinners for channels. First, it started with singing competitions. Then it went on to dance performances. Now every language channel has these talent shows, with fat prize money and big sponsors. These shows were initially confined to adults or teen-adults. But once the kid versions began, aspiring parents, desperate to see their children on television and, win prizes, are in a tizzy. This spurt in reality talent shows on television has got parents to dream big. Once on television, these children are exposed to very stiff and insensitive judges, which could be detrimental to their psyche. Comparisons and competition, which fan negativity among children, are what get these shows their TRPs.
Even residential gated communities, organizing small-scale festival programmes, have special prizes for best dressed male child and female child! Why? Most parents dress up the child with an eye on the prize, however uncomfortable the clothes are for their children. Another example is the fancy dress competitions organized by schools. Children are made to wear the most complicated outfits to look as weird and fancy as possible to catch the judges’ attention.
Indian parenting has become a high-pressure area. Showcase pressure on parents, and performance pressure on children. There is pressure on parents to showcase their children’s talent. Parents push their aspirations onto children, and goad them into becoming toppers. This pressure has robbed the children off their innocence, making them puppets on parents’ hands. So, after school, they are pushed into tuitions for the top grades in school. Then into various hobby classes, where they are expected to perform well.
It is certainly necessary for children to pursue a few hobbies, be it music or dance or a sport. Parents, in fact, must expose kids into various activities. But then the children have the right to decide what they want to pursue.
So what is the next reality in store for children? Is it Fear Factor/Khatron ke Khiladi for kids between 5-15 years? You never know!
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Im'print'ing bias
The Times of India carried a story on the front page with the headline: On Dashami, Muslim housewife kills Laskhar terrorist with an axe.
Muslim housewife? Dashami? What is the link? When you read the story, it talks about Ram vanquishing Raavan and Durga slaying the demon, and therefore, on Dashami, a Muslim housewife slays the modern rakshas, a Lashkar terrorist. We tend to get carried away by the Dusshera mood , but carrying a news story with this hackneyed comparison is taking it too far.
The print media is now getting desperate. In trying to compete with the electronic media, it is trying out all possible gimmickry in headlines and handling of news stories to steal the eyeballs from the LED generation, which prefers the visual deafening screams of our news anchors to the quiet written words. In the process, news stories have ceased to be neutral.
The event was certainly newsworthy, but its presentation was problematic. Why should the media ascribe religious identity to the housewife, who has displayed raw courage in killing a dreaded terrorist? What would the news headline and news writing style be if the woman was a Hindu?
According to the report, the terrorist tried to misbehave with the woman, and was, therefore, axed to death. This is a story of a woman defending herself from a groping man, who happened to be a terrorist. Is courage or self-defence bound by religion? Gender, yes. Religion?
The presentation reveals the ugly truth that along with politicians, the media, too, has become a pawn in the communal game.
Journalists are meant to be passive observers and active listeners, with attention to detail. Their observation and attention must be translated into impartial reportage. What we read instead are views of reporters in the guise of reporting. Another example: the day the law minister Veerappa Moily announced measures to speed up the justice system in the country, a newspaper report said: In a country where courts take decades to deliver verdicts, this is sure to sound audacious. Law minister Veerappa Moily is attempting the unthinkable -- reducing the life of litigation from an average 15 years at present to one year, and that too in just three years from now.
What the law minister says might actually sound audacious. But a newsperson is not supposed to lace his/her report with opinionated phrases like “this is sure to sound audacious” and “Moily is attempting the unthinkable”.
Moily might really be attempting the unthinkable. But who is the reporter to debate that in a news report and, in the process, bias the reader? In the same line, the report says, “…and that too in just three years from now”. The use of the four-letter word “just” just changes the report from being objective to subjective.
We all have strong opinions, and the media has space for analysis and opinions. It is tempting to pass judgements on events. But it is in sensible reporting/anchoring to resist such temptation.
Muslim housewife? Dashami? What is the link? When you read the story, it talks about Ram vanquishing Raavan and Durga slaying the demon, and therefore, on Dashami, a Muslim housewife slays the modern rakshas, a Lashkar terrorist. We tend to get carried away by the Dusshera mood , but carrying a news story with this hackneyed comparison is taking it too far.
The print media is now getting desperate. In trying to compete with the electronic media, it is trying out all possible gimmickry in headlines and handling of news stories to steal the eyeballs from the LED generation, which prefers the visual deafening screams of our news anchors to the quiet written words. In the process, news stories have ceased to be neutral.
The event was certainly newsworthy, but its presentation was problematic. Why should the media ascribe religious identity to the housewife, who has displayed raw courage in killing a dreaded terrorist? What would the news headline and news writing style be if the woman was a Hindu?
According to the report, the terrorist tried to misbehave with the woman, and was, therefore, axed to death. This is a story of a woman defending herself from a groping man, who happened to be a terrorist. Is courage or self-defence bound by religion? Gender, yes. Religion?
The presentation reveals the ugly truth that along with politicians, the media, too, has become a pawn in the communal game.
Journalists are meant to be passive observers and active listeners, with attention to detail. Their observation and attention must be translated into impartial reportage. What we read instead are views of reporters in the guise of reporting. Another example: the day the law minister Veerappa Moily announced measures to speed up the justice system in the country, a newspaper report said: In a country where courts take decades to deliver verdicts, this is sure to sound audacious. Law minister Veerappa Moily is attempting the unthinkable -- reducing the life of litigation from an average 15 years at present to one year, and that too in just three years from now.
What the law minister says might actually sound audacious. But a newsperson is not supposed to lace his/her report with opinionated phrases like “this is sure to sound audacious” and “Moily is attempting the unthinkable”.
Moily might really be attempting the unthinkable. But who is the reporter to debate that in a news report and, in the process, bias the reader? In the same line, the report says, “…and that too in just three years from now”. The use of the four-letter word “just” just changes the report from being objective to subjective.
We all have strong opinions, and the media has space for analysis and opinions. It is tempting to pass judgements on events. But it is in sensible reporting/anchoring to resist such temptation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)