Two reports in the newspapers today grabbed my eyeballs. I skimmed past the humungous coverage given to F1: it did not interest me as much as a small story on our sports minister, Ajay Maken, being denied a ticket for the inauguration of the obscenely expensive sport that India (or even our planet) obviously cannot afford to host, given the huge appetite for fuel that it has. The other one was on Wipro’s Azim Premji planning a network of free primary and secondary schools in our country’s remote districts.
Ajay Maken is trying to be for the sports ministry what Jairam Ramesh had been for environment ministry and is now for urban development ministry: a minister with a conscience.
A few months back, Maken had tried to bring forth a new sports bill that would bring the sports federations, including the super-rich Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), under the ambit of the Right to Information Act (RTI).
Predictably, the Cabinet did not clear the Bill that was essentially meant to increase transparency and introduce accountability of all sports bodies. How could it when it had its ministers heading the federations and boards?
Today, when the media, corporate giants, celebrities and F1 enthusiasts are focussing on the flag that will be waved to ignite the event that is to take place on the swanky Rs 2000-crore Buddh International Circuit, our sports minister will be laying the foundation for the Rs 5-crore synthetic track at P.T. Usha’s academy in Koyilandi near Calicut.
The F1 organisers decided to snub the sports minister because he refused a Rs 100-crore tax exemption for the sport that is guaranteed to rake in billions. Isn’t the demand for tax waiver for a sport like Formula One itself a bizarre one? Especially when we are going to witness unbridled flow of money and liquor from corporate coffers; when we are going to see film promotions on cars; when we get to peek into those lavish after-parties (thanks to the paparazzi hunting down the celebs). So the very suggestion of a tax exemption is rather infuriating.
The other news story on Azim Premji planning free schools was a novel gesture in a country plagued by the heady concoction of population, poverty and corruption. The lack of basic education and health care in a country which is hosting a multi-billion-dollar sporting event is a trifle difficult to digest. Sorry for bringing in the formula one again and again into the thread of argument. But, when a country is unable to even whet the basic calorific appetite of millions, and offers an unrealistic Rs 32-a-day as a level to measure poverty figures, it does seem lopsided food for thought.
At least, Premji has lead by example for corporates to come out of their ivory towers and spare a thought for a country starved of basic necessities for survival. Even a few crumbs from them could go a long way to redefine corporate social responsibility, and not let us believe that it is an oxymoron!
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Loyalty counts
I do owe an apology for my earlier blog about the way Kolkata newspapers had reacted to Steve Jobs’ death. I had made the comment reading the internet versions of the newspapers, which had a news story about his death, in stark contrast to the way other newspapers had splashed the story. The reality is that The Telegraph was shut on October 6 for Dashami (Dussehra) and, therefore, there was no edition of the newspaper the next day. The early morning net edition of the paper carried the news as its second lead. And, I had misconstrued it as it had been carried in its print edition.
I could have easily sneaked in a delete click and let my post go into oblivion as if nothing happened. But I chose to keep the post, say sorry in my next one and expose my misunderstanding of the reality. That's loyalty for the newspaper that shaped me up. Cheers!
I could have easily sneaked in a delete click and let my post go into oblivion as if nothing happened. But I chose to keep the post, say sorry in my next one and expose my misunderstanding of the reality. That's loyalty for the newspaper that shaped me up. Cheers!
M’i’das fails to touch Kolkata media
My 10-year-old daughter rushed to me this morning and asked me: “Will there be more versions of i-pad, now that this person has died?”
That is the level i-technology has pervaded into our system. We no longer just connect, we “touch” each other’s lives.
I have never been a gadget freak, not even too friendly towards technology. I just about managed to understand its power and applications. Even the choice of my mobile handset is banal for the “arrived”. The three factors that guided me to choose my handset were: making and receiving calls, sending and receiving text messages and setting the alarm clock. So my present Nokia phone with its bulging number cover thanks to having been dropped umpteen number of times by my butter fingers, has just these functions. And, it has worked very well, has kept me connected (not informed) and has been loyal to me (no complaints) as I have been to it. So is my personal Dell. We were all living happily ever after…till I was bitten by the apple bug. The i-pad did help me shed my diffidence towards technology. It seemed to work intuitively, almost like magic. It seemed like this little rectangular device understood me and willingly came alive by my touch. I felt like Midas.
Then tragedy struck. The real Midas died. I came to know only when my Facebook account was full of tributes to the tech leader, who had once said: “Thomas Edison did a lot more to improve the world than Karl Marx.” I then told myself, “Why am I unable to react the way my Facebook friends have?”
I was not alone. I had company in the form of two leading newspapers that come out in Kolkata. Both these newspapers covered Steve Jobs’ death without much ado. Newspapers across the globe splashed the news on its front pages, like the world was being struck by a calamity. I was shocked to see The Telegraph and its muted coverage of the ‘i’con (this has now become a cliché). And, this came from a newspaper, which usually reacts furiously to even street clashes, giving banner headlines every other day.
I tried to understand the reason. I developed my own little argument: technology is connected closely with market, economy and consumerism. My friend had once told me how many schools in Kolkata even today were reluctant to allow technology walk past their wrought iron gates. And, the newspapers seemed to reflect this attitude. While the media across the globe screamed and wept for Steve Jobs, the Kolkata newspapers chose to let out a silent moan.
Time to ‘i’ntrospect?
That is the level i-technology has pervaded into our system. We no longer just connect, we “touch” each other’s lives.
I have never been a gadget freak, not even too friendly towards technology. I just about managed to understand its power and applications. Even the choice of my mobile handset is banal for the “arrived”. The three factors that guided me to choose my handset were: making and receiving calls, sending and receiving text messages and setting the alarm clock. So my present Nokia phone with its bulging number cover thanks to having been dropped umpteen number of times by my butter fingers, has just these functions. And, it has worked very well, has kept me connected (not informed) and has been loyal to me (no complaints) as I have been to it. So is my personal Dell. We were all living happily ever after…till I was bitten by the apple bug. The i-pad did help me shed my diffidence towards technology. It seemed to work intuitively, almost like magic. It seemed like this little rectangular device understood me and willingly came alive by my touch. I felt like Midas.
Then tragedy struck. The real Midas died. I came to know only when my Facebook account was full of tributes to the tech leader, who had once said: “Thomas Edison did a lot more to improve the world than Karl Marx.” I then told myself, “Why am I unable to react the way my Facebook friends have?”
I was not alone. I had company in the form of two leading newspapers that come out in Kolkata. Both these newspapers covered Steve Jobs’ death without much ado. Newspapers across the globe splashed the news on its front pages, like the world was being struck by a calamity. I was shocked to see The Telegraph and its muted coverage of the ‘i’con (this has now become a cliché). And, this came from a newspaper, which usually reacts furiously to even street clashes, giving banner headlines every other day.
I tried to understand the reason. I developed my own little argument: technology is connected closely with market, economy and consumerism. My friend had once told me how many schools in Kolkata even today were reluctant to allow technology walk past their wrought iron gates. And, the newspapers seemed to reflect this attitude. While the media across the globe screamed and wept for Steve Jobs, the Kolkata newspapers chose to let out a silent moan.
Time to ‘i’ntrospect?
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
‘Maha’ blunder
A new “gem” from the Maharashtra government: it has floated a new proposal to “reward” families who have a third child if it is a girl. Am I mighty impressed by this sudden girl shopping spree of the government? Apparently, the government wants to correct the skewed boy-girl ratio in the state, which is among the worst in the country at an abysmal 883 girls for every 1,000 boys. It also plans to tweak the existing laws to ensure government employees or elected representatives at all levels, including the gram panchayats, are not disqualified for giving birth to a third girl child.
This is the most bizarre proposal I have come across in a country, struggling with a high rate of population growth. We are already grappling with many many more mouths to feed, and a state government in this country comes up with this brainwave of encouraging families to go for a third child.
This is certainly not a solution to improve the sex ratio. The state government has ignored the gaping holes in its implementation of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act (PC-PNDT) and the consequent large scale female foeticides. Now does it have a moral right to introduce an idiosyncratic proposal?
It says it will now introduce an awareness campaign in the state’s seven-worst affected districts. Where were those awareness campaigns when there were loud warning signs of a lop-sided gender ratio? Besides, how can families predict that its third child will be a girl? And, what if the third child turns out to be a boy in two of every three or say four families? Can our country afford to take this risk that will throw us beyond the edge of a population explosion? What’s more? The state government seems to be going against its own law, banning sex determination.
On the whole, the entire idea is ridiculous, bordering on profligacy. Merely doling out largesse and incentives to the girl child is grossly insufficient to curb the practice of female foeticide. In fact, it will only open up fresher avenues of corruption; the more proposals and incentives, the more money goes floating around, and more are the chances of that money sticking to the palms of our powers-that-be.
There has to be a turnaround of our psyche to make the girl child wanted; and this will work only if certain social evils are rooted out of our system. There has to be awareness in every warp and weft of our society’s fabric to eliminate gender discrimination that is prevalent at various layers and at various levels. In lower echelons, the gender discrimination begins with food and work distribution, education and health care; it continues at the altar and ends at the grave. In the middle-level society, basic education and health care is by and large taken care of, thanks to peer dynamics. But then career choices are given to a privileged few. In any case, most of them end up getting entangled in the evil web of dowry (sometimes in the guise of grand weddings). And, the lavishness of weddings despite the affordability of this class speaks volumes about the bias firmly entrenched in society.
The government must effectively implement laws securing gender equality. It must work from the grassroots level to ensure right to food, education and health care across gender; it must ensure to put in place effective mechanisms to root out social evils.
Finally, the bulk of the population, which comprises the middle class, must understand the meaning of bearing a healthy child, rather than a boy child. We, as a populace, must understand that it is not necessary to have a male progeny to “carry” forward the family name. That is the most preposterous of arguments in favour elimination of female foetuses and the urge to keep trying for a male child.
So instead of blaming our dumb politicians, let us clear the cobwebs in our minds; the gender ratio will automatically improve.
This is the most bizarre proposal I have come across in a country, struggling with a high rate of population growth. We are already grappling with many many more mouths to feed, and a state government in this country comes up with this brainwave of encouraging families to go for a third child.
This is certainly not a solution to improve the sex ratio. The state government has ignored the gaping holes in its implementation of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act (PC-PNDT) and the consequent large scale female foeticides. Now does it have a moral right to introduce an idiosyncratic proposal?
It says it will now introduce an awareness campaign in the state’s seven-worst affected districts. Where were those awareness campaigns when there were loud warning signs of a lop-sided gender ratio? Besides, how can families predict that its third child will be a girl? And, what if the third child turns out to be a boy in two of every three or say four families? Can our country afford to take this risk that will throw us beyond the edge of a population explosion? What’s more? The state government seems to be going against its own law, banning sex determination.
On the whole, the entire idea is ridiculous, bordering on profligacy. Merely doling out largesse and incentives to the girl child is grossly insufficient to curb the practice of female foeticide. In fact, it will only open up fresher avenues of corruption; the more proposals and incentives, the more money goes floating around, and more are the chances of that money sticking to the palms of our powers-that-be.
There has to be a turnaround of our psyche to make the girl child wanted; and this will work only if certain social evils are rooted out of our system. There has to be awareness in every warp and weft of our society’s fabric to eliminate gender discrimination that is prevalent at various layers and at various levels. In lower echelons, the gender discrimination begins with food and work distribution, education and health care; it continues at the altar and ends at the grave. In the middle-level society, basic education and health care is by and large taken care of, thanks to peer dynamics. But then career choices are given to a privileged few. In any case, most of them end up getting entangled in the evil web of dowry (sometimes in the guise of grand weddings). And, the lavishness of weddings despite the affordability of this class speaks volumes about the bias firmly entrenched in society.
The government must effectively implement laws securing gender equality. It must work from the grassroots level to ensure right to food, education and health care across gender; it must ensure to put in place effective mechanisms to root out social evils.
Finally, the bulk of the population, which comprises the middle class, must understand the meaning of bearing a healthy child, rather than a boy child. We, as a populace, must understand that it is not necessary to have a male progeny to “carry” forward the family name. That is the most preposterous of arguments in favour elimination of female foetuses and the urge to keep trying for a male child.
So instead of blaming our dumb politicians, let us clear the cobwebs in our minds; the gender ratio will automatically improve.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)