Archive for November 2016
Media bias and why it is bad
India had its first brush with power of media with Jessica Lal murder case. Govt. and Courts buckled under media pressure. Public supported the campaign whole heartedly. The case had all the ingredients of a pot boiler made for television. It garnered TRP’s and served justice. A win-win.
Media backed Anna Hazare who shook the roots of Indian politics and gave us Arvind Kejriwal. Kejriwal’s anti-political diatribe was tailor made for claps and whistles. People lapped it up (at least those who could afford cable television), resulting in a resounding win.
Last half decade or so Arnab Goswami took media activism to another level, equalling US journalists. In US, journalism is too bi-partisan. Two major political parties reflecting two differing ideologies have their own propagandist media apparatus. Last decade or so has given India the same. Media, which used to be a stronghold of Congress, got rivals in BJP. Today the field looks evenly distributed.
But the bias in media has turned out to be bad for society. To be true, it’s not just the bias, but the biased people earning millions and prospering is what irks common man more. It’s not mere coincidence that oldest and largest democracies are headed today by individuals who rode the anti-media wave. Modi called media news-traders, his people called them presstitutes. Trump has called media all sorts of names.
6-8 years back, in India, media was this promising child with high credibility. Currently, it’s credibility is as bad as that of US media. Biased towards one side or the other.
Earlier media used to shape the politicians and politics worldwide. Nowadays politicians shape opinions about media. Ironical isn’t it? In India it would be a first in modern times that PM and Govt has more credibility than media. And it’s scary. I’ll tell you why.
Media is one branch which has the power to keep the legislative in check. It talks directly with public and informs them if executive is doing anything wrong. And public does the rest in the next election. The loss of credibility of media will hit this balance hard. With corporatization of media, the problem is bound to get much worse. Media bias is the new form of crony capitalism and quid pro quo. Scratch my bacl and get favorable coverage.
Whatsapp, facebook and youtube channels have come up as alternate media. They berate main stream media just like I have been doing through this post. Some like the_young_turks have got a huge following and along with that subscription money. It was nice initially but as the current US election showed they too became biased and carried out their own propaganda.
It’s very important for media to curb political leanings. If media persons want to be political activists, it’s their right but they should quit the profession first. If they can’t curb this inherent bias, they should not go on air. Rise of fascism is preceded by a biased media!
Why are people so angry these days?
Living in a metro city, fast paced life and tiny homes, I find people around me angrier more than ever. I remember a time when my grandfather/father used to hang out with people in the evening, talking range of topics. They did that in a calm tone and could have a decent conversation. Mix of social and political issues with a bit of gossip thrown in.
I find the conversations totally different around me. They are more political, more hard-lined and end up becoming heated. I am sure a lot many of us would have had similar experiences. Let’s try and find out why.
I feel people are getting bad at taking jokes and making self-deprecating humor. It’s always, how dare you? It’s coming from an inherent anger in them. What is the source? Well, it’s complicated. Fast paced life coupled with globalization might be the reason. Globalization in the sense of online globalization. Facebook and google. People sitting in Mumbai gets to know of what is happening in the world. Gets to interact with people and see videos/images. And that kind of makes them unhappy. Thy must not covet.
Same is happening with people living in villages and small towns. Apart from online, they get to travel to big cities and become grumpy seeing the lavish life there. I know it sounds a bit simplistic. But I feel envy is one main reason for the grumpiness which keeps building up inside and bursts into anger.
Google and Wikipedia have made people instant gurus. They know everything. What will this other person tell me that I don’t already know? We don’t like if we are called out for being wrong. We take it as an insult rather than getting to know something new. We better come to know from Google than out of discussion with fellow beings. This has killed the evening calm discourses.
I am not trying to come up with some solution to this anger. It wouldn’t be that easy given the convoluted society we live in. I can recommend finding small reasons to keep ourselves happy, respecting the wisdom of people around us and trying not to covet. What looks lavish comes with that much tension and hassle.
धूमिल शाम वो
थकी हुई सी शाम थी वो,
जब देखा था तुझको मैंने,
पागल सी, झबराई थी,
पर मेरे मन को भाई थी।
बात बात में गुस्सा होना,
कभी पूरा, या आधा पौना,
हर लहजे में तेरे लड़ाई थी,
पर मेरे मन को भाई थी।
आँखों में डाल आँखें मैंने,
जब दिल की बात बताई थी,
तू जरा भी ना शर्मायी थी,
पर मेरे मन को भाई थी।
पागलपन औ सनकपन में,
अपनी ही लत, अपनी ही हट.
दिमाग की तूने हटाई थी,
पर मेरे मन को भाई थी।
रोते रोते, हँसते हँसते,
आस पास, कभी दूर-दूर,
परेड मेरी करवाई थी,
पर मेरे मन को भाई थी।
हाँ ना में औ ना हाँ में,
कभी सुलझन, कभी उलझन,
सांसें मेरी अँटकायी थी,
पर मेरे मन को भाई थी।
राह कठिन, चाह अडिग,
कट ही गया, काफी रस्ता,
भूला ना धूमिल शाम वो मैं,
जब मेरे मन को भाई थी।।
Tata vs Mistry
We haven’t heard the last of Tata vs Mistry. New revelations are coming out each day. Leaked emails, sound bytes, sources and what not. I don’t want to take sides here, but a bad image of India Inc is going out to the world. For investors looking to invest in in India, the feud is a red flag.
I was puzzled as to the manner of removal of Mistry (not the removal itself). Removal of a chairman is the prerogative of Board of Directors, which was well within its right. However the manner was puzzling. There was a report that Mistry was asked by Ratan Tata prior to the board meet to step down, but Mistry turned it down. There has been no clarification on this from either Mistry or Tata’s. Mistry, who has been a lot vocal on a lot of things, is conspicuously silent on this report.
I see a deep rift and a suspicion that Board members had with Mistry, so much so that they thought that giving Mistry 2 week notice might be detrimental. Maybe they feared sabotage. That can be the only logical explanation. Mistry has not covered himself with glory by badmouthing Tata Group. That’s not what grownups do. It is his conduct post the exit that makes me and a lot of us wonder. Outing privileged information is just not a done deal.
If you see the ouster as Chairman as a reputation loss that you need to salvage by going with a hammer after the organization, you were wrong to become the chairman in the first place. After all it’s a job and it comes with a threat of termination.
I think the issue here is that he was a Chairman with 20% stake in the company. He was not an employee but the owner. He was too rich for his ego to take the termination in right spirit. Any employee level chairman would not have done so. He/She would have been worried about the prospects of next job. But not Mistry. He doesn’t need to find another job. He is hell of a rich guy and has his reputation loss to take care of.
I urge Mr. Mistry not to wash dirty linen in public. It doesn’t suit the stature of ex-chairman of Tata Group. As this moment, his conduct since exit makes me believe his ouster was the correct decision.
ArpitGarg's Weblog 