Money, status: The original Utopia

I have been interested with the history of man and the kind of divisions that he has made up. Now, these divisions are so much a part of life that you wonder why was all this in aid for? Why were these divisions allowed? what posessed man to divide his brethren, when he ultimately was the same?

There is no definite point in History which says that the divisions occured. Some may point to the beginnings of the Indian Civilization, others during the period when trade was being discovered. But, i guess it all has evolved from the changing mindset of man through these times. This situation has gotten worse in the 21st century, with money and status suppressing the progress and the thinking of man.

The problem with society and man's thinking of this time is the fact that money is held important beyond life. The mind has been twisted in such a way that a piece of paper is considered holier than life. A pice of paper, with a denomination or a number is considered to be the status bearer for millions of people. How can this piece of paper determine the status of individuals in Society?

What and who determined the status of money? The dynamics of life and society nowadays are such that relationships, status and position are all becoming deterministic. If you have certain money value, only then you are acceptable, otherwise, there is too much of stress on your mind and you stagnate. Can we human beings live out of the purview of money and all? I think we can. If individuals can keep their priorities different, and have a holistic view of what THEIR life should be, i guess they can achieve it. But, to shatter the mindset involves tremendous odds, as you are going against the established notion of life itself.

Money and this so called Status is the Utopia that people are living on. Money cannot and should not be the individuals determining points. So, if a job is not found, maybe you can get more out of life if you do something else. What that something else is i won't say. Man is different, his thinking is different, so won't get into all that.

History in the making

This deals with the craze of the subcontinent. A game called Cricket is going to usher in a new history in that region. We all knew what passion this game can evoke in both India and Pakistan. Two of these countries, ever so volatile, ever so electrifying, ever so exciting, face of in a Cricket match today. Now, the question will be asked, so what? The thing this time is that India and Pakistan are meeting in the FINAL of the 20-20 Cricket WORLD CUP.

Traditional Cricket has tried, conventional short forms of the game gave a glimpse, but is the maverick creation of 20-20 cricket that has made it a reality. It was considered a dream if both these nations met in a final of a major competition. Now, on 24th September, this will be a reality in Johannesburg. Passions, emotions, Patriotism will all be in a different notch from fans of both nations. I can imagine the press in India whipping up a frenzy. It almost resembles a declaration of War! I guess Cricket and war are inter-related, especially when it is India and Pakistan.

Generations of both India and Pakistan have waited for a moment like this. Mnay of us were not born when India lifted the World Cup back in 1983. That was of course, the more conventional form of One Day International Cricket. But, the new era, a new style, and a new generation may be about to see something special. If 20-20 can make dreams into fantasy, then it definately should be the norm of the Cricket world now. The world is slowly watching, and taking not of this radical form.

Purists and advocates of the Old school of Cricket argue that this will destroy the game. It does not give its due to skills and applications. I would like to add that the game of Cricket, following this pattern of skills and applications has been largely confined to the sub-continent, and its losing popularity elsewhere. No doubt, the "purer version" of Cricket is challenging, and at times entertaining, but i guess the dynamics of time call for a global outlook for the game, and 20-20 is the catalyst for that.

I guess in a day it depends upon what are the priorities of the administrators. Whether they want the Old school, or a maverick form? Whether they want the purer version or a diluted International one? These issues will take a backseat for the moment, because history is playing out today at Johannesburg. Generations have only thought about this epic clash in their mind. I wonder how will the public interact when they see it on the Television set

Journalism perception

"All the President's Men" is a movie about the Watergate Scandal. This scandal was the biggest political scandal to hit the US government. This bought down the President, subverted the entire concept of the Constituition, compromised personal liberty and freedom of speech, and it was hailed as one of the Greatest Investigations in the field of Journalism.

Looking at the way Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, reporters at Washington Post covered the incident, it is no wonder that Watergate changed the face of Investigative Reporting. It emphasizes the fact that many things don't occur in Isolation. A certain small piece of evidence can lead to a bigger controversy. It also tells us that if lies and unlawfulness have to come out in the open, it is upto the Journalist to put in that maximum effort. The movie emphasized the fact that Woodward and Bernstein undertook Maximum of field research. They spent their time out on the field, calling people, confirming facts on paper, interviewing them personally, and always taking notes.

What it also tells us is that Journalists have to be committed to the cause at all times. It is very easy to dismiss the movie because technology has made many things easier. Technology has reduced the legwork that Woodward and Bernstein put in on the field, but it doesn't take away the fact that for solid confirmation of a fact, Fieldwork and simple note taking are of paramout importance. Technology is a device by which a lot of this Generation's journalists take for granted.

Woodward and Bernstein tell us that efforts should not be made in the office, but out on the field. They emphasize a very important point of perseverance, and careful management of their sources. This generation has to be very patient, and we have to put in so much of fieldwork that we forget what the office room looks like! However, one doubt still remains. Will sources and people concerned with the issue talk openly to Journalists in today's time? Many people nowadays are tending towards secrecy and concealment. Journalists are made to prode that little bit extra to get information, thus it throws ethics out of the window completely.

Watergate teaches us that if journalists put in creditable and useful fieldwork into good use, and with good source management and note taking, Accountability in the instituitions of Democracy shall always remain.

Remembering 9/11

It is now 6 years since the attacks on America took place. Millions around the world witnessed the change in the world dynamics at that moment. For a generation, people lived with the fear of the Cold War, and now people live with the shadow of terrorism and global uncertainties. 9/11 changed the world, perhaps for the worst, because it made everyone a lot less safer than previously. With 9/11, a domino effect was witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effects have been there ever since.

What can we make of 9/11? It shattered the myth that America was not vulnerable. But, was it fair for some analysts to comment that something like 9/11 would have been prevented? How fair is it of the world community to undermine America's intention in Iraq and Afghanistan? It should be noted that the mood of the world is such that it is a typical Catch 22. If America does something on Terrorism, then it recieves brickbats. If it does not do anything, then it again recieves flak. What should be the action on Terrorism? The fact that this is more of a question is the reason why Terrorism is so dangerous.

Many nations now are in a War against Terrorism, and many nations have been victims of terrorism. The world seems to be on the edge, and every time there is a terror attack in some suburb of Baghdad or another terror warning, we get the picture of the approaching doomsday which will envelop the world. But, if nations and the government are concrete on the methods to combat terrorism, then it will can be contained. But, the problem is what can be the Concrete action?

As terrorism involves ordinary people and it is so ephemeral in nature, concrete actions might not be possible. Common individual rights and the broader civil liberty rights are compromised when action against terrorism needs to be taken. I guess terrorism is like a fire, it may burn for a while, and then burn out on its own. The question is how big the fire is and in how much time will this burn out?

The Nuances of constantly moving

From tomorrow, my contribution on this blog might be scratchy if not at best occasional. I will be ruing the fact that i am falling vicitm to a policy of getting settled in and also testing this wide convoluted world of technology. I am moving to my new residence tomorrow, and it is going to be my base for the next ten months. But, i am always apprehensive about going to a new place and taking additional time to settle in. During that time, you can be in a better frame of mind and can think about positive things on planning your day.

The new place is good, a bit like the present place where i am staying. But, it carries the uncertainty of No Internet connection, so i guess the contributions to this blog might be stalled for the time to come. But, i only hope that i can use the Internet. Because for me, with the absence of television, the Internet is my soul source for news. UK newspapers give very little information on International affaris, and it will take me some time to get used to the local news, of which i have no bearing.

As usual, Technology is making me uncertain about how to plan my day. If there is no Internet, then i may have to make additional trips to the cyber or to a building which is Wi-Fi equipped. I am looking forward to the sporting endeavours here, which might improve my attitude and my outlook in life. Although I am not going to set the sports arena on fire, i look forward to being refreshed. The Library will be my home away from home, and i will continue this trend until the course is over.

The nuances of constantly moving were highlighted in the packing today. i had to once again stuff things to the point where my suitcase would break. But, somehow i managed to get it done, and life both of them to the place of my residence. Now, those suitcases wont move for at least 4-5 months, before i may have to take another trip somewhere. I look forward to the intermitent contributions on my blog, but will keep it a point to highlight it on a regular basis. I am very proud of this one creation of mine, and I intend to nurture it.

Too much Intellectual Capability?

I was reading a book titled Foreign News: Ulf Hannerz. This book is one of the guideposts around which i will have to built my International Journalism around. There will be several, but along with books, i feel practical experience will be equally important. Being Street smart, or even grasping the knowledge of the common man on the street will be important. There is one statement in that book which will act as a reminder that Intellectul Capability will not be everything in Journalism.

He mentions that Many of the Foreign Journalists today are not a Major in Journalism or its related fields. All the noted Economic journalists, and other beat journalists have done their specializations in fields like Engineering. There was a paerson who was intellectually very good, but he did not work out for Journalism. Too many hassles were involved. There is a lesson in there for me. The message of being too intellectual and more to the book is what might get me into trouble in the coming few years.

The message for me is that i have to be very practical minded, and that i shoudl have common sense. Common sense would be to have a bit of street smartedness, get to know the events from the eyes of the people. I have to ask the right questions, and have to train regularly at that. I have to be out on the field most of the time, not in the office and make my judgements.

There should be determination from my side, and balance it out with acurate and sensible judgement. If common sense and fieldwork are followed quiet judiciously, along with sensible judgement, then we can become a good journalist.

Comparisons: The bane of Life

In every walk of life, an individual is compared to other individuals on account of the deeds that he has performed. Some individuals are compared to the broader socio-economic index. Some individuals are compared on account of their sporting exploits. Nations are compared to other nations on the development front. The rationale behind all this is to have a model to look upto, so that man and nation can emualte that. But, is this rationale correct? Is it wise to compare everything to a model of development or humanity?

At a personal level, very few individuals like to be compared to other people. The reason being that nowadays the diversity factor is more prominent. There is acknowledgement that people have different mindsets and different wavelengths of thought. Each is unique in their own way. The reason that they lag behind others and force themselves to be compared is either the lack of mental application or expression of interest where there is no medium.

Lack of mental applications means Ideas and Innovativenss, while medium of expression could be any work which suites the Individual mindset. All may not want to become Doctors or engineers, but they against their wishes because of lack of any flexible alternative orbecause of societal pressures. If man has to be on his own, then it is important to have at least ideas. Because, by having an idea, man progresses ahead and achieves it. He then becomes something, rather than a shadow of someone else.

Comparison of nations is also been done at a large scale today. Globalization has meant that no economy operates independently of the other. But, this comparison is very dangerous, because it wipes out the uniqueness factor, and puts nations on a framework which might not be sustainable and in the end subject to colapse and anarchy. None is more evident today then US centric economic development. Wherever we go, the US is the economy to be emulated, and many in India are dedicated to emulating it.

But, the notion to comparison of nations economy is indeed frought with danger. A prime example of this being India. In one part of the country, the rich are dominating. Rich are getting richer. Majority of India, about 70% of the population are rural, are getting poorer. This division is prompting critiques to say that, "There is an India within a Bharath". The socio-economic fabric is being tested, with constant violence among the population to also join in the prospierity. The problem pertaining to India is that no mainstreaming or follow up is done on any initiative.

People comparison is in a Microcosm. The comparison of nations is in a Macrocosm. When there are so many discrepencies in the Microcosm, would it be wise to consider something else in the Macrocosm? In the Microcosm, elements of diversity and different setups hinder the comparison. In the Macrocosm, the same things are prevelant, only differnce being that the Macrocosm is blanketed by an even bigger element.

Comparisons do not work. Experiences for a very minor proportion may be the same, but otherwise, it is known that nations and people have different experiences. This may be the ultimate stumbling block for Globalization, but since it shows prospierity and that it can adapt to various circumstances, this arguement may be pushed aside until collapse is ushered.

Good News, Bad news Priority

From the time printing began in the 15th century, events and information has assumed utmost importance in the life of man. With the advent of Technology and Journalism, man can now get the information that he seeks. Journalism has undergone changes in Technology, and now gives the public important information. Some Bad news which tell citizens of increased vigilance and encourages them to help democracy. Some Good news or Human Interest stories that may inspire citizens and help them feel positive about the world they live in. In the Western School of thought, Bad News always has to occupy front pages. Events regarding Politics, Socio-economic troubles, International Tensions always will dominate the front pages of western Liberal democracies like US, UK. In the Soviet times, Russia used its media to carry stories about the good aspects of Russia. Any event that could be good was covered, and bad news was relegated.

At that time, the west dismissed it as a Propoganda campaign, so that Citizens are not aware of the trouble the Russian state could be. But, looking at the new threat that confronts us, namely terrorism, we need to reassert what shall constitute good news and bad news. What impacts should this have on a multi-cultural society like India, which has been on the terrorist radar for so long? what needs to be done, because all bad news all the time may cause Citizens mindset to become negative, and withdrawn from the process.

I recently came across this critique by Outgoing Indian President APJ Abdul Kalam. He said that the Media highlights too much of the bad aspects of our country. It does not put in that much effort to show the progress and the good things about our country. He cited an example of Israel, a place where Teror activities occur everyday. When the President was in Tel Aviv, a suicide bomber had struck, killing lots of people. He expected the story to be on the front page of an Israeli daily. But, to his surprise, he found a human interest story which acted as an inspiration to Israelis who heard and witnessed the horrific incident of that day. The story was about how a man turned his desert ranch into a beautiful fruitful Garden.

Looking at the above example from the Western Liberal Media, they would have scorned at this concept. They would have alleged that the Media in Israel is not doing its job. But, they did not say anything. Unlike dismissing Russia's Propoganda Media tactics during the Cold war, they did not mention this. I am not focusing on the Double standards of the West, but i do want to bring in the point that Journalism needs to advocate a model based on the socio-economic set-up of a nation.

What defines good news and Bad news? What has been made Priority information and events which assume secondary information? Once again, we are in the crossroads of Citizens right to information and Dumbing Down. I feel that All good and Human Interest stories should not be put in the garb of Dumbing Down, Similarly, all Serious stuff should not be put on the front page, so much so, that the Citizen gets discouraged about the world he lives in.

Overdose of serious news all the time leads to Citizens becoming Apathic to the process. It is seen that more serious the news, the more the public interprets as being very tough to handle. Too much of serious news saps the mental strength of the Citizens, thereby stalling the democratic process. Very few individuals may rise above that and remain positive, but they soon will have doubts. This is because whatever the Media portrays nowadays, with technological devices, becomes real and factual.

At the same time, too much of human interest and gossip is also not desirable. Dumbing down poses the same threat as overdose of serious news. The key for Media organizations in diverse countries is to understand their priorities, and strike a fine balance. It is this balance that will keep the Citizen active in the proces. They will realize that they are indispensable to the problems of the process, and thus will be more vigilant. By having a clear conscience and clear bearings on right and wrong, the media will aid the process of democracy.

The western liberal thought of Media functionign will lead to periodic stagnating of the process. An alternative view must be established that good news, human interest and not so serious stuff can also contribute to the democratic foundation. A balance of serious news, to make the Base strong, and an equal dose of good news, to keep Citizens positive and also engaged in the system, should be the ultimate aim of the Media

True Patriots?

I am normally not a fan of Advertisements. As a critque of Advertising because of its influence on the News media, i am in a very peculiar position now. I am writing this post on the basis of a Public Service Advertisement that i viewed. The topic was regarding the issue of Patriotism, and it was quiet a good Ad. It has an award at the Cannes festival, and it portrayed this theme quiet emotionally. The end message was, "People need to respect the National Anthem". Although, good in structure and theme, it highlighted several underlyings of the rich and poor divide in India.

In the advertisement, only the poor Cobbler, with one leg missing, and some street children stood and repected the national anthem. The pride that they had in their eyes was absent in the rich and affluent youth, who just ran past them as the rain was getting heavy. The rich youth's main motive was to evade the weather, not to respect the national anthem. Can this be interpreted as the Poor who represent the True Patriot or are the rich taking Patriotism for granted?

This is a very touchy topic, and one more so during the age of the Diaspora. There are various levels of Patriotism, i feel, so to put the factor of Patriotism under the garb of true and false may not be worth it. But, we cannot dismiss this fact that majority of Indians are taking our patriotism too much for granted. lots of people do not respect the Indian flag, and because we are so obssessed with material needs, we do not think about our patriotism.

I am not advocating that each of us slit our wrists to highlight our patriotism. I neither advocate the extreme levels of Jingoistic patriotic expression in the case of any event. The Pre-World Cup Cricket Ads, and the subsequent Public Jingoism of Patriotism during Kargil are reasons why the extreme level is also not desirable. I guess a Patriot should be defined by his contribution. By contribution, i stress upon the need to not measure that contribution.

If you start measuring contribution, then even Patriotism will become Materialistic.The rich have this tendency, and so that must be avoided. By contribution, i stress that if every individual maintains his dignity, and also does not shatter the social and economic tranquility, and is who he is, then that is a true Patriot. Expression should be his own personal decision.

By stressing on the expression of Patriotism, we are tending to materialize it. The bottomline for Patriotism is that we stop stressing on the expression of it, and realize that people are responsible and mature, and that there is a true patriot inside them.

Clash of News and Television dynamics

Many hail the technological advancements that Television has made since the days of its inception. From Public service Broadcasting to Terestrial Cable networks to Satellite TV, it has come a long way. 24 hour broadcasting is the bottomline, and this definately has had an impact on the Media. The Television News channels, aided by this technology, and the process of Live Visuals now keep citizens informed about events that matter to them. Or Do they?

I have always been in doubt about this. One aspect is the Structure of media organizations, and the second one deals with the very dynamics of its operation. Lots has been written about the vulnerable structure of the Media organization. The structure that allows Advertisers, Multi-National Corporations and indirectly government intervention has been written ad nauseam by theorists. However, i feel that it has more to do with the dynamics of its operating as well as the Public mind.

This primarily revolves around the factor of moving pictures. Man has been fascinated with the machinations that have produced moving pictures. From the Lumierre Camera to the Modern Handycam, he continues to be fascinated with moving pictures. With the advent of Special effects, the picture now is larger than life for man. When Television came up, Man's fascination was in the tip of his fingers anytime. Television's basic structure operates on both the visual and the audio, which keeps man interested.

With the advent of Technology, the moving picture assumes a more different method. The fact of reality is blurred, because technology suspends Individuals rationalist thinking, and makes him believe in some thing else. This is very detrimental to the News dynamics, which operates on Tangebility.

News takes into account the facts which can be seen, heard or percieved by the senses. Although Television has provided that platform, many people are not appealed by the News. I guess the reason for this is the conditioning that the Human mind recieves from Television itself. Because of the Moving picture syndrome, Entertainment and Sports dominate on TV. The factor of Drama is what TV captures more elucidly, and thus people follow that line.

Seriousness of the Public is something which is far too complex to handle. The bottomline here is that the nature of TV is such that drama and entertainment can be shown more effectively by this medium. Serious stuff like News and Documnetary will never make an impact on the public, because the seriousness factor goes against the dynamics of Television.

The factor of Serious minded Public is one which will puzzle experts of the Media. If TV news channels was hailed as a technological wonder, why then are the public becoming more apathic now then ever before? Is the Public discarding TV news because of the compeition and the information clutter? The second point may explain the mind of the public now, and the reason why News and Television dynamics are at the opposite end of the operating spectrum.