Sideshows derailing India’s anti corruption movement

It has been some days since Anna Hazare ended his fast. In this period, Hazare has been associated with the Sangh Parivar, his methods questioned and his campaign slandered. The latest entrant into the media circus is Amar Singh. Considering that he has been out of sight for some time, it was providential that he got hold of a CD that has conversations attributed to Shanthi Bhushan when he did. Amar Singh barged into the already crowded arena, like a doctor late for surgery, brandishing the CD. Though we do not know whether the contents of the CD is authentic, technology should answer that for us soon.

Focus is important for the success of movements. In a recent example, Egyptians prevailed in their campaign against Mubarak by staying and persevering. Importantly, media helped. Several outlets like the Al Jazeera, the BBC and many other international news media organizations dedicated journalists and space to cover the uprising. They piled pressure on Mubarak to make way and the leaders of the West to ensure Mubarak did. Media, apart from the protesters themselves, had a role to play. Considering the ends, the media did its job.

Recent events have reiterated my belief that India’s popular media is irresponsible and does not discriminate. I have had occasion to talk about it earlier. Popular India media appears to be too concerned with its necessity to be free and fair. A balanced media can, doubtless, have its uses. But the media also plays a larger and more important role in society that cannot be served by balance, but by taking an informed position on events. In India’s movement against corruption, the protesters did their jobs. They came out and made sure they were heard. They were organized and their message reached the powers that be. The media, commendably, played its part by making sure the protest got coverage. However, media behavior may well contribute to derailing the very campaign that it helped foster a few weeks back. A columnist in Open, for example, has called Hazare a performer rather than anything else and the event a performance for the media. The media itself has been scampering to report every ad hominem argument against Hazare and Bhushan and every argument against the Jan Lokpal bill.  Kapil Sibal has had as much coverage as the campaign itself. The Amar Singh episode got more coverage than it deserved. While Anna Hazare may well be an empty performer, that is not the real issue. The real issue is that the country is corrupt and needs comprehensive legislation to fight it. The media has contributed to obfuscating the real issue and failed to ensure that the focus remains on the need for a Jan Lokpal bill.

Will the IPL hijack India’s anti-corruption movement?

It is said that location and timing are everything. Anna Hazare‘s protest against corruption has excellent timing. It started a couple of days after India’s World Cup win. And there is still enough time left for the protest to gain momentum before people switch to more important things like the IPL. The timing worked for Anna Hazare and the other protesters in two other ways. The media had 5 days with nothing significant to air. The government, therefore, has an equal number of days of constant media and public attention to ward off; especially with local Tamil Nadu allies DMK getting into trouble with the Election Commission almost everyday for attempting to distribute money and goodies. In the last 9  months, we have had the 2G scam, the CWG scam and now, the DGCA recruitment scam. That is more scams than Akshay Kumar movies. One or the other will win soon. All of these will play a part in how successful the movement becomes.

Each protest has its own mechanics. The freedom and wealth a sizable portion of India has will ensure that localized, street-level protests remain that way. Most Indians, especially the urban and middle class, cannot afford to participate in any movement for the time required for the idea to gain critical mass. India cannot expect a protest like Egypt or Libya. More precisely, India does not need one. No doubt we will be much better off without corruption, but the idea is not worth spilling blood over. Many Indians realize (hopefully) that it is not just the political class that is corrupt. In any case, I think the number of Indians as a percentage of the population who are really against corruption is too few for a mass revolution.

Anna Hazare understands all of this. His movement is socially engineered so well that people are buzzing, tweeting and status updating their thoughts about the fight against corruption. He is drawing attention to his demands. He has not made it a disruptive mass movement. All he needed is a few celebrities and media coverage and he is getting all of it. Of course, his civil movement now runs the risk of being railroaded by opposition political parties into a political movement spearheaded by the opposition and will also lose the eyeball race to the IPL from tomorrow. Congress and the UPA will be aware of all this. Giving in to Hazare’s demands for civil society participation in the framing of the Jan Lokpal Bill will give the Congress some moral authority. The party can also, just as easily, wait for enough time for the protest to lose direction and meaning and the IPL to hog the people’s attention.

As for the location, 10 Janpath would have been a great location. Some protesters should also have camped outside the houses of Kalmadi, Yeddyurappa, etc. And, of course, a whole city should protest outside Anna Arivalayam.

People, media and our cricketing gods

It has been two mornings and two nights since India won the Cricket World Cup. Emotions should have died down by now, for most fans. The hardcore Indian Fan is probably still gloating over the victory. Some of the journalists who covered the event over the last 6 weeks may be feeling sheepish and even embarrassed about stuff they have written – about talk of war without guns, cricket being a religion, Sachin being God, Dhoni ready to rule India. That is, if they still have the dignity to be embarrassed.

A footnote: As I am writing this, the Times of India has 11 articles about the World Cup win or items of related interest; one article each about a gay movie, oral sex and a girl who has committed suicide. My point? They are all equally relevant (or irrelevant) in the scheme of things.

There are journalists who dedicate hours to research a point. They look at facts, analyze what they get and attempt to understand and explain phenomena. There is the astute armchair writer who can provide serious insight into everything from the economic state of Tuvalu to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s uneasy relationship with the media. They are erudite and spend hours chewing on things before they go to print. These are the people who help us understand, think and create informed opinions for ourselves. These were the kind on journalists on whom serious newspapers and journals relied to attract and retain readership. And then, there are the wannabes and so-called journalists who look for anything that can help them string a few hundred SEO friendly words together. They are paid to make up the bulk and fill the pages. It is not hard to guess which kind wrote the 14 articles in the Times of India today.

Consumers of serious news should be seeing all this with a faint note of alarm. There are such consumers. Maybe it is a coincidence that movies like ‘Unnai Pol Oruvan/A Wednesday’, ‘Payanam’, ‘Peepli Live’, which made strong statements about media frenzy and behavior, came after Mumbai 26/11. Probably not. Some times it takes a defining moment for general and widespread decadence to be noticed. Media would like to call the 24 x 7 live coverage of the 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attacks journalism. In reality, it was porn. While it is easy to blame the lack of responsibility of Media, it is also an indictment of how we ‘consume’ news. Media has considerations – the need to ‘break’ something ‘new’, create frenzy, get eyeballs – that consumers do not. Consumers should be more discriminating than Media can afford to be.

This brings me to another point – separating the real and the illusory. I have written about Tendulkar’s stature earlier. The essential idea of my original arguments apply for any larger-than-life figure – Rajinikanth, Shahrukh Khan, Chetan Bhagat (!), et al. Players like Tendulkar and Dhoni are, no doubt, at the top of their professions. Their achievements deserve respect and, perhaps, even admiration. However, the Indian Fan needs to differentiate respect and worship. Respect is healthy. Worship works by undermining yourself against something else – Tendulkar, God, Rajinikanth, Shahrukh Khan, you name it. Worship implies veneration – bestowing on someone else a kind of respect that you are denying yourself.

The noisy Indian Cricket Fan

Staying in an apartment with at least twenty other houses can be challenging. There are so many things to decide. Do you want to be friends with your neighbors, make acquaintances, send a subtle message that you would like to be left alone, greet people in the hallways, offer them a ride if you see them? It makes life hard. Thankfully, I have wonderful neighbors. I have never seen more than four or five of them. They never bother me even if the home theater is on full-blast. Not too many children or old people around. Overall, it is a healthy place and way to be.

You can imagine my indignation when all that magical equilibrium that was disrupted today. Someone decided to invite a bunch of friends over and together they ruined the quiet evening I was spending at home watching a clinical bowling display by the Indians. They found something to cheer in every dot ball till the 49th over. I guess they did not realize that the match was already over by the time Sehwag had departed in the first innings. It was a revelation that 6 people could produce so much noise. Apparently, an India-Pakistan contest is an occasion to be noisy. I’ve often wondered why many Indians equate noise with enjoyment. Sanjay Manjrekar and Ravi Shastri, in particular, seem positively delighted with noisy crowds. They probably get orgasms when they see a bunch of people chanting De ghuma ke tunelessly!

Crowds are not all bad. A Mexican wave that goes around a stadium with endless energy and enthusiasm is a beautiful sight. Often, it drives home the point that we are all connected – something we tend to forget in pursuit of materialistic ambitions. It is the crowds that bring tourists and casual observers of life to cities. There is so much to see, feel and absorb in a city. The crowd can have a neutralizing effect on negativity. It can amplify positive emotion. Everyone brings their own vibes into the city and being with so many other people drags you along. Cities and crowds are great places to feel a sense of kinship with strangers. A cricket match, a movie, a concert, a play are all perfect to feel that because everyone is there for a common purpose.

Circling back to my original point, is being noisy the only way to enjoy a game? Why not a respectful, silent awe instead of all that deep-throated yells and banshee-cries? Maybe watching Tendulkar or Muralitharan on the field with silent, respectful awe may even enhance the experience. People do it all the time in places like Wimbledon, Augusta and they seem to go back satisfied. I am also quite surprised by the hostility of Indian crowds during cricket games. Ponting had almost no applause when he scored a brilliant century against India a few days back. Every boundary by a Pakistani batsman today was greeted with deathly silence, as if each boundary was a personal insult against one’s mother. Pakistan is not even the best team India has played in the last month. Several other games were much more closely contested and emotionally draining. That is why I find it hard to believe my neighbors got so worked up about this one match. I barely knew they existed when India was fighting it out with England and South Africa.

It may be hard to be graceful in defeat. Why not in victory, at least? In the middle of all the noise in the stadium, it was hard to miss Dhoni smile quietly and walk off the field. I am not even sure The Indian Fan noticed it. They were busy celebrating. Noisily.

Why it should be India’s World Cup

Or, How a naked woman can change priorities!

Players, former players, critics, the Great Indian Fan have all gone public saying that India should win the World Cup for Sachin Tendulkar. At 37, it is unlikely Tendulkar will play one more World Cup in 2015. I cannot reconcile myself to the idea that the team wants to win the World Cup for Tendulkar. If they really want to do it for him, they should wait till he retires from the game and then dedicate it to him – in 2015, 2019 or 2035 if the game is around till then. Taking into account the relative importance of players to their respective countries, I did not see Sangakkara or his Sri Lankan temmates aspiring to win the World Cup for Muralitharan. England did not want to win it for Collingwood. South Africa did not want to win it for Kallis. Kenya did not want to win it for Tikolo(!). The Indian reaction probably boils down to the emotional attachment India has to Tendulkar. Tendulkar himself may not be too happy with it – given a choice, he would rather win the cup for India.

However, all this is just the entrée before the plat principal. I have gone on record earlier saying that all I care about is a good contest in a cricket match. But it is not set in stone. I am perfectly fine with a lopsided contest if there are extenuating circumstances. One such extenuating circumstance is a naked woman, a model too at that. Indian model Poonam Pandey has promised that she would strip if India won the World Cup. Looking at trending Twitter topics, a lot of people are excited about the prospect. In the West, a woman losing her ‘nudity cherry’ is an occasion to wait for. I know people who went into anxiety attacks waiting for Anne Hathaway to lose hers. Incidentally, she went 6 years in filmdom without doing that. So, whoever this Poonam Pandey is, she understands the male psyche and is making hay while the sun shines.

A stripping Poonam Pandey is neat. A nude Poonam Pandey on top of a World Cup victory is the stuff fairy tales are made of. On a related note, I went all out for Paraguay during the FIFA World Cup when model Larissa Riquelme promised to streak if Paraguay won. I even had tickets to Paraguay ready! Anyway, the point is I am now rooting for India. Of all the possible reasons Indians could have found to win the World Cup, this is the one I find most appealing. But I should also footnote that assertion. I am ready to change my mind and cheer for Pakistan if an equally unfamiliar Pakistani model offers to strip. Or, Sri Lanka if a Sri Lankan model is ready to go nude. Let it never be said that I am just One More Unreasonable Indian Fan.

Note: Despite all the talk about nude women, I am still categorizing this under Cricket!

Understanding the Tendulkar phenomenon

I read an article a few days back in Business Line about Sachin Tendulkar. It was one of the very few articles I have seen questioning Tendulkar’s place in the team, considering his current form. I have always had a few misgivings about Sachin Tendulkar. Many other people have complaints too – he was never a Test match winner, he was inflexible about his batting spot, etc. But few cricketers have given me the pleasure I have derived from watching Tendulkar. For someone who enjoyed a good contest more than anything else, Tendulkar’s batting would be one of the happier moments in the most one-sided and dull games.

Tendulkar entered the sport at a very young age. He was no more than a boy, standing up to the likes Walsh, Ambrose, McDermott, Imran, Akram et al. That was an image a country like India could get used to, a natty David-Goliath moment. Aside from his batting, he was a gentleman on and off the field, he was never involved in sledging or responding to it, he was squeaky clean. He was a complete sportsman. For the Indian cricket fan, he was a player unlike anyone they had seen before. For a nation starved of role models, he was someone who could inspire, just with his bat. He symbolized aspiration and success for a whole new generation of Indians.

There were a few other things which went in Tendulkar’s favor. India was a nation that did not have role models. India’s political landscape was never breeding ground for leaders who could inspire a young country. Academics and scientists were irrelevant. There was no one else in the country’s sporting horizon who could play the role. At least, there were none in cricket, the only sport that had a following. Gavaskar was done. Kapil’s career was coming to an end. The game was changing. The country’s cricketing team was devoid of stars, till Tendulkar arrived on the scene.

Coincidentally, India’s economy opened up. People were becoming richer. Media blossomed. Television ownership and the number of satellite television channels increased. Brands aspiring to come into India and anyone selling anything worth buying wanted a brand ambassador who could sell across the nation. Cinema was divisive. People from two states never cared for the same stars. Apart from cinema, there was only one thing Indians cared about. Cricket. The Mark Mascarenhas WorldTel coup is now history. There was a time when you couldn’t escape Tendulkar. He was constantly on TV – it was either a match, or a cricket program or an advertisement. It is hard to watch TV even now without a little bit of Tendulkar in it. It is probable that Tendulkar is the most recognized Indian. The most important reasons for the man’s popularity, however, are different – critics and the attitude of the average Indian fan.

Critics and wannabes took upon themselves the task of building Tendulkar’s reputation. Critics dream of being the one to ‘introduce’ the next star. Tendulkar was obviously one in the making. What they ended up doing was blowing his achievements out of proportion. Tendulkar got the kind of articles written about him that Pete Sampras could not have gotten at the end of his career. Not many were concerned that Tendulkar’s predominantly individual achievements did not reflect on the team’s results. Most got carried away by the grace of Tendulkar’s batsmanship and their own abilities with the written word. No wonder Tendulkar’s achievements have been compared to stuff as unrelated as Michelangelo’s work in the Vatican by intrepid sycophants. Critics failed to observe the fine distinction between putting things in perspective and glorifying them.

The average Indian cricket fan is a fickle animal. Being a Tendulkar fan credited the fan with a discernment that he did not possess. Many of them were enthralled by the exciting batsmanship of Tendulkar. It was easy being a fan. The relationship fans had with Tendulkar transcended respect and became reverence. It lost meaning and credibility.

There were two consequences to this. One, Tendulkar became so much of a phenomenon that the fan forgot what was most important – the game. Tendulkar, in the eyes of the fan, became bigger than the game. He was elevated to a super-normal, God-like stature. Two, a new set of stars and match-winners emerged in Tendulkar’s shadows. Players like Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly, VVS Laxman, Virender Sehwag, Zaheer Khan and Yuvraj Singh found the space to perform and grow. With Tendulkar soaking up the pressure, these players came into their own. It did not take long for these players to cement their place in the team, riding on exceptional performances and winning matches for India. India started winning more matches than they ever had, even Test matches. But the collateral damage of the Tendulkar aura was that none of these players got their due. Athletes thrive on adulation. They play for the applause at the end of a remarkable innings or spell. Unfortunately for these players, the loudest applause and the maximum coverage was always reserved for Tendulkar. We do not know how this affected the rest of the players in the team, what difference it made. We never will.

Despite all the commotion and adulation that flows around him, Tendulkar himself is unmoved. Over the years, his conduct has remained exemplary and his game as exciting as ever. While he deserves respect and admiration for his achievements in sport, Tendulkar also deserves a better class of fan. A class that is as devoted to the game as he is, that applauds good cricket as much as he does; a more discriminating set of critics talking and writing about him. We can only hope that he finds them.

On the relevance of the Wikileaks idea

There are so many stories about Julian Assange-some true, some maybe not-that it seems easy to judge him. Coming to a conclusion on who Assange really is depends on what you read about him and your political predisposition. Maybe all stories about him have an element of truth. He has been called a terrorist, a hero and many other things in between. Irrespective of the label he comes with, his idea is vital in establishing transparency and accountability. However, my interest is less on the man himself and more on what he spawned, Wikileaks.

It is hard to talk about Wikileaks without making an attempt to understand why many people think it is necessary. Most democracies have an active and functional mainstream media that is entrusted with the job of keeping governments and corporations in check. They are expected to be the conscience-keepers. In what could be one of the most debilitating phenomena of the twentieth century, all media had to go ‘mainstream’ for survival. Serious newspapers and journals had to compete with glamorous and less serious rivals. All newspapers and journals had to compete with radio and television. All channels had to compete for advertising revenue and eyeballs. Publishers and channels lost the ability to cover expenses with subscriptions alone. In some cases, media outlets had to shut shop. Many had to take in more advertising and dumb down content. Somewhere along the line, corporate houses with profit motives bought stakes in media outlets. Certain ‘visionaries’ decided that mass media was the perfect medium to spread propaganda. Simplistic as it may sound, all of this is in some way responsible for media as we know it today, for why there is scant regard for facts; facts being substituted with opinions and rhetoric. In hindsight, mass media lost its relevance long ago, perhaps, even before Noam Chomsky accused It of being subservient to the needs of the elite. Maybe even before Lippman decided that mass media was the perfect tool to ‘manufacture’ consent.

In a recent interview to CBS, Assange comes off as someone who understands the gravity of his decisions and more than aware of the power of his idea. He made two important distinctions. One, that Wikileaks did not have an agenda and never ‘went after’ anyone. Assange stressed that the whistleblower website was only a ‘conduit’ for people aggrieved with questionable practices to publish information. Two, that Wikileaks was always at the mercy of someone-its sources and the people who donated the money to keep the organization running. Both these points are in direct contrast to the role mass media traditionally plays – disseminating government propaganda, wittingly or unwittingly, and being victim to the arrogance and elitism that goes with the territory.

Christopher Nolan in his ‘Inception’ says nothing is more resilient than a well-formed idea. The Wikileaks site hosts a poster that says (and I quote) “Information wants to be free”. Cheesy and sixth gradish as it may sound, this is an idea that could well ‘stick’. It may be too early to say whether the Wikileaks idea has the kind of resilience that could make it a phenomenon. But the idea itself is fundamental to what many of us require of our governments and corporations-transparency. Wikileaks is different to the extent that the messenger does not confuse the message. It gives us facts and opinions, without the spin, from the people who matter, as in the Wikileaks cables. And it allows us to make up your own minds on what they mean.

Wikileaks is not Assange. The relevance of Wikileaks transcends the invisible bunch of people who keep the organization running. Considering that the world’s most powerful governments would like to see the people who keep the company ticking brought to book, it is hard to dispute the power of the Wikileaks idea. As an alternate source of information, Wikileaks may be more invaluable than we can understand now. Wikileaks plays a critical part in the ‘democratization’ of information and needs to be protected. The success of Wikileaks will depend largely on finding the right sources to harvest, publishing relevant information, taking responsibility for protecting sources, minimizing collateral damage arising out of their leaks, learning from their mistakes and keeping themselves from becoming part of what they are against – elitist and out-of-touch.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.