The Court of Media

I have once written about media’s unfettered freedom in India.

Now, I do not think that unfettered freedom is that good. Media is not comprised of folks who are all super-intelligent, super-educated, super- analytical and simply outstanding human beings. Not at all. On the contrary, most of them are sensationalists and the rest are mere reporters.

While I am not denigrating the importance of a free press in any society, it is critical to rethink the role of the media when they choose to “execute” accused or inflame passions, before the truth is discovered and reported. While it is all good to know what happened in a particular case or scandal, it is also important not to pass any judgements at the “Court of the Media”. The media is not qualified to pass any judgements. Neither can they claim to know everything about every case or every person in every situation. Mostly their information is incomplete. Given that the influence of the media is overblown in our society, it is very important to reassess the role of the media.

The current arguments in the Supreme Court of India about the critical importance of the press bear testimony to the strength of democracy and the independence of the judiciary in India. The very thought of formulating a set of reference guidelines for the media is obviously anathema to the media world, and they are understandably resisting any such thought, notwithstanding any logical arguments in favour of the same. The futility of winning a case against the media is well established, at least in India. The lawyers for powerful media houses and publications will argue till the end of this world how critical it is that the media maintains its independence and neutrality – everyone knows that no media is absolutely independent or neutral.

The question of sullying the reputation of any individual – whether he has public standing or not – is an important consideration before the Court. Why should the media make the conclusion on the integrity of an individual – what right they do have in asserting their position which may not be justified at all – and what recourse the individual has against the concerned media ?

The other important situation is the safety of a victim. The more information is revealed about the situation of the victim, the higher the probability that the victim will be disturbed trying to influence the outcome of the case. The media mostly plays a destructive role in such situations.

While I am not providing any evidence in this post, one is free to make his own judgement by just following the news media. It is evident that media needs to operate within a set of guidelines, and if they cross the boundaries, the Court should have the liberty of passing strictures and exercising their power based on a suitable legislation.

Well, these are my thoughts, and I could easily be challenged, of course. Let us think carefully before hailing the “Court of the Media”, which is not conducted by qualified individuals who can pass judgements on any one and anybody in the society.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
14th April 2012
Mumbai

Right to Sleep

Right to Sleep was every person’s fundamental right, that is what I thought.

So, I was surprised to see the Supreme Court of India’s judgement that right to sleep is a fundamental right, see The Times of India coverage at “Right to sleep a fundamental right, says Supreme Court” .

What was the issue here ? Obviously, nothing is as simple as what it appears to be, especially in India. It is a complex nation emerging from hundreds of years of stupor, into a modern nation capable of holding its own in the comity of the top countries of the world. Hence, it is sometimes not really surprising to see that notions that we take for granted are getting endorsed either by the government or by a court of law.

That said, the specific issue here is the liberty of a set of protesters sleeping in the open space where a protest was being organized against the government in Delhi last year. Should they be allowed to make use of that open space to sleep ?

Delhi Police violated this fundamental right of citizens to sleep peacefully by attacking the peaceful protesters. Right to sleep is of a fundamental nature, and is categorized in the same plane as right to privacy, right to food, right to education, et al. This ruling of the Supreme Court of India is very significant and clearly delineates the rights of citizens vis-a-vis the enforcement powers of the police force. It is now clearly ruled by the Supreme Court of India that what the Delhi Police did was violative of the fundamental rights of citizens.

But the interesting part of the ruling was whether the citizens can exercise this fundamental right to sleep anywhere and at anytime they like. In that respect, it is to be interpreted in the same manner as when one’s right ends, the other’s right begins. So, the Supreme Court rightly ruled that citizens cannot, for example, sleep at the Court premises !

As the civilized society slowly tames the arrogance of power, and disciplines itself in the process, we can surely hope to arrive in the league of the developed nations of the world (forget we were one of the most developed nations some thousands of years ago). Police brutality is not a good sign of a developed nation. Forget brutality and insensitivity – even acts showing lack of respect will not be acceptable. No one should be presumed guilty by the police unless proven guilty by a court of law. Law enforcement cannot disturb and cannot afford to disturb the fundamental rights of the people.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
25th February 2012
Mumbai

Moral Police

Mumbai is the entertainment capital of India (apart from being the financial and commercial capital of India). Bollywood is synonymous with the Indian form of entertainment around the world.

Most of the movie stars live in Bandra, a Western suburb of the city.

In this context, it was funny to see the news item today in The Times of India “Cops slammed over ‘kiss-and-hug’ fine” .

Where are we headed in India ?

If this can happen in Mumbai to a young man who just hugged his friend before seeing her off in an auto-rickshaw, one can imagine what could happen to even holding of hands, or looking at each other, in other parts of the country.

There are many instances of the moral police acting in a high-handed manner around the country, especially in the State of Karnataka. But, in Mumbai ? I could not believe this is happening here of all places.

It is better to avoid looking at even one’s own wife or girlfriend and be very stern-looking when one ventures out. For heaven’s sake, don’t even touch anyone. Who knows, the moral police may just be around the corner of the road, and you do not wish to take any risks. They can easily charge you under some vague Indian law or section of some old British Act and cite you for “indecent behaviour in a public place”. Not everyone is a lawyer to contest the actions of the police.

The young man in the news story was fined INR 1,200 (some USD 25) for this offence of “hug-and-kiss”, and he was required to appear in the Court soon. That is the plight for causing a moral hazard in this morally uptight nation.

Visitors also beware of the moral police !

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
25th February 2012
Mumbai

Filtering FaceBook, Google and Twitter

And 21 other websites !

That is what Delhi High Court and the Government of India want to do.

The matter is now coming to a head, and it might yield dangerous results.

Both for the Government of India and the 21 websites !

According to a Time of India report, the Delhi Court “had on December 23 issued summons to 21 social netorking websites for allegedly committing offences of criminal conspiracy, sale of obscene books and sale of obscene objects to young persons. It had said prima facie the accused companies were liable to be summoned for promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class…….”.

I have written about this topic earlier. My views on “objectionable” content on heavily used websites such as Facebook, Twitter, Google and Yahoo are more or less the same as that of the law of the land. Nobody is above the law of the land, notwithstanding fancy foreign names.

The only objection I do have is the removal of “politically sensitive” matters from these sites. That will go against the freedom of speech that is enshrined in the Indian Constitution. Ofcourse, if any politician or political party wish to pursue charges against these sites for politically objectionable or sensitive content, they are free to file a case in a court of law in India – no issue with that, but they rarely take that action. And, I don’t understand why a politician would not take immediate action if he is defamed.

However, I do not have objection for the removal of racially sensitive or religiously objectionable content from these sites. These sites are not a “global”, “regional”, or a “national” publishing platform. They are not a licensed publishing “media” in that sense. And, there is no recourse against frivolous content published on their sites which could hurt the public sentiments in several areas.

Ofcourse, the sites can easily claim (and they have done so) that they are only providing a platform, and the content is not theirs. By that argument, a copyright owner cannot proceed if his content gets published without his permission – what recourse he has against a “platform” ?

We need to apply our own thinking hats and decide what is right and wrong, instead of following precedents from totally different environments. I am not, for a moment, saying that Asians and Indians are thin-skinned. I am only saying that there should be a mechanism for proceeding against either the content owner or a content aggregator/publisher in the absence of access to the content owner. The content owner published his objectionable content using the free service provided by the platform. He could have used his own platform, but he chose a widely trafficked platform to create maximum impact, didn’t he ?

Well, my readers may not like what I am expressing. But I truly feel that we should respect each others’ positions and views on this matter. Yes, it is easy to beat up each other – people do get targeted for expressing their views. That happens in free democratic societies (actually more often these days) than in autocratic or theocratic societies. Is there a conflict with democratic ideals ?

You bet.

Well, think carefully before jumping into the bandwagon which supports Facebook all the way. And, think for yourself and your society, what is right and what could be wrong, in fact, what is going wrong these days.

Cheers

Vijay Srinivasan
14th January 2012
Mumbai

Duty at Customs

For a very long time, it was not at all a pleasant experience to go through the Customs check at International airports in India. They used to check everything that you brought back from your overseas trip, and fined people who did not declare taxable goods.

This changed a few years ago, probably from 2005 onwards, when the Customs Department took a more relaxed approach. They waved off people with a single piece of baggage without any checks. Of course, 90% of the passengers were still asked to put their baggage through X-ray machines before exiting the airport, and some officer was checking each and every piece of baggage on the X-ray monitor. But some folks who appeared to be business professionals with a single piece of baggage could just walk out.

All this was fine, if that is what the country wants to do, so be it. In any case, none of the international airports in India are “free” ports like a Hong Kong or a Singapore. So, there is always a “green” channel for passengers who have nothing to declare to Customs, and a “red” channel for passengers who have something to declare. The idea behind this arrangement was trust.

I am sure millions of folks might have misused this trust based arrangement, but some would have followed rules and paid the taxes at the red channels all over the country. The rules are clearly described at the Customs website and at the airports, so no one should feign ignorance of the rules. In any case, given that India does not have “free” ports, how can people assume that they can just walk in and not be expected to pay duties ?

So, I was amused when one (actually several over the past 6 months) actress was caught by the Customs last week at the Mumbai International Airport and released only after payment of taxes, duties and penalties. She complained about the Customs Department’s behaviour, stating that they informed the media who covered the incident. She also stated that she did not know the Customs rules, and so failed to declare the good she had brought from overseas.

Who would believe ? She is an intelligent and well-read person, and her claim of ignorance of rules is only laughable. Why do Indians with intelligence, knowledge, education, social status and wealth, feel that they could take the government for a ride ? May be if a poor Indian below poverty level does that, it might be considered to be OK, but what about wealthy and well-known people ?

While it is not necessary for the Customs Department to make a noise about any one individual, their attempt to shame such people is not without precedence. Such acts also would show to the world that they are not scared of powerful and influential or famous people in their city of operation, and they are applying the rules on the statute without fear or favour. What is wrong with that approach ?

The other fact is that if the law does allow, the repeat offenders should be jailed. I am not sure whether the Customs computers do throw up the names of the first time offenders at the immigration counter itself, so that the customs officials can keep a watch to nab them.

Let us follow rules. If the concerned person has walked through the red channel, she would have paid less than one-fourth of what she incurred by not declaring her goods. Let us not set bad examples, let us remember that our own examples are very important when we are people of substance in the society.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
8th January 2012
Mumbai

The Impatient Honkers

During monsoon rains in Mumbai, I find that vehicle drivers on roads are increasing the decibel of their horns as well as the frequency of horning on the roads.

It is quite annoying to be hounded constantly by a joker driver at the back who is potentially horning to avoid another vehicle coming on his way in his lane (not your lane thankfully), and one tends to look at the mirrors to see if it is all about one’s bad driving. I mean yours !

When you figure out that you are driving in your lane perfectly well, and you are not the cause of the commotion at the back, you tend to get irritated with the driver who is horning continuously. Anyone would, and even if I am not driving I tend to turn back and check to see what is going on. After all, the constant honking affects your concentration or your phone call.

I find that the understanding required of drivers during tough driving conditions just does not exist. The drivers are mostly illiterate, or of young blood, or the angry ilk, that they tend to brake hard and horn hard, and think every other driver on the road is a complete idiot to be driving slowly or following the traffic rules. Good drivers are to be banished according to the current drivers on the roads of Mumbai, it appears. I do not, for a moment, agree that Mumbai’s drivers are far better than those in other cities – may be in parts of South Mumbai, the drivers tend to follow rules due to strict enforcement. But in 90% of Mumbai, drivers have gone crazy (they were always crazy, to start with).

I recall policemen used to haul up indiscriminate horners, and even fine them occasionally in Mumbai, because their honking was not required, was causing trouble to other drivers, or was used in silent zones such as hospitals or school areas. But drivers are idiots who do not learn even after paying one or two traffic fines. They continue with their ways, and I have also heard them justifying their ways stating that everyone else is doing that way, and they will be in trouble if they do not follow the other idiots’ driving habits.

At the end of the day, I believe that idiots need to be trained as well and accredited properly, and fined for not following traffic rules, notwithstanding recurrence of their poor driving practices. Any impatient idiots should be fined heavily, and should not be allowed to bribe their way out. They impact on any good drivers on the road in a negative manner, and should be punished vigorously. Suspension of driving licenses, and not monetary fines, is the best punishment to incapacitate idiot drivers.

Hopefully, the monsoon rains are subsiding, and drivers will get back to their normal (yet poor) driving habits in Mumbai. I hope they stop issuing driving licenses till people reach the age of 25, and eliminate major road rage cases as well. Re-training and re-certification is badly needed, but how can the Road Transport Office (the agency responsible for issuing driving licenses) operate in this critically needed area, when they are already knee-deep in water ?

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
13th August 2011
Mumbai

Crowds: Power and Destruction

Indian cities are very crowded. Of course, there are many tourist places around the world which are also very crowded. But in India, all major cities and even towns are crowded. The reason ? We are a big country with 1.2B people, and the country is rapidly urbanizing. India does not have and cannot have the restrictions that China imposes on the movement of its people from the rural to the urban areas.

The result is that we have very crowded places and streets. This is one reason why terrorists can have easy targets in India. Many crowded places where the potential for destruction is much higher than in the Western world, and also the possibility of escape multiplies when there are such dense crowds. So, it is easy to attack India and damage its social fabric, and it is also very difficult to detect the people who caused the mayhem.

Crowds have a rather funny behaviour. People in crowds tend to congregate around shopping places on the streets, and more people, in turn, draw even more people. People have a sense of anonymity and safety in such crowds, and the assumption is that you can go undetected, doing the same chores that people do, day in and day out. Easy to vanish in the crowd. On the contrary, there are people who do not like crowds – I, for instance, is one such person. I completely avoid crowds, since crowd behaviour is so unpredictable.

Yes, crowds are unpredictable. For instance, a person in the crowd starts beating another person in the crowd for some unknown reason, and explains the rationale with a story on the crime committed by this person. The crowd around the beater joins him in beating up this poor person on the ground, since they probably find common cause. On the other hand, crowds can also just watch the fun without doing anything – recently a person was beaten to death in one of the main roads of Coimbatore and the crowd just watched, doing nothing to save the poor soul.

Hence, I do not trust crowd behaviour, and do not believe that crowd behaviour and performance is symbolic of what should actually transpire in a democracy. Crowd is NOT equal to democracy, crowds have to be controlled when they become organized. Usually, crowds move in random Brownian motion around shopping places and streets in cities, and constantly people move in and move out. But, when crowds become organized, the result could be mob violence on public properties. We have seen this happening repeatedly when crowds take law and order into their hands, and the police could not control their behaviour. Political and Religious factions are drivers of organized crowds.

Organized procession of a group of people could be orderly if they just wish to represent a cause. But if the crowd is organized with violence in mind, then one can only get destruction. Governments and police forces understand this rather well, but refuse to take timely action, leading to public losses.

Overall, my verdict on crowds – unreliable, potentially violent, and driven to extremes in behaviour. Stay away from crowded places, and do not become part of an organized crowd, whether you sympathize with their cause or not. Individual thoughts are more powerful at the end of the day. Crowds can only become meaningful and useful when they are led by a determined and charismatic leader, such as Mahatma Gandhi, or Subhash Chandra Bose, who were respected far beyond the crowds that they were leading. We do not have leaders like them anymore.

Crowd = raw power + violent destruction

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
23rd July 2011
Mumbai

How to murder oneself

Courtesy: Anu, my IIM-B Classmate

Truth is stranger than fiction ……..
For those who have served on a jury…this one is something to think about……Just when you think you have heard everything!

Do you like to read a good murder mystery?

Not even Law and Order would attempt to capture this mess. This is an unbelievable twist of fate!

At the 1994 annual awards dinner given for Forensic Science, (AAFS) President, Dr. Don Harper Mills astounded his audience with the legal complications of a bizarre death.

Here is the story:

On March 23,1994 … the medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus, and concluded that he died from a shotgun wound to the head. Mr. Opus had jumped from the top of a ten-story building intending to commit suicide. He left a note to the effect indicating his despondency.

As he fell past the ninth floor, his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast passing through a window, which killed him instantly. Neither the shooter nor the deceased was aware that a safety net had been installed just below the eighth floor level to protect some building workers and that Ronald Opus would not have been able to complete his suicide the way he had planned.

The room on the ninth floor, where the shotgun blast emanated, was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. They were arguing vigorously and he was threatening her with a shotgun! The man was so upset that when he pulled the trigger, he completely missed his wife, and the pellets went through the window, striking Mr. Opus.

When one intends to kill subject ‘A’ but kills subject ‘B’ in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject ‘B.’

When confronted with the murder charge, the old man and his wife were both adamant, and both said that they thought the shotgun was not loaded.

The old man said it was a long-standing habit to threaten his wife with the unloaded shotgun. He had no intention to murder her. Therefore the killing of Mr. Opus appeared to be an accident; that is, assuming the gun had been accidentally loaded.

The continuing investigation turned up a witness who saw the old couple’s son loading the shotgun about six weeks prior to the fatal accident. It transpired that the old lady, had cut off her son’s financial support and the son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that his father would shoot his mother.

Since the loader of the gun was aware of this, he was guilty of the murder even though he didn’t actually pull the trigger. The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.

Now comes the exquisite twist …

Further investigation revealed that the son was, in fact, Ronald Opus. He had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to engineer his mother’s murder. This led him to jump off the ten-story building on March 23rd, only to be killed by a shotgun blast passing through the ninth story window.

The son, Ronald Opus, had actually murdered himself. So the medical examiner closed the case as a suicide.

A true story from Associated Press.

Courtesy: Anu, my IIM-B Classmate

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
17th July 2011
Mumbai

Two Brilliant Replies

Courtesy: Anu, my IIMB Classmate

These two responses are superb:

This policeman was being cross-examined by a defence attorney during a felony trial.

The lawyer was trying to undermine the police officer’s credibility…

Q: ‘Officer, did you see my client fleeing the scene?’
A: ‘No sir. But I subsequently observed a person matching the description of the offender, running several blocks away.’
Q: ‘Officer — who provided this description?’
A: ‘The officer who responded to the scene.’
Q: ‘A fellow officer provided the description of this so-called offender. Do you trust your fellow officers?’
A: ‘Yes, sir. With my life.’
Q: ‘With your life? Let me ask you this then officer. Do you have a room where you change your clothes in preparation for your daily duties?’
A: ‘Yes sir, we do!’
Q: ‘And do you have a locker in the room?’
A: ‘Yes sir, I do.’
Q: ‘And do you have a lock on your locker?’
A: ‘Yes sir.’
Q: ‘Now why is it, officer, if you trust your fellow officers with your life, you find it necessary to lock your locker in a room you share with these same officers?’
A: ‘You see, sir — we share the building with the court complex, and sometimes lawyers have been known to walk through that room.’

The courtroom EXPLODED with laughter, and a prompt recess was called.

The officer on the stand has been nominated for this year’s ‘Best Comeback’ line.

========================================================================

Now here’s one from General Schwarzkopf

In a recent interview, General Norman Schwarzkopf was asked if he thought there was room for forgiveness toward the people who have harbored and abetted the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks on America.

His answer was classic Schwarzkopf.

The General said:

“I believe that forgiving them is God’s function. OUR job is to arrange the meeting”

========================================================================
Courtesy: Anu, my IIMB Classmate

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
26th June 2011
Mumbai

Driver Dependency

For a long time, my wife and myself were pretty independent, driving around on our own – no problem.

But, when we returned to India, an immediate dependency was created. That is called “driver dependency”. Initially, we were just not able to move around without a driver for our car, who can ferry us to any place we wanted to go to. The situation is not very different five years later (we complete full five years this month of living in Mumbai), we still depend heavily on our driver, or driver(s).

While getting around to nearby places is not an issue for me (I have re-gained control over the manual gear stick), driving in thick traffic even for five kilometres is a challenge, due to the constant balance that is required to navigate without hitting anyone or avoiding getting hit by others. It is stressful and strenuous, to say the least, as drivers create a minimum of five sinuous highway lanes from the three lanes that are designed to operate. Horns come in handy (!) – constant use of horns is expected, so when my car horn failed one fine day, I found it very difficult to drive even for a short distance !

However, my wife had used only automatic transmission, so she is not driving in India. The more critical problem for her is the navigation described above – tight and narrow traffic in roads full of potholes. So, she has diligently avoided driving. In a nutshell, we are very dependent on a driver to drive us around the city.

But what do drivers do ? They are never happy with their salary, even when we paid some 20% more than our neighbouring apartments for our driver. At one time, one of my neighbours even complained, saying that it would be better to do price control ! However, we found that money is not everything for the driver(s). We have had a series of drivers, so we have built a decent database of driver behaviour and performance !

In essence, drivers look for couple of key things: (a) they would like to time their entry into the job or exit, depending on the award of the bonus for the year, which typically happens around the Diwali time, and which is one month’s salary – they absolutely do not wish to miss the bonus payment ; (b) they want to take one month time off in a 12-month service duration: during this time, they want salary to be paid, which qualifies their leave as “paid leave”, and during their period of absence, you would be left to fend for yourself, looking for a temporary driver, who would charge market rates ; and, finally (c) the drivers do not want to start their days early – they wish to work for someone preferably from 9 AM onwards, or later, and work till late (say 8 PM), rather than start early at 7 AM and finish by 6 PM, like what we desired.

It took us a couple of years and some three drivers to figure all this out. Just raising the salary did not produce the desired response or loyalty, and it was difficult for us to believe that kind of behaviour. And, of course, there are absolutely no loyalties, unless if the driver is from your home town !

So, the dependency is bad, and the behavioural impact is very bad. But can we do anything to mitigate, in the absence of public transportation ? The only thing we can do, is of course, to learn to drive on the treacherous roads in the midst of uncouthed drivers, and traffic cops who are just waiting at all the turns to catch for the silliest of mistakes even when traffic signal lights are not working !

Welcome to driving in India.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
26th June 2011
Mumbai