Protest benefits: AAP's idea to reward lawbreakers is bad

Shocking decision

Break the law and we will reward you — this seems to be the message from the AAP government in Delhi to the people. Its decision to foot 50% of the electricity bills of consumers who defaulted on their payment between October 2012 and December 2013 and to waive any penalty on these bills is unviable at best and unfair at worst. The government has identified 24,036 such defaulters who will be rewarded and this move will cost the state exchequer `6 crore. The Arvind Kejriwal government has already subsidised water and electricity tariffs at a cost of `200 crore. Cabinet minister Manish Sisodia’s statement that “the people who supported us during the andolan….should benefit now” puts the government’s move in perspective — `6 crore of the taxpayers’ money is being used to ‘benefit’ a few party supporters.
In Indian politics there is nothing new in a political party or government announcing sops in the hope that the intended group of beneficiaries would vote for the party. From cycles, televisions, mixies to laptops and even regularisation of illegal settlements, political parties, both at the central and state level, have tried to outdo the other. However, AAP’s move takes populism to a new level.
The AAP government in Delhi is in a tearing hurry, and in eagerness to sprint ahead it does not seem to ponder too much about the consequences of the statements and decisions it is taking. The subsidy can only be seen as a move to ‘reward’ those who stood by the party in its ‘bijli-paani andolan’ days. It sends out a covert message to AAP supporters that ‘if you stick by the party in all its decisions, you will be rewarded’. This move mocks the consumers who stuck to the law and did not heed Mr Kejriwal’s call to default on bill payments. This also sends out a wrong message to political parties like the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, which is on a protest against toll taxes in Maharashtra, that they can break the law and also to the people that if they go against the law they will be rewarded, not punished.

Bollywood Loses the Plot and Trivialises the Issue

Film stars discovering themselves on television shows, be it reality shows, chat shows or even soaps, is not a recent phenomenon. There is also nothing novel about the media frenzy — doctored without doubt — surrounding it. These days with TV rivalling cinema as we know it there isn’t much surprise that many film stars — even the so-called superstars — are testing new waters. Even though only a handful of these film stars who have ventured into the small screen have tasted success, it nevertheless is still a very enchanting milieu.
The entry of Aamir Khan — last of the troika Khans in Bollywood to do so — with an ‘Oprah Winfrey type show’ into every Indian living room was pitched sky-high. Three episodes old Satyamev Jayate is the talk of the town — or at least that is what the media keeps reminding us by saying that the show has broken all known records on TV viewing records and has forced law-makers take decisions.
It is telecast at the ‘Mahabarat’ slot —11 am on Sunday. Telecasting at a coveted timing, however, will alone not do the trick. Unlike the epic, Satyamev Jayate does not have drama, grandeur and flamboyance. What it has, instead, is an artificial, thrust-down-your-throat packaging of reality. If the producers of Satyamev Jayate thought they could replicate the Mahabarat success, it only goes to show their overconfidence in their marketing genius. Mahabarat is an Indian epic, with almost all the essential ingredients to keep one glued to the TV. That it was based on a religious text helped in its success.
Satyamev Jayate, on the other hand, speaks about taboo issues that are unfortunately prevalent in our society but none would want to address. This in no way is to undermine the importance of the topics that are discussed, but how many people would want to spend a lazy Sunday morning listening to issues that many cringe at?
The promoters of the show have heavily relied on the image of Aamir Khan as a crusader for social causes and have taken great pains to show that the issues discussed are close to his heart. The fact that female foeticide is close to the actor’s heart will make good Page 3 news or will make headlines in news channels that have unashamedly blurred the lines between news and entertainment. The question is: how does it matter to someone who is taking such a decision, wrong as it is, either due to ignorance or pressing circumstances whether Aamir Khan is against the practice? Film stars or celebrities have not been able to create such a profound impact in society. If that was the case, law and order would have been much better in the country given the number of police-officer roles the popular film stars have portrayed.
In the effort of covering Aamir Khan in an activist armour the promoters of Satyamev Jayate have actually done harm to his image as an entertainer. That, one presumes, explains the clarification given by the actor shortly after first episode of Satyamev Jayate stating that he was just an ‘entertainer’. It perhaps seems that it was seen as necessary to disassociate the ‘star’ from the ‘cause’, not because the ‘cause’ was not worthy to be associated with the ‘star’ but because contrary to expectations the ‘cause’ was hampering the image of the ‘star’.

An overkill of activism is eating into the ‘entertainment’ quotient Aamir Khan is commanding, and there is little argument that projects he is associated with are the most anticipated ones in Bollywood. In addition to the quality of the film and publicity surrounding it, what gives an Amir Khan movie an edge is the fact that unlike many other stars there is a certain invisibility about the actor from the public eye and rampant speculation about the project/film. Satyamev Jayate brings him in the news almost every day, into the living room space and thereby killing an anticipation that earlier existed. One wonders how this will affect his Talaash, which is now slated for a November 2012 release and by then Satyamev Jayate would have run its whole season and Aamir Khan would have addressed almost all social evils in the country. Would this constant reminder of what ails our society hamper Aamir Khan’s glow? After all, who likes someone who always points out the mistakes in us?
Finally, recent news reports linking Satyamev Jayate to Parliament passing a Bill on child molestation and Rajasthan seriously considering addressing female foeticide is wrong on two counts. First, it trivialises these important social evils. One only wishes addressing these issues was such an easy task. Secondly, to say that our politicians wake up and take note only if celebrities speak is a sad state of affairs.

Tharoor finds himself caught in blind alley

It’s a little over 240 days since former United Nations under-secretary Shashi Tharoor chose the Nehru jacket over the three-piece suit, and the heat and dust of India to Manhattan traffic snarls. In these 240 days, Tharoor and the controversies surrounding him have consumed 1,542 reels of newsprint (including the vernacular media) and a good 108 hours of prime time news discussions.

Though many might doubt the newsreel-media hour statistics, not many will disagree that Shashi Tharoor is among the most unconventional of politicians to chance upon the Indian political scene. How many first generation politicians among the present crop have entered the legislature through the hustings after a successful career outside the country?

But this uniqueness has become a double-edged sword hanging over Tharoor’s head. Surprise, by now, is Tharoor’s middle name right from his selection of political outfit. For all the Congress-trashing, Sonia-bashing views he has expressed through his writings, he joined the grand old party. It can be said that the choice of Congress as a means to sit in the hot seat of external affairs was a no-brainer given the Congress juggernaut in the 2009 elections. But he chose to face the electorate, not manoeuvre a ticket to the Upper House and a ‘backdoor’ entry to power. He also fought from Kerala, which traditionally does not favour ‘outsiders’ or celebrity candidates. So Tharoor is not a pushover but someone who knows the threads.

Despite all this, Tharoor is not in an easy place. At 53 he is too old for the much-hyped Gen Nxt in the party and too young for the old-school veterans who are masters at the game called ‘Indian politics’.

The thought of Tharoor hanging out with Rahul Gandhi & Co to be clubbed in the ‘Gen Nxt’ group would be similar to the hilarious scene from Munnabhai MBBS in which when Sanjay Dutt, as a freshman, enters the first year classroom all the students greet him, mistaking him for a professor. Moreover, with his loaded resume Tharoor is not the person who would be studying the ‘real’ India in the remote villages of Uttar Pradesh.

Though Tharoor could be bracketed with the likes of Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Manish Tiwari it seems that seniority, be it of a few hours as is the case in government service, is a factor that does not weigh in favour of the new-kid-on-the-block. His lateral entry seems to have not gone well with many in the party.

The last group to hang out with is the seniors who have ploughed their way to the top through the years. Tharoor is not their blue-eyed boy. They don’t take kindly to his twittering on about travelling ‘cattle class’ or visa norms or Nehru’s foreign policy. The last may have earned him a rap on the knuckles because he is maintaining a low profile but the question is: For how long?

Another reason for the hostility Tharoor is facing within the party is the flamboyance with which he has courted the media and the young urban middle-class using his social networking skills. By being just a click away from the public Tharoor has brought down the ‘multiple layers of obstacles’ with which a politician, more importantly a minister, cushions himself from the aam aadmi. Tharoor has deconstructed the liturgical jargon associated with government communication and policies in just 140 characters. His remarks and style of working have rattled a few old guns in the party and seem to be contrary to the image the Congress is trying to project — an image being carefully woven for Rahul Gandhi to take the sceptre in 2014.

Tharoor’s campaign and election victory gathered so much media publicity that he has become a more familiar name than three-time former Kerala chief minister and current defence minister A K Antony. But he has disappointed those who yearned for a change in government policy and thought he was the answer (not much has changed on the foreign policy front; the Centre’s outlook has not changed from UPA I — it looks to the US for everything and is ditching old allies like Iran).

Fame and power come but at a cost, and who would know that better than Shashi Tharoor who has entered a maze that will take him time to figure out.

A prescription for fairness creams

Is it fare to be fair? Is it a crime to aspire to be a few tones lighter? While most of us would find it usual, the Union minister for health Dr Anbumani Ramadoss does not. Ramadoss is an angry man these days and has taken offense of manufacturers who advertise 10-second spots promising damsels (even dukes) a fair deal. If Ramadoss is serious about his fight against fairness products, for its lack of “scientific proof” as he reiterated in Delhi recently, he would have to lock horns with Kollywood super star Rajinikanth who in a movie tries fairness creams, among other means, to lighten the tone of his complexion, to win over his love interest.
But going by past instances, where the minister has raised objections against - smoking, junk food and alcohol - it would not be surprising if this new-found aversion is soon forgotten. At the early stages of his tenure as minister his TRPs soared during his much-publicised tiff with the previous AIIMS director Dr Venugopal that went in favour of the latter. His crusade against smoking is an apology to the space it occupied in the national media. The ban imposed on smoking was perhaps stillborn. Later, Ramadoss took up the issue of junk foods and even later was for prohibition. All the above mentioned initiatives taken by Pattali Makkal Katchi founder’s son was abandoned after it lost its charm. The enthusiasm that was shown initially soon lost steam.
While the minister’s intentions, as was in earlier cases, might seem noble, what is intriguing is to see what steps he would take to ensure that such advertisements are stopped? One would expect the minister to have learnt from his previous experiences but that does not seem to be the case.
By asking the information and broadcasting ministry to take action against manufacturers of fairness products, Ramadoss, who is a doctor by education, is treating the symptoms and not the disease. We would want the minister, under the aegis of his or any other ministry which would suit the job, to conduct a study in any renowned laboratory on these fairness products and if they are found to be just promising the stars, cancel their licences. In that way Ramadoss would not just be preaching but practising as well.
But that would be asking too much from the minister who is running the last lap of his tenure. We also forget that the importance of this year and what would be an election year without some clattering. Ramadoss might or might not leave the issue but to get back to Rajinikanth - he does become fairer in the movie and wins the love of the heroine.

Bollywood at its shrewdest

PUBLIC memory is short. To see larger than-life characters on 70MM, to forget a harsh reality called life, we willingly suspend disbelief and cherish the action on screen. But public memory is not short as in the case of Sanjay, the protagonist in Aamir Khan’s Gajini, whose memory span is not more than 15 seconds or so. We remember what we consider important and what we are told is important. Similarly we keep a tag on our celebrities — what they do, what they don’t, and what they are believed to have done. No celebrity is immune to this scrutiny.
In a scorching April in 2006 he braved the Delhi summer and extended his support to the Narmada Bachao Andolan and the Bhopal Gas Tragedy. The next day was the DVD release of his movie Rang De Basanti. More than appreciation, he received flak from all quarters, so much so that activists asked him to stop promoting a soft drink and his movie Fanaa was not screened in Gujarat.
Two years later, he again braved an unforgiving Delhi April and ran with the Olympic torch. This time (as mentioned in his blog) he ran “with a prayer in my heart for the people of Tibet, and indeed for all the people across the world who are victims of human rights violations”. He might have had little option, as the soft drink giant he was endorsing was an official partner for the games.
This winter he is back, with a new cause. Yes, it is 26/11 — the talk of the town. This time he has expressed a desire to postpone the release of his movie, slated for Christmas day, as he is yet to come out of the ‘shock’ of the attack and is not in a frame of mind to think about movies. A closer scrutiny would reveal the arithmetic behind the thought. The fact is it might not be a good time to release a big budget movie. Post-26/11 around 70 theatres/multiplexes in Mumbai saw less than 25 per cent collection till the second week of December.
Another reason for Aamir Khan’s press conference on Id-ul-Adha could be that Shah Rukh Khan, whose movie Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi released on December 12, has been all over the media speaking about religion, his movie and the terror attack.
Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi is clearly the most anticipated Bollywood film in recent times, and is hogging all the light. While trade pundits bet on the movie for its freshness and the SRK-Aditya Chopra team, the feedback from distributers and moviegoers is that it has the power to bring the audience back to theatres post-26/11 — and the movie seems to be doing that.
Other than the fact that it is an Aamir Khan movie, there’s nothing fresh about Gajini. The heroine is a new face in Bollywood and so is the director. The storyline is known, as it is a remake of a Tamil movie ‘inspired’ by an English one. It might be this fear that has made the actor market his movie in a way best known to him — get hold of a contemporary issue, identify himself and then the movie with it.
Bollywood has been all over the media, expressing shock and making suggestions on the lapses, what needs to be done and how the nation can fight terror. It seems everyone is an expert in terror management except the government and police. Sanjay Dutt was among the first from Bollywood to be interviewed after the attacks — maybe the anchor thought firsthand information on how hard it is to handle an AK-47 would give some perspective on how much training the killers received in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir or wherever they came from. It is not Aamir Khan’s acting skills that are in doubt. It is his concerns that often come across as the conniving shrewdness of a politician who waits for the press before paying floral tributes at a leader’s memorial.

OF LEADERS AND DOGS

In an uncouth, callous and insensitive statement the Kerala (a state that boasts 100 per cent literacy) chief minister has bared his fangs at the family of slain officer Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan for snubbing him at Bengaluru. His statement to a news channel that “If Sandeep had not been a Major, not even a dog would have gone to his house”, has come for much criticism from the media, political circles and public. What is more alarming is that the 85-year-old leader refused to apologise and it took him three days and arm-twisting by the Polit Bureau to ‘regret’ his remarks.
Velikkakathu Sankaran Achuthanandan and the state home minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan called on the Unnikrishnans’ late on Monday only after political and media pressure mounted on the state government for not attending Sandeep’s funeral. The vernacular media in Kerala has been projecting the Major as a son-of-the-soil and to make things worse for the grumpy old man, the Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa was seen by Unnikrishnan’s side during the funeral.
What irked the Unnikrishnans’ was the political mileage that the Left government in Kerala was trying to gain by the visit. Not heeding the family’s request for privacy, sniffer dogs were sent to sanitise the house before the leaders could call on.
In our country where the death of a soldier is seen as a part of his ‘duty’, it is not of surprise that a leader would politicise the issue, especially when the party is preparing for an election.
The triviality of the sacrifices for the country and the outbursts over inaction can been gauged by the reactions from our leaders --- a minister brushes aside the Mumbai attacks as a choti choti baath, a BJP leader cannot stomach the protest march taken out by Mumbaikers and says that people in suits and lipsticks do not represent the voice of the nation.
At a time when the country should show a semblance of unity and purpose, politics has taken the attack and its aftermath to a low --- the gutters of vote-banks politics. The principal Opposition party is busy campaigning, the Gujarat chief minister has offered Rs one crore to the family of slain ATS chief Hemant Karkare (the family declined the solatium).
Mumbai will show its resilience and get back to normalcy, India will shoot blanks at Pakistan --- this time overseen by the US, heads will roll – governments will continue, alerts will be sounded -- life will continue. After all, public memory is short.

The Minister prefers shadow boxing

WITH statements like “for us, everyday is no smoking day,” and his seemingly relentless pursuit of celebrities to knock away the cigarette, Union Minister Anbumani Ramadoss comes across, with best intentions though, as a desperate man.

In an era of coalition politics, it is the small parties that call the rook when it matters the most (as was seen during the last trust vote). So it boils down to not what is done while one is in power but the amount of visibility and media space one has managed to achieve then.

If Ramadoss was ‘really’ concerned about the health of the nation, his focus should have been on the thousands of PHCs that are crying for attention. With the medical supplies system plagued by an archaic approach, it is a miracle that vital health figures are intact. Moreover, to get a grasp of the problem, one does not need a WHO study or a mortality rate figure. A visit to a government-run facility would be a revealing experience.

Ramadoss’ anti-smoking drive, at its best, can be seen as an effort to occupy media space. There is no denying that smoking is a dreaded practice and the effects it has on the individual and society are perilous, but targeting an individual for his supposed influence upon society or by banning smoking is immature. The liberty of making an informed choice should be given to every individual. Moreover, with an election in the near future, one cannot but read between the lines.

The countless studies by his department and NGOs are proof enough that more than smoking, tobacco-chewing affects crores of Indians. Maybe, the Minister could turn to his high-profile colleagues and ask them to stop painting their mouth red. Politicians, thanks to the ever-growing media coverage, have more visibility than any professional in the country. Ramadoss would have got a glimpse of this lately because he readjusted his target from Bollywood to West Bengal Chief Minster Buddhadeb Bhattacharya.

If the Minister is sincere about his efforts of putting out the light, he should look at the world and learn from it. With an estimated budget of nothing short of $40 billion spent every year, AIDS research, prevention and treatment is the largest funded health project in the world. AIDS gets this royal treatment much to the dislike of health experts who often claim that with this focus, many other vital diseases are ignored. But this was not the case 10 years ago. Dr Peter Piot, executive director UNAIDS, has been in the field of AIDS research and programme management for three decades. Piot who was trying to bring world leaders to understand the enormity of the disease hit upon an idea as the millennium approached. “I asked myself what political leaders really cared about. The truth is, it’s not health. It’s economics and security. Health is what they talk about if there is money left at the end of the day,” Piot was quoted telling the Newsweek. Piot said that the disease would wipe away a young generation, destroy the health system and in turn reverse the economic progress achieved. Soon diplomats, policy-makers and world leaders were paying attention. The Unites States that was allocating $100 million a year in the 90’s for AIDS in 2003 allocated $15 billion.

Dr Ramadoss would be aware of this but he is part of a government that fills its coffers with the revenue earned from tobacco trade in the country. Probably the Minister prefers this kind of publicity. The one that is seen before a boxing match - A match between the Minister and the shadow of a heavyweight industry.
(Edited version of the post is published in The New Indian Express: http://epaper.newindpress.com/NE/NE/2008/10/13/index.shtml )