Farmer Suicides Highlighted

KBC logo (c) Sony Entertainment

A story in the Hyderabad edition of The Hindu caught my eye today. The widow of a farmer who had committed suicide because of debts incurred, from the village of Vara Kawtha in Yawatmal district in Maharashtra, was given a chance to appear on "Kaun Banega Crorepati" (KBC - the Indian version of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire). She was identified to the producers of the show by Kishore Tiwari of the Vidarbha Jan Andolan Samiti, an NGO, and once selected she and some friends were flown to Mumbai for the taping by the producers of the show.

She ended up winning 6.4 lakh Rupees or about 13.5 thousand USD.

Now here is an issue no one else is really talking about, and KBC just gave it a nationwide audience of millions. 6.4 Lakh Rupees is not too much money, but for Aparna Malikar, who survives her husband and has two young girls to take care of, it could be a game changer. Amitabh Bachchan, the star and host of the show, also blogged about the issue and about Aparna herself, and was moved enough to hand over another 50 thousand Rupees (about 1000 dollars) of his own money to her.

Sustainable farming needs to be a bigger focus in India and the coming of big retail and factory farming will be a death knell to traditional, small-plot farming - a practice that remains the backbone of India's large agrarian economy.

Now I'm not a regular viewer, let alone a fan of KBC. I haven't seen a single episode for the latest season, and maybe all of one or two episodes from the last three seasons. Also, when I first read the story my instinct was to be cynical about it and dismiss it as sensationalism.

But here's the thing: KBC and Amitabh Bachchan just gave the issue an enormous amount of visibility, and they put their money where their mouths were.

All I can say is: Bravo! Well done!

If popular platforms like KBC can be used to raise awareness about serious issues, perhaps they will pierce the fog and be featured front and center in political and economic debates!

Social Networking Introspection

Perhaps I should title this post: "Why I post on social networks"... Or: "A note on what led me away from Facebook and Twitter, and on to Google+"... It will serve both titles equally.

Ever since Google+ launched I've been thinking about sharing things online - about why it is the thing to do these days, and whether this is simply the automation or "cloud-ization" of existing social behavior for most people.

The "why" is more perplexing to me than whether there is a real world analogue that we mimic every time we post something online...

The Grey Side of Business

Evidence suggests that technology companies enabled brutal repression in Libya and Bahrain, two of the countries currently undergoing impressive change as part of the Arab Spring. This is not a surprise.

Technology is morally neutral - you can use it for good and for evil. This is been discussed enough and often enough. The real question of the hour is are businesses morally responsible, should they be held to the same standard as we hold individuals and governments? When is it OK for a business stop following a profit motive and hold to a sociopolitical position? Should every business deal be scrutinized to ensure it is not aiding and abetting something "immoral"?

In the aftermath of the Great Recession, given the "evil bankers and financiers" it is easy to pass judgment and say "Of course businesses need to be moral!" Nokia and Siemens have no business enabling dictators to better spy on their people! Lenders had no business lending to people they knew wouldn't repay!

I submit that this represents a less nuanced opinion than the real world would support.

An-na-na-na-na-na!

Mass movements make me nervous, because their leaders are deified and in the eyes of their followers, can do no wrong. The kind of intensity and focus that members of these movements bring to the cause is not often matched by depth of understanding of the issues, or more importantly, breadth of understanding of the world. No issues can be resolved in isolation, or there will be unintended consequences.

All too often, the recruits for these mass movements are those with the time to devote to them - not necessarily those qualified (in any sense of the word) to contribute.

Finally the leaders of these mass movements become rockstars - and from there either they are corrupted by their power, or become victims of their own fallibility, because no one is smart enough to be a god... unless they go completely offstage (or worse, die) before they make their first mistakes.

This is why Anna Hazare's "anti-corruption movement" in India is at best a quixotic piece, and at worst a circus that is going to benefit media TRPs more than the country. I almost feel sorry for the man - he has one good idea, but no vision to speak of, and is now cornered by his own followers. He reminds me of Raju Guide more than Mahatma Gandhi at this point!

A Clouded Memory

The Matrix

Remember the Information Superhighway? Used to be a buzzword about a decade and a half ago. No one uses it any more! I read about this study by Columbia University psychologist, Betsy Sparrow published a little while ago and I was reminded of the concept, and how it is finally coming to fruition. 

Scenario: two colleagues are talking about their favorite author or poet (who I've never heard of) while I'm sitting at my desk. I quickly Google the name, and join in the conversation - but I enter it saying "such and such" is my favorite poem by this poet... particularly the line "..."