Artificial Intelligence and the future of journalism

[This piece was sent to The Assam Tribune on 7th January 2024 with a request for publication. Apparently, they could not find it worth publishing] 

A correction: It seems, the article was not so bad after all. The Tribune has published it on 7th March 2024. I am sharing the jpg file at the bottom of this write-up.

We have seen numerous discussions about the enormous possibilities that artificial intelligence (AI) has opened up in front of us – both desirable and not so desirable. There have been voices on possible replacement of humans in various fields which may create largescale job-loss, voices for regulations on the use of AI and praise on the possible revolutionary application of AI in health, agriculture, industry, defense, education, entertainment and other sectors for benefits of mankind. However, a lawsuit by The New York Times against Microsoft and Open AI (the company that pioneered the use of text generative AI with ChatGPT) filed just after Christmas has opened up a whole new front for discussion. The lawsuit is the culmination of failure of more than seven months of discussion on terms and conditions of licensing the newspapers content to AI companies.

The two companies allegedly used millions of articles of the newspaper to train their Large Language Model (LLM) text generator AI applications – ChatGPT and Copilot – which now produces similar content in the same style of the newspaper, thereby competing with the newspaper itself as a source of reliable information. The New York Times is one of the early integrators of print and online journalism after the proliferation of internet and decline of newspaper circulation in the West. They had invested heavily to build a subscription-based model of online journalism which had been largely successful so far. The lawsuit alleged copyright violation by unauthorized use of unique content generated by it, thereby causing significant loss to the newspaper.

To fathom the issue, we need to understand how generative AI works with LLMs and go back to the year 2012 when Google used 16000 computer processors to process 10 million digital images found on YouTube and identify a cat! The neural network of these 16000 computers had then actually identified the cat, with 16% accuracy. However, work on creating a machine that can act like human brain started in 1950s and a system of connected computers was developed that spends days, weeks or even months identifying patterns in large amounts of digital data. For example, after analyzing names and addresses scribbled on hundreds of envelopes, the system could read handwritten text.

By 2012, a neural network was trained to recognize common objects like flower and cars. The same basic technology of learning by analyzing patterns was used by Google to identify the cat and now used by various AI applications to generate text, images or sound. A Large Language Model or LLM is essentially a neural network that learns from enalyzing an enormous amount of digital text. Once trained on the digital text, it can produce text on its own. In 2015 Elon Musk funded a company called Open AI which released the first AI application capable of generating text in 2020 (then called GPT-3). Today, there are so many companies, applications and search engines that are using generative AI that it has become really difficult to believe that it has only been three years that artificial intelligence came out of the lab.

While the debate goes on whether AI would elevate the world or destroy it, let us face another question - what will happen to journalism if AI continues to generate both online and print texts instead of a human being? It is almost impossible to differentiate between actual truth and ‘truth’ generated by AI. Our older generation keeps on saying that Google is not always right and they are correct to some extent. The truth or fact generated by AI is actually the truth and fact used to train it. What will happen if the LLM used to train it is biased or fake in the first place? We have already experienced the menace of fake news, fake videos and doctored photos in social media and have seen it spill over to both print and electronic media. Despite the onslaught, print media has been able to somewhat hold on to its credibility. If AI trained on ‘fake truth’ is used to generate textual or visual content for journalism, the implications are horrifying to even imagine.

AI is not so intelligent if we go by the true meaning of intelligence – the ability to differentiate between what is right and what is correct in a particular situation in time or space. For example, let us imagine a situation where a law enforcer finds a ninety-year-old visibly deranged person entering a restricted area where he / she has instructions to shoot any violator. AI will shoot the person, but an intelligent human being would perhaps use all the faculties to take a humane decision. Journalism is also a world where intelligence to differentiate between what is right and what is correct is in premium.

How does AI transforms communication itself? Generative AI – whether for text or for images - helps people to express themselves better. Use of AI for image generation would enable one to express more vibrantly and imaginatively than one could previously. Tools like Midjourney can create an entire imagined landscape like Marine Drive in Mumbai or a Yeti in Himalayas or an adorable portrait of a dog and a cat together or a scene in an American town from 1950s! Just imagine how easy and fruitful communication would be if one can create a picture of what one imagined. In terms of generating text for communication, we have already seen that AI tools can write better communicative text than most of the humans.

The legal battle between The New York Times and Open AI may prove to be the proverbial tip of the iceberg as several other publishers including Gannett, the largest U.S. newspaper company; Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, The Daily Beast and the magazine publisher Dotdash Meredith are also trying to negotiate with AI companies to make the later pay for using the formers content. 

KEVIN CARTER'S 'THE VULTURE AND THE CHILD'

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta was making a spirited submission in front of Supreme Court on May 28 this year attacking journalists as ‘prophets of doom’ for highlighting the desperation and plight of workers who had been trying to reach home amid the lockdown. You can read the details of Mr Mehta's arguments here, here and here.

Mehta later on June 1 said he had never referred to journalists as "prophets of doom". To defend Mr Mehta, Times of India carried an interesting refutal of Mr Mehta where he reportedly said that he used the term 'Prophets of doom' against "certain NGOs and so-called activists who filed a slew of PILs and intervention applications before the courts to look into migrant workers and other problems. These were the same people who contributed nothing to mitigate the problems of any section of the society during the pandemic."

On March 31, the same Mr Mehta told Supreme Court that "No one is now on road. Anyone who was outside has been taken to available shelters". A blatant lie about which you can read here and here. A day before, hearing two petitions by advocates Alakh Srivastava and Rashmi Bansal seeking immediate redressal to the "heart-wrenching and inhuman plight of thousands of migrant workers walking back home",  the SC had asked Central Government to submit a status report on the measures taken to prevent exodus of migrant workers in the wake of the 21-day lockdown that began on March 22 midnight.

After 63 days of the lockdown and many hearing on the two petitions, the SC finally took sou-moto cognisance of the issue of migrant workers on May 27 and asked the Central Government to file a reply in two days. While appearing before the court, Mr Mehta referred to the iconic photograph of a malnourished child and a vulture in Sudan taken in 1993 by South African photo-journalist Kevin Carter, which got him a Pulitzer.

This has brought into sharp focus a decades-old debate on ethical dilemma faced by journalists. While submitting that the government was doing a lot for the workers walking home, the SG accused journalists of spreading negativity. What the SG failed to tell the court is that he quoted verbatim from a social media post (mainly in WhatApp) that was doing rounds since around 19^th May. 

Various well-crafted translation of the post in regional languages were also being circulated. ‘Remember the picture? The name of the picture was The Vulture & the Little Girl’ – the post read. The child in the picture was actually a boy, but the SG said it was a girl – just as circulated in the social media post. He also told the court that the photo was taken in 1983 missing the actual time by exactly a decade.

The social media post described how Carter committed suicide after being called a vulture for choosing to take photo instead of helping the child. ‘There was(sic) two vultures in the picture, one with a camera’ – the post screamed. The depiction of Carter as the second vulture sought to draw a parallel between Carter and the media’s role in reporting the migrant workers’ crisis.

 

“Today, 26 years later, the vultures are still returning home from all over India with cameras in their hands, busy taking pictures of workers walking thousands of kilometers... These vultures are more concerned with gathering news, with increasing channel TRP, than with worrying about workers' deaths. They are busy collecting breaking news by pouring spices on the bodies of dead workers and children”. These were the venomous words in the post which was being forwarded.

 

Carter’s photo has a story behind. Sudan was experiencing a ‘silent famine’ during 90’s following a protracted civil war and hundreds were dying of starvation and malnutrition, which the world at large was not much aware of. The United Nations was aware of the need for a massive humanitarian support and wanted to highlight the plight of the people. Carter was one of the journalists engaged to document this human tragedy.

 

On that day in March 1993, Carter had completed the day’s work and was returning to the waiting aircraft at the small airstrip in the Sudanese village of Ayod, when he noticed a child resting amid a crawl, trying to reach the United Nation’s food distribution centre run by and NGO called Doctors’ of the World situated near the airstrip. The NGO had divided the population in need of assistance into two categories – T for severe malnutrition and S for supplementary feeding. People in T category were to reach the food distribution centre first. If anyone looks carefully, a plastic band with the letter T3 inscribed can be seen on the wrist of the child in Kevin’s photo.

 

It is not that Carter just clicked the photo leaving the child to the vulture as the social media posts insinuated. What he did as a professional photo-journalist may seem even more revolting to many readers who does not understand the profession. Carter later recollected that he, in fact, waited almost twenty minutes for the vulture to open its wings for a more impactful photograph. But, when he realised that it was not going to happen he took the image anyway, shooed the bird away, and left.

 

The question about the fate of the child remained unanswered for another 18 years when the Spanish newspaper El Mundo tracked the father of the boy in 2011. The severely malnourished boy named Kong Nyong was the third to reach the UN food centre that day; he survived the famine but died of ‘fever’ in 2007.

   

 

It is a dilemma faced by not only journalists but almost every professional in their life - whether to be professional or be humane. Many journalists face this moral and ethical question – whether to intervene or to observe and tell. Carter's death had given a new dimension to the ethical debate. There is no conclusive evidence as to why he committed suicide; it was just a convenient conjecture that is being spread that he felt remorse for his action of not helping the child in Sudan. Maybe there were other reason! He had a failed relationship and fathered a daughter out of wedlock. He had little money and a lot of obligations. His closest friend died a few months ago. May be these were the passive causes for his suicide.

 

When the Solicitor General told Supreme Court that Carter’s work spelled “doom” he was wrong on at least two counts. First - as representative of the executive, his tasteless remarks on journalists and others highlighting the crisis actually amounts to one pillar of democracy attacking another pillar, which is ominous. His reference to Carter as the second vulture is derogatory to the entire profession of journalism. Second – his longwinded submission based almost in toto on a WhatsApp forward was not only factually inaccurate, but also symptomatic of a greater malaise in the society. By replacing sound legal arguments with propaganda materials to question the motive and credentials of people highlighting the crisis, the solicitor general has erred in professionalism, to say the least.       

A shorter edited version of this post was published in The Assam Tribune on 3 June 2020.

 

Government and Religion: State should have no religion

 

Published in The Assam Tribune, 24 August 2020. The link to the e-paper is here.

A Semicolon

Among all the little symbols, I find the semicolon the most confusing punctuation mark in English language. It is supposed to be a punctuation mark that separates major sentence elements like clauses. Yet, Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities starts like this -

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way.....

See, there is no semicolon there. I think, he should have started like this - "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times....". The Oxford dictionary says the main task of semicolon is to mark a break that is stronger than a comma but not as final as a full stop.

University of Sussex allots only one major use for the semicolon - it is used to join two complete sentences into a single sentence subject to three preconditions - (1) the two sentences are felt to be too closely related to be separated by a full stop; (2) there is no connecting word which would require a comma such as 'and' or 'but' and (3) the special conditions requiring a colon are absent.

What I understand now is that a writer puts a semicolon when a sentence actually ends, but he decides not to end it, and want to continue with the sentence. If he wanted he could have put a full stop. But, he decided, for whatever may be the reason or compulsion, to continue the sentence.

Life has many commas, they are momentary stops; the journey continues relatively smooth even after a comma. The semicolon is much stronger than a comma. If you encounter a semicolon, your life has actually come to a full stop. Deciding not to put a full stop and put a semicolon instead, depends on the desire to continue life. The semicolon can be justified if the "two sentences are felt to be too closely related" still. Otherwise, use a connecting word like 'and' or put a full stop. 

  

My People - My Concern : One

This news appeared on Friday, 9 June in Kolkata edition of Business Standard. I have waited till today to see if any of the 16 Guwahati-based newspapers that I have access to on a regular basis picks up the news. They did not.

The Context:
Any news on Hydroelectricity is of concern to me as I have been reading for last 20 years that Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and other northeastern states together has potential for production of more than 60,000 MW of electricity through hydel projects - either run of the river or on dams. Realisation of this potential can make India power surplus nation, experts kept on telling.

The irony of it lies in the fact that, almost none of 133 projects in Arunachal Pradesh, out of which 125 were allotted to private companies during the UPA rule, have so far been commissioned because of various issues. The annual report for 2011-12 of the Ministry of Power had proposed that 57,672 MW of power be generated in the Northeast, of which 46,977 MW are to be generated in Arunachal Pradesh alone. It is also very interesting to note that whoever gets political power, becomes aware of the benefit of hydroelectric power. The big thrust to hydroelectric projects was given by Congress during 2000-2010. BJP had then consistently opposed it. When BJP came to power in centre in 2014 they started to realise importance of hydel projects.

Similarly in Assam, a major project - the 2000 MW lower Subansiri Hydroelectric Project at Gerukamukh - being executed by NHPC is stalled since December 2011 because of protest by various political parties and groups. The project has been a staple for media and political parties for almost six years now. In October 2013, Congress Chief Minister in the State Tarun Gogoi appealed to protesters to stop stalling the work of the project.

During the 2014 Parliamentary election, BJP and AGP (Asom Gana Parisad) along with All Assam Students Union and Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS) had opposed the construction of the dam for the project. However, when these two parties came to power in the State, their opposition has weaned and the Union Power Minister Shri Piyush Goel has recently (April 2017) thanked Assam Chief Minister for lending support for the project. ASSU has become silent on the issue and KMSS has become weak with its leader Akhil Gogoi being arrested and put in jail for close to six months soon after BJP came to power in Assam in May 2016.

The lone resistance to the project now remains in the form of a case in NGT. Abhijit Sharma of Assam Public Works petitioned the National Green Tribunal against the dam and the hearing on the case ended on 27 May 2017. Initial project cost was Rs. 6285 crore, but an estimate in August 2016 by NHPC CMD K.M. Singh pegged the cost estimate at Rs. 17,000 crore. The project was to start generating from 2014.

The News in Business Standard:

A large number of hydro-power plants are stranded in the country. The total power that can be generated by the hydro-power plants that are being constructed in the country is 11,639 MW. The projects that are stalled has a capacity to produce 6,429 MW. Out of this, 1411 MW is in private sector, 2171 MW in Central sector and 2847 MW is in state sector.

Stalling of the projects results in cost overrun and increase in price of per unit power when the projects become operational. The current tariff of hydropower is about Rs. 3 - 3.15 per unit. The rate for stalled projects would be Rs. 6 - 7 per unit.

The installed capacity of hydropower projects in India is about 40,000 MW at present and the sector has recorded 28% growth in last 10 years. Whereas, renewable energy sector (Wind & Solar) has recorded a growth of 89% in the same period, 20% of the growth coming in last 3 years. 

So, the Ministry of Power has proposed "Revival of Hydro Sector" with a central fund of Rs. 16,000 crore called the Hydro power Development Fund. Under the proposal, a 4% interest subvention for 10 years (7 years during construction, 3 year after commissioning) would be provided to all projects above 25 MW capacity including private ones.  Currently, a hydro project with installed capacity of less than 25 MW is considered under renewable energy and falls under administrative purview of Ministry of New & Renewable Energy. Projects with more than 25 MW installed capacity fall under Ministry of Power and the largest hydro-power company NHPC. 

The proposal also entails declaring all hydro projects as renewable energy. And as is applicable for all renewable energy, the states will have to mandatorily purchase hydel power under "Hydropower Purchase Obligation" (HPO).

The fund for this bail out will come from either Coal Cess, or from the National Clean Energy Fund or the non-lapsable pool for the Development of North Eastern Region (DONER). Both private and state projects would receive funds.

Between the lines and the concern:

(1) The government has committed in Paris Climate Change Summit-2016 to build 40% of its total energy generation from renewable sources. Reclassifying all hydropower projects as renewable energy and kickstarting the stalled projects, the government wants to meet its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC). That's also why we have suddenly woke up to solar energy even if the companies supplying solar panels are Chinese.

(2) The interest subvention is proposed for not only the ongoing and stalled projects. The proposal says it will be applicable to any project that would be commissioned within five years from the date of notification of the policy. That means, any new project which is completed within five years will get the benefit for the period of construction and three years after commissioning. This is intended at benefitting private players at the expense of government money.

(3) Why the Rs. 16,000 crore from non-lapsable fund of DONER? After all one of the major projects (Lower Subansiri) has been opposed because of concern related to possible disaster from the dam, adverse effect to ecology and doubt over the benefit of the project. Now, you are trying to compensate the project with our money?

(4) Why this arm-twisting of the states with HPO? The states will have to buy power at higher rates from these projects even if cheaper power is available. When UPA Power Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia had proposed HPO, the BJP-ruled states made a huge noise.  

(5) If the government is planning to fund the bail out with taxpayers' money, aren't they also stakeholder in the proposal. Why is not made public yet?

(6) Why media in Assam is quite? Is it ignorance? Or is it something more sinister than that? After all the media in Assam have so far been the greatest supporter of Akhil Gogoi when he came to prominence with his opposition against big dam. The Congress has always supported big dam, but BJP opposed it before election. Now they have become even bigger supporter of big dams. So, the Parivartan was actually acceleration of the Congress policy.

You can read a nice piece on Dams by Ramchandra Guha here.

"You cannot buy peace" ....... but they can buy you.

The next piece (2nd lead in editorial page) just below Arup Dutta's writing in Assam Tribune (on meter gauge heritage railway line in Assam and what authorities need to do to preserve it, you can follow the link to read it) is by M Venkaiah Naidu, titled "Let us not politicise farmers' issues". Mr Naidu is currently the Union Minister for Information and Broadcasting. The same article was published as lead article in editorial page of Times of India across all editions.

Now read what Arun Shourie has to say about Mr. Naidu. While referring how newspapers and media people want to buy peace by providing politicians space. Shourie said, "Never delude yourself into believing that a little concession will buy you peace". He was speaking in front of an array of veteran journalists at the Press Club of India in New Delhi. The event was to protest the CBI raid on the founders of NDTV, Pranoy Roy and Radhika Roy. Mr Shourie added, "Many of you think that if you give prominence to some of the articles of these ministers or if you give them air-time, they will help you in a crisis."
"Give Venkaiah Naidu that small third-standard notebook, and ask him to fill one page coherently on any random topic. But you keep printing his articles, when you know very well that he cannot write. Because you think that by giving him that space, that much airtime to these fellows, you are buying peace. No, in fact, when the assault comes to you none of them will help." [The Telegraph, Page 1, Saturday, 10 June, Guwahati edition]

Asomiya Pratidin

P.S.  The meet at Press Club of India on Friday, June 9 to protested CBI raid in NDTV offices on trivial ground and the veteran journalists felt it was an attack on freedom of press. Here is how newspapers in Assam, which otherwise are very sensitive about freedom of press, treated the news -

(1) The Telegraph - page 1
(2) Assam Tribune - not covered
(3) Times of India, Guwahati - not covered.
(4) Asomiya Pratidin - Page 9 with smallest headline in the page.
(5) Dainik Agradoot - Not covered
(6) Asomiya Khabor - not covered
(7) Dainik Janambhumi, Guwahati edition - not covered
(8) Dainik Asom - Page -10

Dainik Janasadharan

(9) Janasadharan - page -1 (2nd lead)The newspaper is owned by Congress
politician Rakibul Hussain.
(10) Dainandin Varta - not covered
(11) Amar Asom - not covered.(They carried it in front page on Sunday, 11 June)
(12) Dainik Gana Adhikar - not covered.
(13) Ami Asomor Janagan - not covered.

Now let us have a look at the display advertisement received from government by these newspapers on Saturday, June 10. Classified like tenders etc. is not counted.


(1) The Telegraph - Nil, except a Railway function advt released by Eastern & South Eastern Railway for Kolkata edition, which is carried by default in Guwahati edition.
(2) Assam Tribune - two half page advt from Social Welfare Department, one half page from Assam Minorities Development Board, 1/4 th page from National health Mission, Assam
(3) Times of India, Guwahati - Same railway advt released to Telegraph, again to Kolkata edition but printed in Guwahati by default.
(4) Asomiya Pratidin - one half page from Assam Minorities Development Board, 3/4 page from National Commission on Women & Social Welfare Deptt,
(5) Dainik Agradoot - one half page from Social Welfare Department, one half page from Assam Minorities Development Board.
(6) Asomiya Khabor - one half page from Social Welfare Department, one half page from Assam Minorities Development Board, one half page from Central Board of Direct Taxes, 1/4 page from Central Excise Board, one half page from National Commission for Women.
(7) Dainik Janambhumi - two half page, one from Social Welfare Deptt. the other from Assam Minorities Development Board, 1/4 th page from National health Mission, Assam, another half page from National Commission on Women.
(8) Dainik Asom - None
(9) Janasadharan -None
(10) Dainandin Varta - one half page from Social Welfare Department, one half page from Central Board of Direct Taxes, one half page from National Commission on Women.
(11) Amar Asom -  two half page, one from Social Welfare Deptt. the other from Assam Minorities Development Board, another half page from National Commission on Women.
(12) Dainik Gana Adhikar - two half page, one from Social Welfare Deptt. the other from Assam Minorities Development Board.
(13) Ami Asomor Janagan - two half page, one from Social Welfare Deptt. the other from Assam Minorities Development Board, another half page from National Commission on Women.

I am not asking you to draw any correlation from above, and I will come back at a later date to record the revenue collected by these newspapers for these advertisements.
(Reports on 11 June 2017, in the newspapers which received the Assam Minorities Welfare Board's half-page advertisement on Chief Minister attending Iftar, said the government spent close to Rs. 24 lakh on this advt) 

The Shadow of the Glory

Scandals involving betting and fixing in the game of cricket are international phenomenon. So far at least five cricket betting scandals have been reported. With the arrest of Sreesanth, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan in mid-2013, the spot-fixing scandal in cricket hit India. Judicial intervention in the form of an inquiry under Justice (retired) Mukul Mudgal started in October 2013. Later, Supreme Court set up a committee of three retired Supreme Court Judge headed by former Chief Justice R. M. Lodha. The committee submitted a report - now popularly known as the Lodha Committee Report - advising radical changes in the governance of BCCI - a club synonymous with cricket in India.
The Supreme Court instructed BCCI to implement Lodha Committee report by end-October 2016, but BCCI kept on delaying it on the pretext of one or other. When the BCCI failed to meet the deadline, the SC fired BCCI president Anurag Thakur - a rich politician with hardly any cricket in him - and secretary Ajay Shirke. Exasperated, the SC on 30th January 2017 appointed a Committee of Administrators (CoA) to oversee implementation of Lodha Committee recommendations in BCCI. The members of the CoA were former CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) Vinod Rai, Vikram Limaye - the CEO and managing director of IDFC Ltd (holding company of IDFC Bank), Diana Edulji - former captain of Indian Women Cricket team and Ramchandra Guha - a sports historian.
Four months into working - Ramchandra Guha resigned from CoA on 28th May. In a letter to the chairman of CoA Vinod Rai Mr. Guha cited several 'conflict of interest' in BCCI which CoA ignored.
On June 3, Shekhar Gupta wrote for Weekend Business Standard pointing out 'conflict of interest' of CoA chairman himself. Gupta wrote, "Mr. Rai, who heads the central government's all-powerful Banks Board Bureau (BBB),reforming and restructuring public sector banks, is also the chairman of IDFC which promotes IDFC Bank, a private competitor of government banks. Then he chooses his own CEO Mr Limaye as a member of the CoA to assist him". Mr Gupta also writes about possible conflict of interest for Mr Limaye flagged by SEBI - the financial market regulator who refused to clear appointment of Mr Limaye as CEO of National Stock Exchange (NSE) unless he relinquishes the membership of CoA. As it happens, many IPL franchise has either been listed or are in the process of being listed for trading. So, can Limaye be both in BCCI and NSE?
At least two years before all these broke out, I had written how we swarm left-right-front and behind glorious people just to busk in reflected glory and why I do not like BCCI. As I am writing this piece, Pakistan dropped Virat Kohli in ICC World Cup match between India - Pakistan at the fag-end of indian batting. Kohli was short of his fifty and It was an easy catch. Soon he completed his fifty and was seen in an explosive display of sixes and fours. Immediately it came to my mind - was it fixed. With many details of BCCI affairs coming out in last few years - it has becomes difficult to enjoy the game unbiased. A lingering doubt remains after each game - was it staged like any other show? It seems we are now living in the shadow of glory.

Public Relations in Governance

Governance and Government:

According to UNESCAP (United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific), Governance is "the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented or not implemented". Simply put, governance is what the government does. On the other hand, Good Governance means the processes implemented by organization or institution to produce favorable results to meet the needs of its stakeholders, while making the best use of resources – human, technological, financial, natural and environmental – at its disposal.

The basic purpose of governance are – maintaining order in the society, ensuring prosperity for the people, avoiding conflicts among or with the people and managing crisis or disaster. While accountability is key tenet of Good Governance; the major elements of good governance are transparency, consensus, people’s participation and responsiveness. Consensus is also important for avoiding conflicts and waste of resources.

Thus, two preconditions for Good Governance are that people must participate in government’s activities and accept its decisions. However, people’s opinions often and generally remain divided on any major government decisions without the much-needed consensus. Therefore, favorable opinion formation plays crucial role in governance. Romans even said that the voice of people is the voice of God (vox populi, vox dei). In our modern participatory democracy too, people or citizens, in fact, play the central role. 

Public Relations for public:

The later part of Industrial Revolution in the West had seen increasing need for market exploitation. Mobilization of people’s opinion for political or religious causes, influencing people’s minds for selling product and such other needs saw growth of a creed called the Publicists.

There had been innumerous attempts to define Public Relations since Ivy Ledbetter Lee, an American publicity expert, first coined the term in 1897. Lee, who started his career as a Publicity Manager in 1903, later worked for the Rockefeller family and the Pennsylvania Railroad. In 1905, he established a public relations firm – Parker & Lee - mainly catering to publicity needs. The public relations that Lee practiced was honest communication based on the Publicity Model. Lee believed - good public relations was not possible without good performance. For him, Public Relations is a communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationship between organization and their publics (the target audience).

According to Lee, a PR practitioner essentially was a liaison man between the organization and its publics. While the PR man will try to build goodwill for the organization, the organization in turn would continuously reinvent itself and adopt better ethical and humane practices. The theoretical essence of all government PR even today is the same – that the government will act for the benefit of the citizen and the PR man will ensure generation of enough goodwill so that the citizen would support the government. 

Public Relations for propaganda:

However, Edward Luis James Barneys added a new twist to the concept of PR in the 1920s when he said that PR is the attempt by information, persuasion and adjustment to engineer public support for an activity, cause, movement or institution. Ethics and honesty in communication took a backseat for Barneys, who was an Austrian – American and is widely regarded as “the father of Public Relations”. The definition of Public Relations given by Barney in his book “Crystallizing Public Opinion” was published in 1923.

Unlike Lee, Barneys was a crafty propagandist well versed in media handling who believed that people’s opinion can and need be influenced for generating goodwill. Legends goes that Barneys convinced Thomas Masaryk, the founder of modern Czechoslovakia, to delay announcement of the country’s independence by a day for better press coverage. He would go to any length to influence people’s opinion favorably for the organization. When the American Tobacco Company asked him to promote smoking among women to increase sale of its Lucky Strike brand, he readily agreed and staged a series of events to make American women believe that smoking in public was symbolic to freedom for women. In one such event called “Light Up, America”, he arranged for many famous women to publicly light up a Lucky Strike all across America at the same time. In another event, he made some women light up cigarettes in New York’s Easter Sunday parade making the cigarettes their “Torches of Freedom”.

We find parallels of Barneys PR in modern day governments and politics, when events are staged to catch public attention. Easy-to-remember slogans like “Parivartan” (Change), “Make America Great Again” etc. are coined to create stereotype and thus crystalize public opinion.      

Why do government need Public Relations?

We can find many examples of Governments communicating with people throughout the history of mankind.  The people holding power by virtue of being in the government needs people’s participation and support for continuation in power. Even governments enjoying absolute majority last for only five years in our country and would need people’s goodwill to return to power. On the other hand, the importance of people’s participation was aptly exemplified by the less than partial success of the First Five-year plan when the large number of government schemes for boosting agricultural production found no takers. The polio-eradication plan of the government would have been a failure without people’s participation.

Government also needs to build up consensus on vexed issues for smooth implementation of necessary but unpopular decisions. The introduction of Goods and Service Tax (GST) in place of a plethora of State and Central Taxes would not have been possible without a consensus. Government also needs to avoid conflicts. Doing away with government subsidy for domestic LPG or recent de-monetization would not have been possible without communication efforts for avoiding conflicts. Building Big Dams for hydroelectricity is currently testing government’s communication efforts in avoiding conflicts. The communication skills of PR professional can immensely help government to achieve these objectives.   

How Public Relations is practiced in government?

Starting with Lee and Barneys, PR practices had remained more or less same through the two World Wars till 1990s.  Since then, however, PR has developed immensely to become a major profession and academic discipline.  The government has limited need for specialized communication skills, as the purpose of PR in government is limited to getting publicity, running propaganda and occasional consensus building. Politicians who head governments are already adept in such communications inherent in political campaigns. These politicians, when they head governments, become the government spokespersons and set the basic goal for government public relations to keep the public sphere favourable. The government PR thus, serves the need of the political masters.

To achieve this most PR people in government do publicity – both earned and paid for (i.e. advertising). The mainstay of earned publicity campaign for government still is the press releases and press conferences. Occasionally, media professional are coerced or motivated to carry government publicity materials. Events, exhibition, rally etc. serve the purpose of government propaganda. The tools employed by government for consensus building are workshops, conferences, round-table discussions, negotiations etc.

While using these tools of public relations in government, tradition plays the most important role. Majority of government PR people who head the public relations department are on the job learners. For them public relations is what they practice. Precedents and common sense are two most prevalent guides for these PR practitioners. Media personnel are heavily dependent on government PR people for information. A fact amplified by relative lack of news on Saturdays and Sundays when government departments remain close. These media people provide the much-needed earned publicity and hence are great friends of government PR professionals. Moreover, government is the single big revenue provider for the media industry in our country.

Thus, it is smooth sailing for government PR so far. While public relations as a profession and as an academic discipline is developing tremendously throughout the world, government PR in India is still confined to the above mentioned few functions. However, given the potential of PR, it could play a very significant role in good governance, which unfortunately is being denied to it.

Why have we suddenly woke up to celebrate women behind the scene?

The story of three women working behind the scene at ISRO was first broke by BBC on 12 December, three weeks before the USA release of Hidden Figures. The BBC story spoke about only Ritu Karidhal, Anuradha TK and Nandini Harinath. Later, on 15 February 2017, when ISRO's PSLV - C37 rocket successfully placed 104 small satellites into orbit, Internet news sites started writing about 8 women in ISRO. The BBC list was now expanded to include - Maumita Dutta, Kirti Faujdhar, N Valarmathi, Mrinal Sampath and Tessy Thomas. Soon, social media platforms like WhatsApp, Facebook etc become agog with stories of these women and their relentless selfless work behind the scene for making the country proud.

Nobody, however, pointed out that some of these women have been working in ISRO for more than 20 years now. Anuradha TK has been working at ISRO for 34 years! It was somehow too much time that India needed to eventually recognize them. And there were no mention that it was a BBC journalist Geeta Pandey who had traveled to Bangalore following a two year old lead and broke the story to challenge the perceived notion that space science is a male bastion.

Hidden Figures is a 2016 Hollywood drama film about three African-American women working behind the scene at NASA who had played vital roles during the early years of Us space research programme. The film has won 26 awards and nominated for 60 more including 3 Oscars this year. The film was released in US on 6 January and in India on 17 February this year. The film is produced by 3 companies including Hollywood biggie Fox 2000 Pictures, and distributed by 10 compnaies worldwide. Made with an estimated $25,000,000 budget, the film has grossed estimated $ 142,591,830 till 17 February 2017 when it was released in India. By the time it was released in India, the enthusiasm associated with the film has ebbed. New York Daily News reported - "Hidden Figures is an earnest movie, but not a very exciting one. The screenplay feels as engineered as a Gemini rocket launch, with every scene and line carefully calculated". The popularity of the movie was on the decline. No doubt, it needed some boost for its India release where about 45 million people watch movies. Consider this - only 25 million people watched 3 Idiots to make it a big hit. India is a big market for Hollywood films and producers with almost 500 million people below the age of 20 . Hollywood producers have started producing Hindi films now. 

I am self -confessed skeptic as long as I am dealing with media. I need to be. My early life as journalist had trained me to be so. Here, I am bit intrigued by the timing of BBC waiting a full two years to write about women working along with men in ISRO and India's space research programme. Two years ago when India put a spaceship on Mar's orbit, a photo went viral in social media.

The message accompanying the photo described the women as scientists in ISRO and challenged the stereotype that space science in India is a male dominated area. ISRO later clarified that the women in the photo were administrative staff, but also added that there are many women scientists working in ISRO. After that, two years went by and BBC decided only in December 2016 to write about these women, just three weeks before the release of Hidden Figures. This may be a the work of a brilliant news editor with very sensitive nose for news. But, this also may be a marketing ploy for the movie. With India parallel in ISRO, you find it easier to connect with the story of Hidden Figures and thus help it gross more in India. As I am writing this Hidden Figures have completed five days in India and have got 4 star review from Times of India.

Read about Hidden Figures' sucess here.     

Every year in December they say car prices will increase in January, Why?


News like to one above is published by all newspapers across India in the month of December every year. Car prices are likely to increase - why do I need to know that? So that I can buy the car now in December before the price is hiked in January. Simple! Car companies are indeed doing a great social service by telling everyone in advance about the imminent hike in prices and thereby helping us to save a few thousand rupees.
But, does it make any business sense? I mean telling everybody that "input costs have gone up and we were so far absorbing them. But from January, we are going to pass in on to you, keeping our profit intact". And then, why such news appear every year invariably during December, not any other time?
Moreover, why do I read about a lot of incentives, discounts and other freebies on car sale during December? Such announcements are understandable during festive seasons as many people like to buy cars on auspicious occasions. December does not have any festivals.
To understand this, we need to consider a few facts. First, the depreciation in value of a car is in the range of 6-10% every year. So, a car bought today will have 24-40% less value after four years. Second, car registration in India is on calendar year basis. That means a car registered in December 2016 is one year older than a car registered in January 2017 even though the registration is only one month apart. So, a car bought in December 2016 will become four years older in January 2020. But, a car bought in January 2017 will become only three year old in January 2020.
Therefore, if you want to sell your car in future you will get less value if you had bought it in December. It makes sense not to buy a car in December if you want to sell it later.
Now, let us come back to the apparent news. What will be the likely consequences of the news? It is basically aimed at enticing you to buy the car in December. That makes it advertising, not news. There are other reasons why car makers want to sell all stocked up inventory in December. The total number of a cars sold up to December gives the car fancy title like "Car of the Year" "People's Choice of the Year" etc. No wonder, they want to clear all their stock in December. For this reason most car maker postpone new launch till January. Tata motors have postponed its launch of Hexa till January next year.
To help calculate benefit or loss of buying a car in December, I am listing the price of a few Tata Motors' vehicles here (as on today, price is approximate only as it varies from states to states). Find out in January (with simple arithmetic) whether the news above is actually a news to help you or an advertisement to entice you.

Tata Tiago – Rs. 3.32 to 5.85 lakh

Tata Zest – Rs. 5.28 to 8.73 lakh

Tata Nano – Rs. 2.33 to 3.31 lakh

Tata Bolt – Rs. 4.73 to 7.42 lakh

Tata Safati – Rs. 9.72 to 10.95 lakh

Tata Indica eV2 – Rs. 4.89 to 5.60 lakh

Tata Indigo sCS – Rs. 5.12 to 6.54 lakh

Tata Safari STORME – Rs. 10.50 to 15.48 lakh

Tata Nano GenX – Rs. 2.33 to 3.31 lahk

Tata Hexa – to be launched in Jan 17 (exp 15 Lakh)

Tata Kite – to be launched in July 17 (exp 4 lakh)

Tata Nexon – to be launched in Dec 16 (exp 8 lakh)

Tata Aria – Rs. 12.15 to 17.46 lakh

Tata Sumo Gold – Rs. 6.82 to 8.64 lakh

Tata Xenon XT – Rs. 10.14 to 11.19 lakh

   

Teardrops

When the eldest of my Mamas (maternal uncles) suddenly died in 2004, the extended family had an impromptu conference discussing a seemingly serious matter as to who all had cried, how much, with how wild frolics and who had NOT. I was not witness to it, but someone told me about it later. Apparently all the family members unanimously concluded that those who failed to shed tear or show antics at the obvious sad incident were less human, loved Mama less and needed overwhelmed condemnation. And those who did shed tears abundantly are better human, loved Mama more and should be praised wholeheartedly. Ironically, the widow had fallen in the first category.  

Those were the time when Facebook had not become the universal vulgar, perverted platform of vindication and show off. Social gatherings like death, birth, religious ceremonies and the occasional visit to the house of friends and relatives were the arena where we tried to outperform each other. Your grief was my secret happiness even then. And boasting of achievements used to take shape of a new piece of jewelry or cloth that you wear to the occasion to show off, and small talks limited to topic like the marks your children had scored, the college that he/she secured a place in etc. Parent felt unhappy if their children were not as smart as those of others. Wives felt unhappy if their husbands were not making as much money as the husbands of others. But, on the face of it everybody showed perfect happiness at the achievement of others.    

Shedding tears or crying is possibly the first emotional outburst that human being register after being born. As they grow, learn the ticks of life and acquire the so-called civilized norms of social behaviour; they learn to control this emotion. We teach our children how to control tears. Not because, we hate to see tears rolling down their cheek, but because we want them to be strong – at least emotionally. We were taught males do not cry; at least not in public. There are also people who are structurally incapable of showing this raw emotion in public. Yet, not being able to show your raw emotions becomes a yardstick for measuring your social status, your upbringing, and your character.

The widow had more practical issues, more pressing worries, and more immediate priorities – like how to raise the sixteen-year-old son alone. She possibly could not afford the luxury of giving vent to the raw emotions at that time. And who knows how much did she cry in private? Even if you cried out loud once the dust - created by the storm of sudden and untimely death of someone who had ever been the fulcrum of your life - have settled; does it make any difference?

Twelve years down the lane, the scene has not changed much. Only that the social gathering has been replaced by Facebook. So, you do not have to cry in public, just click a photo of you crying at your own leisurely time and post it. If someone had died in the family, just take a selfie at the crematorium and post it with a comment like – Me, at cremation of my uncle, feeling sad. Social etiquette of Facebook says you ought to comment on the photo of me with my wife in Singapore with line like – oh! sooo cute. Although, something inside you would continue smoldering in jealousy until you can you post a photo of your being in Las Vegas.

Your grief will always remain my secret happiness, my vindictiveness will always catch you peeking at the photos of my being able to savour better material comfort then you can muster. Just, do not hesitate to call up your friend and relatives to tell how much you cried. And of course, do not forget Facebook.

When ethics went for a toss

A baby was born to a pair of parents after the mother went through a series of miscarriages. The parents were happy and grateful to the doctor who helped in the process. A private hospital in Guwahati was also involved in the whole exercise.
At a personal level, apparently it is a happy news; may even be exceptional. I hope nobody would doubt that. Having a baby, by all counts, is a personal experience to be shared with friends and relatives. It, however, hardly qualifies as news unless you are a Princess or a celebrity. Nobody would perhaps be interested in Nomal kai becoming a father. Would you like to read it on first person from Nomal in a newspaper that one has to buy paying money?
The first cardinal rule for a something to be news is that it has to be new. Newspapers are deluded with news everyday and all newspapers has a policy (either declared or undeclared) of selecting news. One of the widely accepted thumb rule is that the news has to have relevance to the public. The unwritten ethics in newspapers tell all editor to be on guard against advertisements passing as news. When it happens, we call them paid news.

Now, read this piece in The Assam Tribune under the headline "A New Lease of Life". (I am also placing a downloadable image of the piece at the bottom, in case the internet link becomes inaccessible). The parent was all ga ga abut the private hospital and the doctor involved. He wanted to share it with readers of the newspaper and the newspaper gave him space to do so. Apparently nothing wrong in that; except the fact that para 6.1.1 of the Guidelines of the Medical Council of India says - "A physician shall not make use of him / her (or his / her name) as subject of any form or manner of advertising or publicity through any mode either alone or in conjunction with others...". It also says that the doctor shall not permit the publication of any report to boast of cases, operations, cure or remedies through any mode. If anybody cares to complain, the good doctor may lose her license for being a part of the publicity.
The other issue here is finding "point of public interest" in the piece. The page on which the item appeared also carries 'Obituary'. One can understand the logic of carrying Obituary as a homage to the departed. But, what was so extraordinary in the birth that warranted it to be a news and not an advertisement can best be deciphered by my esteemed readers. Or was it so that an advertisement has actually been passed as a news? If it actually happened in a newspaper like The Assam Tribune, its time to become concerned.

Given a Chance

Vinod Mehta is one of the Editors whom I find largely unpretentious. I was reading the second part of his autobiography called Editor Unplugged and came across one chapter titled What I would do Differently. The title jolted me to sit back and think – yes, given a chance what would I do differently?

Mehta writes that he finds “people who boast they have no regrets in life”, people who would do nothing differently given a chance to live their life all again, rather ‘phoney’ and ‘hypocritical’. I could not agree less. Life is actually a trial and error experiment – one occasionally makes a wrong move and ought to learn from the mistakes. And, one should be ready and candid enough to live life differently, if at all given a chance.

I would turn forty-eight next May, and I think forty-seven is good enough an age to think and write what would I do differently given a chance to live life all over again. There are regrets, and realization of mistakes; there are heartburn and occasional taming of ego. But life, as it is, been generous in all its ups and downs.

So, what would I do differently given a chance? The first in my agenda would be not to take life too seriously by not trying to be a perfectionist. I do not remember who imbibed in me the need to constantly try to improve until perfection. It must be somebody from my childhood. Whoever it was, I realize, he or she was wrong. You need to aim at the sun so that your arrow flies high, but the world it not going to tumble if you do not hit the sun.

A sixteen-year-old girl in my neighborhood, whom I never met, and who was healthy and bubbling with life by all account, died last evening. The only thing she could tell her mother before she died was that she could not feel her body - there was a tingling sensation all over her body and it was over in a matter of few minutes. Given a chance, how would her parents live life differently?