To warn you beforehand, the topic is much more serious and the post, comparatively a longer one.
I had an interview this evening on a news channel, not popular though. The topic was "अश्लील सोशल साइट्स". I know many of you would think of the topic is really obscure, at least I thought it was. You may credit it to the lack of knowledge about what political buffoons in this country are cooking up.
However, there are a couple of points that I would like to re-think and share with you.
1. The debate on banning Facebook, Google, Youtube and the likes (21 sites in particular) for having malicious or abusive content on their network.
2. JEE or no JEE.
First of all, as I have earlier said it on the show and on facebook, that when the society faces increased traffic accidents or murders, you simply don't ban use of cars or gunpowder. What they presently do is to punish the convicted. However, I would like to discuss the much less explored option of going to the root cause, and eliminating it, that caused the convict to commit the crime.
There is a famous proverb, "With greater power, comes greater responsibility". When you are handed over the license to drive a car, or trigger a gunshot, you are considered responsible enough to use it wisely. Considering the social websites as a similar instrument, people who have been endowed with the privilege of connecting to their known ones at their ease, they are also entrusted the responsibility for the words they speak. I wish to address this topic to four kind of people : 1. People bothered with adult content, 2. People who think that the country is moving in the right direction, 3. People who think that social websites are playing a damaging role, and lastly, the policymakers (if they ever lay hands on this work).
Now, for the people who are bothered with the adult content, can you force the court to ban physical social interactions because there are people who are cunning, who say abusive things to your son/daughter? No, instead you don't make your children enter the society, or keep them under your supervision unless they attain a particular age. The same goes for the social network sites. Banning them is logically not the correct thing to do.
For the people, who think that Mr. Kapil Sibbal or whomsoever, is responsible for this action, has done the right thing, and thinking about him as a hero, working for the cause of the nation. Guys, if he was really interested in improving the society, he would have gone far beyond the call of his duty to analyze rigorously the reasons behind the use of this language. The language that has now developed is a result of several complex social phenomenon, and a large group of experts is needed to analyze it, and not a political figure. (this indicates the need of social scientists) Understanding these phenomenon, and then dealing with them if they are right or wrong, or how could it be corrected, is not such an arduous task that cannot be completed in his tenure. So please stop believing that he is doing the right thing. Because believe me, he is going to repeat the same damn thing, during his campaign in the following years. You need to develop an original thinking, and not merely believe what is being portrayed.
For the people, who think that social websites have a role to play in monitoring the content on the website (though I think this is a small minority), please understand the role of terms & conditions that you agree to while joining the above mentioned sites, and give your slightest attention to the powers that you have been endowed with. E.g. On Facebook, you have privacy settings, where you can restrict the people who have access to your photographs or comments or personal information. Heed to it. Moreover, understand the role of "Report Story, or Spam". Instead of saying, this person doesn't need invitations of Farmville, report it. This goes for any content that you think is malicious, adult or inappropriate for your children or parents to see. Be responsible.
For the policy makers, if there is a remote chance of them reading this, rather than blaming Facebook or photoshop for this, realize why the people are doing this. You have continued to ask the question, "who has given you the right to abuse a person/religion online". I would like to raise a cross-question to them, "Who has given Manmohan Singh, or Sonia Gandhi the right to assume position to ask for respect and what on earth do you understand by the meaning of the word Democracy? Last time I read about it, everyone, including the President herself, is a citizen of the country, and are equal. If they have the right to preserve information about their Swiss bank accounts, or the reasons behind their actions (or inactions), we have the full right to demand that information, or abuse you if you don't help us with them. Don't start with "We are providing you security and you have to respect the Bureaucrats or the people who are running this country" I am sorry to say but we are paying our taxes in lieu of the security and apart from our duties we have a fundamental right to equality and expression, and forming groups PEACEFULLY. If you consider these things, people can say anything about anyone or religion as long as it is peaceful. Raising a subjective question of a content being abusive is not an intelligent thing to do, in a country of 1.2 billion people having such diverse views.
I leave the discussion open regarding JEE or no JEE since it is a kind of topic where you all know a lot of stuff already. I consider that drawing parallels would not be difficult then. Still comments are welcome again for any discussion.
Think Responsibly and Originially
Cheers!
I had an interview this evening on a news channel, not popular though. The topic was "अश्लील सोशल साइट्स". I know many of you would think of the topic is really obscure, at least I thought it was. You may credit it to the lack of knowledge about what political buffoons in this country are cooking up.
However, there are a couple of points that I would like to re-think and share with you.
1. The debate on banning Facebook, Google, Youtube and the likes (21 sites in particular) for having malicious or abusive content on their network.
2. JEE or no JEE.
First of all, as I have earlier said it on the show and on facebook, that when the society faces increased traffic accidents or murders, you simply don't ban use of cars or gunpowder. What they presently do is to punish the convicted. However, I would like to discuss the much less explored option of going to the root cause, and eliminating it, that caused the convict to commit the crime.
There is a famous proverb, "With greater power, comes greater responsibility". When you are handed over the license to drive a car, or trigger a gunshot, you are considered responsible enough to use it wisely. Considering the social websites as a similar instrument, people who have been endowed with the privilege of connecting to their known ones at their ease, they are also entrusted the responsibility for the words they speak. I wish to address this topic to four kind of people : 1. People bothered with adult content, 2. People who think that the country is moving in the right direction, 3. People who think that social websites are playing a damaging role, and lastly, the policymakers (if they ever lay hands on this work).
Now, for the people who are bothered with the adult content, can you force the court to ban physical social interactions because there are people who are cunning, who say abusive things to your son/daughter? No, instead you don't make your children enter the society, or keep them under your supervision unless they attain a particular age. The same goes for the social network sites. Banning them is logically not the correct thing to do.
For the people, who think that Mr. Kapil Sibbal or whomsoever, is responsible for this action, has done the right thing, and thinking about him as a hero, working for the cause of the nation. Guys, if he was really interested in improving the society, he would have gone far beyond the call of his duty to analyze rigorously the reasons behind the use of this language. The language that has now developed is a result of several complex social phenomenon, and a large group of experts is needed to analyze it, and not a political figure. (this indicates the need of social scientists) Understanding these phenomenon, and then dealing with them if they are right or wrong, or how could it be corrected, is not such an arduous task that cannot be completed in his tenure. So please stop believing that he is doing the right thing. Because believe me, he is going to repeat the same damn thing, during his campaign in the following years. You need to develop an original thinking, and not merely believe what is being portrayed.
For the people, who think that social websites have a role to play in monitoring the content on the website (though I think this is a small minority), please understand the role of terms & conditions that you agree to while joining the above mentioned sites, and give your slightest attention to the powers that you have been endowed with. E.g. On Facebook, you have privacy settings, where you can restrict the people who have access to your photographs or comments or personal information. Heed to it. Moreover, understand the role of "Report Story, or Spam". Instead of saying, this person doesn't need invitations of Farmville, report it. This goes for any content that you think is malicious, adult or inappropriate for your children or parents to see. Be responsible.
For the policy makers, if there is a remote chance of them reading this, rather than blaming Facebook or photoshop for this, realize why the people are doing this. You have continued to ask the question, "who has given you the right to abuse a person/religion online". I would like to raise a cross-question to them, "Who has given Manmohan Singh, or Sonia Gandhi the right to assume position to ask for respect and what on earth do you understand by the meaning of the word Democracy? Last time I read about it, everyone, including the President herself, is a citizen of the country, and are equal. If they have the right to preserve information about their Swiss bank accounts, or the reasons behind their actions (or inactions), we have the full right to demand that information, or abuse you if you don't help us with them. Don't start with "We are providing you security and you have to respect the Bureaucrats or the people who are running this country" I am sorry to say but we are paying our taxes in lieu of the security and apart from our duties we have a fundamental right to equality and expression, and forming groups PEACEFULLY. If you consider these things, people can say anything about anyone or religion as long as it is peaceful. Raising a subjective question of a content being abusive is not an intelligent thing to do, in a country of 1.2 billion people having such diverse views.
I leave the discussion open regarding JEE or no JEE since it is a kind of topic where you all know a lot of stuff already. I consider that drawing parallels would not be difficult then. Still comments are welcome again for any discussion.
Think Responsibly and Originially
Cheers!
The problem with politicians now a days is that their intentions are not clear. They all seem to be serving for their own good only. I totally agree that if they are really worried about abusive content start from the root cause.
ReplyDeletewell it all comes from Prof. Mohan's classes :)
ReplyDelete