What does the mandate mean?

It is widely being reported that this is a mandate for stability, secularism and reforms. Nothing to take away from this observation, but one should keep in mind that this is a generalization drawn from the final results without taking into consideration the fact that the final count is an aggregation of multiple factors at play. While in some constituencies it was the entrant of a new player that played spoil sport for non congress led parties, in others it was other factors like pro or anti incumbency vote, and in others it could have been anything from a ‘no’ to right wing politics to good old allegiance to the family scion. One should be careful while drawing generalizations from the aggregate results, for it is these inferences that drive policy decisions. Yes, it is a mandate for stability at the center. Yes, it is a mandate for secularism and clean politics, but when it comes to inferring that it means a mandate to opening the flood gates on reforms, I am a bit skeptical. I am not anti reforms, but I am definitely against the unfretted privatization and permitting of foreign investment from ‘then hallowed now dubious’ western corporations. The travails of corporates in the western world couldn’t have come at a better time in the India’s quest for growth; an eye opener. The following article I came across in the ‘Frontline’ by Dr. Athreya, who taught me economics during my masters degree at Trichy, is one I agree with completely.

What a low TV journalism has hit?!!!

In recent months, whenever I watched an English language news channel to get the latest on the happenings, I was left wanting far more. These channels, all of them, have lost it. The quality of journalism is pathetic with real issues never being reported. In a country of India’s size and diversity there is no dearth of issues to report. Instead, what you get to see on these channels is everything except good reporting on real issues – relentless advertisements, unparalleled frenzied self marketing, talk shows with irrelevant issues, panels of people who look like they are just another group of people having an emotional and uninformed discussion in their living room, journalists fostering personal bonhomie with the power mongers on live camera, repeated telecast of the same 4-5 news items through out the day, sensationalization of the smallest bit of irrelevant comment from a minnow in the political landscape on the most irrelevant topic as THE news of the day and also the emphasis on it being an EXCLUSIVE news item. A sad state of affairs. What paucity and shallowness we see in TV journalism today! The culprits are none but Rajdeep Sardesais and Barkha Dutts of the world.

Emails have invariably come to invade our work lives and personal lives. In personal emails, etiquettes come naturally; that is what I believe. But in the case of work related emails, I think all organizations should have a primer for email etiquette. Even this doesn’t seem to work in some cases where it is done, like in my company, but nevertheless, it has to be done. There are soft skills programs to sensitize everyone in the organization to these aspects, but, in spite of them, I come across so many outright rude mails. I can’t credit them to lack of language skills, because the language structuring is pretty good in most of them. What I have realized is that people use emails as a tool to emphasize and reiterate their position in the organization, be it an explicitly defined  role or a superior position which is in the gray. The most irritating and common manner in which this is expressed is by starting the mail without a greeting. This comes across as very rude. The other tool used is to end the mail with no words like ‘thanks’ ‘regards’, or even a casual ‘cheers’ but just the name. Besides these, the structuring of the email in terms of words used and general tone of the mail smell of condescendence, in a failed attempt to impose one’s non-existent authority!  Lack of time to put in a few words of greeting at the start and end of an email, also a conscious effort to keep the tone of the mail neutral is one of the lamest excuses you can get.

Well, What do I do with such mails?  Initially, I used to get agitated and restless; but in the end I usually let it be forgotten if it didn’t need any action from me or didn’t indict me, so to say. Later on I realized, “why should I let them off?”. There is no logic to let these people get away with it. Now, I actually enjoy such mails for they act as a let out vent. I am equally rude in my reply and I take enough pleasure in writing such mails and hitting the send button on them.