Lecture by K K Venugopal

In a thought-provoking lecture on democratization of electoral politics, Mr K K Venugopal said it was important to prevent criminals and history sheeters from contesting the elections. Accused persons, including sitting MPs, should see that cases against them were discharged within a year before they were allowed to contest in elections. Further, corporates should not be allowed to generously disburse funds for campaigns and that the governement should itself allocate funds for campaigns by the parties and prevent them spending inordinate amounts for each election. He indicated the examples of England and France...

It seems to me that within the constitution and the law, everyone is not judged equally. The constitution bears distinct traces of descending from vedic forbears, which is not as secular as it professes to be. Plus, even the points that have been put in of reservations and minorities and tribals acts, are not being enforced.

I raised a question: What can the law do to enable marginalised people rather than speak of preventing the ones with criminal records from contesting...?

The question finally came back to me. Do you have any ideas? So I throw this open to readers... do you have ideas?

Mayavati and Maneka

Today's Television had a fantastic report about Mayavati's retort to Maneka's accusation. ( Yesterday, Maneka had said that Mayavati could not understand her pain about the Varun Episode as she (maya) was not a mother herself.)

Today in a fitting retort Mayavati replied: (if her accusation about Mayavati's maternal instincts were justified...) "As a mother, Maneka should not only feel the pain of her son, but also of the sons of other mothers!"

On Varun Gandhi.... I couldn't say it better!

I could not say it better - Here is a post from nanopolitan, who got it from calcutta chromosomes...

One of the best comments on the Varun Gandhi outburst
If Varun Gandhi had said that he would slaughter a chicken instead of Muslims, his mother would have put him behind bars herself, pronto!
Interesting sense of priority we have in this country...

A Fine Distinction - Journalistic Work Ethics

I do not know if this is a situation peculiar to India, but scientists and others working in science have to answer many questions regarding what is ethical in their work. For many, especially the more sensitive workers, this conflict never gets resolved. People in this situation either just leave and take up work elsewhere or divide their time and personalities, perhaps, to accommodate the clamour within. But all said, I always thought ethics meant keeping intouch with the "innervoice" or "conscience" ... I was surprised to read about this different definition of Work-Ethics... and thought I'd share it on the blog...

In a conference on Ethics in Science and Science Journalism, held in Barcelona in July 2008 , James Cornell of International Science Writers Association speaks of one such conflict - Advocacy journalism - the fatal act of "taking sides" in sociological problems, instead of "reporting "objectively.

In his speech he flays two really well-known Indian journalists, Pallava Bagla and Daryl D'Monte, and Sunita Narain of Down-to-Earth. Here is an extract of his talk:

`Still, it is clear that major changes are occurring in how science journalists see their roles in countries like China, with a gradual shift from serving as “advocate/adjuncts” to behaving more as “advocate/adversaries.” '

`In truth, the term “advocacy journalism”—at least as used in the United States—has usually applied to those journalists who pursue a single point of view, promoting a cause or an issue, not always but quite often, at odds with establishment viewpoints or official policies.Let me cite two Indian colleagues—both members of ISWA—who exemplify this type of advocate/ adversary. Darryl D’Monte and Pallava Bagla.....'

(He continues later) `....But both men are also highly opinionated and subjective writers, who are deeply committed advocates for protection of the environment. As such, they are often in conflict with powerful governmental, political, and industrial interests and their reporting—I should say, writing, for it is often more akin to editorializing than reporting—is not ambiguous in any way. It is squarely on the side of the environment.

Even more opinionated--and adversarial--are the activist journalists of India’s Centre for Science and Environment. Founded in 1982 by the late Anil Agarwal to address the specific problem of air pollution caused by New Delhi’s diesel-guzzling buses, the CSE is now headed by Agarwal acolyte Sunita Narain. Her group’s focus has expanded to five areas of concern: air pollution, climate change, water management, pesticides, and poverty eradication.

Well that's the general drift - plenty of food for thought....!

(For those who don't know...Darryl D'Monte writes for the Times of India, among other outlets, and Pallava Bagla for Science magazine and NDTV.)