Reader Vikram Chandrashekar points me to a couple of news pieces (1, 2) about the launch in the UK of Current TV, the television channel started by Al Gore. We are informed:
The user-generated programming will feature three to eight-minute short documentaries, known as pods, and half-hourly “news” bulletins describing the UK’s most popular Google search terms.
A third of the films will be made by members of the public and the rest voted onto the channel by viewers.
I’m rather sceptical about “user-generated programming.” As I mentioned here, crowds are great at collating content (Wikipedia) and filtering content (Digg etc), but not so much at creating content. Still, the content creation of crowds can work if you have a real-time filtering mechanism that crowds themselves operate, and if you can cater to the long tail. YouTube can do both of those; Current TV can do neither. For that reason, I think Gore’s venture is likely to fail.
Of course, there’s still the presidency. (1, 2.)
Posted by Amit Varma on 13 March, 2007 in
Miscellaneous
ATimes of India report begins:
Protests against Bengal’s industrial revitalisation could receive a new fillip after the suicide of a 62-year-old cultivator, an organiser of the Krishi Jami Raksha Committee (KJRC) in Singur, who lost nearly an acre of land to the Tata Motors project.
This is either dishonest reporting or shoddy journalism, and I shall give the benefit of the doubt to the reporter and assume that it is the latter. The protests at Singur are not against “Bengal’s industrial revitalisation” but against the forceful appropriation of land by the government. As I wrote in an earlier post on eminent domain and Singur, it really does not matter if the farmers got compensation: if they did not want to sell, it is theft.
Now, eminent domain might be justifiable as a last resort for matters of public use, such as building roads, but it is outrageous when it is applied to take land from poor farmers and give it to a rich industrial house. The irony here is that Tata would probably have been willing to negotiate with the farmers for the land directly, but by law, farmers aren’t allowed to sell their agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes. Yes, that’s right: even if Tata was willing to talk to the farmers and negotiate with them, and farmers were willing to sell, it would have been an illegal transaction. So Tata had no choice but to go to the government, which, of course, is not into negotiating, and simply took the land by force.
I entirely agree with Shruti Rajagopalan when she writes here that the fundamental right to property, revoked in 1978, should be reinstated in our constitution. An “industrial revitalisation” is only sustainable when property rights are sacrosanct. Otherwise it’s a mockery.
Posted by Amit Varma on 13 March, 2007 in
Economics |
Freedom |
India |
Journalism |
Politics
Most of the Indian women I know who are around 30 years old are unmarried—and they’re happy that way. That is why I was somewhat bemused by this line in a Reuters report of Liz Hurley’s wedding:
Indian women are commonly married off in their teens to a man of their parents’ choosing, and are a cause of despair if they are still a spinster at 30.
Clearly the reporter in question, Jonathan Allen, had just flown down to India for the wedding, and obviously hadn’t spent any time here to get to know the place. Perhaps he even read Kipling for his research.
In tune with their coverage of India in the 19th century, another Reuters headline reads, ”Horses, elephants to star in Hurley’s Hindu wedding.” I’m relieved that there is nothing in the text about how Indians worship the cow and consider it their mother. Joy.
(Link via Divisha Gupta via email from Gautam John.)
Posted by Amit Varma on 13 March, 2007 in
India |
Journalism
They’re the new trend, Time magazine informs us.
Thanks goodness my days of working for others are behind me. Socially awkward chappies like me would have immense difficulty in impressing anyone with a video résumé. I’d imagine, however, that even if good video résumés help some confident freshers get entry-level jobs, their usefulness will diminish as one goes up the ladder. After a point, what you do surely has to have more impact than how you present yourself. No?
(Link via email from Kusum Rohra.)
Posted by Amit Varma on 12 March, 2007 in
Miscellaneous
Headlines like ”India-Pak terror pact sinking fast” exasperate me. Whaddya expect? As I have written before, the India-Pakistan peace process is a charade. While it is in General Pervez Musharraf’s interest to talk peace with India, as it makes him appear responsible in the eyes of the international community, it is equally in his interest to continue the conflict, which Pakistan’s military needs for its sustenance. All talk, no walk, in other words.
Similar incentives drive Musharraf’s actions as far as the War on Terror is concerned. As I wrote here, appearing to be America’s ally gets the foreign aid flooding in (1, 2), which Pakistan’s economy desperately needs. However, if al-Qaeda and the Taliban are actually defeated, then that aid will begin to dry up, as Musharraf and Pakistan will no longer be needed so badly.
In each case, Musharraf is doing what any rational person in his place would do. The only way to solve either problem is to change his incentives. And, much as the mandarins in New Delhi may shudder at the thought, the Americans can do that far better than we can.
The next few months will be interesting.
(Some earlier posts on Musharraf.)
Posted by Amit Varma on 12 March, 2007 in
Economics |
Politics
You can’t undo history, can you? What, then, is the point of this?
Posted by Amit Varma on 12 March, 2007 in
Miscellaneous
Upside: The chicks throw themselves at you.
Downside: Everybody knows if you snog them.
I wonder why the British haven’t yet thought of putting their royal family on a reality show. Clearly there’s a market for it, and the royals would hardly notice the difference.
Posted by Amit Varma on 12 March, 2007 in
Journalism |
Miscellaneous
Everybody wants a share of the pie. Reservations, pah!
(My feelings on reservations have been expressed here. What else is there to say? The divisions grow...)
Posted by Amit Varma on 12 March, 2007 in
India |
Politics
The Indian Economy Blog is looking for contributors. If you enjoy writing about the Indian economy, and are interested in joining the team at the IEB, get in touch with Prashant Kothari at ppkothari[AT]stringinfo[DOT]com. Make a difference!
Posted by Amit Varma on 12 March, 2007 in
Miscellaneous
In a wonderful series where masters and their protégés talk about each other, the young golfer Henrietta Brockway says:
Golf is pretty addictive. You hit 20 bad shots, then you hit one good one. You want to hit that good one again and again so you just keep trying and trying and trying.
I think that’s true of writing as well. But here’s the problem: in golf, you know when you hit a bad shot, because it hits a bunker or goes into the woods or misses the green by a long way. In writing, it’s not so clear, and depends on an individual’s judgement. Some writers could think that every shot is a good shot, and fool themselves into easy satisfaction. Others could set their bar too high, and be forever scared to write because their definition of a good shot is one that Calvino or Kundera played, and no beginning writer can compete against those. I think the ones that make it minimise the self-delusion, but have the courage to persevere even when they are racked with self-doubt, as all good writers inevitably are at some point.
Needless to say, writing about writing is easier than the writing itself. Pah.
Posted by Amit Varma on 10 March, 2007 in
Personal |
Small thoughts
