Anatomy of a Rape: Sponsored Crime and Consumer Awareness

LATELY, watching TV at home has become synonymous to watching 'public undressing' performances like this, this, and this (among many others) most of the time. TV today is giving birth to more voyeurs in this society than anything else ever did. It is sad that creativity has lost all its colors and reserved itself to blue!

Sponsored by Lewd Entertainers?

Snapshot of a disturbing AD

With advertisements restricted to 20% of the TV airtime per-hour, advertisers are pushed to the limit of retaining viewer attention, and resorting to 'public undressing' seems to be their way-out?! Watching these lewd visuals have gradually come to being an acceptable ritual in the living room. What used to be earlier a taboo to even talk about has suddenly become the tea-time pastime for a good portion of the TV market. And this very society is now plagued by rapes & other heinous crimes. These behavior changes sponsored by the market forces are not doing any good to us at all.

Daring Questions, But...
Clearly, as a society, you cannot undress in public (on- or off-screen) and not be plagued by crime at the same time! We've got to choose between these two. There's absolutely no logic in daring the opposite sex by taking them to the limit of hormonal tests by means of these public undressing performances. Likewise there's no logic in questioning the integrity of people when there's no way of separating the ones with integrity from the ones without it. It is enough trouble if each city has one rapist at large. But on similar lines demanding capital punishment to anyone that commits this crime, however heinous, doesn't help alleviate the problem. A judicial precedent means nothing for a mind that is weak enough to become criminal.

The Whole Anatomy
Rapid, unplanned and unsustainable urbanization has triggered unforeseen migration at national levels, leading to unhealthy inter-personal relations in an otherwise well-connected society, also causing a perceivable plummet in average moral values among dwellers. Viral consumerism, considered quintessential to running any urbanized settlement, has blinded the average citizen to the ill-effects of such sponsored behavior changes in a society. The aberration between market and society faced by common man makes him miss the big picture - that he is being modified (from within) in the pretext of being captured better by market forces. Even to the extent of approving the inappropriate and making their societies breeding grounds for criminals.

Although a weird one, this is a comparison I find convincing always - crime is like a river, with not a single clear source of its birth, innumerable tributaries contributing to its growth, all headed towards one common destination: an out-pour of the darkness out of oneself. This state-of-mind called crime cannot be culled by an act of law, instead it should be culled by an act of collective conscious minds. In fact drawing from experiences of various people in the same society, it can even be deduced that penal laws constructed out of similar compelling situations (viz., Sec 498A IPC) have only jeopardized harmony in the society and paved new avenues for corruption of the human mind. Like it is said, in the case of Sec 498A, it has heralded new ways of exposing the lowest levels of the executive & judiciary to corruption, who had been deprived of the benefits of erstwhile penal laws.

Hence, in the interest of public welfare, it would be prudent of the youth to not take up the cudgels for compelling the legislature to play a blind-game. Instead the same youth had rather display their collective sense and strength in warding off spirits in the market that, in the name of consumerism, convince people to even approve vulgarity such as 'public undressing'. Being a better informed customer is as important today as being a better informed citizen. Let us not build unnecessary fortresses of legislation when we can prevent such a need by being a better informed customer.

Rape, Crime, Decentralized Democracy & The Sarojini Mahishi Report

Circle of Federalism?

IF CRIME in general and rape cases in particular are on the rise in Delhi & other north Indian regions, the best way to protect women in other states (viz. Karnataka) is to closely monitor and reasonably control migration of people from Delhi & other north Indian regions into other states. Even while not curtailing what is popularly perceived as a fundamental right in India (to be able to migrate and settle anywhere in this country,) this measure will greatly help local authorities to plan development programs within the state, track settlement of migrants in host state and make sure migrants do not resort to unlawful activities. Had this been in place already, we would have had far lesser incidents like this one, this one, or may be this one...

If all the waves created by the media around this story serve as a cue to any government, it is the state government (Govt of Karnataka for instance) and these state governments urgently need to wake up to their real job of protecting their state and the state's interests.

For starters, here's a list of things each state government could do in the interest of common welfare, and prevention of migrant related crimes:

1. Demanding education back into state list of items.
• After all it is education, or the lack of it, that is leading people to commit crimes. 
• Education being in the concurrent list, and with an ill-equipped central government at the helm of education affairs in the entire nation, employment & economic disparities are easy consequences.
• This in turn leads to social disparity driving the social awareness disparity quotient high.
2. Demand decentralization of Railways - one of the major carriers of migrants across this country.
• Although not the reason for migration themselves, in the hands of a central govt. the railways are an easy pawn for interested parties to create vote banks out of potentially migration oriented peoples.
• When decentralized and handed over to state governments, railway policies will be governed by the respective state and its usage for induced, as well as uncontrolled migration will be curtailed.
3. The labour ministry at the center needs to be dissolved or diluted to have lesser jurisdiction and control than now, and lesser control than the states.
• Each state needs to be the ultimate point of control and legislation when it comes to labour laws and settling of labour disputes.
• Owing to this ministry being currently held by the center, the labour laws relating to various industries uphold homogenization across boundaries of labour market, and in process encourage excessive migration across the country.
• Proper installation of and enforcement as per Sarojini Mahishi Report (vote) will limit unnecessary migration of people into its state.

The points go on, and is not limited to the list above. Revolutionary changes such as these are not easy achievements and certainly not feasible achievements for political parties that have conflicting interests within and outside of the state. At political crossroads, a state with weaker political lobby always ends up losing the battle and thereby its interests. The dire need for all states that are part of this union is therefore an urgent up-rise of (regional) political parties that understand democracy and the urgent need to usher in federal forces to save this democracy from internal plunder.

Is Karnataka also being Telanganaad?

Karnataka Districts Map @ 2008
(Courtesy: Karnataka State Election Commission)

The Constitution of India appoints the Parliament with a right by law to edit the boundaries of the states that constitute this union called India. Part I (The Union and its Territory) of this constitution features an Article (Art. 3) stated thus:

3. Parliament may by law—
(a) form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by uniting two or more States or parts of States or by uniting any territory to a part of any State;
(b) increase the area of any State;
(c) diminish the area of any State;
(d) alter the boundaries of any State;
(e) alter the name of any State:
[Provided that no Bill for the purpose shall be introduced in either House of Parliament except on the recommendation of the President and unless, where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the area, boundaries or name of any of the States 1***, the Bill has been referred by the President to the Legislature of  that State for expressing its views thereon within such period as may be specified in the reference or within such further period as the President may allow and the period so specified or allowed has expired.]

After re-reading the above Article, a point that intrigues me in hindsight is why did the GoK invite the PoI Mr Pranab to inaugurate the Suvarna Vidhana Soudha built recently in Belgaavi, a district in north Karnataka? Was it a cue to impress upon him to refer to the GoK seeking its opinion about a reorganization of the Karnataka state? Is this some sort of collusion happening between the two otherwise rival national political parties in the country? Have they come to see a common political gain as their 'fortune to be won' at the end of this division? Is Karnataka also being Telanganaad?

(to be continued...)

Wrong Statistics and The Gumma-nomics of Dubbing

This article in yesterday's Bangalore Mirror laid out a laundry list of so-called deterrents to dubbing in Kannada. Owing to the nature and presentation of its contents, this article sent out two messages - One that Sandalwood (KFI i.e.), as it stands today, is pure crap and people who'd like to come and invest & innovate in this industry had rather stay away or brace for super-losses. Another, that regardless of its lossy-by-design nature, the dubbing industry seems to be a threat to KFI! Seems like a big gumma (ghost in children's parlance) is running the KFI, not its talent or business acumen.

What this article does is take media rights beyond imaginable boundaries and use statistics, however unsupported, to project a notion that is deeply embedded in the minds of a few people in the KFI, and perhaps another few programmed souls in other quarters. In saying that -

The film industry has steeled itself against the onslaught of a ‘consumer group’ which is demanding dubbed content in Kannada, especially films.

and from the way it is said, the this article seems to be a mouthpiece of the anti-dubbing squad within KFI. But this very statement is so irrational with respect to the functioning of an industry. If a consumer group has been demanding dubbed film content in Kannada, is it wise for the film industry to consider it as onslaught and 'steel' itself against it?


Even if one were to momentarily accept the statistics presented in this article, isn't this 'steeling' of the industry against a consumer group (among its audiences) enough evidence for the claimed minuscule share of Kannada movies in the film market in a Kannada state? Here're some interesting anti-statistics:

1. If 9 out of 27 lakh theater-goers in Karnataka watch Kannada movies, and the other 18 lakh watch non-Kannada movies, market wisdom lies in figuring ways to attract those people towards Kannada movies again, not in blindly disowning those 18 lakh cine-goers as non-Kannadigas and mentally shrink one's own Total Available Market. 
2. It is also a true businessman's interest to see why, among 6-crore people that live in this state, only 27 lakh people (a disappointing 5%) are being captured in the film market. A careful observation reveals that a good portion of contemporary movies of KFI are remakes of movies people have already watched in other languages, and another portion of KFI made movies are deprived of screens because those theaters have very little Kannada movie choice to choose from, or yield to immense pressure from a deluge of non-Kannada movies ready to fill the gap created because of a dysfunctional image of KFI projected by itself.
3. That 50 lakh Rupees is what dubbing rights of a non-Kannada movie costs, and that 5 crore Rupees is the minimal expense of making an original Kannada movie (or even a remake), and given that the current annual revenue of the latter is just 100 crores with at least 100 movies made every year, makes dubbing of films into Kannada surely more profitable to investors than movies being Made in KFI today. Besides, it is what the people from 'consumer groups' are demanding.
4. If movies of other languages can grab 120 screens across Karnataka on the first day of their global release, and corner nearly 66% of Kannada audience, it only goes to show the command non-Kannada movies have come to hold over an otherwise Kannada movie-going audience. The reasons for such success is a shameful combination of KFI's lackluster market behavior and a daring act of entrepreneurship performed by non-Kannada film businessmen.
5. The general expectation of movie audiences always follows the best entertainer, and hence the expectation of Kannada cine-goers has outgrown the KFI itself. The time-warped KFI standards is perhaps the reason for this. But the steeling of KFI against consumer demand is portrayal of its inability to meet growing audience expectations, and display of arrogance in the form a cold-ban on dubbing. 

At this juncture, the non-Kannada movie revenue model is worth imitating for KFI, with revenues from multiple platforms like Internet, TV, Mobile and other conventional media like CD/DVD being exploited to their limits. The best way to react is to mimic, yet compete. The way to handle the evolving consumer need would have been to not oppose dubbing but embrace it in this liberal market and derive the same benefits that film industries of neighboring states have been deriving.


Lets not make belittling of ourselves the way of existence, and our ray of hope in the market. If actress Tara, the current head of KCA (Kannada Chalanachitra Academy), had to reserve her stage-seat during the recently concluded GIM 2012 with a reason, the film industry that she belongs to must show some mettle and prove its business sense. If dubbing of movies into Kannada is such a loss making business, why fear the gumma; just mind your business.

(Related read: A Dubbed audience and the suspicion around Dubbing)

Part-1 : Should the Kaveri flow through New Delhi?

Come summer and the two south-Indian states, Karnataka and Tamilnadu, inevitably start the year's quota of dialog on Kaveri river water sharing and people get soaked in political arguments, water related negotiations and political engineering or the lack of them! This has become a pattern etched in stone, with the two states repeatedly being pushed into the arena by the sheer failure of political machinery on all three sides of the table - the two riparian states and the center.

This year the cry heard in some Karnataka voices is the need for a national (river) water sharing policy stemming from an apparent belief that such a 'national policy' could magically uncoil the tension among riparian states just because a third party, the union government, proclaiming itself to be JUST & EQUAL, when given the funnel, will take in all the water in the rivers and direct them to the riparian states in a fair manner. This is pure fiction, as will be shown in this series.

Regardless of the fairness in this deal between states and the union, these are the things that need to be deeply pondered about:

1. (River) Water sharing between states is a characteristically local problem, limited to the interests of the riparian states and the people within them directly influenced by the river waters. A solution to this had rather not come from outside of the problem domain for those would not really address the problem!
2. The farther removed a government is that is arbitrating river water sharing between states, the little it can do to benefit the riparian states, and the lesser JUST & EQUAL its policies and decisions come across to some of them. 'The reason why this is so often the case is that bureaucrats and technicians base themselves mainly on political considerations external to the region in question: the needs of the local population rarely feature at all' ("Water under threat", p 161). Hence the union govt. which is further removed than the governments of the riparian states is much poorly disposed to do justice to these states. (In fact it is better disposed to favor either of the states over the other!)
3. The adverse impact such remotely-designed policies have on the hydrology of various river basins is considerable and long-lasting. Historical tribunals of such remote origins and their verdicts on river water sharing in India have proven this point amply.

Keen on catching up on this debate? Here're some trivia (along with my interpretation) I thought we'd rather help ourselves with before we dive-in, hoping it'll expose whatever sense exists in this argument (about the consequences of a national river water sharing policy).

1. The preamble to the Indian constitution offers JUSTICE (social, economic and political) and EQUALITY (of status and of opportunity) to the citizens of India.
• Literally interpreting: Among other things. the citizens of this republic are secured social, economic and political JUSTICE. 
• Likewise, the citizens have also been secured their EQUALITY of status and of opportunity in this sovereign democratic republic.
2. Item 56 in the Seventh Schedule of this constitution places regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys under the Union List. 
• This officially strips the riparian states of their otherwise natural political right to regulation and development of the rivers flowing through the respective states. 
• How can political JUSTICE be secured by stripping people of rights to govern and develop themselves?
3. Karnataka and Tamilnadu elect 12 & 18 members respectively to the Rajya Sabha and 28 & 39 members respectively to the Lok Sabha. Hence on every vote in Delhi, there are 17 extra Tamilnadu voices roaring to mute Karnataka voices!
• How can Karnataka's EQUALITY of status ever be secured by such unequal representation at the center?
• How can EQUALITY of opportunity be secured by a denial of states' rights to engage in constructive negotiations, targeted at deriving mutual gains, with neighboring Union members? 
• How can any government, other than the state governments, secure this EQUALITY any better?
4. Article 262 of the same constitution conveniently assumes the center (union govt.) to be the responsible body to arbitrate disputes related to inter-state river water sharing.
• But it has been found on several occasions that the decisions arrived at and tribunals awarded by the center have only provoked the states to plan or execute massive reservoir projects purely driven by hoarding intentions laden with greed & fear. 
• Such greed & fear are syntheses of non-federal siphoning off of responsibilities from the states to the center; a center that is not better disposed than the states themselves to decide on such local matters.
• One instance ("KWDT Report", p 331) of Andhra Pradesh describing river waters flowing into the sea as wastage is a clear indication of how such tribunals have bred greed & fear to dangerous proportions at the state level.
• Not only has this led to hydrological degradation of various river basins, but also led to intra-state conflicts (IWMI Research pub., pp 11-14) unseen till then.
5. Coalition equations at the center lead to biased water sharing tribunal awards announced by the center, thereby further complicating the battle over water jurisdiction.
• With the strength of such a coalition lying in safeguarding interests of its members and ally states, non-ally states, where national parties electorally dominate over little or no local political force, don't get their interests safeguarded equally well. Such non-ally states, usual example being Karnataka, are in a way expected to cooperate and endure pains of severe water deprivation while ally states enjoy unfair water surpluses year over year.
• While ally states, like Tamilnadu, continue to reap water lotteries from such central tribunals, as a compensation, non-ally states, like Karnataka, are lured with political mirages like ministries and other such confectionery. National parties, in turn, insure their electoral dominance in Karnataka this way!
• Hence this biased water distribution, and biased treatment of states in general is mainly attributable to the delegation of those tasks to the center that the states themselves should execute. This non-federal, centralized administrative structure of the union govt. combined with sub-optimal state-focused representation at the center is leading to distress and disharmony in this union of states.

IRS '11Q2 results: Looking at the Fine Print

A week ago MRUC (Media Research Users Council) reported results from its recent surveys of print media readership conducted across the nation. Statistics relevant to Karnataka reveal pleasing results with every other newspaper gaining readers on top of their base from previous year. This news clears the table and lays data afresh, portraying once again how printed content in Kannada still continues to top and lead readership charts across the state, with urban hotspots like Bengaluru being no exception.


A question of capability and choice
The IRS (Indian Readership Survey) is, according to an official release :

.. a syndicated study based on a comprehensive sample size of 2,14,486 with a geographic spread of nearly 70 cities, 1178 towns & 2894 villages...The random sample size is distributed across all metro towns, rest of urban & rural using an appropriate method that ensures adequate sample representation across all the population strata.

Apart from being a good manifestation of a people's literacy ratio, IRS data are also a good 'currency' for advertisers and media houses to trade with. These data provide statistical reassurances about the market reach of newspapers - something that media and ad agencies expect to obtain by partnering with the print media players in the form of advertisements and sometimes (paid) news! In effect these results are much awaited by benefactors in business & media houses alike. While business houses interpret this data to measure the capability of print media to reach their market audiences, media houses use this data as currency in exchange for a proportional amount of advertising investment by business houses.


There, but not yet?
Evidently, the Kannada print media has come out in flying colors in every successive IRS survey in the last 6-8 quarters, displaying fierce competition among its leading players, each inching further towards a higher readership QoQ (Quarter on Quarter). The following leader-board illustrates this competition, making evident the battle for the top two spots thereby emphasizing on the value of playing in the Kannada print media market. 

Kannada Print Media Leader Board (10Q1-11Q2)

This may be news to cheer, but statistics underlying them expose the relatively meager coverage of Kannada literates (& Karnataka population in general) compared to their other South Indian counterparts. 


Since literacy of a state directly dictates its limit of print media penetration, the same reflects in the maximum AIR (Average Issue Readership) numbers one can expect to see in each state. Kerala with the highest literacy among South Indian states tops the charts, both in terms of literacy and AIR whereas Karnataka with a literacy better than Andhra still fails to beat it in terms of AIR. This is not an exception we can ignore, for it indicates how poorly Kannada print media has been able to tap the literate Kannadiga population and also various other people that can read and understand the Kannada script. The following chart summarizes this trend.

AIR vs Literacy trend

While literacy agreeably plays a critical role in defining the market size, traits of a print medium such as: 

• content quality, 
• readership loyalty, 
• distribution efficiency, 
• localized rendering of content, 
• emphasis on local language usage, 
• ability to customize content and render it more appealing to local audiences 

Reach Comparison (%)

- appear to be influencing a newspaper's patronage. Kannada print media has miles to go and work to do to improve their patronage on the lines of what its neighboring language presses have achieved. This chart exhibits (in percentages) how a majority of print media in South India, especially the Kannada version have stayed below the average both in terms of net AIR and net literate AIR. (The red dotted lines represent averages.) While it may not be able to do much that can directly bump up Karnataka's literacy, the Kannada press certainly needs to strengthen its focus on education in Kannada medium and emphasize on the importance of increasing the usage of Kannada in every walk of life in Karnataka. Even a small example cited in this regard points fingers at a Kannada daily which writes reams about the importance of Hindi for Kannadigas, or another which does nothing to educate advertisers to not field English advertisement in a Kannada daily. The Kannada press isn't doing enough to help broaden the Kannada reader base! What is observed today instead is that quite a few Kannada press members have, unconsciously or otherwise, become glorifiers of the success stories in other languages thereby sidelining what is being done and what needs to be done to empower Kannada to reach the same stage for Kannadigas.


Contrasting 'under the lamp' observations
The Kannada press has certainly got some reason to celebrate, especially keeping in mind the fact that repeated IRS results from Karnataka and Bengaluru have revealed Kannada dailies as leaders in terms of AIR year-on-year, reinforcing the truth about how deep Kannada alone penetrates into this society. In this backdrop wild & wrong assumptions and misplaced fears like Kannada losing prominence continue to be expressed by concerned authorities like the head of Kannada Abhivruddhi Praadhikara. All these surveys and their results - confirming that more than 17 out of 20 Benglurians listening in public (FM, for instance), talking in public (FM, again), and reading papers are plugged in to Kannada - seem to be falling on closed eyes of responsible people. Is it time for them to wake up yet?


PS: One fairly reasonable assumption made in the calculations here is no overlap of readers of two newspapers, thereby making the AIRs of two newspapers linearly additive in nature.

A Dubbed audience and the suspicion around Dubbing

One interesting pattern that I find among people opposing dubbing of movies into Kannada is that they seem to be thinking more about welfare of the industry (KFI i.e.) not valuing their own expectation from the industry as customers. Talking in pure market terms, this anti-dubbing camp appears to be advocating for demanding the betterment of the supplier at the cost of the customer himself!


For a moment, if we all pause to visualize this scene from a different perspective - the perspective of a customer - we'll realize that with regards to this dubbing episode, we'd be better off thinking about the Kannada Film Market and not the Kannada Film Industry instead. The difference between these two is key to understanding why Dubbing, while not being an essential ingredient, can still be one way in which the Kannada Film Market can attract a much higher percentage of its audience to watching movies in the Kannada Medium itself.

Today a substantial mass of the Kannadiga audience is getting 'leaked' to movies from across the border(s) only because movies made in-land are, apparently, 'not enough' both in quality and quantity. There's also a historical factor of in-confidence among Kannadigas about Kannada movies, especially in the urban markets which drives them away towards more glamorous and 'not essentially' better movie markets. So this phenomenon of Kannadiga audiences leaking towards other language movies is a loss to the Kannadiga audience, and to the Kannada Film Market in essence.

Now if we were to think about the Kannada Film Market as an entity that needs to be enriched with good Kannada entertainment, whether the movie is originally a Kannada made film, or a film of another language, dubbed into Kannada, or re-made in Kannada, the end-beneficiary is in fact the Kannada film-goer him/her-self. This makes the Kannada Film Market richer.

As Dr Rajkumar always said, it is us (the Kannada movie audience) that he lived for, acted for, and prayed for. In the same way, the Kannada movie audience needs to be at the core of all planning that happens in the Kannada Film Market.

The industry (or industries) that drive entertainment & happiness into the homes & theaters of Kannada movie audience is just incidental. Does one care if a pack of biscuits one buys is manufactured by a Kannada industry or not? All you need is a good enjoyable pack of biscuits. Likewise all you need is a good enjoyable Kannada movie. Why care about the 'industry' at the cost of your own entertainment experience? Why care so much to get influenced by some tricky words with vested interests? 


A good Kannada movie is what we want. If one can get that only in a dubbed Kannada movie today, it need not mean a good Kannadiga son will not be born tomorrow to make a better movie originally in Kannada. In fact it only further increases the chance of such movies in future. It only increases the chance of more Puttanna Kanagals in the future of Kannada Film Market.

Lets stop talking about an industry, and start talking about the market. Be it Dubbing or Remaking or Swa-making, without the permission of us (the audience) no son-of-a-gun from across the borders can loot the Kannada Film Market. We are the ones that'll certify the success of a movie. We need not fear about the industry, we need fear only about our market.


(Essence of this post featured here on this Facebook thread.)