Paid news a big threat to democracy.

  Paid news during elections has become a big threat to democracy. Even as politicians are guilty of subverting democracy, media houses are entering
    into clandestine deals with candidates and political parties.



    THE report of the Press Council of India's (PCI) Committee on Paid News needs to be appreciated. The problem is not new. Anyone with money or power - high net worth individuals, corporations, powerful trusts in health, education and so on, and people in power - always had some degree of influence. They could control advertisement revenue flows to a particular media house.



    There is also a natural reluctance to take on the rich and powerful. For instance, Professors from a leading Business School in the US say in private that it is not advisable to expose the dealings of some of the big corporations in India. Here we look at only one aspect of it - paid news during elections.



    The phenomenon existed for at least a decade, but recent exposures by the media and the PCI's detailed report show the extent to which it has spread.



    We ask three simple questions. What are the roots of this problem? How does this affect good governance? What if anything can be done about it? The roots of the problem are clear. Both the media and the political system need money. On the one hand, there is intense competition in the media with hundreds of newspapers, magazines and TV channels. They are under pressure to earn profits. Some of the reporters, journalists and editors are also exposed to temptation when money is offered. Beyond individual corruption, media houses are entering into clandestine deals with candidates and political parties.



    On the other hand, elections have become a very high stakes game as candidates and parties pour in huge sums of money to ensure a win. There is a proliferation of political parties, spending more and more money to woo smaller and smaller vote banks. For a fraction of what they spend on wooing voters, they can buy some sections of the media. The roots are, therefore, in the intense competition and complete commercialisation of media and politics. This was inevitable, and the trend was clear for several years. We as a society did not sufficiently anticipate how big the problem would become.



    The impact of paid news during elections and its long-term implications also need to be clearly understood. Debates on paid news seem confined to the English media. The majority of voters in the country are exposed to the Indian language media. Selected candidates or political parties are built up by the media. Political parties or their leaders own newspapers and TV channels. In this situation, there is a good chance that voters are influenced.



    While we can debate the extent of money involved and its influence on the eventual outcome, the real question is: what kind of governance can we expect from someone who wins using dubious means? They are either the rich and powerful, or people who will stop at nothing to further their ends. Once in power, they will use it to recover their investments, and to manipulate the system in the interests of those who support them.



    High stakes, high investment elections have become the norm. Big money was perhaps always ready to accommodate those in power, a few honourable exceptions apart. But now they find that the balance has tipped - they need not humour those in power. Those in power are now eager to humour them.



    Big money is also flirting with directly entering politics instead of merely manipulating it from behind. This is a dangerous tipping point in the life of a nation, and we have reached it. In a two-part nation like ours, with India and Bharat on different sides, the implications are not difficult to see. On the one hand, politics will increasingly become populist, with more subsidies and concessions to vote blocks. That is because we have a very fragmented political system with small vote banks, and those in power often do not have the stamina or political strength to tackle the real problems of the country. They find it easier to build vote banks.



    On the other hand, there will be further sell out to corporate interests. This is not to paint the entire corporate sector as greedy and manipulative. But sections of it are definitely putting pressure on governments to bend rules, get tax concessions and get new laws passed. We will also see bigger and bigger mega projects coming up (that is already happening) involving huge sums of money. If the government cannot pay for it, we will use the PPP (Public Private Partnership) model, with some deals clearly favouring the investor over the consumer.



    Large-scale scams periodically hit the headlines. And the recent Commonwealth Games is only a case in point. Behind all this, the problem of black money will further spiral upwards. The real danger ahead is whether we will end up tarring the moral fabric of our society itself. In short, paid news contributes significantly to bad governance.



    Tackling the problem of paid news is not easy, and even if we succeed, the nexus between money and power will not entirely go away. One radical solution is to change the structure of media from a profit-making one, to a not-for-profit model, either as a society or trust, much like educational and religious organisations.



    There is also a crying need for more credible, honest media houses that are independent of big money and power. The Press Council of India's detailed report also has some excellent suggestions, and we need to consider them seriously. It includes an enforceable code of conduct, complete and transparent disclosure of paid news, inclusion of the electronic media under the PCI's jurisdiction, disclosure of all interests and share holdings of the media house and its owners, and strengthening the Election Commission to tackle this issue during elections. With the political system and the judiciary under a cloud, we cannot afford to soft-peddle the issue of media reforms.

NEW ATTIQUATE : CURTOSY

I just walked out of a nice, new restaurant where I enjoyed a delicious meal.  The food was fairly priced, magnificently prepared, and effectively presented by a friendly waiter.  He was prompt and business-like and did his job extremely well.



Obviously, that is the kind of experience we all hope for when we walk into a restaurant.  I'm happy to say that in this particular case it got even better.  The young man who waited on me added one last touch which was very important and is seldom done: I paid with my credit card and when he came back and presented me with the receipt to sign, he again smiled pleasantly and said, "Thank you very much, Mr. Ziglar.  It's nice to have you with us."



Question: How much time did it take for him to learn my name by reading it on the credit card?  You probably will agree it took no time, and yet in most cases when I pay by credit card in a restaurant, the wait person will simply say, "Thank you, come back again, and have a nice day."  Little things really do make a difference.



It is my conviction that if the wait person will always look at the name and, when they present the sales slip to be signed, just say "Thank you," and then call the customer by name, I can guarantee that not only will it benefit the restaurant, but the chances of the tip being larger will go up. In the incident I described above, that's exactly what happened.  I added 10% to the tip.



I'm constantly amazed that owners and managers of all businesses don't train their people to call the person by name. It definitely makes the customer feel good and will be a factor in bringing them back to your place of business.

"where you sit is also important."

To be honest, I could have started this column with "where you sit is also important."  The reality is that where you sit influences where you stand, but where you stand has a direct bearing on where you sit.  Let me explain.



In our business and governmental world, each one of us is influenced by the position we occupy in the organization as to how we will feel about certain projects that are brought to the decision table.  For example, the research and development department and the sales department like to spend money to develop new products.  On the other hand, the accounting department would probably feel that, in view of the economy, they should be more cautious in investing funds which might not produce a return for a long time.  That's where the decision-making process is so important.  All factors have to be weighed and analysed as to the long-range best interests of the company. Once the facts are in, the decision has to be made and that decision will affect the entire company.  That's the reason input from everyone involved is important.



It's also true that where a person stands influences to a very large degree where they sit.  Research very clearly indicates that people who take a stand for what is right, build on an ethical, moral base and stand on principle, are the ones who end up in the upper echelons of business.  When you put these two factors together, it simply means that the person of integrity (and, obviously, experience and ability) is going to be the one who is most likely to end up making those all-important decisions about the best place to put the company time and resources.  It's still true that the best way is the right way, or the right way is the best way.

"There is only one person who is capable to set limits to your growth:

One day not too long ago the employees of a large company in St. Louis, Missouri returned from their lunch break and were greeted with a sign on the front door. The sign said: "Yesterday the person who has been hindering your growth in this company passed away. We invite you to join the funeral in the room that has been prepared in the gym."



At first everyone was sad to hear that one of their colleagues had died, but after a while they started getting curious about who this person might be. The excitement grew as the employees arrived at the gym to pay their last respects. Everyone wondered: "Who is this person who was hindering my progress? Well, at least he's no longer here!"



One by one the employees got closer to the coffin and when they looked inside it they suddenly became speechless. They stood over the coffin, shocked and in silence, as if someone had touched the deepest part of their soul.



There was a mirror inside the coffin: everyone who looked inside it could see himself. There was also a sign next to the mirror that said:

"There is only one person who is capable to set limits to your growth: it is YOU."



YOU are the only person who can revolutionize your life.



YOU are the only person who can influence your happiness, your realization and your success.



YOU are the only person who can help yourself.



Your life does not change when your boss changes, when your friends change, when your parents change, when your partner changes, when your company changes.



Your life changes when YOU change, when you go beyond your limiting beliefs, when you realize that YOU ARE the only one responsible for your life.

APPEARANCE COUNTS

According to a study I read, the way we look has a direct bearing on our paycheque. Employment data from 7,000 adults was analysed. Interviewers divided the group according to looks and then compared what those working similar jobs in each category were paid. Those who were below average in appearance earned less than those rated "average." Those who rated average earned less than those who were rated "above average."



Appearance includes many things. The style and neatness of your clothing, the shine on your shoes, the crease in your shirt, your choice of colours, and a host of other things affect your "appearance rating." The way you fix your hair, your make-up, and all the elements of your personal grooming make a contribution.



However, the biggest factor is the smile on your face, followed closely by your attitude and sense of humour. A good sense of humour and a positive attitude are particularly important as you move into the upper echelons of business. The reality is that people promote people. Evidence is solid that when everything else is equal, we will promote the person we like versus the one about whom we might feel either neutral or negative almost regardless of their skills.



The question is, who do we like? I believe you'll agree that the people who are pleasant, cheerful and optimistic are easier to like than the ones who are inclined to be dour and even negative in their approach to life.



It's also true that the cheerful, optimistic person is going to get more done and will have more cooperation from his or her fellow workers than will the negative individual. It's a practical matter that employers seek those who "fit," get more done, and are pleasant to be around. So let your "Sunday best" appearance include a smile, a great attitude and an easy sense of humour.

Why should we deeply care about our inner feelings?

Eyes and ears that seek evil, tongue that craves to malign, nose that enjoys the foul, and hands that delight in wickedness—these must be totally avoided. Whoever has any of these must correct them immediately. Or else, one’s future is bound to be disastrous. The wrongs of the five indriyas (senses) will result in the destruction of the five pranas (vital energies) and the killing of the five koshas (sheaths of existence). Of course, the senses yield momentary pleasure and joy but, as the saying goes, “senility lies in wait.” Sensual pleasures bring about great grief quite soon.

Why is it critical to have an open mind with everyone?

It is quite a common occurrence that stories of the Divine are narrated and heard by gatherings of thousands. But Jnana (wisdom) can be achieved only by placing complete faith in what is heard. That faith must result in a cleansed mind, a pure heart.  Whoever listens to the Lord's narrative and imbibes the nectar therein with a heart bubbling over with yearning for the Divine, with unshakeable faith in God, they will attain constant joy and Self-realisation. This is beyond the realm of doubt.