A welcome respite from the overbearing specter of Swine Flu.

And young Ganapati has his annual task pretty clearly chalked out.

As the saying goes, nothing moves in Mumbai till this young elephant God’s blessings are taken.

He is the unofficial CEO of the city.

He is the Remover of All Obstacles.

Possibly the reason why, this year, even television channels are seeking his blessings in their hunt for greater TRPs.

Picture this.

The Star News anchor introduces us to Lord Ganapati, Lord Shiva and Parvati.

Ganapati is introduced as the God who is worshipped before any other God.

Shiva and Parvati indulgently look on.

The anchor goes on to talk about Saas, Bahu & Saazish.

Lord Shiva innocently asks – “What is Saas, Bahu & Saazish”?

(Isn’t the destroyer of all evil supposed to know it all?)

Nevertheless, the anchor explains.

We go on, as part of the program, to see small clips of programs like Sach Ka Saamana and Channel V’s eXhausted, among others.

The Gods look on with interest.

I honestly didn’t know they would find reality TV so cool.

Especially if you consider the fact that the almighty keeps an eye on the biggest reality show ever.

Yeah that’s us – you, me, neighbor, neighboring country, global warming, politics, cricket etc etc.

As the episode of Saas, Bahu & Saazish ends, the anchor seeks their blessings.

Ganapati, seated between Shiva and Parvati, holds the Star News branded mike in his hands.

The Gods bless the anchor and the show closes.

Sweet, no?

I guess there is a large audience that will smile adoringly at this.

And go on to add to the TRPs of the channel.

I am also waiting to see the day when the Gods will actually don the role of anchors.

And read the NEWS, possibly?

(This post was first published Here on Desicritics)

She thinks, agonizes, sweats.

So does he.

An audience of a zillion watches with bated breath.

Hold it.

What is she sweating for?

Trust is frail.

It can break at the slightest poke.

Especially in times of greater individual insecurity than ever before.

What was she agonizing over?

If she actually loved him, why was she worried?

Because the machine’s endorsement of her love was critical in the social context?

What was he agonizing over?

That a “lie” would brand him wrong, never mind what the truth was?

No, don’t expect any links to articles on the veracity of lie detector tests in this post.

I actually don’t care if the lady in question actually loved the man in question or not.

I have a question.

Do programs today operate independently?

Is the social impact they have not a part of the criteria of selection?

This is not a TRP argument.

That’s business.

As a business target, a channel’s job is to gain a greater audience, hence provide a bigger/richer target audience, and hence invite bigger advertising investment.

But a channel cannot ignore the fact that it has a social context too.

Sure, a condom brand’s future sales could lie in it promoting irrational and promiscuous sex.

But it doesn’t work that way.

I have a problem with Sach Ka Saamana.

It’s selfishly irresponsible.

Yes, every contestant is an adult, who probably signed a 40 page agreement before even appearing on the show.

But who are we fooling?

A contestant?

The poor bloke or lady doesn’t know what will hit him/her before it actually does.

Any mass media medium HAS to operate while being cognizant of the impact it will have.

You cannot transfer the responsibility on to the participant.

In any case, most participants who brave terribly intrusive questions actually declare that they desperately need the money.

Like the lady in question tonight.

Individuals are weak, foolish, susceptible and gullible.

Channels are not.

Tonight’s episode, where the young lady, even though she did it of her own free will, was rather saddening – it painted a rather sad picture of the channel and of us, the viewers, who gave the channel reason to telecast such stuff.

I, at a point, did NOT want to know of her personal life anymore.

I hated the sight of her agonizing over that single question.

And her man as well.

The machine can take a flying ****.

Why should we even hear a human subject another human to this crap?

PS:

On a rather unscientific count : enough has been said about love being the most misunderstood emotion of all times.

How do we expect a machine to understand, diagnose and rule a verdict on it?

All hell breaks loose.

Seems his name flashed on the computer and he was grilled.

SRK is peeved.

Indians are irate – globally.

The blogworld, media, phone-lines, twitter have all helped the news travel back and forth and are continuing to do so as we speak.

Hold on. For a moment.

The issue is NOT that a film-star was detained for 66 WHOLE minutes because his name is Khan.

The issue is NOT that this comes right after our ex-president was frisked by a US airline in our own country prior to boarding a Newark bound flight.

I don’t think we are angry that the Americans had the gall to frisk/search men of fame or stature from our nation.

We are angry that WE don’t have the gall to do the same.

We come from a nation where people love to please anyone who seems to be ‘connected.”

We fawn over celebs of ANY kind.

Our stars get escorted past the security check.

We have seen celebs get picked up in separate cars once they get off an aircraft.

We have seen VIPs hold flights because they themselves are running late.

I mean – we love all this.

It’s ingrained in us.

APJ Abdul Kalam – one of the most respected Indians alive, cheerfully underwent a frisking.

Maybe that’s the way he is – humble.

Or maybe he strongly believed there is nothing wrong in being frisked prior to boarding a flight – especially if the person before him was frisked, and the person after him will be.

What is SRK peeved about?

That he, Shah Rukh Khan, was not recognized – and detained for 66 mins without being allowed to make a call?

Or that he, a Khan, was detained indiscriminately?

If it is the former, it is not worth a rethink.
From America’s security perspective, being Shah Rukh Khan does not make you any less or more privileged than any other visitor from another country – especially at the immigration desk.

If it is the latter, it is sad.
The computers in Newark could do with a little reprogramming – so they don’t simply stop anyone with a particular surname – I am sure a more detailed and deeper profiling of suspects can be done.

Imagine all the Mehtas in the world being stopped at the security check because Harshad Mehta scammed and ran.

Remember the law? It professes equality.

Every individual, be it the richest person in the world or Ram Singh Ojha from the dingiest part of India, has to stand up when the Judge walks into the court.

Why should it be any different when it comes to security?

The Mumbai attacks taught us (or have they?) that we MUST cheerfully volunteer to be checked when walking into a mall or a theatre or any other public place.

It is for our own good.

If we feel insulted, it is because of our own bloated egos.

I have heard, and I am sure so have you, of friends and colleagues going through an inordinately long security check because of the country we come from.

Nobody argued about that.

It comes with being an ordinary Indian citizen travelling abroad.

Well, SRK is an ordinary Indian citizen travelling abroad.

He pays taxes at the same rate as many others do and he too needs a license to drive.

So he will be treated the same way you or I will be.

Sure we may fancy treating celebs, big-shots and politicians with kid gloves even when it comes to national security.

Why are we expecting the US to tow the same line?

Before cursing the US, shouldn’t we do a little soul searching here at home?

Why the hell can’t we search/frisk/strip search anyone coming into our OWN country if required?

You know why we are searched like this when we go abroad?

Possibly because no one trust us with our own security – that’s why.

We are world famous for allowing our own rich, powerful & famous to bend rules at the drop of a hat.

And that goes a long way in building our own reputation as a strict nation the world over.

Shah Rukh, being who he is, could call Rajeev Shukla and get help.

Most Indians, in his place, wouldn’t know who to call beyond their dads or spouses.

So quit all this shouting.

Till such time we can’t enforce security measures on our own ‘privileged class’ and till such time we can’t enforce them on ‘privileged visitors’, we should quit wasting our breath over Shah Rukh – never mind how much we love him.

All this brouhaha over his 66 min/2hour long detention is such a waste of precious airtime, amongst other things.

That kind of time, if you ask me, is better spent telling people how to handle the Swine Flu.

Once upon a time, in far-far-away land, possibly centuries back, someone declared ‘Knowledge is Power’.

Someone else took the words too seriously.

The result?

Mum’s Law of Suppression

“Most humans will succumb to their chronic urge to refrain from sharing even the most useful information with others until compelled by an external impressed force, tantamount to pain of death, to act otherwise.”

Look around.

People often find a huge sense of power in withholding information that could help many if shared.

The same information, when contained, offers nothing tangible to the suppressor.

Yes, the same can be said of companies, organizations. But then companies and organizations are nothing but a collection of people.

So back to people it is.

I am sure we have all encountered and continue to encounter such people in our day-to-day life.

The finance person who WON’T tell you that you can save tax by shifting one part of your salary from one head to another.
(No, he does not freelance for the IT Department)

The HR person who does NOT consider it important enough to tell you that you can claim cab fare after certain hours of late work.
(As if he/she co-owns the bus you take)

The fellow in the elevator who can see your fly is open, but WON’T tell you.
(WTF. I mean WTF mate, what do YOU gain here??)

The chap across the counter who CAN tell you that you filled the form wrongly, but would RATHER let you discover it when the it comes back to you after a month.

A closer look will reveal this:

Corollary to Mum’s Law

“The triviality of the information suppressed as per Mum’s Law is directly proportional to the satisfaction derived by the suppressor.”

Seriously. Be it in office or outside, the glee that people experience by NOT sharing what they know increases with the utter silliness of what they know.

Tell me. What will the accountant gain by NOT telling you that your claim is lying approved on his desk since 10 days.

I mean WTF – he doesn’t get to take it home.

Closer home, in Advertising, creative people have historically failed to fathom what servicing people gain by NOT telling them that the pitch got postponed by two days.

It’s Mum’s Law. And it rules.

Interestingly, during my research, I made another observation.

Exception to Mum’s Law

“If at any point, under any circumstance, Mum’s Law faces that unique a situation where it can actually be useful, the Law will, of its own accord, CEASE to work.”

Yes. When encountered with totally trash information, the law stops working.
Precisely at the point where it can, for ONCE, be useful.

I am sure you will recognize some of these information forms.

• I-know-what-those-two-were-up-to-in-the-conference-room.

• I-know-what-his-CTC-really-is.

• I-know-why-he-actually-quit-his-last-job.

• I-know-exactly-why-she-hired-him.

When faced with such knowledge, Mum’s Law instantly ceases to work

Possibly because this knowledge will NOT, in any form, help any one.
Which in some way, goes back to reaffirm the ‘triviality’ clause of Mum’s Law.

Mum’s Law is a chronic disease that afflicts many individuals.
Evidence can be easily found in corporate and non-corporate environments.
I have collected some examples.
Feel free to add to the list, from your experience.

If any of it seems useful, I will not tell anyone.

I promise.