Offstumped – Commentary on Indian Politics

Icon

Politics and Public Policy in India

March 8, 2011 • 11:59 pm 6

Dear BJP Digital disengagement is not the answer

Back in the days when news was not reported in real time, transcripts were not readily available forget YouTube Videos, it was convenient for Politicians to extricate themselves from mass communication snafus by seeking refuge in  - “I was misquoted by the media” or “The media misinterpreted what I said” or “The media twisted my remarks”.

The 24×7 TV and now the Digital era has changed much of that what with Politicians most recently blaming Twitter’s 140 character limit. News filtering today of a proposed ban on blogging and twitter on policy issues by BJP leaders highlights a larger point that is being missed by the political leadership of not just the BJP but other parties as well.

It is myopic to dismiss away the rapid rise of personalized social media platforms like  Twitter as a passing  fad. The kind of Digital Internationalism we are witnessing over the events in the Middle East is a reminder that this medium is here to stay and its growth is irreversible.

It is also foolish to characterize a personalized digital megaphone like Twitter as somehow fostering a personality cult and as somehow going against a culture of joint leadership. All mass communication in politics is personality oriented albeit from a medium of one’s choosing. Fellow blogger Pragamtic_D said it right in this comment on Twitter:

Some politicians may be more comfortable with 24×7 TV Studios and Op-ed columns. Comfort with the English language might put them a distinct advantage on those media. Some others may prefer the more informal Social Medium for both its brevity, flexibility and one to one interactivity with their constituents.

Any Digital disengagement via diktats over new media is akin to an attempt to turn the clock back to the days when politics thrived on information asymmetry.   What the BJP needs is not a social media ban but a coordinated Digital Strategy so a distinction may be drawn between the Party line and an individual leader’s opinion.

We already have this undemocratic environment where in the name of consensus building Parties dont conduct internal elections,  key appointments are an outcome of backroom intrigue,  legislative freedom is stifled through strict Party line Whips and the threat of disqualification thanks to the archaic anti-defection law. By  extending this culture of gagging opinion to the digital medium political parties are making an already bad situation worse.

So what might that have Ms. Sushma Swaraj done differently in this situation ?

Ms. Swaraj made a fundamental mistake by drawing a distinction between the cattle class and the media on Twitter. By maintaining two different twitter accounts she allowed herself to be twitter baited by the media in projecting what might have been her personal opinion as the party line. It is clear that Ms. Swaraj is not personally savvy with the technical aspects of the medium and their  impact on mass communication.  A  safer and far more meaningful Digital Strategy for Ms. Swaraj would have been to use  Twitter for its natural strengths – viral and non-linear digital amplification of stated positions and opinions.

What could the BJP do differently ?

Rather than box itself into a corner on apparent contradictions it should turned this whole episode to its advantage by projecting it as an example of how vibrant and open the BJP is on debate and discussion and in embracing new media. After all there is no precedent for a  Leader of the Opposition in a Parliamentary Democracy to have used Twitter in the manner Ms. Swaraj during the J&K intervention.

It is clear that there is a spirited battle for who must lead the BJP in 2014. That battle has to be settled through an open and transparent process, ideally with a Primary of sorts. It is unfortunate that Digital Engagement is being made the casualty in that battle.

Dear BJP leaders, Digital disengagement is not the answer.  We need @SushmaSwarajBJP to tweet and tweet more. We want @NarendraModi to continue to do what he is already doing. There surely is a  yet to be claimed Arun Jaitley Twitter handle. It would not be a bad idea at all to make Twitter the Platform where Debate takes place on Decision 2014 for the BJP.

Filed under: Assam elections 2011, Assembly elections 2011, DesiPundit, Digital Citizen, Internet Hindus, Narendra Modi, Nitin Gadkari, Offstumped, Social Media Reflections

February 6, 2011 • 10:18 pm 1

Twitter – the anti “Social Network” ?

In continuation to earlier posts on “Twitter Crusades and Anarchy“, “Why do we really Twitter“.

Is Twitter really the anti “Social Network” ?

Let me be clear I am not referring to a network of “anti socials”.

What I am asking is if Twitter is the opposite of the “Social Network” in the sense that Facebook is a social network ?

Perhaps we can answer that question by reflecting on what makes social beings in the first place in the real world. There is Trust which is the bedrock of civilized living. Then there are intimate relationships that enhance this web of trust. Then of course there is the peer standing. Both intimate relationships and peer standing bring with them significant barriers to behavior that risks violating that Trust. Then of course there is the unwritten and unstated social contract of give and take within these intimate relationships and peer groups. That contract makes implicit demands of consistent behavior, reciprocity, parity amongst others that either boost or stress inter-personal dynamics.

It is arguable to what degree a social network like Facebook mirrors the real world in these aspects of social behavior. But when you have your immediate family and closest friends  within the immediate circle of you digital life, it is more than likely your social interactions in the digital closely mirror your social interactions in the real world.

Now here comes the contrast with Twitter with its web of untrusted relationships with no underlying social contract.

It is foolish to expect consistency, parity and reciprocity in this untrusted web where nobody owes anybody anything in the real world. It is even more foolish to hold each other to exacting standards of digital behavior when identities can morph in a split second. Even if one were to be so foolish to hazard such an endeavor, it is humanly impossible to even hold one’s own self consistently to those exacting standards.

Twitter with its anonymity and lack of intimacy best reflects our behavior in a Crowd or a Mob. It allows us liberties we can afford to take in the relative anonymity of the crowd in the real world without the physical risks. Celebrities can talk down to the masses, revolutions can become spectator events and the faceless, nameless can shoutback with good odds of being heard but not necessarily being singled out.

But as is our wont, the social beings that we are, we seek out cliques and comfort zones within the crowd and inside the mob. We seek validation from whosoever appears to lead the crowd at a given point in time. Inevitably expectations follow. But then we forget that the Crowd and the Mob can be brutually insensitive. Not because individuals are intentionally insensitive but because in the cacophony and anarchy of the Crowd there is far less listening and far more shouting. We also forget that crowds usually mobilize for an agenda.

Is there a place for the lone ranger on Twitter who is neither a celebrity nor a leader ?

No more than there is comfort and security for that lone ranger in a real crowd. Such is the harsh reality of this digital anti “Social Network” that allows us to be heard while not requiring us to listen.

Make no mistake there is nothing permanent or certain about our understanding of this digital medium. It is continuously evolving and morphing with our actions.

Can there be such a thing as a Twitter Dharma ?

Perhaps if the Crowds, their Leaders, those Lone Rangers and the many Celebrities figure out why it is exactly they need each other on Twitter.

Filed under: Digital Citizen, Internet Hindus, Offstumped on Twitter, Social Media Reflections

January 31, 2011 • 3:57 am 9

Why do we twitter ?

So why exactly do we twitter ?

Come to think of it until the 26th November 2008 Mumbai Attacks I had not even heard of twitter. Had vaguely heard of something called microblogging but didn’t quite understand why some one would microblog when you could blog.

My own run-ins with social networking have been less than social with infrequent updates to Facebook and a LinkedIn network that has become a chore to keep up with.

When I first got introduced to twitter thanks to Nitin over at the Acorn, it was to fill an important gap. The blog had its overheads when it came to quick reactions to real time events. The Twitter plug in for WordPress offered a convenient mechanism to post a short reaction. Perhaps that was the beginning of the end in a sense. With the Breaking News mindset setting in, increasingly commentary was getting more and more real time. Less and less deliberative. Much of the discussion on the blog moved to Twitter as well, as comments dried up.

And then there was a defining moment when Twitter took over subordinating Google News and email as the primary avenue for digital news sourcing and enrichment. To me the 2009 general election was that defining moment when Twitter usage peaked.

Soon the monologues became dialogues and a network around personalities, idiosyncrasies, grievances and agendas.

Someone recently commented that Twitter and Facebook are a kind of modern day madness. That observation is not too widely off the charts. When anonymous personalities who you have never met in real life, find space in your subconscious and make it to your dreams, it is a warning sign. The blackberry, the iPhone, iPod Touch and now the iPAD are all accessories to this mental crime.

It now no longer is enough to know a revolution is on Egypt. It also is no longer enough to see the revolution breaking on TV. It is far from enough until the live hash tag stream on Egypt is refreshed in quick succession multiple times over till the same tweets are and re-read to be reassured that nothing new has broken that you were the last to spot.

I count myself as the generation that made the cut over to the digital age. When I started work as a Trainee you went to a cube with a bare table staring at an empty wall. You shared one desktop PC with no network access. You shared one email account with the entire office. Microsoft Outlook did not set the agenda for the day and the social network was real people getting together over lunch and chai.

There was no Dead Time for you were not aware of the tedium that made up most of the day.

In our attempt to fill up dead time we have ended up becoming more and more aware of dead time. Now every dead minute is a minute not spent checking Twitter for any new updates, checking google for any new stories and checking the blog for any new comments.

But something else is happening in the background. The real world is shrinking to make space for the digital world. There are now digital expectations to be managed and digital sentiments to be respected towards individuals you have never met, will probably never meet, most of who are anonymous anyway.

All this makes one think the the anarchy on Twitter and the recent negativity on Twitter as a fallout of multiple unrelated digital controversies may not be such a bad thing after all. A Twitter backlash and some measured digital disengagement may actually be healthy. It might just bring a much needed reality check to our virtual emotions – both at the individual and collective level.

This is not to say the current trend towards crowd sourced real time media needs to be reversed or will get reversed. That trend is irreversible. What is perhaps needed is an adjustment on our part.

What that adjustment might be will hopefully become apparent once we figure out why exactly it is we Twitter ?

Filed under: Digital Citizen, Offstumped, Social Media Reflections

January 29, 2011 • 12:28 pm 7

Of Twitter Crusaders and Internet Anarchists

India’s foremost Counter Terror Analyst and a former head of one of India’ Intelligence Agencies B. Raman had this to say on his blog 

I can block them, but how can I ignore them? How can I refrain from drawing the attention of the Indian public to this pernicious phenomenon of misuse of the Twitter world by the Hindutva Storm-troopers for a campaign of defamation and criminal intimidation against those whom they do not like?

How can I fail in my duty of sounding a wake-up call to alert our people to the emergence of battalions of electronic Hindutva Storm-Troopers to intimidate people they don’t like?

How can I refrain from drawing the attention of Shri Mohan Bhagwat, the head of the RSS, and Shri Ram Madhav, the RSS leader who has been my friend since 2003, to the worrisome direction in which the Hindutva movement has been drifting?

The intolerance of critics and the willingness to destroy them and their personality by any means demonstrated by the Storm-Troopers are dangerous not only to you and me, my dear co-citizens, but to the country as a whole.

Mr. Raman’s frustration with the anarchy of opinion on Twitter is understandable given his age, health and given what is evidently his unfamiliarity with the technical interface.

What is however incomprehensible is this obsessive compulsive digital behavior to counter argue on every idiosyncratic disagreement. The tenacity with Twitter Crusaders engage in arguments makes one wonder if they have divined upon themselves a religious obligation to counter argue.

Every one has the freedom and right to their idiosyncracies and obsessive compulsive behavior on Twitter. The anarchic medium that it is, wisdom lies in exercising discretion in engagement and in ignoring the noise even if it gets abusive on ocassion.

But the optics of an eminent senior citizen and a patriot being frustrated by a raucuous group of voices in an anarchic medium reflects less on the merits of that Senior Citizen’s arguments and more on that which identifies this raucuous group.

What we are increasingly seeing is that in trying to make sense of the Anarchy on the Internet and the cacophony voices on a medium Twitter one looks for the least common denominator. Dogmatic ideologies and Agenda based Digital Activism make ideal candidates for such a least common denominator. They lend themselves easily to negative stereotypes and sweeping generalization. What is worse their dogmatic stubborness not only reinforces the negative stereotype but also gets amplified disproportionately given the cacophony of voices and the anarchic frequency at which they make themselves heard.

There are perhaps less than a handful of extremist voices of the Hindutva persuasion on Twitter. But as Mr. Raman’s frustration exemplifies, the dogmatic stubborness to counter argue with him and the multiplier effect of those counter arguments across time zones has created an impression where the Ideology and the Agenda become the casualty while the Crusaders and the Anarchists fade away into the background thanks to Internet anonymity.

This is hurts the Ideological Right more than the Ideological Left and not the least because the Left are less dogmatic about their ideology or less activist about their agenda. The Right hurts more purely because of the perceived sensitivity deficit.

When the Right are stubborn on dogma it is because they are arguing on an ideological principle (rightly or wrongly) unlike the Left who more likely than not are arguing on a human condition (real or imagined) which inherently carries with it emotion and sentiment. There in lies the sensitivity differential between the Left and the Right.

As a communications channel the digital medium is unemotional. Arguments on principle are more likely to come across as cold and harsh when using a terse and chaotic medium like Twitter. Arguments on human conditions on the other hand, thanks to the inherent emotion and sentiment are more likely to come across as sensitive and understanding despite the nature of the digital medium.

Perhaps Mr. Raman could have been more tolerant of the chaos and anarchy and more savy on effectively using the medium. Perhaps those who felt obliged to counter argue with him could have been more sensitive to his situation and less combative. But in the final analysis the casualty is the broad ideological movement labeled Hindutva and thus by association the BJP and the RSS for no direct fault of theirs.

As the digital entropy on the Internet increases over time the challenge for the BJP and the RSS will only get worse unless a clear line is drawn in their own self interest.

Filed under: Digital Citizen, Flat World Hindutva, Internet Hindus, Offstumped, Social Media Reflections, Uncategorized

RSS Now Playing on Offstumped Live

  • On Third Front day dreams and Uttar Pradesh nightmares – Wrap up Podcast March 14, 2012
    A podcast conversation with  @dubash (http://phalaka.com) where we wrap up the Uttar Pradesh polls discussion with a look at the final numbers and analysis of vote shares. We also look ahead on all the buzz around Akhilesh Yadav, the rise of the Samajwadi Party and all of the day-dreaming over a possible Third Front Government [...]
    admin

Live Tweets

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,670 other followers

Offstumped Archives

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed on this site using the alias Offstumped are the blogger's personal opinions and do not in any way reflect the views of the blogger's Employers.