Debate on Data Privacy & Public Information

Dhruv Bindhani · Thursday at 12:00 AM

amit2011 said:
Debate on Data Privacy & Public Information

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 23rd Mar. 2018

The debate that has kicked-off in the News Media (Commercial dropped), is interesting. With the ministers from the government ‘chirping up’, this has become even more involved. The News Media is hard=pressed to inform us (public), that how can they be influenced and that too without even them realizing about it. The activists as well as journalist are asking some tough questions about the general level of awareness in India about this aspect. This is while the questions on preparedness of the government machinery to tackle the same continues to linger, including our laws, procedures, regulation as well as investigative machinery. The News Media seems to have woken up to the tilt in power to ‘build opinions’, which has shifted from the News Media companies to the ‘Data companies’. As far as ‘Game’ is concerned, it’s ‘better late than never’. It won’t and should not however stop me (the author) from taking opportunity to point out that the News Media itself had been lethargic towards the ‘paid news’ including ‘unethical journalism’, when ‘Game (author)’ brought up the issue, using Management Paradise. Laws as well as established practices restricted government’s hand in taking any effective action and the News Media industry was simply exhorted to discipline itself. This however doesn’t hinder the government in case of the ‘Data Industry’, and the author won’t be pusillanimous, but would join the News Media over the issue being raised. There is still a lot of need for self-disciplining of the News Media companies but since the balance is tilting towards the Data companies with scales rising up fast, so it may need to be tackled ‘first’ and therefore a higher priority. This should not however stop the News Media’s effort to correct itself of the follies of the past and its acknowledgement would be a great beginning. This might be the second big area which may require huge focus at the top level in the government as well as in other political parties similar to the issues related to Banking. Of course Agri & rural distress, state of educational institutions, jobs, state of local (mis) government etc. are some of the ongoing crisis areas, which the Netas probably have become accostomed to live with and they try to ensure the same for the public as well.

The biggest challenge has been that earlier it was the same News Media and the same Journos that were rooting for the Data companies including open display of their dependency on the tools provided by these Data companies to explore information and ‘formulate opinions’ to be ‘broadcasted on the fly’. While it being realized now by the Journos and they are raising the temperatures, however it seems that they just want some government action and at the same time not acknowledging their own follies. Any credible action would actually require many further steps, but there might be a need for a deeper understanding of the whole situation. The Journos actions in the past of open display of their patronization of some of the tools which continues to be done even now by Journos as well as people in public life, helped some of the Data companies to build monopolies or strengthen their position in oligopoly in this Data business. To simply lament about lack of awareness level for the possibilities in the Data business to manipulate opinions is simply not enough. In fact due to actions of the News Media, the ability of any local players to be able to have a similar level of understanding of the Data and its possibilities, doesn’t exist. Also, the News Media companies itself have just burnt their cash and remain in tight position. What may perhaps do the trick is that some of the News Media companies fast evolve their own Data business and this may perhaps help in building up some credible level of understanding including necessary and sustainable deterrence. The action by Media companies is required as Data business requires technology plus credibility or branding, so IT skills alone may not be sustain it. This should also help in the professionals as well as the government departments to acquire and maintain the required levels of skills including maintenance of surveillance, which are being questioned. It should be realized that this is not a one-time exercise but a continuous process and in fact embarking upon the same might help us to not only become more robust from within but also to help out some other countries. A plain blame game either on the Netas, parties or the government may no longer be enough, but seems that this is yet to be realized.

Due to the nature of the challenge, it might be required that the elected representatives sit down to debate issues around this and formulate a high level opinion about the trends first. This will then need to formalize some policy initiatives, institutional framework including infra requirements for the same, training and skilling of the professionals to ‘man these areas within government’ as well as direction of evolution for the industry. To their credit, we only have players like a global data company being given a free hand when it joined hands with a new telecom player or another naïve way to allow data to be captured and exported without any censure. In this light, the bravado of some Neta or Minister is therefore hilarious since there really aren’t any policy or institutional development programs, rules or procedures including limited maturity of even the courts to an extent. The previous lack of awareness on the issue has ensured limited understanding as well as skills to appreciate and address the ‘issues involved’, here. While there may be need to build upon information set and opinions on the issue which seems to being embarked upon lately, however the exercise need to explore systematic development being exhorted for rather than just the blame game either between the Netas or the parties or between the News Media and the government. Yes, in spite of the Digital India, what has been out efforts on this count would continue to be explored and should be taken in good stride. The Netas in government should be ready to depict their sincerity to take actions including evolution for Institutional infra, policy, rules and regulatory frameworks amongst many other support measures instead of mere old and rickety Bhaiyya Istyle political posturing. Let the ‘Game’ evolve…

This political article is a masterclass in architectural writing, where every element serves to construct a compelling argument. The writer's writing style is both authoritative and exceptionally precise, cutting through the common obfuscation of political discourse to reveal the core issues. There's an intellectual rigor evident in the prose, yet it remains remarkably accessible, guiding the reader through complex ideas without condescension. The structure of the piece is its backbone, meticulously designed to build a logical and unassailable case. Each paragraph and section is placed with strategic intent, creating a seamless flow that naturally leads to a profound understanding of the political landscape being discussed. Crucially, the unwavering clarity of the analysis is the article's greatest strength; every nuance of policy and every facet of political strategy are laid bare with such lucidity that the implications are undeniable and instantly graspable, making it an invaluable resource for informed citizens.

Dhruv Bindhani · Thursday at 12:00 AM

amit2011 said:
Debate on Data Privacy & Public Information

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 23rd Mar. 2018

The debate that has kicked-off in the News Media (Commercial dropped), is interesting. With the ministers from the government ‘chirping up’, this has become even more involved. The News Media is hard=pressed to inform us (public), that how can they be influenced and that too without even them realizing about it. The activists as well as journalist are asking some tough questions about the general level of awareness in India about this aspect. This is while the questions on preparedness of the government machinery to tackle the same continues to linger, including our laws, procedures, regulation as well as investigative machinery. The News Media seems to have woken up to the tilt in power to ‘build opinions’, which has shifted from the News Media companies to the ‘Data companies’. As far as ‘Game’ is concerned, it’s ‘better late than never’. It won’t and should not however stop me (the author) from taking opportunity to point out that the News Media itself had been lethargic towards the ‘paid news’ including ‘unethical journalism’, when ‘Game (author)’ brought up the issue, using Management Paradise. Laws as well as established practices restricted government’s hand in taking any effective action and the News Media industry was simply exhorted to discipline itself. This however doesn’t hinder the government in case of the ‘Data Industry’, and the author won’t be pusillanimous, but would join the News Media over the issue being raised. There is still a lot of need for self-disciplining of the News Media companies but since the balance is tilting towards the Data companies with scales rising up fast, so it may need to be tackled ‘first’ and therefore a higher priority. This should not however stop the News Media’s effort to correct itself of the follies of the past and its acknowledgement would be a great beginning. This might be the second big area which may require huge focus at the top level in the government as well as in other political parties similar to the issues related to Banking. Of course Agri & rural distress, state of educational institutions, jobs, state of local (mis) government etc. are some of the ongoing crisis areas, which the Netas probably have become accostomed to live with and they try to ensure the same for the public as well.

The biggest challenge has been that earlier it was the same News Media and the same Journos that were rooting for the Data companies including open display of their dependency on the tools provided by these Data companies to explore information and ‘formulate opinions’ to be ‘broadcasted on the fly’. While it being realized now by the Journos and they are raising the temperatures, however it seems that they just want some government action and at the same time not acknowledging their own follies. Any credible action would actually require many further steps, but there might be a need for a deeper understanding of the whole situation. The Journos actions in the past of open display of their patronization of some of the tools which continues to be done even now by Journos as well as people in public life, helped some of the Data companies to build monopolies or strengthen their position in oligopoly in this Data business. To simply lament about lack of awareness level for the possibilities in the Data business to manipulate opinions is simply not enough. In fact due to actions of the News Media, the ability of any local players to be able to have a similar level of understanding of the Data and its possibilities, doesn’t exist. Also, the News Media companies itself have just burnt their cash and remain in tight position. What may perhaps do the trick is that some of the News Media companies fast evolve their own Data business and this may perhaps help in building up some credible level of understanding including necessary and sustainable deterrence. The action by Media companies is required as Data business requires technology plus credibility or branding, so IT skills alone may not be sustain it. This should also help in the professionals as well as the government departments to acquire and maintain the required levels of skills including maintenance of surveillance, which are being questioned. It should be realized that this is not a one-time exercise but a continuous process and in fact embarking upon the same might help us to not only become more robust from within but also to help out some other countries. A plain blame game either on the Netas, parties or the government may no longer be enough, but seems that this is yet to be realized.

Due to the nature of the challenge, it might be required that the elected representatives sit down to debate issues around this and formulate a high level opinion about the trends first. This will then need to formalize some policy initiatives, institutional framework including infra requirements for the same, training and skilling of the professionals to ‘man these areas within government’ as well as direction of evolution for the industry. To their credit, we only have players like a global data company being given a free hand when it joined hands with a new telecom player or another naïve way to allow data to be captured and exported without any censure. In this light, the bravado of some Neta or Minister is therefore hilarious since there really aren’t any policy or institutional development programs, rules or procedures including limited maturity of even the courts to an extent. The previous lack of awareness on the issue has ensured limited understanding as well as skills to appreciate and address the ‘issues involved’, here. While there may be need to build upon information set and opinions on the issue which seems to being embarked upon lately, however the exercise need to explore systematic development being exhorted for rather than just the blame game either between the Netas or the parties or between the News Media and the government. Yes, in spite of the Digital India, what has been out efforts on this count would continue to be explored and should be taken in good stride. The Netas in government should be ready to depict their sincerity to take actions including evolution for Institutional infra, policy, rules and regulatory frameworks amongst many other support measures instead of mere old and rickety Bhaiyya Istyle political posturing. Let the ‘Game’ evolve…

This political article is a masterclass in architectural writing, where every element serves to construct a compelling argument. The writer's writing style is both authoritative and exceptionally precise, cutting through the common obfuscation of political discourse to reveal the core issues. There's an intellectual rigor evident in the prose, yet it remains remarkably accessible, guiding the reader through complex ideas without condescension. The structure of the piece is its backbone, meticulously designed to build a logical and unassailable case. Each paragraph and section is placed with strategic intent, creating a seamless flow that naturally leads to a profound understanding of the political landscape being discussed. Crucially, the unwavering clarity of the analysis is the article's greatest strength; every nuance of policy and every facet of political strategy are laid bare with such lucidity that the implications are undeniable and instantly graspable, making it an invaluable resource for informed citizens.

Priyani Gupta · Sunday at 9:21 PM

Your article is an insightful and necessary wake-up call that dissects the deep entanglements between News Media, Data companies, and government preparedness. It's timely, layered, and invites overdue introspection. However, the complexity of the issue also demands greater candor and collaboration—especially from those who’ve long benefited from the very systems now under scrutiny.

First, your appreciation of the power shift from media houses to data conglomerates is both logical and alarming. You're absolutely right—today, it's not the newsroom but the algorithm that shapes public sentiment. While this shift is being discussed more openly now, it’s concerning that this reckoning is only occurring after years of inertia and even complicity. As you pointed out, many journalists were early adopters of tools from these very data firms, often showcasing their dependence under the guise of tech-savviness or progressivism.

But here's where things get both practical and slightly controversial. The News Media cannot now simply cry foul without addressing its own history of fostering “paid news,” sensationalism, and unchecked opinion manufacturing. While it’s convenient to now point fingers at data monopolies, there’s a need to reconcile past omissions. The concept of media self-regulation has clearly failed—and that failure is not just ideological but operational. Without addressing that, demands for governmental intervention risk appearing opportunistic or even hypocritical.

Your observation that the government has a freer hand with the data industry than with media is critical. However, this should not translate into selective activism. Any new regulatory framework must ensure transparency, data sovereignty, and accountability—without becoming a tool for censorship or political maneuvering. The idea of News Media companies developing their own credible data wings is forward-thinking. Still, one must tread carefully here; without proper ethical guardrails, we risk replicating the same exploitative cycles under a new name.

Where I particularly applaud your stance is in urging institutional frameworks, skilling, and a long-term strategic vision. This is not just a regulatory need but a national imperative. From education to surveillance, from digital infrastructure to judiciary readiness—each area requires overhaul and alignment. Relying on anecdotal ministerial outrage without structural policy scaffolding is performative at best and dangerous at worst.

However, a cautionary note: it’s vital not to pit media versus government or data companies versus journalists in binary terms. We must acknowledge overlapping responsibilities, blurred lines, and shared culpability. As you rightly point out, blame games don’t solve systemic inertia. Instead, what we need is synchronized action between all stakeholders—media, civil society, government, judiciary, and tech sector—to ensure ethical data handling, protect democracy, and restore institutional trust.

Your call for moving beyond “rickety Bhaiyya-style political posturing” is as humorous as it is sharp. Let the ‘Game’ indeed evolve—but not without rulebooks, referees, and responsible players. The challenges ahead are multifaceted, and only by recognizing the faults across the board can we begin to build something more robust and sustainable.

#MediaReform #DataEthics #DigitalSovereignty #InstitutionalAccountability #TechAndDemocracy #MediaResponsibility #IndiaPolicy #TruthInJournalism

_MASA · 2025-06-30T02:17:19+0530

This is a highly compelling and timely reflection on the evolving dynamics between the News Media, Data Companies, and Government Institutions. The concerns raised about the shifting center of influence from traditional media houses to data-driven tech giants deserve serious public discourse and policy intervention. What makes this conversation even more critical is the long-standing complacency—not just from the media but from all stakeholders including the government and judiciary—on the implications of data monopolies.

The central thesis of this piece—that the News Media has, knowingly or unknowingly, facilitated the rise of data oligarchs—is difficult to refute. Journalists and media houses were among the earliest adopters of tools and platforms offered by data companies, many of which were promoted with little skepticism. Ironically, they are now raising red flags over the very tools they once championed. While the concern is justified, the media’s delayed realization and its lack of introspection weaken its moral authority in this debate.

Moreover, the notion that awareness alone is sufficient to address data manipulation is simplistic. Real countermeasures require structural reforms: robust data protection laws, institutional frameworks, public-private collaborations, and skill development within government machinery. The absence of these foundations makes any regulatory posturing by political figures seem superficial or performative at best.

The article also rightfully calls out the vacuum in India’s domestic data ecosystem. With global giants dominating the data landscape, there has been little to no encouragement or capacity-building for local players to develop indigenous alternatives. The News Media, despite having strong brands and public trust, has not adequately capitalized on this opportunity to venture into the data business itself—something that could have created a much-needed counterbalance.

Your argument for joint responsibility—where both the government and media must reflect, act, and invest—is crucial. A blame game will neither create accountability nor innovation. There must be a commitment to create credible deterrence, not only through legislation but also by developing technological capabilities and ethical practices across sectors.

Additionally, a parliamentary-level debate involving elected representatives and experts is vital. Only a national consensus on the direction of data governance will enable India to evolve a coherent policy, capable institutional frameworks, and aligned skill development programs. This is especially important if India is to transition from being a passive consumer of global data narratives to an active shaper of them.

Finally, the point that this effort should not be one-off but a sustained process is key. It’s not about isolated regulation or reactive legislation; it’s about a continuous evolution of norms, institutions, and awareness. In the same way the banking sector became a national priority post-reforms, the data sector now requires similar urgency and strategic thinking.

In sum, the piece makes a strong case for moving past superficial responses. It invites all stakeholders—government, media, civil society, and industry—to engage in sincere, structured, and long-term planning. Let the “Game” indeed evolve—but this time, with everyone playing their part responsibly.

Vidhya S · 2025-06-30T17:10:30+0530

The ongoing discussion on the shifting power dynamics from traditional news media to data giants is not only valid — it is necessary, overdue, and dangerously underplayed in national discourse. What’s happening isn’t merely a matter of algorithms influencing opinions. It’s about who gets to define truth, control narratives, and ultimately shape democracy.
The original post accurately critiques the hypocrisy and delayed reaction of legacy media, many of whom celebrated the rise of data tools and integrated them into newsrooms without ever questioning their long-term implications. Journalists once flaunted dashboards, analytics tools, and click-based headlines only to realize years later that they’ve ceded not just content distribution, but ideological influence to a handful of tech monopolies.
We now live in a reality where data companies do not just report trends they create them. And the troubling part? The Indian government and institutions remain far behind the curve.
Let’s be honest we have no clear data protection law, no indigenous policy framework for data sovereignty, and little understanding at the bureaucratic level of how platforms manipulate attention, behavior, and even political will. Ministers who shout from podiums are often the same individuals who lacked the foresight to build firewalls around India’s digital independence. Courts, regulators, and investigative bodies are ill-equipped or insufficiently trained to question the core architecture of these platforms.
But the blame does not lie solely with the government or media. Civil society, academia, and even the public have allowed convenience to replace caution. We’ve normalized surrendering our privacy for personalization, our agency for algorithmic suggestions. Worse, in the absence of any ecosystem to nurture local data companies, we’ve silently given up the market — and with it, control — to foreign giants.

What we need is a national digital resilience policy one that brings together media houses, data scientists, legal experts, and government departments to build institutional capabilities in four key areas:

Data Literacy: Every journalist, policymaker, and elected representative must understand how data influences public opinion.
Ethical Regulation: Instead of knee-jerk bans or rhetorical outbursts, India needs structured rules that protect citizens and ensure platform accountability.
Homegrown Infrastructure: Build and incentivize indigenous tech tools, analytics platforms, and secure data storage solutions.
Collaborative Oversight: An independent oversight body with media experts, civil rights activists, and technical professionals to assess and audit media-data interactions.

The media, too, must take ownership not by resisting change, but by evolving responsibly. Investing in credible data operations, diversifying revenue models away from clickbait, and committing to transparency can help reclaim trust.
In this digital “Game,” there are no spectators only participants. Every retweet, click, share, or “like” contributes to a much larger cycle of influence. If the media, government, and citizens fail to recognize the urgency, India risks becoming a mere data colony in a world ruled by a few information empires.
The solution is not in silencing platforms, but in matching their power with ethics, vision, and robust institutional frameworks. Let the game evolve but let India evolve with it.

#DataSovereignty #MediaEthics #DigitalIndia #TechPolicy #InformationControl #DemocracyInDigitalAge #DataGovernance #DigitalRights #MediaVsTech

Debate on Data Privacy & Public Information