The Elusive Missed Call
By: Amit Bhushan Date:8th Nov. 2015
Rarely is a missed call missed so much as on the date of an election result. Missed calls are usually about making the wrong calls which do not return. However the elusive missed call was about not enrolling for the membership, and probably rightly so.
This was when crores were said to have made the missed call to gain a highly privileged connection with the ruling party which they could cherish for a generation. Few 'analysts' ever manage get such a deep mystery unravel so soon and so well. If this is about the correctness of ideologies, then the correctness of it seems to actually coming out in commercial news media steadily, though again not recognizing the ones who failed to make the elusive 'missed call' at the right juncture.
I am sure some of those had proper invitation as well for making the missed call, but still decided to give a conscious miss. Basically the commercial news media is more about self-promotion in the guise of a viewpoint, rather than a search for the origin of views, its evolution, development and stages of lifecycle.
The celebration is of those who rely solidly on give and take relationship with the media which may not be monetary but in various kinds, some of which may not be understood as corruption. Such give and take might be regarded as helping co-workers on a bad day rather than shutting up some others from blurring out their versions of truth. A pursuit for truth by contrast is free of such deceptions and is therefore able to permeate much deeper and much more easily in the consciousness of the viewer/reader.
The elections also proves that civilizational values and economics allows several small canvas views and political ideologies can flourish simultaneously in the country as long as they decide to stay calm and co-exist to be developed by their respective follower but aggression to impose themselves on others through any form of coercion gets reprimand.Given this backdrop, the commercial media is hazarding a guess. That the opposition has gained ammunition to stall economic reforms while government may focus to realign with core-constituency a bit more in order to 're-gain' support. My own guess is a little reverse.
The opposition having understood the fact that multiple ideologies can co-exist should try to support reforms where there is a larger consensus (though may not be perfect) like GST, rule on motor-vehicles, waterways etc. etc. rather than be 'seen' as an obstacle to 'development' while on its way to build up its good governance image. This may be necessary to build and sustain its 'good performer' image as a worthy challenger which tends to get rewarded by public. It would off course continue to point to partisan acts in favour of businessmen gaining unfairly out of government actions as a means to pursue political ends.
The governing party in the centre will off course need to show progress in the states which are currently under its rules and where elections are due much earlier, so that the balance of image doesn't tilt against it and this again is not possible without the economic reforms. This is because most of these leadership in these states is guarded/defended on the basis of development plank, rather than on core constituency whims. Changing the plank of course is a big deal and hazarding the same (change of main plank), may pose a much bigger political challenge than pacifying the core constituency with other mechanisms.
The challenge of the verdict poses a challenge to both the ruling centre as well as opposition both of which now need to compete for the good governance and development image in order to convince public to back them with votes. Off course, we will continue to have leaders who may want to put brave face rather than accept pressure while some others continue with their efforts to make hay in sunshine.
Off course in politics all equations change with time & with news ideas as well and this may too change with the passage of time, but most analyst will agree that the point is worth consideration.
By: Amit Bhushan Date:8th Nov. 2015
Rarely is a missed call missed so much as on the date of an election result. Missed calls are usually about making the wrong calls which do not return. However the elusive missed call was about not enrolling for the membership, and probably rightly so.
This was when crores were said to have made the missed call to gain a highly privileged connection with the ruling party which they could cherish for a generation. Few 'analysts' ever manage get such a deep mystery unravel so soon and so well. If this is about the correctness of ideologies, then the correctness of it seems to actually coming out in commercial news media steadily, though again not recognizing the ones who failed to make the elusive 'missed call' at the right juncture.
I am sure some of those had proper invitation as well for making the missed call, but still decided to give a conscious miss. Basically the commercial news media is more about self-promotion in the guise of a viewpoint, rather than a search for the origin of views, its evolution, development and stages of lifecycle.
The celebration is of those who rely solidly on give and take relationship with the media which may not be monetary but in various kinds, some of which may not be understood as corruption. Such give and take might be regarded as helping co-workers on a bad day rather than shutting up some others from blurring out their versions of truth. A pursuit for truth by contrast is free of such deceptions and is therefore able to permeate much deeper and much more easily in the consciousness of the viewer/reader.
The elections also proves that civilizational values and economics allows several small canvas views and political ideologies can flourish simultaneously in the country as long as they decide to stay calm and co-exist to be developed by their respective follower but aggression to impose themselves on others through any form of coercion gets reprimand.Given this backdrop, the commercial media is hazarding a guess. That the opposition has gained ammunition to stall economic reforms while government may focus to realign with core-constituency a bit more in order to 're-gain' support. My own guess is a little reverse.
The opposition having understood the fact that multiple ideologies can co-exist should try to support reforms where there is a larger consensus (though may not be perfect) like GST, rule on motor-vehicles, waterways etc. etc. rather than be 'seen' as an obstacle to 'development' while on its way to build up its good governance image. This may be necessary to build and sustain its 'good performer' image as a worthy challenger which tends to get rewarded by public. It would off course continue to point to partisan acts in favour of businessmen gaining unfairly out of government actions as a means to pursue political ends.
The governing party in the centre will off course need to show progress in the states which are currently under its rules and where elections are due much earlier, so that the balance of image doesn't tilt against it and this again is not possible without the economic reforms. This is because most of these leadership in these states is guarded/defended on the basis of development plank, rather than on core constituency whims. Changing the plank of course is a big deal and hazarding the same (change of main plank), may pose a much bigger political challenge than pacifying the core constituency with other mechanisms.
The challenge of the verdict poses a challenge to both the ruling centre as well as opposition both of which now need to compete for the good governance and development image in order to convince public to back them with votes. Off course, we will continue to have leaders who may want to put brave face rather than accept pressure while some others continue with their efforts to make hay in sunshine.
Off course in politics all equations change with time & with news ideas as well and this may too change with the passage of time, but most analyst will agree that the point is worth consideration.