Media turns anti-capitalist.

Yesterday I read something in TOI that made me wonder if our media is turning anti-capitalist if not downright socialist (Times Impact. RCOM reduces SMS to 1p, Nov 28).It was a self-congratulatory note on how TOI reports and intervention had led to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) start "looking" into the matter of why telcos were charging Re1 per sms when it costs them a fraction of 1p per sms. Why should the media be concerned about this? Let the free market forces play themselves out. Telecom tariffs in India are anyways lowest in the world. If consumers can afford to pay Re1 per sms then it is a great way to subsidise lower tariffs on voice calls. Its a win-win situation. With more number of competitors coming in, the Average Revenue Per User (ARPUs) are set to decline further and telcos will be under further pressure to reduce prices and increase service. Reducing a profitable revenue stream will mean a serious hit on the bottom line. As a consumer, of course I will be jubilant if sms becomes 1 paise or something like that ( reliance plans some ulimited sms plan at nominal cost). But we need to look beyond consumer happiness. Telecom has been our poster boy of success. It has been an integral part of our economic growth of the past decade in two ways - one through generation of employment and second through increasing efficiencies in the system through a robust communication system. By using such interfering tactics under the garb of consumer good, will only mean stymieing growth and killing a once profitable industry. The SMS move in itself may not be enough to kill the industry, but the question is where does the interference stop? Our government is anyways doing a great job of jacking up things by messing around with the 3G policy. We don't need help from the media to make things worse. Let Laissez-faire be the rule of the game. Regulators should limit themselves to ensuring a fair playing field for all providers and crack down on collusive tactics. Let companies decide what they want to price. Let consumers decide what they want to pay. Simple demand and supply.
Its disheartening that a publishing house like TOI should forget this.

Capitalizing on Death!

There seems to be no better money puller than death itself. Why else is everyone capitalizing on the anniversary of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks?. From newspapers to reality shows, 26/11 is being plastered all across our consciousness again and again. Interviews are being held, special guests are being called on shows, reports of bravery and valour are being thrown at us and as usual celebrities have come together to show their solidarity against the terror attacks. It is as if, if you are not talking 26/11 then you are not doing the IN thing (I do realise how ironic this is but the constant media blast has got the better of me).
Have we learnt anything from 26/11/2008?. Dare I ask, will we ever learn anything? There are two things that we will keep doing forever. First, we will keep repeating mistakes and let others walk all over us (It makes me sick in the guts when R R patil, who downplayed this whole incidence as a small thing in a big city, is our home minister again!! ). Second, we will always scrape the healed wounds of others and infest them like parasites - all for our convenience. Thankfully I did not have any friend of relative who died in the attacks but I cannot even begin to imagine what must be happening to those bereaved families by watching all the "26/11 anniversary" bull crap being shown all over.

But I would like to take this to a level beyond 26/11. We are generally incompetent at dealing with all types of disaters - natural or manmade. And the general public is just as much at fault as the government. Take the case of the recent swine flu pandemic. Its all subdued now, but if it were to resurface, I am sure exactly the same thing will repeat itself. And this will again give the media full chance to capitalize on death.

It is just so pathetic and yet true. Nothing sells like death does.

Grass is always burnt on our side!!

I happened to chance on an ex-TCS colleague after lunch today. He left TCS to join a well-known MNC about the same time as I left for my MBA. Now we work in the same campus, but different companies. One topic led to the other and he revealed that he would be interested in joining another company because he thought there were better opportunities there. I said to him very casually, Grass is always greener on the other side mate. I wasn't prepared for his reply. He said not only is grass greener on the forward looking side, it is also greener in retrospect i.e once you jump to a new job, the former employer starts looking better. My prompt reply was, 'maybe grass is not really greener on either side, its just burnt on our side! It was supposed to be a joke and rightfully so we burst out laughing. The seriousness of what I had said started creeping in only when I was walking back to office.
We always think what we have is inferior to what others have; that there are better opportunities elsewhere. We do not realize the opportunities we have to make our current situation better rather than keep fantasizing about a better future. This is not to suggest that one should be content with what he has simply because its the same everywhere else. Doing so would be the end of our personal growth.
All I am saying is that one should objectively evaluate the existing situation and compare it with available options. Greed needs to be out of the equation for this objective evaluation to work.