Gravy Train

Selling out, if you ask any youngster, is supposed to be an ignominy, but why? The very artists that we so easily accuse of having "sold out their beliefs" would not have reached us in the first place if they weren't part of the commercial channels. Which then makes one wonder if they were ever true to the cause in the first place. An article on this will follow at a later date, but for now, some half-baked lyrical poetry:

Psst, Ms. Anthem! I'm talkin' to you,
You don't know what he's gonna do.
He's selling you down at Planet M,
He's whoring you and he's to blame.

Didn't I tell you not to talk to strangers?
Haven't I warned you of the dangers?
Why're you hearing what he's telling you?
I created you; what did he do?

You think he cares about any part of you?
Or what you'll cause the damn blessed to do?
You're his showpiece; he's the front-page story,
You're the sunshine; he basks in your glory.

I mean what I make, every word that I sing,
it's awareness not revolution that I try to bring,
How'll they hear you if it ain't through me?
How'll they know me if I don't cut me a deal?

He's just in it for the name and the fame,
his material thirst puts the causes to shame,
he could've walked around, guitar in hand,
a song on his lips, nights of head in the sand.

How would we then be known in the public domain?
All my efforts would've gone right down the drain.
So I chewed on that cigar; sipped some champagne,
stepped aboard and took a ride on the gravy train.

Now he'll talk of Dylan and other icons of the past,
well Lennon maybe a hero but never working class,
Mick Jagger no one buys was a street fighting man,
and the Gallaghers scripted their masterplan,

He could've stayed true,
if he really wanted to...

Well, me and you,
we wouldn't have got our rightful dues,
if I did what he wanted me to,
and stayed pure like a mule...

Happy new year Ms. Anthem I rest my case.

The 400-crore yacht, among other things - Part 5/5

The capitalist messengers
All forms of media have been criticized and rightfully so, but being more of the business ventures (and less of informers to the public) that they've become, they've taken even that criticism and turned them inside out. So while the print media came out with defense articles (see above), the TV stations held debates upholding the rights and functions of the news channels. As if we didn't see uncensored shots of blood being flashed on the screen, and the constant "breaking news" being used to push hours-old headlines, and the live coverage of a terror tragedy as if this was the one and only chance for the news channels to compete with their sports counterparts.

And when it comes to debates and discussions, instead of providing a forum, these shows and in particular the anchors forget that their roles should be limited to being that of unbiased moderators who have an informed view of the subject being talked about. Like Joey Tribbiani once famously said, "You don't put words in people's mouths! You put turkey in people's mouths!" These "journalists" already seem to have a fixed view on things and will not acknowledge the other view. Capitalist mouthpieces, through their editorials, are shunning a very realistic analysis (and one which came to my mind long back) - why is it so difficult to digest that our increasing friendship with the West is a possible root cause? Just because the person who suggested so differs radically from you in terms of economic policies? And the fact that the owners of such news networks are collaborating with industrial barons and diversifying to celebrate the "good life of shining India" obviously means that they've turned a blind eye to - and here I shamefully use a term used by a prominent Leftist who was the only person talking any sense on a show on one of the very channels I'm overtly criticizing - "suffering India", which unless we choose to live in our urban cocoon we have to admit is the real India, and is not confined to the rural belt, but is also co-existing with us in the cities.

Thank God, then, for the re-opening of the Taj Mahal Tower and the Trident. Sorry, not God. Thank the pseudo-celebrities and the professional socialites for showcasing their resilience, expressing solidarity and making yet another stand against terror. As for me, I'm just sad that I wasn't there to pose for the cameras and eat without paying at a five-star. Who said there's no such thing as a free lunch?

(concluded)

The 400-crore yacht, among other things - Part 4/5

Rich man's blood splashed on a rich man's lens
I'm sure most of you must have read at least one of the articles in the print media with the common title, 'Don't Shoot The Messenger'. By various authors, all try to defend the media, using the very example that has been cited most often as an example of the media's irresponsibility - of commandoes landing on a roof during the Nariman House siege. I personally would like to think that though that example is obviously flawed (even if the event was shown live - and there's considerable debate on that as well - given the noise a chopper makes, there couldn't have been much stealth involved), the argument isn't, and that's something I've already covered in my previous posts. Just to recall one incident that particularly comes to my mind, a reporter given access to the backside of the Oberoi/Trident complex accidentally spilled out the location of the commandos closing in on the terrorists.

But what's more of a concern to me is the 'why' and 'how' of this particular strike being the watershed. This very city has seen a spate of such gruesome attacks, and I happened to be stuck in office when a series of bombs went off in the local trains. Now, I wasn't going to be on those trains but my colleagues possibly would have, but thankfully weren't since it was issue-closing time. The marketing people came back from hastily terminated meetings and told us about the carnage they saw. People were desperately trying to get in touch with their families. We saw streams of people walking the 20-odd kms. home due to the suspension of train services and clogging of roads. I finally got home past 1am.

Interestingly, the news that followed focused on the spirit of the city (yes, that very cliche) being visibly shaken. Even more interestingly, even though just about a month back, there were candlelight vigils, peace marches, human chains and signature campaigns as a part of the massive anti-reservation protests (which I would like to attribute to that year's first hit Rang De Basanti), there was nothing of that sort after the blasts which seemed to suggest that people had had enough and wanted change. Maybe because Obama wasn't around back then. Of course, the entire coverage had its focus on the Taj and the Oberoi/Trident. Nariman House (which, it was reported by the international press on the very first day, houses an extremely orthodox sect of Jews) was completely ignored till the time our local media checked the international response and realized that it's not just some random building in the crowded bylanes of a not-so-upmarket part of south Bombay.

All the reactions have been from the showbiz and P3 fraternity, and not suprisingly, each and every one of them claims that the Taj was like their second home. Maybe they actually can afford five-stars on a regular basis; maybe they need to give such an impression for reasons known only to them. All I know is that I can't - heck, even Leopold was a place I went to when I felt I could afford to splurge - and happened to be in a mood to tolerate the differential treatment meted out to people with coloured skin. All I know is forget five-stars or even lesser luxuries - most of my compatriots can't afford to have 2 square meals a day, and who are yet to experience the things we've been taking for granted ever since we were young - telephone, television, electricity.

This is not the first time people have died such tragic deaths. Earlier, the targets were public transportation systems and such middle-class infrastructure; even this time, scores lost their lives in Victoria Terminus, a few each in Cama Hospital (imagine the kind of headlines one of those high-profile private hospitals would have made) and at Mazgaon docks, Vile Parle and Metro Circle. From the looks of things, these people were clearly lesser victims whose blood is meant to be shed. Granted that the people with the riches are the only ones in positions powerful enough to force a response, but what good does it do to talk in vague circles? And how is a rich man's blood any more precious than a poor man's?

Such stake-outs and seiges have been happening on a regular basis, but in troubled hotspots which are away from the media glare, most notably Kashmir and the North-East. No one gives a damn when that happens. The very people who are out on the streets now never gave a damn when the common man was blown apart again and again and again in the very city who ordinary citizens they now claim to be. And at the same time, they are hypocritical enough to say on camera that "earlier, these things used to happen at markets, trains and buses which are places we never went to, but now it's as if they've entered our homes. We thought that we, the elite, are untouchable but clearly even we're not safe." This shameful comment of a socialite was one of the many ones in a similar vein aired by one of the most respected 24-hour English news channels of our country.

(to be continued)

The 400-crore yacht, among other things - Part 3/5

We, the people, suck
There is a huge disconnect between different strata of the society within the limits of a metropolis, and one needn't look further than the city which is always in the limelight, and quite often for tragic reasons - Bombay. Now there's a city which has seen strife not only recently, not only during the serial bomb blasts of '93, '03 and '06 (among many other such sporadic incidents), not only during the flash flood of '05, not only during the riots of '84 & '92 and not only during the on-and-off bashing of minorities and outsiders ever since the Shiv Sena was founded in the mid 60s, till date (with its breakaway faction MNS joining in).

Bombay isn't a unique case but is definitely a classic example of the undeniable fact that we, the people, are already divided on numerous counts, whether we like to admit it or not. There are people for whom religion is of utmost importance; for some, there are castes; for others, there are regions. For my fellow youngsters, it is increasingly becoming "cool" to shun religion and denounce the caste system while citing both as an example to deride our elders and emphasise the importance of our generation (augmented by the random percentage figures of our population under a certain age), but given the urban setting that we are growing up in, we are unbelievably divided socio-economically, and by our very own logic, are no better than our seniors.

It is so easy for us to blame the politicians for dividing us, whereas we are an inherently divided people and they are simply taking advantage of this fact. The fact that the Sena (and now, the MNS) survive is because they have a substantial enough support base. A reader who on the lines of the chain SMS wrote about non-Marathi commandos vis-a-vis "Marathi kids playing cricket on the empty streets" was lampooned by other readers, who in venting their ire came out in support of those 2 parties, their leaders and their beliefs. Then again, a politician who voiced the first thing that came into my mind when I heard that the ATS chief who was a key figure in the Malegaon investigations had been killed ("how convenient") and who could have done without saying so given that he is a Union Minister is being ostracized by what is emerging to be a potent combine - showbiz and media. And the urban populace is firmly with this non-political coalition.

(to be continued)

The 400-crore yacht, among other things - Part 2/5

The ever-lengthening bridge
The contrast was, as it always is but only when we care to look at it closely enough, spellbinding. While NDTV India's Zaika India Ka had Vinod Dua roaming around and sampling the local cuisines of the remote streets of Maharashtra's Konkan coastal region, the news that was flashing on our screens was the 400-crore gift that Anil Ambani has given his wife Tina. A bit of research revealed that this is the latest form of sibling rivalry - "Mr. Big" answering his industrialist brother, who gifted his wife Nita (note the coincidental anagrams) a 250-crore private jet. Congratulations on your mighty efforts, sirs.

The brothers, along with a handful of other people and industrial groups, represent everything that is shining about our country. Then again, this "shine" is confined to certain pockets in no more than the Big Six cities. I don't know how many of you are from or have spent considerable amounts of time outside the Big Six, so I'll just talk about myself here. Till the time I turned 14, vacations every year meant a trip to Patna. And though my age didn't stop me from realizing that it was a much smaller place than Delhi, the fact is I was really young, and also hardly had any reason to step out of the house and roam around. Of course, after that my maternal grandparents shifted to Calcutta and that was the end of my yearly visits to the capital of Bihar.

Now, I love travelling in general, and travelling by trains in particular. And I've travelled quite a lot, but haven't really experienced life in the small towns. But observing closely gives me quite an accurate picture of the ground realities. That, and the fact that due to certain quizzes, I happened to be first in Nasik and then in Anand (in case you don't know, the home of Operation Flood and Amul), and subsequently in Baroda. These are the places that occupy the middle rungs of the social ladder. They are nowhere near a Delhi or a Bombay, but are better off than the vast stretches of our lands where Reliance or Idea might have reached, but landlines have not; where only the richest farmers with sizeable holdings can afford that elusive solitary lightbulb which provides the only other glow in the wilderness, other than the headlight of a dusty old two-wheeler belonging to who is possibly the only person from that locality to have ever been to a big town or city.

I can keep romanticizing about real India - I feel I'm in that phase, and I sincerely hope it doesn't desert me. I feel wiser than I was a few years back. How wise I am not sure, but I was definitely very naive back when the whole "India Shining" campaign was launched by the people in power at the Centre, and whole-heartedly endorsed by the industry and the media, and predictably, therefore, urban India. In the firm grasp of the "feel good" factor, I refused to acknowledge my dad's remarks about real India. Come to think of it, I rarely ever acknowledge what dad, who has travelled to the most remote areas and troubled hotspots over the past five decades and is by far the most knowledgeable person I know, says. Anyway, I have a much less hazy perception of real India now.

(to be continued)

The 400-crore yacht, among other things - Part 1/5

I don't really know how I'd like to start this one. And it's not like I'm facing a dearth of ideas - on the contrary, I've got too many in mind. So let me just put them all down.

(EDIT: I'm breaking it up and making it into a 5-part series, as otherwise the length is proving to be a deterrent)

The first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club
I make it a point to mentally scoff every time one of my fellow urban youngsters says to me, 'Dude! You've seen Fight Club right? Isn't it, like, the most fucking awesome film, like, ever made?' and I am compelled to do so in at least 9 out of every 10 cases, and at multiple levels.

First, the literal level. Now, it's a fact that most people aren't smart enough, so it's safe for me to say that at least 5 of those 9 say so because they either loved the action sequences or were simply blown away by the premise of a character's non-existence. And I concur. But they watched it once, observed those things and that's about it, whereas the very reason why the film (and the novel) is so brilliant is its depth which merits at least one repeat viewing. Because without that, you have to be a genius to appreciate the existential angst of the protagonist caught in the increasingly materialistic world.

The reasons for the other 4 targets of my mental sneer are tricky, as in many cases, I should be at the receiving end of my own wrath. Anyway, these people are smart enough to appreciate the intricacies of the story, and acknowledge the demons of our times, but they (or should I say we?) are too used to the luxuries of our routine well-off lives that it's not possible for us to even think about life without them. Think about it - big brands, plastic money, the good life. In our own ways, we are as much addicted to these as we are to a certain substance or the other.

Since I've not a clue what I'm getting at, let me move on to the not-so-literal levels. Here, it's just the way my "hep" generation would say such a thing. In a way, it is intertwined with materialism. And while it's great that you have access to everything global, nothing can justify your need to turn into clones. While I'd love to be part of a group that makes good use of the resources of this information age but at the same time is wise enough to pick and choose attributes from the West while maintain one's Indianness, I'm sorry to say but I don't see that happening. And say it if you really mean it, but please don't say "change" just because a certain Obama says so.

(to be continued)

The chauffeurs on our one-way ride to perdition

***WARNING: Devoid of humour; might contain traces of romanticism; definitely contains dollops of cynicism and disillusionment***

I only vaguely recall the days of Doordarshan. In spite of having got a cable TV connection only ten years back, my recollections of the small screen prior to that, and of the news in particular, are very hazy. But what I do remember is that back then, we had to wait for a fixed hour to be informed by newscasters who never seemed to slip up or stumble, and appeared to be so emotionally detached, that at times they seemed to be almost inhuman. Cut to now, and we have at least a couple dozen 24-hour nation-wide news channels in each of the two national languages, in addition to several other localized as well as regional-language channels. And it doesn't take a keen sense of observation for one to notice that other than the time being devoted to the reporting, the quality (when you take into account not just the reporting per-se but also the analysis and the nature), and at times, even the quantity (in terms of distinct but significant pieces of information) of it all has been steadily rolling off downhill in an inverse logarithmic fashion.

The saddest part is that it's not just the dime-a-dozen newscasters (who, given their constant wriggling, don't seem to be anymore comfortable in Western attire than they were in a saree), over-enthusiastic reporters (who are able to avoid stuttering on only that one, oft-rehearsed line: 'with cameraperson , this is , , ') and the ever-increasing number of behind-the-scenes staff (which takes care of the tickers and comes up with such howlers such as "CONG COMABACK IN RAJ") who are to blame (that's not to say that they're not. Whereas earlier on DD, a gaffe would mean being out of a job and fading into oblivion, the current lot have a huge margin for error, and given the sheer numbers, they're bound to get an alternate even they do manage to get themselves fired after a series of slips.) - these greenhorns are merely following the instructions given to them by their seniors; those award-winning journalists who are the best known names and were, till as recently as about five years back, professionals I looked up to.

EXHIBIT 'A'
One of these seniors, a personal favourite since 20 years back (and the fact that I can remember so far back is much more of a testimony to him and his programme, other than its highly infectious jingle, than it is to my memory), claimed it was a national shame that the Prime Minister and the Leader of Opposition didn't travel together to Bombay during the terrorist attacks, in spite of announcing that they would. Well sirji, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a national shame, but the fact that even you, in spite of being one of the, if not the most experienced of the lot currently present, have started making an occassional error; more alarmingly still, the psephologist in you has been, of late, getting election analyses mostly wrong, and for reasons that are hardly surprising.

Granted that you do take into account the factors which come into play when it comes to the majority of the electorate and in particular the voting sections of the populace, and these are the people who actually interact with their area representatives. But you are increasingly doing so in very vague and generic terms, while your brainstorming and predictions are limited to the upper-middle class urban points of view. Which no doubt is your target audience (and I'm part of it) but, since they (rather, we) form an insignificant little percentage of the total turnouts, is a gross misrepresentation of the ground reality. To readers (if any), I ask this: can you name the legislator or MP of your home constituency? Can you at least name your home Vidhan Sabha/LS constituency?

EXHIBIT 'B'
On to someone who is probably the most celebrated journalist of our times. On one of the special debates after the recent attacks, she suggested that the people are getting caught up in a lot of passionate, romantic, unrealistic rhetoric. That was probably the only thing she said in those 4 days or so which made sense. Ironically, she was acknowledging the nature of the opinions stirred up, force-fed and reported by none other than her. She started off her coverage by insisting on drawing parallels with 9/11 by referring to people, trapped inside the high-rises symbolic of the economy, signalling for help. (Ironic again, then, that this was dubbed 26/11 and not 11/26. Why shy away from complete Cocacolonization, ma'am?)

As she shuttled from one location to the other and then to a third, she just became increasingly insensitive while interviewing directly affected people (some argue that she might even have given away the positions and hence lives of some people trapped inside; her critics have had similar complaints about her in the past, most notably the Kargil conflict). And while she tried her best to show that she shared their grief, she failed miserably in her efforts, all of which seemed nothing but contrived. It is difficult to believe a Metallica or any other band when they sing anti-establishment songs after they've been minting money for more than two decades; in the same vein, it is impossible not to see through the array of fake emotions of someone who has been there, done that and won accolades for the same.

It wasn't a pretty sight when she, a senior member of the editorial team of one of the most respected news channels, was being pushed around while mobbing a foreign hotel guest who had just been rescued; it was somewhat humorous when, while she wandered too close to the site after operations were wrapped up, she was being shooed away on live camera by security personnel unaware of her celebrity status; it was annoying, as it increasingly has been, when one saw that the panel of "experts" consisted of 5 from showbiz vis-a-vis 2 from fields of genuine expertise; it was outrageous when on the same show, she forced an apology out of an audience member for his rightful outrage against an irresponsible statement made by one of the five "celebs"; it was distasteful when she, on air, said about the anchor - "I can't hear what she's saying. Tell her to shut up"; it is amazing that most of the rhetoric she was referring to ('systemic failure', 'need for accountability', 'we, the people, are / want change') has been, over the years if not right now, been manufactured by her.

Kudos, then, to her ability of planting her creations in the pop urban lexicon. It's all too easy to take the opinions of the rich and the famous on behalf of being "average citizens of the city and the country" (which they are not - refer below). Or allow the people, and in particular the youth, to come and shout out ridiculous stuff like 'politicians leave the people alone', 'the entire system is to blame', 'let's form our own party', etc. and in the process, grant them their fifteen seconds of fame. But it would be great if even one feasible suggestion is thrown up - not necessarily implemented, just thrown up. Again, a question for the readers (if any): Of all the talk that went on during the crisis and after, did any of the suggestions seem remotely feasible? Do you have any ideas of your own?

EXHIBIT 'C'
And then we have the other celebrity journo with a legacy to live up to; the rebel who is responsible for the contents of a group of channels, known especially for exaggerating its facts and figures. (Remember the '03 Bombay blasts? Initially reported by his channel to be seven, the number was gradually, almost reluctantly brought down to four, by which time no one really cared.) Now he's a guy who keeps harping on about this being the age of the information media. Well, yes this is the information age, where practically anything is available at the click of a button, and yes, the growth of media on the whole is a part and parcel of this age. Then again, there is information media and then there's entertainment media, and our friend here is confused. While the sections of the media meant to entertain are of course allowed to inform and provoke thought (and we don't necessarily have to turn to European cinema for that, when we have equally good home-grown material), I personally think that it's best if the information media knows its limits and steers clear of being a source of entertainment.

Along the same lines, he also washed his hands off being insensitive and immature in the coverage of the siege, claiming that it was the sole responsibility of the administration to cordon off the affected areas, and not in the least bit of the editorial policy of the broadcasters. Never mind the fact that the events were telecast as live proceedings not unlike a cricket match, to the point of being a possible operational hazard and causing increased grief, and not only to those who were directly affected. Does he really imply that there is no such thing as moral responsibility? Yes, if he doesn't go ahead and show the footage, some rival will, but for someone who and whose channels are all for standing up for change, can't he exercise some restraint and with that, display some much-needed maturity? And you, the reader, won't you like to see (or for that matter, read) news without being told that this was first reported by ABC or is an XYZ exclusive, or without being misled by that now-eternally flashing 'breaking news' banner on your screens?

OVERVIEW
I can go on and on about lots of things, and I will post them soon in my upcoming posts, but let me just restrict this already humongous post to the 3 TV news stars, and try to wrap this up as soon as possible, for now. So, just a few generic pointers to act as an overview as well as reminders for full-length posts to follow. So just in case anyone didn't notice or refuses to acknowledge:
* the coverage of the attacks, for me, merely highlighted the elitist nature of these channels in particular and urban Indian society in general,
* in spite of all the focus on the people and the youth, it is clear that different segments of the society are totally disconnected from each other, and the voices that are being heard either lack conviction or brains. Little knowledge is a dangerous thing indeed,
* there might be a huge global financial crisis going on and mergers, acquisitions and take-overs might have become the norm of the recent past, but the capitalist nature of our country's media should be a cause for concern for one and all, and,
* politician-bashing is all well and good, but truth be told, it's sort of difficult to further divide a people who are already as divided as we are. Having said that, we should all thank our lucky stars for being part of the kind of system that we have here, because in any alternate scenario, even if these dissenting voices are heard, they are silenced ruthlessly.

It's not just the politicians who seek our votes - the media does too, albeit in a different form. Even though they have much more of a power to bring about change for the better, they are more bothered about approvals in the form of ratings and viewership, and are more than happy to pass the baton of action to us. And while we're comfortably seated in the wagon holding this baton, unless they, our drivers who are the media-persons, change the course of this ride they're taking us on, we are all headed straight to hell. And that hell is our own future.

[Originally written, but not completed, on 7/12/08]

Railway security tightened!

Having decided to shuttle between Bombay and Delhi during the long gaps between my exams, I also decided to take the opportunity of transporting some stuff which has been gathering dust just lying around without being used in Bombay back home. So, a couple of days back when I headed back after the first exam (which, by the way, was one of the most horrendous experiences of my academic life), I took along my, ahem, desktop cabinet.

So there I was, at the nearby local station (Sanpada), waiting for a Panvel-bound local during rush hour, with what was, from a third person's point of view, a suspicious-looking package being transported by, again from a third person's point of view, a suspicious-looking long-haired character. A short wait was followed by an excruciating half-hour journey in a jam-packed local; finally, weird baggage in tow, I was at Panvel station.

While I can't say for sure whether the glances by fellow passengers were of suspicion or dumfoundedness, what I know for sure is that in spite of there being a police desk, the luggage was not checked; heck, I wasn't even questioned about its contents even when I went up to them and enquired about an ATM.

Of course, that bunch was manning the suburban section of the station. There was another desk at the entrance of the long-distance section of the station, right next to the ATM. This group was more interested in implementing the ban on smoking in public places (they shooed a puffing passenger away) than they were in bothering about who and what was entering the station.

So far, so good. The train I was waiting for was the Madgaon-Nizamuddin Goa Sampark Kranti Special, connecting the coastal tourist haven to the national capital via 2 stops serving the recently affected commercial epicentre of the nation. My berth was in a coach at the fag end of the train. Apparently, it was too far away for any of the ticket-checkers to pay a visit anytime during not just my section of the journey, but the entire 31-hour, 2100-km duration from Goa to Delhi via Bombay.

It's evening when I reach Delhi's Hazrat Nizamuddin station. Solo passengers are being received by 2 people, in some cases even more. I take my stuff up a foot-overbridge which turns out to be the wrong choice as it gets me onto a platform, from where I had to climb up another foot-overbridge before exiting the station. On this entire "trek", in spite of the presence of numerous police personnel, I was, as expected, not asked about my luggage; additionally, the station ticket-checker was also missing.

The ticket-checker was also missing at Bombay Central when I reached the station five days back by none other than the Rajdhani Express. And since I took the foot-overbridge across to the suburban section, there were no security personnel either. During the entire duration of my journey (or at least while I was awake) in the supposedly elite train, there were no policemen doing rounds, checking passenger's luggage or walking sniffer dogs. In fact I remember all these, which one would think should be standard procedure, being done on just one journey - a few years back on the Golden Temple (erstwhile, Frontier) Mail from Delhi to Bombay. Even while entering New Delhi station, the bags were being checked only if their owners chose to get them checked; the same option prevailed in the case of use of metal detectors.

Few months after the July '06 train bombings, individual frisking and baggage checks were performed for a couple of days around Independence Day at two of the busiest suburban stations of the city - Victoria Terminus and Churchgate. This, of course, had to be quickly discontinued, since the sheer magnitude of the task made it impossible to make it into a norm. But even in those few days, it felt more like a publicity stunt, brought on by the city's media boom which happened to occur simultaneously, rather than a serious precautionary measure.

On long distance routes, stringent rules were introduced to ensure that only one platform ticket issued per journey ticket so that not more than one person accompanies the passengers to inside the stations, whereas since it was not possible to procure platform tickets without a corresponding journey ticket, it became theoretically impossible for someone to go receive their near and dear ones. Slowly but surely though, these unpopulist security measures have faded into oblivion.

With the recent attacks and impending hijack threats, all airports have seen heightened security (in spite of which, a Qualis from which a couple of gunshots were reportedly fired sped away from the chasing security personnel). On the other hand, at least from what I saw, it is theoretically possible for anyone to board a train (ticketless if it happens to be a special one) with whatever luggage they want and transport it to anywhere in the country without being searched or even questioned. Just goes to prove that the railways are for the masses, and for the authorities, the masses continue to be second-rate. Which is in sync with the elitist character of urban India and the ditto nature of the recent tragedy's coverage.