KSRTC has changed, passengers haven't

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) which was just another public sector white elephant sometime back is now on a sensational ride. KSRTC, now sub-divided into four zones, is now making profit, and consequently, its buses offer better safety, comfort and punctuality when compared to the recklessly managed private buses. I, like most other frequent-long-distance travellers, am amazed at the change of approach and demeaner of KSRTC staff. They appear to be thorough professionals and prompt (remember the days when you wouldn't get tickets in return for your money !).
But sadly, the mindset of the passengers has remained much the same. Most of them still think they can travel in government buses in the manner they want and that the conductors are a redundant presence in buses. More sadder part is that the youth, who otherwise wear the garb of thorough professionals, behave like uncouth sapiens with the bus staff.
The other day in Shimoga when I boarded a volvo bus bound for Bangalore, three youths who appeared to be software professionals, made the other thirty-five passengers of the bus wait for nearly an hour because of their ignorance/arrogance regarding the ticketing procedure. They had booked e-tickets but forgot to bring their original identity cards to be verified by the bus staff as stipulated by the KSRTC.
When the lady conductor of the bus asked for original identity card, one of the two in question produced a xerox copy. She insisted for the orginal but the men argued that nobody would keep original identity cards and that the rules of KSRTC held no importance for them. When the matter reached the boiling point, one of the three claimed that he had a original ID card and he is the brother of the ticket holder. "When I am certifying my brother, what other identity would you require", he challenged. But the mild-mannered lady was not ready to relent to the `kinship claims' and she re-confirmed that xerox copies of identity cards are not considered valid, after calling a department official over phone. She also advised the three to pay again for the reserved seats and get refund for e-tickets they have booked, later.
But the three men called up some senior government official of their acquaintance and coerced their entry into the bus. They were least cared about what would happen to the poor lady conductor if their travel in the bus was considered illegal by checking squad. As far as I know, the KSRTC is merciless on erring staff, most of whom are contract employees, and the punishment ranges from high penalty to suspension from service. This delayed the departure of the bus by nearly an hour, leaving the fellow passengers red-faced.
Add to this another episode: A government official of (Additional) Superintendent of Police rank (considered by Lokayukta as one of the most corrupt after unearthing disproportionate assets worth crores possessed by the officer in question) also boarded the same bus on a supposedly official visit to Bangalore. He claimed that he was eligible for free travel which was objected to by the lady conductor. Surprised by this, he issued a mild threat to her saying that he would engage her at a higher level of bureaucracy. I later saw her consulting the staff of other buses during a midnight stopover, about the `overwhelming presence' of the `hugely grown' bureaucrat in the bus. Her colleagues advised her to issue the ticket to the officer, even if it meant shelling out from her pocket, to escape punishment which was imminent in case she was found guilty by checking squad later during the journey. She was caught between two threats.
She promptly issued a ticket to the officer along with a copy of KSRTC guideline that no official can claim free travel in high-end volvo buses on the grounds of official visits. He read the guideline and returned it and gave no money, but. She took his cell number and also requested him to brief the depot manager about his travel so that she would be spared of paying the money from her salary.
The conductor appeared to me as a symbol of a much-changed work culture in the overhauled KSRTC, a professional confronted with unprofessional customers and a woman who finds it too hot to handle the arrogance/ignorance of male beauracrats.

'Bicycle Thief' in the making in Bhagalpur

image source:indiatimes

There could hardly be anybody who would not be moved by the pathetic condition of Antonio who gets beaten up by the mob while trying to steal a bicycle, in Bicycle Thief, a vintage movie set in post-war Europe. In the movie, Antonio, the protagonist, who is caught in abject poverty lives in a time of widespread unemployment. He learns about the job of a poster man which is meant only for persons having bicycles. Having his own bicycle stolen and the responsibility of his wife and son weighing on him heavily, Antonio is left with no other choice but to steal a bicycle. When he does it quite unprofessionally, the crowd beats him up back and blue while his kid watches him helplessly with tears rolling down his cheeks.
The emotion could not be any different when one watched TV footages of a youth fastened to a two-wheeler being dragged on the road by a policeman in Bhagalpur, Bihar, on Tuesday. Mohd Aurangajeb, the victim was punished in such a brutal way by the police for his petty crime - snatching a gold chain. He was then dumped on to a cycle cart to be carried to a police station instead to a hospital. The man who was begging for mercy was roughed up by the people all along. The people who meted out `criminal justice’ to the chain-snatcher seemed to be exalted over their `valiant’ efforts, as though they had won a Napoleonic war. Soon, the police, the custodians of law, joined the barbaric act by dragging the bleeding youth along the road.
Aurangajeb who appeared to be a confused illiterate is an autorikshaw driver and has a sister to look after as his parents are no more (going by the TV reports).
Astonishingly, Bhagalpur DIG, G N Sharma defended the act saying that the police had done a good job by rescuing the thief from the mob. According to him, Aurangajeb was fastened to a motorcycle to prevent him from escaping and he accidentally fell down and got dragged only for some distance.
Echoing similar opinion, Anil Sinha, another senior police officer, questioned the attitude of the people who took law in their hands. In an apparent bid to defocus the attention on the police brutality, he talked about the `plummeting values’ in the `civilized society’ in asked “where we are heading to?”.
More interesting was the statement of Railway Minister Laloo Prasad Yadav who said it was the ‘Jungle Raj’ of Nitish Kumar government, and talked of increasing corruption, loosening law and order! It is not sure if the former Bihar CM made such a criticism after watching the news as nobody saw the hand of the government in the barbaric incident except the police atrocity.
Bhagalpur has a history of police atrocities since the time of Laloo. But no officials and politicians talk about it. And now, there are fears that the Bhagalpur incident could turn out to be a communal issue as the victim belongs to a minority community.
A still from `Bicycle Thief'. image source: moviediva

Jog Falls from unusual viewpoints

Come Rainy season, the world famous Jog Falls regains its glory, attracting tourists from all over. People come, see and enjoy the splendour of the Falls from the usual viewpoints. Here are some of the views of the Falls from quite unexplored angles. This is a close view of the Falls.


View of waterfalls from Forest Guest House point, seen from British Bunglow, Jog Falls.


A close view of Raja, the main constituent of Jog Falls.


Wonderful view of Raja of Jog Falls in the backdrop of concave rocky wall.


We are at the beginning of a great fall. This is the point where one of the falls dives down.


Peeping into Raja from rocky terrain.


Deeper(!) view of the depth of Jog Falls.


It is a waterfalls which takes birth only during the rainy season. It is seen on the right side of the main Jog Falls.


Seasonal waterfalls on the left side of Jog Falls. One can approach the point from a Forest Guest House also seen above.


Another view of the seasonal waterfalls by the side of Jog Falls

YouTube Debate: Politics of Verisimilitude

When CNN and YouTube collaboratively provided a platform for netizens to interrogate US presidential candidates on Monday, it heralded a novelty in the history/future of the media. It was the first ever video-questioning of the running horses by the public through a social networking site, and, the telecast of the same by the traditional media, lending a sense of immediacy and a streak of naturalness to the otherwise-reality-show. Here, the second part of the description (sense of immediacy…streak of naturalness) of CNN-YouTube surreal show is an initial uncensored thought and hence could be vague.
Politics apart, the collaboration of new media with the old has presented us a phenomenon requiring some thought. While hailing the foray of social networking site into the active political realm as a defining moment comparable to the impact of television on politics when Richard Nixon debated John Kennedy during 1960 presidential elections, the liaison of old and the new media has been interpreted in many ways even within the media fraternity.
To borrow the coinage of The Sydney Morning Herald, “Old media are entering into an uneasy alliance with new media to grill the Democratic candidates in the US presidential race”. Certainly, the expression here echoes a sense of insecurity and a fear of the new among the traditional media.
New York Times wrote, “Yet while there was a new format for the debate, which was sponsored by CNN and the video-sharing Web site YouTube, the change went only so far: Candidates frequently lapsed into their talking points, and there was little actual debate among them”.
CNN-YouTube presidential debate is a path-breaking phenomenon merely of its novelty and not because of its ability to impact the way of the old media. That is to say, it failed to redefine the relationship of the performer (presidential candidates, in this case) and the audience (TV viewers) so as to liberate the latter from the shackles of the traditional media. On the contrary, it brought a section of the audience (cybercitizens) within the ambit of the old media and imposed `editorial judgment’ on them. Bringing people out of their closet and subjecting them to the scanner of the camera is in a way reinforcing the authority of the old media.
The event could not do away with the moderator, the media interface between the people and the candidates. It was just a surrealistic show creating an impression among the public that they were directly engaging the presidential candidates, little realising that it was instead them who were being `watched’ and hence `interrogated’.
Of more than 2,000 video questions that were posted on YouTube for the debate, only 37 could confirm to the editorial judgment of the CNN editors (who, of course, are bound by time). Elimination of rest of the questions and the `editorial discretion’ exercised by the professionally regulated old media while choosing `appropriate’ voter videos nullified the very essence of the amateurishly free new media at one go. The rest was just the continuation of any other presidential debates on the television involving a moderator who struggles hard to contain the oratory of the candidates so as not to exceed the timeline.
It is surely a change from the days when only the people used to watch candidates on their TV screens in their houses to a day where the candidates observe the `voters’ on the screen and study them. The cybercitizens who participated in the YouTube show appeared powerless as they were not provided an opportunity to cross-question the candidates and to engage them in true sense. Instead, their personality and the surrounding came to the full public glare. This lent a sense of immediacy and naturalness to the show which was not true. And centredaily.com is correct in predicting that “The march of citizen video into politics might not have the revolutionary impact that television had a half-century ago - despite predictions of such an upheaval Monday from YouTube's founders”