Barely 17-years-old, Aashna Lidder bravely recalled the immense impact her father Brigadier Lakhwinder Singh Lidder, had on her, as she and her mother Geetika Lidder bid farewell to him one last time on Friday. Brigadier Lakhwinder Singh Lidder, was the defense advisor to CDS General Bipin Rawat and was traveling with him on the helicopter that crashed in Tamil Nadu on Wednesday. 

 “I am going to be 17. He was with me for 17 years. My father was a hero, my best friend. Maybe it was destined and better things will come our way. He was my hero…motivator. He pampered me so much,” she said, calm and composed even as she was deeply grieving. 

Naman to Courage of Wives & daughters of #indianArmy Men ?? They are the Real Warriors behind the Warriors. See Maturity of 17 yr old Ashna Lidder daughter of Brig LS Lidder “It’s a national loss. My father was a hero. Maybe it was destined & better things will come our way” ? pic.twitter.com/zfkyayb0vU

— Rosy (@rose_k01) December 10, 2021

Her mother Geetika Lidder told the media, “We must give him a good farewell, a smiling send-off, I am a soldier’s wife. It’s a big loss,” as the final rites of Brigadier Lidder were performed with full military honours at Brar Square crematorium in Delhi Cantonment. Their intense grief and dignified composure touched many hearts of those who watched the ceremonies. 

However, there were some trolls who openly seemed aligned to right-wing ideologies who began spewing hate against the teenaged daughter of the senior officer. Some dug out old tweets they claimed were posted by Aashna Lidder’s and started taunting her as ‘woke’ because she had reportedly ‘liked’ many tweets of Congress and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra. Some others began sharing screenshots of old tweets purportedly by Lidder where she expressed opinion on the state of Uttar Pradesh. Some on the microblogging site fuelled a chat about how “military kids can end being woke”. Another compared her to peace activist Gurmehar Kaur, who is also a daughter of an Armyman killed in action. 

In 2017, Kaur came under vicious attack by the supporters of the right-wing for promoting peace between India and Pakistan. Her video in which she can be seen holding a placard that read, “Pakistan did not kill my dad, war killed him” went viral and the supporters of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) began mocking her. 

How do you justify these ? https://t.co/asX6e4rE1C pic.twitter.com/uX1BNf3qiU

— Arvind Gunasekar (@arvindgunasekar) December 10, 2021

On the same lines, trolls on Friday, began circulating a screenshot of a tweet from an account named Aashna Lidder which “criticised” Uttar Pradesh CM Adityanath. According to reports as right wing users started trolling the account, it was deactivated by the user.

A Twitter user wrote, “Mr Lidder’s daughter is woke too, just checked her profile.” Another added, “Aashna Lidder opposes BJP and leans towards INC on an ideological level as she believes in freedom, progressiveness, and inclusiveness. She should be respectfully asked if she wants to join politics after time heals her wounds. India needs people like her.” While it is not confirmed if the now deactivated account was that of Brigadier Lidder’s daughter, it has exposed the hate that the right-wing holds for anyone they suspect of being critical of their ideology. 

Shiv Sena’s Priyanka Chaturvedi and Congress’ Karti Chidambaram, were among those who extended their support to Aashna.

17 year old,grieving yet holding strong,has just cremated her father,a decorated army officer,is being trolled for her views,they want to moderate her woke-ism,military train compulsorily,want her to be corrected. In the process got her to delete her account. How low will you go?

— Priyanka Chaturvedi?? (@priyankac19) December 10, 2021

Shame on the faux “patriots & nationalists” who have hounded a young educated & thinking girl off @Twitter #Aashnalidder

— Karti P Chidambaram (@KartiPC) December 10, 2021

This is Aashna Lidder.
Woke. Opinionated. Fearless.
No wonder they fear her.
I am proud of her. You should be too. pic.twitter.com/ZR4uJSEPiM

— Kaveri ?? (@ikaveri) December 10, 2021

Related:

Gen Bipin Rawat, wife and 11 others confirmed dead in chopper crash

Gurmehar Kaur is being targeted for her Sikh heritage

The post Why did right-wing trolls target 17-year-old daughter of Brig Lidder? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On July 9, 2019, Twitter updated its hateful conduct rules to specifically prohibit language that dehumanizes others on the basis of religion. Despite this, Twitter users in India regularly find hatred-fuelled messages trending on Twitter every day. What gives? Let us have a look at why hate trends so consistently on Twitter.

How do tweets get on trending?
A trend is a topic or hashtag which has been algorithmically determined to be one of the most popular on Twitter at that moment. They are tailored according to your location, your interests, and who you follow. Location trends are a subtype of popular topics from a specific geographic location. The algorithm which determines these trends is set up to help users discover the emerging topics of discussion on the site.

Although Twitter claims that the volume of tweets focused on a topic is only one of the factors that the algorithm looks at, a topic cannot trend without a significant number of tweets being posted around it. A large number of tweets on an issue posted at the same time within the same geographical location gives the topic more than just a fighting chance to be featured as trending.

If, let’s say, a dozen people from one location start using a hashtagfor an hour, it is likely to be picked up by the Twitter algorithm. If the hashtag shows up on trending for a specific location, other users come into its contact, who may then make posts using the tag. Thus, bringing a hate-ridden topic to Twitter’s fore can be achieved without too much concerted effort. An Indian dataset study has shown that hateful accounts tend to express more negative sentiment and profanity in general.

The echo chamber effect
An echo chamber refers to a metaphorical space that amplifies or reinforces a certain set of ideas and beliefs by consistent, repetitive exposure to them. It can be thought of as creating an information bubble around oneself as a way of exercising confirmation bias and supporting motivated reasoning.

Social media sites like Twitter are echo chambers by design, since they are developed to increase user engagement by showing them content similar to what they already consume. Twitter has multiple features that try to hold onto the user’s interest by showcasing similar content. The site’s suggestions on who to follow, for example, helps create a bubble around the user in terms of the voices that can reach them. Each user’s news feed is accordingly populated with tweets that are likely to align with their interests or beliefs.

Conversely, since a user’s popularity on the site depends on the likes and retweets they muster, the user’s tweets are likely to be in line with their followers or any online community they wish to be part of. Receiving a like affirms that your two cents resonated with someone. Such affirmation is important for many people in radicalist circles, as this kind of support helps normalise a member’s beliefs in the community.

A group of persons belonging to an extremist community can, thus, easily manipulate twitter mechanics into by posting abhorrent comments and encouraging their group of followers to get it trending. HindutvaTwitterati are often seen making “hate chains” out of their tweets for this reason.

If not overt, one can often find covert connections between the hate-filled hashtags and persons engaged in politics. The author of the following tweet, AkashSoni, was reported by AltNews to have been an admin of a BJP WhatsApp group that was harassing NDTV journalist Ravish Kumar

As the report notes, Soni’s Facebook profile and personal page have pictures of him with various BJP leaders, and has also posted publicly private numbers of journalists like BarkhaDutt, Kumar, RajdeepSardesai and Abhisar Sharma on his Facebook timeline.

Communal vitriol packs its volume
It is well understood that internet popularity wields power, and the ability to control public discussion can prove to be very useful. This is the primary reason for which political parties have their own IT cell to do their bidding in terms of garnering support and, sometimes, spreading propaganda.
[Note: Prior to the LokSabha elections, a former employee who worked in data analytics for the BJP alleged the party has collected reams of personal data to classify voters and add them to different group chats based on their location, socioeconomic status, age, religion and caste. The founder of BJP’s IT cell referred to it as Frankenstein’s Monster.]

Case Study: The KamleshTiwari Murder
The latest burst of hatemongering trends came after news breaking of KamleshTiwari’s murder. On October 18, 2019, the saffron leader was found dead in his Lucknow home with a slit throat and multiple gunshot wounds. Since his death, Twitter has been flooded with, and vitriolic and offensive tweets have been seen on the trending board. 
It began with #KamleshTiwari, and #KamleshTiwariMurder. Soon enough, it devolved into blatantly islamophobichashtags in reference to a deplorable incident from 2015 where the saffron leader had referred to Prophet Muhammed as “the first Homosexual of the World”.

A flurry of vile hashtags calling the Prophet gay, a rapist, and a terrorist popped up in English and Hindi. Along with these jibes, a second wave of hashtags calling for a boycott of Muslims emerged.

From a long, hard look into these hashtagspopularised made by Saffron Twitter, one notices two methods that are commonly used to other and demonise the Muslim community

1. Insulting the Muslim Faith
In these type of posts, the users use a predecided hate chain of hashtags that call the Prophet names, and often include islamophobic captions.
A few examples:
“Islam is not a religion, it’s a way to spread terror.” https://twitter.com/Nikesh/status/1185755895122157568 [Note: contains expletives]

“Today, A truth is trending!”

3. Asking Hindus to Wake Up
A surge of tweets seem to equate Tiwari’s death to mean that the entire Hindu community is in danger and needs to “wake up” from their stupor and take action against Muslims, lest you are next in line.
A few examples:

“मुसलमानों का लक्ष्य है हिन्दुओं का सर्वनाश”

“If they want “Violence”, we will show what is “Violence” by means of Blood.”

4. Asking Hindus to Boycott Muslims
On a similar note, other fundamentalists are found imploring their followers to stop availing goods and services of Muslims.
A few examples:

Plea to boycott Muslims

“YOU are giving every penny of your money to them”

Hateful tweets have #consequences
As social media becomes more intrinsic to our daily lives, it has also begun to play a role in our conflicts. In the United States, a study has shown that cities with a higher incidence of hateful tweets have more actual hate crimes. In India, multiple incidents of social media-related fatalities have been reported over and over. Internet shutdowns often follow communal riots. The insurgence of these tweets cannot be treated lightly. There are around 350 million Indians on social media, even a small fraction of those people taking up arms against one another can prove to be disastrous for the fabric of this nation.
 
What can Twitter do?
Twitter’s hateful conduct policy clearly states that a user may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of their religious affiliation. The company states that it would take action against accounts that participate in any of the following types of behaviour: violent threats; wishing, hoping or calling for serious harm on a person or group of people; references to mass murder, violent events, or specific means of violence where protected groups have been the primary targets or victims; inciting fear about a protected category; repeated and/or non-consensual slurs, epithets, racist and sexist tropes, or other content that degrades someone; and hateful imagery.

Evidently, these tweets go against the company’s policy, but the presence of the hate-fuelled hashtags is proof that no real action has been taken against by organisation. Salman Soz called out Twitter India on the anti-Muslim hashtags trending in India.

Twitter has proven its capacity to take action against hate speech and propaganda before.

However, it has been previously argued that Twitter profits greatly from users’ extremist political views.As Darren Linvillnotes, Twitter didn’t report a profitable quarter until 12 years after its founding in 2017. The company wouldn’t view it as being in its financial best interest at this point to alienate a large portion of its users.

The post Hate Watch: How Hate Trends On Twitter—A Look into Communal Echo Chambers appeared first on SabrangIndia.

And despite Joshi apologising and deleting his account, the hate continued to spew online. 

The post MakemyTrip co-founder tweets on beef, comes under attack appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Fail at life. Go bomb yourself.”

Comments like this one, found on a CNN article about how women perceive themselves, are prevalent today across the internet, whether it’s Facebook, Reddit or a news website. Such behavior can range from profanity and name-calling to personal attacks, sexual harassment or hate speech.

A recent Pew Internet Survey found that four out of 10 people online have been harassed online, with far more having witnessed such behavior. Trolling has become so rampant that several websites have even resorted to completely removing comments.

Many believe that trolling is done by a small, vocal minority of sociopathic individuals. This belief has been reinforced not only in the media, but also in past research on trolling, which focused on interviewing these individuals. Some studies even showed that  trolls have predisposing personal and biological traits, such as sadism and a propensity to seek excessive stimulation.

But what if all trolls aren’t born trolls? What if they are ordinary people like you and me? In our research, we found that people can be influenced to troll others under the right circumstances in an online community. By analyzing 16 million comments made on CNN.com and conducting an online controlled experiment, we identified two key factors that can lead ordinary people to troll.
 

What makes a troll?

We recruited 667 participants through an online crowdsourcing platform and asked them to first take a quiz, then read an article and engage in discussion. Every participant saw the same article, but some were given a discussion that had started with comments by trolls, where others saw neutral comments instead. Here, trolling was defined using standard community guidelines – for example, name-calling, profanity, racism or harassment. The quiz given beforehand was also varied to either be easy or difficult.

Our analysis of comments on CNN.com helped to verify and extend these experimental observations.

The first factor that seems to influence trolling is a person’s mood. In our experiment, people put into negative moods were much more likely to start trolling. We also discovered that trolling ebbs and flows with the time of day and day of week, in sync with natural human mood patterns. Trolling is most frequent late at night, and least frequent in the morning. Trolling also peaks on Monday, at the beginning of the work week.
 

Moreover, we discovered that a negative mood can persist beyond the events that brought about those feelings. Suppose that a person participates in a discussion where other people wrote troll comments. If that person goes on to participate in an unrelated discussion, they are more likely to troll in that discussion too.

The second factor is the context of a discussion. If a discussion begins with a “troll comment,” then it is twice as likely to be trolled by other participants later on, compared to a discussion that does not start with a troll comment.

In fact, these troll comments can add up. The more troll comments in a discussion, the more likely that future participants will also troll the discussion. Altogether, these results show how the initial comments in a discussion set a strong, lasting precedent for later trolling.

We wondered if, by using these two factors, we could predict when trolling would occur. Using machine learning algorithms, we were able to forecast whether a person was going to troll about 80 percent of the time.

Interestingly, mood and discussion context were together a much stronger indicator of trolling than identifying specific individuals as trolls. In other words, trolling is caused more by the person’s environment than any inherent trait.

Since trolling is situational, and ordinary people can be influenced to troll, such behavior can end up spreading from person to person. A single troll comment in a discussion – perhaps written by a person who woke up on the wrong side of the bed – can lead to worse moods among other participants, and even more troll comments elsewhere. As this negative behavior continues to propagate, trolling can end up becoming the norm in communities if left unchecked.
 

Fighting back

Despite these sobering results, there are several ways this research can help us create better online spaces for public discussion.

By understanding what leads to trolling, we can now better predict when trolling is likely to happen. This can let us identify potentially contentious discussions ahead of time and preemptively alert moderators, who can then intervene in these aggressive situations.

Machine learning algorithms can also sort through millions of posts much more quickly than any human. By training computers to spot trolling behavior, we can identify and filter undesirable content with much greater speed.

Social interventions can also reduce trolling. If we allow people to retract recently posted comments, then we may be able to minimize regret from posting in the heat of the moment. Altering the context of a discussion, by prioritizing constructive comments, can increase the perception of civility. Even just pinning a post about a community’s rules to the top of discussion pages helps, as a recent experiment conducted on Reddit showed.

Nonetheless, there’s lots more work to be done to address trolling. Understanding the role of organized trolling can limit some types of undesirable behavior.

Trolling also can differ in severity, from swearing to targeted bullying, which necessitates different responses.

It’s also important to differentiate the impact of a troll comment from the author’s intent: Did the troll mean to hurt others, or was he or she just trying to express a different viewpoint? This can help separate undesirable individuals from those who just need help communicating their ideas.

When online discussions break down, it’s not just sociopaths who are to blame. We are also at fault. Many “trolls” are just people like ourselves who are having a bad day. Understanding that we’re responsible for both the inspiring and depressing conversations we have online is key to having more productive online discussions.
 

Jure Leskovec at Stanford University also contributed to this article.
 

Justin Cheng, Ph.D Student in Computer Science, Stanford University; Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, Assistant Professor of Information Science, Cornell University, and Michael Bernstein, Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Stanford University
 

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The post Our experiments taught us why people troll appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Gulmehar pleads here to stop the politics of HATE! Unfortunately our regime thrives using it. Natural that they bounced like vultures!

Then we have icons and celebrities who will bootlick the feet of regime for obvious reasons! It’s their opportunity to show where loyalty lies.

We have media court jesters who bends the criticism like don’t deny FoE to poor celebrities, they too human, please please let them speak.

It’s a silent but steady and solid revolt, the youth of the country started speaking fearlessly.. Don’t try to twist their windpipes!

Here the discussions are bludgeoned with a weapon of “nationalism” which is nothing but the bigotry & parochial view of the regime.

For the ‘sauve’ lawyer turned back door Minister of Finance Jaitley, the uprising of the students is nothing but “alliance of subversion”.

Finally the video posted by @mehartweets is not riddled with acronyms and alliterations.. There is no post truths.. It’s deep from her heart.

Now watch this video from Pakistan as a response to @mehartweets. Compare that with the response of our Ministers.

And here is another one –

The post Must-watch: video messages for Gurmehar from across the border! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

I am not one for generalizations, but the incessant trolling, rape threats, bullying and condescending allegations of being ‘used’ as a political tool that Gurmehar Kaur has been facing paint a picture that’s hard to get rid of. It seems like the central government officials, right wing student organizations and their supporters are a bunch of trolls at their best behavior and pathetic bullies at their worst.

Gurmehar’s father was martyred in the Kargil war. In a video, that has been viral, she explained the pain she went through; how she had started blaming Pakistan and Muslims, and how she gradually came to understand that it was the war that was responsible for her father’s death. Look at the nuance this 20 year old girl has! Being pro soldier means being anti-war, and no one could have put it more beautifully. It was a sad message, but it gave hope.

Hope, because we millennial are always accused of being socially and politically unaware by the previous generations. Because, after you lose a loved one, easiest way to cope with the pain is to put the blame on someone and hate them with all your heart. Hope because these are times where no one wants to risk their neck for others.

With that one message, this 20 year old student showed that she is socio- politically aware, mature enough to let go of hate and think rationally and brave enough to stand up for others.

For that, she should have received love. Instead, she has got the entire troll army sending her rape threats. And saddest part is, that army can boast of several celebrities and people of high stature now. Virender Sehwag poked an insensitive joke at one slide from her video. Randeep Hooda joined in. Twitter lost all its senses and went into a frenzy of jokes. Kiren Rijiju stripped her of any agency claiming that she is letting herself being ‘used’ as a political tool. And I can’t make up my mind as to which is worse.

I had a look at Gurmehar’s profile. Here are some of the comments she got:

And after all this, when people like Kiren Rijiju say that she is letting herself being used as a political tool, they indicate that she is incapable of thinking for herself. If she is a political tool, what are ABVP cadres? They are the same age as Gurmehar, if they are thinking individuals acting based on their ideology, so is she.

In a lot of ways, such statements encourage the troll army, and internet bullying is no small matter. Cyber bullies have access to their victim any time of the day, because of the relative anonymity that social networking provides, it is crueler then being bullied in person sometimes; and by their actions, stalwarts like Sehwag, Hooda, and Rijiiju are trivializing a criminal offence.

Rajiv Tyagi, a former Fighter Pilot with the Indian Air Force says, “There is an attempt by the current fascist polity, to institutionalize online bullying and social violence by extending implicit and tacit support for it, by refusing to condemn such action. The ability of BJP acolytes to broadcast rape and death threats with impunity is a dangerous precedent for civilized society.”
One doesn’t have to agree with her to see something wrong with these comments. We seem to have forgotten the way of disagreeing with someone. I hope these people see what twisted, disturbing and above all, criminal trend they have extended their support to.

More power to you Gurmehar. All of our love, all of our solidarities.
 

The post Trolls at best, bullies at worst: what the hounding of Gurmehar Kaur tells us appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Trinamool Congress leader, Derek O’Brien, on Thursday had raised the much-talked about issue of right-wing abusive trolls allegedly enjoying tacit approval of PM Modi.

Speaking in the Rajya Sabha, O’Brien named some of the individuals who were notorious for their abusive behaviour on the microblogging site adding that some had been suspended by Twitter including Bhaksala (run by Rahul Raj) and Mahiviram.

He had said, “”Twenty six Twitter handles that give out rape threats, communal threats are followed by the Prime Minister of India. Twenty six. Two of these handles have been suspended by Twitter. Now this is not Trinamool or Congress or CPM or DMK, this is an international company called Twitter.”

He went on to say, “Where are we headed, sir? And these Twitter trolls, they are paid handles. And they are invited and this is not some private thing, they are public information, it is even published now in a book. They are invited now to the Prime Minister’s house for a nice social digital media party.”

Responding to the TMC leader’s comments, Union Textile Minister, Smriti Irani, urged the Rajya Sabha chairman to expunge from Thursday’s parliamentary records the name taken by O’Brien.

She said, “An individual was named yesterday by my colleague Derek O’Brien, that individual is not a politician, not a celebrity… he’s a common citizen who has the right to free speech but does not enjoy the privilege of this house.

“As the convention of this house, I am beseeching you, kindly expunge the name of an individual as you’ve done on many occasions so the individual who cannot defend himself do so.”

As expected, one of the abusive troll Twitter handle, Bhaksala, was quick to thank Irani.

His tweet read, “Thanks a lot @smritiirani ma’am. Thanks a lot. You spoke for the millions of commoners like me.”

Abusive trolls enjoying Modi’s blessings has been a topic of intense social media debate but even in the face of incessant criticism from intellectuals and hosts of civil rights activists, the prime minister has not stopped following them. Critics say that the abusive trolls in question form the infamous Twitter army of the saffron party.

Courtesy: Janta Ka Reporter
 

The post Smriti Irani comes to rescue of Twitter’s right-wing vicious trolls followed by PM Modi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

भक्तगणों का – अर्थात वही बिरादरी जो ढ़ाई साल से लगातार सुर्खियों में रहती आयी है –  जवाब नहीं !
 
अपने आराध्य को इस कदर नवाज़ते रहते हैं गोया आनेवाली पीढ़ियों को लगने लगे कि ऐसा शख्स कभी हुआ न हो। वैसे टेक्नोलोजी की तरक्की ने उनके लिए यह बेहद आसान भी हो गया है कि वह फोटोशॉप के सहारे दिखाए कि कथित 56 इंची सीने के बलबूते वह कुछ भी कर सकते हैं।

मिसाल के तौर पर वह बाढ़ के हवाई सर्वेक्षण के लिए निकलें और धुआंधार बरसते पानी में उनकी आंखों के सामने समूचा शहर नमूदार हो जाए। यह अलग बात है कि उनकी इस कवायद में कई बार उनके इस हीरो की हालत हिन्दुओं के एक पवित्रा कहे जाने वाले एक ग्रंथ में नमूदार होते नारद जैसी हो बना दी जाती है, जिसे इस बात का गुमान ही न हो कि उसने कैसा रूप धारण किया है और उनका यह आराध्य दुनिया भर में अपने आप को मज़ाक का निशाना बना दे। 
 
हम याद कर सकते हैं अमेरिका के तत्कालीन राष्ट्रपति ओबामा की अगवानी का प्रसंग जब दिन में तीन तीन बार ड्रेस बदलने या अपना खुद का नाम अंकित किया दस लाख या करोड़ रूपए का सूट पहनने की उनके आराध्य की कवायद विश्व मीडिया में सूर्खियांे में रही, उसका जबरदस्त मज़ाक उड़ा और इसी दौरान मीडिया ने इस तथ्य को उजागर किया था कि इसके पहले ऐसी आत्ममुग्धता भरी हरकत मिस्त्र के अपदस्थ तानाशाह होसनी मुबारक ने की थी।
 
अब चूंकि आलम यह है कि फिलवक्त़ मुल्क में भक्तों एवं उनके आंकाओं की ही तूती बोलती है लिहाजा वे कुछ भी करने के लिए आज़ाद है। कमसे कम आने वाले ढाई साल तक भारतीय लोकतंत्रा को ऐसे कई नज़ारे देखने को मिलेंगे, और वह सभी लोग, जमातें जो संविधान के बुनियादी मूल्यों की हिफाजत की बात करते हैं उन्हें ऐसी विपरीत परिस्थितियों से बार बार रूबरू होना पड़ेगा और उन्हें लोहिया की उस उक्ति को विस्मृति से बचाना होगा जिसमें उन्होंने कहा था कि ‘जिन्दा कौमें पांच साल तक इन्तज़ार नहीं करतीं।’
 
बहरहाल, कभी कभी भक्तगण भी अति कर देते हैं जैसा कि पिछले दिनों देखने को मिला, जब किसी अलसुबह लोगों ने खादी ग्रामोद्योग आयोग के कैलेण्डर पर गांधी के बजाय वजीरे आज़म नरेन्द्र मोदी की तस्वीर देखी। पहले तो लोगों का यकीन भी नहीं हुआ कि उनके देखने में कुछ गलती हो रही हो, मगर जब बारीकी से देखा तब लोगों को पक्की तौर पर यकीन हुआ महज यह दृष्टिभ्रम नहीं है। अपने फकीरी या सन्तनुमा अन्दाज़ में बैठ कर सूत कातते गांधी को मोदी की तस्वीर ने प्रतिस्थापित किया है। सियासी दलों, गणमान्यों की तरफ से तीखी प्रतिक्रिया आयीं मगर इसके पहले मोदी द्वारा गांधी के इस अलग ढंग से प्रतिस्थापन को लेकर सोशल मीडिया में इसे लेकर कई फोटोशॉप्ड इमेजेस शेअर की गयीं जिसमें भारतीय इतिहास के इस ‘पुनर्लेखन’ का जम कर मज़ाक उड़ा। भारत के इतिहास की कई अविस्मरणीय घटनाओं में शामिल शख्सियतों के स्थान पर मोदी की तस्वीर चस्पां करके लोगों ने इस प्रयास की धज्जियां उड़ा दीं, फिर चाहें दांडी मार्च की तस्वीर में दिखाए जो रहे ‘मोहनदास करमचंद मोदी’ हों या आज़ादी के वक्त भारत की अवाम को संबोधित करते नेहरू के स्थान पर नज़र आते मोदी हो, किसी शरारती व्यक्ति ने खादी ग्रामोद्योग के बाद अब किंगफिशर कैलेण्डर पर भी जनाब मोदी की तस्वीर चस्पां कर दीं। (https://scroll.in/article/826756/modi-fying-history-social-media-photoshops-modi-into-the-freedom-struggle-and-kingfisher-calendar) तस्वीर की कई अंगों से विवेचना भी हुई जिसमें एक पहलू यह था कि बारह पन्ने के समूचे कैलेण्डर में महिलाएं लगभग अनुपस्थित हैं या अगर नज़र भी आ रही हैं तो बेहद धुंधली नज़र आ रही हैं।
 
भाजपा की असमावेशी राजनीति की मुखालिफत करनेवाली तमाम पार्टियों ने, समूहों ने इस भोंडे प्रयास की जम कर आलोचना की, कई जगहों पर प्रदर्शन हुए। अब कायदन होना यही चाहिए था कि कैलेण्डर को वापस लिया जाता और जनता से माफी मांगी जाती कि जो कुछ हुआ वह खेदजनक था और जिसके लिए उपर से अनुमति नहीं ली गयी थी । मगर हुआ बिल्कुल उल्टा। भाजपा की तरफ से आधिकारिक तौर पर यही कहा गया कि गांधी उनके लिए आदर्श हैं और उन्हें प्रतिस्थापित करने का उनका कोई इरादा नहीं है। और इस बयान के विपरीत पूरी कवायद यही की गयी कि मामले को औचित्य प्रदान किया जाए। कई मंुहों से कई बात की जाए। 
 
खादी आयोग के हवाले से बताया गया कि किस तरह मोदी खादी के लिए बड़ा ब्राण्ड बन गए हैं, वह किस तरह यूथ के आइकन हैं, गुजरात भाजपा की तरफ से कहा गया कि किस तरह मुख्यमंत्राी पद के दिनों में जनाब मोदी ने खादी को बढ़ावा दिया था आदि। हरियाणा भाजपा नेता और कैबिनेट मंत्राी अनिल विज इस मामले में सबसे आगे निकले। अंबाला में एक कार्यक्रम में उन्होंने कहा कि ‘खादी गांधी के नाम पेटेण्ट नहीं हुई है। खादी उत्पादों के साथ गांधी का नाम जुड़ने से ही उसकी बिक्री में गिरावट आयी। वही हाल रूपये का भी हुआ है। जिस दिन गांधी रूपये की तस्वीर पर अवतरित हुए तभी से उसका अवमूल्यन शुरू हुआ है। धीरे धीरे रूपए के नोट से भी उनको हटा दिया जाएगा। मोदी गांधी से बड़ा ब्राण्ड बन चुके हैं।’ 
 
उधर ब्राण्ड मोदी को लेकर राहुल गांधी का संक्षिप्त बयान आया:  ‘हमें नहीं भूलना चाहिए कि हिटलर और मुसोलिनी भी बड़े ब्राण्ड बने थे।’
 
2.
 
प्रश्न उठता है कि गांधी का यह प्रतिस्थापन क्या खादी आयोग के स्थानीय अधिकारियों के अतिउत्साह का नतीजा था – जैसा कि मीडिया के एक हिस्से में कहा जा रहा है – या यह पूरी कोशिश एक व्यापक योजना का हिस्सा है। अगर बारीकी से पड़ताल करने की कोशिश करें तो देख सकते हैं यह सबकुछ ‘भूलवश’ नहीं हुआ और इसके पीछे एक सुचिंतित सोच, योजना काम कर रही है। और गांधीजी की छवि को अपने में समाहित करने या उसे अब ‘विलुप्त’ करने की यह कवायद कई चरणों से गुजरी है। खादी आयोग का कैलेण्डर तो महज एक टेस्ट केस है। 
 
यह सर्वविदित है कि 2014 में जबसे भाजपा की हुकूमत बनी है तबसे गांधी के हत्यारे आतंकी गोडसे के महिमामंडन की कोशिशें कुछ ज्यादा ही परवान चढ़ी हैं। हिन्दु महासभा के लोगों द्वारा गोडसे के मंदिर बनाने से लेकर समय समय पर दिए जानेवाले विवादास्पद वक्तव्य गोया काफी न हों, ऐसे उदाहरण भी सामने आए हैं जब सत्ताधारी पार्टी के अग्रणी नेताओं तक ने गोडसे की तारीफ में कसीदे पढ़े हैं। दिलचस्प हैं कि एक तरफ गांधी को अपने प्रातःस्मरणीयों में शामिल करने के बावजूद उसके हत्यारे गोडसे के महिमामंडन को लेकर न भाजपा और न ही संघ ने कभी आपत्ति दर्ज करायी या न ही उसके जैसे एक आतंकवादी की छवि को निखारे जाने को लेकर कुछ कार्रवाई भी की। एक घोषित आतंकी के महिमामण्डन के माध्यम से हिंसा को बढ़ावा देने के लिए किसी के खिलाफ प्रथम सूचना रपट तक दर्ज नहीं की गयी है। 
 
निश्चित ही यह कोई पहला मौका नहीं रहा है कि पुणे का रहनेवाला आतंकी नाथुराम विनायक गोडसे, जो महात्मा गांधी की हत्या के वक्त हिन्दु महासभा से सम्बद्ध था, जिसने अपने राजनीतिक जीवन की शुरूआत राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ से की थी और जो संघ के प्रथम सुप्रीमो हेडगेवार की यात्राओं के वक्त उनके साथ जाया करता था, उसके महिमामण्डन की कोशिशें सामने आयी थी। महाराष्ट्र एवं पश्चिमी भारत के कई हिस्सों से 15 नवम्बर के दिन – जिस दिन नाथुराम को फांसी दी गयी थी- हर साल उसका ‘शहादत दिवस’ मनाने के समाचार मिलते रहते हैं। मुंबई एवं पुणे जैसे शहरों में तो नाथुराम गोडसे के ‘सम्मान’ में सार्वजनिक कार्यक्रम भी होते हैं। लोगों को यह भी याद होगा कि वर्ष 2006 के अप्रैल में महाराष्ट्र के नांदेड में बम बनाते मारे गए हिमांशु पानसे और राजीव राजकोंडवार के मामले की तफ्तीश के दौरान ही पुलिस को यह समाचार मिला था कि किस तरह हिन्दुत्ववादी संगठनों के वरिष्ठ नेता उनके सम्पर्क में थे और आतंकियों का यह समूह हर साल ‘नाथुराम हौतात्म्य दिन’ मनाता था। गोडसे का महिमामण्डन करते हुए ‘मी नाथुराम बोलतोय’ शीर्षक से एक नाटक का मंचन भी कई साल से हो रहा है।  
 
हम याद कर सकते हैं कि लोकसभा चुनावों के ठीक पहले 30 जनवरी को 2014 को महात्मा गांधी की हत्या के 66 साल पूरे होने के अवसर पर किस तरह गांधी के हत्यारे नाथुराम गोडसे की आवाज़ मंे एक आडियो वाटस अप पर मोबाइल के जरिए लोगों तक पहुंचाया गया। अख़बार के मुताबिक ऐसा मैसेज उन लोगों के मोबाइल तक पहुंच चुका था, जो एक बड़ी पार्टी से ताल्लुक रखते हैं और वही लोग इसे आगे भेज रहे थे। मेसेज की अन्तर्वस्तु गोडसे के स्पष्टतः महिमामण्डन की दिख रही थी, जिसमें आज़ादी के आन्दोलन के कर्णधार महात्मा गांधी की हत्या जैसे इन्सानदुश्मन कार्रवाई को औचित्य प्रदान करने की कोशिश की गयी थी। इतनाही नहीं एक तो इस हत्या के पीछे जो लम्बी चौड़ी सााजिश चली थी, उसे भी दफनाने का तथा इस हत्या को देश को बचाने के लिए उठाए गए कदम के तौर पर प्रस्तुत करने की कोशिश की गयी थी।
 
क्या गोडसे के महिमामंडन पर ‘आधिकारिक चुप्पी’ इसी बात का परिचायक थी कि उस प्रसंग के खुलते ही संघ परिवार के लिए कई सारे असहज करनेवाले प्रश्न खड़े हो जाते हैं ? हर अमनपसन्द एवं न्यायप्रिय व्यक्ति इस बात से सहमत होगा कि महात्मा गांधी की हत्या आजाद भारत की सबसे पहली आतंकी कार्रवाई कही जा सकती है। गांधी हत्या के महज चार दिन बाद राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ पर पाबन्दी लगानेवाला आदेश जारी हुआ था -जब वल्लभभाई पटेल गृहमंत्राी थे – जिसमें लिखा गया था:
 
संघ के सदस्यों की तरफ से अवांछित यहां तक कि खतरनाक गतिविधियों को अंजाम दिया गया है। यह देखा गया है कि देश के तमाम हिस्सों में संघ के सदस्य हिंसक कार्रवाइयों में – जिनमें आगजनी, डकैती, और हत्याएं शामिल हैं – मुब्तिला रहे हैं और वे अवैध ढंग से हथियार एवं विस्फोटक भी जमा करते रहे हैं। वे लोगों में पर्चे बांटते देखे गए हैं, और लोगों को यह अपील करते देखे गए हैं कि वह आतंकी पद्धतियों का सहारा लें, हथियार इक्ट्ठा करें, सरकार के खिलाफ असन्तोष पैदा करे ..
 
27 फरवरी 1948 को प्रधानमंत्राी जवाहरलाल नेहरू को लिखे अपने ख़त में -जबकि महात्मा गांधी की नथुराम गोडसे एवं उसके हिन्दुत्ववादी आतंकी गिरोह के हाथों हुई हत्या को तीन सप्ताह हो गए थे – पटेल लिखते हैं:
 
‘सावरकर के अगुआईवाली हिन्दु महासभा के अतिवादी हिस्से ने ही हत्या के इस षडयंत्रा को अंजाम दिया है ..जाहिर है उनकी हत्या का स्वागत संघ और हिन्दु महासभा के लोगों ने किया जो उनके चिन्तन एवं उनकी नीतियों की मुखालिफत करते थे।’’ 
 
वही पटेल 18 जुलाई 1948 को हिन्दु महासभा के नेता एवं बाद में राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ की सहायता एवं समर्थन से भारतीय जनसंघ की स्थापना करनेवाले श्यामाप्रसाद मुखर्जी को लिखते हैं: 
 
‘‘..हमारी रिपोर्टें इस बात को पुष्ट करती हैं कि इन दो संगठनों की गतिविधियों के चलते खासकर राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ के चलते, मुल्क में एक ऐसा वातावरण बना जिसमें ऐसी त्रासदी (गांधीजी की हत्या) मुमकिन हो सकी। मेरे मन में इस बात के प्रति तनिक सन्देह नहीं कि इस षडयंत्रा में हिन्दु महासभा का अतिवादी हिस्सा शामिल था। राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ की गतिविधियां सरकार एवं राज्य के अस्तित्व के लिए खतरा हैं। हमारे रिपोर्ट इस बात को पुष्ट करते हैं कि पाबन्दी के बावजूद उनमें कमी नहीं आयी है। दरअसल जैसे जैसे समय बीतता जा रहा है संघ के कार्यकर्ता अधिक दुस्साहसी हो रहे हैं और अधिकाधिक तौर पर तोडफोड/विद्रोही कार्रवाइयों में लगे हैं।"
 
प्रश्न उठता है कि गांधी के हत्यारे अपने इस आपराधिक काम को किस तरह औचित्य प्रदान करते हैं। उनका कहना होता है कि गांधीजी ने मुसलमानों के लिए अलग राज्य के विचार का समर्थन दिया और इस तरह वह पाकिस्तान के बंटवारे के जिम्मेदार थे, दूसरे, मुसलमानों का ‘अड़ियलपन’ गांधीजी की तुष्टिकरण की नीति का नतीजा था, और तीसरे, पाकिस्तान द्वारा कश्मीर पर किए गए आक्रमण के बावजूद, गांधीजी ने सरकार पर दबाव डालने के लिए इस बात के लिए अनशन किया था कि उसके हिस्से का 55 करोड़ रूपए वह लौटा दे।
 
ऐसा कोईभी व्यक्ति जो उस कालखण्ड से परिचित होगा बता सकता है कि यह सभी आरोप पूर्वाग्रहों से प्रेरित हैं और तथ्यतः गलत हैं। दरअसल, साम्प्रदायिक सद्भाव का विचार, जिसकी हिफाजत गांधी ने ताउम्र की, वह संघ, हिन्दु महासभा के हिन्दु वर्चस्ववादी विश्वदृष्टिकोण के खिलाफ पड़ता था और जबकि हिन्दुत्व ताकतों की निगाह में राष्ट्र एक नस्लीय/धार्मिक गढंत था, गांधी और बाकी राष्ट्रवादियों के लिए वह इलाकाई गढंत था या एक ऐसा इलाका था जिसमें विभिन्न समुदाय, समष्टियां साथ रहती हों।
 
दुनिया जानती है कि किस तरह हिन्दु अतिवादियों ने महात्मा गांधी की हत्या की योजना बनायी और किस तरह सावरकर एवं संघ के दूसरे सुप्रीमो गोलवलकर को नफरत का वातावरण पैदा करने के लिए जिम्मेदार ठहराया जा सकता है, जिसकी परिणति इस हत्या में हुई। सच्चाई यह है कि हिन्दुत्व अतिवादी गांधीजी से जबरदस्त नफरत करते थे, जो इस बात से भी स्पष्ट होता है कि नाथुराम गोडसे की आखरी कोशिश के पहले चार बार उन्होंने गांधी को मारने की कोशिश की थी। (गुजरात के अग्रणी गांधीवादी चुन्नीभाई वैद्य के मुताबिक हिन्दुत्व आतंकियों ने उन्हें मारने की छह बार कोशिशें कीं)। 
 
अगर हम गहराई में जाने का प्रयास करें तो पाते हैं कि उन्हें मारने का पहला प्रयास पुणे में (25 जून 1934) को हुआ जब वह कार्पोरेशन के सभागार में भाषण देने जा रहे थे। उनकी पत्नी कस्तुरबा गांधी उनके साथ थीं। इत्तेफाक से गांधी जिस कार में जा रहे थे, उसमें कोई खराबी आ गयी और उसे पहुंचने में विलम्ब हुआ जबकि उनके काफिले में शामिल अन्य गाडियां सभास्थल पर पहुंचीं जब उन पर बम फेंका गया। इस बम विस्फोट ने कुछ पुलिसवालों एवं आम लोग घायल हुए।
 
महात्मा गांधी को मारने की दूसरी कोशिश में उनका भविष्य का हत्यारा नाथुराम गोडसे भी शामिल था। गांधी उस वक्त पंचगणी की यात्रा कर रहे थे, जो पुणे पास स्थित एक हिल स्टेशन है (मई 1944) जब एक चार्टर्ड बस में सवार 15-20 युवकों का जत्था वहां पहुंचा। उन्होंने गांधी के खिलाफ दिन भर प्रदर्शन किया, मगर जब गांधी ने उन्हें बात करने के लिए बुलाया वह नहीं आए। शाम के वक्त प्रार्थनासभा में हाथ में खंजर लिए नाथुराम गांधीजी की तरफ भागा, जहां उसे पकड़ लिया गया।
 
सितम्बर 1944 में जब जिन्ना के साथ गांधी की वार्ता शुरू हुई तब उन्हें मारने की तीसरी कोशिश हुई। जब सेवाग्राम आश्रम से निकलकर गांधी मुंबई जा रहे थे, तब नाथुराम की अगुआई में अतिवादी हिन्दु युवकों ने उन्हें रोकने की कोशिश की। उनका कहना था कि गांधीजी को जिन्ना के साथ वार्ता नहीं चलानी चाहिए। उस वक्त भी नाथुराम के कब्जे से एक खंजर बरामद हुआ था।
 
गांधीजी को मारने की चौथी कोशिश में (20 जनवरी 1948) लगभग वही समूह शामिल था जिसने अन्ततः 31 जनवरी को उनकी हत्या की। इसमें शामिल था मदनलाल पाहवा, शंकर किस्तैया, दिगम्बर बड़गे, विष्णु करकरे, गोपाल गोडसे, नाथुराम गोडसे और नारायण आपटे। योजना बनी थी कि महात्मा गांधी और हुसैन शहीद सुरहावर्दी पर हमला किया जाए। इस असफल प्रयास में मदनलाल पाहवा ने बिडला भवन स्थित मंच के पीछे की दीवार पर कपड़े में लपेट कर बम रखा था, जहां उन दिनों गांधी रूके थे। बम का धमाका हुआ, मगर कोई दुर्घटना नहीं हुई, और पाहवा पकड़ा गया। समूह में शामिल अन्य लोग जिन्हें बाद के कोलाहल में गांधी पर गोलियां चलानी थीं, वे अचानक डर गए और उन्होंने कुछ नहीं किया।
 
उन्हें मारने की आखरी कोशिश 30 जनवरी को शाम पांच बज कर 17 मिनट पर हुई जब नाथुराम गोडसे ने उन्हें सामने से आकर तीन गोलियां मारीं। उनकी हत्या में शामिल सभी पकड़े गए, उन पर मुकदमा चला और उन्हें सज़ा हुई। नाथुराम गोडसे एवं नारायण आपटे को सज़ा ए मौत दी गयी, (15 नवम्बर 1949) जबकि अन्य को उमर कैद की सज़ा हुई। इस बात को नोट किया जाना चाहिए कि जवाहरलाल नेहरू तथा गांधी की दो सन्तानों का कहना था कि वे सभी हिन्दुत्ववादी नेताओं के मोहरे मात्रा हैं और उन्होंने सज़ा ए मौत को माफ करने की मांग की। उनका मानना था कि इन हत्यारों को फांसी देना मतलब गांधीजी की विरासत का असम्मान करना होगा जो फांसी की सज़ा के खिलाफ थे। ..
 
3.
 
बहरहाल गांधीजी के नाम की इस कदर लोकप्रियता थी कि संघ या उसके प्रचारकों के लिए इससे आधिकारिक तौर पर दूरी बनाए रखना लम्बे समय तक मुमकिन नहीं था, लिहाजा उन्होंने उनके नाम को अपने प्रातःस्मरणीयों में शामिल किया, अलबत्ता वह इस नाम से तौबा करने या उसके न्यूनीकरण करने की कोशिश में लगातार मुब्तिला रहे।
 
अटलबिहारी वाजपेयी के प्रधानमंत्रित्व काल की दो घटनाओं पर रौशनी डालना इस सन्दर्भ में समीचीन होगा, जो बताती हैं कि किस तरह अपने लिए एक ‘सूटेबल’ /अनुकूल गांधी गढ़ने की उनकी पुरजोर कोशिश रही है। उदाहरण के तौर पर उन दिनों गांधी जयंति पर सरकार की तरफ से एक विज्ञापन छपा था, जिसमंे गांधी के नाम से एक वक्तव्य उदध्रत किया गया था, जो तथ्यत‘ गलत था अर्थात गांधीजी द्वारा दिया नहीं गया था और दूसरे वह हिन्दुत्व की असमावेशी विचारधारा एवं नफरत पर टिकी कार्रवाइयों को औचित्य प्रदान करता दिखता था। जब उस वक्तव्य पर हंगामा मचा तब सरकार की तरफ से एक कमजोर सी सफाई दी गयी।
 
गांधीजी की रचनाओं के ‘पुनर्सम्पादन’ की उनकी कोशिश भी उन्हीं दिनों उजागर हुई थी, जिसके बेपर्द होने पर तत्कालीन सरकार को अपने कदम पीछे खींचने पड़े थे। इकोनोमिक एण्ड पोलिटिकल वीकली जैसी स्थापित पत्रिका में गांधी विचारों के जानकार विद्वान त्रिदिप सुहरूद ने इसे लेकर एक लम्बा लेख भी लिखा था।  ( http://www.epw.in/journal/2004/46-47/commentary/re-editing-gandhis-collected-works.html#sthash.8LRVLB1x.dpuf) जिसमें उन्होंने तथ्यों के साथ यह बात प्रमाणित की थी कि 

‘महात्मा गांधी की संकलित रचनाओं के पुनर्सम्पादन की यह कवायद अपारदर्शी और दोषपूर्ण है और एक ऐसी अकार्यक्षमता और बेरूखी का प्रदर्शन करती है जिसके चलते संशोधित प्रकाशन को स्टेण्डर्ड सन्दर्भ ग्रंथ नहीं माना जा सकेगा। इस नए संस्करण को खारिज किया जाना चाहिए और मूल संकलित रचनाओं को गांधी की रचनाओं एवं वक्तव्यों के एकमात्रा और सबसे आधिकारिक संस्करण के तौर पर बहाल किया जाना चाहिए।’
 
या हम याद कर सकते हैं कि ‘‘क्लीेन इंडिया’ के नाम पर 2014 को गांधी जयंति पर शुरू की गयी मुहिम को जिसमें भी बेहद स्मार्ट अंदाज़ में गांधीजी की छवि का एक अलग न्यूनीकरण सामने आया था। चन्द विश्लेषकों ने इस बात की तरफभी बखूबी इशारा किया था कि उपनिवेशवाद और हर किस्म के सम्प्रदायवाद के खिलाफ उनकी तरफ से ताउम्र चले संघर्ष को लगभग भूला देते हुए महात्मा गांधी की विरासत को इस अभियान के तहत महज ‘सफाई’ तक न्यूनीक्रत किया गया था और अतीत के असुविधाजनक दिखनेवाले पन्नों की भी ‘सफाई’ करने की कोशिश की गयी थी। यशस्वी कहे गये प्रधानमंत्राी की अगुआई में शुरू इस अभियान के जरिए एक अलग किस्म के साफसुथराकरण अर्थात सैनिटायजेशन से हम सभी रूबरू थे, जिसके जरिए हमारे समाज के एक समरस चित्र प्रस्तुत करने की कोशिश हो रही थी जिसमें सफाई या उसका अभाव ‘भारत माता’ की तरफ हमारे ‘कर्तव्य’ को ही उजागर करता दिख रहा था।
 
दिलचस्प है कि न्यूनीकरण की या समाहित करने की ऐसी कोशिशें महज गांधीजी के साथ नहीं चली हैं। डा अम्बेडकर, जिन्होंने ताउम्र हिन्दू धर्म की बर्बरताओं की मुखालिफत की और हिन्दु राष्ट के निर्माण को आज़ादी के लिए खतरा बताया, उन्हें भी इसी तरह हिन्दुत्व के असमावेशी दर्शन एवं व्यवहार का पोषक साबित किया जा रहा है। यह अकारण नहीं कि बीते छह दिसम्बर को डा अम्बेडकर के परिनिर्वाण दिवस के अवसर पर प्रकाशित सरकारी विज्ञापनों में कुछ स्थानों पर अम्बेडकर की तुलना में अपने आप को ‘अम्बेडकर का शिष्य’ बतानेवाले जनाब मोदी की तस्वीर बड़ी दिखाई दी थी।
 
लेकिन वह किस्सा फिर कभी !
 
 

The post भक्तों दा जवाब नहीं! गांधीजी का ‘विलोपन’: तीन ‘आसान’ किश्तों में ! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The new President was handed control of the @POTUS account when he took the oath of office at Friday’s inauguration.

Some users parted ways with @POTUS on the social network once it changed hands from former president Barack Obama to Trump. However, for reasons unexplained, they automatically re-followed the presidential account without their permission.

Users who noticed the glitch were quick to bring it to the attention of Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey who acknowledged “mistakes” in the process that caused users who unfollowed the POTUS account to follow it without opting to do so.

He explained in a series of tweets that users who followed President Obama’s new handle — @POTUS44 — after noon on Friday were automatically set to follow the Trump-run @POTUS handle.

In addition, “some people who unfollowed @POTUS in the past were mistakenly marked to now follow @POTUS,” Dorsey said via Twitter. “This also affected other official Administration accounts like @VP, @WhiteHouse, and @PressSec.” “We believe this affected about 560,000 people. This was a mistake, it wasn’t right, we own it, and we apologise. No excuses,” he tweeted.

Dorsey said the issue has been corrected, CNN reported.
 

The post Users forced to follow Donald Trump on Twitter after glitch appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The demonetization survey was officially launched on 22^nd November 2016 on the NM app by the government. Its purpose was to receive feedback from the people themselves on the validity of withdrawing 86 percent of the currency in circulation to address two problems: that of black money and counterfeit currency. The survey consisted of nine questions, with the tenth providing space for sharing suggestions. The questions dealt with people’s beliefs about the existence of black money in India and on its need to be eliminated. On their opinions of the government’s efforts against corruption, and more particularly, on the effectiveness of demonetization in ridding society of black money, all corruption and terrorism while creating opportunities for higher education, health care and affordable housing for all.

According to the last reports published on the survey on 1 December, 2016 by the government (Historic support for PM Modi’s efforts to make India corruption and black money free, www.narendramodi.in), the survey had polled an enormous 10.20 lakh people across 684 of the total 687 districts, being the first of such massive scale in India “on a policy or political issue.”

However, learnings from basic research methods warn us to be cognizant of two factors in surveys: the aim of the questions, and the purpose/person it serves. In the demonetization survey there lies ample data, on both accounts, and it revels something that, until now, has only begun to be discussed about Modi, his governance practices, and its tirade on dictating public opinion.

It’s all about him
The survey was available on a free downloadable app named after the Prime Minister himself, “Narendra Modi.” Once installed, the icon on the phone had NM cemented on the screen, peering at you against a saffron background. There were no insignia of an organization or of the government infrastructure working alongside him. The survey, similarly controlled, asked about the “Modi Government’s” efforts — against corruption and on banning notes. It was “Modi,” and “Modi’s government,” against all odds. And, why is that a problem?

Perhaps because the world has witnessed several examples of newly emerging forces, such as Trump, who rely on similar claptrap we have witnessed to cash in on very real issues of public discontent, without once stopping to articulate comprehensively the arguments underlying their claims of liberation or economic prosperity. How will Trump actually revive the economy, or Modi actually address the problem of the generation of black money? In his editorial Demonetization: The morality of binaries (The Hindu, 17 November 2016), G. Sampath reflected how Modi had circumvented the problem by making demonetization (or it could be any other thing he has done) appear like a personal, moral battle against the world. In opposing his policy, you were made to feel like you were opposing a working class (national) champion, but were never left empowered to articulate why. Tools such the demonetization survey were deployed to serve this crucial function: of pushing us even further from demanding an answer.

The Purpose of the Survey
There was no reversing demonetization; the survey was not a referendum of any real consequence. The purpose of the survey was just more in the direction of the fortification of Modi. If it was indeed about people, where were the questions (and methods) to access people—their difficulties and anxieties? Of job losses, wage cuts, disinvestments, small scale industry and shop closures. The survey should have been about assessing that— the plight of the vast majority of the population whose lives are characterized by informalisation — so that the post-demonetization math could be carefully worked out — of the sectors and sections into which the presumed earned money (from newly taxable income) would be spent. Since, reports of the rise of an increase in farmer suicides and deepening agrarian crisis have emerged (The Wire, 16 January 2017) even though they made no appearance in the surveys.

Instead what we got was a set of questions replete with errors and exposing a single focus: aggrandizing the leader (and condemning the rest).

The design flaw that found most attention was the imbalanced answer options on the disagreement end. The popular one being, “Demonetization will bring real estate, higher education, healthcare in common man’s reach” A. Completely agree; B. Partially agree; C. Can’t say. There was no option to disagree.

The questions were also double barreled with two questions loaded into one; one that you might agree with and the other, maybe not. For example, “Did you mind the inconvenience faced in our fight to curb corruption, black money, terrorism and counterfeiting of currency?” There was the first question, “Did you mind the inconvenience?” Then, the second question, “Do people think demonetization addresses corruption, black money, terrorism and counterfeiting?” By combining two questions, the results had the potential of being inflated. This was also evident in the first round of results shared by the government on the 23^rd of November. According to the government, 90 percent of the half million people who took the survey supported the move of banning old rupees 500 & rupees 1000 notes. Support incorporated three answer categories ‘it’s okay,’ ‘nice,’ and ‘brilliant.’ The other 10 percent were forced to resort to either choosing ‘bad experience’ or ‘can improve.’ Maybe someone thought it was a ‘bad experience,’ and ‘it was okay,’ but were forced to choose ‘it’s okay’ instead of the ‘bad experience,’ landing with the statistic that 90 percent supported the banning of old 500 and 1000 rupee notes.

Survey text books warn against another misstep – preempting a response by pushing the respondent into an inductive loop. The sequencing of the survey questions did precisely that. If you answered ‘yes’ to the initial question of “Do you think the evil of corruption and black money needs to be fought and eliminated” (99 percent did; q2), how can you then mind “[T]he inconvenience faced in our [government’s] fight to curb corruption, black money, terrorism and counterfeiting of currency?” (q8). At the end of nine questions you were locked into agreeing with everything, and also introduced to believing that “[S]ome anti-corruption activists [were] now fighting in support of black money, corruption & terrorism” (q9).

If the intention was to actually collect data that put people in the center, the questions would instead have started with ones about people’s experiences, availability of infrastructure, digital and banking facilities, assessed their means of survival, and certainly have had answer keys that ranged from ‘most likely, somewhat likely, somewhat unlikely, most unlikely, to don’t know.’ The growing crises in small industries, agriculture and among labour would have registered.

Magnifying and perhaps manufacturing opinion along with curbing dissent and criticism couldn’t have been framed in any more straightforward language. The demonetization survey is yet another example in elevating the leader of one political party above questioning. History shows that, irrespective of ideology, once that happens, it makes for a dangerous future. 

Juhi Tyagi is a Sociologist and an ICAS Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Institute of Economic Growth.

Courtesy: Kafila.online
 

The post Modi Govt’s Demonetization Survey was a Tool for Manipulating Public Opinion appeared first on SabrangIndia.