Dear Friends,
At the very outset, allow me to apologise for being off air for some time now. Actually, the demands and pressures of regular work sometimes become so overwhelming that it becomes, well neigh impossible to pen down the ideas in your mind.
I am sure that all of us must have seen the latest programme (reality show) being aired on the idiot box under the euphamism of 'sach ka saamna'. Actually the word that I shuld be using here is not 'euphamism' but 'blasphemy'. That is because this show is wrongly titled. The real title for this show should be 'sach ki veshyavritti' (Prostitution of truth). Like most other such programmes, (kaun banega karorpati, and big-boss being two notable examples) this programme is a copy of a similar programme being aired in the USA. The underlying presumption of this programme is that a certain machine called 'Polygraph' has the magical-almost godly- power of diagnosing a truth and differentiating it from a lie. Well, the oxymoron here is that nothing could be farther from the truth. Polygraph as yet is an inexact machine. It works on the assumption that telling a lie produces anxiety in a human being. That anxiety is reflected in the form of apparent (in case of the unskilled lier) or imperceptible (in case of the skilled lier) fluctuations and changes in blood pressure, rate of breathing, pulse count etc. The polygraph measures these vital parameters and compares them to normal values. Any significant changes observed in BP, Pulse etc. during answering a question, indicates that the subject is lying. However, this entire test is based on changes in physical parameters caused due to anxiety or a feeling of guilt. The unfortunate fact is that similar changes can be caused by anxiety produced due to any other cause. The nature of the question itself may cause sufficient anxiety so as to cause a change in vital physical parameters being monitored by the polygraph. In such a situation, the polygraph (lie-detector) will mark the reply to the question as a lie. Not surprisingly, the polygraph is used by our security forces and law enforcement agencies merely as a tool of interrogation. The result of any lie-detector test is as yet (and rightly so) not acceptable in any court of law as evidence under the IPC. Thus the question here is that how and under what principle or law has such an inexact and legally non-admissible machine has been give the status of a virtual god on Television? And then, even if we assume that there was indeed a way or a machine that could accurately and in one hundred percent cases distinguish between a truth and a lie and if we further presume that the results of such a test or machine were admissible in the court of law as a legally clinching evidence, even then, such a show would deserve to be banned.
Take the case of the first episode of this show that was beamed into our living and bed-rooms. The person on the chair was a housewife called Smita Mathai. She was asked all sorts of questions, but the one that she lost out on was thus. "Would you sleep with another man if you were certain that your husband would never come to know about it ?" Now, consider this question carefully. Is the subject matter of this question related to a fact or an openion? In my view it is related to an opinion. Whether a person would cheat on his/her spouse is not a varifiable fact. It is at best an opinion given by that person based on a very subjective judgement of his/her own feelings towards his/her spouse and his/her moral grounding. The answer to this question is subject to change depending upon the mental and emotional condition of the person being so examined. The same machine can declare the same answer to such a question as 'true' on one day and 'false' on the other. And imagine the plight of the person being publically examined under such conditions. Smita Mathai answered that she would not sleep with any body else in case she was certain that her husband would not come to know. It was a perfectly valid answer and should have been accepted as true because at that time and point, she felt certatain that she would not indulge in such an act. But what happened? The 'God' called 'Polygraph' announced in a manner of 'aakashvaani' that Smita was lying! What does the poor woman do in such a circumstance? She is saying that she would not sleep with another man and the machine is announcing that she is lying!! That means that she would indeed go and sleep with another man. What that means is that the machine has proved to all and sundry is that that poor woman is a cheating, lying and unfaithful wife!! And since this 'fact' has been aired on national television, everybody who is anybody knows that this woman is 'availbale' (to say the least). Now, what life does she have left after this? How on earth is she going to prove to Tony (her husband) that she was not lying? How is she going to contact the entire India again and explain to them that she is not 'available'? In one stroke, on the basis of an inexact and legally inadmissible machine, the life of a perfectly sober woman has been ruined both personally and publicly!!
Again, it would still be OK if this programme was ruining only the lives of the contestants who are foolish enough to volunteer to participate in it. But it goes beyond. It is ruining the life of those around them. I think that all of us will agree that a personal truth is not so personal. Actually a truth which relates to the sexual behaviour and other relationships of an individual is a collective truth, the revelation of which has a negtive impact not only on the individual revealing the truth but also on those who would have preferred that the truth should remain a secret. To illustrate this point, let me move to the second episode of this programme. The gentleman undoergoing public humiliation on his own volition was an actor, 60ish in age, belonging to Lucknow. He was asked a number of titillating questions all of which revealed that he had led a very interesting and colorful life. This gentleman had slept with prostitutes, changed wives and thought that he was pretty handsome and happening. Well, all was fine till he was asked this question. "Have you ever slept with a near relative?" To this scandalous question about incest, he replied in the affirmative-that he had indeed slept with a close relative. Now, I will not dwell on what this public admission of incestuous behaviour did to his reputation. But spare a thought to what this admission did to the reputations of all his lady relatives to whom he had ever been close. In one moment the lives of all of them stood shattered. True, one of his lady relatives committed incest with him as per his admission. But what about the rest who didnt?!! Will they not become suspects in the eyes of their families and loved ones on the strength of this admission by this gentleman? Would his entire family not be guessing as to which of the ladies it was who went and slept with him? Would not all aunts, cousin sisters and the like be placed under a cloud of suspicion and redicule because of this singular admission by an irresponsible maverick?!! And then again, it is the polygraph that decides that this gentleman is speaking the truth. What if he is lying? After all he is a thespian and a seasoned one at that. Is it absolutely certain that there is no way he can avoid hoodwinking this mechanical and electronic God?!! So far as I am aware, regular tibetan buddhist monks, through constant practice, aquire the ability to slow down their hearbeat, and raise their body temperatures in the frigid environment which they inhabit. Can the polygraph catch a lie spoken by such a monk? If not, then what is the certainty that a skilled and experienced actor will not be able to fool this machine? Now, let us move a step further. Suppose this gentleman had a beautiful cousin of his own age by the name of Zubaida. The next question could well have been, "Is the name of the relative you slept with Zubaida?". What would have been his answer to such a question. Suppose he said "Yes" and the polygraph declared that his answer was true. In that case, regardless of what our fictional Zubaida said, she would be completely and irrevocably ruined by such an answer. Now, suppose that this gentleman said that it was not Zubaida who slept with him and the polygraph machine declared that he was lying. In this case also poor Zubaida would be ruined. How can we allow any single individual to play with the lives of so many people and that too publicly?!!!
The next question here is that of money. Since there is a maximum reward of Rs. One crore (Rs. 100,000,00/-) for anwering 21 questions 'truthfully', it can, therefore, be safely presumed that the persons coming on this show are coming in order to win the jackpot of Rs. 100,000,00/-. Well, I always thought that the truth was priceless and that it could not be bought or sold. But here, the 'truth' appears otherwise! Look at it from this angle. When two individuals sleep together for the sake of love and affection, it is known as 'making love' and is a desireable activity. On the other hand when a man sleeps with a woman and pays her for it, it is known as 'prostitution', and the woman in question suffers grave social stigma. The similie applies here also. Truth should be spoken not for the lure of money but because of a love for it. Truth spoken under duress of any inducement is bereft of free conscience and is akin to a prostitute. Thus, what this show called 'sach ka saamana' is doing is public prostitution of truth!! Thre is also a financial twist to this tale. As per the rules of this game, one lie reduces the entire winnings of a contestant to zero. Now look at it this way. The questions posed to the contestants are those that have been asked in advance under polygraph monitoring. The responses of the contestants to these questions are also known to the promoters of this show. That means that they know the questions, the answers to which, as per the polygraph are false. Again, that means that the moment a contestant starts coming close to Rs. one crore jackpot, the anchor can easily slip in one question which (as per the polygraph) that person had answered falsely. With this trick, the chances are hugely against the hapless contestant because he/she will in all probability give the same answer on the show that he/she had given during the previously conducted polygraph test. That answer, obviously, would be declared false by the polygraph during the show and the contestant in question would end up losing all his/her winnings and getting eliminated from the show. Small surprise then that all the contestants who have not quit the show after winning Rs.5 lakhs have been declared to be liars at some juncture or the other and have been made to lose all the money that they have won. This is game of poker in which the opponent holds his cards and yours too! If at all such a game is to be played on national television, it should be done under the independent monitoring of statutary regulator in order to ensure transparency and exclude possibility of fraud by the promoters.
Last but not the least, is the effect such a show is going to have on the society and its structure. Think about the children and teenagers who will watch this programme. Imagine the mental state of two cousins attracted towards each other watching a 'respectable' gentleman admit that he/she has indulged in incest. What will be their thought process. I feel that it will be "if this guy can do all this and still be respectable and a celebrity to boot, then let us do it too". Think of the industry that this programme will spawn. Soon Polygraph 'clinics' will sprout all over India like mushrooms. The day is not far off when the outcomes of little spats at home between spouses will be decided in 'Polygraph Clinics'. Suspicous husbands will start insisting that their wives undergo polygraph tests in order to prove that they are not cheating on them. Imagine the helplessness of a woman who faces such a suggestion from her husband. What escape does she have? Such a wife is finished the moment she faces such a suggestion, request or order from her husband. If she undergoes the test, the husband will believe the polygraph machine rather than her. And in case she refuses to undergo the test, well, its curtains for her since her husband will take such a refusal as the confirmation of his suspicions regarding the chastity of his wife. In future, what is stopping schools from demanding polygraph tests of children/parents for admissions or bosses (especially in the private sector) from forcing the same on their employees? What will happen when some would-be groom and his clan demand that the would-be bride undergoes a polygraph test before the nuptial vows are taken (or vice-versa)? What is stopping a hitherto unsuspecting wife from raising a questining eyebrow to her husband when a question like "have you ever slept with another woman" is asked to one of the male contestants on the screen?
It is alright to say that it is a free society. It is alright to invoke the right to speech and expression (article 19) of the constitution. But article 19 does not do away with the maxim of "your freedom ends where my nose begins". This programme, and the likes of it, are making a mockery of the whole concept of right to speech and expression enshrined in our constitution. That is because the questions being asked on this programme and the 'truths' being spoken by the participants are negatively impacting the right to life and liberty guaranteed to all the citizens by article 21 of the same constitution. The airing of this programme is also against the directive principles of state policy which have been put in the constitution in order to ensure and guard 'common good' against the depredations of the individual under the guise of fundamental rights.
Friends, in our scriptures there is a line, "Satyam bruyet priyam bruyet, na bruyet satyam-apriyam" Translated into Lingua Franca, it means, "if you have to speak the truth , let it be Pleasant (i.e. for common good). If not for common good, don't speak the truth". It seems that the wisdom of this line has been completely lost to the promoters of 'sach ka saamna'. They are peddling cheap titillation and commioditification of human beings in the garb of truth. From the live telecast of the death of Jade Goody, to the Swayamvar of Rakhee Sawant, to Sach Ka Saamna, the television is exploring new avenues of turning human beings into commodities and their lives into juicy potboilers.
At the very outset, allow me to apologise for being off air for some time now. Actually, the demands and pressures of regular work sometimes become so overwhelming that it becomes, well neigh impossible to pen down the ideas in your mind.
I am sure that all of us must have seen the latest programme (reality show) being aired on the idiot box under the euphamism of 'sach ka saamna'. Actually the word that I shuld be using here is not 'euphamism' but 'blasphemy'. That is because this show is wrongly titled. The real title for this show should be 'sach ki veshyavritti' (Prostitution of truth). Like most other such programmes, (kaun banega karorpati, and big-boss being two notable examples) this programme is a copy of a similar programme being aired in the USA. The underlying presumption of this programme is that a certain machine called 'Polygraph' has the magical-almost godly- power of diagnosing a truth and differentiating it from a lie. Well, the oxymoron here is that nothing could be farther from the truth. Polygraph as yet is an inexact machine. It works on the assumption that telling a lie produces anxiety in a human being. That anxiety is reflected in the form of apparent (in case of the unskilled lier) or imperceptible (in case of the skilled lier) fluctuations and changes in blood pressure, rate of breathing, pulse count etc. The polygraph measures these vital parameters and compares them to normal values. Any significant changes observed in BP, Pulse etc. during answering a question, indicates that the subject is lying. However, this entire test is based on changes in physical parameters caused due to anxiety or a feeling of guilt. The unfortunate fact is that similar changes can be caused by anxiety produced due to any other cause. The nature of the question itself may cause sufficient anxiety so as to cause a change in vital physical parameters being monitored by the polygraph. In such a situation, the polygraph (lie-detector) will mark the reply to the question as a lie. Not surprisingly, the polygraph is used by our security forces and law enforcement agencies merely as a tool of interrogation. The result of any lie-detector test is as yet (and rightly so) not acceptable in any court of law as evidence under the IPC. Thus the question here is that how and under what principle or law has such an inexact and legally non-admissible machine has been give the status of a virtual god on Television? And then, even if we assume that there was indeed a way or a machine that could accurately and in one hundred percent cases distinguish between a truth and a lie and if we further presume that the results of such a test or machine were admissible in the court of law as a legally clinching evidence, even then, such a show would deserve to be banned.
Take the case of the first episode of this show that was beamed into our living and bed-rooms. The person on the chair was a housewife called Smita Mathai. She was asked all sorts of questions, but the one that she lost out on was thus. "Would you sleep with another man if you were certain that your husband would never come to know about it ?" Now, consider this question carefully. Is the subject matter of this question related to a fact or an openion? In my view it is related to an opinion. Whether a person would cheat on his/her spouse is not a varifiable fact. It is at best an opinion given by that person based on a very subjective judgement of his/her own feelings towards his/her spouse and his/her moral grounding. The answer to this question is subject to change depending upon the mental and emotional condition of the person being so examined. The same machine can declare the same answer to such a question as 'true' on one day and 'false' on the other. And imagine the plight of the person being publically examined under such conditions. Smita Mathai answered that she would not sleep with any body else in case she was certain that her husband would not come to know. It was a perfectly valid answer and should have been accepted as true because at that time and point, she felt certatain that she would not indulge in such an act. But what happened? The 'God' called 'Polygraph' announced in a manner of 'aakashvaani' that Smita was lying! What does the poor woman do in such a circumstance? She is saying that she would not sleep with another man and the machine is announcing that she is lying!! That means that she would indeed go and sleep with another man. What that means is that the machine has proved to all and sundry is that that poor woman is a cheating, lying and unfaithful wife!! And since this 'fact' has been aired on national television, everybody who is anybody knows that this woman is 'availbale' (to say the least). Now, what life does she have left after this? How on earth is she going to prove to Tony (her husband) that she was not lying? How is she going to contact the entire India again and explain to them that she is not 'available'? In one stroke, on the basis of an inexact and legally inadmissible machine, the life of a perfectly sober woman has been ruined both personally and publicly!!
Again, it would still be OK if this programme was ruining only the lives of the contestants who are foolish enough to volunteer to participate in it. But it goes beyond. It is ruining the life of those around them. I think that all of us will agree that a personal truth is not so personal. Actually a truth which relates to the sexual behaviour and other relationships of an individual is a collective truth, the revelation of which has a negtive impact not only on the individual revealing the truth but also on those who would have preferred that the truth should remain a secret. To illustrate this point, let me move to the second episode of this programme. The gentleman undoergoing public humiliation on his own volition was an actor, 60ish in age, belonging to Lucknow. He was asked a number of titillating questions all of which revealed that he had led a very interesting and colorful life. This gentleman had slept with prostitutes, changed wives and thought that he was pretty handsome and happening. Well, all was fine till he was asked this question. "Have you ever slept with a near relative?" To this scandalous question about incest, he replied in the affirmative-that he had indeed slept with a close relative. Now, I will not dwell on what this public admission of incestuous behaviour did to his reputation. But spare a thought to what this admission did to the reputations of all his lady relatives to whom he had ever been close. In one moment the lives of all of them stood shattered. True, one of his lady relatives committed incest with him as per his admission. But what about the rest who didnt?!! Will they not become suspects in the eyes of their families and loved ones on the strength of this admission by this gentleman? Would his entire family not be guessing as to which of the ladies it was who went and slept with him? Would not all aunts, cousin sisters and the like be placed under a cloud of suspicion and redicule because of this singular admission by an irresponsible maverick?!! And then again, it is the polygraph that decides that this gentleman is speaking the truth. What if he is lying? After all he is a thespian and a seasoned one at that. Is it absolutely certain that there is no way he can avoid hoodwinking this mechanical and electronic God?!! So far as I am aware, regular tibetan buddhist monks, through constant practice, aquire the ability to slow down their hearbeat, and raise their body temperatures in the frigid environment which they inhabit. Can the polygraph catch a lie spoken by such a monk? If not, then what is the certainty that a skilled and experienced actor will not be able to fool this machine? Now, let us move a step further. Suppose this gentleman had a beautiful cousin of his own age by the name of Zubaida. The next question could well have been, "Is the name of the relative you slept with Zubaida?". What would have been his answer to such a question. Suppose he said "Yes" and the polygraph declared that his answer was true. In that case, regardless of what our fictional Zubaida said, she would be completely and irrevocably ruined by such an answer. Now, suppose that this gentleman said that it was not Zubaida who slept with him and the polygraph machine declared that he was lying. In this case also poor Zubaida would be ruined. How can we allow any single individual to play with the lives of so many people and that too publicly?!!!
The next question here is that of money. Since there is a maximum reward of Rs. One crore (Rs. 100,000,00/-) for anwering 21 questions 'truthfully', it can, therefore, be safely presumed that the persons coming on this show are coming in order to win the jackpot of Rs. 100,000,00/-. Well, I always thought that the truth was priceless and that it could not be bought or sold. But here, the 'truth' appears otherwise! Look at it from this angle. When two individuals sleep together for the sake of love and affection, it is known as 'making love' and is a desireable activity. On the other hand when a man sleeps with a woman and pays her for it, it is known as 'prostitution', and the woman in question suffers grave social stigma. The similie applies here also. Truth should be spoken not for the lure of money but because of a love for it. Truth spoken under duress of any inducement is bereft of free conscience and is akin to a prostitute. Thus, what this show called 'sach ka saamana' is doing is public prostitution of truth!! Thre is also a financial twist to this tale. As per the rules of this game, one lie reduces the entire winnings of a contestant to zero. Now look at it this way. The questions posed to the contestants are those that have been asked in advance under polygraph monitoring. The responses of the contestants to these questions are also known to the promoters of this show. That means that they know the questions, the answers to which, as per the polygraph are false. Again, that means that the moment a contestant starts coming close to Rs. one crore jackpot, the anchor can easily slip in one question which (as per the polygraph) that person had answered falsely. With this trick, the chances are hugely against the hapless contestant because he/she will in all probability give the same answer on the show that he/she had given during the previously conducted polygraph test. That answer, obviously, would be declared false by the polygraph during the show and the contestant in question would end up losing all his/her winnings and getting eliminated from the show. Small surprise then that all the contestants who have not quit the show after winning Rs.5 lakhs have been declared to be liars at some juncture or the other and have been made to lose all the money that they have won. This is game of poker in which the opponent holds his cards and yours too! If at all such a game is to be played on national television, it should be done under the independent monitoring of statutary regulator in order to ensure transparency and exclude possibility of fraud by the promoters.
Last but not the least, is the effect such a show is going to have on the society and its structure. Think about the children and teenagers who will watch this programme. Imagine the mental state of two cousins attracted towards each other watching a 'respectable' gentleman admit that he/she has indulged in incest. What will be their thought process. I feel that it will be "if this guy can do all this and still be respectable and a celebrity to boot, then let us do it too". Think of the industry that this programme will spawn. Soon Polygraph 'clinics' will sprout all over India like mushrooms. The day is not far off when the outcomes of little spats at home between spouses will be decided in 'Polygraph Clinics'. Suspicous husbands will start insisting that their wives undergo polygraph tests in order to prove that they are not cheating on them. Imagine the helplessness of a woman who faces such a suggestion from her husband. What escape does she have? Such a wife is finished the moment she faces such a suggestion, request or order from her husband. If she undergoes the test, the husband will believe the polygraph machine rather than her. And in case she refuses to undergo the test, well, its curtains for her since her husband will take such a refusal as the confirmation of his suspicions regarding the chastity of his wife. In future, what is stopping schools from demanding polygraph tests of children/parents for admissions or bosses (especially in the private sector) from forcing the same on their employees? What will happen when some would-be groom and his clan demand that the would-be bride undergoes a polygraph test before the nuptial vows are taken (or vice-versa)? What is stopping a hitherto unsuspecting wife from raising a questining eyebrow to her husband when a question like "have you ever slept with another woman" is asked to one of the male contestants on the screen?
It is alright to say that it is a free society. It is alright to invoke the right to speech and expression (article 19) of the constitution. But article 19 does not do away with the maxim of "your freedom ends where my nose begins". This programme, and the likes of it, are making a mockery of the whole concept of right to speech and expression enshrined in our constitution. That is because the questions being asked on this programme and the 'truths' being spoken by the participants are negatively impacting the right to life and liberty guaranteed to all the citizens by article 21 of the same constitution. The airing of this programme is also against the directive principles of state policy which have been put in the constitution in order to ensure and guard 'common good' against the depredations of the individual under the guise of fundamental rights.
Friends, in our scriptures there is a line, "Satyam bruyet priyam bruyet, na bruyet satyam-apriyam" Translated into Lingua Franca, it means, "if you have to speak the truth , let it be Pleasant (i.e. for common good). If not for common good, don't speak the truth". It seems that the wisdom of this line has been completely lost to the promoters of 'sach ka saamna'. They are peddling cheap titillation and commioditification of human beings in the garb of truth. From the live telecast of the death of Jade Goody, to the Swayamvar of Rakhee Sawant, to Sach Ka Saamna, the television is exploring new avenues of turning human beings into commodities and their lives into juicy potboilers.
No comments:
Post a Comment