Information overload

The present time is called the information era. But what is intriguing is that there is no authentic definition of information. Whether there is information boom or information bloom or information bomb that impacts us is hard to explain. Though we believe that we are in the information age, we are not very sure if there is information rage or information craze or information outrage that has affected the society. But one thing is certain that more than information, there is misinformation and disinformation that is doing the rounds. Rightly, then, there is growing concern on the impact that this information explosion is creating on the society. Digital information behemoths like Twitter, WhatsApp and Facebook have all come under scrutiny for their ever imposing and over imposing role. The knowledge that they can influence minds has given them some kind of an arrogance. Right to information and freedom of expression do not mean you can write anything. While questions were raised in the past over authenticity and intention of information spread as research, observation or even investigation, there were scandals like Cambridge Analytica that proved how social media platforms can serve oblique interests. The popularity of social media has made them a tool to influence human minds in a big way and this is being exploited. The tech platforms have become Frankenstein like monsters, difficult to monitor. The problem is that there is no effective regulation to rein them in. India is more of a soft target for the simple reason that we have a large population with enough time and high gullibility to be influenced by mischief mongers. It is rather timely intervention that the government is trying to make. The apprehension that the apex court has raised that social media manipulation can put the democratic process in peril is quite right. Free market and free information are all subject to reasonable restrictions and government has every authority to enforce regulatory mechanisms to curb misuse of digital platforms. It can be argued that social media has given the means of expression to a large section of humanity and is enhancing equal and open dialogue between different interest groups. But that cannot be a licence to disseminate falsehoods, surmises and unsubstantiated information that can harm societal interests. There is truth in the reasoning that social media has become a means in the hands of vested interests who recognise its disruptive potential and use it to achieve undesirable ends. In fact, we saw the dangerous side of social media during the pandemic. It created a havoc by disseminating misinformation and disinformation. The free flow of fast and spurious information added to the ferocity of the pandemic by creating a terrible fear psychoses causing many deaths. Social media has become an opiate for the gullible masses who are attracted to it to the extent of addiction. For many people the information of the social media is gospel truth. Laws alone cannot check rampant misuse of social media and a massive and serious campaign is needed to spread awareness amongst people. Social media is often used to spread falsehoods like wildfire that needs to be doused forcefully and systematically.

Survival of the richest

Darwin stands corrected. What was evident has been swept under the carpet. Darwin had propounded the law of natural selection suggesting that the world is a jungle in which there is a struggle for survival. Only the fittest shall survive. But our interpretation of this term fittest was wrong. Corona pandemic has proved that it was the richest who were the fittest. As the pandemic struck viciously across the globe, we realised that though the pathogen chose to infect all, it killed selectively, preferring the poor over the rich. It is the poor who are the worst sufferers, country’s economic status notwithstanding. While the rich managed to survive, the poor bore the brunt of the pandemic. It was the Black population that suffered the most in the US, not because of the colour of the skin, but due to the size of the wallet. The Black Americans make up for around 12.5 percent of the US population, yet they accounted for over 22 percent of covid deaths. That was the case of the richest democracy. In the largest democracy, it was no better. In India too, the poor were the worst sufferers. As the covid-19 ravaged through 2020 and 2021 the poor bore the brunt of the strike. The treatment protocols where costly, the availability of hospital beds had a premium and the out of the pocket expenses were beyond the capacity of the poor. The outcome was that the poor suffered the maximum casualties. Even those who could hang around had to sell or mortgage whatever they had, to save their near and dear ones. Tragically, nemesis in the form of debt trap is still staring at them. They might have won the battle but the war is on and perhaps to their disadvantage. The healthcare costs were always high but in the Corona times medical bills pushed crores of Indians into poverty. The choice was tough. To save someone today or face devastation tomorrow. According to one report, out of pocket health spending has forced more than 55 million Indians into poverty. In India, 63 percent of the health spending is borne by the households. Incidentally this is one of the highest in the world. And the poorest States are the worst off. There is a need to rethink public health. You don’t need a white paper to know that the health of a nation depends critically on the extent of access of the citizens to an equitable, affordable and accountable healthcare system. That Public health expenditure in India is insufficient and inefficient was always known but Corona made it glaringly obvious. As the second wave hit Indians hard, the poor and even the not so poor were rendered hopeless and helpless. The insufficient number of per capita health facilities were largely cornered by the highest bidders. A nominal rise of around 1.5 to two percent in healthcare GDP may bring down the out of pocket expenses of the poor considerably. Our attitude towards public health has to change and we must consider it as an investment rather than a cost. In fact, our ability to distinguish between cost and investment has always been imprudent. Let us make amends at least in the wake of Corona. We need to remember that the poor also have a right to life that is inalienable and health is that critical determinant of life.