Do readers really have a choice? Delayed reaction

After going through the article, where Grand Master Miss Humpy’s woes were compared with tennis sensation Miss Mirza, it got me thinking. There were two questions that I thought needed an answer. One, is it wrong what Sania is getting bestowed with? Two, if it is wrong, who is to be blamed? For a proper approach towards this debate, let’s take second question first.

Whole India knew there was a person by the name of Sania Mirza who was playing tennis in international circuit. Whole nation knew her month by month ranking. Whole nation knew she has a nose ring. Whole nation knew she wears these outrageous T shirts, which are a style statement for her. Whole nation knew she was grappling with typical conventional mind set while wearing those short skirts. How did whole nation come to know about it? I think it was hardly because one billion people went to her house, or her match to observe it.

Suddenly televisions starting airing her more often. Suddenly newspaper (read Times Of India) had found one more page three article, which thankfully belonged not only on Page three, but on the front page and the sports page. Suddenly TOI had more options of putting those opinion polls, like should she wear nose rings, should she have more piercings in her ear, should she wear shorted/longer/more colorful skirts. Thankfully TOI hasn’t done that yet. But what has TOI done?

I am proud of the achievements of TOI. My friends from college work there after all. But taking these happenings to orgiastic heights, seems a bit of an over-kill. On one side, TOI makes people take a long breath, that there is something more to write about than cricket, which is at best struggling right now. So TOI rode on a wave called Sania Mania (a term coined by TOI itself).

There have been innumerable articles when TOI writes how much pressure was building on players because of so much expectation from a billion people nation. Who was building that pressure? Not people, because they had no option to make that pressure reach the iconoclastic players. TOI and such newspapers, worked as a telescopic sight and made everyone see that pressure.

And now, while reading this article, between Miss Humpy and Miss Sania, TOI likes to play a devil’s advocate role. Its taking a moral high ground, where it has no right to take that stand. Sania is selling more, because TOI chose to do so. Sania is getting more endorsements, because TOI made her more desirable and hence sellable. Sania is getting more money, because the nation waits with abated breath, which picture will TOI print next. So the poor lady has to spend on her getup. Has there ever been any attempt from TOI to make Humpy more visible. The column, in which her achievements are written, is so tinny, that you miss it, if you see the large size picture of Sania. After all, TOI itself had written an article that human beings face a short term visibility impairment, if they look at “arousing” picture.

Leaving with these arguments, that TOI should think about these issues before trying to take a moral high ground, whether it is justified in doing so. Answer to first question lies in the answer to second question.