A Short History of Public Relations in India

Growing Importance, Declining Values

Speech at Communications Unplugged

A TED^X Event

MICA, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

February 26, 2011

Good morning.

Many thanks to the organizers for this opportunity.

I’d like to talk to you this morning about the history of public relations consulting in India.

My perspective is unique.

The firm that I founded in 1987 was the first of its kind in India.

So the history of the business intersects with my own experiences in the business.

Coincidentally, it also is a history of economic liberalization in India.

###

Does anyone know how old the business is?

Well, it dates back to biblical times.

The first PR consultant was with Moses, when he led the Jews out of Egypt to escape the Pharaoh’s vicious rule.

Thousands of Jews followed Moses as he led the march to freedom in the “promised land.”

The flight came to a stop at the edge of the Red Sea. With the Pharaoh gaining on, his followers turned to Moses, praying for help.

“Don’t fret,” Moses told them. “I will part the sea and we will simply walk across.”

Everyone was awestruck; religious fervor rose to fever pitch. They hailed Moses as the Messiah. They swore loyalty and fealty and praised the Lord.

Among them was this public relations consultant, who spotted a huge opportunity. He went up to Moses.

“Look chief, if you pull this off, I can get you 10 pages in the Old Testament.”

###

By comparison, PR is relatively young in India; but the issues are similar: about right and wrong; ethics and morality.

Let’s take a closer look…

In 1988, when I had just launched IPAN, India’s first PR consulting firm, I was asked by a journalist from The Economic Times to explain the essence of public relations.

I held out two identical pencils. “The one in my left hand is made by Tata; the other by Reliance. Which would you pick?”

Guess which one the journalist picked?

Today, he may have picked neither; then he picked the Tata pencil.

Asked to explain the reason for his choice, the journalist said it was because Tata has a better reputation than Reliance.

Since neither company did much by way of corporate advertising, focusing instead on product advertising, it is clear that Tata did all kinds of things that got noticed and met with public approval.

In advertising parlance, these are known as “below the line” activities.

That, I told the journalist, is the essence of public relations.

The job of a public relations man is to persuade his client to do good things, ensure they get noticed and thus win the public trust.

###

One of the 20^th century’s foremost public relations men was Mohandas Gandhi. As such he did not have a client but a higher cause.

His “Satyagraha" was a shrewd strategy that attracted media attention: whether he was burning passes in South Africa or making salt in India.

Familiar with the British press, parliament and courts, Gandhi knew instinctively which buttons to push.

He used the press and the courts to stir British Parliament.

Just how sophisticated was this strategy!

Gandhi figured that non-cooperation would force the colonial government to respond with violence and incarceration.

This made the front pages of British newspapers and forced Parliament to act.

In the end, Indian independence came when the differences between Parliament in London and the colonial government in Delhi became irreconcilable.

It’s too bad that India has deified Gandhi. One of the titans of the 20^th century is now worshipped when he deserved to be studied.

But I digress…

I want to trace for you the growth of the business since I founded the first PR consulting firm in 1987.

PR consulting started out with a bang.

The company I founded, IPAN, was first off the block.

###

One early client was Pepsi that had struggled for more than two years to secure government approval to set up operations in India.

When we arrived on the scene, Pepsi had become the butt of negative stories in the press and questions in Parliament.

Beleaguered, the American company changed partners and roped in Voltas and the Punjab Agro-Industries Corporation.

From January 1988, we went to work, trying to beat back the disinformation spread about the company in the media and in Parliament.

At the time, the soft drinks industry in India was small, dominated by one player, Parle that had 80 percent of the market.

A check with the media and various politicians told us the campaign against Pepsi was orchestrated by Parle.

Our strategy then became not to reply to the negative stories but to show that the entrenched soft drinks lobby was behind the negative publicity.

We also showed that the soft drinks industry in India simply could not meet the demand and that there were huge quality issues.

Then, we highlighted Pepsi’s commitment to Punjab; that they would help farmers build a value-added business of growing potatoes and tomatoes.

Thus, we were able to demonstrate that entry of Pepsi was in the public interest.

We were able to do that once we convinced the press and the parliamentarians that the campaign against Pepsi was simply a market manoeuvre.

It took until September when the government okayed the Pepsi project.

In the flush of victory, many people told me it had to do with my equation with Rajiv Gandhi.

In fact, Voltas had a “resident director,” Anil Shastri, who went on to become the minister of state in the finance ministry.

Neither of us brought up the subject in our interactions with Rajiv.

No, the approval for the Pepsi project did not result from influence peddling.

What we did was change the focus of public debate.

The domestic sector had raised all kinds of from pseudo nationalistic issues.

We said it was just plain commercial rivalry.

We said it often and with great conviction.

Once that message sank in, we were able to tell the Pepsi story and how it would benefit India, Punjab and soft drinks industry.

Today you know how Pepsi has gone on to become a youth icon.

The company has created thousands of direct and indirect jobs, not just in bottling and distribution but also in advertising, pr and other ancillary businesses including the paanwallahs and various others in the “unorganized” sector.

###

A year later, there was Citibank. Its local management was charged with introducing the global consumer to India.

At the time, the sector was monopolized by public sector banks that were charged with “social banking.”

There was no sense of consumer banking: no credit cards, no ATMs, no mortgages, and no car loans.

Citibank had applied for licences but was stumped by the government banks and the Reserve Bank.

The idea was to prove to the government that the lobby against foreign banks was sheer ideological bias.

We conducted a survey that showed among the regulatory agencies, there was perceptible bias against Citibank.

Our counsel was to highlight the fact that Citibank that had done business in India since 1902 was very much part of the national agenda.

To this end, we persuaded Citibank to make a strong pro-India statement in response to the US Trade Representative’s decision to name India as an unfair trader under a new law called Super 301.

The bank’s New York public affairs unit submitted an affidavit to the USTR saying their experience was that India is a fair trader.

We gave the story as an exclusive to India’s most credible economics writer.

It made a huge splash and rapidly changed perceptions about Citibank.

In the event, the Indian government gave Citibank permission to set up their consumer operations in India.

The rest is history: what we take for granted now—credit cards, auto loans, mortgages, consumer financing—had their origins in the campaign by Citibank.

Over the years, millions of people in India were empowered: to buy cars, appliances, vacations and homes and also stocks and mutual funds and insurance.

###

In 1991, a young English guy came and talked to me about a pie-in-the-sky venture called Satellite Television Asia Region, now known as STAR TV.

Promoted by Richard Li, a twenty-something from Hong Kong, the satellite television venture ran into predictable opposition from the information and broadcasting ministry that had a monopoly on television.

By creating a business opportunity for small and medium enterprises, cable operators and equipment manufacturers, we advised STAR TV to challenge the government monopoly by rallying these newly-minted businesses to support them.

In a final bid to retain its monopoly, the government introduced the confused Cable and Satellite Regulation Act in 1993 with view to curb the threat to its monopoly.

We helped STAR TV rally support from cable operators and equipment manufacturers to fight against the bill’s unreasonable strictures on the cable and satellite business.

Today, there are still many flaws in the cable business, which got taken over by thugs and political goons, and has therefore languished in technological backwaters.

In the event, cable has been surpassed by organized satellite broadcasters. And we have global quality direct-to-home television.

In freeing the television business, STAR TV created thousands of jobs not just in their direct operations but in associated businesses.

Though I must add the boom in television broadcasting is not all to the good.

The news element is beset by shrill incompetence.

The entertainment business has revived all manner of traditional practices that have no place in a modern society.

On the whole, though, it has been good for the country.

###

These three case studies were about success in challenging monopolies.

One of the things we prided ourselves on was our involvement at the very cutting edge of change in India.

As India evolved rapidly into a consumer market, we were there.

Pepsi Citibank and STAR TV changed everything.

The Indian citizen, always beset by a scarcity mindset and a make-do culture, now had choice and abundance.

###

The next case study is one of which I am very proud.

In 1993, Manmohan Singh, then finance minister, was about to announce a path-breaking budget that dissolved the licence-permit raj.

The previous December, we were retained by the Indian Soaps and Toiletries Manufacturers Association to help their campaign to bring down taxes.

They told us the government was ready to slash taxes on the sector but it was important for ISTMA to handle the “fallout.”

Toiletries and cosmetics were treated as somehow not in sync with tradition.

The sector also was treated derisively by policy makers and their academic fellow travellers.

“You talk about lipstick and perfume when there so many millions in the country who can’t get a square meal.”

This was a typical rejoinder from high-minded mandarins in the bureaucracy and in the academy.

But Singh saw the merit in the ISTMA argument that reduced taxes could help the sector boom and provide jobs and additional revenue from increased sales volumes.

Our effort to handle the “fallout,” began with the prejudice issue; we asking well-known women across the country to sign a petition that said toiletries and cosmetics were in fact a part of the Indian tradition.

On the taxation issue, we made common cause with many economists who showed how lowering rates could boost tax revenues.

Finally, we worked with consumer groups such as Common Cause to highlight how high taxes bred spurious and pilfered products that posed a hazard to consumers.

It was with great satisfaction that on budget day 1993, we found the finance minister had used lines from our petition to announce a huge cut in tax rates on the sector.

Since then, as we all know, the toiletries and cosmetics business boomed.

And the boom energized the beauty sector and made India into a super power, winning back to back titles in the various contests such as Miss World and Miss Universe.

###

In recent times, we’ve dealt with the commissioning of the Bandra Worli Sea Link.

You may know that there were several contentious issues that swirled around the project that was built by HCC, a Bombay-based infrastructure company.

One was about delays and cost escalation.

Another was about the sustained opposition from so-called activists.

By positioning the bridge as the icon of 21^st century Bombay, we gained support from the media, political leaders and prominent citizens.

Tools included a National Geographic documentary that highlighted the state-of-the-art technology.

Also the bridge was offered as a backdrop to a Times of India promo featuring Amitabh Bachchan.

We also helped the company set up an experience center at the site.

This became a good way to educate media and others about the project.

On June 30 2009, when the project was officially commissioned, political leaders, bureaucrats and prominent citizens literally fell over each other for an invitation to the function.

The Bandra Worli Sea Link is a boon to Bombay’s frazzled commuters and is an indispensable part of the city infrastructure.

It is well on the way to replacing the colonial-era Gateway of India as the icon of 21^st-century Bombay.

###

In “breaking news,” our most recent project is the Lavasa Hill City that is coming up near Poona.

The first of its kind in independent India, Lavasa is a new-age concept that uses the principles of the “new urbanism” in which urban areas are planned so that people can live, work and play there.

Under assault from Luddite groups and an ambitious union minister, the project is currently stranded.

I can’t tell you much more than that.

Except the Lavasa project has challenged the notion purveyed by various activist groups that all development is bad.

That in fact, development is a carefully considered choice in which growth and environment need to be balanced.

###

In the nearly 25 years of its existence, the public relations consulting business has grown in importance.

In the early years, it played mainly an advocacy role, helping international and domestic companies pioneer new businesses in India.

Later, it became an adjunct to corporate marketing departments, focused mainly on media relations.

Now it has assumed a management function, helping newly empowered corporate communications department meet the growing demands for advocacy, media relations, media monitoring, training, cyber PR, government relations, recruitment, and CSR.

###

There is however a darker side to our discipline.

And it needs to be addressed squarely else we lose credibility as a 21^st century discipline.

As it has grown in importance, professional values and ethics have become somewhat blurred.

This has become painfully evident in recent months.

I refer here to the telecom scam and role played in it by a PR consulting firm and its chief executive.

It is amazing that a single person, with no previous experience in the field, climbed to such dizzy heights using influence peddling techniques.

As such, she was entrusted with the responsibility to manage corporate communications for India’s two largest conglomerates.

It is even more amazing that the heads of both these behemoths heeded the advice of an untrained and inexperienced person.

The 2G scam dented many individual and corporate reputations.

My concern here is to make a clear distinction between the practice of professional public relations and the kind of influence peddling that was revealed in the scam.

We need for the profession to embrace some sort of a pledge like the Hippocratic Oath in which, among other things, the practitioner pledges “first, do no harm.”

Thank You

Copyright Rajiv Desai 2011

A Thoughtful Budget

Media Don’t Get It

Except for The Wall Street Journal and the very thoughtful program anchored by Prannoy Roy on NDTV, the budget got short shrift everywhere else in the media. The general assessment was it was a mediocre or bad budget. Which is as far from the truth as Alaska is from India.

Hours on television and pages in the newspapers were full of meaningless analyses. Some said there were no major reform announcements; others moaned about the tax provisions. One particularly egregious businesswallah, member of the tribe that shows up on television each February 28, ranted about the tax on “centrally air conditioned hospitals.”

The growth brigade was out in full force lamenting this, that and the other. The Left and jholewallahs also dismissed he budget as a continuation of the neoliberlal conspiracy to sell India to the West. The BJP, its credibility waning by the minute, made its usual noise.

The media, “civil” society groups, the Left and the Hindu nationalists couldn’t have got it more wrong. The media are ill-informed and incompetent. The activists are naysayers; the Left works on a discredited economics model and the BJP, aka the Hindu nationalists, are clueless.

Consider the following ten points taken straight out of the finance minister’s speech:

1. Food prices are high despite improved availability. The finance minister said this was because of shortcomings in the marketing and distribution system. Held in thrall by the government and random retailers and middlemen the marketing and distribution system is a problem. So the signal is they will open up to organized retail marketing.

2. Inflation management calls for a focus on agriculture. The need is to improve productivity. The finance minister’s message was to improve the quality of inputs including mechanization, nutrient-based fertilizers and biotech applications.

3. Also addressed in the budget was the need to remove bottlenecks in value-added farming, including horticulture, dairy, poultry and meat. This is of a piece with the findings of the S S Johl committee that was formed in the 1980s and recommended that at least 20 percent of farm land be given over to value-added crops.

4. The finance minister announced the formation of a public debt management agency. The idea is to depoliticize debt and curb populist spending.

5. Disinvestment of public sector units is a huge problem. Calling it the need to increase people’s ownership of these government owned companies, the minister said the government looked to raising 40,000 crore from the sale of their shares in the stock market.

6. Amendment of the banking regulation act is a major announcement. In its purview, private sector banks will be allowed to open more branches. As such, the so-called aam aadmi will not have to battle for banking services that are a problem in the nationalized banks.

7. Also announced was a plan to modernize the stamp and registration administration and the setting up of a central electronic registry for immovable properties. It is a strike in the heart of darkness because real estate is the major source of black money.

8. This is perhaps most important. The government will now do direct cash transfers to people below the poverty line. It’s a brilliant move to stop leakages from welfare schemes.

9. On the taxes front, the finance minister has left most levies untouched but has given a break to the bulk of taxpayers by increasing the exclusion amounts.

These are a few, and there are many more, of the budget’s highlights. It is abundantly clear the government knows what it’s doing.

The budget is beyond is beyond partisan politics and is a sophisticated response to the globalization of India’s economy.

It is clear that this government understands the issues and the problems. It is, as the finance minister said, a transition to a more transparent and result based economic management system.

I think it is a great budget for an increasingly sophisticated economy.

What do you think? Write me.

Copyright Rajiv Desai 2011

India: Hostage to a Demented Culture

My father, who is in his 90s, suffers from dementia. As such, he has no memory of the past and no idea of the future. He lives in the here and now.

Just the other day, he fell and hurt his head. We took him to the emergency room at a local hospital, where the doctor examined him and declared him fit.

The nurses cleaned the superficial cut on his head and released him. In the interim, I was heart broken to hear him utter the words, “internal sorrow,” not once but twice.

As I got to thinking about his condition, I couldn’t help marvel how closely it parallels the state in which India finds itself: without any wisdom from the past, without any vision of the future; just the here and now.

The words “internal sorrow” are often expressed and lived out in the myriads of petty conflicts and self-centered postures.

India is in a state of dementia, largely because of the here-and-now culture that has taken hold since the turn of the millennium. It is hard to discern if there is anything learned from the past or if there are any plans for the future. And let’s not blame just the government or politicians; the citizenry has a lot to answer for.

At a recent lunch in the Delhi Golf Club, I saw the unseemly spectacle of a child fooling around with the lawn umbrella, changing its incline in dangerous ways while his mother shoveled food into his mouth; or on a Spicejet flight a few weeks ago, where a mother, diverted her bawling son’s attention by allowing him to play with the call button that summons a stewardess.

Both taught their sons to be oblivious of other people who might be disturbed and diverted their attention rather than discipline them.

Such children grow up to be inconsiderate adults, rich or poor, educated or illiterate, who have no restraints on public behavior and the need to be alive to the privacy and wellbeing of others. Thus, on an automated walkway at Delhi’s dysfunctional Terminal 3, a couple, obviously well educated and affluent, walked abreast, not giving way, unmindful of me right behind them, in a hurry to get to the gate where my flight had been called.

These child rearing practices have bred a uni-dimensional culture. Such cultures are demented in the sense that only a self-serving present matters; there is no learning from the past, no dimension of a better future other than instant gratification. Barbaric rituals and hypoglycemic hypocrisy are the hallmarks of such a culture.

In the grip of this demented culture, India is increasingly rich but less modern; increasingly powerful but less civilized. And government and politics and corruption and inequity have little to do with it.

Some years ago, I complained to a senior police official about the inability of his force to ensure the smooth flow of traffic. He looked me squarely in the eye and said, “I could have five million traffic cops on the streets but still you will not have order; the culture seems to breed chaos.”

More recent: another senior policeman told me last week the problem is that despite clear-eyed laws, “we are told to encourage consensus even in the face of flagrant violations.” In other words, “adjust!”

Yet, civil society groups, the media, the business elite and the intellectual set would have us believe that the system works but is subverted by corrupt businessmen, politicians and bureaucrats. The arguments are essentially messianic based on a belief that ascetic figures like Medha Patkar and Anna Hazare; brand ambassadors like Sachin Tendulkar and Amitabh Bachchan or soothsayers like Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Satya Sai Baba could restore values and bring order into public life

Messianic zeal in Indian public affairs is the legacy of Mohandas Gandhi, who acquiesced in his lifetime to the title, “Mahatma.” He was indeed a great soul who challenged and ultimately defeated the British Raj.

Trouble is Gandhi had a lifelong problem with modernity. His book, Hind Swaraj, was a diatribe against modern culture, which he equated with Westernization. His retort on Western civilization, (“I think it would be a good idea”) remains in my mind the tipping point in his conversion from political strategist to the Mahatma.

In that flippant remark, Gandhi dismissed the Renaissance and the Enlightenment that brought modernity and economic prosperity to the West. Gandhi’s view of the West still has acolytes in 21^st century India.

That is one reason why economic prosperity is there for all to see in India today; but modernity, defined as civil values stemming from a concern for others, is a long way away.

The key to India’s modernization is education. Today, parents demand a “good education” so their children can find steady, well-paid jobs in India and around the world. The system is geared to vocational, technical and management training; it does not provide a liberal arts perspective in which civility and socialization are inculcated in students.

What’s more, parents fail to understand that “success” does not come just being “well educated.” The most important thing is for their children to be “well bred.” This means that their children should not just be knowledgeable and bright but aware of their civic responsibilities: don’t drive like lunatics, don’t litter, don’t pee in public, give a thought for others and be courteous.

Above all, parents need to inculcate in their children pride in the neighborhood, the city, the country (not the stunted nationalism that the Hindutva hordes propagate). Children can be well-educated through schools but well-bred only through parents. They hold the key to India’s modernity.

An edited version of this article appeared in Education World, February 2011.

Copyright Rajiv Desai 2011

Parents role critical to India’s modernity

My father, who is in his 90s, suffers from dementia. As such, he has no memory of the past and no idea of the future. He lives in the here and now. Recently, I was heartbroken to hear him utter the words “internal sorrow,” not once but twice.

As I got thinking about his condition, I couldn’t help but marvel at how closely it parallels the condition of contemporary India which is bereft of wisdom from the past, without any vision of the future; just living in the here and now.

India is in a state of dementia, largely because of the here-and-now culture that has taken root since the turn of the millennium. It is hard to discern if there is anything to learn from the past or if there are any plans for the future. And let’s not blame just the government or politicians; the citizenry has a lot to answer for.

At a recent lunch in the Delhi Golf Club, I witnessed the unseemly spectacle of a child fooling around with a lawn umbrella, changing its incline in dangerous ways while his mother shoveled food into his mouth. Likewise on a Spicejet flight a few weeks ago, a mother diverted her bawling son’s attention by allowing him to play with the call button that summons the stewardess. Both mothers taught their sons to be oblivious of other people who might be disturbed, and diverted their attention rather than discipline them.

Such children — rich, poor, educated or illiterate — grow up into inconsiderate adults who have no restraints on public behaviour and ignore the need to respect the privacy and well-being of others. Thus, on an automated walkway at Delhi’s dysfunctional Terminal 3, a couple, obviously well-educated and affluent, walked abreast not giving way, unmindful of me right behind them, in a hurry to get to the gate where my flight had been called.

Such child rearing practices have bred a uni-dimensional culture, demented in the sense that only a self-serving present matters. There is no learning from the past, no dimension of a better future other than instant gratification. Barbaric rituals and hypoglycemic hypocrisy are hallmarks of such a culture.

In the grip of this demented culture, India is increasingly rich but less modern; increasingly powerful but less civilised. And government, politics, corruption and inequity have little to do with it.

Some years ago, I complained to a senior police official about the inability of his force to ensure smooth flow of traffic. He looked me squarely in the eye and said: “I could have 5 million traffic cops on the streets but still you will not have order; our culture breeds chaos.” More recently another senior policeman stated that despite clear-eyed laws “we are told to encourage consensus even in the face of flagrant violations”. In other words “adjust”!

Yet civil society groups, the media, the business elite and intellectual set would have us believe that the system works but is subverted by corrupt businessmen, politicians and bureaucrats. The arguments are essentially messianic based on a belief that ascetic figures like Medha Patkar and Anna Hazare; brand ambassadors like Sachin Tendulkar and Amitabh Bachchan or seers like Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Sathya Sai Baba can restore values and bring order into public life.

Messianic zeal in indian public affairs is the legacy of Mohandas Gandhi, who acquiesced to the title ‘Mahatma’ in his lifetime. He was indeed a great soul who challenged and ultimately defeated the British Raj. But the Mahatma had a lifelong problem with modernity. His book Hind Swaraj, was a diatribe against modern culture, which he equated with westernisation. His retort on Western civilisation, (“I think it would be a good idea”) remains in my mind, the tipping point in his conversion from political strategist to Mahatma. With that flippant remark, Gandhi dismissed the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, which brought modernity and economic prosperity to the West. Gandhi’s view of the West still has acolytes in 21st century India.

That is one reason why economic prosperity is there for all to see in India today; but modernity, defined as civil values stemming from a concern for others, is a long way off.
The key to India’s modernisation is education. Today, parents demand “good education” so their children can find steady, well-paid jobs in India and around the world. The system is geared to vocational, technical and management training; it does not provide a liberal arts perspective in which civility and socialisation is inculcated in students.

What’s more, parents fail to understand that “success” does not flow simply from being “well-educated”. Equally important is for children to be “well-bred”. This means that children should not just be knowledgeable and bright but also aware of their civic responsibilities: don’t drive like lunatics, don’t litter, don’t caterwaul, give thought to others and be courteous.

Above all, parents need to inculcate in their children pride in the neighbourhood, city, and nation (though not the stunted nationalism that the hindutva hordes propagate). Children can be well-educated through schools, but well-bred only through parents who hold the key to India’s modernity.

(An edited version of this post will appear in http://www.educationworld.in, February 8, 2011.)

American Life 10

Hatemongering…

New York: It was a jaw-dropping piece of news. Gabrielle Giffords, a young Democratic member of the House of Representatives from Tucson, Arizona was shot in the head by a crazed assassin in a parking lot as she did her regular meeting with her constituents on Saturday January 8.

The shooting shocked America. Since March 1981, when John W Hinckley Jr took a shot at Ronald Reagan, I can recall no other such event. The Reagan shooting precipitated a national debate on gun control; this latest one raised issues about the polarization in politics that took hold when George W Bush was president.

For me, the news harked back to the night of May 21 1991 when I got a call informing me that Rajiv Gandhi was killed in Sriperumbudur in the southern state of Madras. My heart went out to the family, friends and staff of Giffords.

Giffords’ immediate supporters probably feel today as I felt on that stormy night in May 1991: the dream was over; political violence has a way of putting paid to ideals. I worked with Rajiv for many years and was devastated at the news of his death.

When Rajiv was assassinated, I told an interviewer from The Times of India that he was killed because of the hate atmosphere that was created by his opponents in politics and in the media.

Amazingly, this was among the issues being debated 30 years later in America. In a television discussion on January 12, David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker, told the host Charlie Rose that hate mongering is an important determinant of political assassinations. In his cool, scholastic way Remnick endorsed what I told the Times in a fit of emotion some two decades ago.

The Giffords shooting brought to mind the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln, Mohandas Gandhi, John Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. Their opponents had launched a relentless and visceral hate campaign against them.

Among the many stories that emerged from the Giffords shooting, one was about Sarah Palin’s website on which she had marked targeted constituencies for her yet-unspoken campaign in 2012 with cross-hair targets and one of them was Giffords’ 8^th congressional district in southern Arizona.

In the middle of the reasoned debate about how a polarized hate atmosphere can move deranged people to target public figures, Sarah Palin, the erstwhile Republican vice presidential candidate, the Narendra Modi of American politics, weighed in; she accused the media of “blood libel.”

In turn, her detractors pointed out that her phrase “blood libel” was anti-semitic. The phrase has been used since Biblical times to reinforce the fundamentalist Christian view that Jews are the killers of Jesus Christ. Like Gujarat's Modi, Palin lacks sophistication, preferring the use of propaganda to work up her constituents; like Modi, she uses insulting and intemperate words to score over her opponents.

A recent example of this was in her tweet: "So how's the hopey-changey thing working out for ya?"

Contrast Palin's tilt in the debate to the much anticipated speech that President Barack Obama gave after the shooting. Rising above the clamor, he said that political differences are real but should not be allowed to become the source of violence. He reached out to his opponents and asked for a compact of civility that would foreswear hate.

Watching television coverage and debates on the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords, I was struck by several things. One, the coverage was wall-to-wall. Two, there was a liberal slant to it in that most reporters and commentators pointed discreet fingers at the right-wing cable and radio mafia for hatemongering. Three, Sarah Palin got embroiled in it.

It’s much like what the Indian media do except the Americans did it in a sophisticated, understated and well-researched fashion. No screaming and shouting and rumor-mongering, just well-reasoned arguments.

Conversations on public affairs in India are sophomoric with opinions based on prejudice rather than facts; debates are in the nature of high school encounters; the discourse as a result is usually twisted and misses the point. Indeed, if America is a post-doctoral democracy, India is still to get into college.

Though it may be not the most politically correct thing to say, fingers can be pointed at Mohandas Gandhi’s jibe. Asked what he thought of Western civilization, he said, “It would be a good idea.”

In that one smug remark, Gandhi dismissed the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Enlightenment, movements that raised the West to unprecedented heights of prosperity and civility.

Consider 21^st century India: people urinate and defecate in public; female children are suffocated at birth; brides are snuffed out for lack of dowry; there is still hunger (India ranks number 94 in the global hunger chart); most people live without water and sanitation; cities are slums and villages dens of inequity and filth.

The legacy of Gandhi’s flippant remark can be observed in the immaturity of public discourse in India. Serious issues are subverted in the flush of smug opinions.

Copyright Rajiv Desai 2011