PM Narendra Modi
government has transformed the shape and direction of Padma awards. A journey
from what Harish Khare of the Hindu once described as the bent and beautiful to
the ordinary India achievers seems to be here to stay. Achievers do not seek
visibility but are guided by passion irrespective of the level they function. It
should be unsurprising to see the winners from grassroots achievers, yet the elitist
underpinnings of Lutyen’s patronage creates a sense of pleasant surprise
glancing the list of Padma awardees in recent times. Beyond doubt, what Prof Subhash
Sharma terms as capillary action, generates increasing returns of success is undisputed
given the sheer population and diversity in India. What seems missing was the
element of discovery and recognition of more and more Bharat as against India.
In the erstwhile
years, bestowing Padma awards was a product of strength of lobbying. It seemed
inevitable given the selection mechanism and the subsequent post award benefits.
To the party in the power, Padma awards were obviously the means to distribute
the rewards of patronage. This distribution of patronage came with a price- the
price of supporting the government. More often than not, people in diverse
fields with connections in the government were the favoured beneficiaries
though rarely exceptions arose. The awardees given their visibility the media
both print and electronic would leverage to market the government downstream.
Implied is the visibility of the agent to the government and subsequently to
the people who matter. Thus media
personalities and experts constantly appearing in media and those in large
cities like Delhi, Mumbai etc. had the highest probability to be conferred the
Padma awards. Visibility in the eyes of
national public was equated to national service and achievement and thus bestowed
the awards. In Gladwell phraseology, visibility was synonymised into those
talented few who had the skill in them to be connectors, mavens and
salespersons.
The fundamental
technology and communicated structure favoured the approach. Fundamentally, the
economics of things and economics of information work in different ways. In the
former, the information, carried by things, is constrained to follow the linear
physical value chain. Information thus constrained by physical mode of delivery
is subject to the law of inverse relationship between richness and reach of
information. The detailed application of the same in the context of political
communication has been discussed
here.
Communicating customized, interactive large bandwidth information required
dedicated channels of communication, the costs of which restricted their reach.
Messages to larger audiences meant compromises in terms of the richness of
information and holds true for companies, non-profit organization, social
campaigns and political parties.
This
pervasive trade-off shaped the nature of communication, collaboration and
transaction both internal and external to the organization. Thus conspicuousness
in the mass media, the product of this complex mechanism, was associated with accomplishment.
Attempts in
building organization independent of state control or market demands, ended
being either too feeble or localized to make decisive impact on the narrative. The
hub and spoke technical model with unidirectional flow of information from the
centre to the periphery meant presence in the hub mandatory for greater
visibility and rewards. The hub and spoke model revolved around production
economies, identical forms of communication to each consumer equipped with low
cost unidirectional ubiquitous cheap recipient systems Therefore, the media
became a convenient vehicle for patronage dispersion and construction of a network
of connectors, mavens and salespersons. The perceived stickiness contributed substantially
to the increasing returns.
Internet offers
autonomy of choice for individual recipient of information and communication.
It facilitates multiple versions of narratives to be communicated allowing the
exercise the choice on consumption and production of information. There was
bidirectional flow of information and communication and passivity shrunk with
consumers too functioning as producers of information. Internet redefines the role of individuals in
shaping the narrative besides increasing their ability to move beyond the
confines of private conversations to engagement with the rest of the fraternity.
Conversation were liberated from the tyranny of geography. Decentralized production of information,
knowledge and culture is denouement of heterogeneous motivations in large
number of consumer-producers. Web based platforms simplify the aggregation of
the generated accounts.
With the
traditional models of communication ceding the monopoly space, they increasingly
began to lose the bargaining power. A natural corollary thus was discovery and
recognition of individuals who made substantial contribution at their societal
level. However they lacked visibility given the selective choices of the mass
media sphere. These new connectors and mavens and salespersons are not
nationally renowned but in their own way command respect within the local
environs. They are recognized for their knowledge and service but the
recognition due to the erstwhile structure of information ecosystem could never
scale up.
One can take up
some examples. Salumarada Timmakka or Tulasi Gowda. Not that they were unknown.
They were known and celebrated within their region or locale for many years.
Yet the scaling up was not possible because it was felt their contribution did
not fit into the scheme of what was top down description of national
achievement or contribution. When the government sidelines the top down
definition of national contribution and achievement and redefines in the local
context, numerous cases will spring up. There are many who have worked
tirelessly without seeking recognition. Perhaps they within the work they have
been performed have attained self-actualization. Self-actualization is not a theoretical
formulation about celebrity achievement but finding passion inner peace and
meaning within work without care for external recognition or rewards. To Salumarada
Timmakka it perhaps came in planting trees despite the circumstances in which
she took up the task. To Mohammad Sharif it was perhaps in giving dignity to
the dead, again in response to personal tragedy, for Dr. Ravi Kannan in
treating cancer patients in remote Barak Valley. To Dr. Bhakti Yadav, it was in midwifery and obstetrics
that gave her the self-actualization. It
is moot whether they desired recognition or not but national gratitude for
those hundreds who altruistically make difference people’s lives at the local
level that matters is requisite. Impact not scale matters.
These ordinary
people are subconscious connectors and mavens and salespersons of recognition of
achievements. It is just not one of them that is honored, but the message diffuses
to the others in near and distant communities. There would be an increasing
feeling of the government in Delhi recognizing the work, which sends the
message of gratitude. For those untouched by these grassroots achievers, the
very news of them being rewarded would be sense of satisfaction of genuine achievements
and contributions being recognized. They are the ones who develop the
stickiness of the message and give a context to the same. For many living in
the distant peripheries of the country, it would be a symbol towards eliminating
the tyranny of distance. There would be a feeling of proximity to national
endeavor. One does not have to be Delhi or Mumbai or other metros to get
noticed. It is not the elite that perpetuate the pyramid. It is not the
visibility or PR associated with the work that matters but the actual work and
the context of the work that matters. Appearance of national TV, perhaps due to
being merely present and working in Delhi is no guarantee to be synonymized
with achievement. The geography of work is not material just the work is suffice
to be rewarded.
There obviously
would be spill overs. It is evidently politically lucrative to go beyond Delhi
and seek the achievers in the remote corners of the vast and complex nation.
Yet despite the political lucrativeness and
thus rational for PM Modi to walk the talk, the real will lies in the ability
to sideline the Lutyen’s elite. There would be a price to pay. The elitism
flourishes for a reason as discussed
here.
For the Lutyen’s elite, the fact that somewhere someone in India is silently
engaged in nation building with contribution perhaps greater than all of the
Lutyen’s put together might be unpalatable. Yet the political will was
necessary to break the Lutyen’s cabal of Padma Awards. The fact that it’s has
been broken is a reason enough to celebrate the new era of People’s Padmas.
Comments
Post a Comment