I have seen still cameras, especially those attached to the smart phones, with auto option which clicks on its own when the person photographed is smiling. I find that there are many video cameras doing such ‘great’ jobs by continuously focusing on “pretty’ faces. We can see this in the video clippings aired by the news channels and in the TV shows and also in the videos of marriages and other functions.
Why do the video cameras focus only on the fair, “pretty” ones? We can be charitable to the underemployed neighborhood video guy who has been chartered to cover the marriage function focusing only on those who are naturally gifted to be of wheatish complexion or those who looked pretty in his eyes or those who are attired well! But even mainstream media when they air entertainment programs or functions, one can see the camera suddenly stopping to capture when it sees a fair skinned person in the audience!
Live coverage of matches
This is obvious when we watch live matches. The cameras in charge of capturing matches live, zoom more on the “attractive” skins and curves in the audience than even the players, bats and the balls! Of course, people love to go in their most attractive attire, sometimes with a passion for rigorous ‘reductivism’ or clothe minimalism. This is fine and nothing wrong in it. But why those cameras have a momentary bias towards the whitish surfaces?
The White Obsession
The skin-color obsession of the world has promoted a multi-billion-dollar cosmetic industry. Media look for fair skinned presenters. Airlines look down upon dark skinned candidates as crew even when they are well natured and qualified. Matrimonial advertisements solicit grooms and brides with fair complexion. My dermatologist wife vouches the frantic attempts of people – young and old – to become fairer by experimenting all latest skin procedures. Professional treatments like peeling, lasers, facials etc. are not bad if that are tried to remove the scars, acne, sun burns, skin tags etc. and not exclusively aimed at whitening the skin.
Whenever I was invited for long TV interviews, I was subjected to a rigorous makeup prior to the program in the in-house beauty parlour at the studio. I felt embarrassed to see myself when the program got aired. I do apply moisturizer or mild cream to cover up dryness or the under eye darkness mostly after a sleep deficit night due to late night work and not because I am ashamed of my natural colour.
The No-Make up Movement
‘No Makeup’ hash tags are becoming popular these days among some enlightened women who post photos in social media, especially Instagram. Many got inspired by Alicia Keys, an American singer-songwriter and musician, who started the No Make-up movement. She said that she does not want to cover up: “Not my face, not my mind, not my soul, not my thoughts, not my dreams, not my struggles, not my emotional growth. Nothing,”.
Fathima Lodhi, a Pakistani woman started an anti-colourism movement named “Dark is Divine”. She wrote: “I never got a chance to become a fairy in my school plays because fairies are supposed to be fair-skinned!”
The First Step
Hope our video cameramen of the TV channels and the live matches will take the first step not to focus only on the ‘pretty’ and the fair skinned people in the audience, but zoom on people irrespective of their skin colour or their physical appearances. We would also like to see more of people who are good natured rather than fair and pretty among airhostesses too!
Let us remember the words of Martin Luther King (Jr) that “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
“Good, is a fairer attribute than White,
Tis the mindes beautie keepes the other sweet:
That’s not still one, nor mortall with the light,
Nor glasse, nor painting can it counterfet,
Nor doth it raise desires, which euer tend
At once, to their perfection, and their end”
(Sir Thomas Overbury, “A Wife”, Originally written in 1614 –Old English)
© Sibichen K Mathew Views are personal
(The above article is posted along with related images in my blog as well.)
You might also like to read: Save the Jeans: Vulgarity is in the mind of the beholder
These are the times when we are flooded and sometimes suffocated with tons of inspirational messages about people and events from all over the world. We admire those facts and accomplishments and tend to forward them to others. However, rarely we notice something in our immediate surroundings that would be worthwhile to get inspired to emulate.
Behaviours and lifestyles we see in our immediate proximity can be more impactful and easily replicable. Four very humble actions I noticed recently in my immediate family circle have given me instant inspiration and great happiness. I would like to share them with all of you in spite of the possible risk of being branded as a shameless blower of family trumpet!
During the short visit to my sister during Onam holidays, I noticed two little things that my sister, who is an Assistant Professor did. After getting up early and preparing a sumptuous Onam meal and before driving my wife for a quick shopping, she gave a home made quick pedicure to our mother. I observed a very bright, happy and relaxed expression on my mother’s face as she sat on the sofa and her feet gently pedicured by her daughter. But that was not the thing that really touched me. I found out that she carries every working day, one more pack of lunch to be given to a needy student in her college. May be a very small deed. But I felt happy for her students to have a great teacher who walked the talk.
It is not very unique these days to see people celebrate their important days with people who are less privileged. But, when my daughter did that, I felt really proud. She spent her birthday with inmates of ‘Mercy Home’. She cut her birthday cake there and spent time interacting with very old persons who were mostly physically impaired and mentally special. I could see how she could bring beautiful smiles on their faces.
My son recently participated in a quiz competition. After clearing the first two levels, he was too happy and told me that if he wins the championship, he would like to use the cash prize of Rs 5001 to buy a new mobile phone for him. He won the first place at the finals and was overjoyed with the victory. While coming out of the hall, he saw a few students from a very economically backward background in the audience. He took my permission and immediately donated the entire money to the teacher who accompanied those students to buy ‘General Knowledge’ books for their school library. As I saw that, I couldn’t control the tears of happiness.
Last, but the most inspiring action, I would like to share with you in this article is about my wife. Her father became extremely sick in her home town without any immediate medical help. As his condition became worse, she flew to home town on a highly priced air ticket and returned with him and admitted him to a super specialty hospital. I was away at work in another city. No other family member or relatives were nearby to help. She single-handedly took him to a series of specialists and scores of lab tests, and got the emergency surgery done. In spite of being a full time doctor with a busy practice, she spent her days and nights to look after him, to feed him and to attend to all his personal needs. At a time when parents are neglected by busy children or when their dear ones limit their care remotely by sending money without their valuable presence, this is a very laudable work.
We need not look always far away to get inspired to do something meaningful in our life. I am sure you will see exemplary acts in abundance in your own family as well! Small instances of kind gestures we observe around, can make us proud of the people we are destined to be with rather than always picking out their faults. Who is perfect? Certainly, I am not!!
Views are personal. ©Sibichen K Mathew
Would like to read another article on related topic? Click For inspiration, don’t always look up. Look down too!
For many years, we blamed the government and the government organizations for being inefficient, complex and corrupt. We adored Max Weber for appropriately applying the word bureaucracy and spoiled the reputation of this nomenclature by attributing to anyone and anything that are adamant, stoic, apathetic and irresponsive. Inevitable regulatory system imprisoned the government officials inside an iron cage giving them peanuts. But the smarties lavishly feasted encashing on the nuances and nuisances of the laws and ever expanding procedures, thanks to the voluntary and involuntary paperweights (read as hot cash) kept on the hopeless files by both hapless and dishonest citizens. Scholars, politicians, senior bureaucrats, media and the civil society angels loudly professed: No hope, no salvation, and no atonement – for and from the corrupt bureaucratic system.
But the neocolonial policy experts, public intellectuals and multinational policy advising entities researched hand-in-hand and invented a prescription: Privatize, de-regulate, merge, acquire, and spread out.
What is the result?
Let me start with the brighter side:
It paved way for many players who were waiting for an opportunity to get the large business share hitherto monopolized by the government. Competition resulted in ensuring quality, cheaper rates, and accountability. The ambitious, greedy and aspiring middle class in third world countries got what they craved for: to live the life of a first world citizen while unfortunately destined to be born in a wretched third world.
And what is the darker side?
To know this, one need not look at any empirical studies. (In fact, there is hardly anyone who would like to research on this now!) Just look at our experiences rather than giving a complex theoretical discourse delivered by policy experts or intimidating statistics frequently displayed by economists.
One simple ‘everyday life’ example from the bottom
You are a subscriber to the most essential service of the day: a phone or internet connection. You have a grievance to be settled. You approach the large, mighty, sophisticated, automated, cosy, pretty, and articulate service provider. You find that the polite voice on the other end cannot understand your pulse. The replies are disseminated from a stock of frequently needed answers. Each time you remind about the unsettled grievance, you are with a different person. You do not know where to go next. You are not allowed to explain your problem in plain and simple human language. No access to the huge structures guarded by private security guards. No awareness about the hierarchical structure. Even when you are fortunate to get a soul to interact, the response would be, ‘I don’t have the mandate’ or ‘this is the Standard Operating Procedure’, or ‘I am sorry, I can’t help’, or ‘register your complaint at Interactive Voice Response System once again’. You encountered with the new face-less private bureaucracy.
You were happy when you were told that many services hitherto provided by the mighty government have been contracted to be done by private players who have quoted the lowest rates in the tenders. Only the large entities could afford to quote lower rates. Cartelisation, predatory pricing and anti-competitive mergers and acquisition destroyed the fairness in allocating the resources and work of the public sector to the private players. They outsourced these contracts to smaller players who did not have the capacity and resources to execute the work. You found the same old ‘bureaucratic’ delays coupled with data thefts, corruption, and lack of accountability among those private providers. Some examples of criminal opportunities: the promoters can exploit the resources with scant regard to sustainability, people can get multiple PAN numbers, criminals can get cell phone connections without any documents or by giving fake documents, vendors can circumvent standard postal procedures and can transport contraband, thieves can get into secure offices with the connivance of private security guards. These are just a few generic examples.
Why all these happen in a large private environment? a) Profit motive is predominant than service motive, b) The tendency to sub-contract the work to make more profit, c) Lack of monitoring of quality of the sub-contractor, d) Frequent attrition among the employees and lack of long-term loyalty, e) Lower risks for the mischief makers as they can vanish from the company before being caught and punished, f) When the company practices are perceived to be unethical, the employees also tend to be dishonest and selfish, e) Inadequate government regulations to monitor the affairs in a liberalized environment, etc.
Apart from the above inefficiency in large private sector companies, most of these entities are marred by internal corruption. Managers at each level engage in deals that satisfy their personal interests. However only a few cases are reported to the police as there are no clear rules to punish the corrupt executives for financial crime committed within a private company. To safeguard the reputation, corporate managements let off these criminals with just an expulsion from the company. Businessmen and traders have many stories to tell about how they had to please the managers at various levels in a large firm to get into a business with the company.
Governments were quick to understand the corporate inefficiency and corruption and consequently established ombudsmen, sector regulators, and enacted various corporate governance legislation. However none of these initiatives have curbed the problems mentioned above.
The real reason: The problem of ‘Large’
Policy experts and technocrats dumped E F Schumacher’s concept of ‘Small is Beautiful’ many years back. But all the problems we face in the name of ‘bureaucratic inefficiency’ are the contribution of the ‘Large’. It is proved from the bitter experiences we have from the large private sectors that inefficiency, red-tapism and corruption are not the exclusive attributes of Government, but necessary fallout of any large, complex and non-transparent system.
What is the solution?
The solution lies only in creating small, independent, and responsible units within the existing large structures, whether it is in government or in private sector. Each unit should be given delegated powers based on the unique attributes and should be accountable for its operational decisions. There should be human interface in these units so that services are provided and grievances are redressed based on the needs and requirements rather than universal procedures. Technological interface should not undermine the genuine need for human interaction to find a satisfying solution to a problem.
Privatization and deregulation are irreversible. These processes need to continue. However governments cannot abdicate their responsibilities to ensure fairness, transparency and public welfare. Similarly, large firms cannot continue in an outsourcing and delegating process without ensuring quality and efficiency.It is imperative to have a stringent law to curb corruption in private sector and to make it mandatory for the private sector management to report the criminal incidents of internal unlawful acts to law enforcers. Regulators and ombudsmen need to establish their field arms to monitor compliance to regulations rather than be armchair watchdogs. Both statutory auditors, internal auditors and the Audit committees need to be proactive and should be made accountable for their laxities in reporting irregularities not only in financial affairs but also in security issues and consumer affairs. Strict penalties may be imposed on all acts of corporate corruption, ethical failures, and procedures that are against public interest.
In short, we need to go back the concept of ‘Small is Beautiful’ to get rid of the ghost of Max Weber and his iron caged bureaucracy that has reincarnated as corporate bureaucracy.
© Sibichen K Mathew
Views are personal. Comments are welcome
To see all the posts in the blog, click Cyber Diary
Two men fought in the name of Income tax! One was adored; the other man was deported!
Sir James Wilson was committed for a wrong cause! He fought tooth and nail to bring in an unjust income taxation in India amidst popular opposition.
Governor of Madras Sir Charles Trevelyan, broke all protocols and went public like a people’s leader defying the Queen. It is said that he ‘instigated’ the “great Madras revolt” against the introduction of income tax in India. Quite unheard of in the colonial history! What a brave step by the representative of the colonial master!
He said: ” It is a desperate leap in the dark….The claim of deficit is not true…”. He argued that deficit could be met by reduced spending, even on defence.
Lord Canning, who was earlier in agreement with Sir James Wilson, later got convinced with the argument of Trevelyan and said: ” Danger for danger, I would rather risk governing India with an army of only 40,000 Europeans than I would having to impose unpopular taxation.” Lord Elphinstone, Governor of Bombay also agreed with Trevelyan.
Sir Charles Trevelyan was recalled immediately to London for opposing Income tax and was accused of ‘palpable and plain insubordination’. Sir Charles Wood had stated that ‘Sir Charles Trevelyan is an honest, zealous, upright and independent civil servant. He was a loss to India, but there would be danger if he were allowed to remain, after having adopted a course so subversive of all authority, so fearfully tending to endanger our rule, and so likely to provoke the people to insurrection against the central and responsible authority’.
Sir James Wilson won. He ensured that Income Tax bill became a law on July 18, 1860. The bill received the assent of Governor on 24th July 1860. He wrote jubilantly to his daughter in July 1860: ‘ ..for a bad job the best has been made of it, but the task is heavy and I fear a long one…’. Rightly, Simon Commission in 1927 ( about 67 years later) noted: ” …very definite limits to the extent to which an irresponsible government can force increased taxation on a poor country”.
India had an unjust, inequitable, biased and unpopular tax history since ancient India. It continued to be unjust during medieval and British India. Only in the post independent India, Income tax got legitimacy due to its fairness, horizontal and vertical equity and its transformation as an instrument of social welfare. (Read ‘Making People Pay (2010)’ by the author to view the references).
Present day civil servants also need to draw a few lessons from this. Sir Charles Trevelyan represents a civil services ethos that understands the pulse of the people, abound with administrative wisdom and rooted in fiscal prudence. In contrast, Sir James Wilson represents a bureaucracy that advocates impractical, irrational and illogical policies to project their superior knowledge and to please the uninformed masters. Fortunately, we have a strong democracy that is not authoritarian and exploitative like the colonial government and therefore committed leaders and taxmen of Trevelyan’s genre are not snubbed and deported easily.
It was on April 1st, 1962 that Income tax Act – truly an act that is Indian in content and character – was born. Therefore, it would be more appropriate to celebrate April 1st ( Nothing to do with April fool’s Day!) as Income Tax Day rather than July 24 on which an unjust, harassing, inequitable, despotic and discriminatory income tax law was thrusted upon. Nevertheless, a very laudable initiative to declare a day for this – it doesn’t really matter which day is that. Let Income tax Day be an occasion for taxmen to dedicate themselves to the nation to administer the tax laws with fairness, transparency and empathy than to go on an education and PR spree about the utility of paying taxes. Yes, Indians understand the rationale of taxation and they believe in the benefits of the culture of tax compliance. What they don’t understand is the avoidable procedural complexity administered by an unfair and uninformed taxman! Therefore, the Income tax Day should be ideally marked by more events that make taxmen introspect than any artistic or cosmetic outreaches. However, PR actions that are substantive and beneficial with long term implications to taxpayers can add value.
(c) Sibichen K Mathew. Views are personal and purely academic in nature.
To see all articles – Click Cyber Diary
How many of you evaluate the past performance and future prospects of a company before investing in its shares? We go by the popular perception, public profile of that company, or the ‘hype’ created by the company itself! The media, the consultants, the specialists and the advisors suggest the best deals to the potential investors. All of them give their views on the basis of the financial statements and audit reports of the company. That means, investors trust the audit reports. To put it simply, ‘people trust the Chartered Accountants’!
Contracts are entered, money is lent, job offers are accepted, tax incentives are given, and above all ‘social recognition’ is bestowed on many corporates on the basis of a beautiful (well-dressed) balance sheet amply certified by auditors.
Yes, we – the government, the investors, the lenders, the purchasers, the sellers, the service providers, the taxmen, the employees, the public – means, the entire society, repose faith in the auditors! And the auditors are supposed to vouch, examine, evaluate and certify the correctness or otherwise of the transactions of the company and its orientation.
Yet, we hear well-established companies bursting like bubbles, share prices reaching rock bottom, promoters fleeing the scene, top management going behind the bars, and all stake holders watching everything helplessly!
What was wrong?
Audit, all over the world, is a powerful instrument to ensure accountability and financial regularity in all types of institutions and organizations. Though millions of investors rely on corporate audits, the recent corporate scandals all over the world have raised serious questions about the efficiency and effectiveness of corporate audit regulations and enforcement. The audit report is a powerful indicator of a company’s financial stability, accounting consistency and reliability. However, everything depends on how efficiently the audit was done and how clearly the transactions are reported in the audit report.
The Lehman Bankruptcy Examiner’s Report has come down heavily on the failure of Ernst & Young in preventing one of the biggest failures in the Wall Street that triggered global recession. Audit and accounting failures were also evident in the cases of BAE Systems , Olympus , Enron , World Com , Lucent Technologies , Sun Beam Corporation , Waste Management , Boston Chicken etc. India has also witnessed a series of financial scams in the last decade especially during the liberalization period, most of which are rooted at accounting frauds. However, the responsibility of the auditors in these scams and their role in frauds are never viewed seriously. Reserve Bank of India has a long list of companies who have been guilty of unethical accounting practices and diverted public funds. A number of companies vanished with crores of rupees immediately after the public issue. Financial statements of several companies became unreliable and depicted wrong state of affairs. Satyam scam is the best example.
The Problem areas
The corporate scams and scandals happened in the world in the last few years are clear indications of the collusion between auditors and management in accounting frauds. They have happened either through active suggestions and consultancy to commit frauds or through deliberate omissions in the job. Inefficiency and technical incompetence of the auditors have resulted in some of the corporate debacles. It is foolish if one refuses to learn any lesson from the above scandals, thinking that these are just aberrations and will not recur.
Dependence on the clients
In many cases it is seen that the audit firm is unduly dependent on the client financially. It may be due to the fact that the audit firm provides bulk of its resources for that client or it receives substantial amount of its earnings from that particular client. Thus it is a question of survival for the firm. It results in subjectivity in the performance and reporting of the auditor. In spite of strict codes of conduct, many auditors enter into financial transactions in the names of relatives with the client or the client’s associated concerns. There are also beneficial interest in trusts of the clients, and in shares and investments in associated concerns and also employment of close relatives in connected concerns and re-employment by the auditors in the clients’ concerns. Most of the audit firms involve in the non-audit work of their clients and they receive substantial portion of their earnings from such non-audit activities.
Responses of the regulators and intra-disciplinary bodies
Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act , is the US authorities’ response to political outrage in the wake of Enron, WorldCom, and other equally shocking failures of law, standards, governance and audit. SOX Act is considered as the legislation, which brought most sweeping changes to securities law, corporate governance, and the regulation of auditors since the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 . The SOX Act has international implications since the auditors of overseas subsidiaries or associates of US listed companies are obliged to sign up to it if they wish to retain the work. SOX Act laid down an array of strictures on company directors, especially CEOs and CFOs. Failure to comply could mean prison terms of upto 25 years. The creation of the self regulatory board of Public Companies Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) by the US Congress through the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002, was meant to give powers to the Board over the external auditors in order to guide them in auditing the public led companies. Though there are enough laws, the institutional mechanisms in India and many countries are marred by weak enforcement.
Need for a global policy
What is imperative today is the establishment of an International Quality Assurance Body that formulates universalistic principles and guidelines for all accounting, auditing and consulting firms all over the world. The body should suggest an appropriate mechanism that ensures quality, reliability and objectivity among audit firms. It is also necessary to have concerted action to prohibit direct or indirect monopoly in the area of auditing and consulting by a few firms. Proper auditor rotation, disciplinary mechanism, and an environment that ensures auditor independence can bring back public trust on the auditors. Establishment of an Independent Audit Regulatory Authority is necessary in countries.
© Sibichen K Mathew
Views are personal
Click here to see my blog Cyber Diary