http://www.deccanchronicle.com/op-ed/scandal-sach-762 The issue was not really about banning. Comparing the show to Khajuraho was a form of illiteracy. It is not the sociology of censorship that is interesting, it is the construction of truth that offers more fruitful possibilities. It raises a fascinating list of questions. How is a fact different from information? Are facts, data and information equivalent to the truth? Are honesty and transparency the same? Is a confession, a statement of the truth? Does truth telling TV-style demand the spectacle as a certificate of truth? On an ethical note, does not auctioning privacy make it true? How do confessions rank as a form of truth telling in our culture? The responses to the show became a problem in the sociology of knowledge. Visualise an alternative set of circumstances. Imagine there is a politician on the show. Would a confession that he took a bribe create a sensation? Sting operators might feel unemployed, but beyond politicians and media, the decibel level would be low.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
