Randism Rocks the world... literally

The case for Paying out AIG Bonuses
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/17/business/17sorkin.html
There is simply no case. Any and all arguments are superficial and do not hold up to even the simplest scrutiny.



Argument 1. Sanctity of Contracts.

There is no such thing as sanctity of contracts as far as "retention bonuses" for any AIG employee goes unless he or she is a PR agent. Retention bonuses are for people to stay back. And as the author himself describes, many have already packed up and still received their so called retention bonuses and you and I know that the minute they receive the money, so will the rest. Moreover, by definition a bonus is a share of the profits from a profitable company that goes to an employee for having made a significantly positivie contribution to that company's profits. Hmm.. AIG has plunged depths that even the Dutch East India Company didn't and not only did these employees NOT contribute anything, they were directly party to the mess the world financial markets are in.
The emotional would also add that if the sanctity of contracts is not upheld for the millions of middle class workers in the Auto, IT, Manufacturing etc. etc. sectors, why in the bloody hell is it important to uphold it for incompetent fatcats?
If Auto contracts are only under "negotiation" so are these. We know finally how the blue collars at GM & C etc. will fare. So please spare us the hijinks.

Argument 2. A.I.G. built this bomb, and it may be the only outfit that really knows how to defuse it. taxpayers need to keep some of these brainiacs in their seats.

Bollocks. First AIG didn't build it. It was a second rate party that gave the people who built it, the erstwhile Wall Street, the rating organisations and the Main Street divisions, the bulwark to keep going at it by insuring possible defaults to the main culprit, CDOs, by issuing CDSes.

Now... the people who created CDOs.. you gotta admire them ... give loans, chop em up and sell them and other parties make CDOs and spread it around till no one can actually see any risk. Now on the other hand how can anyone who insures these things be anything but a complete and utter idiot?

These are no "brainiacs". If they were, they wouldn't have been party to this "risk mitigation" scheme in the first place. Any brainiac would've known that this was in fact a brush the risk under the carpet scheme. Problem of course was that the lump of risk was big enough to trip the whole world's economy. And any brainiac would've at the right time, maybe mid or late 2007, skipped out of AIG and traded against AIG's books. These are no brainiacs, these were incompetent fools with inflated egos for whom innovation was not about creating money or empowering people with it but thieving it.

Argument 3. A.I.G. knew it needed to keep its people.

So? They'll leave irrespective of what you offer them. Which you already have. And quite a few have already left. This goes against the grain of market economics. So you'll pay significantly HIGHER for incompetent people to work in a failed firm propped up by tax dollars? Umm.. how really does this work?
AIG fuelled by incompetent and greedy fools, requires tax money to keep it afloat. And then you give the same fools Higher than usual pay to KEEP them? So that this incompetent organisation doesn't get into a depper hole... which it will manage to do by paying the same fools to do the same job? Wow! that blows my mind!


Dear Mr. Sorkin. You seem earnest in your arguments. From 13000 kms across the world, maybe seeing it from here gives me a more objective perspective than one who's in the thick of things. Or maybe I'm just a guy who like black and white or maybe its because I'm from a country where politicians and fatcats are honestly acknowledged to be thieves. Here's my two pence or 10000 shares of AIG - What we're seeing here is a kleptocracy run by thieves who've been discovered because they grabbed too much too fast and are making a last ditch attempt to distribute the loot.And it seems to me that its not just AIG but endemic to all the bailouts that the US Govt. is offering.

All of this of course is assuming what seems to be taken for granted... the world will collapse if not for AIG, and the other bailed out minions. I still haven't seen one good case... hell! ANY case.. for the people who vote in your country to pay for this world-saving gesture even as they battle lay offs and erosion of their property values. Its always been implied and no one, not even Jon Stewart, who I suppose is the only remaining person in your country with a modicum of intelligence has tried to prove it.


All this only serves to demonstrate, quite dramatically, in fact that the current system, constructed and encouraged by Messrs. Reagan and Greenspan and Paulson bowing to the Goddess Rand does not favour merit and rewards incompetents who had parents rich enough to pay for Harvard. Everything that critics had to say about Ayn Rand zealots has come to pass. Does the egg in your face and the peasants with pitchforks at your door force the least bit of remorse on you people?
If I were anyone with authority, I'd take my chance with "government appointed financial people" ,that some NYT reader contemptuously labels them, trying to disentagle this. They may not be Harvard or Wharton but I'm assuming that there's every chance that they're not inbred boston brahmin neanderthals and can tell a loan from a deposit.

Has anyone thought how satisfying it would be to actually hold these people accountable? To make them live in an industrial town and sign up with the UAW and get 200 days of work a year where they actually make a nut or a bolt instead of weaving themselves money from other people's entrepreneurship and work for the simple service of moving money from one place to another?

India Dancing

Never ever ever did I think I'd ever write something on an Indian dancing show... in complimentary terms.
But I gotta say this about the Zee TV Dance India Dance show. Just absolutely amazing. Everything about the show except maybe for the sets.. which aren't bad really, they just don't do justice to the amazing dancers, the really good judges, decent anchors and the fantastic fantastic Mithunda who does one helluva job being the "grandmaster".
I don't give out compliments easily but where it is deserved, they go.
I've never seen a show on a Hindi GE channel that I was fascinated by. Never. Vijay TV has some innovative shows like Ipadikku Rose and a few others including comedy shows like *Lollu Sabha which have really good concepts and pretty good implementation and I don't watch other language GE channels of course. And I do a lot of browsing and I'm pretty sure I've seen at least two or three episodes of every show on Hindi and Tamil GE channels (except for the completely irredeemable ones).



First things first; Zee's Dance India Dance has simply the most amazing dance and dancers I've seen on TV, including "So Yo Think You Can Dance" that draws from the most vibrant dance community, the US. Its gratifying to see such amazing dance and variety among Indian dancers. I did think what next for these guys? But then I put it aside because the dancing was just too fascinating to think too much during the show.

Next comes the best job I've seen done by an anchor judge, Mithunda. Crisp with very little or no flabby gyaan, incisive comments and ones that even a layman like me can see matter and pertinent. And he is great fun too!

And then there are the three judges who each mentor a certain number of dancers, choreograph and choose styles for the dancers' efforts. Do I credit them or the dancers with the really innovative dances and the introduction of never before seen styles into Indian TV? They do a great job of mentoring and judging. The non-existence of a point system and a simple elimination system seems to help their objectivity too. Remo, Terence and Geeta gave me a measure of faith that there can be sanity in the crap that is the usual dance TV.

This is also one dance show that has very little flab in the way of useless drama, the crafted behind-the-scenes bitching, the mummy-daddy sentiment etc. etc. It does, of course, but its kept to a bare minimum. Also we've a wide selection of people from various places, even one who doesn't speak Hindi at all and speaks only Malayalam, which ... Mithunda translates for us :D. The diversity immediately speaks in terms of competence of dancers who introduce to us diversity in styles and moves. Its a wonder that the incredibly stale punjabi staple of both people and dance still finds takers among the producers of other shows. Its automatically assumed that for any dance or reality show you need a vast majority of participants from Punjab and Delhi the concept which this show uncerimoniously flushes down the toilet. The best dancer here so far being a Muslim from Bangalore, Salman. I'm assuming that these guys will mine even better showstoppers if they reach into TN, Andhra and the NE.

Even the onscreen histrionics you see on dance shows and reality TV is helluva lot better. Its not over the top and seems to have very little scripting. I might be wrong but is it real embarrassment I see in the anchors' faces when they announce an elimination? The responses to winning a certain round or a spot prize or losing also seems pretty raw and un-scripted and Mithunda's zingers are definitely un-rehearsed.

All in all, from locking-popping to madhuri jhatkas, from pole dancing to belly dancing, from staid tangos to item numbers the dancing has taken my breath away and is as of now the ONLY show I watch on a Hindi GE channel.

Mebbe I should buy some UTV and Zee shares. The disclaimer being ... the episodes that have the auditions are nothing to write home about.

I Bourgeois

Untouchable women enjoy a night of fashion
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/untouchable-women-enjoy-a-night-of-fashion/#comment-336791

Why the hell wasn't this reported in Indian media? Because the indian media is more concerned with suppressing the acknowledgement of the existence and treatment of dalits than in bringing it to light. Why? Because its audience, the "great" Indian Middle Class is more embarrassed than shameful of its treatment of the Dalits. They'd rather not acknowledge their existence than do anything to better the "untouchable"'s lot. A dramatic example of this of course is the middle class student's protests over Mandal 1 & 2. Obvioulsy all of the students were upper caste and it was such a blatant upper caste movement that they didn't even try to prove otherwise that it was a pan-class movement. In their disgusting diplay, the upper caste students and their parents brandished brooms and rakes to tell the media what they thought their under-privileged brethren should rather be doing.

Our NRI brethren are of course, as is their wont, even more vocal about their objections to reservation and they don't care enough to make a distinction between SC/STs and OBCs. NRIs are almost exclusively upper caste excluding at the most a few OBCs from TN/Andhra, Punjab and Gujarat. A quick run-through of the common surnames will tell you the truth.

A run through of the NRI demonstrations on the 2006 reservations issue.
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/caste/reservations/PressRelease_060906.html
The author writes about the hypocrisy of the demostrators far more effectively and in fewer words than I can

An IIT defending its reticence to reservations
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/badge-of-iit-is-talent-not-privilege-or-caste-iit-kanpur-staff/5246/

Sure, you can be agnostic to caste and privileges if you're an Amity University or an IIPM but you're an IIT. If the Govt. forces Air India to fly to Aizwal for all of two passengers and we look at that as a public service, how is an IIT/IIM/DU any different? An IIT is our government's construct. Our government is Our societal construct. A society that has over 160 million Dalits, over 80 million Tribals constituting a good quarter of our poulation and a wide variety of lower castes estimated at 52% of pop. by the Govt. and quoted at 35% by the National Statistical Organisation, which figure obviously the anti-reservationists use (they selectively don't use the 28% of SC/STs)

If an IIT's job is to take children of traditionally privileged parents who can afford an education in a DPS or a DAV, the extra tuitions, the Kota classes and Brilliant's tutorials and turn them into exemplars of talent, why don't we simply outsource the job to SRM university? For if it were not for these consequences of privilege, many of the IITians and DU students would find that their "merit" is the same as the the son or daughter of their sweeper. Their SC/ST brethren also labour under the stigma that their surnames produce automatically and the fact that their parents are usually blue collar or menial workers who can neither afford nor understand what their children need to succeed academically. IIT Kanpur is mistaking the symptom of its existence to its cause.

The atrocities against Dalits, Tribals and minorities aren't just systemic and institutional but also violent.
http://www.sikhtimes.com/news_012806a.html
http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2323/stories/20061201004713000.htm
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/779892.cms
http://www.aiccindia.org/news/gohana_incident_probe_panel_seeks_action_against_district_officials.htm
http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/lsdeb/ls10/ses1/0409089101.htm

As one would notice, the violence isn't random but is brought to bear brutally when the oppressed stand up for their rights or show cognisance of their rights or show improvement in their lot beyond what is judged by the upper castes as agreeable.

The Indian Middle class is rife with hypocrisy. So are its constructs like the Indian media. Unlike Engels idea of the bourgeois, I refuse to give the Indian Bourgeois the credit for breaking down barriers and dismantling feudalism. The Indian bourgeois is more interested in keeping those barriers and constructing a modern version of feudalism.

Holding a mirror to yourself - Slumdog

The NYT tries to understand why we Indians hate Slumdog

To be honest, I didn’t think it was a great movie as far as Oscar nominated ones go. Considering the stilted english (as opposed to accented), the bad acting by the lead etc. But I did think it was an honest and plausible portrayal of the situation surrounding the characters.

I was surprised by some of my friends’ reaction to the movie. While they borrowed phrases like “poverty porn” and used the argument of western condescension which used tired old cliches like the taj, bachchan etc… they WERE honestly disturbed by the picture of India that the movie painted.
… which is endemic to the middle class and higher in India. Most of us have absolutely no idea how our drivers and housemaids and electricians live. Seeing them on the screen disturbs our “middle-class sentiments”. There is no acknowledgement that we, the middle class are a privileged 40-50 million in a country of a billion. We’re interested only in stories of Vinod Dham and Sabeer Bhatia and gossip about our business houses’ latest acquisitions abroad… and forwarding fake spam on how 30% of NASA is Indian and the value of the Hyderabad nawab’s fortune.

Helplessness? Apathy? Romanticisation of poverty to hide guilt? I don’t know but “Slumdog Millionaire” as an international phenomenon is discomfiting.

Again, most of the Indian middle class would like very much to subscribe to the right winger's idea of India. A great country where there aren't any cultural dissonants like Muslims and embarrassing truths like our Dalits. Where all of us live like the NRIs in the Karan Jonar-Yash Chopra movies. Which is why you'll find wide support for the "nationalist" right wing loonies of the sangh from the middle class. This is even more drastic in our NRI brethren who hypocritically would support all kinds of minority protection, anti-racism measures etc. in their adopted homes but would generously contribute moral and monetary support to the Sangh which does the exact opposite of supressing minoroties and glossing over our societies damnable truths like untouchability, casteism, indentured servitude and feudalism.

As for the organised protests and forced shutting of theaters, I tend to agree with Mr. Sinha’s analysis of our dear Hindutwadis attempting to deflect attention from their actions which for probably the first time are being seen on mainstream internation screens. Its an embarrassment to them. Movies like Bombay, Parzania and Black Friday might exist but that an open truth to be shared among us Indians and we'll then proceed to give it a cursory acknowledgement. But to be seen on the silver screen all around the world? And just when Advani is launching his web2.0 initiative? The right wingers are giving people around the world more credit than they deserve. They're assuming the people of the world or the NRIs will put two and two together and actually see that Advani is the same leader that helped inititate the embarassing scene of riots in Slumdog. Don't worry my dear saffronites, we resident Indians and much less our NRI brethren are all too caught up in fighting off the 100 Re. increase of our housemaid's salary to notice you a******s tearing our country apart.

The Sigma Protocol... in action.. in India

"...The Second World War was a conflict that had clear rights and wrongs and yet many of those involved were utterly indifferent to what was at stake. There were numerous corporations whose only concern was to maintain their operating margin. Some, alas, even viewed it as an oppotunity to be exploited-an opportunity to increase their profits. The victors never adequately came to grips with this legacy of corporate double dealing. It was never convenient to do so." Her sardonic half-smile reminded Ben of his brother's banked sense of outrage, his smouldering anger. "Why not?" "Too many American and British industries might have had to be seized for trading with the enemy, for collaboration. Better to sweep the problem under the carpet. The Dulles brothers, you know, made sure of it.


Fictional? Entirely. Believable? Almost. From the Sigma Protocol, a fictional book that stretches ideas and ideologies to their limits.

With their endorsement of Narendra Modi, some of the titans of Indian industry, including deeply respected ones like Ratan Tata have proved that capital knows no boundaries. Political and more importantly Moral.
Encouragement of this kind for hate-mongers and genocidal prima donnas like Modi spur and concretise the radicalisation of places like Gujarat. It provides the Modi-apologists and supporters with a ready excuse with which they deflect the attention from their atrocities.
An argument can be made for capital being agnostic to moral and political issues, which is in someways desirable too. But does the current issue make business sense?
From L.K. Advani's Blog
http://blog.lkadvani.in/uncategorized/how-gujarat-has-become-%E2%80%98vibrant%E2%80%99

Like all rhetorical BS coming from the BJP, he doesn't answer the main question in the title itself "How"
Instead he takes the easy way of describing its outcomes and crediting Modi for it. Are the Gujaratis so insecure that they can't realise that its them that's the reason for Gujarat being the industrial state it is? That they need to give credit to their development to Narendra Modi who has been in power for less than a decade? Are they willing to give up on their pioneering mercantile history of more than 400 years so that they can subscribe to Modi's version of Gujarati Asmita? I sincerely hope that isn't the case but the vast majority of responses of Gujaratis to Modi's antics in articles online and offline seems to prove otherwise.

"Good governance, Development and Security" is what Advani credits to Modi. The minorities, not just the muslims but the dalits and tribals have been marginalised further. Even China has a deppely ingrained policy of assimilating minorities so that they don't see themselves as having fallen back with respect to the majority community. Its a direct reason for social upheaval. We have a glaring example in the naxalite regions. Repressed communities WILL lash out eventually. It may be the communists who catalyse it, the missionaries might unwittingly consolidate the non-muslim minorities leading to a community-wide realisation of repression, the minorities might consolidate themselves behind a modern day Ambedkar or the democratic process might itself come in handy to consolidate them, Gujarat already being the birthplace of the Nav Nirmal movement. Irrespective of the cause, its an eventuality.

Business houses are supposed to be intelligent about the long term. Unlike us humans, in the long term, they're NOT dead. Do they really want to be mired in what is already shaping up to be the Hindu version of a Taliban state?

Business houses established in Gujarat should be looking to move out not the other way round. Its simple economic sense. People say that corruption is lesser in Gujarat but that is the newspaper version of the truth. Corruption is centralised and streamlined in Gujarat which makes it entrenched and harder to fight in the long term. Another point of view is that of course businesses USE corruption to further their ambitions, therefore it is only the more professional businesses that will need to keep off Gujarat. Those that do use underhand methods to further their businesses will find a readymade and friendly infrastructure in Gujarat.

Modi's Gujarat is unsustainable. As a social construct, it is a nightmare. As an economic construct it is dream... in the short run. Professional businesses intending to be in it for the long term and becoming global enterprises will do well to steer clear off the current state of Gujarat if they want to have sustainable businesses and do not want their names associated with a state that covertly promotes repression and is an international name for human and religious rights violations.

Rewarding Mediocrity

Ash and Akshay get Padmas. What's next? Bravery award for Raju? ... goes the MTV tickr

Spot on. Bollywood is filled with extremely un-creative people. A Hum Aapke Hain Kaun spawned a million clones. In any other movie industry, the HAHK phenomenon would be accepted as a meme and the industry would proceed to make a few clones with increasing sophistication. But no siree not bollywood. We'll make a few thousand clones all worse than the last. Anyone with half a brain can tell that the "Formula" only works if the next one is better but the marketers believe that Bigger is better. Script? screenplay? direction? huh? wazzat? pour money into glossy cinematography and other technical stuff imported from the southern film world, market ad nauseum and run away with the money to the bank after the weekend is over. Marriage dramas, "Phamily" kitsch, glossy gangsters, gangster comedy, encounter dramas etc. etc. are well abused memes. The latest one seems to be college gang chronology.

Getting back to Ash and Akshay... now what the hell is Ash's "contribution" to the Indian movie industry? Can she even act? Has she done critically acclaimed, hard to do, stereotype breaking, socially conscious roles? Has she been a force multiplier getting young women to look up to a forceful, conscionable personality? What the hell has she done except being the Bachchan bahu? Akshay while probably being more deserving (more of course is relative) has done nothing much either. He does more than the average bollywooders share of socially responsible stuff like his support of the mumbai constable's family, helping Indian sport by adopting wrestlers etc. but does that deserve a Padma for Art? The likes of Abhay Deol, Rahul Bose, Konkana Sen who are good versatile actors are few and far between. Even the average actors who can pull their weight at the box office like Priyanka, Akshay, Hrithik are scarce and actors who are both good, versatile and box office heavyweights is actually singular. Aamir.

This award is all the more unconscionable when juxtaposed by the blind-eye the awards have shown to our olympic pugilists. In a country of a Billion with fewer than 50 million middleclass where almost half the burden of emancipation of women, the poor and the socially downtrodden is taken up by activists and social workers can't we find people more worthy of a national award equivalent to a knighthood? Aishwarya and Akshay are my Knights? Are you bloody kidding me? We have so many cultures and art forms and you can't find a koothaadi or a lavani artiste? We have an exciting advertising industry that has been reaping awards, can't we award them any? If we can RTI the admission criteria for IIMs, we can RTI the award criteria for the awards.

That we need to relook if the Govt. is capable of judging Indians worty of celebration is a point taken for granted. But since the Padmas aren't going to go away anytime soon, we need to make the awards process transparent and the lobbying system banished.

Bollywood doesn't have a professional body to give awards. The supposedly impartial judges at say an IIFA can't even make the difference between Indian Cinema and Bollywood. And even if it did have an academy, the awards will probably go to incompetents like Kat Kaif and Karan-Chopra types. We might insititute a raspberry awards clone and award one for EVERY bollywood movie and actor except the 4 or 5 a year that make it past the average quality mark.

The Padma's and other such awards are supposed to be a celebration of excellence by Indians in various fields. You and I pay for it. Its time we started to demand accountability for our money in this too.

More on the Fourth Estate

Just saw Good Night, And Good Luck. Now this is a movie that has to be, HAS to be shown to every graduating media person.
I was impressed by Murrows statements here and there during the movie, irrespective of whether he really did say them or not or if he did, if he did so so eloquently. One of them that particularly impressed me was

"Let us dream to the extent of saying that on a given Sunday night the time normally occupied by Ed Sullivan is given over to a clinical survey of the state of American education, and a week or two later the time normally used by Steve Allen is devoted to a thoroughgoing study of American policy in the Middle East.
To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. Good night, and good luck."
addressing the people gathered, presumably to institute the Radio and Television News Directors Association (RTDNA) - Edward Murrow Awards.
The question of whether the struggle is lost or not is one that will require many many more pages by people more intelligent and involved than myself. But I've no doubt that it has indeed been lost.
The US has had a maturing television broadcasting industry for more than 6 decades now and provides the potential for the fastest maturity due to the sheer size of the country, its diverse communities and vibrant culture. And yes it has matured... but not in ways one would like it to be.
The niches provide sermons for the converted. Conservatives watch conservative channels and programs and the liberals watch their own. Latinos have their own channels and Indians log on to rediff.com for their dose. There is no cross pollination and there is no attempt either by the media or the consumers to cross pollinate. Blogs are even worse as they provide you with highly niche content and readers are even more fragmented here.
This is beginning to tell on India as well as the industry here has leapfrogged into the 21st century straight into US-style reporting with none of the pains and lessons learnt from puberty. We are unapolegetic about trying cases in the media. We are unapologetic about wrong reporting or plagiarising. We are unapologetic about carrying rumours.

Conservative Indians call the Indian media "liberal" and slanted towards "minorities", even while it is nothing of that kind. To be honest, editorialising with all the ills that it can bring is non-existent except in the Hindu, the Outlook and the pioneer, the first two of which are unabashedly liberal and the latter, unabashedly conservative.
The laughing stock of the agnostic media consumer, the old lady of Boribunder, is unabashedly "market driven", while its nothing of that sort. The marketers there assume the average Indian is an idiot and they fulfill their prophesy with content that matches the average idiot. Yet, even this reportage is termed "liberal". And nothing to say of the likes of NDTV which is supposedly anti-conservative, probably because it provides platforms where conservatives can be heard and be laughed at for the idiots that they usually are.
Sorry, I seem to be editorialising the post :D
Editorialising is such a temptation. But the fourth estate has to have some amount of restraint. To slant like Fox does is criminal.
The BBC and the Guardian both of which I highly respect faulted on the reporting of Zimbabwe due to Britain's involvement. Zimbabwe might be a tin-pot republic but the people of the world have a right to know what really is happening there without reporters giving their own slants to the reportage and prejudices showing through barely concealed contempt.
The NYT does something similar whenever Venezuela is involved. And its reporting on China is preposterous for the amount of bad press they give this country that has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. And so is its reporting of India which seems to be less than a dot on the map. And when it does report on India, we get condescending articles of cows on expressways and about BPOs.
Where, honest reportage? Where the maxim "I may not agree with you but I'll fight to death for your right to disagree with me". It chokes me to think that there ARE still people in this world for whom this maxim is internalised but it seems to me that they are completely drowned in a morass of "market driven" bullshit and disingenuous editorialising.
My disclaimer is disclosure that I'm unabashedly liberal and I read the Hindu, the Outlook, the NYT and the Guardian and watch NDTV and BBC; not because they're "liberal" but the quality of restraint on editorialising on all of these is very high and the editorialising is usually restricted to the editorial in the newspaper/magazines and opinion-programmes in the broadcasters. I'd also like to wonder, why it is that editorialisation is lower in liberal media.