The IPL controversy: NO WINNER

Three years ago, when Lalit Modi declared the first season of the Indian Premier League(IPL) open,he became a household name. The brain behind the $4 billion project,the promoter of Modi Enterprises, laughed all his way to the bank.

Then came Shashi Tharoor,former UN employee,diplomat and eminent writer. He contested the 2009 Lok Sabha elections on Congress Party ticket from Kerala and won. He was appointed as MoS(Minister of State),External Affairs by the Prime Minister.

It all began when the IPL decided to sell the Kochi franchise. It was purchased by Rendezvous Sports World(which is a consortium of leading companies) for $333 million. Later,Modi on his twitter account revealed the names of the promoters of the Kochi team. He also revealed that a Union Minister had unethically intervened in the auction process.

Tharoor,then defended himself by accusing Modi of tarnishing his image. Modi hit back by stating that one of the Kochi promoters Sunanda Pushkar, who owned $70 million worth of sweat equity, was in fact a proxy for Tharoor.

The IPL had been in controversies since day 1- match fixing allegations,manhandling of cheerleaders,Pakistan players auction etc. But this scandal shook Modi,BCCI and the Union Government.

The question we must ask here is: WHO GAINED?

Lalit Modi was sacked by the BCCI as IPL Chairman,despite the strong support of the franchise owners. The man,who took the world by surprise 3 years ago,had been disgraced. The IPL is considered to be the apple of Modi's eye. He singlehandedly turned the project into a billion dollar enterprise. Once the most powerful man in Indian cricket,Modi has now filed a lawsuit against the BCCI. But those who idolized Lalit Modi, now doubt his methods.

Shashi Tharoor, former Under-Secretary of the UN,famous writer and youth icon had to resign as MoS following widespread protests. Tharoor has been quite unpopular ever since he won the Lok Sabha seat. Earlier,he termed Air India's "Economy Class" as "CATTLE CLASS". He also criticized the foreign policy of Pandit Nehru, much to the dislike of his party members.He also criticized the new visa policy introduced by the government. Hence, Tharoor is no winner here.

Sunanda Pushkar had to come out of hiding and decline the $70 million sweat equity. She resigned from the Rendezvous consortium and had to clarify that Tharoor was just a friend rather than boyfriend.

The BCCI sacked its "Don King". BCCI had to face a lot of humiliation and criticism for not regulating the IPL properly. It now has to deal with a suit filed by Modi.(and 1000+ pages of Modi's statements) Clearly, the BCCI lost its lucky DUCK. Subsequent Investigations have shown that many BCCI officials are actually stakeholders in many teams,which is against the rules and regulations of the IPL.

The Union government became a laughing stock. Following Tharoor's resignation,two other minitsers- Sharad Pawar and Praful Patel-were accused of misusing their power in favour of the IPL. The opposition openly panned the government. Many MPs wanted the IPL to be nationalized.

The players too suffered a lot. Rather than focusing on their on field performance, they concentrated on their OFF-SCREEN persona: The Late night parties, the fashion shows, their hairstyles, their clothes and of course, advertisements. Their health along with their performance deteriorated. Yuvraj Singh, once respected as one of the batsmen in the world, was dropped from the national squad due to his poor form. The players were panned even more after their humiliating first round exit from the T20 World Cup.

The franchise owners too, are biting their nails, thanks to the investigations of the income tax departments. The promoters of Kolkata Knight Riders were asked to submit proper vouchers and account balances, after the I-T department found many important documents to be missing. The Rajasthan Royals franchise was asked to submit a list of its stakeholders. So, the franchise owners too had something, if not everything, to lose.

But the spectators and lovers of the game- which is no less than a RELIGION in our country- had a lot to lose. Many of them felt cheated and betrayed. The malpractices of the IPL shook them. Many blame Modi and the BCCI for infiltrating the beautiful game with dirty politics and money and glamour. Even the government was not spared by the people.

So, who gained from this great IPL fiasco? It wasn't the brain behind it all- Lalit Modi. It wasn't the once respected diplomat Tharoor. It wasn't the richest sports body in the world- the BCCI. The Union Government had no clear answer to the staunch corruption allegations by the opposition. Many players were dropped from the national squad and were panned for their improper behaviour. The promoters have a lot to answer the I-T department.

"No one gained from the great IPL tamasha"- this statement is not fully true.

Amidst all this, one silent "player" gained quite a lot. It all started with a social networking site. It ended with the fall of once respected people. This "player" is a website called TWITTER. As people were being questioned,sacked,panned and investigated, Modi,the franchise owners, the players and the spectators all expressed their views and opinions through this micro-blogging site.
Score: TECHNOLOGY-1, MAN-0

THE HIDDEN APARTHEID

India has always advocated human rights and social equality. It has always supported the countries fighting against apartheid. In fact, India is known to be a “Defender of Social Rights”. But India is a developing country. A developing country has to eradicate all its problems in order to grow. Several issues have been raised by many people. But there are some issues, people have forgotten or rather want to forget. One such issue is growing apartheid in the 21th century.

Fair skin is believed to be the symbol of purity and aristocracy. It is believed to be the ladder to success and happiness. This is prominent especially in the marriage market and the matrimonial columns.

“WANTED Extremely Beautiful and Fair Complexioned Girl for handsome IIT Graduate.”

If we look at any matrimonial site in India all profiles would self-describe them as fair, attractive etc… but none of them would call themselves dark. But, majority of Indians are brown rather than fair.

Don’t dark boys and girls deserve to get married? Why this biasness or preference for fair complexioned? People also get over excited whenever they see a fair skinned foreigner. They show off and couldn’t stop staring at them.

It is not only the marriage market that fair complexioned is desired. Any glamorous field, be it media, acting, airlines, hotels etc requires so called beautiful, fair and handsome people. Don’t dark/wheatish complexioned people fit that definition?

This has given rise to the use of fairness creams in India. The ads for these creams showing girls getting jobs or getting married after using these creams should be discontinued. One such ad shows a girl using a fairness cream goes on to win a dance contest. I have only one question-

WHAT HAS FAIR SKIN GOT TO DO WITH DANCE?

Does that mean that she wasn't a good dancer when she was dark? Or does it mean that only fair skinned people are talented and successful?

Our national obsession with fair skin is perhaps a hangover of white colonial dominance. The foreigners inculcated in us the belief that they were superior because of their fair skin. In fact, much of the colonization happened on the premise that white skin was superior and now this has been so ingrained into our mentalities. Not to mention all those fairy tales that you read of princesses who were fair as “snow” and beautiful as “rose”.

What is funnier is that India is a country where majority of the people are black/brown rather than fair.

Decades ago, a know-all neighbor of mine commented: "If a girl is fair complexioned and the boy is earning well, it's certainly a perfect match. Nothing else matters." By and large, this is still the common yardstick to measure qualities of a groom. Education, job, family background, talent and even moral values, are often all set aside in favour of bride's fair skin. It's a saving grace when all qualities are lacking. Bollywood heroines and heroes croon gore gore/, banke chhore, gora gora/ chand sa mukhra, goriya tu kahan chali, gaon ki gori, etc.

Ayurvedic fairness creams have extracts of roses, aloe Vera, walnuts, oranges, saffron, licorice, wheat germs, and even pearls. Niacin amide, titanium dioxide and hydrolyzed milk proteins are some of chemicals contained in fairness cosmetics. Dermatologists say that chemicals can cause unseen damage at the cellular level like sloughing. Basic skin tone cannot be changed. Milk proteins can lighten it to some extent and that too temporarily, after prolonged use. Fairness creams, claiming to transform dark ducklings into white swans, fail to deliver their promised results but they do sell hope! Even beauty saloons do a brisk business by applying bleach packs, churning out temporarily fair women. Bleaching creams' key chemical ingredients are hydrogen peroxide and ammonium bicarbonate, often resulting in temporary itching, reddening and burning of skin. The fairness cream business earned over $ 200 million in 2007 and over $ 300 million by May 2008!!

William Blake's famous poem The Little Black Boy reveals that ultimately the colour of one's skin does not matter at all, but it is one's deeds that count, when one goes to Almighty after death.

“My mother bore me in the southern wild,

And I am black, but oh my soul is white!

White as an angel is the English child,

But I am black, as if bereaved of light.”

When the Australian Cricket Team accused us of being racists, we defended ourselves and the people rampaged and burned effigies of the Aussie cricketers. But when one ponders over these allegations, he finds that yes, it is true.

It is unfortunate that a country which worships Goddess Kali and Lord Krishna (who is also called Ghanshyam), is so much obsessed with fair skin. If being black, is a curse, then people like Morgan Freeman, Barrack Obama and Oprah Winfrey and Indians like Bipasha Basu, Nana Patekar, etc would not have been popular.

I, too, want to be fair and handsome. But not by skin….but by heart.

POPULAR BLACK SKINNED INDIANS

· Nana Patekar, 3 time National Award winner.

· Late Smita Patil, a veteran actress.

· Bipasha Basu, India’s popular actress and model today.

· Barkha Dutt, leading news reporter.

· APJ Abdul Kalam, former President of India.

And many others who’ve reached the pinnacle of their glory not by the colour of their skin but by their hard work, sincerity , perseverance and determination.

NICK CLEGG: Britain's Most Powerful??

Thirteen years of Labour Party rule finally ended in Britain and how!? The 2010 elections proved to be one of the most intense and close ballots in Britain's democratic history. And the results? It was shocking and unprecedented! A hung parliament! Britain's many years of two party politics suffered a heart attack! What's more intriguing (and partly,amusing) is the fact that the key to the 10,Downing Street was now in the hands of the Liberal Democrats.

Nick Clegg was definitely the person of the moment. The small,underestimated player in the game,was now the godfather of the system. With 57 seats,his party emerged as kingmakers. Thus,began a series of buttering & sweet talks,back room deals and compromises. The "auction" for Clegg's support was won by the Conservatives. But only,by a whisker.

Conservative leader David Cameron was chosen as Britain's new Prime Minister and Clegg became his Deputy. However,things won't be the same as they were. The Conservatives have dropped their proposal to revise the inheritance tax,which would've supported the wealthy and affluent families. Cameron has even declared that his government will look into voting reforms,a strong demand of Clegg and the Liberal Democrats.

Same thing happened in 2004 in India. The UPA alliance had to woo the Left Front and had to compromise on a lot of issues. This,eventually,led to no confidence motions,nosebleeds and the downfall of the Left in the 2009 elections.

Clegg will have a big role to play in the government. Bigger than David Cameron. This is the one golden opportunity that the Liberal Democrats wanted.They now have to show their mettle to the world. They must act wisely and with full responsibility,else they will have the same fate the Left had. Surely,Clegg doesn't want that.

A strong reason for such a shocking result is the US televised debate style which the British system decided to adopt in this election.

The three candidates- David Cameron,Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown- participated in a series of televised debates.This,hugely,benefited the Liberal Democrats and their young leader Clegg,who strongly labelled his two rivals as "two pawns of the same old system" and called for a change. His oratory skills won his many fans and thus began "Cleggmania",something,that happened in 2008 with Barack Obama in the US.

But,unlike Obama,Clegg's party failed to achieve the magical number of seats But they won enough to be the 'BIG DADDY'.

Is Nick Clegg the next big thing n British politics? Can he capitalize the moment and turn things in his favour? Will he be able to win more seats in the nest elections? Or will "Cleggmania" wear off? Only time can tell.

But,as of today,Nick Clegg is surely,the most powerful person in the British politics!