A DRIVE THROUGH KERALA NH
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Monday, October 16, 2006
PITCH REPORT BY TONY BLAIR
It is a matter of pride for the officials of SET Max channel, that the ingredient they included just to add spice to the show is also entertaining the viewers in a mission to establish herself as an idiot. I'm speaking about the performance of Mandira Bedi in the cricket discussion (extra innings) prior to the commencement of the match (15th Oct), in which she addressed Tony Greig as Tony Blair. Her facial expression certifies that she was confident of her statement. What to be inferred from this is that she knows neither of them. Such an instance is a blot on the channel's reputation. As a precaution, while using such gimmicks, the channel can telecast the program as deferred live giving a margin of 4-5 seconds so that they can monitor such craps.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
COLA BAN
The immediate cause that lead to the 'cola-ban' demand is the reports about the presence of pesticide residues in colas.
For:
Colas are given wide publicity through their ads as 'refreshing drinks'. How many of you have got refreshed after taking cola? Is there anyone who have not experienced a slight burning sensation in the belly after consuming such drinks? The colas were said to be 100% safe. But the companies have deceived the people of a country as a whole. It is seen that in their home countries, colas comply to the safety standards, whereas in countries like India they supply substandard goods. This mediocrity points to the discriminative attitude of the corporate companies. Another concern is the side-effects of the colas. If a tooth is put in cola for some days, it becomes coloured. The stain is not a big issue. But the acidic nature of these drinks leads to the formation of pits on the enamel, the hardest substance in human body. The 'clear-water' beverages such as Sprite, Mountain Dew, etc. are less acidic compared to colas. Indiscriminate exploitation of underground water is yet another problem. Each litre of cola requires more than two litres of water. Millions of litres of groundwater is drawn everyday which seriously affect the water level in the wells and ponds. The Plachimada agitation was the result of such a development.
Against:
The demand for the banning of cola is not rational. If one feels that cola is not good for health, he may refrain from consuming it, and he may promulgate the idea or file a lawsuit. If cola poses health hazards and needs to be banned, then why cigarette and alcohol which are more injurious to health, not banned? Is it because the high tax imposed on them is a main source of revenue for the government? Then, if there is clear evidence against colas, the same stand may be taken here also - a tax hike and a label bearing statutory warning. For majority people in India, cola is an occasional drink. When compared this with a yearly average of 400-500 bottles-a-person in developed countries, they bring in virtually no harm to people here. What does the tooth-test have to do in real life? Even the worst effect found out by the test could be overcome by just washing the mouth thoroughly after taking the cola.
The immediate cause that lead to the 'cola-ban' demand is the reports about the presence of pesticide residues in colas.
For:
Colas are given wide publicity through their ads as 'refreshing drinks'. How many of you have got refreshed after taking cola? Is there anyone who have not experienced a slight burning sensation in the belly after consuming such drinks? The colas were said to be 100% safe. But the companies have deceived the people of a country as a whole. It is seen that in their home countries, colas comply to the safety standards, whereas in countries like India they supply substandard goods. This mediocrity points to the discriminative attitude of the corporate companies. Another concern is the side-effects of the colas. If a tooth is put in cola for some days, it becomes coloured. The stain is not a big issue. But the acidic nature of these drinks leads to the formation of pits on the enamel, the hardest substance in human body. The 'clear-water' beverages such as Sprite, Mountain Dew, etc. are less acidic compared to colas. Indiscriminate exploitation of underground water is yet another problem. Each litre of cola requires more than two litres of water. Millions of litres of groundwater is drawn everyday which seriously affect the water level in the wells and ponds. The Plachimada agitation was the result of such a development.
Against:
The demand for the banning of cola is not rational. If one feels that cola is not good for health, he may refrain from consuming it, and he may promulgate the idea or file a lawsuit. If cola poses health hazards and needs to be banned, then why cigarette and alcohol which are more injurious to health, not banned? Is it because the high tax imposed on them is a main source of revenue for the government? Then, if there is clear evidence against colas, the same stand may be taken here also - a tax hike and a label bearing statutory warning. For majority people in India, cola is an occasional drink. When compared this with a yearly average of 400-500 bottles-a-person in developed countries, they bring in virtually no harm to people here. What does the tooth-test have to do in real life? Even the worst effect found out by the test could be overcome by just washing the mouth thoroughly after taking the cola.
Monday, September 25, 2006
COEDUCATION
The question is "Whether Coeducation Necessary or Not?".
Coeducation refers to boys and girls studying together. There's nothing wrong in it. The point of discussion is that whether there is anything good in it.
Arguments For:
Coeducation brings up the feeling of equality between boy and girl in the minds of students. The sexes form the society and since man, being a social animal, their interaction becomes vital for the existence of the society. As far as a student is concerned, the need for social interaction is less. He studies the primary lessons on mingling with people from the class room itself. It is quite usual that those who studied in boys' or girls' only schools exhibit shyness in interacting with the opposite sex. The people who study in such institutions till graduation find it difficult to approach the other sex with a free mind. There are no offices which offers employment to either men or women only. Then why this discrimination in education field only.
Arguments Against:
Coeducation has no noted influence in the mindset of the student community. It is true that the circumstances in which a person grows determines his character. In this case, shyness if any, attributed to the absence of coeducation exists, does not last long if one comes to mingle with other. There is no point in arguing that coeducation is the only cure to character. According to our constitution one should keep a barrier in mingling with others which seeks nothing more than a civic sense. It is the duty of teachers to keep students aware of such virtues. The 'not-mixed' group can have the advantage of more open discussions in this topic. It's true that there are no offices which offers employment to either men or women only; but there are educational institutions. Why?? The answer is simple - children are not mature. Therefore a distinction is necessary atleast in their growing stage.
Remarks:
It is parents who admit their kids to schools and they have to act thoughtfully since children are not in a position to decide which alternative they should select.
The neutral stand is that children may do their schooling in a 'non-mixed' instituion and they may opt for coeducation for graduation or post graduation.
The question is "Whether Coeducation Necessary or Not?".
Coeducation refers to boys and girls studying together. There's nothing wrong in it. The point of discussion is that whether there is anything good in it.
Arguments For:
Coeducation brings up the feeling of equality between boy and girl in the minds of students. The sexes form the society and since man, being a social animal, their interaction becomes vital for the existence of the society. As far as a student is concerned, the need for social interaction is less. He studies the primary lessons on mingling with people from the class room itself. It is quite usual that those who studied in boys' or girls' only schools exhibit shyness in interacting with the opposite sex. The people who study in such institutions till graduation find it difficult to approach the other sex with a free mind. There are no offices which offers employment to either men or women only. Then why this discrimination in education field only.
Arguments Against:
Coeducation has no noted influence in the mindset of the student community. It is true that the circumstances in which a person grows determines his character. In this case, shyness if any, attributed to the absence of coeducation exists, does not last long if one comes to mingle with other. There is no point in arguing that coeducation is the only cure to character. According to our constitution one should keep a barrier in mingling with others which seeks nothing more than a civic sense. It is the duty of teachers to keep students aware of such virtues. The 'not-mixed' group can have the advantage of more open discussions in this topic. It's true that there are no offices which offers employment to either men or women only; but there are educational institutions. Why?? The answer is simple - children are not mature. Therefore a distinction is necessary atleast in their growing stage.
Remarks:
It is parents who admit their kids to schools and they have to act thoughtfully since children are not in a position to decide which alternative they should select.
The neutral stand is that children may do their schooling in a 'non-mixed' instituion and they may opt for coeducation for graduation or post graduation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
