Malayan

Malayan is also in love with a girl played by Shammu. Director M P Gopi’s decision to lend the romantic scenes some decidedly unfunny humour robs the movie of its emotional vitality.
 
Karan’s character is stuck with near-angelic qualities, which can be as irritating as the manic, cliched villainy of his arch-rivals. The shrill, ennui-inducing way the message of loyalty and the need for hope for the toiling masses is delivered at end (you have to be awake till the climax if you want experience the slow progression from mere irritation to utter ridiculousness) also falls flat.

And so, even as the debate on the new wave rages on, it is clear that the challenge is not from the more conventional forms of film-making, but from the rotten parts of the ‘movement’ itself.

The world has certainly seen singers just as good as Michael Jackson, who died on June 25. Bob Dylan, Elvis Presley and The Beatles are all just as revered. Jackson’s lyrics are certainly not the most deep or complex among songwriters. His dance was capable of sending a thrill down the spine of millions of people, but there are other performers who are just as good. Jackson’s singing voice while instantly recognizable and versatile was certainly good, but was it the best in the history of pop music? Certainly not. So what is that which makes Jackson’s place unique in the annals of pop?  What was it in Jackson that his death that triggered a worldwide outpouring of grief? What is it that makes Jackson the most consummate performer of all time, someone who has sold 750 millions records across the world?

Jackson was born in Indiana in the US in 1958. He was just 50 when he died. His body had been constantly abused by drugs and quirky dietary habits. Years ago, Jackson’s quest to have a dancer’s body had left him anorexic. He also suffered from a disease which turned his skin pale, often requiring him in later years to wear an umbrella to sheild it from the sun. From morphine to valium, Jackson is reported to have been addicted to a host of drugs. Though the exact cause of his death is uncertain, the abuse his body took certainly brought a quicker end to his life.

As the lead singer of Jackson 5, the youngest in the group consisting of Michael and his brothers, Jackson shot into fame at a tender of age of 10. He was precocious and extraordinarily gifted. In videos shot of the group performing, it is impossible to take your eyes off Michael. His high-pitched voice, which would mature but remain quite shrill over the years, was nevertheless versatile and sweet. In 1971, Jackson went solo with the album Ben. But it was Thriller released in 1982 that made Jackson an universally recognized artist.

It was Thriller that made Jackson actor Prabhu Deva’s idol. It was Thriller that inspired an unknown number of similar dance sequences in Tamil cinema, some of them choreographed by Deva. It was Thriller, which sold a world record 100 million albums, that put Jackson on the cultural map in India, making him an inspiration for every teen in the country. Even those who had never heard of pop music until Thriller knew Jackson. In the US, Thriller’s 14-minute video, produced by Jackson and his longtime friend Quincy Jones, started the music video revolution and when aired on MTV became a turning point for the channel. Overnight, the music video went from being a promotional tool used to boost CD and cassette sales to an artistic medium in its own right.

In death, Jackson would similarly change the shape of the media. News of Jackson’s death, which was first reported by the website TMZ, owned by Time Warner, created such a surge of visitors on the Internet that nearly silenced it. TMZ reportage was so fast that it beat the official coroner’s announcement of Jackson’s death by nearly six minutes. Google reports that the sudden rise in visitors to its news portal had initially caused it to fear a massive attack on its servers. Twitter, the fledging micro-blogging tool, too crashed with a flood of tweets from people inquring about Jackson’s fate. Wikipedia has reported that its page on Jackson has had the maximum number of hits in its eight-year history.

But fame for Jackson came at a punitive price. Jackson would in later years reveal that his childhood was torturous. His father Joseph Jackson, who was in the show business, often abused Michael, physically and mentally. Years later, in 1993, Jackson was accused of child sexual abuse, charges that would surface again in 2005 resulting in a trial. Though he was acquitted, Jackson’s image would never be the same again. Accusations that he slept with children at Neverland Ranch, the home he had created for himself (based on the Neverland in Peter Pan) were so endlessly repeated that nobody at the end cared whether they were true or false. At least a few may have been forgiven in death, but during the time of his trial, the world incensed by relentless and often untruthful media coverage, poured hatred on Jackson. The artist himself was responsible for some of the bewilderment he caused. Right from the 1980s, Jackson planted controversial stories about him in the media, including one in which he was reported to have been sleeping inside a chamber that supposedly would slowed his aging process. These incredulous stories too did their fair share in harming Jackson’s public image.

debt running into millions of dollars may actually be negated by the surge of emotion for him, which has fueled the sales of his records. Obit writers have spend columns writing about his glove, his dance, his music and the most difficult to understand of all this: the artist himself. Jackson surpassed all the Rock greats because he was the best at packaging himself. His signature was so etched into his music, his jerky dance movements, his moonwalk, that sequined glove, that vulgar move he made to grab his crotch, and even the shrill cries that often punctuated his songs. Jackson was the sort of artist where the whole was more than a sum of all those parts. It is perhaps why in these days we keep returning him. To decipher him, one has to concede, is impossible.

The media has, by and large, a highly non-serious outlook towards the critical issue of global warming. The sustained and often painstaking coverage of the increase in temperature of the world’s near-surface air and its oceans seem elusive to the mainstream media. Driven by forces of advertising and marketing that demand a continuing increase in readership or audience, the media ignores the issue almost completely.

Global warming also requires that the coverage be over large periods of time. Covering it can be done only if dedicated mediapersons are delegated to the task. As is the case with investigative reports which traditionally used to be done in teams and after voluminous research, the coverage of global warming is also facing a dwindling media attention.

The primary man-made cause of global warming is the burning of fossil
fuels. We are taking energy stored over hundreds of millions of years
in the form of coal, gas and oil, and releasing it suddenly. This
causes global warming, and there is a pass-along effect. Since glaciers
and snow reflect sunlight but sea water absorbs it, the more the ice
melts, the more of the sun’s energy is retained by the sea.

The ’someday-somewhere’ nature of the story, mediapersons covering the beat report, prevent editors from give the news front page attention. In the case of television with its constant demand for eyeballs, global warming as a urgent story that needs to be reported, and constantly so, simply does not happen. TV is addicted to breaking news: coverage of terrorism, crime and political developments hold thrall while an issue of urgent attention goes unreported.

The common man’s perception of global warming seems to be that the issue is best left to scientists. Even in a worse case scenario, studies have shown that the increase in temperature is slightly over six degree Celsius over the 21st century. But it could also be as low as only a degree increase in mean temperature. This difference which is largely due to the variation is sensitivity to greenhouse gases that various models include. A slam dunk case that global warming exists and it is an urgent issue has still not been made. Many people continue to debunk the theory, and the media has a large role in shaping the common perception towards what is in reality a grave danger.

Differences also continue to exist over whether global warming is causes by human activity and therefore can be shaped by man. Coverage of the need for tapping alternative energy sources such the wind and the sun is also not given the attention is deserves.

Anyone familiar with the dilemma around the coverage of global warming will tell you that the question is essentially a simple one. Does the coverage of the issue exhibit a diffidence towards it by the common man or is the media inherently responsible? In other words, does the media bury the coverage of global warming because we won’t view it or read it? Some believe that the media has a responsibility towards informing its readership or audience of an issue that most certainly concern them. Others, and they seem to larger in number, see the media as a vehicle for advertisements, and therefore has no concern towards the people.

Though we can’t shy away from the fact that the issue is difficult to cover because of its very nature, there exists a persuasive case why the issue needs to covered. I believe that global warming as a story will eventually provide gains for the media but they would be long term. Only a TV channel or a newspaper willing to invest in the coverage will see returns.

Also the media is bogged down by the issue of objectivity. This rule, that journalists are today taught in journalism schools, has it that the reporter should always cover both sides of the story. This means the opinion of a smaller number of scientists, whose credentials may or may not be in question, is greatly amplified. These scientists may even be funded by carbon-based industry interests, but journalists in pursuit of objectivity often quote these voices, disreputable as they are. Balanced coverage does not mean accurate coverage. In the quest to report competing points of view, journalist actually sacrifice accuracy when reporting this issue.while reporting issues of science, to present competing view points as if they had equal scientific weight can be misleading. As a result whether global warming exists or not becomes a contentious issue.

However, there can be virtually no doubt over the issue of global warming. The United Nations-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has consistently said that human activities will lead to an increase in temperature of the earth’s surface and that the ocean’s level can increase by as much as 35 inches. This can submerge countries if not vast tracts of land.

Ross Gelbspan, drawing from his 31-year career as a reporter and editor, charges in his books The Heat Is On and Boiling Point
that a failed application of the ethical standard of balanced reporting
on issues of fact has contributed to inadequate press coverage of
global warming.

So like Mark Twain said, What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know. It’s what we know for sure that just isn’t so

I remember listening to the music from the movie, Thiruda Thiruda, one of A R Rahman’s early works in Tamil. This was before his graduation to Bollywood and at the time was one of his best albums. Blue, Rahman’s first after bringing home the Oscars, shares a similarity with TT. You possibly can’t get the music the first few times you listen to it. I am playing it on the loop now and though the music isn’t bad, it is not a patch on Rahman’s earlier works. Download it instead of buying the album, if you can.

Just saw the video of Walter Cronkite announcing the death of JFK. News gathering, it is apparent, was harder those days. The death of the president is not confirmed for over half an hour after its occurence. But what stuck me was the sanity that prevails in the coverage. The number of times that Cronkite makes it clear that the news is not confirmed. The way he stays so unflappable. He doesn’t, contrary to most TV news coverage in India these days, drive anyone hysterical. No wonder he is remembered in this fashion.