The morning of 20th May, as I was sharing my morning cup of tea with my mother, she started chatting with me mostly to brief me about the things that had happened in the family and in our neighbourhood.
She broached the topic concerning a recently married
relative of ours not going right. After seeing my non-interest to participate
in the discussion, she changed the topic to the latest and most happening thing which has captivated the whole nation – the 2024
Election. Realising that most of her observations are a copy of
the narrative created by the local TV channels - each of which voices the
interest of one of the major political parties, I chose to caution her.
I asked her, why is she watching these channels which are out to manipulate her mind and influence her decisions and why
is she curious to know about the life of the relative over which we have no
influence or control to guide it for the better? Is it not a waste of time?
She was visibly upset. But was she an exception?
I think, all our mothers do talk about such general things. Do we
expect them to discuss jobless growth and income disparity in our country with
us? No. Every one of us indulges in such discussions occasionally in our free time; some more some less.
For us, it can
be a discussion, to the person being discussed, it's gossip.
Same day, by
early evening a Tweet from Rohit Sharma created a flutter in
the media. He directly blamed the
broadcaster Star Sports for intruding into the privacy of the players and releasing content that had nothing to do
with the game being played. It was a private conversation between his
teammates. He prayed for good sense to prevail and appealed to everyone
involved to show respect, sensitivity and maturity while dealing with an individual's right
to privacy and public curiosity. The channel realising the
insatiable appetite of the cricket crazy nation to know anything and everything
about their cricketing heroes publicised the conversation after being requested not to
do so, in their enthusiasm, not respecting where to fix the boundary of the viewers’ curiosity
before that turning voyeuristic which intrudes into peoples’ private
spaces.
Such invasions are commonplace now with the advent of easily
accessible and affordable communication devices. Unknown to us our
privacy is violated by many, and we are gleefully violating others’ space too.
Two incidents in one day. The first is about our
curiosity, how to stay curious and control it by directing it and regulating
it to give positive outcomes without damaging us and things around us. The
second is about how we are vulnerable to other’s curiosity and how they can or are manipulating
us to get their interest achieved.
Curiosity is not a bad thing.
Every journey of major scientific
discovery has begun by someone’s curiosity. The history of scientific discovery is filled with
stories of how individual curiosity has resulted in great scientific
discoveries that have optimized human efforts of that time and resulted in the overall well-being of society. One can’t be
curious about everything at once. Such curiosity is naturally drawn to
a specific topic based on one’s interests, experiences, and biases. The journey
gives us unknown knowledge and the chance to discover unplanned and unexpected
objects and results. That journey comes with its cost. It requires a great deal of focus, attention, time, and financial
resources.
We are generally
curious about famous people like politicians, sports personalities, cinema
stars and successful new-age businessmen; to know more about them and their private lives
beyond their work. If their authorised biographies
sell like hotcakes, their unverified salacious sides them make
rounds through gossip circuits and unregulated media. Many draw inspiration
from the various situations they tackled in
their lives and use them to manage
their own. This also has led to the existence of the
paparazzi culture which relentlessly tracks famous people and feeds
the hungry audience with the minute details of their private lives with photos
and saucy news creating a multitude of speculations. A casual dining
out with a male friend at a restaurant leads to a national debate about whether
everything is fine with her marriage. Excessive curiosity turns into obsession leading to
unrealistic expectations and develops a cult personality around
celebrities. This constant push and pull between the public interest and someone’s privacy
leads to an ethical dilemma for the news outlets that thrive on TRPs,
journalists who gather and post such stories and the fans who consume them.
If curiosity is
good, unbounded curiosity comes packaged with negatives. Unethical exploration
and exploration of the unknown and unknowable can
frustrate us and lead us down paths that are harmful to us and others.
Every man is
born curious. Scientists are curious, and so also, the cat in our house, and
the monkey sitting on your balcony. What is the difference between us?
When we pick up
a particular book to read, turn on a TV and tune in to a particular channel to
watch a particular show or the particular anchor of a particular news, pick up
a particular newspaper, choose a particular item to read in detail, trawl the
internet, scroll the phone screen for a particular type of content, call a
particular person to discuss another particular person, behind our general
curiosity, we are naturally drawn to specific topic based on interests,
experiences, and biases. It shows a predictable pattern. Our innate instincts
drag us to what now can be called as Voyeuristic curiosity. A conscious mind
can know when he wanders off from the track of positive curiosity to
voyeuristic curiosity.
Curiosity and
voyeurism offer a very thin strip of land to navigate between, especially
when it comes to other people.
Ideally,
curiosity about a famous person is
fuelled by a genuine interest in
their work, accomplishments, or public persona. This information is often
readily available through interviews, documentaries, or public appearances. But
when curiosity ventures into seeking out private details or experiences a
person hasn't chosen to share, it edges towards voyeurism. A
healthy curiosity often seeks to learn, understand, or appreciate someone
better. But voyeuristic curiosity is often driven by a desire for excitement,
titillation, or a sense of power over someone's privacy. Curiosity can be a positive force,
inspiring fans to emulate good qualities, support causes, or appreciate a person's talent.
However, voyeurism can have a negative impact, causing emotional distress,
damaging reputations, and fostering an unhealthy obsession.
Many of us are
slowly becoming aware of our vulnerability to someone else’s curiosity.
Big companies like Google, Meta, X, and Instagram gather real-time data from our smart
gadgets and sell it to the marketeers at a price or charge a fee as a
marketplace. Unknown to us, newspapers, advertisements, social media platforms
set traps to know more about the behavioural patterns of our consumption
choices, preferences, and lifestyle, and income to drive traffic to our screens
to grab our attention. Smart advertisement makers have realised the
chink in the armour of their target audience and use the potential of social
media to take advantage of this weakness and create contents to control and
manipulate people’s minds towards a product, misinformation, and a
political support base. The whole game of marketing involves discovering and
exploiting these cracks and biases of human psychology and planting their seed
to grow inside their target audience turning them
their slaves.
We are privy to
the power of WhatsApp and WhatsApp University and the damages it can cause. Thousands
of digital warriors with pseudonyms were
made to sit in front of their
terminals to produce and push content to your screen which used
an algorithm that exploited these patterns of yours. Highly educated and rational people these days are
seen forwarding false, and doctored videos even without checking their
veracity. If there were a thousand trolls in the IT Cell a decade back who
were pushing one agenda, now every house has one or two who are fighting
a non-existent enemy forgetting the immediate issues that concern him. Unknown
to them their unbounded curiosity has slowly killed their
rationale and turned them into zombies or puppets who are controlled by
an invisible force to achieve his agenda.
Ultimately, the
line between curiosity and voyeurism is subjective. By considering the
factors mentioned above, one can determine if his interest
in another person is healthy and respectful, or if it's veering into an intrusive and potentially
harmful territory. A healthy balance is the key. Curiosity can be a positive force that fosters
connection, but it's important to be respectful of others' privacy and boundaries.
_ *
_
No comments:
Post a Comment