Share this page!

Sarayu Pani Profile picture
Twitter logo
1 May, 4 tweets, 1 min read
Poor dear. Apparently things were so terrible, he was forced to jet off to the UK. 😢
thetimes.co.uk/article/adar-p…
The Times is very upset with us for being mean to our billionaires
Yikes- who’s going to chop of your head, Adar? Do tell!
And there’s much more guff in the article.

Good to remember that today as state governments have been refused stock of the vaccine, private hospital chains that pay significantly more, have been given supplies.

So yeah, worlds smallest violin etc etc.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Sarayu Pani

Sarayu Pani Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @sarayupani

Sarayu Pani Profile picture
30 Apr
The “give them what they want to hear” media model is not new. It’s was what spurred Bennet Coleman’s (Times Group) rapid growth in the late 90s and early noughties.

But it’s important to understand fully how it has harmed all of us and how that harm began before 2014
Thread

+
First - it created a vicious feedback loop.

We’ve always been aware of communalism in our society. But the fact that you didn’t see it portrayed on television or in major newspapers made its expression limited in day to day affairs. It wasn’t “normal” or civilised.

+
Of course it would break through from time to time around festivals or rumours or specific events. But it wasn’t openly expressed in workplaces and social conversations.

+
Read 16 tweets
Sarayu Pani Profile picture
27 Apr
Is anyone seeing these stories in Indian papers? Some of this just sounds like plain coercion.

+
Another one
This thread
Read 4 tweets
Sarayu Pani Profile picture
23 Apr
At the end of the day sports stars, movie stars and other celebrities are all in the business of monetising our emotions. They convert our adulation into wealth for themselves

The smarter ones give a small portion of that money back to the community.
+
It’s an investment - that money then generates more adulation which they can monetise further.

Some use their platform for genuine good, but that’s the exception not the norm. Most just raise their voices when they know that will generate more adulation at minimal cost

+
When there is a cost involved to raising their voice, they weigh it. Carefully. Is angering a authoritarian government in India worth the adulation it will get you? If it isn’t, they don’t speak. An elephant in an opposition ruled state is an easy win- so they speak.

+
Read 5 tweets
Sarayu Pani Profile picture
23 Apr
Putting together the must-read Bobde retirement articles as I find them so that when we have more time, we can sit back and savour each zinger.

+
By @gautambhatia88
By Sanjay Hegde in @BloombergQuint

bloombergquint.com/law-and-policy…
Read 5 tweets
Sarayu Pani Profile picture
22 Feb
On March 3, 1921, Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Shaukat Ali visited the Nankana Sahib Gurudwara near Lahore. They dropped everything relating to non-cooperation on receiving a wire that informed them of the massacre and rushed to Lahore.

Gandhi spoke to the congregation.
"It seems almost unbelievable that not a man died at the hands of the Akali party. Did not the brave men who were armed with kirpans and battle-axes retaliate even in self-defence? If they did not, it is an event that must electrify the whole world."
"I hope that you will not take the credit of the bravery for the Sikhs only, but that you will regard it as an act of national bravery. The martyrs have died not to save their own faith merely but to save all religions from impurity."
Read 5 tweets
Sarayu Pani Profile picture
30 Dec 20
Looking at the stories coming out of China, it’s increasingly clear that we were rather shortsighted in 1999 in fighting to keep labour standards out of the mandate of the WTO.

A thread
In 1996, in the inaugural WTO ministerial in Singapore the US tried to introduce what would be called a “social clause” in multilateral trade agreements. This would make certain labour standards mandatory in all member countries.

+
The motion failed in Singapore. It was defeated mostly by developing countries who saw it as a means to negate their low cost labour advantage. They argued it amounted to using labour standards as a form of protectionism.

(An understandable argument at the time.)

+
Read 17 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @sarayupani has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @sarayupani!

Read all threads by @sarayupani