We are anonymous, we are legion

Future Value of Data

Admin — 2018-01-17T00:32:50Z

Carnegie India with support of Facebook organized a workshop in Bengaluru on January 10, 2018. Sunil Abraham participated in the workshop.

The event focused on the political economy of reform in India, foreign and security policy, and the role of innovation and technology in India's internal transformation and international relations.

Core aims of the workshop included:

Share and debate views on what changes we expect in the value of data over next decade.
Challenge and explore the underlying drivers of change across broad arena.
Debate the regional and global perspectives and highlight unique issues of greatest impact.
Build an informed collective view on the topic for all to use going forward.

For more details on Future of Value Data, click here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/future-value-of-data

Future Tech and Future Law

Admin — 2019-01-03T01:17:29Z

The Dept. of IT & BT, Government of Karnataka organised the 21st edition of Bengaluru Tech Summit from November 29, 2018 to December 1, 2018 at Palace Grounds, Bengaluru. Arindrajit Basu was a speaker at the panel on 'Future Tech and Future Law'.

The discussion was moderated by Tanvi Ratna. Aayush's co-panelists were Apar Gupta,Jaideep Reddy and Nilesh Trivedi. During his remarks, he attempted to focus on our AI research thus far and our suggestions for AI regulation.

For more details see this page.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/future-tech-and-future-law

Future of Work: Report of the ‘Workshop on the IT/IT-eS Sector and the Future of Work in India’

ambika — 2020-03-05T19:03:07Z

This report provides an overview of the proceedings and outcomes of the Workshop on the IT/IT-eS Sector and the Future of Work in India (hereinafter referred to as the “Workshop”), organised at Omidyar Networks’ office in Bangalore, on June 29, 2018.

This report was authored by Torsha Sarkar, Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rath. It was edited by Elonnai Hickok. Akash Sriram, Divya Kushwaha and Torsha Sarkar provided transcription and research assistance. A PDF of the report can be accessed here.

Introduction

The Workshop was attended by a diverse group of stakeholders which included industry representatives, academicians and researchers, and civil society. The discussions went over various components of the transition in the sector to Industry 4.0, including the impact of Industry 4.0-related technological innovations on work broadly in India, and specifically in the IT/IT-eS sector (hereinafter referred to as the “Sector”). The discussion focused on the reciprocal impact on socio-political dimensions, the structure of employment, and forms of work within workspaces.

The Workshop was divided into three sessions. The first session was themed around the adoption and impact of Industry 4.0 technologies vis-a-vis the organisation of work. Within this the key questions were: the nature of the technologies being adopted, the causes that are driving the uptake of these technologies, and the ‘tasks’ constituting jobs in the Sector.

The second session focussed on the role of skilling and re-skilling measures as mitigators to projected displacement of jobs. The issues dealt with included shifts in company, educational, and social competency profiles as a result of Industry 4.0, transformations in the predominant pedagogy of education, vocational, and skill development programmes in India, and their success in creating employable workers and filling skill gaps in the industry.

The third session looked at social welfare considerations and public policy interventions that may be necessitated in the wake of potential technological unemployment owing to Industry 4.0. The session was designed with a specific focus on the axes of gender and class, addressing questions of precarity, wages, and job security in the future of work for marginalized groups in the workforce.

Preliminary Comments

The Workshop opened with a brief introduction on the research the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) is undertaking on the Future of Work (hereinafter referred to as “FoW”) vis-a-vis Industry 4.0. The conception of Industry 4.0 that CIS is looking at is the technical integration of cyber-physical systems in production and logistics on one hand, and the use of internet of things (IoT) and the connection between everyday objects and services in the industrial processes on the other. The scope of the project, including the impact of automation on the organisation of employment and shifts in the nature and forms of work, including through the gig economy, and microwork, was detailed. The historical lens taken by the project, and the specific focus on questions of inequality across gender, class, language, and skill were highlighted.

It was pointed out that CIS’ research, in this regard, comes from the necessity of localising and re-examining the global narratives around Industry 4.0. While new technologies will be developed and implemented globally, the impact of these technologies in the Indian context would be mediated through local, political and socio-economic structures. For instance, the Third Industrial Revolution, largely associated with the massification of computing, telecommunications and electronics, is still unfolding in India, while attempts are already being made to adapt to Industry 4.0. These issues provided a starting point to the discussion on the impact of Industry 4.0 in India.

Qualifying Technological Change

Contexualising the narrative with historical perspectives

The panel for the first session commenced with a discussion around a historical perspective on job loss being brought about due to mechanisation. The distinction between Industry 3.0 and 4.0, it was suggested, was largely arbitrary, inasmuch as technological innovation has been a continuous process and has been impacting lives and the way work is perceived. It was argued that the only factor differentiating Industry 4.0 from previous industrial revolutions is ‘intelligent’ technology that is automating routine cognitive tasks. The computer, programmatic logic control (PLC) and data (called the ‘new oil’) were also a part of Industry 3.0, but intelligent technologies are able to provide greater analytical power under Industry 4.0.

The discussion also went over the distinction between the terms ‘job’, ‘task’ and ‘work’. It was argued that the term ‘job’ might be treated as a subset of the term ‘work’, with the latter moving beyond livelihood to encompass questions of dignity and a sense of fulfilment in the worker. With relation to this distinction, it was mentioned that the jobs at the risk of automation would be those that fulfill only the basic level in Maslow’s hierarchy - implying largely routine manual tasks. Additionally, it was explained that although these jobs will continue to use labour through Industry 4.0, it is only the nature of technological enablement that would change to automate more dangerous and hazardous tasks.

Technology as a long-term enabler of job creation

It was argued that technology has historically been associated with job creation. Historical instances cited included that of popular anxiety due to anticipated job loss through the uptake of the spinning machine and the steam engine, whereas the actual reduction in the cost of production led to greater job creation, increased mobility and improved quality of life in the long-term. Such instances were used to further argue that technology has historically not resulted in long-term job reductions.

The platform economy was posited as a model for creating jobs, through the efficient matching of supply and demand through digital platforms. It was indicated that rural to urban migration is aided by such platforms, as labourers voluntarily enrol in skilling initiatives given the certainty of employment through platformization. It was further argued that historically, Indian workers have been educated rather than skilled, and that platformization and automation, coupled with the elasticity of human needs, will provide greater incentives for technically skilled workers by creating desirable jobs.

Factors leading to differential adoption of automation

In relation to the adoption of the technologies Industry 4.0, it was argued that the mere existence of a technology does not necessitate its scalablity at an industrial level. Scalability would be possible only when the cost of labour is high relative to the costs entailed in technological adoption. This was supported by data from a McKinsey Report^{^[1]} which indicated that countries like the US and Germany would be impacted in the short term by automation, because their cost of labour is higher. Conversely, since the cost of labour in India is relatively cheap, the reality of technological displacement is still far away and the impact would not be immediate.

Similarly, a distinction was also made to account for the differential impact of automation in various sectors. For instance, it was indicated that since the IT/IT-eS sector in India is based on exporting services and outsourcing of businesses. Accordingly, if Germany automates its automobile industry, that would impact India less than if it automates the IT/IT-eS sector, as the latter is more reliant on exporting its services to developed economies. The IT/IT-eS sector was further broken down into sub-sectors with the intention of highlighting the differential impact of automation and FoW in each of these sub-sectors. It was agreed that the BPO sub-sector would be more adversely impacted than core IT services, given its constitution of routine nature of tasks at a higher risk of automation.

Disaggregating India’s Skilling Approach

The discussion around skilling measures was contextualised in the Indian context by alluding to data collected from the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) surveys. The data revealed that around 36% of India’s total population is under the age of seventeen and approximately 13% are between 18 - 24. Additional statistics suggested that only around a quarter of the workforce aged 18-24 years had achieved secondary and higher secondary education and close to 13% of the workforce was illiterate. While these numbers included both male and female workers, it was pointed out that it was an incomplete dataset as it excluded transgender workers. It was suggested it should be this segment of the Indian demographic that is targeted for significant skilling pushes, which could be catalysed through specific vocational training centres. It was also suggested that there was a need for to restructure the role of the National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) in the Indian skilling framework.

A comprehensive picture was painted by conceptualising the skilling framework in India as 5 distinct pillars. This conceptualisation was used to debunk the narrative around NSDC being the sole entity pushing for skill development in the country. The NSDC’s function in the skilling framework was posited as providing funding to skilling initiatives with programmes lasting for a period of 3 months. These 3- month programmes were critiqued for being insufficient for effective training, especially given the low skill levels of workers going into the programmes. The NSDC’s placement rate of 12% as per their own records was used to support this argument. Further suggestions on making the NSDC more effective were made in a later discussion^{^[2]}.

Related to this, the second pillar of vocational skilling was said to be the Industrial Training Institute (ITI). The third pillar was said to be the school system which was critiqued for does not offering vocational education at secondary and senior secondary levels. The fourth pillar comprised of the 16 ministries which governed the labour laws in India - none of whose courses were National Skills Qualifications Framework (NSQF) compliant.

The fifth pillar was construed as the industry itself and the enterprise-based training it conducted. However, it was stated that India’s share of registered companies who did enterprise-based training was dismal. In 2009, the share of enterprise-based training was 16% which rose in 2014 to 36%. Further, most of these 36% were registered large firms as opposed to small and medium sized enterprises. Unregistered companies, it was suggested, were simply doing informal apprenticeships.

Joint public and private skilling initiatives

In addition to government sponsored skilling initiatives, attention was directed to skill development partnerships that took the shape of public-private initiatives. As an example, it was said that that a big player in the ride-hailing economy had worked with NSDC and other skilling entities to ensure that soft skills were being imparted to their driver partners before they were on-boarded onto the platform.

It was also brought forth that innovative forms of skilling and training were gaining traction in the education sector as well in the private sector. This was instantiated through instances of uptake of platforms which apply artificial intelligence, and within that machine learning based techniques, to generate and disseminate easier- to- consume video-based learning.

Driving Job Growth: Solving for Structural Eccentricities of the Indian Labour Market

Catalysing manufacturing-led job growth

The discussion began by discussing specific dynamics of the Indian labour markets in the context of the Indian economy. It was pointed out the productivity level of the services sector is not as high as the productivity level of manufacturing, which is problematic for job creation in a developing economy such as India witnessing capital-intensive growth in the manufacturing sector. The underlying argument was that the jobs of the future in the Indian context will have to be created in the manufacturing sector.

Several macroeconomic policy interventions were suggested to reverse the trend of capital-intensive growth in order to make manufacturing the frontier for enhanced job creation. The need for a trade policy in consonance with the industrial policy was stated as imperative. This was substantiated by highlighting the lack of an inverted duty structure governing the automobile sector that has led India to be amongst the biggest manufacturers of automobiles. The inverted duty structure entails finished products having a lower import tariff and a lower customs duty when compared to import of raw materials or intermediates. However, it was highlighted that a dissonant industrial policy failed to acknowledge that at least 50% of india’s manufacturing comes from Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) and provided no assistance to MSMEs in obtaining credit, market access or technology upgradation. On the other hand, it was asserted that large corporates get 77% of the total bank credit.

Another challenge that was highlighted was with the Government of India’s severely underfunded manufacturing cluster development programs under the aegis of the Ministry of Textiles and the Ministry of MSMEs. For sectors that contribute majorly towards India’s manufacturing output, it was asserted that these programmes were astonishingly bereft of any governing policy and suffer from several foundational issues. Moreover, it was observed that these clusters are located around the country in Tier 2, 3 and 4 cities where the quality of infrastructure is largely lacking. The Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) program devised for the development of these cities is also myopic as the the target cities are not the ones where these manufacturing clusters are located. The rationale behind such an approach was that building infrastructure at geographical sites of job creation would lead to an increase in productivity which would in turn attract greater investment. This would have to necessarily be accompanied by hastening the setting up of industrial corridors - the lackadaisical approach to which was stated as a key component of India being outpaced by other developing economies in the South East Asian region.

An additional policy intervention that was suggested was from the lens of setting up of skilling centres by NSDC in proximity to these manufacturing clusters where the job creation is being evidenced as opposed to larger metropolitan cities.

Carving out space for a vocational training paradigm

It was asserted that the focus of skilling needs to be on the manufacturing rather than services sector, given the centrality of manufacturing to a developing economy undergoing an atypical structural transformation^{^[3]} - as outlined above. Further compounding the problem of jobless growth, it was stated that 50% of the manufacturing workforce have 8 or less years of education and only 5% of the workforce including those that have technical education are vocationally trained, according to the NSS, 62nd Round on Employment and Unemployment.

A gulf in primary and secondary education vis-a-vis vocational training was pointed as one of the most predominant causes behind the much touted ‘skills gap’ that the Indian workforce is said to be battling with. Using data to further cull out the argument, it was said that in 2007, the net enrollment in India for primary education had already reached 97% and that between 2010 - 2015, the secondary education enrollment rate went from 58% to 85%.^{^[4]} It was hypothesised that the latter may have risen to 90% levels since. Furthermore, the higher education enrollment rate also commensurately went up from 11% in 2006 to 26-27% in 2017.^{^[5]} It was argued that this is impossible to achieve without gender parity in higher education. This gender parity in education was contrasted with the systematic decline in the women’s labour force participation that India has been witnessing in the last 30 years.

Consequently, the ‘massification’ of higher education in India over the past 10 years was critiqued as ineffectual in comparison to the Chinese model, as the latter focused on engaging students in vocational training, which the Indian education system had failed to do. The role of the gig economy in creating job opportunities despite this gap between educational and vocational training was regarded as important, especially given the lack of growth in the traditional job markets.

Accounting for the Margins

With relation to the profiles of workers within sectors, it was indicated that factors such as gender, class, skill, income, and race must be accounted for to determine the ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ of automation. Several points were discussed with relation to this disaggregation.

Technology as an equaliser? Gender and skill-biased technological change

First, the idea of technology and development as objective and neutral forces was questioned, with the assertion that human decision-makers, who more often than not tend to be male, allow inherent biases to creep into outputs, processes, and objectives of automation. Data from the Belong Survey in IT services^{^[6]} indicated that the proportion of women in core engineering was 26% of the workforce, while that in software testing was 33%. Coupled with the knowledge that automation and technology would automate software testing first, it was argued that jobs held by female workers were positioned at a higher immediate risk of automation than male workers.

The ‘Leaky Pipe Problem’ in STEM industries i.e. the observation that female workers tend to be concentrated in entry level jobs, while senior management is largely male dominated was also brought to the fore. This was used to bolster the argument that female workers in the Sector will lose out in the shorter term, when automation adversely impacts the lower level jobs.

A survey conducted by Aspiring Minds^{^[7]} which tracked the employability of the engineering graduates was utilised to further flesh out skill biased technological change. As per the survey, 40% of the graduating students are employable in the BPO sector, while only 3% of the students are employable in the sector for software production. With the BPO sector likelier to be impacted more adversely than core IT services, it was emphasised that policy considerations should be very specific in their ambit.

Social security and the platform economy

The discussion around the platform economy commenced with a focus on how it had created economic opportunities in the formal sector by matching demand and supply on one hand, and by reducing inefficiency in the system through technology on the other. It was pointed out that these newer forms of work were creating millions of entrepreneurship opportunities that did not exist previously. These opportunities, it was suggested, were in themselves flexible and contributing the greater push towards enhancing the numbers of those that come within the ambit of India’s formal economy.

This discussion was countered by suggesting that the shift of the workforce from the informal sector to the formal sector, which companies in the gig economy claimed they contributed to, have instead restricted the kind of lives gig workers have been living historically. As an instance, it was pointed out that a farmer who had been working with a completely different set of skills was now being asked to shift to a new set of skills which would be suited for a very specific role and not transposable across occupations. In other words, it would not be meaningful skilling. It was also pointed out that what distinguishes formal work from informal is whether the worker has social security net or not - mere access to banking services or filing of tax returns was not sufficient for characterising a workforce as being formal in nature.

Relatedly, the possibility of social security was discussed for the unorganised sector and microworkers. One of the possibilities discussed was to ensure state subsidised maternity, disability, and death security, and pensions for workers below the poverty line. The fiscal brunt borne by the government for such a scheme was anticipated to not be above 0.4% of the GDP. It was suggested that this would move forward the conversation on minimum wage and fair work, which would be of great importance in broader conversations around working conditions in the platform economy.

The interplay of gender and platformisation

It was highlighted that trends in automation are going to change the occupational structure in the digital economy - the effect of which will especially be felt in cognitive routine jobs given their increased propensity to platformisation. A World Economic Forum report^{^[8]} was cited which indicated the disproportional risk of unemployment faced by women given their concentration in cognitive routine jobs was also brought up.

The discussion logically undertook a deeper look at the platformisation of work with a specific focus on freelance microwork and its impact on the female labour force and culled out certain positive mandates arising from such newer forms of work. It was suggested that industries are more likely to employ female workers in microwork due to lower rates of attrition, and flexible labour. It was reiterated that freelancing in India extends beyond data entry and other routine jobs, to include complex work - thereby also catering to skilled workers desirous of flexibility. Platforms designing systems to meet the demand for flexible work were also discussed, such as platforms geared towards female workers undertaking reskilling measures and counselling for females returning from maternity leave or sabbaticals. Additionally, the difficulty of defining freelancing under existing frameworks of employment, compounded by the lack of legal structures for such work, was outlined.

Systemic challenges within the Indian labour law framework

Static design of legal processes

Labour law was, naturally, acknowledged as a key determinant in the conversation around both the uptake and impact of automative technologies encapsulated within Industry 4.0.

The archaic nature of India’s labour law framework was highlighted as a major impediment to ensuring both worker rights as well as the ease of conducting commerce. It was pointed out that organised labour continues to be under the ambit of the Industrial Disputes Act, which was made effective in 1947, has undergone minimal amendments since. This was critiqued on the basis that the framework for the law is embedded in its historical context, and while the industrial landscape in the country has transformed drastically since the implementation of the Industrial Disputes Act, the legal framework has not evolved. Similarly, the Karnataka Shops and Establishments Act, 1961 which regulates the Sector today was enacted much before the Sector even opened up in India in the 1990s.

Additionally, it was pointed out that the consolidation of the fragmented extant framework of labour laws in India was being consolidated into 4 labour codes without any wholesale modernisation push reforming the laws being consolidated. Consequently, it was argued that the government has to drive changes through policies alone as the legal framework remains static. Barriers to implementation of adequate policies were also discussed, such as the political impact of labour policies, lack of state initiative to deal with the impact of the future of work, apart from the historic inability of the law to keep up with the state of labour and economy.

Labour law arbitrage

One of the reasons behind the increasing contractualizing of labour in India was attributed to over-regulation. There was consensus that the labour law regime was not conducive to industry in India leading to greater opportunistic behaviours from industry participants. It was acknowledged that the political clout that a lot of contractors (of labourers) enjoy along with providing primary employers greater flexibility to hire and fire employees at will has led to a widespread utilisation of contract labour entities.

It was further stated that industry behaviour has adopted several other tools of arbitrage to not consider labour law as a key impediment in the ease of scaling business. Empirical evidence of labour law arbitrage was cited to drive home the point - according to national surveys, 80-85% of enterprises employ less than 99 workers as the law mandates stricter compliance requirements for enterprises employing 100 or more workers^{^[9]}. This was acknowledged a serious hurdle to scaling businesses.

Problems behind other apparently well-intentioned legislation from a public policy lens having counterproductive consequences was also highlighted. In the space of labour laws, the example of the recently enacted Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 was cited. By enhancing maternity benefits, without accounting for other provisioning such as a paternity benefit inclusion, it was anticipated that companies may entirely shy away from hiring women.

Policy Paralysis

The discussion progressed towards a high-level discussion around the efficacy of law vis-a-vis state policy as a means to create a system of checks and balances in the context of Industry 4.0. It was highlighted that law, by design, would be outpaced by technological change. The common law system of law operating in India is premised on a time-tested emphasis on post-facto regulation. In other words, it is reactionary. While policy making in India suffers from a similar plague of playing catch-up, it is in large part due to a bureaucratic structure premised on generalism - a pressing need for domain expertise in policy making was emphasised upon. Having said that, it was stated that it is the institutional design of policy making institutions that needs rectification. What was acknowledged was the success, albeit scant, that individual states have had in policy making catering to specific yet diverse domains. A greater push towards clear and progressive evidence-based policy pushes was stressed upon with the anticipation that it would lead to self-regulation by the industry itself - be it in terms of the future of employment or of the economic direction that the industry will embark on.

Concluding Remarks

The discussions during the course of the Workshop situated the discourse around Industry 4.0 within the contours of the Indian labour realities and the IT sector within that.

As a useful starting point, various broader perspectives around the impact of technological change on the quantum of jobs were brought forth. While the industry perspective was that of technology as an enabler of job creation in the long-run, it was sufficiently tempered by concerns around those impacted adversely in the short to medium-term time frames. These concerns coalesced towards understanding the potential impact of Industry 4.0 on the nature of work, as well as mitigation tools to ease the impact of technological disruption on labour.

Important facets of technological adoption within the Sector were highlighted, such as potential for scalability as well as the distinct eccentricities of the various sub-sectors the IT sector subsumed. The differential impact within the various sub-sectors was pegged to the differential composition of automatable tasks (routine, rule-based) within each sub-sector. However, questions regarding the exact contours of task composition were left unanswered signalling a potential area for further research. On the other hand, the primary challenge to technological adoption faced from the labour-supply side was skilling, or the lack thereof. This was contextualised in the larger scheme of structural issues plaguing the skilling machinery operating in the country, which lead to inadequate dispensation of technical and vocational education and training (TVET). In terms of additional structural issues that would potentially have an impact on how Industry 4.0 plays out in the Indian context, attention was directed towards overdue reform of the labour law framework which has already struggled with incorporating newer forms of working engagements such as platform and gig work, that are being evidenced as a part of Industry 4.0.

An underlying theme that found mention across sessions was the need to devote attention to prevent further marginalisation as a consequence of technological disruption of the already marginalised. Evidence from government datasets as well as from literature around concepts such as skill biased technological change, the leaky pipe problem, and the U-shaped curve of female labour force participation were cited to explicate these issues. The merits of different policy measures to address these concerns, such as social security, living wages, and maternity benefits were also discussed.

While the Workshop touched upon several facets of the discourse around Industry 4.0 in the Sector, it also sprung up areas that require further inquiry. Questions around where in the value chain use-cases for Industry 4.0 technologies were emerging needed a more comprehensive understanding. Moreover, the impact of Sector Skill Councils (SSCs), a central aspect of the skilling ecosystem in India, wasn’t touched upon. An additional path of inquiry that emerged pertained to evolving constructive reforms to legal and economic policy frameworks as top-down interventions within the Sector that could be anticipated to play a significant role in the uptake and impact of Industry 4.0 technologies.

^{^[1]} McKinsey Global Institute, A future that works: Automation, employment, and productivity, https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/featured%20insights/Digital%20Disruption/Harnessing%20automation%20for%20a%20future%20that%20works/MGI-A-future-that-works-Executive-summary.ashx, (accessed 10 August 2018).

^{^[2]} See discussion under ‘Catalysing manufacturing-led job growth‘.

^{^[3]} R. Verma, Structural Transformation and Jobless Growth in the Indian Economy, The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Economy, 2012.

^{^[4]} S. Mehrotra, ‘The Indian Labour Market: A Fallacy, Two Looming Crises and a Tragedy’, CSE Working Paper, April 2018.

^{^[5]} ibid.

^{^[6]} Mohita Nagpal, ‘Women in tech: There are 3 times more male engineers to females’, belong.co, http://blog.belong.co/gender-diversity-indian-tech-companies, (accessed 10 August 2018).

^{^[7]} Aspiring Minds, National Programming Skills Report - Engineers 2017, https://www.aspiringminds.com/sites/default/files/National%20Programming%20Skills%20Report%20-%20Engineers%202017%20-%20Report%20Brief.pdf, (accessed 11 August 2018).

^{^[8]} World Economic Forum, The Future of Jobs Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Global Challenge Insight Report, January 2016.

^{^[9]} Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, All India Report of Sixth Economic Census, Government of India, 2014.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/future-of-work-report-of-the-workshop-on-the-it-it-es-sector-and-the-future-of-work-in-india

Future of Work in the ASEAN

aayush — 2020-03-05T19:22:50Z

A literature review of the future of work in automotive manufacturing and IT services in the ASEAN region, authored by Aayush Rathi, Vedika Pareek, Divij Joshi, and Pranav M B.

Read the research paper: Download (PDF)

Authored by Aayush Rathi, Vedika Pareek, Divij Joshi, and Pranav Bidare

Research assistance by Sankalp Srivastava and Anjanaa Aravindan

Edited by Elonnai Hickok and Ambika Tandon

Supported by Tides Foundation

Introduction

The world of work, and its future, have attracted a lot of attention in recent times. The discussion has been provoked by the confluence of recent technological breakthroughs that portend to have wide-ranging implications on work and livelihoods. In what has been termed the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” or “Industry 4.0” , the discussion has engaged numerous stakeholders. However, no shared understanding of what this future of work will look like has materialised. Historical scholarship around technological change and its impact on the labour market was focussed in the context of high-income countries. Contemporaneously, however, research is being produced that outlines the possible futures of work in low and middle-income contexts. It is exigent to generate scholarship dedicated to low and middle-income contexts given that in addition to technological drivers, the future of work will be mediated through region and country specific factors such as socioeconomic,geopolitical and demographic change.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/future-of-work-in-the-asean

Future of Privacy in India

praskrishna — 2013-03-26T05:14:45Z

DSCI and ICOMP are organizing a meet on Privacy at the Oberoi Hotel in New Delhi on April 5, 2013. Sunil Abraham will be participating in this event as a speaker.

In recent years, there has been an increasing deployment of ICT in the collection of personal information by both private sector and state agencies. Data is a reason for empowerment for both commercial and public purposes. The prolific use of the Internet for search, social networking cloud computing and e-commerce transactions places increasing amounts of personal information and Internet history in hands of dominant private sector players. Data is undeniably the capital of the Internet. While technology has evolved to be able to collect, store and mine increasing amounts of data for improved public services or for commercial purposes, there are understandable concerns over the lack of accountability for the purposes and limits of the use of personal data. These concerns demand an appropriate regulatory framework for Privacy.

As an important step toward formulating the privacy bill, an Expert Group headed by Justice A P Shah provides inputs based on a study of the international landscape of privacy laws, along with the predominant privacy concerns ensuing from technological advancements. The Committee’s report, submitted in Oct 2012 has recommended Nine Principles as the cornerstone for privacy legislation. While the Privacy Act is under development, DSCI and iCOMP are organizing a meet focusing on the following areas:

Outline an appropriate Indian context for privacy: the nine principles
Presentation of the state of play on privacy in key markets (practices, Issues, regulatory interventions)
Analyse the scope and implications of data collection by public agencies in India.
Analyse privacy challenges and risks related to commercial use of data collected on the Internet by private players
Consider how India can address these challenges and enshrine privacy principles in legislation

Key Speakers

Dr. Gulshan Rai, DG, CERT-In*

Mr. Simon Davis, London School of Economics

Mr. Manoj Joshi, JS, DOPT*

Mr. Kanta Roy, CEO, NeGD*

Dr. Kamlesh Bajaj, CEO, DSCI

Mr. Sunil Abraham, ED, CIS

* To be confirmed

Event Flow

Opening Remark by Mr. S V Divvaakar, Executive Director, ICOMP
Framework for Privacy Regulation in India, By Dr. Kamlesh Bajaj, CEO, DSCI
Keynote Address
‘Privacy :The International state of play’, by Mr. Simon Davis, London School of Economics
Panel Discussion 1: Context of Privacy in India
Panel Discussion 2: Business responsibility in the age of ‘data driven’ transformations

Date: April 5, 2013
Time: 9.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.
Venue: Oberoi Hotel, Nilgiri Room, New Delhi

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/future-of-privacy-in-india-on-april-5-2013-at-oberoi-hotel-new-delhi

Future of Integrated Science Education in Higher Education in India

praskrishna — 2012-01-15T09:50:50Z

The Higher Education Innovation and Research Application (HEIRA) at the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (CSCS) and the Centre for Contemporary Studies (CCS) at the Indian Institute of Sciences (IISc) hosted a two day workshop on 2 and 3 January 2012 on the Future of Integrated Science Education in Higher Education in India at the Centre for Contemporary Studies, IISc, where they invited a core group of academics and researchers from the leading technology and science studies institutes in the country, to look at the possibility of designing innovative and new curricula for undergraduate students in India.

The conversations across the two days involved participants from IISc Bangalore, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER) Pune, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) Pune, Indian Institute of Technologies (IIT) Delhi, Ambedkar University Delhi, School of Women’s Studies Jadavpur University Kolkata, Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education Mumbai, SNDT College Mumbai, King’s College London, and the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) Bangalore. This report captures some of the key points that emerged in the dialogue while also looking at the possibility of building an integrated science course for undergraduate students in India.

Introduction

Within higher education in India, there has been a strong polarisation and hierarchy of disciplines, with the pure, applied and life sciences at the top, professional courses in the middle, and social sciences, humanities and arts education at the bottom of the stack. Despite the fact that elementary and formative education in schools is geared towards a broader approach leading to integration of knowledge and skills across disciplines, the higher education landscape is overtly hostile, with disciplinary boundaries very tightly drawn. However, in recent years, as disciplines have collapsed due to advances in research and pedagogy, there has been a blurring of disciplinary boundaries. Interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity have become the buzz-words that have regularly been invoked by new universities, modernising curricula and the innovative cross-disciplinary structures of knowledge production outside the university structure. We have, hence, seen various spaces like the Indian Institute of Sciences and the Indian Institute of Technologies, opening humanities and social sciences research and education spaces to introduce their students to other forms of knowledges.

Unfortunately, both these ideas — of interdisciplinarity and integration — have been very limited in their scope and creativity. Interdisciplinarity plays itself out in a hostile environment where social sciences produce a critique of the ‘hegemony of science’, “positivist world views” and ‘experimental models’ in knowledge industries and with natural sciences (applied and theoretical), discrediting the non-objective ways of understanding phenomena and the emphasis on the human, the affective and the experiential that marks methods and analyses in social sciences and humanities. The bridge between the two remains shaky, and most attempts at interdisciplinarity either stay within identifiable disciplines (physics-chemistry-biology coming together in molecular biology, or sociology, literature and political theory joining hands in cultural studies). There is very little attempt at cross-paradigm dialogues that can breach the gap between natural and human sciences, humanities and the arts. Even when efforts have been made at integration, there is a relationship of inequity that is presumed in the two disciplines, leading to each criticising each other, rather than providing a critique that can reflectively and critically examine the biases and prejudices of each discipline, opening it up to new forms of inquiry, methods and knowledges.

In a few parts of the world, programmes in science-technology-society (STS) – including but not limited to philosophy of science, history of science, epistemology of science, and critique of science — have tried to integrate the different models of knowledge and research. However, most of them suffer from the fact that the researchers are generally social scientists who critique sciences from the outside and vice versa. In the rare occasions when people from within sciences have tried to produce a critique of their own disciplines, these voices have been quelled under sciences’ privileged position that exempts it from the same scrutiny that other knowledge claims were historically put under. The vibrant and dynamic debates of STS studies, research and critique do not reflect strongly in the Indian education system where such interventions are still few and far between. It is in this space where there is a paucity of integrated science teaching and a growing need for the same that the participants at the workshop addressed.

Rationale

It is necessary to explain what integrated science actually means. Till now, the efforts at integration have been at either exposing science students to social and human sciences, or to train students in social and human sciences to critique existing philosophies, modalities and structures of knowledge produced through the pure and natural sciences. In each of the attempts, there is an endorsement of the Cartesian dualism (mind-body, nature-culture, objective-subjective, etc.) that led to the splitting of knowledge systems into these different schisms. Integrated science is an attempt by which a simultaneous critique of two disciplines which are not complementary to each other opens up a dialogue and a mode of inquiry where each discipline can reflect on its own practices and presumptions while learning from the other. In the process, what emerges is a curriculum that is not only about the content but about the methods of producing a critique of existing knowledge structures. Keeping this in mind, short four-day courses were proposed which would demonstrate this ambition and also produce new curriculum which can actually be taught in three different locations: IISER Pune, Central University of Jharkhand and the Central University of Tamil Nadu.

I give a brief synopsis of five of the courses proposed, that this core team is planning to develop over the next year, using the three locations as the sandbox where they can be structured, taught and built upon.

Course 1: Science-in-Making

What is Science? What is not? How do we make these distinctions from our own science practice and research? How do we unpack the different methods, models and modes of knowledge production within science and understand that they are not pre-given but are actually constructed and despite their alleged objectivity, construct certain world-views? The course aims to route the history of science by looking at the Cartesian dualism and tracing its way to the emergence and contestation of Newtonian Science.

Beginning with a distinction between mechanical causality and teleological causality, the course, through stories and scientific conflicts would introduce students to thinking about how the fundamental truth of their disciplines are actually made in error. Three illustrative stories of Mendel, Milliken, and Addington would be used as the basis of showing how, if these scientists had actually applied the rigorous error analysis protocols of contemporary science, they would not have been able to make the claims that they did, which have formed the basis of so many scientific disciplines.

This ends by exploring the Data-Theory connections with science and the actual practice of science to offer a way of looking at the role of creativity, affect, experience, instincts, subjectivity, etc. in the process of knowledge making within sciences, rather than leaving them in sterile controlled lab-like environments within which science is generally taught.

Course 2: Seeing what you see: Cognition and the human mind

One of the most contended concepts between natural and human sciences has been about ways and methods of looking, knowing and understanding. Cognition studies helps complicate the picture from both the disciplines by positing a series of questions: What KIND of mind are you trying to study? How has the mind been accounted for in human history? Social sciences have dealt with this question by turning it into one of human behaviourism where as the natural sciences have deployed an algorithmic reductionism by concentrating on localising parts of the brains to establish catalyst-effect relationships.

The course aims to look at modern theories of mind and brain studies to show how they are infinitely plastic and cannot be localised. The attempt is to break away from the hierarchical neuronal model and introduce the students to the brain as complex, plastic, and dynamic. Drawing from life and biological sciences as well as psychology and artificial intelligence studies, the effort is to show how the methodological departures in each field produce a certain way by which we see ourselves and the world around us.

It ends by looking at the problems and the possibilities of the two popular models of understanding the human mind – The Mind that Thinks and the Mind that Dreams. Opening up sciences to questions of affect and empathy and expanding horizons of social sciences to look at theories of evolution and physiology, by locating them on the site of digital technologies, will help build better models of understanding the human mind-brain.

Course 3: Health, Technology and Bio-ethics

Technologies of health care are often posited to us as benign and for our own good. Questions of ethics – unless they ‘grossly violate’ concepts of life – are never factored into the practice of these technology mediated practices. This course wants to unravel the ‘truths’ and ‘knowledges’ of technologies of health care in order to look at the texts, institutions, attitudes and practices that construct health practices and how they gloss over the question of ethics.

Taking the clinic, the experience of health care, the role of the patient in healing and the hidden role of technologies, from eugenics to assisted death, the course takes the students through different discourses that rest on technology-nature debates in order to understand what it means to be human within a network of health care. Foregrounding the human over the patient, it then looks at the science-experience binary to offer alternative ways of thinking about technology-body-life relationships. It also unravels the ‘romance of science’ and the need to factor it out of our attitudes and practices with the digital technologies of care and life.

Course 4: National Technologies & Technologies of the Nation

In the history of science, the abstraction of facts and experiments from the larger socio-political contexts is accompanied by the abstraction of skills and knowledge from the larger scientific intellectual. How do we re-tell the story of conditions that made certain kinds of sciences possible and validated? How do we see the role of the nation state in promoting, shaping and endorsing certain kinds of technologies and technological choices? This course looks at the alternative history of science to examine different instances when India has thought of itself as a scientific nation.

Beginning with the colonial encounter and technologies of biometric sciences – photography, cranial measurements, surveys, etc., the course looks at how different technologies of the personal to the massive industrial projects like postal services, trains, etc., help establish the sovereignty of a nation state. The second instance it examines is the imagination of India as a nuclear state, to see how the history of technologies is also a history of war, violence and terror.

The third instance is the instance of liberalisation and the ways in which economic choices shaped the telecommunication wave initiated during the Rajiv Gandhi era. It examines the ways in which the material presence of TV, telephones, ISD centres, etc., change the ways in which we understand and experience the nation. The course ends by looking at the rise of the digital and the internet, and how, in the era of digital globalisation, we have new questions like food security, bio informatics, etc., which get mediated by these technologies.

Course 5: Sociology of Science and Science in Society

How do science and scientists work? What are the kind of work cultures and ethos that they belong to? How do we understand their practice while being outside of it? What happens when we are inside the space? These are the questions that serve as a catalyst for this course. The main ambitions of the course are two-fold:

To reflect upon practice of science – Looking at how science is done. What we get taught is a series of rote skills and methods without actually looking into how the scientific method is constructed and what does it critique in its practice.
To see how science is received – There is a social context to science which is rarely attributed to the science itself. While there is study of how science contributes to society, there is little awareness on how science is structured by its reception in various circles – policy, regulation, social discourse, arts, cultures, expectations, popular media, speculative fiction, etc.

The course begins with Descartes and Bacon to explain the cause-and-effect structure of the experimental method within the narrative of science. It introduces the notion of ‘magic of science’ to look at the ideas of secularism, democratization, patronage, wonder, creativity, etc. which are built into the very structure of scientific discovery and technological innovation. In the process, it seeks to dismantle the positivist presumptions of science and technology – logic, reason, experiment etc., – and look at contesting and complementary accounts of reality which accompany scientific discourse.

Introducing the coupling of development and process of science as a constructed one, by looking at the different kinds of resistances which it has faced and how it is changed to negotiate with those resistances, it seeks to make a distinction between the scientific intellectual and pragmatic contexts of science and bring together these two trajectories to understand our practice better.

Next Steps

Each of these courses is going to begin as a four-day module which can be taught to undergraduate students at CUJ in the coming year.
A detailed course description with bibliography, module objectives, methodologies, annotations and class-notes will be created and compiled together to form an introductory course.
Each module, based on the teaching experience, feedback from students and peers, and more conversations, will be developed in a full-semester course, that will be accompanied by video lectures and podcasts by different instructors.
The ambition is to produce full teachable open courses for different locations, which can also be taught by people outside the core group.
Additional plans for doing faculty training for capacity building can also be thought of.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/integrated-science-education-in-india

Fundamental Right to Privacy — Three Years of the Puttaswamy Judgment

pranav — 2020-08-24T07:46:10Z

Today marks three years since the Supreme Court of India recognised the fundamental right to privacy, but the ideals laid down in the Puttaswamy Judgment are far from being completely realized. Through our research, we invite you to better understand the judgment and its implications, and take stock of recent issues pertaining to privacy.

Amber Sinha dissects the Puttaswamy Judgment through an analysis of the sources, scope and structure of the right, and its possible limitations. [link]

Through a visual guide to the fundamental right to privacy, Amber Sinha and Pooja Saxena trace how courts in India have viewed the right to privacy since Independence, explain how key legal questions were resolved in the Puttaswamy Judgement, and provide an account of the four dimensions of privacy — space, body, information and choice — recognized by the Supreme Court. [link]

Based on publicly available submissions, press statements, and other media reports, Arindrajit Basu and Amber Sinha track the political evolution of the data protection ecosystem in India, on EPW Engage. They discuss how this has, and will continue to impact legislative and policy developments. [link]

For the AI Policy Exchange, Arindrajit Basu and Siddharth Sonkar examine the Automated Facial Recognition Systems (AFRS), and define the key legal and policy questions related to privacy concerns around the adoption of AFRS by governments around the world. [link]

Over the past decade, reproductive health programmes in India have been digitising extensive data about pregnant women. In partnership with Privacy International, we studied the Mother and Child Tracking system (MCTS), and Ambika Tandon presents the impact on the privacy of mothers and children in the country. [link]

While the right to privacy can be used to protect oneself from state surveillance, Mira Swaminathan and Shubhika Saluja write about the equally crucial problem of lateral surveillance — surveillance that happens between individuals, and within neighbourhoods, and communities — with a focus on this issue during the COVID-19 crisis. [link]

Finally, take a dive into the archives of the Centre for Internet and Society to read our work, which was cited in the Puttaswamy judgment — essays by Ashna Ashesh, Vidushi Marda and Bhairav Acharya that displaced the notion that privacy is inherently a Western concept, by attempting to locate the constructs of privacy in Classical Hindu [link], and Islamic Laws [link]; and Acharya’s article in the Economic and Political Weekly, which highlighted the need for privacy jurisprudence to reflect theoretical clarity, and be sensitive to unique Indian contexts [link].

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/fundamental-right-to-privacy-three-years-of-the-puttaswamy-judgment

FUEL Kannada - Workshop on Kannada Computing Terminology

praskrishna — 2012-02-23T10:32:59Z

A two days workshop on the standardization of Kannada computing terminologies was organized on January 28th and 29th 2012 at the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore under the FUEL project. This FUEL Kannada workshop aimed at the community review and standardization of frequently encountered computing terminologies in Kannada. FUEL Kannada Evaluation meet aimed at solving the problem of inconsistency and lack of standardization in computer software translations in Kannada language. This workshop was hosted by CIS, sponsored by Red Hat and organized by Sanchaya (sanchaya.net).

Along with well know television actress Jayalaxmi Patil. members from Banavasi Balaga, Translators, Kanaja Content writer, Linguistics, Journalists participated in this workshop. Shankar Prasad welcomed every one and explained the importance and need of standardization of Kannada Computing Terminologies. KaGaPa's Secretary Narasimha Murthy shed light on the past work on computing terminologies.

This workshop discussed on 578 commonly appearing entries people use. FUEL Kannada Evaluation meet was a concrete move towards solving the problem and after the meet, FUEL Kannada came with the standard translation of entries in Kannada language for the first time that are frequently being used by a normal user.

Localization is the process of transforming a product into different languages and adapting it for a specific locale. As the localization process becomes more complex and involves more players and tools, problems related to consistency of translations and terminology are faced. Henceforth, in this context the need of such type of meet is significant and important. Except few languages, this type effort is generally the first effort for most of Indic languages for computing terminologies.

FUEL tries to provide a standardized and consistent computer interface for users. Before Kannada language, FUEL already completed evaluation phase for 9 other Indian languages.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/fuel-kannada-workshop-on-kannada-computing-terminology

FTN: Should social networking sites be censored?

praskrishna — 2011-12-08T05:32:41Z

Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal met the representatives of Facebook, Google and others seeking to device a screening mechanism. Sunil Abraham was on CNN-IBN from 10.00 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. speaking about freedom of expression in India.

VIDEO

Watch the original video on IBN Live here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/censor-social-networking-sites

From Virtual to Reliable: Exploring Freedom and Facts in the World of WWW (World Wide Web)

praskrishna — 2017-03-29T04:01:25Z

An interactive seminar on internet freedom was organized by the Embassy of the Kingdom of Netherlands and Adaan Foundation on March 21, 2017 at the India International Centre in New Delhi. Saikat Dutta and Amber Sinha were panelists.

The seminar was coincident with the inauguration of the World Press Photo Exhibition 2016. In total there were four panelists. Read the agenda here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/from-virtual-to-reliable-exploring-freedom-and-facts-in-the-world-of-www-world-wide-web

From net neutrality to IBC & Aadhaar, how Vidhi is framing key government legislation

Admin — 2018-01-04T14:45:59Z

It's not every day that a 30-something former Oxford academic disrupts the plans of the world's biggest disruptor.

The article by Surabhi Agarwal and Samanwaya Rautray was published in Economic Times on January 4, 2018.

But Arghya Sengupta is no pushover — his boyish charm perfectly couches confidence, clarity and commitment towards translating law for the layman. That alone helped Sengupta and his team from the Vidhi Centre of Legal Policy to take on none other than Facebook's Mark Zukerberg and his army of public policy wonks and spin doctors during the fiery net neutrality debate, helping the telecom regulator draft guidelines. Vidhi's intervention had a huge impact and led to Facebook's Free Basics programme being called off, changing the global narrative on net neutrality forever. That zeal continues.

Walk into their office in a plush Defence Colony bungalow even at 7 pm and you will feel the fervour. The day ET did, two colleagues were discussing interference in appointments to tribunals.

Judicial reforms is one of the many independent research projects Vidhi has been pursuing since it came into existence in December 2013. It has since carved out a significant role for itself in framing key government legislations — perhaps more than any legal think tank in India. In fact, several of Vidhi's independent research projects on public policy have led to commissioned assignments from the government as well as the judiciary.

The Game Begins

Vidhi's first government assignment had to do with the ministry of finance's Public Procurement Bill. Since then, it has assisted in framing the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the Aadhaar Act and amendments to the Companies Act. It has also helped in drafting differential pricing norms under net neutrality guidelines issued by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. It is currently working on the Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance (FRDI) and Data Protection Bills, and is also involved in deliberations over simplifying GST.

So how did this not-for-profit organisation manage such velocity? Sengupta, the 33-year-old founder of Vidhi, points to the void that exists between good legal research and framing of legislations in India. "A particular problem that exists within the governance framework is that good policy ideas don't often translate into good legislation because lawyers and policy makers don't talk to each other," he says to explain where Vidhi fits in. "There is nothing special about us...Policy and law is a new area and there are very few people doing high-quality work in it." Vidhi is mostly engaged directly by ministries or departments drafting a particular law, and not by the law ministry.

Sengupta, former faculty at Pembroke College in the UK, where he taught administrative law, emphasises that Vidhi does not draft laws, only assists in their drafting. "To some, we provide inputs and research, while for others we sit together to draft the legislation."

Their primary goal is to draft better law — and they have no competition. The only other organisation coming even close is NIPFP, providing sectorial services for government committees. In that sense, NIPFP doesn't have lawyers so they may not draft the law, says Sunil Abraham, executive director of Bengaluru-based think tank, Centre for Internet and Society (CIS). "Vidhi's efforts are pioneering and it's not surprising that they have become so successful. They are like that Mad Magazine tagline, number one in the field of one," he quips. "Other bodies such as Carnegie Mellon are vehicles for US MNCs to lobby but Vidhi doesn't have any foreign funding, so they are credible for the government," says Abraham, who was member of the Shah Committee when privacy principals were being drafted.

An Outsider Perspective

"Drafting of legislations requires a whole lot of research. Ten years ago, there weren't any institutions that did that kind of work," says Sumit Bose, Vidhi's current chairman. This retired bureaucrat was instrumental in getting Vidhi its first project as then finance secretary.

He was introduced to Sengupta through his daughter and son-in-law, a graduate of National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bengaluru. Although things are better now, Bose says, many states still don't have enough capacity for the research behind laws. "You need one foot in the door, and then it's up to you," says Sengupta, son of a teacher and banker in Kolkata.

In a system where the legislative department is typically engaged to draft laws, Vidhi has emerged as the "new interface" between policy and law-making, says its board member Arvind Datar, a senior advocate in the Supreme Court. "They have the unique ability to give an outsider's perspective to any area of law." Datar says Vidhi did extensive research for former Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi in debates on Aadhaar and the National Judicial Appointments Commission.

Other members on Vidhi's board include Star India chief executive Uday Shankar, strategic adviser Ireena Vittal and NLSIU associate professor Govindraj Hegde. A Union minister familiar with Vidhi's work offers an explanation as to why the government was roping it in. "It is about comfort as well as secrecy and they bring both," he says, asking not to be identified.

A top bureaucrat who has worked extensively with Vidhi says it is not a yes man, and this sets it apart. "Many times, they refuse to include our suggestions, telling us that it will not stand the scrutiny of court or it will not be proper from a legal standpoint," he explains, also requesting anonymity. "There is a lot of research that goes into drafting a legislation, be it pertaining to international best practices or previous judgements. Post a lot of internal discussions, these inputs are included."

Another government official says his department has a running advisory contract with Vidhi. "They are very young people with fresh ideas. They may not fight cases, but they do a lot of good table research, bringing up new legal points." Sengupta says not many organisations are doing similar work. "A lot of the work of this nature is done by universities."

Resistance to Change

Among the biggest reforms Vidhi has worked on are the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and Aadhaar Act, with GST being an ongoing task. Vidhi helped translate Aadhaar from an executive order to a statutory body. As for the IBC, Sengupta's assessment is that it was a reform 50 years late and essential for entrepreneurship to grow.

But what remains " Vidhi's single-most rewarding experience" is shepherding the net neutrality guidelines. "I think this government is very keen on systemic reforms. They have the appetite to change status quo," says Sengupta. Even so, some legislations Vidhi has been involved with face stiff resistance from citizen-activists.

Sengupta isn't perturbed. He distinctly outlines Vidhi's purpose and role in policymaking — advise the government to ensure that a law being drafted is constitutional, clear, takes into account international best practices and can be implemented effectively. "I believe all opposition is good because it makes everybody think. A lot of the opposition—be it to Aadhaar or to payment-related clauses in IBC —is to the concept," he says. "We didn't come up with the concept so we don't see it as a criticism of our work."

Early Opportunities

Vidhi began as an idea when Sengupta was a graduate student at Oxford University. Along with a lawyer friend, he began sending unsolicited legal input to the parliamentary standing committee looking into the controversial Indo-US Nuclear Liability Bill. To the duo's surprise, it was called to depose before the committee; later, the Department of Atomic Energy sought help with some sections. "We drafted 17 sections and of those, two became law... It was a great opportunity for us," says Sengupta.

This was followed by solicited and unsolicited work during 2010-12 on eight projects, including the Judicial Standards and Accountability, Prevention of Torture and Public Procurement Bills.

The think tank currently has about 40 employees and opened a second office in Bengaluru in August.

Sengupta credits Vidhi's early success to Ashok Ganguly, former chairman of Hindustan Lever (now Unilever) who was also a member of Parliament. In 2011, Ganguly was putting together a representation on policy paralysis and wanted help with research. Ganguly, who would become Vidhi's first chairman, put Sengupta in touch with several people, some of whom provided grant funding to get the think tank going. That did raise some eyebrows.

Conflict of Interest

As they spread their wings, the think tank received funding from the Mahindra Group, Pirojsha Godrej Foundat ion, Vikram Sarabhai Foundation, Jamsetji Tata Trusts, Gourab Banerji, Mohandas Pai and Rohini Nilekani. Verticals within Vidhi have separate funding. For instance, the unit working on the Judicial Reforms Bill is funded by a group called Dasra, which is a collective of philanthropists. And yet, Sengupta says "fund-raising is a constant challenge."

While government work does cover costs, it is not enough to sustain the organisation. Sengupta did not divulge how much Vidhi earns from a typical government project. Over half of the work that Vidhi does is independent research on topics ranging from clean air in Delhi to euthanasia and judicial reform.

Vidhi's fundraising, though, brings up a serious issue of possible conflict of interest, given its work on key legislations such as the Aadhaar Act while being funded by entities that could be affected directly or indirectly by those legislations. For example, Rohini Nilekani, is the wife of Aadhaar architect Nandan Nilekani, who funds Vidhi which not only assisted in drafting the Aadhaar Act but is now also involved with the Data Protection Bill that has key implications on the unique identity number.

Sengupta has also been called to argue in the landmark debate on whether privacy is a fundamental right — ignited after the Supreme Court received scores of petitions against Aadhaar — on request of the government's top lawyers arguing against it. Sanjay Hegde, senior Supreme Court advocate, says, "I see credibility issues when Sengupta argues in favour of Aadhaar in court in the privacy debate and, at the same time, is nominated on the Dr Srikrishna Committee, which is drafting the Data Protection Bill."

He adds, "In a city replete with think tanks and law firms, it would be interesting to see what percentage of government advisory work in terms of billing is cornered by this think tank alone."

Sengupta's defence is that Vidhi believes in transparency and doesn't accept foreign or retail funding. All funding-related information is detailed on its website, he argues. "People are free to make whatever judgement they wish to because conflict is one thing that cannot be eliminated," he says. "The moment you take funding from anybody, there will always be conflict. My answer to that is transparency."

IVY League Talent

What matters is that till date, such issues have not deterred the flow of best Ivy League talent into Vidhi. The founding team included Dhyani Mehta, who heads its environmental vertical; Devanshu Mukherjee, who leads its financial sector work and Alok Prasanna, who heads its Bengaluru office.

Prasanna, had earlier worked with solicitor general Mohan Parasaran's office in Delhi in high profile cases such as the government versus Vodafone and the government versus Reliance Industries. A few "fellows"— Sriboni Sen, Rukhmini Das (pursuing a PhD now) and Ketan Paul (now litigating) — though have moved on.

Yet others like Nikita Khaitan, who graduated from Yale University in the summer of 2016, have stepped in since June last year. Khaitan, who comes from the family of the Khaitan and Co law firm, heard about Vidhi from her cousins who went to the same law school as Sengupta. "Vidhi is one of the few staples where you can do quality work that is not litigation or corporate law," she says, on what clinched the decision for her to join Vidhi after Yale. "A lot of young people today want to return to India and do work which is high-impact." Now that's an argument no one can disagree with.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/economic-times-surabhi-agarwal-and-samanwaya-rautray-from-net-neutrality-to-ibc-and-aadhaar-how-vidhi-is-framing-key-government-legislation

From 1 March, only registered devices to be used to authenticate Aadhaar

Admin — 2018-02-24T07:59:39Z

UIDAI directive to Aadhaar authentication agencies aims to avoid putting citizens’ biometric data at risk

The article by Komal Gupta was published in Livemint on February 8, 2018.

The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has directed all Aadhaar authentication agencies to use only registered biometric devices from 1 March to avoid putting residents’ data at risk.

The initial deadline to upgrade these devices was 1 June 2017, but it has been extended several times. The latest is the sixth extension.

The UIDAI wants the biometric devices registered with the Aadhaar system for encryption key management. The Aadhaar authentication server can individually identify and validate these devices and manage encryption keys on each registered device.

“It is reiterated that to ensure encryption of biometrics of residents at time of capture, it is absolutely essential to use only the registered devices. Any further use of non-registered devices will be putting residents’ privacy at risk,” a UIDAI circular dated 2 February said.

In January last year, UIDAI had instructed all the authentication user agencies (AUAs) and authentication service agencies (ASAs) to adhere to its new encryption standards and accordingly upgrade the devices to the new norms.

The AUA is an entity engaged in providing Aadhaar-enabled services. It may be a government, public or a private legal agency registered in India which uses Aadhaar authentication services provided by UIDAI.

The ASA is any entity that transmits authentication requests to the Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR) on behalf of one or more AUAs.

Requests from AUAs to extend the timeline has been cited as the reason for delay by UIDAI. The last deadline was 31 January.

Still, UIDAI claims most of the entities have migrated to registered devices and “no further extension will be given in this regard.” Failure to meet the February-end deadline will lead to loss or disruption of services, the circular added.

A privacy expert called for better security in the Aadhaar system.

“The UIDAI should have gone in for smart cards, which are inherently more secure and would have proven a better basis for a national ID system. Given its choice of biometrics, UIDAI should have required hardware-level encryption — the yet-to-be-specified (Level 1) security standard— from 2010,” said Pranesh Prakash, policy director at think tank Centre for Internet and Society.

“Making the much-delayed Level 1 mandatory is what UIDAI should be focusing on; sadly, even basic registration and easily-defeated software-level encryption (Level 0) is yet to be made mandatory,” he said.

UIDAI has been under the scanner over the past few months over charges that random entities have been accessing personal information without the consent of individual Aadhaar number holders.

Last month, UIDAI put in place a two-layer security to reinforce privacy protections for Aadhaar holders—it introduced a virtual identification so that the actual number need not be shared to authenticate their identity. Simultaneously, it further regulated the storage of the Aadhaar numbers within various databases.
There are more than 1.2 billion Aadhaar holders in the country.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/livemint-komal-gupta-february-8-2018-from-march-1-only-registered-devices-to-be-used-to-authenticate-aadhaar

FrndiNeed; an app for passengers' safety

praskrishna — 2014-12-27T17:05:38Z

The article by Athira A. Nair was published in the Economic Times on December 10, 2014. Sunil Abraham gave his inputs.

Even as the nation recovers from the shock of an Uber passenger being raped by her cabbie, there is a new app that has repackaged itself to "get back the lost trust and security for the daily commuter". FrndiNeed, a socially-enabled app, which utilizes the user's geo-location, connects the user with friends in the vicinity and requests them for a lift. The app, a variant of those that poke friends for instant meet-ups, has an SOS tab for emergency.

Kunal Kishore, the Delhi-based co-founder of FrndiNeed, said the app was originally meant to catch up with friends who were within a 2-5 km radius."However, when we developed the app in August, we thought of such (women's security) situations also," he told ET.

Newer app developers are looking at preventing a crisis and creating safer situations for women rather than just providing panic buttons. Delhi-based group Socialcops collects data from civilians and authorities to find the safest and fastest routes for users. This app tells the police about the routes which need attention. Prukalpa Shankar, co-founder, said: "We are launching the SocialCops application in Kar nataka through the new Mobile One governance platform."

Jasmeen Patheja, founder of the Blank Noise Project, said apps should be part of a larger system connecting the woman with the neighbourhood, the police and family, and not something that creates panic. "The Circleof6 app created primarily in the US scenario where daterapes are rampant, puts the user in touch with six friends the minute she begins to feel uncomfortable on a date," she said.Jasmeen has not come across a case in which an app has helped a woman in an emergency .

The police is tweaking its app to connect women in trouble to the police. Their six-month-old `DCP SahAya' app will incorporate a facility which will alert the police control room or the local police station, revealed Rohini Katoch Sepat, DCP Bengaluru South-East.

Sunil Abraham, the executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, believes that while certain mobile apps could provide a degree of safety, it would be naive to think that technology will be the solution."How many people do you trust to help you at any time of night? For women, whose emergency contacts are their parents, it would be difficult to alert them on a date night. Also, in the most pessimistic scenario, the mobile signal could be dead, and you may not be able to give an alert at all."

Jessie Paul, CEO of Paul Writer Strategic Advisory, felt that although IT is an enabler and apps are a step in the right direction, they were not preventive.

"To some extent, I believe these are superficial. We should have a centralized database for crime which will make it difficult for criminals to escape and rehabilitate in other parts of the country ," he said.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/economic-times-december-10-2014-athira-a-nair-frndineed-an-app-for-passenger-safety

Freedom struggle 2.0

pranesh — 2015-04-27T01:23:44Z

In the face of the debate on net neutrality, here is a look at the consequences of not having a free, equal, and private internet.

The article was published in the Hindu on April 25, 2015. Pranesh Prakash gave his inputs.

There has been so much noise surrounding net neutrality (generously helped along by All India Bakchod’s explanatory video) that by now even my technology-abhorring grandmother knows something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

However, let us recap: net neutrality refers to a free and open Internet that lets us utilise every channel of communication without bias or — heaven forbid — having to pay extra dough. Paid sites and subscriptions excluded of course; the owners have to send their kids to college, you know. As to the Importance of net neutrality, it is “... a democratic principle (in line with the right to equality in our Constitution) and it is important for freedom of speech and expression,” says Pranesh Prakash of the Centre for Internet and Society.

“Evolving technologies cannot be regulated” was one of the opening lines of Almost Human, a science fiction/crime series that did not survive its debut season. A profound statement, especially in the light of the blistering debate over net neutrality. A debate that has the Twitterati frothing at the mouth and primed to spew sarcasm at those against them in what is being perceived as a battle of epic proportions. Sample these: @Roflindian: What if this net neutrality debate was a clever ploy by telcos to merrily push up rates? And we’ll be like — anything for net freedom! @GabbbarSingh: Someone should launch a start-up just to announce its support to #NetNeutrality “We at Random-Word-with-no-vowels support #NetNeutrality”. @madversity: Net Neutrality has become so popular in Delhi in just three days Aunties want to know where it is available so they can wear it for Karva Chauth.

The battle for net neutrality, in India at least, looks to have exacerbated suddenly in the past few weeks. In truth, however, the issue has been brewing for quite a while, fanned by the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) penchant for preparing sheaves of rules and regulations, sundry disputes and discourses by the Reddit demigods and anyone who owns a blog or a YouTube channel, the Bitcoin mafia’s complacent insistence on being the saviour of the web as we know it, and the rumours and filtered nuggets of news surrounding Google’s plans for a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO).

Here, then, are the main antagonists of our piece: telecom company Airtel (post its announcement of the ostensibly unpopular Airtel Zero plan, so much so that the CEO decided to grace Airtel’s users with an e-mail to “clear the air”) and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) that has taken to pitting Davids (consumers) against Goliaths (telecom companies) by floating a paper (subject to discussion and a cannonade of indignant e-mails) containing “some of the strangest and some ridiculously biased statements”, as Nikhil Pahwa succinctly put it in a MediaNama piece.

According to Airtel’s CEO, their “vision is to have every Indian on the Internet. There are millions of Indians who think that the Internet is expensive and do not know what it can do for them… We know that if we allow them to experience the joys of the Internet they will join the digital revolution.” Noble thought, but the sentiment is marred by the sordid matter of blunt. “Airtel Zero is a technology platform that connects application providers to their customers for free. The platform allows any content or application provider to enrol on it so their customers can visit these sites for free. Instead of charging customers we charge the providers who choose to get on to the platform.” In effect, restricting the freedom of the consumer to choose what site he/she wishes to use.

And I wish telecoms would stop bandying about the word “free” like confetti at a wedding. ‘100 free SMSes per day! Only at Rs. 50 a month!’ Well, I’m still losing Rs. 50, aren’t I? Why would you insult my intelligence by telling me my 100 SMSes are free then? “Customers are free to choose which website they want to visit, whether it is toll free or not. If they visit a toll free site they are not charged for data. If they visit any other site normal data charges apply.” Well, pray tell us plebians, Mr. CEO, since companies like Flipkart, NDTV and others have already abandoned the Airtel Zero ship, and a Google probably mightn’t consider coming aboard, having bigger fish to fry (i.e. its MVNO plans), does not your unequal treatment of these websites go against the very backbone of net neutrality?

The debate on net neutrality has more far-reaching consequences, however, than just having to shell out extra to exchange annoying Whatsapp group messages all day long or Skyping with your significant other. The absence of neutrality will result in a barrage of unregulated technologies and the unprecedented growth of the deep web (the portion of Internet content that is not or cannot be indexed by regular or standard search engines — typically comprising around 90 per cent of data presently available on the World Wide Web). Most of the deep web is a fairly innocuous place, consisting of anything from library catalogues to your private folder of dead baby jokes, but it is also a lair of (mostly) undetectable criminal activity (case in point, the recent shutdown of Silk Road, an online black market for your every requirement, and I mean every requirement).

The deep web, naturally, is the best illustration of “a free, equal, and private Internet” (when its powers are harnessed for good, not evil) and so is its most popular currency — Bitcoin. A Bitcoin is, in the concise words of Danny Bradbury (in an informative CoinDesk piece), “a payment mechanism designed to level the playing field, driving out unnecessary costs and making it possible for even the lowest income members of society to participate in the economy. But it relies on a free and open Internet to do so.” And vice versa. Researchers have been working on a way to make micropayments and encryption work together without privacy or bandwidth compromise via mesh networks (faster connections through nearby peers, thus leading to net neutrality, and further to telecoms becoming skittish). However, steady price gains for Bitcoin as well as altcoins (alternative cryptocurrencies to bitcoin) are undeniable proof that telecoms may have to bow to the inevitable.

Also, in the absence of a free and open Internet, organisations like Wikileaks and Anonymous would abound with alacrity. While some would call that an excellent development, there are those who would want to banish Internet altogether from our fair land, making the aam junta cower, tremble and rage by turns at the usurping of its digital rights.

Another thing that seems to be troubling very few, especially in the wake of the wave of acrimony against Airtel, is Google’s plans to expand into the MVNO market. Google, so goes the news, is planning to go into partnership with Sprint and T-Mobile to further its plans of becoming a wireless carrier. While Google already provides free or subsidised Internet with Project Loon and Google Fiber, the new move could easily prove a challenge to net neutrality. Some see the move as harmless — in fact, for the greater good. Evidenced by a senior software engineer of my acquaintance who, since Google makes money by tracking user information and behaviour online and doesn’t prioritise certain kinds of traffic on the Internet access it provides currently, doesn’t see them having any incentive to do so in the cellular space. In fact, he finds the Google MVNO a fascinating move, especially since Sprint and T-Mobile have far fewer subscribers than ATT or Verizon — meaning that the MVNO provider is at the mercy of these MNOs and that, were Google to be successful with this, it means the MNOs are losing selling power. An interesting irony in the context of net neutrality. On the other hand, a researcher at Centre for Internet and Society and former tech journalist is of the opinion that Google may try to push its services since that has always been the case with corporates, whether they provide CSR freebies or diversify their business.

After all, “Who decides what we consume? What if tomorrow the government decides everyone watching YouTube is wasting their time, or [those] watching cricket should be doing something better? That starts to tread into censorship...” says Vijay Anand of The Startup Centre. I suppose all we can do is keep hope animatedly existent as to the triumph of the freedom in our webspace and spam TRAI’s inbox with as many e-mails as we can.

Net Neutrality

Net neutrality is a principle that says Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should treat all traffic and content on their networks equally.

How does net neutrality affect you?
The internet is now a level-playing field. Anybody can start up a website, stream music or use social media with the same amount of data that they have purchased with a particular ISP. But in the absence of neutrality, your ISP might favour certain websites over others for which you might have to pay extra. Website A might load at a faster speed than Website B because your ISP has a deal with Website A that Website B cannot afford. It’s like your electricity company charging you extra for using the washing machine, television and microwave oven above and beyond what you are already paying.

Why Now?

Late last month, Trai released a draft consultation paper seeking views from the industry and the general public on the need for regulations for over-the-top (OTT) players such as Whatsapp, Skype, Viber etc, security concerns and net neutrality. The objective of this consultation paper, the regulator said, was to analyse the implications of the growth of OTTs and consider whether or not changes were required in the current regulatory framework.

Key Players
Internet Service Providers like Airtel, Vodaphone, Reliance... The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India which lays down the rules for telecom companies The Internet companies like Facebook, Google, whatsapp and other smaller startups You, the consumer

What is an OTT?
OTT or over-the-top refers to applications and services which are accessible over the internet and ride on operators' networks offering internet access services. The best known examples of OTT are Skype, Viber, WhatsApp, e-commerce sites, Ola, Facebook messenger. The OTTs are not bound by any regulations. The Trai is of the view that the lack of regulations poses a threat to security and there’s a need for government’s intervention to ensure a level playing field in terms of regulatory compliance.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-hindu-zara-khan-april-25-2015-freedom-struggle

Freedom Song: Film Screening and Discussion

praskrishna — 2013-03-15T06:51:39Z

Freedom Song, a documentary film produced by the Public Service Broadcasting Trust and directed by Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and Subi Chaturvedi will be screened at the IIHS Bangalore City Campus on March 21, 2013, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., followed by discussions. Paranjoy will be present for the screening and will answer questions from the participants.

Discussions and arguments on freedom of expression and what should or should not be censored are as old as civilization itself, across the world and in India. In recent years, these debates have acquired new dimensions with the growth of the mass media -- especially the internet. Maintenance of public order, national security, religious tolerance, blasphemy, libel, defamation, invasion of privacy, artistic licence, pornography, obscenity, copyright and other intellectual property rights have all become issues linked to freedom of expression, often under highly contentious and controversial circumstances. Whereas Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of expression as a fundamental right of all citizens, Article 19(2) imposes "reasonable restrictions" on the exercise of such freedom. There is no consensus on what constitutes "reasonable" restrictions and/or who or which body should determine what is or should be "reasonable" restrictions on freedom of expression.

The 52-minute-long documentary film entitled Freedom Song produced by the Public Service Broadcasting Trust and directed by Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and Subi Chaturvedi seeks to examine issues relating to freedom of expression in a contemporary Indian context. The film raises a number of questions. Has Indian society as a whole become more or less tolerant to dissent even as sections of the population have apparently become increasingly vociferous in protesting against what is considered offensive? Are vocal minorities drowning out the voices of passive majorities in issues pertaining to artistic freedom and independence of expression? Where does one draw a dividing line between an individual's right to offend and her or his obligations towards maintenance of social harmony?

The film includes examples of alleged violations and transgressions of the fundamental right to free expression in contemporary India. Such examples include incidents and episodes relating to why Salman Rushdie’s video conference at the Jaipur Literary Festival had to be called off, the banning of books by Taslima Nasreen by the West Bengal government, controversial paintings by the late Maqbool Fida Hussain, the chopping of the hand of professor of Malayalam T.J. Joseph in Ernakulam, Kerala, the arrest of professor Ambikesh Mohapatra in Kolkata for circulating an e-mail lampooning West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and the controversy surrounding a cartoon first published in 1949 which depicts India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the architect of the country’s Constitution B.R. Ambedkar.

These examples are juxtaposed with the views of a cross-section of Indians from different walks of life: lawyers, creative artistes, journalists, politicians, social activists and ordinary individuals.

Film duration: 52 minutes
Year of production: 2012

Paranjoy Guha Thakurta

Paranjoy Guha Thakurta is an independent journalist and an educator. His work experience, spanning more than 35 years, cuts across different media: print, radio, television and documentary cinema. He is a writer, speaker, anchor, interviewer, teacher and commentator in three languages: English, Bengali and Hindi. His main areas of interest are the working of the political economy and the media in India and the world, on which he has authored/co-authored books and directed/produced documentary films. He lectures on these subjects to general audiences and also trains aspiring – and working -- media professionals. He participates frequently in and organizes seminars/conferences, is a regular contributor to newspapers, magazines and websites and is featured on television channels and radio programmes as an anchor as well as an analyst and commentator.

Born on October 5, 1955 and educated at St. Stephen’s College, University of Delhi (1972-75) and at the Delhi School of Economics (1975-77) in the same university from where he obtained his Master’s degree in economics, he started his career as a journalist in June 1977 and has been employed with various media organizations including companies bringing out publications such as Business India, BusinessWorld, The Telegraph, India Today and The Pioneer. He worked with Television Eighteen (now Network 18) for almost six years between 1995 and 2001 when he anchored a daily discussion programme called “India Talks” on the CNBC-India television channel -- nearly 1,400 half-hour episodes were broadcast. From March 2007, he has been anchoring two one-hour-long weekly programmes for Lok Sabha Television (the channel owned and operated by the lower house of the Parliament of India) – a panel discussion called “Talktime” (earlier “Headstart”) and an interview called “1-on-One”. He has anchored programmes for other television channels.

He is (or has been) a visiting faculty member at over a dozen reputed educational institutions including the Indian Institutes of Management at Ahmedabad, Bangalore and Kolkata, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Jamia Millia Islamia, Jamia Hamdard University (both in Delhi), the Asian College of Journalism, Chennai, the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, the Film & Television Institute of India, Pune, the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie and the Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi. In September 2010, he became a visiting professor in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Delhi, teaching M.Phil students.

He served as a member of the Press Council of India nominated by the University Grants Commission between January 2008 and January 2011. In April 2010, as a member of a two-member sub-committee of the Council, he co-authored a 36,000-word report entitled “Paid News: How Corruption in the Indian Media Undermines Democracy”.

He is a media trainer and a consultant/adviser on India’s political economy. He was the founder director of the School of Convergence (SoC). He has been a consultant at the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore, making presentations and writing papers on Indian politics. He has been associated with a number of projects of the United Nations Development Programme and the International Labour Organization (ILO). He moderated two panel discussions at the International Labour Conference at Geneva, Switzerland, in June 2009 and at the ILO’s Asia Pactific Regional Meeting in Kyoto, Japan, in December 2011. He is currently president of the Foundation for Media Professionals, an independent, not-for-profit organization. He has advised various organizations, including corporate bodies (Indian, foreign and multinational), government agencies (including India’s Ministry of Information & Broadcasting) and civil society organizations.

He is a director/producer of documentary films. One entitled “Idiot Box or Window of Hope” which examines the impact of television on Indian society – was produced by the Public Service Broadcasting Trust (PSBT) in 2003 and was broadcast on Doordarshan. In 2006-07, he produced and directed a five-part documentary series in partnership with the PSBT entitled: “Hot As Hell: A Profile of Dhanbad”, different versions of which have been broadcast on various television channels including Doordarshan and NDTV 24x7. In 2007, he directed a documentary film “Grabbing Eyeballs: What’s Unethical About Television News in India” for PSBT that was followed up by another entitled “Advertorial: Selling News or Products?” in 2009. In 2010, he produced and directed a three-part documentary film series entitled “Blood & Iron: A Story of the Convergence of Crime, Business and Politics in Southern India” on the political, economic and ecological consequences of iron ore mining in Bellary (Karnataka) and Ananthapur (Andhra Pradesh). The film has been translated into six Indian languages and broadcast on different television channels. In 2011, he produced and directed a documentary film entitled: “The Great Indian Telecom Robbery”. (He was one of the first journalists to write about the telecommunications spectrum scandal in November 2007 and was one of the petitioners in public-interest litigation petitions on the subject in the Supreme Court of India.) In 2012, he co-directed a film entitled “Freedom Song” that examines freedom of expression in a contemporary Indian context. He has produced/directed a number of other documentary films.

He has co-authored a book with Shankar Raghuraman entitled: “A Time of Coalitions: Divided We Stand”, published by Sage Publications India in March 2004. The book was able to anticipate the outcome of the 14th general elections in India, the results for which came out in May that year. A substantially revised, updated and enlarged version of the book titled “Divided We Stand: India in a Time of Coalitions” was published in December 2007. He has written “Media Ethics: Truth, Fairness and Objectivity, Making and Breaking News” published by Oxford University Press India in March 2009 – the second enlarged edition of the book was published in December 2011. He has contributed articles and chapters to books (including “Realizing Brand India” edited by Sharif D. Rangnekar [Rupa, 2005] and “India: The Political Economy of Reforms” edited by Bibek Debroy & Rahul Mukherji [Bookwell, 2004]).

He is currently engaged in authoring/co-authoring other books and producing/directing documentary films. He has travelled widely in India and across the world. He is a partner of Media Network of India, a firm engaged in designing and creation of content for all media, contract publishing, media training, establishment of radio stations and business development.

Contact details: Paranjoy Guha Thakurta
Work: E-1, Nizamuddin West, 2^nd Floor, New Delhi – 110 013, India
Phone: (+91) (011) 4182-7691; Mobile: (+91) 98101-70435
Home: K-33, South City – I, Gurgaon (Haryana) – 122001, India;
E-mail: paranjoy@gmail.com or paranjoy@hotmail.com

For details on the venue: +91-80-67606666

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/freedom-song-film-screening-and-discussion