top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 4:29:04 pm

Algorithmic Anarchy

The NEET paper leak protests at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar should have remained a legitimate expression of student anger over the collapse of examination integrity. Instead, as the agitation escalated into clashes with the police, abusive sloganeering and an increasingly radical political campaign, Meta’s algorithms emerged as an invisible force multiplying the unrest. The controversy surrounding the brief removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s message to the youth in the aftermath of the...

Algorithmic Anarchy

The NEET paper leak protests at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar should have remained a legitimate expression of student anger over the collapse of examination integrity. Instead, as the agitation escalated into clashes with the police, abusive sloganeering and an increasingly radical political campaign, Meta’s algorithms emerged as an invisible force multiplying the unrest. The controversy surrounding the brief removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s message to the youth in the aftermath of the protests only reinforces that concern. Meta has attributed the takedown to a “technical glitch” and apologised. But when the world’s largest social media platform can temporarily suppress the message of the elected leader of the world’s largest democracy during a politically charged moments, the issue extends well beyond a single deleted post. Who decides what India sees? That question has become impossible to ignore during the Cockroach Janta Party’s protests. Across Instagram and Facebook, users have reported being inundated with CJP videos, reels and protest clips despite never following the organisation or engaging with similar political content. Whether this resulted from coordinated paid collaborations, recommendation algorithms or both deserves a thorough investigation. But the larger democratic concern is that public opinion is increasingly being mediated not by citizens, journalists or elected representatives, but by opaque algorithms designed in Silicon Valley and optimised for engagement rather than democratic responsibility. Meta’s recommendation engine is not a passive notice board. Every piece of political content that reaches millions has first been selected by an algorithm whose workings remain largely hidden from public scrutiny. This is hardly unique to India. Around the world, Meta has repeatedly been accused of amplifying polarisation, misinformation and political extremism because outrage keeps users engaged. From elections to ethnic conflicts and episodes of civil unrest, the company has faced persistent criticism that its commercial incentives reward divisive content over balanced discourse. Democracies cannot afford to outsource the architecture of public debate to corporations whose primary obligation is to shareholders rather than constitutional values. While citizens are entitled to challenge governments and demand accountability, there is an important distinction between a movement that expands because people are persuaded and one that appears to be algorithmically amplified into omnipresence. Equally disturbing has been the normalisation of abusive political language during the protests. When such content is repeatedly amplified through recommendation systems, platforms cease to be neutral intermediaries and become active participants in degrading democratic discourse. Platforms that influence elections, protests and public opinion must explain how political recommendations are generated and why particular narratives receive extraordinary amplification. Silicon Valley companies insist they are merely technology platforms. But their algorithms increasingly exercise editorial power. When software determines which protests dominate national conversations and whose voices disappear, technology has already become politics.

A Polarising Figure in Indian Cricket Coaching

Gautam Gambhir’s tenure as head coach of the Indian men’s cricket team has been a rollercoaster of triumphs and tribulations. Appointed in July 2024 following Rahul Dravid’s successful stint, Gambhir brought a reputation for tactical brilliance from his IPL mentorship, where he guided Kolkata Knight Riders to a title in 2024. Yet, despite notable successes in white-ball cricket, including leading India to victories in the 2025 ICC Champions Trophy and the 2025 Asia Cup, he remains a deeply divisive figure. Many fans, pundits, and even former players express outright disdain for him, often amplified on social media platforms like X.


In my opinion, this dislike stems not just from recent Test cricket failures but from Gambhir’s inherent personality traits—his abrasiveness, perceived favouritism, and a history of controversies—that clash with the expectations of a more diplomatic coaching role. While his results in limited-overs formats are commendable, they haven’t shielded him from criticism, highlighting how personal style can overshadow professional achievements in the high-stakes world of Indian cricket.


SWOT analysis

To understand this paradox, it’s essential to dissect Gambhir’s coaching profile through a SWOT analysis, which reveals both his potential and pitfalls.


Strengths: Gambhir’s greatest asset is his strategic mind and ability to foster winning cultures in high-pressure environments. As a player, he was instrumental in India’s 2007 T20 World Cup and 2011 ODI World Cup triumphs, scoring crucial runs in finals. Translating that to coaching, he has excelled in white-ball cricket. Under his guidance, India clinched the 2025 Champions Trophy, defeating strong sides like England and Australia, with innovative tactics such as aggressive batting lineups and versatile all-rounders. The 2025 Asia Cup win further showcased his knack for player motivation, where young talents like Nitish Kumar Reddy thrived. His IPL legacy—two titles as KKR captain and one as mentor—demonstrates a proven track record in T20 formats, where quick decisions and bold selections pay off. Gambhir’s no-nonsense approach also instills discipline, as seen in India’s drawn Test series in England in 2025, where the team showed resilience against a formidable opposition on away soil. These successes prove he can deliver “good results,” particularly in formats that suit his aggressive philosophy.


Weaknesses: However, Gambhir’s weaknesses are glaring and often fuel the dislike. His communication style is blunt and confrontational, which alienates stakeholders. For instance, post the humiliating 0-3 home Test series loss to New Zealand in 2024 and the recent 0-2 whitewash by South Africa in 2025, Gambhir’s press conferences have been defensive, dismissing critics with remarks like, “I’m the same guy who got results in England.” This comes across as arrogant, especially when contrasted with predecessors like Dravid, who handled setbacks with grace. Critics point to perceived favoritism in selections, such as prioritising IPL performers like Sai Sudarshan (despite a modest Ranji average) over domestic stalwarts like Sarfaraz Khan or Abhimanyu Easwaran.


Social media erupts with accusations of “ego and hate,” with X users labeling him the “worst Test coach” after India lost five home Tests in a year—a stark decline from the fortress India was under Shastri and Dravid. Gambhir’s political affiliations with the BJP and past on-field spats (e.g., with Virat Kohli) add layers of personal baggage, making him a target for those who see him as divisive rather than unifying. His pessimistic demeanor, as noted by former coach John Wright in a 2019 article, where Gambhir was described as “insecure and negative,” persists, eroding team morale during slumps.


Opportunities: Looking ahead, Gambhir has ample chances to turn the narrative. The upcoming 2026 T20 World Cup presents a platform to leverage his strengths in shorter formats, where India’s talent pool aligns with his all-rounder-focused strategies. Transitioning the team post the retirement of seniors like Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli could be his redemption arc; by nurturing emerging stars and integrating data-driven selections, he could rebuild India’s Test dominance. Collaborations with supportive figures like Suresh Raina, who recently defended him by emphasizing player responsibility over coaching blame, could help mend public perception. If Gambhir adapts his style—perhaps by being more empathetic in media interactions—he could capitalize on India’s vast resources to achieve multi-format consistency, silencing detractors and cementing his legacy.


Threats: The biggest threats to Gambhir’s position are external pressures and internal fractures. Media scrutiny is relentless; outlets like Hindustan Times and India Today have lambasted his “lost in transition” excuses, while Iceland Cricket’s satirical jab about his poor win percentage underscores global ridicule. BCCI’s impatience could lead to his ouster, as hinted in reports of potential replacements like VVS Laxman. Player unrest, fueled by selection controversies, risks a dressing room revolt, especially if veterans feel sidelined. Broader threats include the evolving game—where Test cricket demands patience over aggression—and fan backlash on platforms like X, where hashtags like #SackGambhir trend after every loss. If white-ball successes wane, these threats could culminate in an abrupt exit, mirroring his IPL coaching stints that ended amid reported conflicts.


(The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page