top of page

By:

Anil D. Salve

21 March 2026 at 8:11:09 pm

A Drought of Wisdom in an Ocean of Information

We live in an age where information is everywhere. With a single click, we can access news from across the world, thousands of opinions, countless videos and endless claims. Knowledge has never been so accessible. Yet, in this overwhelming flow of information, something increasingly scarce is discernment-the ability to distinguish what deserves our belief from what deserves our doubt. Information and knowledge are not the same. Reading, watching or hearing something does not automatically...

A Drought of Wisdom in an Ocean of Information

We live in an age where information is everywhere. With a single click, we can access news from across the world, thousands of opinions, countless videos and endless claims. Knowledge has never been so accessible. Yet, in this overwhelming flow of information, something increasingly scarce is discernment-the ability to distinguish what deserves our belief from what deserves our doubt. Information and knowledge are not the same. Reading, watching or hearing something does not automatically make it true. We need the ability to verify information, understand its context, recognise its purpose and only then form an opinion. In the digital age, this ability has become one of the most important forms of wisdom. Social media has transformed the way information travels. WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook and other platforms have made communication faster, wider and more accessible. But the same speed that connects society can also overwhelm it. Information often reaches us before facts do. A headline is read before the full story. A short video is watched without knowing what happened before or after it. A photograph is circulated without its original context. A message arrives with the familiar words, “Forwarded as received,” and within minutes it may reach thousands of people. By the time the truth catches up, the rumour may already have done its work. The problem becomes even more serious when misinformation is deliberately created and circulated. Rumours may be planted not merely to mislead individuals but to divert public attention from an important issue, create suspicion, damage someone's reputation or push society towards a particular narrative. A distraction does not always need to be completely false. Sometimes a small piece of truth is mixed with exaggeration, selective facts or emotional language. The result can be more powerful than an outright lie because it appears believable. This is how narratives are manufactured. Social media platforms can become powerful tools in this process. A repeated claim begins to look familiar, and familiarity is often mistaken for truth. A provocative post attracts attention. Thousands of reactions create the impression that “everyone” believes it. One emotional video triggers another, comments intensify the mood, and before facts have an opportunity to speak, public sentiment may have already shifted. This is where mob psychology enters the picture. A society can move from calm to anger, suspicion to trust, or optimism to fear with surprising speed. People who would ordinarily think carefully may react differently when they see thousands of others expressing outrage, fear or hostility. The individual begins to follow the crowd, and the crowd begins to reinforce the individual. The danger is not limited to negative emotions. The same mechanism can also be used positively-to mobilise people for social causes, humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, public awareness and community action. Technology itself is neither wise nor foolish. Its impact depends on how information is created, amplified and consumed. The greatest danger, therefore, is not that we have too much information. It is that we may lose the habit of thinking while consuming it. We are increasingly becoming consumers of information rather than creators of thought. Everyone has access to information today, but access does not necessarily mean understanding. The boundaries between a rumour and a report, an opinion and a fact, popularity and truth are becoming increasingly blurred. A post does not become true because thousands of people have liked it. A video does not become evidence merely because it has gone viral. An opinion does not become a fact because it is expressed confidently. An idea does not become correct simply because it confirms what we already believe. This last point deserves particular attention. We often accept information not because it is accurate, but because it is comfortable. We are naturally attracted to information that confirms our existing beliefs and suspicious of information that challenges them. In the digital world, this tendency can be amplified by algorithms that repeatedly expose us to content similar to what we have already watched, liked or shared. Gradually, we may find ourselves living inside an information bubble where we hear many voices-but mostly voices that agree with us. That is not diversity of information. It is an illusion of certainty. Discernment does not mean doubting everything. It means thinking before believing. It means asking simple but powerful questions: Who is saying this? What is the evidence? What is the context? What may be missing? Who benefits if I believe it? And have I heard the other side? These questions may take only a few seconds, but they can prevent hours, days or even years of misunderstanding. This responsibility is particularly important for the younger generation. Children today are growing up in an environment of unprecedented information exposure. They can encounter more information in a few hours than earlier generations might have encountered in weeks. Therefore, education cannot merely teach students how to collect, remember and reproduce information. It must teach them how to question, verify, analyse and interpret it. A student who can write the correct answer in an examination may be academically successful. But a student who knows how to ask the right question is better prepared for life. The classroom of the future must therefore produce not merely informed students, but thinking citizens. They must learn that forwarding a message is also a form of responsibility. Sharing a post is not an innocent act when it can affect someone's reputation, create public fear or influence social behaviour. The challenge becomes even greater in the age of Artificial Intelligence. AI can generate information, images, audio and video with extraordinary speed and sophistication. The distinction between what is real and what merely appears real may become increasingly difficult. In such a world, human judgment becomes more valuable, not less. Technology can produce an answer in seconds. It cannot automatically tell us whether that answer deserves our trust. Some answers require experience. Some require context. Many require the ability to think independently. We have more information, more technology and more connectivity than any previous generation. Yet our real challenge is to preserve something technology cannot manufacture for us: the capacity to think for ourselves. The ocean of information will only become larger. The question will no longer be, “How much information do we have?” The more important questions will be: What should we accept? What should we question? What should we verify? And what should we reject? No technology can completely answer these questions for us. No number of likes can substitute for evidence. No viral trend can replace judgment. No majority can turn misinformation into truth. That responsibility belongs to human beings. Information can tell us what happened. Discernment helps us understand what it means, why it happened, what may be missing from the story and how we should respond. Perhaps, therefore, the greatest educational challenge of our time is not to teach people how to find more information. They already know how to do that. The greater challenge is to teach them how to pause-to pause before believing, to pause before reacting, to pause before forwarding and to pause before joining the crowd. Because sometimes the most intelligent response to information is not an immediate reaction, but a moment of reflection. The ocean is already around us. It is growing deeper every day. What we need now is not more information to swim through it-but the wisdom to know which direction to take. (The writer is the Principal of Podar International School, Ausa, Latur. Views personal.)

After the Mandate, the Test of Governance

Writer: Rahul Gokhale
Rahul Gokhale
Feb 9
4 min read

With a sweeping municipal mandate in hand, Maharashtra’s ruling alliance must prove that concrete victories can translate into everyday competence.

Nearly a month after the January 15 civic polls, the BJP-led Mahayuti is consolidating its clear majority in most of the 29 municipal corporations. While the election of mayors and deputy mayors nears completion, the formation of key standing committees remains stalled. For city administrations emerging from years of bureaucratic oversight under administrators, these delays are bottlenecks that undermine the very capacity of local bodies.


The unexpected political developments following Ajit Pawar’s exit from public life introduced a moment of uncertainty within the alliance, and a brief period of recalibration was perhaps inevitable. But such contingencies cannot become a justification for prolonged indecision. The message from urban voters was clear: after they had delivered an overwhelming mandate, they expect administrative momentum, and not the games of political manoeuvring or brinkmanship.

Lived Realities

The mandate comes at a time when claims of urban transformation through big-ticket infrastructure projects are increasingly being tested against lived realities. The recent incident on the Mumbai–Pune Expressway, which caused an unprecedented traffic snarl of more than 24 hours after a gas tanker overturned near the Adoshi tunnel on the Pune–Mumbai Expressway, exposed serious gaps in the administration’s preparedness. Social media was rife with harrowing stories of the sufferings of stranded commuters, especially the elderly and the children. The grossly inadequate emergency response and utter lack of coordination between government agencies underscored an uncomfortable truth that wide roads and flyovers alone do not constitute development.


Over the last decade, infrastructure has dominated political discourse in Maharashtra’s cities. Expressways, metros, monorails, flyovers and coastal roads have been projected as markers of progress. While these projects are undoubtedly important and often necessary, they operate on long timelines and deliver benefits unevenly. What citizens experience daily are broken roads, erratic water supply, polluted air, unreliable public transport, unchecked construction and visual chaos. And these are the parameters that determine whether or not a city is liveable.


No Excuses

The BJP and its allies have made expansive promises in their municipal election manifestos. Improved civic amenities, cleaner air and water, efficient public transport, better road safety and responsive local governance featured prominently. With control over most corporations and without dependence on non-NDA parties, the Mahayuti can no longer fall back on political constraints as an explanation for inaction.


For the last three to four years, municipal corporations were run by administrators. Political parties routinely argued that the absence of elected representatives was the reason citizens’ grievances went unaddressed. That argument has now run its course. Elections have restored democratic accountability at the local level. If basic services continue to falter, responsibility will lie squarely with the elected leadership.


The warning signs are already visible. In a clear indicator of declining air quality, doctors across urban centres have flagged a rise in respiratory ailments. Traffic congestion, poor road design, and indiscipline continue to contribute to a steady number of accidents. Unauthorized banners and hoardings disfigure city skylines, while incessant and poorly coordinated road digging disrupts daily life. These are not abstract policy challenges but immediate, everyday failures of municipal governance.


Urban administration is often dismissed as unglamorous, but it is precisely here that governments earn or lose public trust. The management of waste, enforcement of traffic rules, regulation of construction, maintenance of roads, and protection of open spaces require sustained attention, not headline-grabbing announcements. They demand coordination between departments, empowered committees, and a willingness to prioritise citizens over contractors, optics, or unwarranted political interference.


Moment of Accountability

During the election campaign, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis was asked in an interview whether cities should be “liveable” or “loveable.” His response was characteristically crisp: once cities become liveable, they will automatically become loveable. The remark resonated because it captured an essential truth. Emotional attachment to a city grows from functional competence — from clean streets, breathable air, safe roads, and predictable public services.


That statement now returns as a benchmark against which the Mahayuti’s urban governance will be judged. The alliance has the numbers, the political stability, and the administrative experience. What it needs to demonstrate now is urgency. The delayed formation of key municipal committees sends the opposite signal.


It must also be remembered that civic issues transcend any political ‘ism.’ Roads, water, air quality, waste management, and public transport affect every resident, irrespective of party allegiance. The responsibility of governance is not to serve ideology but to deliver tangible improvements in the daily lives of citizens.


Rhetoric may help win elections, but it does not build confidence. Nor does it make cities liveable, let alone loveable. The electorate has done its part. It is now for the ruling dispensation to show that its emphasis on infrastructure is matched by an equally strong commitment to everyday governance. The real test of the mandate will not be measured in kilometres of concrete laid, but in whether citizens feel a tangible difference in their daily lives.


(The writer is a political commentator. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page