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.)

Ajit Pawar, a defeated warrior

Suyash Padate
Jan 4, 2025
3 min read

Updated: Jan 6, 2025

Ajit Pawar

Mumbai: Ajit Pawar became the comeback king of Maharashtra as his party emerged as the real NCP in the election results. But within a span of one month, a question is being asked that ‘where is Ajit dada’ and why he has not uttered a single word on the Massajog murder case involving minister Dhananjay Munde.


Straight forward in nature and an outspoken leader Ajit Pawar has suddenly disappeared from political scenarios for a couple of weeks. His silence is conspicuous as his trusted aid Dhananjay Munde is under fire from all four sides. Has Ajit dada gone abroad, is he on vacation, no clue. Now things are becoming increasingly difficult not only for Pawar but even for the Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis to defend Munde as all the parties including NCP and BJP are gunning for his head.


Sources in NCP said, Pawar is aware of the impact of the current controversy on his and his party’s image. There is also a strong Maratha undertone in the case as Deshmukh was Maratha and Walmik Karad, the prime accused in the case and Munde come from Vanjari caste in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category. During the Manoj Jarange Patil-led agitation for Maratha quota, Beed saw a bitter tussle between Maratha and Vanjari communities. Pawar has not asked Dhananjay Munde to step down but at the same time he is not stopping NCP leaders from Beed such as MLA Prakash Solanke from attacking the Minister. The next few days could decide whether Munde manages to save his chair or is asked to take a step back, in the interest of his party and the Mahayuti government.


MLAs of the Ajit Pawar-led NCP have demanded the resignation of Dhananjay Munde, who is at the helm of the affairs of Food and Civil Supplies department and have conveyed their demand to NCP leader and Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar. They said the party legislators are demanding the resignation due to Munde’s proximity with Valmik Karad, who is an accused in the murder of Massajog village sarpanch Santosh Deshmukh. The MLAs are wary of losing the support of the Maratha caste group if they are seen favouring Dhananjay Munde. MLA Prakash Solanke is insisting for sacking him. In spite of these developments Pawar has not surfaced.


At the same time a different script was written to the story. Among the many prayers made on New Year’s Day, one stands out in Maharashtra. On Wednesday, Ajit Pawar’s mother Asha Pawar visited the temple town of Pandharpur and, in her own words, prayed for the reunion of Ajit and his uncle and NCP (SP) chief Sharad Pawar. The political landscape in Maharashtra has often reflected shifting alliances and familial ties. There are speculations that the fractured relationship between Sharad Pawar and his nephew, Ajit Pawar, may be mended. Political observers have been closely watching the possibility of a reunion within the Pawar family following the split in the NCP in 2023. While some see a potential for healing, others wonder if the gap between the two leaders can ever be bridged.


The political ramifications of a reunion between the two leaders could be profound. While Sharad Pawar remains a key figure in the All India Alliance, Ajit Pawar's support for the NDA has created a complicated political situation. The coming months will determine whether the Pawar family can heal its rifts and how their potential unity will impact the state's governance and party alignments. Nevertheless, the NCP leadership has put the full stop on the possibility of the reunion of the NCP factions led by Ajit Pawar and Sharad Pawar.


On the other hand, the Mahayuti government is facing mounting tensions over the distribution of guardian minister positions following the recent cabinet expansion. The controversy surrounding the selection of guardian ministers for districts. This has become a major challenge for Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, with intense competition erupting across the state. 11 out of Maharashtra’s 36 districts have witnessed fierce competition, with multiple contenders vying for the prestigious positions. On this particular issue the Shiv Sena led by deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde is putting hurdles before the NCP on every occasion.


Against this backdrop when Ajit Pawar will in true sense assume the command the question is being discussed in the hush hush voice in the corridors of power. In this complicated situation where Ajit Pawar stands in Mahayui is still unclear.

Comments

bottom of page