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.)

How Microplastics Travel from Krill to Whales

Writer: Dr. Sanjay Joshi
Dr. Sanjay Joshi
Apr 3
3 min read

Dear readers, in continuation of my article from last week, let us once again follow the krill and understand not only how they consume their food but also how they end up ingesting microplastic particles along the way. But before we get to that, it is important to first understand the very basics of the aquatic food chain, because that is where this story truly begins.


In all kinds of aquatic ecosystems—whether oceans, seas, lakes, or rivers—there exist extremely tiny microscopic organisms known as phytoplankton. These are mostly microscopic algae, invisible to the naked eye, yet they play an enormous role in sustaining life in water. In fact, they form the very base or foundation of an intricate and interconnected aquatic food chain and food web.


Phytoplankton are remarkable because they can make their own food. Using water, carbon dioxide, and energy from sunlight, they produce nutrients through photosynthesis and, in the process, release oxygen into the environment. This makes them the primary “producers” in aquatic ecosystems, supplying both food and oxygen that support life at every higher level of the chain.


Countless marine and freshwater species, directly or indirectly, depend on these primary producers for survival. In simple terms, the aquatic food chain begins with phytoplankton. The next level consists of zooplankton, which include krill and other tiny drifting sea creatures. These are known as primary “consumers” because they feed on phytoplankton.


These zooplankton are then eaten by small fish and other marine animals, which become secondary consumers. In turn, they are preyed upon by larger fish and other predators, forming tertiary consumers and higher levels of the food chain. As we move upward, the food chain becomes longer, more complex, and more interconnected.


At the very top of this chain are the apex predators—whales, other marine mammals, seabirds, and, ultimately, we humans. And this is precisely why what happens at the microscopic level, beginning with phytoplankton and krill, matters so deeply to all life above them.


Microplastics and Whales

Microplastic particles, though tiny, can easily cling to the outer surface of phytoplankton and may even enter their cellular structure over time. In other words, a single algal cell can end up carrying multiple microplastic particles within or around it. What appears insignificant at the microscopic level becomes alarming when we look at what happens next in the food chain.


Let us do a simple calculation. A krill, shrimp, or any other small aquatic “consumer” can ingest thousands of these algal cells in a single feeding. If we assume that each algal cell carries around 50 microplastic particles, then a krill consuming 1,000 such cells in one go could take in as many as 50,000 microplastic particles. That is an astonishing number for such a tiny creature.


Now take the next step. Imagine a whale consuming 1,000 such krill, each already carrying 50,000 microplastic particles. In that one feeding event alone, the whale could potentially ingest 5 crore microplastic particles. And in reality, a whale can swallow thousands of krill at once. This gives us a disturbing glimpse into the sheer volume of microplastics that can enter the body of a single large marine animal in a very short span of time.


And this is not just about whales. There are thousands of species of fish and other marine animals that feed either directly on phytoplankton or on these primary consumers, such as krill. This means microplastics are steadily moving upward through the marine food chain, entering the bodies of species large and small.


No matter which animal is affected, microplastics are foreign intruders in the body and can pose a serious threat to overall health. In whales, dolphins, and other large marine mammals, these particles can cause internal damage by irritating or scratching the stomach lining, sometimes contributing to infection, poor nutrition, or even starvation. These mammals often consume prey that has already accumulated microplastics, especially from ocean depths between 50 and 250 metres, where concentrations are believed to be particularly high.


The danger does not end there. Plastics also act as carriers of harmful chemicals, transporting pollutants into the digestive systems of marine animals. These toxic substances can interfere with reproduction, weaken immunity, and disrupt normal biological functions. Studies have also found that microplastics can accumulate in blubber, the liver, the lungs, and other vital organs, making them not just an environmental pollutant but a serious and growing biological threat.


What about sea turtles, seabirds, and other marine animals? Let us explore that next Saturday. Till then, have a wonderful Easter weekend!


(The writer is an environmentalist. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page