I’m still trying to figure out the bizzare behaviour of IIPM in the recent days. The more I think about it, the more I wonder about the role – in this matter – of the perceived status of blogging. Would the same people – at IIPM – have come up with similar uncivilized threats if Gaurav Sabnis had published his views in mainstream media? Would they do it now, with the hindsight of observing the effects of all this on their reputation in the last few days? And does that mean this medium has finally come of age, and found a (collective) voice of its own?
People voicing strong opinions are bound to attract critcism and opposition, irrespective of the medium they choose to air their views in. However, the nature of critcism and the manner of opposition reveals how one party views the other. In the current episode, all the bullying by IIPM shows what they think of Gaurav in the role of a blogger – the perceived status of medium Gaurav used is behind the attitude adopted by IIPM. Is it any wonder, then, that we are all rallying behind him?