Madan Gowri, who is demystifying Issues that resonate with the youth , was recently recognised for his influence in educational content creation by NewsX on its special series NewsX Influencer A-List. In an exclusive conversation with NewsX, Madan spoke about Tamil YouTube space, competition, his channel’s focus on news commentary and much more. Read excerpts:

Talking about the Tamil YouTube space, Madan said, “I think it is a great place to bein  because the competition is very healthy. At the same time, the internet penetration in Tamil Nadu is good as compared to other states. I can see the numbers there. I have seen creators who speak Hindi and have subscribers up to 20 million. That’s the number in Hindi. Tamil Nadu is one state where one  language is spoken to one group. I have 5 million subscribers now and I know Tamil channels that have more than 10 million subscribers. It is interesting for me to look at these numbers coming from Tamil Nadu, as compared to Hindi. Tamil, being a very interesting language, the internet connectivity is crazy.”

When asked if considers Tamil is a disadvantage for his channel or is it a thought that never crosses your mind, he said, “I think it is both. I have my advantages and I have my disadvantages. No matter how good content someone creates in Hindi, it would not penetrate into Tamil.  At the same time, I cannot cross that space. I think it is similar to Bollywood and Hollywood. No matter how great the movie is, unless you dub it and push it, it may not be a huge thing in Tamil Nadu. Even a Tamil movie made here, dubbed in Hindi and pushed there, may not be hit. The market is like that. It is good that both exist. If probably I was a Punjabi or a Marathi or a Bengali, I don’t think I would have these many subscribers. It has its own advantages and disadvantages.”

Speaking about competition in the YouTube space, he said, “I think a competition is always healthy. No matter how many subscribers one has, there are not actually competing with you.  Those videos are probably 10 minutes in length and people have 24 hours in a day. It is free of cost. Movies having competition makes sense because movies have tickets worth Rs 150 and that leads to competition. That kind of competition does not exist on YouTube.”

Revealing how much time did it take to grow and monetize the channel, Madan said, “I started monetizing my channel after 100 videos, that would be about 4 months. I never really wanted to be a youtuber as such because when I started making videos on YouTube, there was nothing as called a youtuber. People were just uploading on YouTube. That’s it. Eventually, I understood that you can make money out of it and make a living out of it. It took me another 3 years to reach there.”

Commenting on his channel’s focus on news commentary, Madan further said, “Since I post videos everything, I started noticing that people looked at me as a friend rather than a creator. Just like you smile at a person who crosses your house everyday, similarly they see my face everyday. I talked to them everyday. When Covid happened last year in 2020, I wasn’t giving commentary on news before that, but then there was something happening everyday. The whole country shut down and you couldn’t go out. These were burning issues so when I started making these videos, people actually started connecting with me more. That’s when I realised why not. “

Travel Influencer Deenaz Raisinghani recently joined NewsX for an exclusive conversation as part of NewsX Influencer A-List. In the exclusive conversation, Deenaz spoke about her love for travel, solo backpacking and her journey so far. Read excerpts:

Speaking about her journey so far, Deenaz said, “It started on a whim for me. I didn’t really think about content creation at that time because when i conceived my child, I had a desire to go backpacking to Europe with her. After coming back, i started writing about my experiences. It was actually a way for me to remember the trip and probably for my daughter to grow up, check up social media, my account and read what we had done. But then, i started seeing a lot of interest from fellow parents, i saw a lot of interest from young mothers who DMed me, “Hey, where did you stayt?’, ‘How did you manage?’ and ‘Is it even possible to take a child as young as a year old to Europe, do your own thing, have a really nice time and come back. I said yes, it is possible. That’s when i realised that there is sort of a gap in the market, where a lot of people don’t know about backpacking as a doable lifestyle in India and more so, with a child. That’s what i try to address with my content more and more. I started documenting more religiously from 2018 onwards. It has just been 3-3.5 years with me seriously being into it. It has been a great journey in the sense that I have made a lot of friends from the social media community, fellow people who like travelling, who like being wild and free. I have also met mothers who really on the verge of travel but don’t really know how to do it. This is a world that i have found, all thanks to social media and thanks to the community that we have created. So yeah, that has been my journey.”

When asked what is it like being a woman traveller and whether she found it scary, Deenaz said, “I would say that it has its own set of challenges. Like any other kind of travel, it is unique in its own way. I started travelling within India more in the beginning. After i got married, i started travelling with my husband a lot. We backpacked almost everywhere and that’s when i grew fond of budget travelling, finding your own way, taking risks and everything. That’s when i said, ‘Hey, let me take my own trips now’, so i started going on my own.”

“Yes, because there is always paranoia of what will happen. I never used to take too many risks as a child. I have a very loving and protective family. I don’t think my parents would have imagined that one day I would just leave with a rugsack somewhere. When that started happening, it was a feeling of joy mixed with fear for me. As the years went by and I started discovering myself more and more through travel, I realised that this is my passion and I really find myself more and more as I go on these solo trips. I get a chance to reconnect,” she added.

Money can potentially rock even the strongest relationships. Money isn’t simply a unit of transaction. When explored in-depth from the perspective of both partner’s, what emerges is a deeper understanding of their money belief systems, what it truly represents to them, the value they attribute to it, how it makes them feel about themselves and thereby how they see it impacting their relationship. 

Conflict often begins with differing attitudes towards saving, spending and investing money. Partners struggle trying to address the fundamental challenge of saving for the future vs spending to live well in the present. This difference cannot simply be addressed through the lens of ‘right or wrong.’ 

It’s challenging because these attitudes develop in early childhood by observing their primary financial role models, that is, parents or caregivers dealing with money. This process is called ‘financial socialisation.’ Children observe their parents attitude towards earning, saving and budgeting, how they make money grow and react to buying on credit, taking loans and how their lifestyle and moods are impacted when in debt. Constantly hearing parents arguing about money make them believe that money causes stress.   

Simultaneously, as early consumers children learn the concepts of mindful spending, the difference between impulse spend and delayed gratification, buying expensive products vs just those on a list, the necessity to first clear debts, and save for the future before spending on oneself, knowing that money can be manipulated to cater to immediate wants or believing that unnecessary expenditure is a moral failing.

Cultural differences also impact attitude. Some caregivers dislike discussing money openly. They’re either uncomfortable or believe that children shouldn’t be involved in money matters. Alternatively, some openly talk about money concerning everything in their lives making them seem money-minded. Some exhibit the gender roles of the husband being the provider and show discomfort when the wife earns more. 

Children often hear, ‘money is bad, be careful with money, money doesn’t grow on trees, being monied means being privileged, having prestige and respect, be modest and don’t flaunt your wealth, useless spending is a wastage, or money can’t buy happiness.’ They internalise these messages and expectations eliciting certain feelings about money. They might feel money is scarce and they can never have enough, feel secure, stable and protected seeing money in the bank, feel shame, weak and stupid about their capabilities to earn, question if they deserve to make more money and feel they’ll always need more. The compulsion to spend ‘unnecessarily’ can inhibit having fun and doing things that can otherwise make them happy. Some even translate having more money as being a better and smarter person and their self-esteem and self-worth become dependent on it.  

As these learnings infuse with the child’s identity they become an extension of their values. It’s the invisible script basis on which they operate in the present. Interaction with their peers, exposure to media and the outside world, societal expectations either strengthen these internal scripts or create dissonance and feel unsettling. 

This process of family and societal financial socialisation affects romantic relationships. Partners might see differences in attitudes but initially ignore them as each handles their own money. In marriage or long-term relationships though it’s impossible to keep financial habits, roles and responsibilities separate from the relationship. 

Toxic money beliefs are unhealthy. An abundance of money can outwardly seem beneficial yet be connected to indulgent and risky behaviour, financial carelessness or disregard for hard work and integrity. It’s challenging when partners’ feel exploited or feel that their relevance is closely tied to their ability to fund needs and feel burdened to constantly resolve financial difficulties. It can make them hide or be silent about how much they earn because they’re fearful about their future. 

When partners try to address these differences from their perspectives without consideration to their genesis, they feel trapped and helpless. The ensuing confrontation further adds another layer of difficulty as they have different styles of conflict resolution. 

Thus, it’s mandatory to consciously discuss money with each other. It builds comfort and creates a safe space to explore deep-seated fears about money, their limiting belief systems and attitudes. Openly sharing can allow them to unburden themselves, acknowledge and reconcile their differences and see how their attitudes are impacting the relationship. It encourages them to establish mutually beneficial and achievable financial goals (for themselves and their family), make responsible financial decisions, receive the support they rightfully deserve and feel confident to step up when in need. It builds dependency, trust and a positive outlook.  

Most importantly, it enhances a clear understanding of one’s financial well-being. They can feel satisfied with their current financial situation, feel successful in life, secure about their relationship and feel in control of their lives. 

The writer is a mental health counsellor.

Actress Meera Chopra opened up about not just her latest web series ‘The Tattoo Murders’, in which she shares the screen space with Tarun Virwani but also about her experience of essaying a cop on-screen and her journey in Bollywood and Tollywood. 

Talking about ‘The Tattoo Murders’ streaming on Disney + Hotstar, Meera said, “‘The Tattoo Murders’ was previously called Kamathipura. As the name suggests, it’s about prostitution, drugs, mafia, and police. How they work hand in glove with the whole system. We have heard about prostitution in India but have not seen much stuff in films or TV around it. It’s strange as it’s illegal but still it happens in such a legal way in our country. The script was different, raw and I was being offered a role which I had not attempted before. I had never even imagined myself in the role of a cop, I have a bucket list of roles I want to play but cop was never on that list. Everything about it was exciting and that made me sign this show.”

When asked about her experience of playing a cop on-screen and if she did any special prep for the role, she responded, “I couldn’t do any physical prep for it but I did see a lot of movies, especially Bollywood movies where the protagonist is a female cop like ‘Jai Gangajal’, both parts of ‘Mardani’. In ‘Jai Gangajal’, Priyanka played a cop and then I saw ‘Drishyam’ so my reference point was Tabu. The way she was walking, her body language and everything was on point, I did not try copying that but it was a very strong referral point.” 

On sharing screen space with Tanuj, Meera expressed, “Tanuj is younger than me. He is like a kid so I treated him like that. He was fun to work with. Even Tanuj was playing the role of a crazy villian for the first time. We shot 80% of the show in Kamathipura and it’s very difficult to get permission to shoot there. 90% of the show is Gorilla shoot wherein we go with spy cameras without any unit. We didn’t have our staff with us. There were only four to five members with us while we were shooting. At times, it can be scary as Kamathipura is not an easy place to shoot. But, the energy levels of both of us was so high that every time the director asked us that ‘Would you shoot without any permission?’ and our response was, ‘yeah, let’s do it.’ There was no attitude problem, both of us were on the same page. We were equally excited about the show.” 

Encapsulating her journey so far in Bollywood and Tollywood, she said, “Both the journeys have been different. The working styles are similar in both the industries. But, in South, things were easy for me. My first film became an instant hit and whatever projects I did after that were served to me on platter. When it came to Bollywood, it was opposite. The struggle was crazy difficult. It’s not easy to get what you want here. The competition is humongous. I am still struggling to get what I want in Bollywood. Things became easier after ‘Section 375’. But, before that, at times, it was depressing. You would start questioning yourself. Do you want to continue or give up. Bollywood journey was an emotional battle but now things are becoming easier. You need to be strong and have crazy passion to be in this industry. Otherwise, it is easy to breakdown.”

I like the people in Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Goa. There are some good and genuine people in the local political unit but I am not a fan of Arvind Kejriwal. His political agenda seems self-centred. I disliked him more after his persistent inconsistency in handling Covid-19 in Delhi and the usage of a health crisis to plaster his face over every television channel in India. In my opinion, he could have saved more lives and not resort to political drama over the health crisis. In fact, I had openly mentioned my dislike to a friend of mine in the AAP central leadership looking at Goa affairs. I told him, “AAP Goa can work, Kejriwal will not work.” If the AAP assumes that the ‘I am Super CM’ Kejriwal will sell in Goa, then their reading on the state is myopic and based on half-knowledge, especially regarding the nature of the people of Goa.

Goa is a state, where its people were ruthless and unkind to the late Manohar Parrikar. He was one politician who genuinely had a vision for Goa. I remember the vicious attacks by some spineless political vermins that relentlessly attacked him, even as he fought for his life while doing his duty to the people of Goa and India. A Catholic priest took to liberty to shout out from the pulpit in a Church that “Manohar Parrikar was cursed by the people of Goa that’s why he suffered and died.”

When Congress faltered in governance, the people of Goa decimated them in the Assembly Elections 2012. When BJP, first led by Manohar Parrikar and then by Laxmikant Parsekar faltered in governance during 2012 to 2017, BJP was reduced to a minority in the Assembly Elections 2017. Of course, through political machinations, BJP retained power and further strengthened its position by inducting 10 Congress MLAs. I disagreed with that damning move but that’s politics.

In Goa today, you do not have the BJP in ideology, you have the BJP because 17 MLAs had been Congress MLAs at some point of time in their political careers, not too far back in time. Not all of them are beacons of virtue for BJP to have inducted them. One is accused of raping a minor girl.

There is growing angst in some constituencies against the BJP. There is absolutely no hope for Congress in Goa as it continues to pander to the old political horses that have become wooden rocking horses; they give Congress a feeling that it is galloping in the state but in reality, it is getting nowhere. The problem with Congress is that even with their five MLAs, each would be aspiring to be the Chief Minister of Goa. That is essentially the problem of Congress in Goa: lack of selfless leadership to build the political party.

The new change in AAP Goa is focused on recruiting disgruntled leaders in both Congress and BJP to create a mark for itself in the state. Its previous strategy under Elvis Gomes focused on the activists’ style of politics. That will never work in Goa. Activists are good at making noise, not winning elections. Winning elections is about building public perception and managing electoral numbers. The number of voters per constituency in Goa is less, managing electoral numbers is a major challenge and an art that few have perfected.

AAP Goa has the potential to make a difference as there is a vacuum in the state as some people are disillusioned with both Congress and BJP, and the regional parties have not yet flexed their muscle across the state convincingly, they have strengths in few pockets. But if AAP Goa brings the Delhi brand of politics to Goa then it will bite the dust here.

AAP Goa may not have the potential to get a majority in the state but they can bag a seat or two if they get the electoral arithmetic right and do not stray towards becoming a drama party in the state. Unfortunately, for Kejriwal, old habits die hard, thinking Goans to be like Delhiites, that will jump for freebies is the error that he has made on his visit to Goa this time. He has announced free electricity, good schools, and Mohalla clinics. 

Unfortunately, he has not understood that Goa is a state where the per-capita income is high. People are not short of money or shy of spending. We do have good schools and a decent healthcare system that has been spruced up; of course, it can get a lot better. The failure to contain the Covid-19 pandemic in Delhi exposed the poor healthcare infrastructure that Kejriwal tomtoms about in India and globally.

Goans want a future and not freebies. Kejriwal, through these antics, is not catering to Goans but the non-Goan migrant population that is growing in Goa. For them, freebies will work. I remember a story last year during the pandemic when the Goa government under the BJP was given free kilos of rice to Goans with a ration card under some welfare scheme, some people were taking the rice and selling it to their friends who did not have a ration card. That’s the true nature of a Goan, they are enterprising. Giving them something free will make no difference to their lives. In fact, it was amusing seeing Pratima Coutinho, a former Congress leader, now in AAP, (which in my opinion was a good decision because in Congress she would get nowhere) distributing freebies in a bag to a lady living in a posh bungalow with a car and bike. That’s not the poverty of the state. That’s the inherent nature of Goans, they do not say no to a gift.

AAP Goa has read the people of Goa wrong. If the party truly wants to bring a change in the state, stop selling Kejriwal to Goans, Goans do not care about leaders from Delhi. Let me say this bluntly, even Narendra Modi’s name is not good enough to win elections in Goa. If his name could win an election in the state, then the party should have won both North Goa and South Goa Parliamentary seats. People from Goa like Modi as PM but that is not sufficient to win Assembly elections. Manohar Parrikar was Defence Minister of India and former Chief Minister of Goa, yet in 2017, BJP did not get a majority.

Delhi stamp does not impress Goans. The moot point is what can you do for the people of Goa. They think differently. They have understood politics, know their power centres but most importantly they know how to play the politicians.

AAP is talking about stopping corruption. Congress brought new faces to supposedly stop corruption. The new faces walked straight into BJP and made a mockery of democracy. That’s the penetration of corruption in Goa. Corruption is a card that is beaten to death. Goans want Goa to regain its true identity in India and globally. They want a future.

The people of Goa are young, vibrant, and futuristic. They want an opportunity to build Goa and make it competitive with the rest of the world, not only India. They want a government to create entrepreneurial opportunities for them. They want a government to bring better companies with job opportunities to the state. They want sustainable tourism development that focuses on the culture, heritage, and content life of the Goans. They do not want the maddening crowd coming to Goa thinking it is Thailand. Young Goa has an aspiration. This aspiration takes the most educated and talented Goans out of the state. They want a better life and if they can get it in Goa, they would never leave the state. Goans living outside of Goa and India want to come back to their home but where are the opportunities to grow and compete with the benefits one gets in other states in India or globally.

Political parties that can fulfill the aspirations of the people of Goa with a roadmap on the socio-economic future of the state coupled with sustainable development and futuristic growth ideas will create a mark in Goa in the forthcoming elections. Goans will take your freebies and vote for the political individual or party that focuses on the growth of Goa. Goans are not slaves to freebies. They do not want non-Goans eroding the inherent culture of its people by turning it into Bangkok or Shanghai. Goa does not want to become a Mumbai or a Shanghai. Goa wants to remain — Goa.

The statement — “There has been a premature push to rule out virus might have escaped from Chinese government lab in Wuhan” — by Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus on Thursday at the global media briefing from Geneva stumped me and got me thinking. He further added that investigating the origins of Covid-19 in China was being hampered by the lack of raw data on the first days of the spread there and urged it to be transparent. “We ask China to be transparent and open and to cooperate. We owe it to the millions who suffered and the millions who died to know what happened.”

For a moment, I allowed myself to believe that the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) probably developed a conscience after finally coming to terms with millions of lives lost and billions of people suffering on account of his and his office’s dereliction of duty and because of pandering to China’s coverup of its role in the Covid-19 pandemic. But Dr Tedros is not a health practitioner, he is a politician. And it is rare in the world to find a politician with a conscience. So there is more than what meets the eye behind his statement. I remember, on 6 April 2020, I had questioned Dr Tedros in a one-question interview during the global media briefing in Geneva. My question was: On 14 January 2020, WHO stated ‘Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in Wuhan, China.’ As an independent global health organisation why did WHO have to rely on China’s preliminary investigations and not conduct its own investigations? To which he replied: “The rule we have in WHO and other UN agencies is when a member state reports, we post the member state report as is. What we did on 14 January on Twitter is we posted China’s report as is. That doesn’t mean that we agree or we disagree; we’re just reporting what came. If India reports, we post India’s report as is. If my country Ethiopia reports, we post that report and treat the same way all 194 member states. But when we post their reports on Twitter or website, we just put it as is and don’t change anything. But at the same time, if we have some differences with what is reported, we can say it. Before 13 January, Dr Maria Van Kerkhove and other colleagues were saying there is a likelihood of human-to-human transmission. Even on 14 January, Dr Maria Van Kerkhove and other colleagues were briefing journalists and they said, there is a likelihood of human-to-human transmission. Our guidance reflected all that.

When China officially reported that it discovered human-to-human transmission on 22 January, we just reported again exactly as we received it from China. That’s a normal procedure and we do it for any country but that doesn’t mean that we accept it or not. The most important thing is our guidance before, during, and after 14 January included the likelihood of human-to-human transmission. That helped countries to prepare.”

On 23 April 2020, I had an opportunity to participate in a one-question interview with Dr Tedros. I asked him: If he had the opportunity to rewind and go back would WHO have called the pandemic earlier than it did or much later? Dr Tedros replied: “Yes, I would like to add to that. My colleagues have already said; based on the International Health Regulations 2005, what is expected from WHO is declaring the Public Health Emergency of International Concern as early as possible based on the factors and as Mike said, the highest emergency as far as IHR is concerned was declared on 30 January. During that time, as Maria said, there were fewer than 100 cases, there were 82 confirmed cases on 30 January outside China. In China, we had more cases but outside China, we had only limited cases and most of these were in the neighbourhood and most of them — since they’re in the neighbourhood — the rest of the world was still reporting no cases. We had few in Europe: five from France, one from Finland, four from Germany; 10 cases in Europe when we declared a Global Emergency. 

In Africa, we didn’t have any cases. From the Middle East, the UAE had four cases so you can see it for yourself. We triggered the highest level of emergency when the rest of the world had only 82 cases and no deaths.  To add to that, a Global Emergency is discussed among experts. We have experts representing all over the whole world and they met on 23 January. They couldn’t agree; they were divided.  Then they continued for a second day but still, they couldn’t agree. Of course, they agreed to meet in six, seven days and then met for a second time on 30 January, when, based on the criteria we have, they were convinced that the criteria were met to declare this a Global Emergency. Looking back, I think we declared the Emergency at the right time and when the world had enough time to respond. ”

I remember the visit of Dr Tedros to China and his pro-China statements which was a consequence of his meeting with the President of China Xi Jinping on 28 January 2020. He said:

“It (China) has already done incredible things to limit the transmission of the virus to other countries. And where respect is due, then you don’t punish. Meaning if anyone is thinking about taking measures, it’s going to be wrong. And WHO doesn’t recommend, and actually opposes, any restrictions for travel and trade or other measures against China.

I think visiting China was a very important one, which is not a new one. Of course, I did it many times to other countries where there were outbreaks and so on. This one was special because I was able to learn many things from what China is doing. And I’m very confident about what they’re doing. I have seen the capacity, and I believe that they will control this outbreak as soon as possible. They have all the capacity that needs.

But not only what they’re doing is protecting their people, but I know from the figures also, you know that it’s protecting the rest of the world. Outside China, we only have 98 cases and no deaths. If strong measures were not taken in China this would not have happened. And that’s why I also said we have to appreciate what China is doing. And this declaration is not actually because China is not doing what it can. It’s actually doing more than China is required to do.”

On 27 September 2020, when questioned that the Covid-19 pandemic came from China at the global media briefing, Dr Tedros stated: “The virus has happened naturally. These are all the publications we know, and if there is anything that will change this, it should come through the proper scientific process.”

Early last year, when he was repeatedly questioned on his closeness to China by many in the media. Dr Tedros stated: “I cannot say they hid or they didn’t. If something is hidden, the world would have witnessed more cases spilling outside its border, given how connected China is to the rest of the world. But the number of cases is very small. Even if China hides it, I don’t think the cases would be prevented from crossing the borders to other countries. So it really defeats the logic.” Interestingly, his change of views contradicts the WHO Investigation panel that conducted the first study into the origin of the Covid-19 pandemic in Wuhan, China. They opined: “Introduction through a laboratory incident was considered to be an extremely unlikely pathway.”

So when Dr Tedros now does a volte-face on China. I am inclined to believe that this is a new game of the top chief of the WHO.

Rising questions over the origin of the Covid-19 pandemic, and research papers by global scientists indicating the possibility of a lab-leak at the Wuhan Virology Lab but most of all the election of the new Director-General of WHO could be the reasons behind this change in his statements on China.

Dr Tedros wants to be re-elected to the post of Director-General of the WHO. With most Member States questioning the dereliction of duty of the WHO under him. There reportedly is a sense of unsurety in the Dr Tedros camp on whether he would be re-elected. China lobbied hard for Dr Tedros for his first tenure. This time, he would need more than China’s lobbying, especially with the US having trained its gun on China with a focus to pin the blame on the Covid-19 pandemic on China.

The US also wants to cover up its own footprints over the continuation of the controversial gain-of-function research experiments at Wuhan Virology Lab. For which funds granted to Dr Shi Zhengli came from the US government through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under Dr Anthony Fauci. Dr Tedros needs more countries to back him and he cannot rely on China alone. He is not distancing himself from China but spinning to a subtle cover stating in his statement yesterday: “I was a lab technician myself, I’m an immunologist, and I have worked in the lab, and lab accidents happen. It’s common.”

The attempt now is to push the spin that if indeed a lab-leak theory gains global traction and evidence emerge, then it must be portrayed as accidental. Thereby absolving China of the questions over a bio-weapon and attributing the origin of the Covid-19 pandemic to an accidental lab leak. Dr Tedros’ recent statements are not misleading at all and neither is it a change of heart. It is the re-election game of Dr Tedros.