They are the result of cognitive biases and have significant psychological drivers. They can be so dominant in nature that may result in unnecessary commentary of a sitting CJI as India recently observed.
Slant comments are effective because they exploit common cognitive biases, which are mental shortcuts our brains use to make decisions and process information quickly. When CJI mentioned the petitioner should 'aks lord Vishnu' how to solve the problem, he triggered a common and familiar cognitive notion of a devout hindu. The place and the context was inappropriate. The ultimate result was a slant comment brought about an antagonistic perception even if it was unwanted.
Confirmation bias is the most significant psychological driver. People tend to seek out and interpret information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs. When an individual encounters a slant comment that aligns with their worldview, it strengthens their existing beliefs, making them feel like their perspective is the correct and only rational one. This creates an echo chamber effect. Obviously, the media was a buzz with the news the whole of Saturday.
In-group/Out-group bias among humans have a natural tendency to favor their "in-group" (people who share their identity, beliefs, or political affiliation) and be suspicious of or hostile toward the "out-group." Slant comments often frame an issue in a way that portrays the commenter's group as "good" or "right" and the opposing group as "bad" or "wrong." This reinforces a sense of group identity and belonging.Being a Buddhist convert in this generation and carrying father's hindu name , the comment merely amplified the in group - out group difference in a country wanting a reliable legal system.
Motivated reasoning is the unconscious tendency to process information in a way that protects one's existing beliefs. When confronted with facts that challenge their ideology, individuals may use motivated reasoning to dismiss or reframe the information, often by labeling the source as biased or untrustworthy. Slant comments provide a ready-made framework for this, offering a biased interpretation that helps a person avoid the cognitive dissonance of changing their mind.
Reflection of Ideologies.
Slant comments aren't just random biases; they are direct reflections of an individual's underlying ideology—a coherent set of beliefs, values, and assumptions about how society should be organized. They are the practical, conversational expressions of these worldviews.
Selective Framing is an ideology that dictates what information is important and how it should be presented. For example, a person with a conservative ideology might write a slant comment about a new tax policy by focusing on the "burden on small businesses," while someone with a liberal ideology might focus on the "benefits for social programs." Both are highlighting specific, ideologically-relevant aspects of the same issue. A slant on a groups nature of God could have been better presented as concern for artistic restoration or even equivocal adjudication without commentary.
Word choice remains equally important.The specific words used in a slant comment are often loaded with ideological meaning. For instance, using the term "tax relief" versus "tax cuts" subtly implies whether the policy is a form of liberation or a reduction. Similarly, referring to immigrants as "undocumented workers" versus "illegal aliens" reflects different ideological stances on immigration. So does comments like ' ask your lord to give a solution ' by a sitting chief justice.
Reinforcing narratives is the powerful outcome of these mere slants. Ideologies rely on core narratives and simplified stories. A slant comment often serves to reinforce these narratives. For example, a comment about a protest might frame it as "a necessary expression of civil disobedience" (a liberal narrative) or "anarchy and a threat to law and order" (a conservative narrative). These narratives simplify complex events and help people make sense of the world in a way that aligns with their beliefs.
Slants are powerful and people in position of authority should be careful about the comments made in public and that which go on record. Judicial records are never expunged. A repentence doesn't help. What happened in the court room on this day shall remain in the memories of all proud Hindus and they may ask their lord the next time they wish to engage with societal dilemmas. That decision may depart from the constitutional framework.
Pratyush Chaudhuri
No comments:
Post a Comment