Recently, I went to a clinic, and happened to see nearly everyone around me indulging in some kind of electronic device. Everyone was busy on their phones. As I kept observing, none of them even noticed who sat beside them or who was passing by and they never moved their eyes off the mobile screen. Even though there were interesting shows playing on the television and magazines around, no one bothered to look at any of them.
This happens not just in clinics; nowadays, it occurs everywhere. People used to talk and have a laugh over a meal, but now people prefer to just sit silently, busy on their smartphones. In this generation, I do agree that everyone needs to know and understand technology and use it, but people should use it limitedly. Even I spend time on such gadgets, but I know my time limit. Children love the entertainment available to them on such gadgets but, at the same time, they need to know the ill effects, if they sit with these devices for long hours.
From Ms Neola Castelino
Sharjah
Cut people some slack
I am not one those people who does grammar policing, although I prefer reading error-free content — even from the average reader or social media user (‘Letters to the editor: Encourage public opinion online’, Gulf News, April 27). The self-appointed grammar police should understand that smartphones come with autocorrect, and touchscreens can be really sensitive to type sometimes, so I think we need to cut people some slack. Everyone, including myself, should review content before posting online, especially due to the larger audience online now.
From Ms Soumiya Hussain
UAE
No need to be perfect
If grammatical errors are a real crime that can be policed, then I must be writing this from inside prison! I don’t think people have to be overly cautious about it because even a native English speaker can be far from perfect in terms of proper English usage. Whoever is acting as grammar police is behaving hypocritically. Ask that person to write an essay on a topic of his choice and present it to a newspaper editor — for sure, there will be a correction. I mean, why should grammar be an issue in a forum like Twitter and Facebook, where perfection is not required?
Yes, we can proofread and that is perfectly alright, but look at the content in social networking forums. I think 90 per cent of it is irrelevant. Why does anyone have to be grammatically correct when commenting about Kim Kardashian, for instance? Come on, guys!
From Mr Carlos Ante
UAE
Is it worth your friendship?
I’m torn on this topic, actually. If it’s a close acquaintance, and they correct my grammar, it is usually fine and I don’t think it is rude, because I feel like they have my best interests in mind. But sometimes, I feel like if my friends ask my opinion about their English, that is the only time I should correct them. If they don’t, I don’t really want to risk hurting their feelings and potentially losing their friendship over something so trivial as an error in grammar usage. Another way I deal with such situations — and I could be wrong about this — is by just groaning inwardly and mentally correcting them.
From Ms Emma Suba
UAE
We need grammar policing
The use of internet lingo and shortened words on text messaging has already corrupted people’s language skills. If there are some of us who are trying to set people back on the track of proper use of vocabulary, why is that wrong? I find it tragic that our parents put us through years of schooling and university education, just to have us destroy our spelling and vocabulary because of laziness.
From Ms Sophie Vita
Sharjah
No place to call home
It is a huge problem when people start fleeing their country due to the fear of losing their lives, and there is no one to accept them (‘Facebook debate: Coping with fleeing refugees’, Gulf News, April 26). Developed countries, mainly those who distribute weapons or money, should accept refugees. Otherwise, funds that are collected through charity will also fall into the hands of dangerous rebels and gangs. The wars or riots never end.
From Mr Abdul Jaleel
Dubai
Collective action is necessary
In this era of globalisation, political unrest in one country invariably affects a host of others. If a country is able to accommodate refugees well and has the resources to do so, then it is a must for them to take up this responsibility. While the influx of refugees has been massive and the losses overwhelming, countries in the vicinity that are better off must take the initiative to collectively accommodate these people and systematically integrate them, if possible.
From Ms Aisha Eapen
UAE
Maritime law crucial for development
The comment in Gulf News about how the Gulf states should back maritime laws, was meaningful and thought-provoking (‘Gulf states should back maritime law’, Gulf News, April 23). The writer has analysed elaborately how the UAE and Gulf states are depending on the sea for a vast majority of their economy. Gulf states should back maritime law for their own economic development.
From Mr K. Ragavan
Bengaluru, India
Stop tweeting, start doing
What social media activism is today, was a drawing room for the politics of yesterday (‘Focus: Social media activism’, Gulf News, April 24). It’s all words and no action. Even the emotions between the hashtags seem manufactured. Only awareness doesn’t help, but implementing the ideas do. How about following up the cause after the hashtag has stopped trending? How about participating in the solution part of it? A sense of responsibility is what one should feel, after becoming aware of the cause — something that we are most reluctant to do. So stop dwelling on activism and become active about your thoughts.
From Ms. Madhura Mukherjee
Dubai
Was beef ban thought through?
The opinion piece in Gulf News by Manil Suri on the beef ban in India was informative and I wish to commend the writer (‘A ban on beef in India is not sensible’, Gulf News, April 21). First and foremost, one has to respect the religious sentiments of any community. As an animal rights activist, I welcome the move on cow slaughter. But, as one who believes in the concept of ‘every action has an equal and opposite reaction’, I wish to narrate the side effects this legislation might create.
India is a country with the highest cattle population in the world. Most of the Indians who rear cattle are farmers: economically poor, middle-class and sometimes downtrodden. These people will retain their cattle as long as they yield returns. Once they become redundant, they sell their cows and bulls for a price to butchers.
If the ban is implemented, there would be no buyers for their cows and, in that case, they would not take care of the cows by feeding and providing for them until their death. In such a scenario, these people will have no choice but to give them to the government to take care of and it will be practically impossible for the Indian government to care for thousands of them. Otherwise, the government would have to provide stipends to the people to care for cattle, or the people will leave them to roam around the city, which will then become a big nuisance.
I am sure the Indian government would have deliberated on all these factors before enacting the legislation, right? If the government can take care of the side effects of cow slaughters and beef bans effectively, then the legislation could become a success.
From Mr Kamal
Dubai
Editors’ note: Is there a news report that you feel strongly about? Something that has to be addressed in the community and requires resolution? Email us on readers@ gulfnews.com. You can also post a comment on our Facebook page or tweet us @GNReaders.
