Analysing the Demonetisation debate in India

On 8th November, 2016 the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi rocked the whole country by his announcement to demonetise INR 500 and INR 1,000 currency notes in a live television address. Considered to be a bold move that ceased the use of old currency notes, which are  replaced with the new one have been among the most discussed topic not only in domestic but global media and amongst economists worldwide. The move aimed to stop counterfeiting of currency notes, reduce corruption and reduce the black money in the economy which will also reduce the terrorist activities by checking on terrorist funding.                                                                                                                  (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_500_and_1000_rupee_note_demonetisation)

For last couple of months this has been the most important aspect being covered by all the news channels, newspapers and a lot of buzz being created on social media regarding its impact on economy and people. The scheme have been a matter of debate with people on both the sides being actively and strongly criticising those on other side. The important aspect have been people without any knowledge of economics, taxation or finance are actively debating with each other on social media, meetings and discussions and even while on date about the demonetisation scheme . What made the people take a stand and that too, a firm stand when many don`t even know a bit about the demonetisation policy and its impact and have not even taken any pains to do the research. Understanding the reason behind this stand will really be fascinating.

While going through the newspapers and watching news being telecasted by different news channel, the talk shows and interviews I could come a bit closure to the reason, Though there might be other reasons too. Newspapers, TV channels and facebook pages and other social media pages are divided on their views about the move by the government. While few are only highlighting the positive impacts, there are few who are just busy portraying the negatives and stating the policy as a draconian move.

The familiarity through mere exposure and the experiment, something  usually called the Rapid Serial Visual Presentation, or RSVP Paradigm can help us to understand this strong support and firm mindset that people have developed towards this policy. The constant exposure either to positive or negative impacts based on the news channel, newspaper or social media pages that people follow is playing a great role in forming a opinion and the stand taken by people. Familiarity, mere-exposure and frequency is making people to believe what they are watching , reading or hearing is the truth and even if someone tells them the other side they are reluctant to change the stand or even consider the other views.

Experiments conducted by Zajonc, Goetzinger and others have all lead to same conclusion that people do develop a preference for things, ideas and characters they are familiar with. This  psychological phenomenon of mere exposure was tested through various experiments and majority of participants in these experiments preferred the items which they were familiar to and this familiarity was attained by mere exposure. In various experiments conducted the participants were exposed to few items before starting the experiment (Test) and were then given options from which they were asked to select either the positive, brighter or even the negative items and in all of the cases the participants selected the items to which they were exposed to before initiating the test. The mere exposure experiments provide a strong base that people develop bias and always tend to prefer the items they are exposed to frequently without any concrete basis. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect)

Also the  experimental model frequently used Rapid serial visual presentation supports the outcomes from mere-exposure experiments.  Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., and Arnell, K. M. (1992) through their experiments stated that if we were attentive to a object or item in RSVP stream (items to which the participants are exposed to prior to test) we develop a preference for the item over another item which was not a part of RSVP as the visual processing of first item which was a part of RSVP interferes with the processing of non-RSVP item. Thus resulting in preference for a item which was a part of RSVP stream (Source: http://www.tankonyvtar.hu/en/tartalom/tamop412A/2011-0018_08_kiserletek/ch03.html)

With the news channels, newspapers and social media pages in favour of the move are constantly highlighting the positives impacts, and show all the facts like money laundering agencies and tax evaders being caught, tax collection being increased people who are constantly been exposed to this positive news are developing a positive mindset and tend to believe that the move had a positive impact. However the media houses taking the other side are highlighting the negative views by constantly showing the huge queues of people at ATM`s and banks, deaths due to non-availability of currency and how people are still converting the illegitimate money to legitimate. The people exposed to these news are  taking a stand against the move and are busy criticising the government and all the people supporting the move.

This makes it very clear as to how the mind of the people can be manipulated by using communication channels to create the mere exposure impact to promote familiarity and control or influence the mindset of the people. If someone or a group gets control over these channels then people can be directed in the manner required and public opinion can be manipulated. The political parties who can exercise control or influence the media house can use the concept of mere exposure for their political benefit. Not only political parties , but others too can benefit by using this influence as we see in certain cases like  film promotion, product launch, marketing events. Though it can benefit certain individual, organisation or group, this can prove harmful to the public in general and can lead to conflicts leading to harsh consequences, as evident from how Nazis used mass media as a tool for control. (Source: http://www.mrhindshistory.com/mass-media.html)