The Misguided Counteraction against Apathy through the Bakra Principle

I saw this video online a few months ago where a couple of guys – north-Indian looking from what I can remember of the hazy footage – were harassing a girl from the northeast on the street. They were actors hired to do that, while a whole bunch of non-actor real life people walked past, most of them busy not caring about the racist remarks being thrown about with a few turning around to check what was going on (out of curiosity more than concern). I don’t remember if there was a hero in the story who stood up to the fake bad guys, but the purpose of the video was to either highlight the searing apathy of the average Indian citizen to injustices being doled out on the streets, or bring out the spirited sense of humanity and compassion that some people still have in this big, bad world. In any case, I watched part of the video – it was really long – and moved on with my life, not learning anything new, just reinforcing the fact that some people can be assholes and that the bystander effect is a very real thing. The headline for the video went something like “This Girl from the Northeast was Getting Harassed on the Streets by the Fine Gents of Delhi. You’ll Never Guess How People Passing by Reacted”. As sure shot a way of getting eyes as any.

This concept has seemingly become a legit thing to do as, in the coming months, I saw a spate of similar links. One was where a couple of actors re-enacted part of the Delhi gang-rape from a couple of years ago, playing the parts of the victims to gauge how people passing by in their big shiny cars would react. I didn’t watch the video but, judging by the headline, I think most people just ignored the whole thing and didn’t stop or bother to help. Another was of guys surrounding a girl at a bus stop, presumably in a threatening manner. Again, didn’t watch it. But the headline seemed to suggest that someone did actually step up to help the girl. After which (I’m speculating), they told the guy that it was all a prank and he looked disbelievingly all around, looking for the hidden camera, and then they all laughed and hugged it out. Because it would have been a great victory for mankind and a touching moment, right.

Well-intentioned it may be, since it’s probably designed to highlight the inherent flaws of the average human being of India while still hoping to discover a feel-good angle to the story through a Good Samaritan moment. But this whole sting operation business, or “Social Experiment” (many thanks to The Dark Knight for popularizing that particular nauseating gem of a phrase – although, usually, it’s not the phrase itself but the tone in which it’s used that’s revolting), wherein hired actors enact some kind of tragic or loathsome situation on the street, and the reactions of the innocent bystander or passerby are gauged and scrutinized, is a misguided sham of an exercise at best, while a worst-case scenario could have implications in the real world. It is literally just an elaborate prank, designed (unintentionally perhaps) to make everyone who’s not acting look really stupid, regardless of whether they step up or not.

For instance, if I see a battered-looking man soaked in blood begging me for help on the street, my initial reaction would normally be either to help the guy by calling the cops/ambulance or actually helping him physically (whether I, or anyone else, would do any of those things or not is a different thing), or to assume he’s a con-artist who’s going to mug me and may threaten me with dire consequences so I leave. Unfortunately, having watched at least one of these lovely viral videos doing the rounds, a third option has been added to my list. Am I being punked? Should I search for a hidden camera? Is Cyrus Broacha hiding behind the bus stop in a wig? Should I quickly hide my face so that when the video inevitably hits the internet, no one can recognize me? Should I smack the actor in the head for his woefully misdirected enthusiasm? (By “I”, I obviously mean a generic I for the sake of the argument, and not me specifically.)

Admittedly, I could also get scared of the potential online shaming that would come my way, and that fear may just propel me into action against the perpetrator or assisting the victim. Or the very apathy highlighted in those videos may just inspire me to step up to the plate, and those are legitimate ways of looking at it too. Then, this essentially becomes a way to highlight the downside as opposed to rejecting the entire premise of the concept.

Again, with these videos, I do think that the intentions are, if not pure, then at least positive – they’re coming from the (somewhat) right place, which is why I’ve tried to refrain from calling them exploitative or opportunistic. There’s some marketing acumen in there too, I suppose, since the guys producing the Social Experiments would have some expectation of hitting the jackpot of Likes and Retweets and Shares and Clicks and Hits followed by Hype and Buzz and Ads and Lots of Money while still doing the Right Thing. They’re not trying to fuck things up deliberately, I don’t think they are. And obviously, this is not something to joke- or be snide about, or trivialize – even the most seasoned of anti-feminists know that (unless they’re politicians). But, ultimately, all they’re doing is appealing to the voyeuristic, vicarious side of people online. The appearance of doing the right thing while not actually doing anything productive at all. It begs the question of whether they're inadvertently making things worse by trivializing the issue or adding further variables to an already fragile system which has comprehensively re-wired itself against the victim in need of assistance. Sure, it leads to outrage on the internet, and outrage can just as easily lead to real, tangible change (not always, not necessarily). But equating outrage to actual change does seem to be a slippery slope.