What some may term crass media entertainment (reality shows?) are obviously in high demand amongst most other viewers. And while I enjoy deeply researched reporting, most other consumers prefer byte-sized local news. The web caters to lovers of the eclectic, niche, and just plain left field by empowering online retailers to take advantage of the long tail.

TV has yet to adapt to this format, but with the growth of on-demand content, changes are around the corner. This pondering was inspired by Amit Varma's piece at Live Mint, where he compares reality shows and the Bombay Plan.

[Arpita] is a beneficiary of the shows she lambasts, which seems to make her criticism credible. Fans of those shows would rail at her hypocrisy and ingratitude. Actually, her comments are entirely rational and predictable. In fact, she reminds me of J.R.D. Tata and G.D. Birla.

In 1944, with India on the verge of independence, a group of industrialists that included Tata, Birla and other notables such as Purshottamdas Thakurdas, A.D. Shroff and Kasturbhai Lalbhai came up with a document called A Brief Memorandum Outlining a Plan of Economic Development for India—also known, famously, as the Bombay Plan. In this, instead of arguing for free markets, they made a case for massive state involvement in the economy.

Hopefully remnants of social-engineering-esque TV programs will go the way of Indias doomed socialist economic policies, and technology will appease all lovers of 'reality' shows: documentaries [1], voyeur-aries [2], competitions [3].