Zomato and the ‘Idea of India’- The problems with this entire debate
- In Current Affairs
- 03:53 AM, Aug 02, 2019
- Ankit Verma
On Tuesday, July 30 as reported by The Hindu Business Line and many other media platforms, a person who goes by the twitter handle (@NaMo_SARKAAR) wrote that he refused to receive delivery by a non-Hindu delivery executive from Zomato (attached is the snapshot of his tweet). Now, this has become a big controversy on social media platforms and media.
Reasons contributing for this issue turning into such a big controversy are the tweets from Zomato in reply to that user said “Food doesn’t have a religion. It is a religion.”
Food doesn’t have a religion. It is a religion. https://t.co/H8P5FlAw6y
— Zomato India (@ZomatoIN) July 31, 2019
And its founder Deepi Goyal tweeted saying "We are proud of the idea of India - and the diversity of our esteemed customers and partners. We aren’t sorry to lose any business that comes in the way of our values."
Did they tweet something controversial or incorrect? Answer: not really. Then, why did it become such a big controversy? Because Zomato didn't simply decline the request to change the delivery boy, had they done that the matter would have ended their and no one would have got to know about issue.
Instead, Zomato decided to make a statement out of it. It is their choice to do so. Once they took that path, it opens the issue up for debates, discussions and usual binaries of "for or against" Zomato. UberEats India also jumped into it, showing their solidarity with Zomato. Now, hashtags like #BoycottUberEats #IDontStandWithAmit #BoycottZomato are trending on twitter.
It’s a needless controversy at the first place. There shouldn't be any doubt that the request made by the customer to change the delivery boy because of his religion is incorrect and cannot be supported at all. Not because the delivery bay is from X religion, he could have been from any religion such a request would have still stayed incorrect. One can't deny people from doing their jobs on the bases of religious likes or dislikes.
Just because someone is from a different faith doesn't mean you have to dislike that person and you can't have any social, personal or professional engagement with that person. This sort of thinking is not right for the society and of extremely harmful consequence, if not corrected. Today that delivery boy was from religion X, tomorrow he could be from another religion and then where will it end? And where will it take us?
But there's another point of view on this debate, that, what about personal choice? In this case, customer asked if delivery boy can be changed, associated organization declined it and user cancelled the order, matter ended. So, what's the big deal? It's a personal choice of the customer to choose a product and its delivery medium (If organization allows it, in this case it didn't). What's the big deal?
The problematic part in this entire debate is the schooling that Zomato and Deepi Goyal tried to give that customer and others about "Food doesn’t have a religion. It is a religion" & "Idea of India" & respectively. Certainly, denying people to perform their duties based on their religion can't be appreciated but there isn't ‘ONE’ Idea of India.
"Idea of India”: To quote former Prime Minister of India Late Atal Bihari Vajpayee "India is not a piece of land, but a living entity". Hence, it can't have one idea. India is home to People with different sets of beliefs (some good, some need to be amended as per time) and values. So, let’s not pretend to know the Idea of India.
"Food doesn’t have a religion. It is a religion”: -
This is even more problematic and a disingenuous defence, which wasn't even required in the first place. Zomato a restaurant search and discovery service, which has tags for Jain food, Vegan Food & Navratri Thalis and Halal, as per their own admission should have never said that. Of course, all the above-mentioned categories are based on the religious choices and there's nothing incorrect in giving these options to the customer but they are based on the choice made in consonance with varying religious beliefs.
Hence, to say that "Food doesn’t have a religion. It is a religion" is incorrect. One set of customers won't consume food from another set and that's based on their religious choices. That's they very reason these tags are provided.
This controversy would have never come to fore had Zomato just conveyed to the customer that we don't allow our customers to choose from our delivery boys. Now, with this controversy the social media is completely divided, and it only deepens the divisions that already exist in the society and brackets people for their views.
What purpose will it serve to the idea of India? It's everyone's responsibility to make sure that we don't discriminate on the basis of religion and respect VALID individual choices.
Comments