There was no optimism in 1991 through 1996 on account of PV Narasimha Rao's reforms. Indian (crony) industry formed 'Bombay Club' to oppose pro-free market reforms. Unions were protesting in the streets. Harshad Mehta was scamming a fake bubble market. Inflation kept shooting.
1n

Congress did not rally behind 1991 reforms. A Congress intellectual now close to Nehru Darbar had floated the line that the reforms would serve India's 'Coca-Cola Class'. Media went to town over undisclosed IMF conditionalities. Congress lost elections in State after State. 2n
To foist the claim that the 1991 reforms "spread optimism and hope across India" is a travesty. Had there been "optimism and hope" then Congress would not have lost the 1996 Lok Sabha election. Such bogus claims can be made because public memory is short. 3n
Iirc @surjitbhalla wrote in defence of 1991 reforms and was quoted in NYT rubbishing the sly Congress campaign that PVNR's reforms would benefit only the 'Coca-Cola Class'. He was brutally lampooned by the same type who are now claiming there was "optimism and hope". 4n
The #LeftLiberal Commentariat and 1990s 'activist' types like Medha Patkar derided the 1991 reforms as "neo-liberalism". Some judges also picked up this term and used it liberally in badly written orders. Opedists hogged columns denouncing PVNR for short-selling #India 5n
'Paddy Clarke, Ha Ha Ha', by Roddy Doyle, won the Booker in 1993. Some days later, there was a tirade against 1991 reforms in one of Lutyens's leading papers (I forget which one) with the headline,
'Economic Reforms, Ha Ha Ha'
A bad pun, yes, but such is their intel calibre. 6n
"Optimism and hope across #India" after 1991 reforms.
The new #GreatIndianRopeTrick in town is opedists airbrushing history that is only 30 years old. Because the under-30 who crowd social media will fall for their trick and amplify their hogwash. 7n
https://t.co/1T7srkNIzG

You May Also Like

Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇

It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details):
https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha

I've read it so you needn't!

Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.

The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.

Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.