The re-laying of roads with concrete on Mada Streets in Tiruvannamalai is set to be completed by July. This project, which involves a ₹15-crore investment, aims to transform the potholed streets surrounding the Arunachaleswara temple into durable concrete pathways. Officials from the State Highways department indicated that this upgrade will significantly benefit the approximately 20,000 daily visitors, providing safer walking spaces for pilgrims.

The work includes widening the streets from seven meters to twelve meters and installing separate ducts for utility cables to minimize road digging in the future. Additionally, stormwater drains are being expanded to effectively manage excess rainwater and prevent flooding during monsoon seasons. Tiled footpaths will be constructed over these drains for pedestrian safety.

Concrete roads are expected to have a lifespan of at least two decades compared to just three years for bitumen roads, which previously required annual re-laying before festivals. This initiative is part of the Chief Minister Road Development Project (CMRDP) for 2024-25 and has been coordinated with local civic bodies and utility services.

Original article

The provided text is a news article about the re-laying of roads with concrete on Mada Streets in Tiruvannamalai, a project aimed at transforming the potholed streets surrounding the Arunachaleswara temple into durable concrete pathways. Upon analysis, several forms of bias and language manipulation are evident.

One of the most striking biases in this text is its nationalist bias. The article highlights the benefits of this project for approximately 20,000 daily visitors to the temple, implying that this infrastructure upgrade will enhance India's spiritual and cultural heritage. This framing assumes that Indian culture and spirituality are inherently valuable and deserving of investment. The use of phrases like "transforming the potholed streets" and "durable concrete pathways" reinforces a sense of national pride, suggesting that India's infrastructure should be modernized to meet international standards. This bias favors a particular narrative direction, one that emphasizes India's development and progress.

Furthermore, the text exhibits cultural bias by assuming that pilgrims require safer walking spaces. While this may be true for many pilgrims, it also implies that these individuals are vulnerable or incapable of navigating uneven terrain without assistance. This assumption reinforces stereotypes about people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds or those who engage in spiritual practices being less capable than others. The article fails to consider alternative perspectives or potential criticisms from local communities about the project's impact on their way of life.

The language used in this text also reveals economic bias. Phrases like "₹15-crore investment" create an aura of grandeur around public spending on infrastructure projects. The emphasis on durability and longevity (two decades) suggests that investing in long-term solutions is more desirable than short-term fixes or maintenance-oriented approaches. This framing favors wealthier interests by implying that they have more resources to devote to such projects, reinforcing an economic narrative where public spending prioritizes long-term gains over immediate needs.

Moreover, linguistic and semantic bias is evident throughout the text. Emotionally charged language like "potholed streets," "transforming," and "safer walking spaces" creates a sense of urgency around road development projects without providing sufficient context about their actual impact on local communities or environmental concerns related to urbanization. Additionally, euphemisms like "utility cables" obscure agency behind technical decisions made by government officials or private companies involved in road construction.

Selection and omission bias are also present in this article as certain facts or viewpoints are left unmentioned to direct the narrative toward a preferred interpretation. For instance, there is no discussion about potential environmental impacts associated with increased urbanization due to improved road infrastructure; nor does it mention any criticisms from local residents regarding noise pollution generated by increased traffic volume after road widening; nor does it discuss whether these upgrades will lead to gentrification affecting existing businesses along these routes.

Structural institutional bias becomes apparent when considering how systems of authority operate within public works projects such as these road developments – particularly when dealing with coordination between state departments (like State Highways), civic bodies (such as Tiruvannamalai Municipal Corporation), utility services providers etc., which often prioritize efficiency over participatory governance models involving community engagement processes before executing major infrastructural changes affecting large populations residing nearby areas earmarked for such upgrades

Confirmation bias becomes clear when examining how evidence presented supports assumptions without questioning them – here we see predominantly positive outcomes projected onto upgrading roads near temples which might overlook complexities faced during implementation stages including logistics challenges posed due unforeseen site conditions unforeseen delays caused because lack proper planning coordination among various stakeholders involved