With the onset of monsoon rains in Bengaluru, the city has seen a significant resurgence of potholes and deteriorating road conditions. Commuters have taken to social media to highlight these issues, prompting civic authorities to take notice. Key roads, including Kanakapura Road, have become particularly problematic, with some stretches deemed unmotorable.

Reports indicate that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has identified 647 potholes, of which they have filled 313 so far. However, many residents express frustration over the temporary nature of these repairs. They argue that simply filling potholes is insufficient; comprehensive measures are needed to prevent waterlogging and flooding during rains. The lack of an effective drainage system has been cited as a major contributor to the worsening road conditions.

Accidents related to potholes are reportedly underreported, with one incident involving a resident who suffered severe injuries after being struck by a vehicle due to poor road conditions. Despite numerous complaints about specific stretches remaining unrepaired for months, officials continue using inadequate methods for repairs.

BBMP's administrator recently held meetings urging faster action on pothole repairs but acknowledged ongoing challenges with waterlogging on at least 82 flagged road sections. Citizens emphasize that without addressing underlying drainage issues, the cycle of damage will persist each monsoon season.

Original article

The text on potholes in Bengaluru exhibits a multitude of biases, reflecting a particular worldview and ideological stance. One of the most striking aspects is the cultural bias embedded in the narrative. The text assumes that the reader is familiar with the concept of monsoon rains and their impact on road conditions, which may not be universally understood. This assumption reinforces a Western-centric perspective, where monsoons are a common occurrence in certain parts of the world, but not necessarily elsewhere. The text's focus on potholes as a significant issue during monsoon rains also implies that this is a unique problem for Bengaluru, rather than acknowledging that poor road maintenance is a widespread issue globally.

The text also exhibits economic bias by framing the problem as one of inadequate civic authorities rather than addressing systemic issues related to infrastructure development and maintenance. The mention of "comprehensive measures" needed to prevent waterlogging and flooding during rains implies that these measures would require significant investment and resources, which may not be readily available due to budget constraints or competing priorities. This framing deflects attention from potential economic factors contributing to the poor state of roads, such as underfunding or corruption.

Furthermore, linguistic bias is evident in the use of emotive language to describe potholes as "unmotorable" and commuters' frustration with temporary repairs as "exasperating." This emotional appeal aims to elicit sympathy from readers and create pressure on civic authorities to take action. However, this approach also risks oversimplifying complex issues related to infrastructure development and maintenance.

Selection bias is apparent in the choice of sources cited by BBMP officials. While reports indicate that 647 potholes have been identified, only 313 have been filled so far. However, no information is provided about how these numbers were determined or what specific criteria were used for prioritizing repairs. This lack of transparency raises questions about whether BBMP officials are using objective criteria or if there are underlying biases influencing their decision-making processes.

Structural bias is embedded in the narrative through its reliance on anecdotal evidence rather than systematic data analysis. While one incident involving severe injuries after being struck by a vehicle due to poor road conditions is mentioned as an example of underreporting accidents related to potholes, no concrete data or statistics are provided to support this claim. This reliance on individual stories creates an impressionistic narrative that may not accurately reflect broader trends or patterns.

Framing bias becomes apparent when examining how different stakeholders are portrayed within the narrative. Civic authorities are depicted as reactive rather than proactive entities; they respond only after being prompted by social media complaints rather than taking initiative themselves. In contrast, residents are framed as victims who need protection from poorly maintained roads rather than empowered actors capable of advocating for change themselves.

Temporal bias emerges when considering how historical context influences contemporary narratives about infrastructure development in Bengaluru. The article does not explore how past decisions regarding urban planning and resource allocation have contributed to current challenges with maintaining roads during monsoon rains.

Confirmation bias becomes evident when examining how certain assumptions about civic authorities' competence go unchallenged within the narrative while others do not receive scrutiny equal attention despite both having merit based upon evidence presented throughout article body; e.g., residents expressing frustration over temporary nature repairs versus officials citing ongoing challenges waterlogging flagged sections without questioning adequacy methods used fill those areas.



In conclusion ,the article presents several forms biases including cultural economic linguistic selection structural framing temporal confirmation .These biases shape reader perceptions reinforce particular worldviews conceal underlying complexities .