Farmers participating in the annual mango mela at Lalbagh Botanical Garden in Bengaluru reported significant losses this year due to poor attendance and lack of publicity for the event. Traditionally a popular gathering for mango enthusiasts, this year's mela saw farmers discarding their fruits and dumping them into waste compactors as a form of protest against the Horticulture Department and the Karnataka State Mango Development and Marketing Corporation (KSMDMC).

The event, which began on May 30 and is set to conclude on June 23, has faced criticism from farmers who claim that inadequate marketing efforts led to disappointing foot traffic. With around 80 stalls set up by farmers, many expressed frustration over having to throw away mangoes that could have been sold. One farmer from Kolar district lamented that despite their care for the crops, they were now facing financial ruin due to government negligence.

Officials from the Horticulture Department acknowledged a decrease in visitors compared to previous years but defended their promotional efforts through media announcements. They attributed low attendance partly to an oversupply of mangoes available elsewhere in the city and noted that some prices set by farmers were higher than those at other stalls.

The situation has escalated tensions among farmers, particularly as prices for certain varieties like totapuri have plummeted to as low as ₹4 per kilogram. Farmers are demanding government intervention in the form of support prices. The director of the Horticulture Department mentioned that a proposal regarding support pricing had been submitted for governmental consideration.

Overall, this year's mango mela has become emblematic of broader issues facing local agriculture, highlighting concerns over marketing strategies and economic viability for farmers reliant on seasonal sales.

Original article

The provided text is replete with various forms of bias and language manipulation, which will be thoroughly analyzed below.

One of the most striking biases present in the text is its economic and class-based bias. The narrative overwhelmingly sympathizes with the farmers who are struggling to sell their mangoes due to poor attendance and lack of publicity for the event. The text portrays the farmers as victims of government negligence, implying that they are innocent and deserving of support. However, this framing conceals the fact that farmers often have a significant amount of power in negotiating prices and marketing their products. By presenting them as helpless victims, the text creates a narrative that favors wealth redistribution from the government to farmers, rather than acknowledging any potential agency or responsibility on their part.

Furthermore, the text's selection and omission bias is evident in its portrayal of officials from the Horticulture Department. While it acknowledges that officials defended their promotional efforts through media announcements, it fails to provide any concrete evidence or counterarguments to support this claim. Instead, it focuses on quotes from farmers who express frustration over having to throw away mangoes that could have been sold. This selective framing creates a narrative that implies officials are incompetent or uncaring about farmers' plight, rather than presenting a balanced view.

The text also exhibits linguistic and semantic bias through its use of emotionally charged language. Phrases such as "significant losses," "poor attendance," "lack of publicity," and "government negligence" create a sense of urgency and outrage, which nudges readers toward sympathizing with the farmers' plight. Additionally, words like "dumping" (used to describe discarding fruits) carry negative connotations, reinforcing a narrative that emphasizes suffering over agency or responsibility.

Moreover, cultural and ideological bias is present in the text's framing around local agriculture. The narrative highlights concerns over marketing strategies and economic viability for farmers reliant on seasonal sales as emblematic of broader issues facing local agriculture. However, this framing assumes a Western worldview prioritizing individual entrepreneurship over collective welfare or state intervention in agricultural markets. This assumption overlooks alternative perspectives on agricultural development that prioritize community-led initiatives or cooperative ownership structures.

The text also exhibits structural and institutional bias by implicitly defending systems of authority within government departments like Horticulture Department without interrogating them critically. By attributing low attendance partly to an oversupply of mangoes available elsewhere in the city without questioning whether this oversupply was caused by market forces beyond government control (e.g., globalization), officials avoid taking responsibility for systemic failures within their own department.

Furthermore, confirmation bias is evident in how certain facts are presented without question or counterargumentation throughout much of this piece – particularly regarding what constitutes effective marketing efforts by Horticulture Department officials versus what constitutes poor ones according to farmer testimonies alone; there seems little room given here towards challenging these claims directly via evidence-based reasoning outside those same sources cited here today!

In terms linguistic manipulation specifically related passive constructions obscuring agency especially when discussing governmental actions against KSMDMC & horticultural department employees involved directly within decision-making processes surrounding event planning; such phrasing subtly shifts blame away onto faceless institutions rather than named individuals accountable under existing laws governing public sector conduct nationwide!

Lastly temporal bias manifests itself throughout article via references made towards current year’s mela compared against previous years’ success metrics highlighting perceived decline without contextualizing these changes historically – ignoring other possible factors influencing visitor numbers such seasonal fluctuations weather patterns etcetera thereby creating misleading impression regarding overall trend direction amongst general public interested parties alike!