What to Read in Indian Express Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1 : Why aircraft are most likely to meet with accidents during takeoffs, landings

Context

An Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner flying from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick with 242 people on board crashed shortly after takeoff recently.

What the data say

• Data has shown that most crashes take place during landing, takeoff, or the phases immediatelybefore/after these two events.
• According to data from the trade group International Air Transport Association (IATA), the landing phase accounted for more than half (53%) of all aviation accidentsfrom 2005 to 2023.
• The takeoff phase was the next most deadly, accounting for 8.5% of all accidents.
• The phases immediately before/after these two events — the approach phase before landing and the initial climb phase after takeoff — contributed to another 8.5% and 6.1% of accidents, Rejected takeoffs accounted for 1.8% of accidents.
• The takeoff and the initial climb phases accounted for 20% of all such accidents as well as 20% of all fatalities despite accounting for only 2% of exposure.
• The subsequent climb phase accounted for another 10% of fatal accidents and, notably, 35% of fatalities,despite accounting for only 14% of exposure.
• On the other hand, the final approach and landing phases accounted for 47% of all accidents and 37% of fatalities, despite making up 4% of exposure. The descent phase accounted for another 3% of accidents and 7% of fatalities.

Why takeoffs and landing are deadliest

• An aircraft is at the highest risk of meeting an accident at the beginning and end of the flight.
• The most basic explanation for this is that during these phases, aircraft are what in aviation lingo is called “low and slow”, leaving pilots very little time to react if something goes wrong.
• When cruising at 36,000 feet, a pilot has the luxury of time and space to course correct. Even if both engines go out, the plane won’t just fall out of the sky. It becomes a glider.
• In this state, a typical airliner loses about a mile in altitude for every 10 it moves forward, giving the pilot a little over eight minutes to find a place to land. But if something goes wrong on the ground, that window shrinks considerably.
• A multitude of environmental and situational factors put stresses on the aircraft during the takeoff and landing phases, meaning that the probability of something going wrong is also higher at this time.
• In simpler words, if during takeoff, the pilot takes an excessive nose up attitude, the aircraft can simply fall out of the air.
• Aircraft engines are also under the maximum stress during takeoff, especially the moment when the hundreds of tonnes heavy vehicle has to fight the forces of gravity to lift off from the ground. This too increases the possibility of failures.
• On the other hand, the pilot herself is most stressed during landings. This is because this is the most technically challenging aspect of flying, requiring the pilot to consider a host of variables, from wind speed and direction to how heavy the aircraft is, while making constant decisions regarding attitude and speed.
• Most aviation accidents, more so during the landing phase, occur due to pilot error.
• Lastly, aircraft are also more likely to encounter bird strikes, turbulence, and unavoidable inclement weather at low altitudes, increasing the likelihood of accidents

Still safest mode of travel

• Nonetheless, it is much safer to travel by airplane than by any other mode of transport. And data show that aviation has become progressively safer over the years.
• According to data from the UN body International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), accidents per million departures in commercial flights went down from 4.9 in 2005 to 1.9 in 2023.
• Similarly, air crash fatalities have shown a general downward trend, although this statistic is more prone to year-on-year fluctuation.
• Aircraft today are better built, more reliable and well-equipped to deal with contingencies,pilots are better trained because of modern simulators, and significant improvements have been made in weather prediction and gathering various analytical data.

Way forward

Aviation safety protocols too have been refined over time to be where they are today. In short, more people are flying than ever before, but fewer aircraft are crashing than before and still fewer fatal accidents are taking place.

 

Editorial 2 : Speech and trust

Context

Regimes of free speech are fundamentally regimes of trust. They rely on a healthy distrust of the power of the state.

Censorship as a Tool of Control

• Historically, censorship wasn’t about getting people to believe what the state believed—it was about reminding them who held authority.
• It treated citizens as incapable of independent thought, as if they needed protection from certain ideas. Censorship asserted dominance, not truth.
• The real defence of free speech lies not in what it achieves truth, democracy, or progress but in something deeper: the belief that no one should have authority over what we think or say.
• Every act of censorship is a blow to personal freedom, an expression of mistrust in our ability to think for ourselves.

Trust Is the Foundation of Free Speech

• A society that supports free speech assumes trust at many levels. It trusts people to hear offensive or false speech without being manipulated.
• It trusts speakers to understand that just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean it’s valuable or right.
• Free speech doesn’t mean all speech is good or harmless it means harmful ideas should be addressed through judgment, debate, and accountability, not legal bans.
• In deeply unequal societies, the impact of harmful speech isn’t evenly felt. Some groups have less power to push back.
• For them, legal protection from certain types of speech is a way of being included and protected in a democratic society.
• However, this raises a key question: does censoring harmful speech actually solve the root issues like inequality and exclusion? Or does it only treat the surface while allowing deeper problems to persist?

The Real Crisis Is Mistrust, Not Speech

• The traditional defence of free speech rested on three ideas. First, that society not the state should hold speech accountable. Public judgment is often more effective than censorship.
• Second, censorship fuels identity politics:in a multicultural society, each group demands protection for its taboos, making exception the rule.
• Third, protecting even bad speech sends a message: if even that is allowed, then everyone’s rights are safe.
• Today, communication moves fast, and hateful or harmful messages can spread instantly. But the deeper problem is not the speech itself it’s the collapse of social trust.
• Censorship often fails to stop harm and instead confirms the beliefthat people can’t be trusted.
• Legal restrictions may offer short-term relief, but they don’t rebuild the social fabric. True free speech depends on the belief that most people will reject hate when they see it and on institutions that protect everyone’s rights, not just punish speech.

Conclusion

In the end, every act of censorship is a sign that we no longer trust each other. The real work lies in building a society where people feel safe, protected, and respected—not because speech is silenced, but because they know they belong.