Acharya Prashant addresses the issue of negative media headlines concerning IITs. He states that having been in decent touch with the IITs, particularly IIT Delhi, he believes the campuses are performing far better than what the media portrays. He suggests that the media has its own agenda and picks up sensational stories, while a lot more positive development is happening. He points to the continuously improving global rankings of all IITs, especially IIT Delhi and IIT Bombay, as proof of their progress, contrasting it with the time when they were lagging. He concludes that these institutions are getting better each year, not deteriorating, and the negative headlines are for trivial reasons, which has more to do with the media "scavenging on the rotten stuff" than the institutions themselves. Regarding a specific controversy at IIT Bombay involving a protest by the Ambedkar-Periyar-Phule study circle, Acharya Prashant finds the genesis of this body both interesting and appreciable. However, he notes that the young students are equating vegetarianism with Brahminism, which he calls a factually misplaced notion. He explains that many Brahmins, particularly in the East and South of India, liberally consume fish, so one does not need to oppose vegetarianism to oppose Brahminism. While he finds their opposition to the injustices of the past justifiable, he believes they are mistaken in the equivalence they establish. Acharya Prashant argues that one should be vegetarian, or rather vegan, not out of ideology but out of compassion. He posits that if one is to stand for the oppressed, as figures like Ambedkar, Periyar, and Phule did, then one must recognize that animals are the most oppressed beings in the world today, with millions slaughtered daily. He asserts that an "Ambedkarite" should be the first to turn vegan because the fight against oppression should not be limited by species, just as it is not limited by caste, gender, or creed. He emphasizes that the oppression of a human is bad, and it is equally bad when an animal is slaughtered. In conclusion, he expresses his deep respect for fighters against injustice like Ambedkar, Periyar, and Phule. He states that justice is truth and should be offered to all beings, not just humans. He requests the members of the study circle to reconsider their stance and not posit a false equivalence between Brahminism and vegetarianism. He questions the logic of slaughtering animals in the name of opposing Brahminism, stating there is no rhyme or reason to it.