logo

Discussion

As we walk into a new era

The changes in the political economy coupled with technological advancements, opened the floodgates of television in India. The age of DD monopoly is over. And there are a number of players – international, national and regional – in the air. From Murdochs and Turners to Subhash Chandras, from CPM and Muslim League to Catholic Church, they are all in the playground. The mosaic of the Indian small screen is transgressing into a diverse conglomeration of business groups and many socio-political organisations. The pronounced potential of the powerful medium in profit making, as well as in interest articulation, is capitalized by the emerging centres of dominance.

The trajectory of the Indian television from the days of Development Communication to Kaun Banega Karorepati marks a transition in the whole understanding of the medium in relation with the dominant ideology of the times. Immediately after the American universities experimented with development communication, as per the Lab to Land programmes in 1950s, there were some proponents like Vikram Sarabhai who proposed to broadcast the farm television programme which ultimately materialized in 1967. He had further envisioned the future of television in India. In all international conference in 1969 he presented a paper which said, ”a national programme which would provide television to about eighty percent of India’s population during the next ten years would be a great significance to national integration, for implementing schemes of social and

economic development, and for the stimulation and promotion of the electronics industry. It is of particular significance to the large population living in isolated communities. That somewhat is reflected in the ideations of the state itself. But, today, in 2000, we stand altogether in a different plane. Amidst the rat race among the diverse set of players.

Recent changes that took place in the field compel immediate attention. There are new channels coming up in most of the regional languages where the scene was rather stable for many years. Diverse formations, most significantly the national media conglomerates, are venturing into regional channels. At the same time, there is a larger assimilation to the global market with new programmes like Kaun Banega Karorepati – a version of a successful programme elsewhere – have transformed the priorities in telecasting. Both the issues are analogous in the nature of the outcome, though it may seem antithetical to each other.

It is argued that the regional media is empowered with the new development of increasing channels. Gail Omvedt (The Hindu, Oct. 1, 2000) opines that the emerging regional channels would stand for the regional identities and challenge the Hindustani/Bollywood dominance in the Indian television. But the idea of keeping the distinct regional identities is rather a misnomer when the ownership of communication systems, not television alone, is largely becoming integrated with a few powerful media groups. Mostly it should be seen as a commercial move to cater to more consumers than ensuring diversities, since the regional content tends to be lesser. The mega clones have started to produce the programmes of a trans-regional appeal so that the transcription can mint profits. Hence it prompts to have a more aggressive homogenization process rather than enhancing the cultural diversities. It upholds the principles of globalization, that seeps into the lives of the people by a peripheral adaptation of the traits of the local culture, though the underlying philosophy always remains intact.

The process of assimilation to the global market, that begun early with the soap operas depicting the lives of the upper crust of the society, has reached newer heights with KBK. One should suspect that the new priorities set forth by the same channel, which earlier flagged off a new trend in the current affairs, mark th e changing directions in which the mini screen is moving. The prime time news and current affairs are sidelined for the programme that capitalize on nothing but the material greed of the audience.

Thus the issues are becoming progressively clearer. Our media is on its ideological identification with globalization as a tool and part of commercialization. It is more and more becoming the agent of cultural homogenization at multiple levels of operation.

Still, as a stark reality, it remains that more than 65% of the television viewers are depending on the public broadcaster. Thus, the changing perspectives are dictated by the channels that muster the viewership of around 35% altogether, whose clients are the privileged class. The majority of the population are, thus, coopted to the ideological preference of the privileged, that subsequently marginalises the majority in deciding the course of their programmes or articulating their needs and interests. It is further engraved by the consolidating media ownerships, which in itself diametric to the spirit of democracy.

On one level the homogenization project is taking place in the social institutions across the board. At the same time, paradigmatically on a different level, the movements of assertion and representation are emerging among the less privileged sections like Dalits, women and minorities. These sections are aiming to carve out a spectrum of their own to represent their democratic aspirations. It is in this social process between the diametrically opposite forces the communication system, or much above, the democracy of India would walk into a new era. An era in which the conflicting ideologies would lead to more egalitarian socio- economic opportunities.

Media News

Cable TV Act amended

The Cable Television Networks Act of 1995 was recently amended to incorporate certain new provisions keeping in mind the administrative deficiencies it had earlier. The new Act, the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 2000, also redefines the scope of programmes and advertisement codes. It was generally held that the earlier rules were insufficient to regulate the cable services mired with video piracy at one end and unregulated programmes and advertisements on the other. The Act empowers the central government to undertake immediate corrective measures in the interests of security, sovereignty and integrity of India, public order, decency and morality.

To check video piracy, the Act insists that cable operators possess a valid telecast authority from the owner of the copyright in order to transmit programmes or films. The Rule 3 of the earlier Act, which permitted the transmission of adult programmes between 11 pm to 6 am, has been deleted as all programmes ”will have to be in accordance with the public orders interest of security, decency and morality.” In addition to the earlier ban on advertisements that directly or indirectly promote the consumption of cigarettes or other tobacco products, alcohol and synthetic baby foods, the new Act also bans advertisements that hurt the religious sentiments of any community. In order to equip cable subscribers to access the public service broadcaster, the Act ensures the proper distribution of wo terrestrial channels of Doordarshan, along with one regional channel, through the cable networks. Subsequently, the Prasar Bharati Corporation issued a notification to the cable operators to telecast DD-1, DD- 2 and the respective regional channels in the prime band, and to ensure that the audience avails a good quality in reception.

Any violation of the Act would result in the seizure of equipment and prosecution of the cable operators. To avoid the distribution of undesirable programmes, the new Act proposes to form an efficient enforcement mechanism on a district level through out the country headed either by the district magistrate, the sub-divisional magistrate, the commissioner of police or any other official of the same rank. In a notification issued by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting immediately after obtaining the  residential consent for the amendment bill, Mr. Arun Jaitley, the I & B Minister stated that the Act would ensure an effective enforcement mechanism.

Meanwhile, the cable operators have come out with their reservations against the amendment Act, which they described as ”lopsided.” The strike call made under tine aegis of the Cable Operators’ United Front received a tremendous support from the operators fraternity in Delhi and surrounding areas. During the three-day strike, most of the areas did not have any telecast other than the Doordarshan. The Front demanded an undertaking from all the channels that are beamed in India to the government that their programmes and the advertisement content would be in tune with the code that has been laid down. It further demanded that the government issue a No Objection Certificate on the basis of the undertaking that will entitle the channels to beam their programmes. Another significant demand registered by the Front is that the encrypted channels that collect revenue from the cable operators should not be allowed to generate advertisement revenue. This, they argue, would subsequently lead to the international norm of barring air channels or a public broadcaster from collecting revenue through advertisement. However, in an urgently convened Press meeting just before the strike began, Mr. Arun Jaitley discounted the arguments as ‘to- tally misplaced’. He added that it is the ban on telecasting of pirated and the pornographic materials that actually caused the hue and cry from the operators than any thing else, and that the legitimate activities are not at all curtailed by the amendment Act.

Justice Sawant expresses concern over declining media ethics

­­Justice P. B. Sawant, Chairperson of the Press Council of India, has expressed his concern over the declining ethical standards among scribes.

While addressing a Press conference in Bhopal immediately after a session of hearing, the Chairperson said that the Press Council has noticed certain cases of blackmailing by the Press.

He said, ”there are journalists who get paid for what they write, and there are others who get money for what they do not write.” He observed that there is a growing tendency to bypass the ethical norms of the profession since the Press is getting bolder. Justice Sawant called for the practice of responsible journalism and opined that the ethical code formulated by the Press Council would suffice the need for a regulatory mechanism.

The Press Council, which is also an adjudicating body, heard 34 cases both for and against journalists. The cases ranged from violations of the ethical code of conduct by the journalists, to atrocities against journalists by state machineries and other sections.

Of late, in a noted direction, the Press Council has censured Vir Sanghvi, the present editor of The Hindustan Times, on the grounds of ”blatant unethical conduct.”

In January 1999 the magazine Sunday , then edited by Mr. Sanghvi, had published an incriminatory article. The Press Council considered the ”ghost story” to have played the role of propaganda for J.B. Patnaik amidst the Anjana Misra controversy and found Mr. Sanghvi breaching the code of ethical conducted being instrumenta1 in publishing the article.

FTII students go on strike

The prestigious Film and Television Institute of India (FTlI) which resumed its fresh academic activities after two years of ”course restructuring” ran into troubled waters again. A majority of the 64 students admitted for the newly structured Basic Course in film making, began a strike against the new curriculum and a steep fee hike. The strike took a serious turn when a section of the students arrived in New Delhi to muster the support of its alumni.

The issues cited by the striking students are significant, with wider academic implications. The new curriculum envisages three distinct sets of courses, each of one year, for attaining the Diploma in film making, instead of the integrated three-year Diploma programme that the Institute had been offering for long.

According to the new system, the students would be admitted for the Basic Course in film making in the first year. An examination conducted at the end of the year would decide whether the applicant is eligible for the Certificate Course to be offered in the second year. This will be followed by another entrance test for the Diploma Course in the third year. Since the number of seats goes progressively lesser in both the higher levels, the students feel that it is bound to invite undue competition at one level, with coercion and nepotism at the other. Moreover, the three- year Diploma Programme operational earlier offered a holistic approach towards the art of film-making as it demanded one to opt for specialization only in the final year. Thus, along with the insecurity factor, the new system will also confine the creative potential.

It is observed that the earlier attempts made to scuttle the three year programme were stalled by the students collectively. However, Mohan Agashe, the Director of the Institute, argues that the new restructured system will be beneficial to the students as one can make a career decision early. Besides, it is in tune with the recommendations made by a core committee consisting of a number of established film makers and alumni of the institute. Earlier it was cited that the new pattern, akin to the technological advancements of communication, would cater to the demands of the market by offering short term and self financing courses.

The other issue raised by the students is regarding the revamped fee structure. According to the revised fee structure, each student has to pay an annual fee of Rs. 22,000 approximately as compared to the earlier batch, which paid around Rs. 3000 per head. The students put it as steep hike, which is eschewed by Mr. Agashe. He feels that even the revised fee is a pittance compared to the annual expenditure per student, which is 4.5 lakhs of rupees.

There are many film makers who have come out in support of the demands of the  students like Mani Ratnam and Rajat Kapoor. The contentions about the new curriculum  are genuine, opine many of them. Moreover, many others as well as the students are irked by Mr. Agashe’s authoritarian style of administration. There are people who go to the extent of ascribing the sole aim of the revamping exercise to the authoritarian aspirations of Mr. Agashe.

This allegation gained further impetus with the abrupt termination of Dr. Shreehari Marathe, a Consulting Advisor of the Institute. Dr. Marathe, a senior faculty member, apparently wrote to the Director with an appeal to address the issues raised by the students sympathetically or to step down if he failed to understand the problems and the needs of the students. Immediately after receiving the letter, Mr Agashe issued the dismissal order and evacuated Dr. Marathe from the campus.

Challenges posed by the new media

The new media is transforming the basic tenets of journalism, felt Tom Goldstein, the Dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the Columbia University. While delivering a lecture  on ‘ Professional ethics: The new media and the role of journalism training” in New Delhi, he said that the techno logical advancements have confined the operational space of the profession.  He also felt that there is a rapid change in the notion of news in itself. The things that constitute news according to the print media are bypassed to a distinct set of preferences, he observed. Goldstein pointed out that the traditional roles of newspapers, editors and the hike are being challenged by the advent of the new media.

”Today, people can get news when they want it, and not when the newspaper decides to publish it or a television channel decides to broadcast it…. ..earlier, the editor decided what the reader should read. Today newspapers come with multiple sections; thereby allowing the reader to make that choice for himself”, he said.

He also stressed upon the tendency of shrinking reporting teams and first – hand reportage in spite of the technical sophistication which the new media enjoys. Citing international reporting in the US as an example, he said, ”publications in the US are cutting down on their overseas staff and, therefore, tend to rely on the State Department for briefs on the outside world.” Subsequently, the new media is slowly but steadily erasing the distinction between fact and opinion, he maintained.

DD Sports becomes a pay channel

In the wake of the Sydney Olympics Doordarshan made a sudden move to make its sports band a pay channel. Doordarshan’s Sports channel, which bagged exclusive rights to telecast the Olympics live in India, decided to collect Rs.5.90 per subscriber. The decision makes one to cast aspersions on the role of a public broadcaster and its way of functioning, in redefining the audience and reaching the people.

Tax Exemption for foreign channels excoriated

The Central Board of Direct Taxes  (CBDT) invited the wrath of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) for providing untoward tax concessions to the foreign telecasting channels including Star, Discovery and Sony between 1996-99.

The CAG observed that these channels were given a ‘special status’ which entitled them to overcome the normal tax assessment procedure applicable to the Indian telecasting companies. The CBDT was convinced with the argument that the foreign channels were to make no substantial profits in the initial years of operation; which proved incorrect, the CAG concluded.

The CAG noted that the CBDT did not introduce any system or procedure to monitor the assessment of the foreign channels, which ultimately led to an ”unfair advantage” for them against the local players.

Earlier, by the end of the last year, there were reports that the foreign channels have successfully lobbied against the CBDT’S move to review the guidelines on taxation on the profits earned by them and the remittances made abroad. It is perceived that the present practice goes against the global norm of providing a level playing ground for all. The CAG has said that many of these channels are pay channels, that collect money from the cable networks and subscribers, and have been assessed to be making high profits.

Campaign Against Death Penalty

The Campaign Against Death Penalty with Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer as it’s Chairperson organised it’s First National Conference in New Delhi on the 22nd and 23rd of July, 2000 at the Indian Social Institute, New Delhi. 110 delegates representing lactates participated in this conference.

The inaugral session of the Conference was addressed by Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, Justice Rajinder Sachar, Dr Mohini Giri, Ms Indira Jaisingh, Mr K. Manoharan and Dr Asgar Ali Engineer. The two day conference comprised of three other important sessions which were addressed by eminent speakers including Justice H Suresh, Mr Kuldip Nayar, Dr Balagopal, Prof Iqbal Ansari, Dr Rajat Mitra, Prof B B Pande, Ms Shohini  Ghosh, Mr Anand Patwardhan, Prof N Radhakrishnan, Mr Krishna Pahadi, Dr R. M. Pal, Ms Nithya Ramakrishnan, Dr Ram Raj, Ms Vibha Parthasarathy and Dr Ambrose Pinto.

Death to the Death Penalty was the emphatic note struck by every speaker at the Conference. Death Penalty is a grave violation and a negation of the Right to Life, making a mockery of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Death Penalty is the most blatant assertion of the state’s privilege to take life, especially given the proven fallibility of the criminal justice system of our country. It is ineffectual, as a form of deterrent and retribution, as the sheer irreversibility denies its justification. In fact, death penalty has not, in anyway, brought down the crime rate. The approach to punitive perspective must shift from retribution and deterrence to reformation and rehabilitation.

The Conference noted with serious concern that new laws which provide for death penalty have bee introduced and amendments have been brought to several existing laws to provide for death penalty for certain categories of offences. It also noted that in all cases of capital punishment the victims have almost always been those who belonged to the oppressed and marginalised sections of society.

In the resolutions adopted by the Conference, the Campaign Against Death Penalty calls upon the Government of India to ratify the United Nations Convention Against Torture and further to sign and ratify the First and Second Optional Protocol to the international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, immediately. The Conference urges the Central Government and the State governments to amend Section 3O2 IPC and all such other statutes which provide for death penalty. It also urges the Law Commission of India to re-examine its earlier recommendation to retain death penalty in this country, and recommend to the Government of India to abolish death penalty from all existing legislatress, to exclude provisions that sanction death penalty in all those statutes and recommend measures to reform and rehabilitant all convicted persons.

The Conference demands that the Home Ministry make public the names of those facing death penalty in the various jails in the country and urges the judiciary as a whole not to impose death sentence in any case pending before them, as death penalty is a violation of human rights and is against the basic ethos of the Constitution itself.

The Conference resolved to constitute a National Cc-ordination Committee and to support efforts to establish a Centre Against Death Penalty based in New Delhi.

True or false?

Media in Bihar, especially the electronic one, have developed a knack for making fools of themselves. Often, in the name of a story, journalists literally chase the chimera, only to end up abusing each other.

Recently, a couple of local dailies front-paged a story about women being paraded naked by village lumpens in Gaya district. Without verifying the news from authentic sources, teams from four major television channels rushed to the place only to discover that the story was far from true. In fact, a local influential farmer wanted to settle scores with some backward caste men and forced the women to give their thumb impressions on an FIR alleging that they were stripped. The women were not aware of the contents of the FIR and were surprised to know that they were being hoodwinked.

However, after returning to Patna, a 24 hour news channel vehemently abused the resident editor of the Hindustan for publishing such a baseless story and causing him unnecessary harassment. The news channel reporter has no answer though as to why he rushed to the spot without confirming the story in the first place.

Controversy

Harry Potter and the media hype

Kumar Vikram
The period of July-August saw the barging in of J.K.Rowling’s new series of adventure stories called Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, if not on the Indian reader per se, then at least in the pages of Indian media. The media went ga-ga over the supposed astronomical sale of the book in the country in the backdrop of its success in the western world. But a month after, there hardly seems to be any follow-up stories appearing in newspaper about the current status of the children’s hero, potter in our country.

The reason is not difficult to decipher. The euphoria created has been rather cumbersome to sustain because it was actually media engineered. After all, Rowling’s new adventure book for children, which commanded the first print order of 5.3 million copies worldwide, had actually got order of only 10000 copies from India with the price of the book being a cool 550 rupees. Moreover, the religious controversies which had a very substantial hand in propelling the sale of the book in Europe and USA, did not hold any relevance for India. Further, Harry Potter is actually a cultural alien with whom it is difficult for Indian children to identify.

That leaves one wondering whether the media should have simply tried to transplant a phenomenon from the west or, should have rather tried to rationalize it in the Indian perspective! And more importantly, the attitude of the media towards the heterogenous children’s literature, which generally remains on the periphery of the media concern, needs to be talked about in the light of the unprecedented publicity given to Potter.

Let us have a look at a representative ‘sentiment’ expressed in the print media regarding the phenomenon called potter vis-à-vis Indian children’s literature. This one seems to have become so much swayed by the marketing strategy employed by Bloomsbury, the publisher, that it has gone to the extent of making a sweeping statement like: Bloomsbury” was pragmatic enough to ensure potter was in the news all along.. No wonder the Amar Chitra Katha came and went. But … J K Rowling ensured a phantasmagoric figure of 5.3 million copies.”

This statement not only manifests the lack of appreciation of the role played by comic strips like Chitra Kathas of all hues in providing entertainment and imparting of values to children of the last many generations but also exposes a lack of understanding of the world of literature.

How ridiculous it is to clap for a literary piece of work which has yet to establish its ‘durability’ as against a work which has now become a part of tradition! It is like comparing a Rajkamal Jha with a R.K. Narayan!

A visit to the recently- held Delhi Book fair also gave a fair enough idea about the brisk selling done by Indian publishers of children’s literature. One could hardly find a ‘mad rush’ for Harry Potter (which the media noticed last month in bookstores) at the stalls selling the concerned book. This was indeed suprising since a book fair happening so immediately after the launch of Rowling’s book could certainly have provided the right kind of opportunity for the buyers!

The case is not against Harry Potter or Bloomsbury. Rowling’s book has unambiguously underlined that love for the printed word is here to stay. And that should be good news for everybody associated with the publishing, including the readers. From the standards of a foreign publication having a strange theme related to goblins and witches, Potter has been a reasonable success in the Indian circuit. But the willingness of the media to provide so much of coverage to a children’s literary piece suprises as well as hurts.

It suprises because the Indian publishers know how difficult it is to carve a space for reviews  of children’s literature in the Indian media. And it hurts because of the ‘obvious’ reasons. Moreover, notwithstanding the hype generated by the publisher of Potter, the fact remains that the Western media is more willing to take children and their needs a bit seriously. The reviews of children’s literary books in the West are written by more informed people – the people who specialize in the field of children literature.

The Indian media has to develop that kind of attitude towards indigenous children’s literature instead of brushing it aside with contempt. One found that some of them, in the aftermath of Pottermania, did carry stories focusing on our own Rowlings, both in English language and regional languages. That in itself underlines the afterthought on the part of the media as far as ‘searching’ for Indian authors is concerned. Still, one hopes that the Harry Potter coverage was guided more by the concern to let our children know about good literature they need to read and was not only a ‘we-too’ effort on the part of the media.

Reprinted from NBT Newsletter
Vol 16 No.7

Global Media

Dawn office raided

In an attempt to control the print media, Pakistan’s military Government conducted a raid on the office of the Dawn group of publications on 27 September. This is a clear sign of the growing impatience of Pakistan’s military regime.

On the fateful day, a group of engineers from the Karachi Electricity Supply corporation (KESP) landed up in Dawn’s office in the pretext of checking the electrical installations in the premises. But the Dawn management termed it as a ‘punitive raid’.

In a statement after the four hour – long operation, the management of Dawn said that the raid is perhaps an indication of what lies ahead for ‘free press in Pakistan. Meanwhile Dawn has decided to send a report to various human rights and civil rights organizations within and outside Pakistan. The raid has set off alarm bells in various sections of the Pakistani society.

TV raises a storm in Italy politics

The state television’s broadcasting of graphic footage of child pornography during prime time has kicked off a major controversy in Italy.

The story run on television was about a paedophile ring that was operating on the internet, and the arrest of eight Italians suspected of belonging to the ring. The police are also investigating the involvement of almost 1700 people in Italy and three Russians in the scandal.

The scandal turned into a political story when two state TV channels showed graphic footage of child pornography. Opposition parties, who see the state broadcaster RAI as a mouth-piece of the government, said that heads at RAI should roll.

Meanwhile, the editor-in-chief of two channels apologized to viewers and the debate made its way into the Parliaments creating a major storm.

Defend the freedom of the Press: says UN Report

Forcing journalists to pass on confidential information to state agencies would have an intimidatory effect, observed Mr. Abid Hussain. A report prepared by Mr.Hussain as the  Special Rapporteur for United Nations Commission on Human Rights states that journalistic freedom includes access to information and right of journalists to keep the confidentiality of the sources. Though the report deals with the state of freedom of expression in the United Kingdom with special reference to Northern Ireland, the developments which led to the report are in a close parallel to India in the wake the  Prevention  of Terrorism Bill of 2000, which held that journalists are legally bound to report any ‘terrorist’ activities they come across professionally.

Upholding the European Convention on Human Rights, the report observes, ”a journalist should not be used as a source for investigating authorities to obtain evidence from.”  Further, it goes on to say that the handing over of confidential information would seriously damage public interest journalism. The information would reach the public domain only when the undertakings of confidentiality are absolute. The safety of the journalists and their sources could be compromised if the identity of the sources are revealed. Hence the Special Rapporteur opines that the legal requirement to hand over such material be dropped.

The report upholds certain basic values of the ‘fourth estate’, in relation to its deeper relationship with democracy. It says, ”the Special Rapporteur is concerned at the use of secrecy in the United Kingdom, which leads to restrictions in the daily work of the Press, but also hinders full access to information relating to public interest. In particular, the Special Rapporteur considers the use of the Official Secrets Act to prosecute the journalists and writers, as well as the existence of the D-Notice committee, to be incompatible with media freedom. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that a democracy can only operate if the citizens and the elected representatives are fully informed. With the exception of a few types of documents, it is desirable to make government documents public to allow citizens to know that public funds are being utilized correctly. Thus the Special Rapporteur notes that in order for journalists to be able to carry out their role as ‘watch dogs’ in a democratic society, it is indispensable that they have access granted on an equitable and impartial basis, to information held by public authorities.”

Gramci’s paper closes down

L’ Unita, the Italian newspaper founded by Antonio Gramci in 1924 to spearhead the fight against Fascism and Nazism, has given way to the whims of the market. The newspaper, once considered to be the most powerful among the Italian newspapers, has formally called off its publication due to the major financial crisis it got into after its prevarication in 1997. It had once played a crucial role in shaping the political discourses in Italy. It often worked underground and issues were irregular during the pre-second World War period. After the Germans withdrew from Rome in 1944, L ‘Unita once became regular and overt.

Though it has failed to attract prospective buyers in the initial rounds, it is observed that the largest centre-left party of Italy, the Democrats of the Left, which had split from the Italian Communist Party in 1991, nurture an interest in casting its options over the newspaper that “historically played the role of being a primer for Italian communists.”

Editor punished

Mr. Lasanta Wickremestunga, the editor of the weekly, The Sunday Leader , was adjudicated to undergo a suspended sentence for two years for publishing an article in 1995 that was found to be decamping the President Chandrika Kumaratunge. The High Court of Columbo found him guilty on the grounds under Section 480 of the Penal Code, which accounts for defaming the head of the state

Information Unrestricted Inc.

Some time back, an investigation team of a TV station at Houston informed its audience of a shocking account of tyre failures that resulted in many deaths. One of the most popular SUVS in the US from the Ford’s stable – the Ford Explorer -which comes to the road on Bridgestone/Firestone tyres was found to have lethal technica1  shortcomings that led to frequent accidents. But the corporate majors operating in the land of free information and right to knowledge concealed and distorted the information.

The chief executive of the Ford finally accepted that the tyres were defective, whereas the Bridgestone chief laid the excuse on the less attention given to the tyres by consumers.

Hence, though out of two different reasons – as Ford did not find it ‘serious’ enough to  report it to the National Highway Transport Safety Administration and Bridgestone straight away denying of any such default – the crime went on. The Congress took the issue in to consideration and the Senators were outraged with the manner in which the big multinational corporations dealt with the problem.

There were other cases also of the similar nature. The US has the advantage of a number of enactments to protect consumer rights and individual liberty. It is known for its risk control mechanisms. The information systems boast to have a sound transparency and access. Apart from all these, the technology in itself could not assure a higher transparency or equitable dissemination since the powerful multi-national corporations doctored the events according to their corporate interests.

This should be taken as an eye opener that even the consumer rights are either not accommodated or less exercised in an economy which proclaims the consumer as the king, when the corporate interests are contradictory to the consumer rights. And the situation in countries like India would be more deplorable as there are hardly any shields to protect one from the  organised and systematic exploitation.  In the wake of its  adherence to liberalization and globalization, it is likely to undergo similar or more crude forms of corporate activities. The advances in the information technology or the advent of transnational media conglomerates could hardly help in reducing the inequality or exploitation. The techno-optimism of the last decade that the Net would empower the ordinary individuals at the expense of the government and the corporate hierarchies, are proved incorrect and it is no more held.

Media doctrine in Russia

The Information Security Doctrine drafted by the security Council has been approved by the Russian President, Mr. Vladimar Putin. It is aimed to ”strengthen the state owned mass media, expand their possibilities for bringing reliable information to Russian and foreign citizens.” The document is observed to be an effort to curb the cultural and commercial onslaught of the Western media. The document would have a tremendous impact on the media scene in Russia since the government has a control over major media establishments, that includes two major national television channels, many news papers and several radio stations.

Uttara awarded

Buddhadev Dasgupta was awarded the Director’s Special Award for his film, Uttara , at the Venice Film Festival this year.

After Satyajit Ray’s Aparajito obtained the Golden Lion, it is the first time that an Indian film got a recognition in the Venice festival. The interest which the Indian films wielded over the 1950′s had waned considerably and it is observed that the award has made an exception to this.

It further reiterates the fact that the serious cinema has takers across the border; which should play an eye-opener to public bodies like NFDC to promote and support the ”non-profitable” genre against the present policy of outright commercialization.

Some milestones of Talkies in India

First talking picture of India : Alam  Arà (hindi)directed by Khan Bahadur

Ardeshir Iràni (1931 )

First Bengali Talkie :              Jamai Sasthi directed by Amar Coudhary (1931)

First Tamil Talkie: Kalidas directed by H. M. Reddi (1931 )

First Telugu Talkie :              Bhaktha Prahlada directed by H. M. Reddi (1931)

First Marathi Talkie :            Ayodhyecha Raja directed by V. Shantaram (1932)

First Gujarati Talkie :            Narasinha Mehta directed by Nanubai Vakil (1932)

First Assamese Talkie :          Joymati directed by Prasad Aggarwal

First Oriya Talkie :                 Sita Bibaha directed by Mohan Goswami (1936)

First Punjabi Talkie :             Pind di kudi directed by K.D Mehta

First Malayalam Talkie :       Balam directed by Notani (1938)

First Indian Talkie in English : Karma directed by J.I. Freer(1933)

First Talkie house in India: Elphinstone Picture Place, Calcutta

First International Award: Sant Tukarama adjudged the best Film of the year in the fifth International film Exhibition at Venice(1937),Winner Indian Talkie

- Adapted from an Indian list, publisher untraceable

Campus

Whipping the dissents out

The controversy surrounding the censure of Dr Kancha Illaiah – the renowned academic and author of the well acclaimed book ‘Why I Am Not A Hindu’ – by the Osmania University should be seen in a high order of caution. Citing an article by Dr. Illaiah that appeared in Deccan Chronicle on 15 February 2000 captioned ‘Spiritual Fascism and Civil Society’, the Registrar of Osmania University, Dr Pannalal, served a notice to Dr. Illaiah. This action is a blatant attempt to confine the academic and intellectual freedom of an individual social scientist, if not a broader design to malign the whole issue that he deals with.

The letter said, “…it is absolutely essential to bind ourselves within the basic canons of conduct of our profession. ” As teachers, the letter continued ”we are bound contribute towards upliftment of every segment of the society, promote social harmony and emotional integration.” It finally ‘requests’ Dr. Illaiah to keep the dictated matters in mind while discharging his role as a teacher, ”with greater vigour and vitality’ to the betterment of the society as a whole,” so that he could be desisted from involving in ”sectarian” arguments to ”eliminate/mitigate” the societal problems.

The issue involves two significant aspects. The foremost is the ideological undercurrents of the letter that significantly undermine the structural violence of the society as a given presupposition of a normal societal existence. The essay ‘Spiritual Fascism and Civil Society’ deals with the spiritual hierarchy that is ingrained in the ritualistic and ideological construct of Hinduism. This spiritual hegemony, established for centuries, manifests in the rigidity of the caste system. Instead of making any hue and cry over conversion or any such issue, Dr. Illaiah argues, the champions of the religion, as well as the civil authorities, should engage in reforming the institutionalization of spiritual fascism in the civil society. The people who are engaged in integrating the Dalit- Bahujans into a homogenized Hindu identity are simultaneously refusing to grant them a spiritual space in the temple system, which inevitably leads to the perpetuation of the structural hierarchy. Dn lllaiah finds it a continuation of the conspiracy historically constructed against the Dalit-Bahujans. Clearly Dr. lllaiah argues his position from a standpoint that is antithetical to the ideological formulation and historical analysis of the present government. Hence, the letter, aimed to censure him from involving in intellectual dissent by an administrative body of the university, involves a broader political question. It reveals the unsympathetic attitude to the democratic value of discourse in civil society. Moreover, the letter in itself imbibes a certain political position which states that the societal problems can have solutions only through ”social harmony and emotional integration” a view which is highly partisan and of- ten historically incorrect. So, the letter should be viewed more as tool of a certain ideological expression that simultaneously expresses two contradictory view points – one that stands for structural violence as a normal social behaviour, and the other, that of an amicable coexistence of the oppressors and the oppressed.

Another aspect of serious concern is the bureaucratization of the academic atmosphere. This incident compels one to think of the shrinking academic space and intellectual freedom. If the Registrar of a university can dictate a scholar of Dr. Illaiah’s eminence about the content and matter of a newspaper article, what is left of our intellectual freedom and academic ambiance? Are our academics also falling into the category of government servants who are professionally bound to a code of conduct that restricts them to voice anything other than the set policies of the government? Or is it a pattern of administrative intervention that is being exerted on academic and related matters in the day to day university life. Or is academics as a profession which encompasses multiple yet contesting ideologies in a democratic and intellectual framework being redesigned into a more unidimensional practice of a commercialized profession?

Since our universities and other academic institutions are in the threshold of a transition with deeper political intentions, this incident cannot be seen as an isolated attempt to confine an individual. Rather, it is part of a concrete plan to restrain the individuals and institutions that exercise the platforms of public sphere for socio – economic transformation. Historically, academic institutions were deemed to be the hub of intellectual activities. These have been the breeding grounds for popular dissent. Hence, the totalitarian regimes have always targetted academic institutions as the ones to be destroyed first. And this is a juncture where academic institutions are being structurally discredited. The universities and other institutions are undergoing massive fund cuts. Political intervention on the academic researches and publications are becoming a routine affair. Scientific methodologies are being replaced with glorified mythologies. Army officers are being appointed as heads of universities. By means of cohesion, the democratic culture nurtured by the academic institutions is being replaced with one that is in tune with authoritarianism. As a part of all these, this incident should be viewed as yet another attempt to weaken the civil society.

Reflection

Another short paper about killing

Shohini Ghosh

Violence and killing seem to occupy a very ambivalent position in our lives. In everyday social interactions it is usual to find people who passionately decry violence in the media claiming that it has a negative impact on the minds of children and some adults. The adults usually referred to are the poor, uneducated or the unemployed. More often than not, the same people have innumerable reservations regarding the abolishing of the death penalty. This paradox makes me feel that many of us are more concerned about the representation of violence than violence itself.

Recently, the platform called Common Cause, a consumer rights organization, has filed a public interest litigation in the Supreme Court citing as respondents the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Ministry of Home Affairs and asking for explicit directions to be issued to producers and a strict code of conduct enforced. H.D. Shourie, founder of Common Cause, reiterate the commonplace and popular view that the depiction of crime and violence on TV have disastrous effects on children. This view is becoming increasingly strident now with even UNICEF releasing a fear-mongering report predictably called the ”Killing Screen.”

Of course, I am not here to defend crime and violence on Television any more than abolitionists of Death Penalty argue for the ‘innocence’ of the person on death row. Just as killing a criminal does not alleviate crime, the killing of a representation does not change the real world. In other words, the belief that media causes violence is misleading and completely misrepresents the complicated relationship that audiences and viewers have with images. This is not to argue that the media does not have any impact at all.

In fact, how people respond to the media have a 1ot to do with their everyday lives and their implication in a much larger socio-historical context.

In 1995, I conducted a study on women’s relationship to popular cinema with 500 women in Delhi. In response to the question, ”what do you most dislike about popular cinema?”

About 98% of the women wrote ”violence.” Later, in the same questionnaire the women were asked to discuss any favourite sequence from a film of their choice. Many women who had identified violence as what they most disliked about films described a scene from the film Baazigar as their favourite sequence. In this sequence, the hero played by Shah Rukh Khan kills his unsuspecting girlfriend by throwing her off a high-rise building. Clearly, people’s responses to violence or killing in the media do not add up to any simple equation. Needless, to say, this is not the only study that reveals the complicated relationship between spectators and representations of violence. Therefore, targeting violent images on television and exterminating them is not going to make our real lives any less violent. On the contrary, studying violence on television might teach us something about our psycho-social relationship with violence and killing.

In an earlier presentation, I have discussed how killing is important material in many of our contemporary films. Because film is representation and not reality, it can perhaps address the idea of killing with far greater honesty and passion than other experiences in our everyday life. Being also a contested site, divergent and conflicting notions about killing are played out. I will for my purpose explore briefly one of the more common themes in popular cinema – killing for revenge and vendetta.

It is important to understand the cinematic space from which the theme of vendetta emerges. The revenge theme is very o1d but really gained prominence in the seventies with the rise of Amitabh Bachchan films. The anti-establishment mood of Bachchan films coincided with the declaration of Indira Gandhi’s Emergency – the blackest chapter of state repression in the history of Independent India, The State was no longer just and benevolent and the popular films engaged forcefully with this disillusion.

Perhaps more than any other cultural form in contemporary India, popular films have best articulated the citizens alienation from the state. From the late seventies onward, innumerable films have depicted how the courts fail to indict perpetrators of crime, while on the other hand, punishing those who are innocent. In the late eighties and nineties, popular films become more categorical about the failure of the state and its machineries. Representatives of the rule of 1aw are shown to be directly compliant with criminals and power brokers. I will argue that it is popular cinema that has most powerfully articulated how bankrupt our judges, politicians and police are and how miserably, the state has failed to protect people’s legal and constitutional rights.

When lawlessness replaces law in the chaotic public space represented in many contemporary films, several things happen. There is a gradual blurring of distinction between the notion of justice and the notion of revenge. As state machineries fail to deliver justice, the responsibility of protecting the society or community falls on individual vigilante figures for whom revenge becomes justice. In innumerable films (like Arjun, Ghayal, Goonj, Gardish, Parinda, Ghulam, Satya, Baaghi, Vaastav) the protagonists find themselves in situations where they are compelled to do the job of the state; that is punish  the guilty. Many of these films resurrect vigilante figures who are allegorical and surrogate representatives of the state. Often, the vigilante figures would themselves been vanquished in the attempt. These films of urban violence or urban terror powerfully capture people’s insecurities and powerlessness on the one hand and their desire for a utopia and mythic delivery of justice on the other.

Moreover, introspection about these films could provide us with an insight into our own killer instincts. Both consciously and unconsciously, popular films enact their stories against a public and psychological space where boundaries between the state and the self, law and lawlessness, justice and retribution become blurred. In the famous climactic sequence in the blockbuster film Sholay, the police stop an enraged Thakur (Sanjeev Kumar) from killing the killer of his family, Gabbar Singh, by reminding him that he is not the law. The brutalized Gabbar is spared instant death by this intervention. Films in the nineties seldom divorce the self from the law. Since barkeepers have failed to deliver justice, the right to dispense justice belongs whoever has the resources to do so. What makes the outlaw hero different from the villain is that he (or she) has moral authority whereas the villain has only material resources. In the films of the nineties, no timely intervention by the police become rare as and retribution is delivered swiftly by the avenger. To this end, the climax of Sholay may seem more progressive as the business of delivering justice is handed over to the barkeepers. Though, I might add, that we as audiences may have gone home happy that the tyrannical and animalistic Gabbar will be put to death anyway and Thakur will not have soiled his hands.

In February, a Symposium on the Death Penalty was held in Delhi where a Former Commissioner of Police described how, over thirty years of service, he had moved from being an abolitionist to being pro-death penalty. He said he could not face the families of the victims of the 1984 Sikh genocide since one man who had been caught, convicted and sentenced to death had not been executed even after 16 years!  In an interesting collapse of individual retributive desire and legal justice, he said that it was imperative the man was killed as retribution is something we cannot rule out. This confession is really the key to understanding why death penalty holds such emotional sway. Because Death Penalty is retribution. It is a perfect arrangement whereby we can murder without being called murderers ourselves. To this end, popular cinema is more honest in visually articulating and representing this desire. Perhaps, that’s also the reason why we are equally passionate about silencing those images.

To return to the paradox that I had begun with. We must remember that image blaming or targeting violence on film and television only addresses the symptom and not the disease. As a student and practitioner of the media, I am often caught in this difficult and unpopular situation of telling people that censoring violence in the media is not likely to reduce violence in real life. That in order to understand our own violent impulses, we need to study the context in which the media text is embedded. And that there is far more violence in real life than there is in the media and more killings in real life than on the screen. lf we are truly concerned about the increasing violence in our lives we must looks notjust at representations, but at our real lives and our own complicity in legitimizing violence in society. Let us at least agree to abolish the one killing that we are all compliant in, that is, the Death Penalty.

This paper was presented at the National Conference Against Death Penalty held at the Indian Social Institute, New Delhi on July 23, 2000

Notes:

1.  See scribe and Violence on TV is a serious Problem” by H.D. Shourie, Times of India, June 29, 2000

2. The Killing Screen: Violence on Television and 1ts Impact on Children, A Public

Hearing, (ed.) Latika Padgaonkar, UNESCO.

3. I presented “A Short Paper on Killing” at the Symposium on the Death Penalty hosted by the Guild for Social Service in New Delhi. The title of my paper is inspired by Krystof Kieslovski’s film A Short Film About Killing. Since this paper builds on somewhat the same ideas expressed in the previous paper, I’ve called it “Another Short Paper on Killing”.

PSBI extends deadline

The Public Service Broadcasting Initiative (PSBI) has extended the last date for receiving proposals from independent filmmakers.

Individual half-hour documentary films will be supported by PSBI. An hour- long film or a short series will be considered in very exceptional cases.

For more details a copy of the InfoBook can be obtained from PSBI by Courier/speed Post against a Demand or Draft or Cheque for Rs 100/- payable in  Delhi and in favour of Public Service broadcasting Trust. Please include a self addressed, 9 inches x 6 inches envelope.

The material is also available on the PSBT website http://www.psbt.org

For further information, contact,

Public Service Broadcasting Trust,

PO Box 3264, Nizamuddin East,

New Delhi -110 013

Perspective

S I T E:
Recalling an old dream

Throughout the last decade there were a number of debates on various aspects of satellite communication – on public broadcasting to state intervention, from government control to DTH. But what remained in the dark is a whole paradigm that emerged out of a  unique experience twenty five years ago, much before the soap operas invaded the middle class drawing rooms. The experiment was flagged with the idea of systemic promotion of Community TV as a medium of socio-economic emancipation. The experiment, Kheda TV in common parlance, took place under the aegis of the Kheda Communication Project at the Space Applications Centre of ISRO, Ahmedabad, between August 1975 to July 1976, though many of its constituents were not wrapped up and continued to function for many years.

Named as the Satellite Instructional Television Experiment (SITE), the SITE was a decentralized communication system completely observing the potential of television as a spatially indiscriminate technology since it hardly requires the functional infrastructure unlike the urban-centric communication systems. This programme had all the potential to set a pattern of conducive communication system in the pre-INSAT days. But for some deep imprints in the area of its operation, it went off the heels unnoticed. By now, to an extend, the political economy has buried the sole idea of Community TV forever in the altar of the market. As we stand today amidst the possible karorepatis, shaktimans and mythologies, the SITE was the celebration of the idea that ”the global reach of satellite broadcasting should be primarily used for education and development in the rural areas,” where the unprivileged majority dwells. And, as far as the nature of the programmes were concerned, it reflected the unsurmountable optimism that science wielded across the board, or what is called as the scientist of the nineteen seventies.

The experiment took place in the Kheda district of Gujarat. The first rural television station in India set up in Pij could cover about 350 villages in the Kheda district. There were 560 community TV sets that served in ten valued of the district. The prime targets of project were the ones who were denied the access to any other forms of communication. So the TV sets were placed in common places where people could assemble to watch the programmes. The aim was to make the media participatory in their issues and activities. It envisaged the participatory programmes in harmony with the context, environment and ecology  – what Mr. Baradi called as the ecological communications approach – to facilitate participatory democracy. Of the one hour daily transmission, the arrangement was that Doordarshan made the programmes for half an hour and the rest was for the SAC producers that consisted of subject experts from outside as well as researchers and writers who were involved directly with the project, the production of the half an hour programme involved major brain-storming and research since the programmes were directly involved with the immediate audience, the small and marginal farmers, landless labourers, artisans, scheduled castes and other weaker sections in the society. The programmes revolved around various themes that included agriculture, health, self employment, elimination of social evils and superstitions, etc.

The plan document of the Kheda project clearly cited its principles and modus operandi. It revealed the vision in which the programmes were chalked out. It attempted ”to use TV – and also to supplement it by other means – for development in the broadest meaning of the term. …Development – economic, social, cultural or ideological – implies a break from the status quo, from inertia; it implies movements change. Change requires a certain attitude, motivation, information and, of course, appropriate physical and social  infrastructures. It also requires an objective understanding of one’s predicament – the family and social constrains one works within. This necessitates the development of a rational outlook, a scientific attitude towards life.” Concretely, it further states, ”the attempt will be to;

(1) Focus on the oppression and the bondage in the present social and

economic system in such a way as to heighten the understanding.

(2) Mobilise the community and the individual himself to break away from

these bondage.

(3) Promote self-reliance among the individuals and the community, by

– involving a reduction in apathy, in dependence in god or others.

– implying improvisation and optimal use of local resources.

– necessitating a cooperative spirit and a willingness to take risks.”

It also said, ”the prime target audience will invariably be lower classes/

castes who, are most oppressed and who need the catalytic input that will

help them to help themselves…”

SITE was a decentralized communication system completely observing the potential of television as a spatially indiscriminate technology since it hardly requires the functional infrastructure unlike the urban-centric communication systems. Or rather, what Kiran Karnik called as the integrated decentralization where the decentralized installation and location of technological dissemination stand connected with a centralized satellite. It aimed as a responsive medium with the vision of localized, autonomous, community controlled communication system with locally made programmes on local issues in the local dialect; preferably with local initiatives.

By integrating the village, technology of communication and a development paradigm, the scientists and the experts in the project ventured to imbibe the essence of development communication to reach the unprivileged majority in the Kheda villages. The programmes and the presentations were scientific in nature, varying between the ones that aimed at rooting out the social evils to a set of instructions for the farmers to adopt better farming practices.

While formulating the programmes, the community viewing situation was given a prime importance as it took the seasonal variations (farming, winter, rains, etc.) into account along with the audience preferences. The medium aimed to play the role of assisting people in different ways, as a partner, expert, facilitated our communicator. It was the technical intervention, to the specific human, spacial and political problems, by a group of scientists and experts. They involved in it emotionally, intellectually and experimentally, as was observed by Yashpal, one of the major architects of SFT’E. It was precisely this spirit that led the experiment; to go beyond the systemic confines, as well as the limited infrastructure which prompted many an expert in the communication system to cast their aspersions on the functional possibilities of the whole programme. With ”the tiniest and the busiest studio in the world (a videotape recorder),” as Yashpal would put it, the Bombay Science Programme could make the audience realise the all encompassing presence of science; in kitchen, in village ponds, in trees and animals. Perhaps this revelation of science as an integral and organic part of one’s conscious world

could help a person develop a ‘scientific temper’ and to shrug off the platitudinous view of science being confined into an activity of an alien breed. Observing the importance of the ‘scientific temper’ in the new generation, the team formulated the credo for the science programmes which said, ”to make children realise that science is everywhere, and that, through the method of science we can explain, understand and manipulate our environment.” While designing the programmes, the formative research was ‘done almost like an in-depth social research, whereas summating research generally plays a more significant role in the conventional media organizations. It also incorporated many other agencies of social engineering, varying from AMUL, NID, FTII to district health authorities, that took part in the project covertly and overtly, from formulating the programmes to

its experimentation.

At a time when the very premises of Community TV is challenged and surpassed, an experiment that took place twenty five years ago is worth remembering so as to introspect where  our dreams were lost and where our reality lies. The present is mired with the worst end of a satellite broadcasting service where the prevailing centralization prompts for immense cultural homogenization, despite the economic repercussions it structurally imbibes. The absence of a platform to express the grassroots sentiments itself assumes the hegemony of the dominant culture. And there lies the relevance of Community TV, which intrinsically insulates the plural ethos, from a centralized and hegemonic dissemination of the dominant ideology, to defend the flag of localism and resist the cultural domination.

The idea of SITE

Kiran Karnik

Interactive communication was the thrust of SITE, though I wouldn’t say we have succeeded. We made a lot of efforts. It’s was not as though people were only enacting, but people were creating. They could not write. So we said, ”okay, you tell us, you enact it, and we will do it.” The most interesting thing, I think, is that it is somewhere there. The initial reactions were to copy what they had seen. But very soon they moved to what affected them, and it became so realistic. I think Mr. Vishwanath has written about a very sad incident where something which had been enacted had actually happened two years later in real life. One of the men who had participated in the programme, a landless Dalit, who went and fought for his rights, was killed in the very same village. Many people who watched the programme did not realise, though it is so obvious. But once they began to realise it gave them a tremendous sense of confidence. In just two or three years in Kheda we could see the amount of self-confidence in those who wrote, those who acted, those who in any way became involved – a sense of confidence that gave them the ability to deal as equals with the district administration, with the landlord, with anybody. It was truly empowering. That, I think, is one of the important aspects of involving the people in a community venture.

We went through this process of involving them to the point where when the transmitter was closed down, for a year and a half they did not allow it to be moved. They said, ”it is our transmitter, it serves us.” The government had to completely back off. We had to accept things quietly. Doordarshan at first could not understand this. They told the villagers about the powerful transmitter they had set up in Ahmedabad which would providing them better signals than what they were getting. They said, ”no, this is ours.” Later, when I came and talked to people in Delhi, they just could not comprehend what we were saying. They told me, ”look, all of you have done a great job and you have been using the transmitter for a few hours a day. You know that we provide that much time in Ahmedabad. But now you will be covering ten districts – isn’t that better? I said, ”no! it is not better.”   But it is quite a different mindset. Many of them genuinely did not understand about this. Of course there were a few who understood and did not want that to happen.

LPTS and the Pij experience

When LPTS were coming up, many of us staunchly supported it because we felt that this would lead to localization, provided you had local programmes generation. This is a very interesting way to use the same facility to do one of two extreme things. You could decentralize completely, if you could link these LPTS – that only have a range of 20 and 30 Km – to a production facility, as against using the same LPTS and linking them to one satellite, and then linking the whole country to one network.

But certain very important larger issues derailed this whole process. The structure of the government, despite the so-called federal structure, is very centralized. And this administrable structure, as in any bureaucratic structure, likes to have centralized control. Whenever we had an argument for decentralization, it was viewed as a direct threat to the power structure. The background factors were many. We must not forget that the early eighties were turbulent when the Punjab problem began to take off, Kashmir and North-East were also posing some serious internal problems. They said, ”look, you can’t have these little TV and radio stations all around, and you can’t decentralize them. Suppose a terrorist captures them?” There were many who believed that the country was in danger and we had to protect it by centralizing everything. This allied with the administrative structure, where centralized power is everything. The same was the case with Doordarshan – the local person had no authority except the one hour you gave him asked him do something locally. But even there, you told him what to do.

So, we had the argument for a very long time citing our experiences at SITE. It was necessary to define a part of the transmission which could be called a common national programme, which could include something which could be of tremendous importance for national integration. However, that should only be for a limited time, may be one hour a day. For the rest of the time one could relay to the local station to take what they want. They could pick things from Delhi because in that given are they were interesting, useful or relevant. If not, they were free not to. They would air something locally or even shut down the transmitter. There was no point broadcasting Delhi market rates in Kerala, which they were doing for about 8 or 9 years. What on earth were they going to do with this when they did not even grow those crops there? But it happened. because they had to take all programmes from Delhi.

So this structuring of Pij model did not involve media alone. It also involved media, but it involved potentially a threat to the very structuring of how the country operated. Not everybody saw this, not everybody felt threatened. But some people genuinely saw this. Some of them, for their own somewhat narrow bureaucratic need did not want it. Some others felt it was not a bad idea, but the country was not ripe for it, it was not the right time. We have too many tendencies to split apart, so we need to have this central control. We cannot have these stations where people can do their own thing and have the community involved. All the local transmitters linked via satellite to Delhi will carry only the Delhi programme. And for almost six of seven years most of them did not even carry the state programmes. There were transmitters in Maharashtra that did not carry the programmes in Marathi coming from Bombay, but carried the programmes coming from Delhi in Hindi! So that degree of paranoia affected the whole case. When you  come to the technology end of it, the novelty was a great fun. There was moving picture for the first time, it did not matter if you hardly understood it. So there was no reaction from people. And they did not even know that an alternative existed, that they could have programmes that were local, in their own language, of relevance to them. They had no idea. They thought television meant that you get programmes from Delhi. And once in a way you see Hindi pictures which everyone enjoys around the country.

So,it’s great fun. And that was it.

– As spoken to Gargi Sen

Society

India towards a knowledge society

Anoop Sam Ninan

The entry into the information super highway marked a major leap to Indian communication and technology. It made ceaseless transformations to the social relations as well as the economic environment of the country. It is in this regard that the agenda announced of late by the Prime Minister Mr.Atal Behari Vajpayee to make India a knowledge society becomes significant. After the Prime Minister’s announcement, the Union Planning Commission formulated a high level task force. Apparently, it was with ardent advocates like CSIR director Dr. R.A. Mashelkar’s jumping onto the band wagon, that the Government decided to make ours a knowledge society.

Since a knowledge society is characterised by the transformation of knowledge and information as a major source of value creation, it is viewed as the subsequent phase of the industrial society. The agricultural society depended on farm activities as the major source of living. The industrial society emphasised upon industrial production. However, the knowledge society would generate value through the creation and exchange of knowledge, that is, the growth of knowledge – intensive business. Operationally, the knowledge society demands a rapid technological change and focuses on the greater use of information and communications technology.

The government has formulated a five-point agenda that emphasises on education for developing a learning society, vibrant government – industry- academia interaction in policy making and implementation, leveraging of existing competencies in information technology, biotechnology, telecom, drug design, financial services etc, economic and strategic alliances built on capabilities and opportunities and global networking. The task force formulated by the Planning Commission would look into the public policy issues in relation with the knowledge society and aims to facilitate broader participation by creating public awareness. It also attempts to provide a support network by creating a website on India’s knowledge society, producing an annual progress report on India’s transformation to knowledge society, etc.

There are many factors that make the attempt to move towards a knowledge society immanent. Globalisation has enunciated the watershed of competition in acquiring wealth  and its control over resources. Coupled with liberalisation, it prompts every country, as of indivisuals, to march ahead as ‘competitors’. The new developments in technology and the spread of internet have also paved the way. The major shift in conceiving technology as a public exercise to an intellectual property forms a deeper base of this immanent transition. The newer emphasis given to the new technologies by the more developed countries and multinational commercial ventures is largely reflected in the shaping of the techno-economic policies of India and other third world countries.

But it is relevant to look into the serious implications of knowledge society in India. India being a country with a less even distribution of material property and literacy, any such measure to enhance a privileged section would result in an increased disparity between the people who have the access and those who do not. Even according to the official records, half the country is teeming in poverty. A huge population is denied of their access to clean drinking water. A majority of the population do not enjoy the access even to the minimum health facilities. Millions of children cannot step into the primary schools to avail their fundamental right to basic education. And it is in the socio-political environment that the government is venturing into an area which caters to the demands of the affluent section. Though the upliftment of the unprivileged sections are mentioned now and then, as do the various documents promoting economic liberalisation, the structural imperatives to improve the economic conditions of the larger section of the population are never incorporated in the plan documents. So, the platitudinous understanding points to the commercial interests of a particular section of people whom the government wishes to represent and the cross border economic pressures.

The moot point of the analysis is, how far will this new venture contribute to the overall development of the country? What could be its impact on the people who are socially, economically and geographically deprived? What efforts are being made to adapt these technological innovations? Do we understand it as a holistic system that encompasses a set of sociological realities? How far are the micro realities of the country projected in the macro level decisions?

An interesting instance is the significant emphasis in the five-point agenda on the role it envisages for the new technologies. The new technologies like the information technology and bio-technology have ushered the era of post-academic sciences. This phase is noted with its non-commital transition of the academic sciences from public knowledge to the commodification of knowledge as market products. Liberalisation has caused enough havoc to the society as even the World Development report 2000 says that the pace of poverty reduction has slowed in 1990’s, particularly in the rural areas. And it is at this juncture, that the Government has decided to  introduce the technological pattern which is antithetical to the egalitarian co-existence of its people.

What do the experiences elsewhere show? A recent study conducted in Australia by the Australian Council of Social Services, the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling and the Communications Law Centre, reveals that the development of Information technology and the widespread usage of Internet has but widened the divide between the social clauses. Almost 43% of the total 13.5 adult population in Australia has the access to the Internet. The study reveals that the poor and the less educated Australians have lesser chances of being on the net and that eventually affects in their social and economic opportunities. Since, almost half of the population is wired, “the digital divide” is more pronounced and the large scale dependency on th
e net results in a cumulative marginalisation of the section who are out of the net. The study reveals that the geographical imbalances have little to do with the digital divide as it identifies the low income earners, the unemployed and the elderly across the geographical zones as those at the receiving end. It is interesting that some studies conducted in the US and the UK also focus on the social situation rather than geographical location in the digital divide.

Hence the questions that arise are more relevant in India since the introduction and promotion of Information technology would further shrink the operational space of the unprivileged classes. As a numerically small affluent section would turn the situation in to fortunes, the lesser equipped will be the more deprived in the rat race. Hence, in a way, the technology itself will become the vehicle of increasing disparity and exploitation. And it is perhaps the distance that humanity has travelled from the old days of the ‘technological optimism’ when every one believed and spoke about the technological advancements that levelled the social and economic inequalities. The post academic turn of the biotechnology is more throbbing. It shook the basic tenets of modern sciences. The very sciences which were said to have ideologically inclined to eradicate the hunger through the Green Revolution are more into the making of genetically engineered food grains. Incidentally, the forthcoming Breeders Act would do away the traditional farmer’s right to produce the seeds in their own farms, as it does not identify them to  have right to breed the crops, but the large scale corporations. The proposed areas like drug design, telecom and financial services have similar or more compelling stories. Hence the knowledge society which we are aspiring to bring in would have the innate elements of  social and economic inequalities. It rather keeps in tune with the demands of the market economy where a Cyberabad coexists with suiciding farmers and endless queues of kidney sellers. And the liberalisation, encapsulated as a package of globalisation and privatisation as we experience today, has a huge binding on the poor and marginalised of the country.

Apart from the factors which bear a direct impact on the socio-economic realities, there are certain fundamental issues which seek an in-depth attention.

There is a major transition in the modern understanding of perceiving the technology, knowledge systems, ideologies etc. The post-cold war political scenario also contributes to the same. The values of modernity are rapidly discredited. The hitherto methodologies of academic and ideological analysis are paradigmatically shifting into different sets of understanding. In the final analysis, it has arrived at a situation where technology is diverting more and more from dispensing the basic commitments to the human kind.

It denotes a crisis in the academic sciences as well. It is envisaged that there would be a ‘vibrant government-industry-academic’ interaction. It is a clear indication of the changing policy shift in the academic researches. With this, the academic institutions would entertain the researches dictated by the industry, which are feasible to the market. It would not only lose the institutions’ freedom to involve in socially relevant research, but also fashion the researches in a unidimensional paradigm.

The ethical concerns of the new technologies invite a new set of challenges to the survival of humanity. The technological innovations are moving in an  unsurmountable pace. It has become a matter of serious concern and incertitude among the very people who were involved in formulating the technologies that shaped the present. Bill Joy, the co-founder and chief scientist of Sun Microsystems, the kingpin behind programmes like Java and Jini, is among the people in doubt about the future of human existence. He opines, purely on technological grounds, that the developments in the new technologies in a sequence of small and indivisually sensible advances would lead to “an accumulation of great power and, concomitantly, great danger.” He says that the twentieth century technologies like nuclear, biological and chemical weapons have been very powerful and potentially destructive. But at the same time, he argues, these technologies needed rare or practically unavailable raw materials, highly protected information and often a huge investment. It made weapons of mass destruction, by and large, affordable and feasible only to nation states and such organised establishments. On the other hand, the 21^st century technologies, which he identifies to be genetics, nanotechnology and robotics, are potential to cause what he calls as the knowledge-enabled mass destruction. He consternates that these powerful systems can work into a new class of accidents and abuses. Moreover, for the first time, these accidents and abuses are widely within the reach of indivisuals and small groups. As ‘knowledge’ is replaced to the large scale facilities and rare raw materials. It will enable any wise nut to engineer a mass destruction. As even the “judicious use” of the weapons of mass destruction by the nation states and such organised formations have instilled enough havoc to the humanity, it is worth considering that any one who does not have even the political binding of the nation states acquiring and exercising the potential of such mass disaster. The catastrophe is amplified with the innate capacity of these technologies to have self-replication by the mere setting of a digital command.

Finding the unrepressed acceleration of the technology may sound far fetched. But the layman’s entry into the crucial areas once considered as secret zones are no more a past. John Pike, the director of space Policy at the Federation of American scientists in Washington DC agreed on the point that there is a lot of information jamming on the net. A US Air Force team has found that the satellite signals can be jammed using very ordinary equipments with the help of Internet. To their wonder, they have even located a few teams who are involved in such activities.

In the final analysis, one should accept the reality that the march towards knowledge society has multi-faceted problems. The ones particularly that of India, are both operational and systematic. And that of the technological catastrophe in general. But, as a political reality, the plan to make India into a knowledge society is intrinsically involving certain dogmatic presuppositions that play against the marginalised sections of the country, who would rather need basic amenities of living like food, water and shelter.

Politics

Indian troops in Sierra Leone –

A “peace-keeping” misadventure

Shishir Thadani

In September the Indian troops finally decided to withdraw from Sierra Leone, but the struggle between the rival groups still continues. The nation’s is being torn apart with bloodshed and destruction. Most of the Indian newspapers reported about Sierra Leone from the western point of view. Here we present a genesis of the problem as it occurred.

Sierra Leone is a small nation in West Africa with a population of roughly 5 million people. A former British colony, it is a mineral rich country with reserves of diamonds, titanium ore, bauxite, iron ore, gold and chromite. Yet, it is also one of Africa’s poorest nations. Life expectancy is barely 50 years, while infant mortality rate is a high 126 deaths/1000 live births. Literacy is roughly 32% and 68% of it’s populations is estimated as being desperately poor. Other than mining, there has been little industrial development, and a large proportion of the population must migrate out of the country to survive. Roughly 10% of the population controls almost 50% of the nation’s wealth.

History of colonial degradation

Like India, and many other West African nations, Sierra Leone has suffered bitterly from colonial conquest. In the 18th century, the British dominated the Atlantic slave trade transporting more slaves than all the other European powers combined. During that period, Bunce Island owned by British firms, was the largest slave trade operation in the Sierra Leone River (now, the Freetown harbour). From about 1750, Bunce Island specialized in supplying slaves to South Carolina and Georgia, where American rice planters were willing to pay high prices for slaves coming from Sierra Leone with rice-growing experience. In 1808, Sierra Leone was officially declared a British colony and remained so until1961.

Since then, the people of Sierra Leone have struggled to build a nation that was physically and psychologically ravaged by colonial rule. But as the experience of Sierra Leone shows, it is very difficult for a deeply impoverished nation to rectify the grave inequities that resulted from colonial rule. As a very small country, it has been a constant victim of external manipulation and governments whether popularly elected, or military based have acted more as agents of international mining companies than as benefactors of the local people.

Roots of Sierra Leone’s civil wars

Not only has the wealth from Sierra Leone’s been usurped by international trading companies, it has also been squandered and unfairly distributed by a series of failed governments. Unsuprisingly, Sierra Leone’s high income disparities and chronic poverty have led to a series of coup attempts and armed uprisings. International intervention rather than helping the situation has only compounded the problem of the small nation. At the behest of the US and Britain, the military governments of Nigeria, Ghana and Guinea intervened by sending troops into Sierra Leone in 1992-93. This intervention only aggravated the ongoing civil war, and led to a precipitous decline in the national economy.

In the last few years, Sierra Leone has been embroiled in a civil war between the government of Ahmad Tajan Kabbah and the Revolutionary United Front(RUF). The RUF has accused the government forces of being agents of foreign powers who wish to loot the small nation’s mineral wealth. The RUF also charged the government with mining away Sierra Leone’s non-renewable resource of diamonds. It has also requested that the US, Britain, Nigeria, Ghana and Guinea refrain from interfering in the affairs of the nation. They have also pleaded for other nations to allow the people of Sierra Leone to resolve their conflicts with out external intervention.

British troops – bane of the people

But the Kabbah government has been calling for international intervention and even accepted the presence of British troops on Sierra Leone. This has naturally infuriated the patriotic- minded people of Sierra Leone who could have hardly forgotten the British role in the nation’s slave trade and subsequent colonization. Although the government has made an attempt to present the British troops as merely “technical advisors”, and the Western media have pretended that the British troops were there simply to protect British civilians, the British troops have been involved in heavy combat inflicting casualties on both civilians and the RUF forces. The British have been the most aggressive champions of hunting down the forces of the RUF in clear violation of previously signed peace-accords.

When the Lome Cease-fire Agreement was signed on 18 May 1999, it called for the setting up of a joint government that would include both the RUF and the Kabbah government, and the UN was enthrusted with monitoring the cease fire. However, there was no mention of any involvement of the British.

Since the signing of the Lome peace accords, the cease- fire agreement has been followed more in the breach. The presence of 6000(or more) British troops has led to a complete break-down of trust and an unraveling of the peace accords. British troops have been a law unto themselves and have refused to place themselves under UN authority and supervision. The impartiality of the UN has naturally been gravely undermined, and it is little wonder that the RUF wants the UN to leave. UN troops are being viewed as a front for British colonial interests and are consequently treated with disdain by supporters of the RUF and by other sections of Sierra Leone’s people.

That a UN “peace-keeping” effort has been hijacked by Sierra Leone’s former colonial lords is hardly suprising. Since the demise of the Soviet union, the US, Britain and it’s allies have dominated the agenda of the UN and treated UN missions as extensions of their own imperial interests.

Indian involvement in Sierra Leone

In this context it is hard to see anything positive emanating from India’s involvement in Sierra Leone. Having fought an exhausting battle in Kargil only last year, it is difficult to imagine that Indian troops relish their Sierra Leone assignment. Reports have suggested that Indian troops are confused and disoriented. To be hated by a section of the people and to be captured by the RUF can hardly be helpful to the morale of the Indian troops. Since independence, India’s governments have been exceedingly cautious in sending peace- keeping troops. They have tried to ensure that peace – keeping missions elicit broad approval and are not a cover for armed intervention in the internal affairs of the nations involved.

It’s consistent opposition to imperialist maneuvers and war-making has won India plaudits and respect in the Non-Aligned Movement(NAM). But India’s role in Sierra Leone is winning India few friends. The British and Kabbah government have publicly criticized the Indian troops as being too “soft” on the RUF, while the RUF rejects the presence of all UN troops as unwanted occupiers.

George Fernandez has defended the embarrassing situation India finds itself in, by trumpeting the fact that UN troops are led by an Indian General. The fact that British troops have refused to accept his leadership and the UN umbrella does not seem to upset the Indian Defence Minister. It is irrelevant if the UN troops are led by an Indian or an African if they are unwelcome guests in the war-torn nation. Having refused to be drawn into Sri Lanka’s civil war- it is bizarre that the NDA government should find any merit in Indian participation in what appears to be a highly dubious UN intervention.

In Iraq, the decade-long UN imposed sanctions have been blamed for over 2 million civilian deaths. One after the other, UN officials have resigned, not wishing to be a part of a program that is causing untold human misery on the beleaguered people of Iraq. The oil embargo against Iraq has helped push oil prices to over 30$ a barrel hurting India’s economy, and creating pressures that have led to a sudden devaluation of India’s currency. Before the Gulf War, Iraq was India’s chief oil-supplier and much of the oil was obtained through barter deals. Indian engineering companies received lucrative business contracts in Iraq. Not only is the UN-imposed trade embargo a genocide of the Iraqi people, it is also against India’s national interests.

It should also be pointed out that since the UN’s Sierra Leone intervention, military coups have deposed popularly elected governments in Pakistan and Fiji. In both cases, Indians have a serious stake in the outcome. But the UN has shown no signs of intervening.

The UN’s interventions have rarely been based on issues of principle or any genuine concern for democratic rights. If anything, UN troops are becoming pawns in the games of re-colonization and global plunder by the world’s former colonial powers. India with it’s more pressing wars in Kashmir and the North-East can ill afford to get sucked into military adventures that give India a bad name and do little to help the local people achieve genuine peace and prosperity. What s particularly dastardly is how Indian troops appear to be aiding and abetting the agenda of the British – the former colonial plunderers of both India and Sierra Leone.

Hence, it is imperative that Indian troops be withdrawn from Sierra Leone without much delay, and Indian governments resist all attempts at seducing India into such ill-advised military interventions in the future.

Opinion

An Interview with Kiran Karnik

Kiran Karnik is presently the CEO of Discovery Channel. But that is not his only identity. For years he has been associated with the medium of television and has been a serious analyst and a critic of the media scene in the country. He was also one of the visionaries behind SITE, the earliest and the most unique experiment with community television, that was left to die. Here Kiran talks to Gargi Sen about his analysis of the media scenario in India today in the realm of growth of television, public broadcast and the market.

In terms of Public Broadcast, what do you think has happened over the last 25 years?

Cynically, I would say that in the last 25 years we have practically stood still. Not just in terms of what has been done, and what has been achieved. But what is disturbing to me, and which I felt strongly about – is that 25 years back, what we tried to do conceptually, in terms of thinking of what could be done, what might be required, how do you define these issues and problems, and how might you do something. I don’t think there has been much progress in terms of either the conceptual part of it, or the theoretical understanding of the whole process of communication, of community, of the role of India in creating change, and in how one might use communication technology to motivate and mobilize communities – these are things we talked about and craved some success in small ways. But I don’t think there has been much progress on these very key areas. In fact, we have probably regressed in some areas, and certainly in terms of the purpose for which these media might be used.

What one sees today is that the forces of the market of commercialisation, of escapism, of basically empty entertainment, have become very strong. They have refined their tools in a sophisticated way and with great effect. Whereas, the very same kind of abilities should have grown in a different direction in the areas of what you can do with meaningful content, with communities, and what you can do with participative as opposed to global television. These abilities have not, as I see it, made much progress.

I actually tend to reflect your cynical view, and I think at one level we are again looking at concepts. What is very surprising to me is – functionally – why didn’t this continue? What is the history?

Well, I think it’s a very, very complex range of factors. It may have been coincidental that more than one of them just happened to coincide. One, was the overall change in the political economy of the country. Most people say 90s – but I believe it’s really from the late 80s. I date it from Mrs Gandhi’s return to power. First very slowly, then faster and faster. And suddenly the 90s saw this done openly and overtly, whereas earlier it was a very slow process. The whole political economy changed, which almost tends to make ideology redundant and nonexistent,which is the overall macro scenario.

The second part of it was – I take a lot of blame for this, since 1 was one of the minor players along with many of my colleagues – the vehement opposition to the market. This was a mistake because, most of us at that time, identified market with commercialization.

But the more I look at it, the market has been a tool. It’s like technology, which can and should be used equally for empowerment and not just for tyranny. Certainly, the market as a tool has many constraints, and some limitations and a lot of dangers. But it is still a very powerful tool.

If we could somehow build up a quasi-market for good things – content oriented programmes, change oriented programmes, empowerment programmes – I think we could have done a much better job. That’s where the political economy moved towards commercialization and liberalisation. The market was taken away completely by commercial forces – which capitalized on it and therefore the middle class – which in Marxist terms is the vanguard of revolution – completely walked over to the other side.

The 3rd factor was the changes in the technology itself. Because as technology changed, it became more amenable to certain kinds of uses, and it required special effort – as in some ways it always has – to make it usable. As technology grew and satellite technology came in, this changed completely and you could cover much larger areas. Another analogy in this case of how we used technology as a tool. We didn’t give it up but we evolved what we call integrated decentralization. Integrate the larger world – you don’t become a frog in the well. So you use technology for the integration part. You use technology in other ways to create your product. You don’t avoid it or shun it. But technology certainly has certain imperatives in terms of getting more global coverage. And in the continuing efforts of this type, how can we grab it and move it to do something else? And unless that kind of very conscious effort was there the natural inertia of it took it on – globalizing, expanding, growing, larger coverage, therefore, more commonality, therefore more lowest common denominator, therefore more instinctual programming, which is violence and sex which is common around the world regardless of the area, the colour of skin, or nationality. That’s where you need strong correctives, and you need proactive work to move it in a certain direction. And as proacitivity is reduced at the moment, natural forces are pushing this towards a larger global coverage.

It was at that same time during emergency, that Mrs Gandhi also put in all the LPTS and the Terrestial network, when I think all this happened…

You’re right! Though It was not emergency, it was post… it was the second coming. She came back to power in 1979, and the Asiad was 1981-82.  That’s the time the whole move of setting up transmitters, of moving to colour began. That created a lot of controversy. But it is very clear that you cannot hold back technology. Now, some of us took the view that we’re not opposed to it but it has to come in a way which does not deprive the disadvantaged. That got taken to a somewhat fundamentalist stand with many people saying no to colour. And once you say no colour versus colour, there’s no question which way that argument is going to go. You need to trim your sails to use the wind rather than trying to fight it. You can’t! Even if you fight it you’re still going to end up going that way. And I think that’s what happened.

But you’re right, it was around that time that all this started happening. This is apparent when you look into the field of Media, you see reflections of her thinking.

In a situation where the market has a free run, the market very easily defines community. That is a situation I find very disturbing. To completely disassociate the state….

I couldn’t agree with you more. Though it’s very fashionable, especially now, to say that the state should be cut off altogether. I think in its overall perspective the state in it’s totality is a force for progress – in a positive sense, which the market, in tile way it is structured, is NOT and never will Be.

Because it’s not only wealth, it’s also intellect. That’s why we went through this – to share with you and discuss – as it’s public knowledge. When we got together as a committee to look at Prasar Bharati we felt that to remove it completely from the government is not workable in our situation. The state has a role, and a responsibility which cannot be wished away. There is a need for the state to have ownership which does not mean day to day control, and it does not mean political interference. And we have tried to say there is conceptual differences between the state and the government. The state is ongoing, and is for the people. Whereas governments come and go. It is true that the state is manifested through the government of the day but there is a difference, that’s why when you join government employment you swear by the constitution of India which is the state.

I believe citizens also have a right and a responsibility. As Professor Cees Hamelink said that communication is too important to leave it to the princes or to the merchants. That way I find the PSBT to be an important initiative. Do you sense that kind of intervention at the level of the intellectuals or social activists?

No, my reading of it is that they are not. In fact they are far less concerned then they were a few years back. I think many people buy this argument without agreeing with the statement. Mr Pramod Mahajan made saying ”you know there are so many private channels they give you a whole diversity of use, they give you al1 kinds of programmes, so you don’t need anything else. What we do need is a mouth piece to the government.” He made it very directly – hats off to him for articulating it very directly without going around and pretending it’s something else. But what he said is not true at all. This diversity of content and channels you get has two problems – one, they are not reaching the full spectrum, they are only there for that little bit on the spectrum and you cover everything in that little bit and you have forgotten 60-70 percent of the people and their needs and addressing their concerns and what is of relevance to them. Secondly, even this wide diversity, from a completely different angle is not really diversity, because the trend worldwide is for mergers, for acquisitions where you are getting fewer and fewer, bigger and bigger megamedia corporations who control everything from hardware to content, to television, to radio, to print. I think there is a very big danger in that too. You possibly get just one point of view, wherever you absorbs your information from. It may be coining from just two different sources. Therefore, as you said every citizen has a responsibility, and this is one of the hopes of PSBT.

There is a new Broadcast Bill, which happened with the new government. They allowed the earlier one to lapse. Is that really envisaging that the LPTS be sold off to private…

First of all, it doesn’t exist except in various drafts. But none of them are anywhere near that. And frankly I don’t think it will happen anywhere in the near future. There is no Broadcast Bill existing at all.

But, I’ll tell you what has been done which is disturbing – 1 have said this publicly also. You know, Doordarshan itself has been selling. First they started with sponsored programmes. Now, they have sold a two hour chunk of time on DD Metro for the whole year to the highest bidder. In theory you could next time make it four hours and eight hours and then fine you’ll use all this time in this transmitter. This is back-door privatisation. Why should I run a private TV station? Why should I buy a transmitter? The biggest thing in a channel means that you have control of content. You decide the content. I mean, we out source almost all of our content. But we keep control on it. We decide what will go, what won’t go. We decide what the theme is, we do a lot of commissioning. We don’t give editorial control. It’s like a newspaper you know- many people may write, but you do your thing. You keep editorial control. You may allow a diverse opinion. We have strongly advocated against this in the report, and the present thinking is that, that kind of sale of time is not on. So that’s not going to happen.

We still have the 1876 Act…

That is it! That is the only thing that controls Broadcasting in the country. But the drafts that exist – they are proposing prevarication – as it is being done for radio, for television, but not for Prasar Bharati. So they will allow private transmitters to be set up. As far as radio is concerned they have already done that. By the end of this year in Delhi you will probably have ten FM radio stations, privately owned.

We’ve been following some of the debates that centred around autonomy. What we have probably missed out has been the whole definition of people and community. Who is this autonomy for? Is it for the market? If not, who are the people? Which is the community?

I think it is a tricky issue. This is something one doesn’t want to get into this because then you become like the Left that fractures into so many bits and pieces arguing on theories that are never clear. But if you say this is to be a community radio station – is it going to be run just by the local landlords? Who is the community? Look at a case like Bihar, where you have competing armies around. Surely it is a community. it’s all local people and they take it over, and you run it locally – But which local people? In a fractured sort of community that can be a serious problem. And I think we have to be a little careful about that, because the power structure, particularly in the more backward parts of the country, is yet very skewed. And unless there is a corrective force of some kind, which often may not be local. In the short run it is very likely that the rich and the powerful will just take over. In the long run these are self correcting mechanisms, this is what  democracy is all about.

BREAD, NOT BOMB!

National Convention for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace

11-13 November 2000, New Delhi

Aims:

• To build and strengthen the campaign against nuclear weapons
• Network amongst peace and nuclear disarmament groups in the country and abroad
• Build awareness on the horrors of nuclear world
• Work for a nuclear weapon free world through a time-bound nuclear disarmament programme
• Halt and roll back India and Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programmes
• Promote transparency and safety in all nuclear programmes

The National Convention will discuss several related issues and adopt a Charter for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace and an Action Plan.

For registration and further information, contact:

The Organizing Committee, National Convention for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace,
c/o Delhi Science Forum,
B-1, 2^nd Floor, LSC, J Block, Saket, New Delhi 110017
Ph: (011) 6862716 (telefax), (011) 6524324, e-mail: natcon2000@fnamil.com

The organisers also request all to contribute financially.

New Films

Guhya

55 minutes, Hindi, 2000

A film inquires in to the feminine sexuality in its multiple manifestations. A dialogue between the spiritual and sexual traditions of the past and it reminiscences in the present. The film is a part of the project on Feminine Sexual symbols and rituals, which the film maker was involved with for last 3 years.

Film by: Kirtana Kumar
Source:  Kirtana Kumar
23( Old 58), St. Mark’s Road,
Bangalore – 560001
VHS Price: Rs.450

Aman Aur Ekjuhti ( Peace and Unity)

60 min, Hindustani, 2000

The film focuses on the Sufi Shrines of Srinagar, Kashmir. It traces the development of Sufism in Kashmir, highlighting its role in promoting communal harmony and social reform. It also looks at the role that these shrines are playing today in bringing people of different communities together, despite the on-going conflict in Kashmir.

Film by: Yogi Sikand
Source: Jamal kidwai
c/0 Oxfam (India) Trust.
B-3, gitanjali enclave
New Delhi -110017
VHS Price: Rs.300