An external regulatory body for news media in the Indian context will very quickly slip or lapse into a body of censorship, said Sashi Kumar, Chairman of the Media Development Foundation.
Delivering a lecture on ‘Freedom of press or freedom from the press', organised by the Indian School of Social Sciences, Mr. Sashi Kumar quoted Italian philosopher Umberto Eco to support the argument that unlike the other three pillars of democracy, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary, the fourth estate or the media, could not be made accountable to people constitutionally and institutionally.
If it were to be made accountable, then it was only one of the other pillars or combination of other pillars that could actually hold it accountable. “And such a media will not be a free media; it will be a guided media,” he said. “You cannot discuss the media in the same breath as you discuss other pillars of democracy.”
As regards Press Council Chairman Markandeya Katju's argument that when the US and other European countries could have strong regulatory bodies why not in India, he said in those countries there was no content regulation.
Stressing the need for differentiating the content regulation and the regulation of object situation in which the media operated, he said that while in the UK there was a long-evolved freedom of press, in the US the freedom of press was constitutionally guaranteed. “But, in India, there is no constitutionally guaranteed freedom. It is not a safe right. It is a fragile right and continues to be fragile because it is not guaranteed constitutionally. The press only enjoy the moral high ground.”
Mr. Sashi Kumar said that the lack of constitutional stipulation or descriptive rights as in the US context had created a situation in which the state had sought to erode the freedom of the press at every vulnerable point, including during the days of emergency.
Stressing the need to understand the consequences of acquisition of media by corporate houses within the country and abroad, he said in India many media houses were creating big properties so that these could be sold to foreign companies for huge money.
Keywords: Sashi Kumar, Media Development Foundation, Katju remark, regulatory body, Press Council of India
The rampant affiliations between the media and political parties and media and corporates are bad signs for our democracy.The media is expected to be neutral and free of political or corporate owners biases. That is how [the media] serves public interest or its role of informing the public.
What does “ radia tapes “ and “paid-news” scandal in Maharashtra and the '2 member sub-committe report' now on PCI website prove ? Did the media barons, Editors Guild , PCI members & journalists groups within the country punish the offenders in order to uphold the integrity & reputation of Indian media ? How will they then prevent it in future ? Does it not mean then that “self-regulation “ will not work and Indian media requires a watch dog ?
Is Indian media a free media , is a question we all must ask ourselves.It is not .
Large segments of the Indian media are controlled by the corporates and politicians is well known fact . If in doubt let us hold debates in all major cities similiar to that held on the BBC recently titled " The media have no morals ".
Promotion and manipulation of society have become the agenda of such media in India today. That persistent, vacuous , unsophisticated gossip & ‘paid-news’ fills the pages and air-time means , media is controlled for the sake of commercial profiteering . With corporates and politicians owning shares in media houses and media houses owning shares in corporates , they now have an axe to grind - to maximise income and profits . Radia tapes expose and 'paid-news' scandal are ample testimony that ethics in Indian media & its independence have been sacrificed for profits . Such media is a grave threat to Indian society and therefore regulation is a must .
Media control in communism era and dictatorial regimes caused destruction of these societies, and the greed of the capitalistic in free societies is using freedom of media to promote its interest unabashedly. We are left to choose between two poor choices: Media control by corrupt political appointees as in communist era, or the NGOs financed by capitalistic media magnates under the patronage of their representative government as in capitalistic societies. The only solution to our problem is a sense of responsibility and accountability not just before the worldly institutions but before an Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient God. Media controlled by corrupt government officials and greedy capitalists has made sure that this consciousness is totally rooted out from human psyche and replaced with fun and false ideologies so that they can reign without restraint. Few journalists who listen to voice of their conscience are harassed and killed in every society.
Freedom of speech or Expression is guaranteed by the Indian
Constitution. 'Freedom of Press' is not included in article 19 but is
included as part of freedom of speech; the intent being, reasonable
restrictions could be imposed in the interest of public order,
security of State, decency or morality; but for these broad intended
reasons 'Freedom of Press' is given the due place in the Constitution
of India. The issue here is not about 'Freedom of Press'; it is about
the quality of news items that these media are focusing on, that
Justice Katju is critical of. The Media should wake up to this clarion
call to concentrate on all real issues that affect common man with the
same intensity that they have shown in exposing the recent scams.
Regulatory body and other watch dog measures would only cause road
blocks to the otherwise vibrant media from carrying out their fourth
estate responsibilities. The present provisions of law are good enough
to deal with erring media/journalist.
Why The Hindu is hiding the facts & encourages Hindu Terrorist, earlier
everyday the hindu use to provide fabricated news about Muslim terrorism
etx .When NIA had come up with the truth.The hindu has for got the
responsible or it is a part minority hatred team.Media can not be
onesided.Its time to realize & confess before the minorities. Play key
role of harmony/secular Media team of our India
Sir,
Though I agree with the sentiments expressed in the article.still i
feel there should be some regulatory mechanism to overse the print media
and specialy the electronic media. Have we not come across the paid news
controversy and the Radia tapes.The excessive coverage of celebrities
and excessive sensationalisation in our 24x7 channels is really a cause
of worry.I definetly see that thereshould be some mechanism to oversee
the print and electronic media.
I fully concur with the Comments of Sanjay , Sasibushan , Pyush Bharati and Venkat . Sasi
Kumar's contention that Freedom of Press is not Constitutionally guaranteed in India is
correct. Except for a brief spell during the days of Emergency , Press enjoys not only high
moral ground but also unbridled freedom in India. Indian Constitution which guarantees the
Fundamental Rights was amended to add the Fundamental Duties. To days Media in India
needs to be regulated. Media may have the Freedom of Choice to come under the purview
of the Media Council suggested by Justice Markandey Katju or the LOK PAL. Indian
Judiciary has never allowed the Basic Structure of the Constitution altered . Above all India is
a Democratic Country and People of this Country will ensure the Freedom of the Media . As
such why do you require constitutional guarantee for Press freedom. Unbridled Freedom of
Media should not deprive the Freedom of the Nation.
Regulatory Body in India in the Great Reform Age is slowly converting into Licence Permit Raj Body in the new format. The Government found that keeping Press free will be dangerous for its tribe comprising of MPs, Ministers, Babus and Contractors. They belief in the British Raj formulation of Governance where the TOP 2% enjoyed all the benefits and 98% suffered from Belts and Bullets. The new Indian Government along with babus from IAS & IPS belives in the British Raj to be kept ON in the new format. Indians really have difficult days and they have to wait for a New GANDHI to liberate them.
There will not be any need for censorship in matters connected with the government since the media in general follow the government's line. Haven't we seen some articles critical of the government disappearing after publication from internet editions of some newspapers in recent times? As regards non-political matters,if Justice Katju has his way, the media may have to sacrifice a good deal of its content. With government leaders on its side and vice versa,the well-meaning Justice Katju may not have his way. Flexible conscience of the media will ensure continued government support.
I totally agree with comments made by Sanjay.
"media, could not be made accountable to people constitutionally and institutionally" means they can do whatever they like--including 'live telecast of military approach to warn terrorists', because they like to be free. No other values and guidelines except profit and publicity. How much foreign investment (in both directions) will be considered safe? Do we know any other mode of public information? Why should the media as business, be allowed to operate and enjoy subsidies and tax benefits, when they are not or could not be made accountable to people? who are they accountable to--its shareholders? the elites? like everywhere else in the West? The article misses all the important issues of media ownership and operational stance. No wonder, chomsky et al do not have any meaning for the Indian masses.
Accepted the facts represented above, obviously a guided media can be of no use for democracy and it may lead a dangerous situation of dictatorship. But, the crust of the issue is about the role of media in our society, the society which is witnessing a radical change in multiple aspects. When the max time is spent on discussing about celebrities, useless issues/incidents, sports or better cricket etc. With two legendary personalities speaking for and against media lies, the common people towards which the media has a great responsibility and what they are doing generally. How many times they arise socio-political or socio-economical issues, can't they have some kind of awareness and informative programs? They should not be into any shackles but the way they are enjoying their freedom, is it correct?
Self regulation ? does any one remember the enthusiasm of indian tv channels covering 26/11/2008 which was conveniently used by the handlers in giving directions to the attackers sitting coolly in their dens whereever they were? By insisting their right to air visuals without any check were they not contributing to thier cause ? come on ! Please grow and be bold enough to fight censorship if needed but dont resist regulation at all
Media is as much a pillar of democracy as other pillars of legislature, judiciary and executive. While other executive & legislature have a robust mechanism of checks and balances with judiciary acting as ultimate arbitrator of public interest, the media seems to be adopted its own definition of freedom of expression whereby it is not willing to adopt any kind of checks. Keeping in mind the important role of media in a country like India and the diversity of interests in India, its very much pertinent that media represents all types of views and uphold the public interest at large. Maybe bringing media under lokpal can be a good start as it will be an independent organisation.
Please Email the Editor