Special Correspondent
Calls for internal institutional arrangements to check excesses
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Minister for Education and Culture M.A. Baby has said that the proposed Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill may well be used to muzzle the media.
He was inaugurating a roundtable on the Bill, organised here on Saturday in connection with the 45th State conference of the Kerala Union of Working Journalists (KUWJ). The Media Information and Communication Centre of India and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Delhi, were associated with the event.
Mr. Baby said though the overall degeneration in society had found reflection in the media as well, draconian legislation that the Bill envisaged could not be considered an answer for it. There had to be internal institutional arrangements in the media industry to check excesses, Mr. Baby said.
The Bill, he said, had been drafted without application of mind or extensive deliberations. Its provisions, which could hurt democracy, should be subjected to close scrutiny and wide discussion. The Bill reminded one about the Defamation Bill sought to be introduced in Parliament by a Congress Government. The move got thwarted only because of a united agitation by democratically minded sections and leadings lights in the media, he said.
Delivering the keynote address, Sebastian Paul, MP, contended that the Bill’s real intention was pre-censorship.
The Press Council, he said, strongly opposed the Bill when it was first circulated for discussion. The council had made it clear that the concept of regulation and any proposal that involved control of the media by an external agency were totally unacceptable to it. Press freedom was the result of long years of struggle. It could not be sacrificed at the feet of the Government, he said.
Hypocrisy
Sashikumar, eminent media person, described the Bill as bad in form, content and motives, and said it clearly brought out the Government’s hypocrisy. Although the Bill did speak of self-regulation, its real intent was regulation and control of the media from outside, he said and added that the only silver lining was the provision that sought to check cross-media holdings.
Mr. Sashikumar said if the Bill got passed, it would bring in inspector raj in the media.
He, however, called upon the media to do some introspection about their work. Otherwise, more such attempts would be made to muzzle the media through indirect means. Sections of the print media had opposed the Bill, but for the wrong reasons. Their main objection was to the Bill’s provisions against cross-media holdings, which were the sole saving grace of the Bill because of the growing monopolisation in the media, he said.
Asianet chief of programmes T. N. Gopakumar pointed out that the Bill’s very name was suggestive of the Government’s intention to regulate the media.
Several of the issues that the Government wished to tackle through the Bill could be tackled using provisions of existing laws. The Bill, in effect, was meant only to enable the Central Government to control the broadcast media, he said.
Amrita TV senior news editor G.K. Suresh Babu called for a serious soul-searching on the part of the media to see what had led to the drafting of such a draconian Bill.
Malayala Manorama chief of bureau John Mundakkayam pointed out that the fast erosion of visual media’s credibility was a threat to the print media as well.
Doordarsan Assistant Station Director G. Sajan called for a better appreciation of the role that technology would play in the future broadcast scene before such legislation was attempted.