National Press Day 2007

 

 

 November 16 the National Press Day is symbolic of free and responsible press in the country and is observed by holding Seminars/symposia/workshops/debates/discussions on topics relating to the press throughout the country.

The National Press Day, 2007 was observed by the Council in the capital on November 16 by organizing a Seminar on “Media As People’s Voice—Pre and Post Independence”. The function was inaugurated by Shri Somnath Chatterjee, Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha at Vigyan Bhawan. To mark the occasion, a Souvenir on the subject was also released by       Mr. Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi, Hon’ble Minister of Information & Broadcasting and Parliamentary Affairs who was also the Guest of Honour on the occasion.

A number of distinguished and eminent personalities including veteran journalists, jurists and legal experts took part in the inaugural Seminar.

            Text of addresses delivered during the occasion and proceedings of panel discussion follows.

*****

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Welcome Speech

By Mr. Ramesh Gupta*

 

Hon’ble Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Shri Somnath Chatterjee, Sir, it is a privilege, pleasure and honour to welcome you to this inaugural function today. It is also an honour for me to welcome Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi, Hon’ble Minister of Information and Broadcasting and Parliamentary Affairs, who is the Guest of Honour of this event, the Chairman of the Press Council Honble Justice G N Ray and Smt. Vibha Bhargava, Secretary, Press Council.

            On this occasion, we have this function to celebrate the National Press Day. Friends, the Press Council of India has decided that the most interesting way of celebration would be to have a Panel Discussion on “Media as People’s Voice – Pre and Post Independence”. What we are about to discuss here today is a subject that not only India but the entire world has       debated and thought about for a long time.

            Wherever there are free men and women, their voice has to reach to the end of the world through the media. So indeed it has been in India both before and after independence. The journalists and newspapers in the earlier era, and the electronic media in our own times, have continuously fought the arrogance and apathy of the rulers, who were somehow unable or unwilling to hear the voice of the people. This is the voice that is raised at every injustice, every indignity and every wrongdoing that happens in the political and social life of the country.  It is the voice that cannot be heard until it is collectively amplified by the media and made loud enough for the nation and the world to hear.

            As Gandhiji said, the journalist’s peculiar function is to reach the mind of the country and to give definite and fearless expression to the mind”. Gandhiji himself showed the way and was a prolific writer and fearless editor, who was both the voice of the people as well as the interpreter of the people’s voice. In the environment of foreign rule and many acts of injustice, Gandhiji’s writing in his newspapers and journals were a call to battle as well as a beacon of hope to people who could not otherwise voice their voices.

 

*Member Elect, Press Council of India

            For Gandhiji the press media was definitely a potent weapon of struggle and Satyagraha, and he was not alone in this.  Many great political and social leaders of that time found journalism and newspapers an effective way of conveying the voice of the millions of Indians to those who needed most to hear it.  Among them were Lala Lajpat Rai, Feroz Shah Mehta, Dadabhai Naoroji, Swami Sraddhananda, Deshbandu Gupta and others.  They all associated themselves with the media.  There are many other unsung revolutionaries of India, who fought the battle of freedom with the media and the weapon of the pen. Many of these leaders, journalists and editors, who waged Satyagraha through the media, were hounded out and kept in jail, even deported, but no one could stifle the press of India, neither at that time nor later.

            Having played a revolutionary role during the freedom struggle, after independence the media settled down to a new role as the information provider. That was a period of calmness and sobriety for most of the media, and those who still took up and fought a cause or spoke in a loud voice were quickly dubbed as instances of yellow journalism. But wherever there were wrongdoing and injustice, the dark side of the society, once again in India it was the media, this time aided by the electronic media that took up the fight. Until the media had become more market driven and popularity conscious, both the print and electronic media played its part as watchdog of the people.  Sometimes they overdo things and sometimes they go astray.  There are issues of responsibility and right-mindedness, the issue of misuse and abuse of the press freedom, but these are aberrations.

            The media in India is perhaps one of the strongest and the most free in the world.  It is perhaps because young people who want to become journalists are given the right advice.  Decades ago, when I wanted to become a journalist, the editor told me that if you want to become a journalist, you must have a mission in life. The mission then, as now, is to speak the voice of the people.

 

 

 

 

Address by

Mr. Justice G.N. Ray*

‘Media as People’s Voice-Pre and Post Independence

                                                                      *[1]G.N. Ray

            With the evolution of mankind was born the urge to know and to communicate. The earliest reference to an organized collection of news in ancient India is found in the Ordinance of Manu, the ‘Manusmriti’, a document of historical as well as societal importance. During ancient India, emperors gathered news from various sources like informers who reported on subversive activities, from the reports from different departments and from accounts of socio-religious activities.

            Evolution of human civilization moved with the expansion of freedom of masses and their right to free speech which included freedom of the communicator, the precursor of present day media, and took the form of dance, drama, ballets etc. The media is, in the ultimate analysis, the culmination of participatory democracy.          

The modern press marked its beginning only after the advent of European Civilization in India. Portuguese were the first Europeans who introduced printing press in India. Today, over the last 250 years, the press has come to occupy an undisputed position as the fourth and the strongest pillar of modern India.

            The struggle for freedom of speech has marched hand in hand in the growth of civilization with the struggle for other human liberties. History shows that human liberty cannot be secured, unless there is freedom to express without fear or favour. The history of the Indian press truly reflects this belief. Indian freedom fighters and reformists during period of subjugation to foreign rule naturally fought for the liberty of the press.

            Though the press in India is an European institution, it owes its origin and growth not to the government but to the individuals who had in them the courage to lead. That the trials and tribulation they had to encounter at the hands of the powers that were, did not prevent the press from growing and becoming an instrument for fight against subjugation, testifies to its inherent strength.

            The Indian national press was the backbone of the freedom struggle.  Its historical importance is linked to the awareness and creation of public opinion.

Pre Independence

            Even though it is very interesting to trace the history and development of print media both in English and regional languages in pre independent era but time constraint does not permit such exercise and cataloguing such news papers.  The earliest newspaper published in India was Hicky’s Gazette on 29th January, 1780.  Amongst some of very old newspapers, Samachar Darpan and Dig Darshan published by Christian missionaries from Sreerampore, Calcutta Journal (1818) , John Bull in the East (1819), Sambad Kaumadi, Brahminical Magazine – Brahman Sebadhi (1821) and a weekly in Persian language by Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Mumbaina Samachar in Gujrati language (1826), Oodant Martand in Hindi language by Mr. Jugal Kishore (1826) deserve special mention.  Hindoo Patriot edited by Hurish Chander Mukherjee deserves a special mention for fearless criticism of British rule and its oppressive measures.  Mr. Hiranmay Karlekar in his editorial introduction of ‘Independent India – The first fifty years’ has commented that the editor of Hindoo Patriot, Hurish Chander “wrote in a language which is strikingly modern and marshaled facts and arguments with a cogency which should be the envy of some of the best leader writers in English of our time”.   

Between the birth of Hicky’s Gazette on 29th January 1780 and the Partition of Bengal, the press was primarily perceived as a source of social awareness and reforms.  Hicky’s Gazette was started by an European but true to the spirit of a fearless journalist,  it protested against injustice and oppression of foreign rulers incurring wrath and displeasure of British rulers and on account of constant hostility and fines imposed for fearless journalism, the paper had to be closed. Hicky’s Gazette will always be remembered as a pioneer in journalism in India and playing the role of media as people’s voice in pre-independence era.

The later years of 19th century witnessed newspapers consistently reporting on challenges ahead of the nation. Moving away from the genre of reporting societal events of the Britishers, the country saw the birth of different kind of journalism, a new journalism which stood for social reforms and public welfare,  and creating opinion on issues like education, child marriage, widow marriage and sati.

            Pioneer reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy did not challenge colonial governance but aimed at social orthodoxies through well reasoned writings. Journalists like Subba Rao fiercely supported the Gandhian mission, also produced journalism of the highest standards ----- frequently controversial, but rooted in their conviction of purpose of journalism’s purpose, which they believed was to mould public opinion.

            The press soon became the most powerful weapon of freedom movement under the leadership of personalities like Tilak and Gokhale who stood for progressive journalism and liberal notions and believed in the strength of the press to mould public opinion, to shape the destiny of the nation and safeguard the rights and civil liberties of its citizens.

            The arrival of Mahatma Gandhi on the Indian political scene after his return from South Africa in 1915 marked the new beginning in Indian journalism. From 1919 to 1947 Indian media was influenced by the agenda set by Gandhiji. The newspapers that reported the speeches and issues given by Gandhiji witnessed higher circulation figures.

            Gandhiji had set rules for the functioning by the press. Gandhiji advocated for ‘truth’, ‘honesty and ‘fearlessness’ in journalism. In his autobiography, Mahatma Gandhi defined the following objectives of the journalists:

            “One of the objectives of a newspaper is to understand the popular feelings and give expression to them; another is to arouse among the people certain desirable sentiments, and the third is to fearlessly expose popular defects.”

                        Editor of ‘Young India’, and ‘Harijan’ Gandhiji had edited ‘Indian Opinion’ in South Africa in 1904 which played an important role in the affairs of South Africa struggling for their rights under colonial rule.  ‘Indian Opinion’ expresses his role as a journalist, as an expositionist of opinion which for him had been equivalent of truth. Knowing fully well the power of the press Gandhiji started ‘Harijan’ to fight against communalism.

            The strong belief of our freedom fighters that the power of their pen can challenge the political establishment injected the Indian journalism with a sense of purpose that never weakened and holds ground till date.

Post Independence

            National political struggle alongwith the advocacy of social reforms and emancipation in the years before independence contributed to the creation of the core strength of the press in the free India.  These included independent functioning, resistance to state oppression and censorship, a cardinal commitment to free speech and expression and its role as the leader of the society and protector of fundamental rights.

Statistically the press has grown by leaps and bounds since independence. In the early years of independence the circulation of dailies was 5.4 per 1,000 populations.  From such a low base, India’s daily newspaper circulation increased from 5,91, 29,000 in 2001 to 7,29,39,000 in 2003 and to 7,86,89,000 in 2005. Recent survey of World Association of Newspaper has placed India second to China in growth in the world newspaper Industry. As per the WAN Report, there witnessed 12.93 percent growth during 2006.

Indian democracy has grown and shaped itself radically in the sixty years of independence through various struggles on the path of development. The press has mirrored the march of this journey of democracy.

            But let us not forget that media has major responsibility of functioning as the conscience of the nation. In a country like India, world’s largest democracy, where it is the people who are the real masters, this responsibility increases manifold. The right to be informed cannot be compromised but due care should be taken that the information or the news is presented in such a way as to helping in nation building and not to keep the interest of the market in the forefront.

            To quote the First Press Commission “Democratic society lives and grows by accepting ideas, by experimenting with them, and where necessary, rejecting them. It is necessary, therefore, that as many as possible of these ideas which its members hold are freely put before the public. We would, however, emphasize that the right of free expression is derived from the responsibility for the common good. Acceptance of that responsibility is the only basis for this right which has been accepted as fundamental freedom of the press does not mean freedom from responsibility for its exercise. Democratic freedom in India, and the freedom of the press, can have meaning only if this background is properly understood.”

            Over the years there has been perceptible decline in the values that the free Indian press inherited from its predecessor. Regional media especially the Hindi press which played a critical role during Independence movement is today going strong. But it needs to come out of its local confines and enter into the national arena.

            The greatest threat that the Indian press faces at present as a result of the globalization, is market driven economy. Serious decline in news values, lack of interest in real issues, sensationalism, trivialization, profit motive, consumerism are some of the unfortunate characteristics of the press today. Press, it is rightly said has become the other face of entertainment. Mainstream newspapers are increasingly turning to strategies that tend to erode news values and the independence of editorial functioning. Journalists today are more loyal to the market, owners, advertisers rather than to the journalistic ethics. Concerns for the marginalized, less powerful and underprivileged have taken the back seat. Focus today is more on celebrities, sensationalism rather than on issues.

            In the words of Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, “It is very important for the media to be partner in national mission. They should highlight the positive aspects and provide solutions to difficult aspects through nation wide consultations”

By highlighting the needs and aspiration of the grassroot level of the society the media can truly contribute to the creation of an India where every citizen would be equal and bridge the chasm between the so called elite and the under-privileged and not so fortunate section of the society on the national level.

The press in India has always been at the forefront of national life. Although there has been a considerable erosion of ethics over the decades since independence, the original values still continue to inspire. The media has always risen to the situation whenever there is a crisis. We must remember that we have to compete in this new era of journalism of information and entertainment without compromising on our glorious journey in the field of journalism. The pre- independence media did have the mission. Today it appears to be more of  a paying profession with the glamour and power attached. We must not forget that media is not only the mirror of society, it has its role as  motivator and guide to  take our country forward on the path of development and progress.  The freedom of expression must not become the business of expression.

I, invite the media of today to be the torch that shows the way and not the fire that destroys, although both give light.

 

 

 

            Let me conclude by recollecting the great thoughts of Swami Vivekananda, “All power is within you, you can do anything and everything. Believe in that, not believe that you are weak. All power is there, stand up and express the divinity within you.”  

Namaskar

 

 

 

                       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Address by 

Mr. Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi*

 

 

Hon’ble Speaker of Lok Sabha and our distinguished Chief Guest of the Press Day, Hon’ble Chairman of the Press Council of India, Mr. Justice G N Ray, Shri Ramesh Gupta distinguished guests, friends, ladies and gentlemen:

            It really gives me great pleasure and it is an honour for me to address all of you here today.

            Clearly, in a democracy the most criticized agency or body is the executive and government.  In every democracy, the Information and Broadcasting Minister is also in it and has to face a lot of scrutiny, and that should continue.  Therefore, on this National Press Day, I come here with an open heart to address you and to support your cause.

            The rights of the media, like any other rights, are enshrined in article 19 of the Constitution of India.  Our Constitution provides those rights which are enforceable. If they are not observed, then the writ court has to intervene.  This is a very unique system in our parliamentary democracy, in our judiciary, in our legal system.

            During my tenure, I found some changes in the Constitution, which added some fundamental duties, which are not obligatory.  They are not being enforced, nor being scrutinized or talked about.  I am not here to give any advice on that issue. 

           

I must say, I am highly enlightened and educated by the address of the Chairman of the Press Council of India. It is not only educative and illuminating; it sets out a vision for the future.

           

 

*Hon’ble Minister of Information & Broadcasting and Parliamentary Affairs

 

 

 

 

 

During the days of the freedom movement, the Indian Press had played a very crucial role in taking the message of the freedom struggle to the masses and thereby broadening the mass support during the freedom movement.  During the occasion of the war of independence, newspaper Tayara Azadi published in Hindi and Urdu asked the people to fight against British rule. The paper was soon confiscated and anyone found with a copy of that paper was prosecuted. The first Hindi daily, Samachar Suddabhasha, newspaper Durmai in Urdu and Sultan Lakhar in Persian faced trials during the national freedom movement.  These are part of our freedom struggle and history.

            In the struggle against the Britishers, some newspapers played a very notable role in 1861. The newspaper Hindu Patriot published a play Neel Darpan, written by the great writer of Bengal, Druvendra Mishra and it launched a movement to stop the cultivation of Neel crop to the white traders and that resulted in a new campaign.  Furthermore, the job as an editor in the Bengali newspaper was taken by no less than Iswar Chander Vidyasagar.

            The history of the evolution of the free press in India is written large in the history of our national struggle in letters of gold. Many national leaders, who were heading the freedom struggle, were great journalists and reformists.  I would like to name one of them, Desh Bandu Chitta Ranjan Das, because I have gone through his earlier writing, Bangla Katha. They have fully realized the potential of the newspaper in furthering the cause of nationalism and supported all secular ethos of the society.  This is how C R Das laid down the principles of journalism those days. 

            Kesari was started by Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak on January 1, 1881. Along with Agarkar and Chiplunkar, Tilak started Daily Press and another literary journal, Marathi News.  Tilak’s Kesari became one of the leading newspapers for propaganda of the freedom movement. Lala Lajpat Rai inspired the publication of three journals viz. Punjabi, Bande Mataram and People from Lahore.

            Gandhiji started publication of Indian during his stay in South Africa. Young India, Nav Jeevan, Harijan, Harijan Sevak and Harijan Bandu were published by him after settling in India.  They all show his kind heart and the concern for the downtrodden of India.

            One of the foremost Hindi journalists, who had earned his name for patriotism, was Ganesh Shankar Vidyarti, whose name we have read in our student days in the classes.  In 1913 he brought out Dainik Pratap from Kanpur. 

            There is not a single province in India, which did not publish a journal or newspaper championing the cause of our national struggle.  This is the 60th anniversary of our freedom and on this occasion I salute them once again for their contribution to the great motherland.

            The print media has changed beyond recognition during the last decades. There has been a phenomenal rise in the number of newspapers and their circulation. The expansion of literacy and rising quest for information resulted in the rapid growth of newspapers, weeklies and periodicals. According to the Registrar of Newspapers of India, 65,000 newspapers and periodicals were registered in India, of which over 7,000 were dailies, 22,000 weeklies, about 20,000 monthlies and the rest with varying periodicity.

            The largest number of newspapers and periodicals registered were in Hindi, almost 25,000.  With 10,000 newspapers and periodicals, UP has the largest number of registered newspapers in the country. I may add, the reading habit of all kinds of newspapers is substantially more in the villages and the rural areas than in the urban areas in India.  

            In any democracy, the print media has a vital role in building public opinion by way of dissemination of information to the public.  Uncensored news, fearless editorial criticism and other articles published in the newspapers and magazines influence day to day governance of the country to a great extent.  In India, the fourth estate has been a popular pillar of democracy and the freedom it enjoys has contributed significantly to the consistent growth of the print media.

            Often we talk about a vibrant media. But when we talk about the freedom of the press today, when we talk about the freedom of their rights, I am sorry to say that we all feel depressed.  Is it free?  Apparently, it is free; yes.  Which are the components of the press?  The first part is the administration and management, the publisher, the chief proprietor and the accountant.  But the real component of the press is the editor, the sub-editor, the principal correspondents, the correspondents and the journalists. 

            After hard work, if a journalist or a field correspondent prepares a story, how much justice does he get for his talent by the exposure of the story in the real page of the paper?  Is it not curtailed, is it not deleted, is it not shortened or truncated?  Does it not undergo the desired censor of certain parts by some part of the management at some point of time or the other?  Therefore, it is often checked or curtailed.  When we talk of the free press, are the journalists free to prepare their story and to present it with all the facts on the editorial page or any other page?

            I am not exaggerating. Let us search our hearts today. How many of our journalists feel secure in their profession?  How many of them count the days and try to please the management to move from the voucher system to a regular salary?  So, we have to talk about these things in the real sense.  When we talk of democracy, justice, natural justice, it is not merely in terms of the Constitution, Parliament, Executive and the Judiciary but in terms of what is obtaining in the other spheres;

            I can narrate many number of incidents.  A friend of mine prepared a whole story, showed it to me and he said I am going to place it before the people. The next day I found him crestfallen, because his entire output was confined to a few lines.  He cannot say anything because he would then lose his job.

            I remember a journalist, who is no more, I salute him, he was a very important guy in the Indian media industry, who was championing the free press, working hard to defend the rights of the journalists, Chand Joshi and this is the story of The Hindustan Times.  I remember many journalists of this type.

            Therefore, when we talk of the freedom of the press and the right of the media, it does not mean the authority and the right of the management. If the real spirit of the right of the media pervades in every press of India, when the real concept of the free press emerges, the journalists will feel more confident to go ahead with their mission.

            Here I am not talking of the print media. The print media is very secure.  But how many correspondents work in the electronic media with dignity, confidence and talent. But they have no job security. They work on voucher, contractual assignments. Only a few reach the top. The rest languish where they are. I know one journalist, one correspondent of the television. He got only two minutes to present a press meet of mine. His mother was ill and he was not in his best. He could not carry the whole focus in time. He was abused and removed.

Therefore, I tell you, when we talk of the freedom, we talk of the freedom in the right sense, in the right place to all of us. It is not the big proprietors, but the editors and correspondents and other people who develop the newspaper in the right spirit of producing stories and reporting columns truthfully.

I know the Hon’ble Speaker will take his time and deliver the Keynote Address as a Chief Guest. But as the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, I feel pained that immediately after the Question Hour, the press gallery is empty save the UNI and PTI, who stay there just to maintain their names in the role as news channels. Otherwise, they would be losing their jobs and the clients will not get the newsprint.

The press is not bothered about what a member from Nagaland is talking at the fag end of the day at 7 o’ Clock on some crisis in his area on drinking water or supply of electricity. It is never reported. We are not very serious about it.  Yet, it is after 12 that we take up very serious issues for discussion in the Assembly or Parliament. But they are not covered even on the 5th page. The unknown hero of Nagaland who is talking at 7 o’ Clock on the crisis in his area is not given any coverage at all. I know this requires re-judgment.

I know the advertisement page is required because they have to meet the cost of establishment. I also know that democracy is not about two big parties.  Democracy is not about a few eminent leaders in Parliament and Assembly, whose names appear in the press every day. Democracy means even the smallest of the people should feel involved in the system and the voice of the masses has to be heard.  Therefore, I feel that a totally new approach is required in the dissemination of information by journalists at the grass-root level. 

I do not like to say which of the media plays a greater role. I know I have a question in Parliament tomorrow on Malaysia and a question on Pakistan.  If I have the authority to say, I would say that the most objective free press in Asia is in India. I can compare them. I had been to London and I can say that when there was a criticism on the Iraq issue, the House of Commons did protest and the top people from the BBC were sacked.  But if it is in India, Parliament shall not be allowed to function for days, because the agitated press would not allow this to continue.

At the same time, I respect the press in other countries. Some of the journalists of newspaper Dawn of Pakistan have shown the example of courage to come out with the factual position of the incidents there.  I know that India occupies the place of pride, so far as media is concerned.  I salute the journalists and correspondents on the Press Day.

We always feel that the Press Day belongs to the press. Delhi is the capital and the heart of the media. But on this Press Day, when the Hon’ble Speaker is the Chief Guest, I feel sad to see the attendance. As the Chairman mentioned, I feel sad of that.  But if the Hon’ble Speaker holds a press conference just now in his house, the attendance would be double with all the TV channels and the media. On the Press Day, I salute the whole fraternity. Thank you very much.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Address by

Mr. Somnath Chatterjee*

 

 

Hon’ble Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Hon’ble Chairman and Distinguished Members of the Press Council, friends from the media, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I deem it an honour to have the opportunity to associate myself with this event, organized by the Press Council of India, to celebrate the National Press Day and to share some of my views with this august gathering on the issue of “Media’s Role as the People’s Voice – Pre and Post Independence”, for which I thank Justice G N Ray, the Chairman, and the members of the Council.

The Press Council of India functions as an interface between the media and the civil society and as a kind of Ombudsman, helping the press conduct itself in a manner consistent with journalistic ethics and with a commitment to societal needs.

Media refers to mass communication, that is communication to people at large.  The process of communication can be by different means. In the years before independence, the communication was mainly through newspapers and journals, but that was not the only form.  Earlier, when newspapers reached only a limited number of persons those who could read, with literacy then confined to the small percentage of people, mainly in the cities and towns, there were other means like songs.  Many patriotic songs like those composed by Gurdev Rabindranath Tagore and Dwijendra Lal Roy in Bengali and Subramania Bharati in Tamil, for example, became extremely popular and were sung by people, mainly students, which inspired the people more than perhaps editorials in newspapers.

There were also plays written and acted by patriots and freedom lovers, such as IPTA in Bengal, what was then Bombay and in other parts of India. They also carried messages and views, as the newspapers did, very effectively.

 

 

*Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha

But the major medium prior to independence was, of course, the newspapers and journals, and they could be divided into two groups.  Many of the latter were in different languages, some like Sambad Kaumudi being brought out as early as 1821, by Raja Ram Mohan Roy. The 19th century saw a number of newspapers and journals published in Calcutta, Bombay and Punjab. In later years, a number of papers were brought out in English, such as the Hindu from Madras. This was the chief medium of communication and it was the communication of information that they were engaged in of what was happening in the country.

During the years of freedom struggle, since the late 18th and early 19th century onwards, many of the newspapers strongly supported the emergence of the liberation movement, forcefully advocated freedom and inspired the people to fight against colonialism and exploitation by the alien rulers, and they provided a platform to the leaders to spread their message as wide as they could reach.

Despite the fact that the reach of these newspapers and journals was much smaller than it is today, it was wide enough for the British to pass a number of laws to restrict the freedom of expression available to these papers. They clearly recognized the effect that the dissemination of the ideas in these papers and journals had on the growing number of educated Indians, and that it was from among these that the leadership of groups of Indians would emerge, and in fact it did.  From the Press Regulations promulgated by Lord Wellesley in 1799 to the infamous Press Act of 1857 promulgated, by Lord Canning, which came to be known as the Gagging Act, because of the virtually unfettered powers it give the government to ban or prohibit the publication of practically everything, the supervision of mass communication was under constant scrutiny. Ten years later, in 1867, the government came out with yet another law, the Press and Registration of Books Act, which I believe is still in force.  In 1878, Lord Lytton promulgated, The Vernacular Press Act and in 1908 Lord Minto issued The Newspapers (Incitement to Offences) Act that authorized local authorities to take action against the editor of any newspaper that published any matter considered as offence or incitement to an offence.

Then, if we look at the media as communication in pre-independence days, one feature that stands out is that it clearly reflected what was stirring among the people at the time, the restlessness and resentment against foreign rule, witnessed in demonstrations in towns and villages. The latter were put down harshly by the police and armed forces, and the media was controlled by a plethora of laws that were in force.

Nor was the print medium the only one to be so controlled. In 1876, the Dramatic Performances Act was promulgated, which controlled all dramatic performances. It highlighted the British awareness of the effect of theatre as a means of communication, as a medium conveying information.

The other feature that distinguishes the media in pre-independence times is the fact that by and large the owners of newspapers and journals were themselves activists in the one cause that united almost all Indians, the struggle for freedom.  From the early days of Raja Ram Mohan Roy to the establishment in Calcutta of Hindu Patriot, which was initially managed by Girish Chandra Ghosh and subsequently edited by Harish Chandra Mukherjee, a paper that systematically wrote on the terrible conditions of the farmers, who were forced to grow indigo for British landowners, to the establishment of papers like Amrita Bazar Patrika, first in Jessore and then other in Calcutta, to the weeklies started by Mahatma Gandhi in 1919, Young India and Navjivan, the founders were involved in one way or the other with the one cause that was foremost in the minds of  most Indians. This fusion, if I may call it that, was a remarkable feature of those times. 

The dissemination of information, the phenomenon we call mass communication, was seen and accepted to be an aspect of the patriotic fervour of the times.  I would like to add a third feature to the nature of pre-independence media, and that is the almost universal courage that was shown by the founder editors of the times, who braved the often savage repression by British authorities for some editorial or article that they had written. Many were jailed, only to come out and resume their activities of presenting their readers with the truth about the struggle for freedom, as well as the conditions that Indians had to suffer in those times.

It has to be borne in mind that the number of papers and journals that were published in those times were small, relative to the present day.  Nor were the number of copies of daily newspapers as many as they are now. Given the fact that they were old style machines, where pages were set by hand, the number of copies printed were necessarily modest compared to the million copies being printed by some of the bigger papers published today.  But it would be true to say that each copy was read by more people and the effect of what was written in each copy was very profound and inspiring.  Gandhiji knew the value of the articles published in Young India and never ever stopped writing for it, except when the presses were seized by the police.

In the pre-independence India, there were two kinds of newspapers and journals, one, if not overtly then covertly, supportive of the colonial power, and another that spoke for the nation’s needs, of the aspirations of the people; that pointed out injustice and oppression and for whom draconian laws were put in place to muzzle them; secondly, those who started, or owned or published or edited these were themselves actively involved in the freedom movement in one way or the other.  Though the number of copies and the number of publications were limited, partly because of administrative obstruction and partly because of technological limitations, the effect of what was printed and circulated was profound, even inspirational.

Independence brought with it, within a few years, our Constitution, which has guaranteed freedom of speech and expression to all citizens, and thus the shackles on press freedom were done away with, excepting for the ‘reasonable restrictions’ provided for in article 19(2) of the Constitution,

The press in India in early years of independence showed its commitment to truth and to transparency. The initial years saw the emergence of a feature that had not been there before, ownership of some newspapers passed from founders and editor-publishers to commercial concerns. For some years, while the interest of some of the owners did shift more to the revenue earned by the papers, the editors were left free to determine what editorial policy would be. That was an age of great editors, who virtually set the standards of impartiality and independence that became an integral part of the print media.

Other factors came into play here; chief among them was the advent of radically new technology, that made it possible to print millions of copies, and set pages on computers, making the production of papers not only fast but more economical.  Then the satellite age made it possible to send content from one office to another, so that local editions could be produced simultaneously. The other factor was the burgeoning advertising industry and the enormous amounts it poured into advertising in newspapers and journals—indeed, it is said that today some newspapers can afford to give away their copies free since their main revenue that runs into may be crores daily, comes from advertising, not from sale of papers, as it used to be the case in pre-independence India.

In sections of the press, it appears that now more importance is given to the marketing divisions of the newspapers’ offices than to the editors. It is said that in some newspapers, the marketing divisions decide what will “sell” the paper in terms of news and how they will do it. Thus it is that we are no longer surprised to read on the front page of some leading paper of the eating habits of some personality from the entertainment industry, or someone who has won some much publicized contest of some kind.  Sadly, news relating to the condition of the country is relegated to the other pages inside.

But, overshadowing all that has been happening and is happening to the newspapers is the most powerful of all, namely, the television.  From a modest beginning to being the handmaiden of the Central Government of the day, television has, since it went into private hands, grown exponentially, especially news channels in English, Hindi and the regional languages.  But one has to think whether the development of television, especially television news in the country, has been on the right direction.

Private news channels are not merely news providers. They make no secret of the fact that they are entirely dependent on advertising revenues, and it appears that advertisers have poured enormous amounts into those channels they perceive as getting the larger number of viewers. This has had two effects; one is that in the fierce competition to get more viewer ship, some channels have not scrupled at compromises with the truth. There has recently been an unsavoury incident of a so-called ‘sting’ operation that was shown to be false, perpetrated with the object of blackmailing the victim.  Others have taken recourse to making their channels more sensational, and all manner of stories are shown as news. ‘Breaking news’, which usually meant something major that was about to occur, or was occurring just then, is now a regular routine feature of all news channels.

However, I must clarify that we have a number of channels that have always maintained the high standards of journalistic integrity, and have as a consequence retained the trust of the viewers, but again these are not so many.

The basic feature of post-independence media is the change in the nature of ownership.  Owning a channel or a newspaper is now seen as a profit-making venture, as indeed it is in all countries where advertising sustains the profitability of a channel or paper. This in itself is not necessarily antithetical to a channel or newspaper’s credibility. There are owners who are committed to their papers and channels, observing the highest standards of journalistic propriety.  But, as I have said, they are few in number, and the number of those who see the ‘packaging’ of news as an essential requirement to earning more money seem to be growing.

A feature that merits highlighting is the fact that owing to the single minded obsession with perceived market requirements, those elements of the governance of our country that were at one time considered of vital importance—the proper functioning of the three arms of our democracy, the judiciary, the legislature and the executive—no longer warrant the attention they got in earlier years. They are noticed, by and large, only when there is something of sensationalist value of some event relating to them, not otherwise.

This is not only unfortunate but also undesirable, as the power of the media, especially of television, is very great in influencing perceptions of viewers, and the images that then remain with people in general are not just negative, but incorrect. To give just one example, it is true that the proceedings of Parliament are disrupted more often than is healthy for a democracy, but it is also true that there are debates held in Parliament, and the numerous Committees of Parliament meet regularly and place their reports before Parliament, as they are required to do.  But this second aspect is hardly ever mentioned by any newspaper, journal or television channel, which amounts to nothing short of presenting a distorted version of what goes on in Parliament.

The recent comments by one of the most respected members of the Fourth Estate, Shri Kuldip Nayar, merit to be mentioned here.  Drawing our attention to the indifferent or inadequate reporting of Parliament in the media he said:

“Serious stories which include the parliamentary proceedings, do not make the grade (for the media).  The media has come to believe that people do not want to read anything which makes them think.  Today, the print media is suffering from a mad disease, which has played havoc with our newspapers.  It is the tabloid syndrome…”

Another respected journalist, Dr. Harish Khare, has drawn our attention to the dangers of trivializing political institutions, when he said: “Of late, we appear to be on the verge of entering a dangerous phase. There seems to be a new arrogance: (that) the government does not deserve to be respected…. The assumption is that the elected representatives of the people cannot be trusted with the public interest, and that it is up to the unelected gods—in the judiciary, the media, civil society, the private sector—to step in and to ‘save the nation.’… Because of a breakdown in the norms of self-restraint among those who fancy themselves as guardians of the constitutional order and public interest, we have produced a script for paralysis”.

Today the newspapers and the private channels cover the stock markets with an obsessive detail but not the details of the debates in Parliament on major policy issues like agriculture or commodity inflation. Thus, debates have ceased to be reported and we have the spectacle of newspapers and news channels spending considerable space and their time, either telling us about the latest developments in the social lives of those who are in the entertainment industry, or some favourite sports persons, or giving unsolicited astrological advice, or covering extra-marital affairs of even ordinary persons sometimes, and bizarre stories from remote corners like snake gods drinking milk in a particular home.  Substantial space is provided to cover parties and weddings of the rich and the famous, with great detail than the problems of the farmers or of suicides among them.

Press freedom is not without responsibility; the media just desist from distorted or concocted reporting, highlighting only those aspects of an issue that suits it and making omissions that ought to have been made public.  Editorial policy of a newspaper should not be directed by the prejudices of media moguls and media barons.  While profit is indeed a motive in the media world, that in itself should not be the sole criterion when it comes to news and views on the issues before the nation.

The increasing level of particular types of content in the print and electronic media is a matter of concern. Today, it appears, the most important page for most mainstream newspapers is the overbearing ‘page 3’. In fact, sometimes I find it difficult to distinguish between page 1 of many newspapers and the famous page 3, which, at times, is only a reference page for all the numerous pages that follow that in the day’s newspaper.  It is for the media itself to ponder on the long-term implications of their acts on the society at large.  More than ever before, today there is an imperative to strengthen our national fabric and the ideals we cherish like democracy, secularism, pluralism, etc.  Unfortunately, of late, we find a tendency among a section of the media to project partisan points of view in the name of dissemination of views, rather than news, which is factual and objective. The glory of the media is in its presentation of information based on truth.  Sadly, this basic duty is at times forgotten by sections of the press. Except for some honourable exceptions, today the newspapers’ or the TV Channel’s political leaning and political predilections are well-known and those obviously affect dispassionate presentation of news and also views.

Democracy is unthinkable without a free press, and its success depends to a large extent on the kind of role the media plays as interface between the Parliament and the people.  We all know that it was on the basis of disclosures in the media that the Parliament of India was able to take stringent action against some of its Members for their acts of misdemeanour, causing to undermine the credibility of democratic institutions in the country.

Parliament is at the heart of democracy and that being so, it deserves serious attention from all quarters, be it the people, the Executive, the Judiciary, the civil society groups or the media. It is in Parliament that important decisions are taken and the government is made accountable. Therefore, I feel that it is the responsibility of the media to inform and educate people on various issues that are before the Parliament.  While trying to express the misdeeds and corrupt practices of the public authorities, including the people’s representatives, the media would do well to report their commendable initiatives and works as well.  Giving publicity only to the interruptions, disturbances and adjournments in Parliament, as if nothing else takes place there, gives a distorted picture of our elected representatives and projects Parliament and parliamentarians only negatively and even derogatorily.

It pains me to say that the media hardly gives adequate coverage to the parliament and has failed to project the institution with the respect and seriousness it deserves.  I have been requesting the media, whenever I get an opportunity, to correct this imbalance, and I would like to use this platform to appeal to the media once again to give due coverage to all the important works transacted in parliament and its Committees, and not just get obsessed with the disturbances, which no doubt need to be checked and adversely commented upon.  We are need to remember that a free media thrives only in a democracy and, therefore, it should be the endeavour of the media also to ensure that cynicism does not pervade the minds of the people vis-a-vis our democratic institutions and it is in the interest of the media that they make efforts to deepen democracy and sustain people’s trust in the system.

It has been a remarkable journey that the media has made, as the voice of the people.  That was indeed what it was in the pre-independence days, and what some newspapers and television channels still are today.  But, as is mentioned in many quarters, sadly market forces have come into play and it affected the credibility of the media and done it considerable damage, damage that does affect even those dedicated, principled papers and channels that do not stoop to the less desirable means of purveying news and  events  which they pass  as news.

While we can applaud the media for its independence in most matters, it is necessary for all those involved, from newspapers to television channels to the internet news providers, to institute a process of continuous introspection to ensure that they are the most transparent and truthful purveyors of information.  I say this because we have come to expect this of our media, and we would like to continue to be as proud of it, as we have been in the past.

In this very challenging task, the Press Council has a key role to play.  It may not need to have draconian powers—indeed, it should not—but it needs to have the respect of all newspapers and news channels, and it is for all of them to sit together o determine how best this can be done.  As we have seen time after time, where law has not been effective, consent has been.  It is time that this matter is given serious thought by all those who profess to abide by the truth above everything else. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



*Chairman, Press Council of India