Interviewed by ANNURAG BATRA & SRABANA LAHIRI (With inputs from NOOR FATHIMA WARSIA)
To MP and former I&B Minister Ambika Soni goes the credit for digitization of television in India
Q] You have always described yourself as a political ctivist…
I still do!
Q] So when you became the Information & Broadcasting Minister, and you were the Tourism Minister before that, how difficult was it to separate the activist from the Minister… especially from an I&B Minister, whose job was to put across the common point of view to make sure the industry does well, that consumers are treated well in terms of the right information, right pricing, and so on?
Naturally, it requires segregating areas where activism would give me maximum results from areas where I have to conform to the normal rules and regulations and procedures, which are very important for any government in office. Having said this, the activist in me came in and I said no way, we are not going to let digitization fail. I made myself a member of the teams of all my officers. If they were going to areas where there were populations in clusters, areas where economically vulnerable people lived, I would have inputs about how they were reacting to digitization. I would also be part of the higher echelons of bureaucracy, which would be dealing with chief secretaries of governments, which would have hesitation about the time-frame. They wanted it extended, but the activist in me pushed them to go a little bit further. Maybe as a bureaucrat or a non-activist politician, I would have said ‘OK, let’s postpone again’. But I was trying to make that subtle difference. I just gave the example of digitization, but this happened in many ways. I had prepared a little agenda. Firstly, it is a very sensitive Ministry. I was very clear in my mind that people would like to see less of me and more of what can be done to improve I&B as a sector, which is growing at a faster rate than most other sectors in the country. The other forte of India is 1,000-plus films a year. The feedback from the festivals was so good that I would feel that I had myself been to Cannes and Venice and Toronto. So, when I dealt and interacted with people who were looking after the National Film Development Corporation and the Films Division, I felt that our marketing was just too poor. I wanted to upgrade the film festivals, our participation in them, improve the marketing of Indian films. When that mindset of activism comes across, your team also realizes that there is no going back, and there is no wishy-washy affair here. You do it once it is decided. I told them, let’s work. Also, everybody can fearlessly give me his or her opinion. I encourage that because I didn’t know everything.
Q] You mentioned during our last interaction that there was a bureaucrat who expressed a very frank view...
That’s true. Not just once; it was his habit. Maybe he always felt that there was another point of view and I thought, ‘What a great asset to have him in the office!’ And of course, Ranjan Thakur, who worked with me closely, was a little polite, would preface his difference of opinion so that there are no hurt feelings, but I encourage this. We used to regularly have meetings with officials and once decisions were taken, I didn’t allow people to go back. I didn’t encourage excuses. No way. We have a very good team now.
Q] Are you happy with the progress of digitization so far?
Most people thought digitization was just something I had said and we would never implement it, because there were so many perceived pitfalls. When we got the Bill passed by Parliament, no one objected to it. Those who had a few apprehensions voiced them for us to keep in mind. So once it was unanimously passed in Parliament, the moral pressure on the Ministry was a lot, because then there were no excuses. The broadcasters have their own points of view, so do the MSOs, the independent MSOs, and the local cable operators and above all the viewers. I said it very loud and clear that the viewer is Priority No. 1. For me, Priority No. 2 was the LCO, because he is the person who really started it all – dug the trenches, put the cables, heard the abusive phone calls when your television was not working. I didn’t want him to be too badly off. Of course, initially I realized after studying the whole thing that he would have to forgo some of his unexplained income from untabulated subscribers in his area, but I wanted to make the changeover as comfortable as possible for him, give him the confidence that he was not going to be out of a job. The MSOs wanted some increase in FDI so that they could get some resources for the heavy machinery. The broadcasters were going to have a win-win thing, carriage fee was hopefully less and TRPS would be more controlled. So, each one had a defined role. The broadcasters had to come on board and do the publicity for digitization. Why would somebody want a set-top box, when he is happy seeing 20-odd channels? He doesn’t go into who pays what carriage fee or anything like that. So they did the broad publicity. The MSOs came on board. The Ministry played the role of a facilitator. Digitization is going forward, thought two state governments –Tamil Nadu and West Bengal probably want more time.
Q] But Chennai and Kolkata seem to be problem areas…
That’s true. The matter went to court and they didn’t issue a stay order because everybody does realize that this is the way forward. For all the stakeholders, including the viewer, it is a win-win situation. It might take time, there might be hiccups, but there is no other way if you are looking at the growth of the broadcast sector. We thought we wouldn’t be able to make it happen by the end of October, and I thought one extension was called for.
Q] You came to I&B Ministry from the Tourism and Culture Ministry, where through ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’, etc, you tried to build Brand India and accentuate what work was done in the past. How do you see the I&B Ministry building Brand India, beyond films?
Through Tourism, we projected Incredible India. It had been there, but it had never been used as a symbol for India which we did. We took some high-profile ventures into different capitals of the world and somehow it gelled, the publicity campaign, the way we chose it worked.
Now, in I&B, I did realize that most people, especially the media, felt it was an unnecessary Ministry. I do remember reading a lot of editorials, written by Shekhar Gupta and others, who said this Ministry should be wound up. Well, I would be only too happy to wind it up because I would probably go to another Ministry or sit at home, I wouldn’t mind.
Anyway, there was such competition in broadcast - 800 plus channels and increasing – that we increased the turnover, so that flippant players would not come into the field. We made the process of getting a license very transparent, because a lot of stories that one heard could be a reason for discontent. The process was all online - every 15 days, your application would be updated. So you wouldn’t even need to come to the Ministry. As I said, the Ministry’s aim was to be seen less, to be heard less, but there was definitely a role.
Q] The phenomenon of paid news has created quite an uproar recently. What would be your view of the media and paid news?
Paid news as a phenomenon has grown and people are unhappy with it. I am convinced that it hits at the roots of our democratic framework. First, it used to be about smaller newspapers, who during election time asked candidates to make a special provision for what they wanted written. I could understand that on the pretext of manifesto, one would have to pay for a page. It is done all the time, but then it is very clearly marked as advertisement. But it has become so bad that some journalists come and tell me - and they must have told my predecessors - that they do not get paid. The managements tell them to go and get stories, and get their money out of that, and expect them to bring some cash back to the headquarters.
Q] It is like the old Punjabi saying – gurudware jana, langar khana, sadde vaste bhi le aana...
Langar has another connotation, I wouldn’t like to compare with this at all...[Langar entails selfless service]. Let me make it very clear – no comparison with any religious symbols. But if paid and other news are on the same page, it talks of you winning and me winning [polls], then who is the loser? And where does this leave the reader? How is he to make up his mind? Also, if you stop paying, how do you get your point of view across? You are totally blanked out. Earlier, paid news was something in which media houses would not indulge, though some were known to have a weakness for it. Nevertheless, to make things transparent, there was need for a facilitator or a coordinator. I saw the I&B Ministry as the nodal point. I understand that you don’t want a Ministry to breathe down your neck and say ‘don’t do this’ and ‘don’t do that’. The UPA government has always spoken of self-regulation. How much of self-regulation are you exercising as a media house, or as a broadcasting house is for you to decide. For the 21st century, self-regulation is the best way forward to have content which the viewer would like. So, we formed a self-regulatory mechanism. There was already one for news channels headed by Justice Verma. After much interaction with stakeholders, which meant resident welfare associations, academics and student bodies, we formed the Broadcast Content Complaints Council (BCCC).
Now you see the tickers on every channel. Broadcasters actually pay for it. The BCCC has very eminent people and on our suggestion, they included the chairpersons of the Dalit Commission, SC Commission, Women’s Commission, Children’s Right Commission and Minority Commission, because these are the sections whose sensitivities the media must take into account. Otherwise, there were incidents where a lot of damage had been done to public property because some channel ran one story or another.
Q] From the time you became I&B Minister to now, when you have transitioned into your new role in the party, what would you term your key achievements? A lot of people from the industry say we have had an I&B Minister who has done something concrete...
It is very difficult to say that, because I don’t know how objective I could be in answering your question. If not, I could probably be accused of bragging if I say this was an achievement and that was almost an achievement. However, we set out a few goals after much discussion with in the Ministry and other players – one was for Indian films; the certification process was made a little different. If you look at the Central Film Certification Board today headed by Leela Samson, the people manning it are all eminent individuals having a presence and a contribution in that field. So that is already saying that we didn’t try to accommodate people as we might be tempted to do.
We changed the whole concept of participation in various international film festivals. In the last two years, our participation at Cannes has been written about more often than during my earlier two years. So there would be a difference. At Cannes, all film producers, actors and directors visit the Indian pavilion for an adda. That is already a focus area. It has got an economic fallout too. At the Goa festival , our marketing section has become big. It is not something that you can do with the flip of a finger and say ‘accha agle saal se ye hoga’. Gradually, it is evolving and it is taking the country forward. If Indian films go around the world as they are, nothing could be better ambassadors of the Indian ethos, Indian culture and our country’s soft power. It would be one of our best calling cards.
Q] What are some of the things that you would have wanted to do in your role as I&B Minister and didn’t have time to do or did not do?
Well, I mentioned that I wrote to the Prime Minister about a few things which I think are achievements. But I missed one, which is community radio stations. For me, it is the ideal thing to encourage the local identity. A Bodoland MP came to see me with a delegation and said, “AIR and Doordarshan telecast from Guwahati must have so many hours of Bodo language content.” Instead, I said, “Why don’t you have it for 24 hours?” The man looked at me as if I was out of my mind. We gave them all the information and they are very happy now with the way things are moving forward. What can be better than an instrument for dissemination of information, not only of government programmes, which you might get ads for, but local cultures and traditions which are dying out?
There are some extremely successful community radio stations being run across the country. We had two workshops in my tenure, and people were enthusiastic, but when they increased the price of the spectrum, they were up in arms. I must say my colleague Kapil Sibal agreed to my request – it would otherwise have turned into a massive protest - and in 24 hours, the rates were revised. Another area to which we paid a lot of attention was the regional channels. They are really growing. Regional channels have the maximum credibility and popularity. So we tried to strengthen them. We changed the DAVP rates, so that they would get a share of the pie. We paid a lot of attention to growth of regional media because it has a lot of potential for growth. As for where we could have tried to do much more... it depends who you are talking to. People point out lots and lots of areas. In one instance, 45 minutes out of a one-hour session during Question Hour in the Lok Sabha were spent discussing just one ad. People felt that I was not being strict enough. The charge made against me most of the time was that I was too much of a liberal and I let go all these ads. Television was making a media trial out of it. The Supreme Court was also saying the ad should be stopped and banned and why were we issuing a mere advisory? There was tremendous pressure on me, but I could not do that. I say it loud and clear - no party should ever attempt to regulate political content in the media. There has to be self-regulation. And if self-regulation is not practised, there are other laws of the land under the Constitution. But to regulate is wrong; it is a short-sighted approach. Then, you tend to get isolated from the pulse of the people. After all, you must be reflecting some kind of popular opinion. Your programme must be seen because people would like somebody to be really pulled up if he or she is not doing a proper job.
I wrote to the Prime Minister saying that that my successor would have to probably pay more attention to the malaise of paid news, because it affects the ordinary citizen. If you are in a big newspaper, you have a pink paper and you are writing what should be an ad. If it becomes a news item, you are misguiding me. I may just have Rs 10,000 that I want to invest, and I go and invest it in a wrong company -- that is not fair. That is violative of the code of conduct for journalism. That is one area where I couldn’t achieve anything.
Q] While you were the leader of the I&B Ministry, you had a very able team to support you. Normally, bureaucrats do what their ministers want; it is the leadership that makes the difference. In that context, would you like to talk about Team I&B?
Prasar Bharti is the major portion of the I&B Ministry. About 75% to 80% of our budget goes to Prasar Bharti. But it was neither fulfilling its role of being an autonomous body under an Act of Parliament nor playing the role of being with the government. It was trying to ape commercial channels, and could only be a poor cousin because we didn’t have the funds to even change the format of our screen. It took me quite a while to put Prasar Bharti where it is today. I am proud of it. The CEO Jawahar Sircar is a man with experience. The board is excellent under Mrinal Pandey, and has very capable people who were appointed by the Vice-President of India. The staff had problems which had been pushed under the carpet.
There were 40,000 vacancies. But soon, DD Kendras opened all over the country. Arunachal, Sikkim, Goa Kendras were not functioning because there had been no recruitment. All that has been worked out. It was the whole I&B Ministry’s efforts. Now, we have a very good set of joint secretaries. The girl who worked on digitization with all of us... she is a joint secretary, Supriya Sahu... She did a good job. She is doing an excellent job with community radio stations. We had two secretaries during my term. Both were good. Uday Verma is still there. My motto is that you lead or you don’t create an obstacle. I have always been proud of my team, which was a Minister’s team, who came along with me from Tourism and Culture to I&B. I was very apprehensive, let me tell you honestly, that I&B would be like living in a glass house. I remember reading your little item [a piece on exchange4media.com] right at the beginning that set alarm bells ringing. ‘Abhi toh hum logo ne kadam nahi rakkha hai, and people are already watching!’ My team really ran the whole thing, coordinating with the rest of the Ministry but for a little hiccup here or there. I have been very proud of all my team players in the Ministry and my personal team.
Q] There is concern about the quality of journalism, the quality of people coming into journalism. As a Minister, you expanded the Indian Institutes of Mass Communication, and said you would make them into a media university and centres that would create talent for regional growth...
Yes, we have got a Bill ready, which will upgrade the IIMCs to institutes of excellence by an Act of Parliament. That will give it a different profile altogether.
Some of our stringers and journalists pay huge amounts of money to buy a diploma from unrecognized institutes. They lose their money on that. They may get placement to begin with and then they lose their job because the channel decides to close or a newspaper is giving pink slips out. So, we decided to have four more chapters of the IIMC, and we chose regions that would reflect the whole country - Aizawl (Mizoram), Jammu & Kashmir, Kottayam (Kerala) and Amaravati (Maharashtra). So we have opened these four chapters on land given by the state governments. Besides this, we have the two archival heritage institutions like the Pune Film and Television Institute of India and the Satyajit Ray Institute in Kolkata. I visited both of them.
As always, there are student-faculty tensions, but we went and sat with the students in the canteens over hours, thrashed the issues out, almost willing to pull at each other’s hair! In that kind of an atmosphere... We have tried to re-organize the courses with them on board. The young people want to be participating and they should. But at Satyajit Ray Institute, one has not been able to do as much.
We are also putting up a hall of excellence at Pune, for which Rs 50 crore has been cleared. In fact, we amended the PRT Act, first formulated in 1867. Till date, they don’t recognize magazines, because magazine as a category is not recognized. Now it has gone to the Select Committee and it should come through Parliament. We have worked at these. We worked on the Cinematographer Act also, amended the whole thing. I must give my office credit for this. Beyond the call of duty, they would push at the personal level and try to befriend people who were vital to our Ministry in the different Ministries. They would then try and push our way through.
Q] The social and digital media are totally unregulated, sometimes to the detriment of democracy and to the institutions of democracy. What do you feel about that?
It does not come under the I&B Ministry, it comes under the Telecom Ministry; so it is not that I have given that kind of dedicated time to looking at it. I myself was pretty illiterate about all this, but I taught myself during my I&B stint.
Q] Do you Tweet?
No, I haven’t got to that stage yet. You are making me accept something for which everybody will ask me to go and start knitting socks for my grandchildren! I taught myself to use the computer and the Internet and my iPad, iPhone... so that’s quite a lot.
Q] Should there be checks on social media?
There was a very serious debate in the country over content on YouTube and Facebook, which really could trigger off situations detrimental to the social fabric of our country. Some films or serials on television have triggered off riots, destruction of public property... Some of the sites I did see after all this came up go against the Constitution, against the law of the land. I don’t think this can be viewed as clamping down on anyone’s freedom of expression. I don’t think that my freedom enshrined in the Constitution ends where yours begins. So I can’t appropriate to myself a right to creative thinking and expression which puts you down totally. We take pride in our unity in diversity, in the fact that we have so many recognized languages, hundreds of dialects and all the religions of the world flourish here. Our food and dressing habits are different yet we are one strong nation - that’s what we articulate time and again. That’s how we want to keep it ... Really nobody can have a right to impinge upon that concept of Indian nation. I’m not talking of being like countries such as North Korea, Iran or China... those countries are viewing it from their perspective, I have no comment to make. But as I said, we are proud Indians. Whether somebody is from Tamil Nadu or Kashmir, each one has the freedom to practise his way of life and thinking, you cannot trigger off conflict and tension which could lead to worse.
Q] One of the expectations that we voiced in that article was increasing the FDI limits in news. In the special interest genre, for instance, you increased it to 100%. But what about newspapers and news channels?
This debate has been going on for a long time. In 1955 also, a lot was written when it initially started to open up a bit. There was a debate. Now, I think it is 26% in the Print media... there is a debate. It’s been going on for the three years that I have been there. In fact, one of the very first delegations I met was one of very senior editors who asked for a higher FDI in Print. But there is an equally strong other side. Those who don’t want it to increase too have strong apprehensions. With 26%, we have opened up a bit, but these things can’t be done by one diktat, they have to evolve. The very fact that so many foreign magazines are being printed in India under the Companies Act, facsimile editions are also coming up... you have the Wall Street Journal... people want to pick up Indian content and Indian ads, which is not allowed at the moment... So things are moving... these things come in a normal evolutionary process. Anything which has such strong opinion on both sides, you’ve got to work on it for a little longer.
Q] You’ve always said that if you want to watch a good news channel, watch Doordarshan. What are your views on Doordarshan and where it can be three years or five years from now?
Though Doordarshan is autonomous, and I respect its autonomy, the I&B Ministry is a nodal ministry, and a lot of my time was spent being answerable in Parliament for Doordarshan. I took the liberty of giving my opinion that I don’t want Doordarshan to ape the commercial channels. When Doordarshan came into being, there were no other channels. At that time there was a strong feeling in the country that it was not fair and the ruling party had a new medium to reach out and disseminate information. People said it was an attractive medium and therefore it should be made autonomous. That debate raged for quite a while. One of my predecessors Jaipal Reddy is credited with this whole business of autonomy. But since then, a lot of water has flowed down the Ganga. Today we have around 800 privately owned channels! If Doordarshan becomes a really autonomous channel, and the government wants to put in a flagship programme like Bharat Nirman across Doordarshan, it would have to pay a fee almost as high as money paid to private channels for ads. In today’s day and time, the government also needs a projection. But if DD is too much of a government voice, people may just switch to other channels. Earlier, people gave more credibility to a BBC news bulletin than they gave to AIR. But today, I’m happy to say that a large number of people say when they want to watch good news and hard news, they turn to Doordarshan News or AIR and not the ‘sansani’ or ‘Breaking News’ channels. That makes me feel good and means that you can be good without being sensational. Look at Lok Sabha TV and Rajya Sabha TV – they are also coming up. I feel Doordarshan should be like balm on people’s frayed nerves while watching a lot of other channels. I don’t want all the broadcasters to be up in arms against me; I’m just trying to define the possible role of Doordarshan. It can have a large number of documentaries made on issues that affect you and me, the common people. They could be on the environment, water conservation or so many other new things that people are into these days. There can be a different genre of films from 1913 till date, as the centenary of films is being celebrated, which Doordarshan can revive. DD can offer content about legends, or archival content on a certain day of the week. A lot of you-and-me stories can be run. The government point of view can be taken up in so many attractive ways. We used to have Janvani, where a Minister used to be called and a genuine television audience would ask him or her about the promises he or she made. I kept telling them to do it, but it takes a while to move things in government organizations. All our flagship programmes are time-framed. Why don’t you call the concerned ministers, and ask them what are the pitfalls? Why aren’t they moving faster? Why aren’t they reaching out with publicity about their programmes? It can’t be just the I&B Ministry which publicizes because the publicity budgets of Ministries are defined in their annual budgets. You can speak to the viewer about your programmes without making it seem like propaganda because his questions are answered. The broadcast sector is one of the most creative fields that reaches every home. Today, even a one-room house has a little television stuck in the corner. So it’s a medium which is everywhere and has immediate impact.
With digitization, Doordarshan will probably lose some of its reach because others will be equalling up. Doordarshan had about 58 channels. We worked over the last three years and have taken permission that Doordarshan should have 200 free-to-air channels. So while you pay Rs 250 or Rs 350, Doordarshan will be able to give you 200 channels, I think already it’s come to 97 or 98. Now that is taking Doordarshan forward, that’s what the role of a public broadcaster would be – providing information in an attractive package. There can be serials as we are doing so much for women’s empowerment. We had a play made by the Song and Drama Division, which depicted the country only up to 1947. We had interactive sessions, and the period up to 1947 was taken care of by visual performances. Then we had a flagship programme called Jamunia which had 12 episodes telling the story of a young orphan girl using the government’s programmes and benefiting from them at different stages of her life. Ultimately, she becomes the Sarpanch of her village. It is a very powerful presentation and one of the major achievements of taking the government’s programmes to the people on a one-to-one basis. At its inauguration at Rae Bareilly, Sonia Gandhi sat through it for two odd hours, 10,000 people attended it because we publicized it, and we had pictorial exhibitions on the government’s programmes. It became like an outing for people living in those rural areas, thousands of people sat and watched Jamunia. Today, there is a long wait-list in the I&B Ministry comprising MPs and MLAs who want to stage Jamunia in their areas. When you have such an event in a rural setting, people from the neighbouring villages take out their jootis and walk, there is a little tea stall walla, a samosa-wallah... so it becomes an event. Women put ontheir best clothes because they are going to be seen. Jamunia has been done in about eight languages; this is another big story of utilising soft cultural power.
Q] What would you call the defining moments of your life?
My whole upbringing - my parents, especially my father, who gave me self-confidence to be what I am, taught me to be fearless, truthful and honest. That quality of fearlessness has led me to venture into fields which no one in my family ever thought I would.
My husband was a diplomat in the foreign service - I think a very big impact was made on my mental make-up when we were posted in Cuba. Cuba was a sugarcane-based economy and every year, they used to have an annual ritual to cut sugarcane. Starting from Fidel Castro, everybody cut sugarcane and this impressed me – where people at the top as well as students and farmers participated in a national endeavour of development. I became a student of Spanish art and literature at the University over there. Cuba made me think of things like equality, a very big connect between the ruler and the ruled, a lot of transparency, in the sense that people lived free lives. I am talking of another age, but my husband’s three-year tenure in Cuba and my joining the university - being a student, being a diplomat’s wife, cutting cane, getting blisters on my hands, going to the plaza to hear Fidel Castro make a speech for three hours and seeing hundreds of thousands of Cubans swaying to his words – these were great experiences and I could relate them to India. Once there was a conference after which Aruna Asaf Ali, Chandrashekhar and other people came to our house for dinner. They asked me what I had imbibed – I said I talked the local language, I was more a student than a diplomat’s wife. They asked me to join their delegation, which I wasn’t allowed to, being a diplomat’s wife. When I came back to India in 1969, my father was Governor of Goa and Indira Gandhi was taking on what many were calling (without meaning any disrespect, I am now more careful!) the dead wood in the Congress. The economy was changing, there was abolition of privy purses, bank nationalization – it all conformed with what I had picked up in Cuba.
Soon, I joined the Congress office as a volunteer and began compiling newspaper cuttings to make the day’s releases for Indira Gandhi - the newspaper thing has stuck with me for very long! When the Congress party split thereafter, I was working with Air France, and the party decided to send me abroad. But Swaran Singh clamped down on it – saying sending the wife of a diplomat would be extra-Constitutional. It was a very big turning point politically for me as I tied up with Mukul Banerjee, who was heading the women’s department and she put me in the Foreign Affairs department of the Congress. At the AICC session in Patna in 1970, I was sitting in the middle of the hall, when Indira Gandhi walked onto the stage and beckoned me with her hand. We all looked around and realized that she was calling me -- I couldn’t believe it, you know, I just couldn’t believe it. Suddenly I was being hauled up and Mukul Banerjee and I were walking towards her. She said, “I believe you are having some problem working for the Congress.” I said “Yes, they tell me I can’t do this work.” “Meet Nandini Satpathy,” she said. “Satpathy is a minister to the PM, and she’ll sort it all out for you.” These two things really made a lot of difference and then of course the third incident happened when the Congress split in 1977. I was probably too much of a novice politically because I found myself in the old Congress; I thought I couldn’t change my membership as it would amount to defecting from the Congress. When Rajivji became the party president, Congress S decided to merge with Congress-I and everybody made their little clarifications on the terms of joining back. I was quiet and Rajivji said “She belongs to the Congress extended family and so my extended family.”He really made it good for all of us. In fact, in 1989, he asked if I would like to contest polls from New Delhi. I openly told him that I had just joined, and there would be a lot of flak. That’s why I say I am not a politician - I should have grabbed a ticket, but I just said no and felt very happy that he had thought about me as a candidate.
Q] You have been voted IMPACT Person of the Year, 2012 by the industry. In our industry, this is probably the biggest recognition as it comes from knowledgeable and informed people such as media-owners, editors, CEOs of media and creative agencies and advertisers. What do you say to that?
It’s a bit overwhelming, actually. I didn’t expect it. Threeand- a-half years is already one of the longest tenures of an I&B Minister, and I tried something in every sector. I didn’t realize that I would even be nominated for this, because as a Minister, you know people are writing editorials close up. You don’t expect an award; you are lucky if you get away with your reputation intact. But I was very happy when I was asked to join the party. If you are giving me this award or I am being voted for, most people will find it very difficult to believe that I didn’t wangle it. Nobody really gets this kind of an award after having been I&B Minister. You get brickbats and snide remarks... But you really made my political career memorable with this award.
Q] What do you look forward to professionally and personally?
I look forward to my party going from strength to strength and this is not only a political statement, because I think what Congress stands for and why we all joined it and why educated people feel an empathy with Congress is because of its value system of secularism. We don’t talk about it too much, but the socio-economic justice mindset is important for a country of 1.25 billion people. In 1997, the Congress was at its lowest ebb, but at the risk of sounding sycophantic, I must say that the determination with which Sonia Gandhi handled it shows a certain dedication of purpose and a certain commitment to the concept of Congress. She became a nodal point for the Congress in the face of mass migration and exodus from the party. She stepped in, and became the catalyst around which we could stay together and build upon our ethos. She was not looking for office because when Rajivji was assassinated, she declined the offer. Working for the party when it was weakest, she was able to enthuse and unite it for a victory in 2004 and again in 2009. She chose Dr Manmohan Singh because she was convinced that his economic thinking would be the best for the country. Even Rahul, instead of becoming a Minister, became a general secretary in charge of youth. When so much primacy is there in the party, the party has to be strengthened. I am very lucky to have occupied many posts in the party and also to have been in the government. There is no personal ambition now per se. I am grateful to my party, my leadership, my colleagues who have been with me. Whatever working life I have, whatever energy I have, I would like to work for strengthening this party.
Feedback: abatra@exchange4media.com
