India rightly calls itself the world’s largest democracy and often compares itself to the US because it’s the oldest democracy in the world. Yet, there are kinks in India that make one wonder about the country’s democratic status. Some of them are because of power-hungry and corrupt politicians and others are because education, the most basic ingredient of a successful democracy, still has a long way to go.
One such kink is a ban on its new private FM radio stations from broadcasting news and current affairs programmes. This is despite the fact that privately owned newspapers are full of news; private TV channels are free to telecast news 24/7; the Internet streams news from all over the world; and even mobile phone messages can give one access to the daily news.
The irony is that organizations that are considered mature enough to provide news through print and TV, are barred from doing the same over radio. Another irony is that while some Indian media channels can’t broadcast news, dozens of overseas radio and TV channels, such as Voice Of America, BBC, CNN, Fox News and even PTV are free to broadcast to Indian homes.
It seems that when the Indian government decided to open FM radio to private entry three years ago, it was in a hurry to approve their licenses. So without taking the necessary time to formulate a well thought-out policy, it approved the idea by delaying the decision on the news element for a later time. But the problem is that even today, three years later, the government has no real policy about FM stations, except for the self-contradictory clauses of hurriedly written agreements, which in some ways are confusing.
One clause in the agreement says that the license given to the FM stations is for broadcasts of audio, excluding news, current affairs and any other services under jurisdiction of the department of telecommunications. But the schedule A of the same agreement allows stations to broadcast content that is termed as “information”.
But is there any difference between news and information? If you go by their dictionary meanings, there is not much difference. News could be new information about impactful people, interesting events, natural or man-made disasters, and scientific discoveries and inventions. And information can be defined as “items of knowledge and /or news”. So can the FM stations broadcast “news” if they call it “information”? So it is obvious that the government needs to revisit its half-baked policy about the FM stations. And the good news is that the government will have to do that because the country’s highest court has raised a question as to why FM radio stations cannot broadcast news.
Responding to a PIL by the NGO Common Cause, the Supreme Court said (on October 17) that it will examine the rules that bar private FM radio channels and community radios from broadcasting news and current affairs. It has also issued a notice on the issue to the central government, returnable in two weeks.
The NGO contended that the policy guidelines, under which the private FM and community radio stations are barred from broadcasting their own news in the way TV channels and print media do, are illegal because they violate the Article of the Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech and expression.
The PIL says, “Effectively, there is a ban on political news more than anything else, since the guidelines allow many other kinds of news, such as sports and weather, under the banner of ‘information’.” But if we take a careful look at the other side of the coin in India, Radio reaches more people and is cheaper than newspapers, the Internet or TV programming. And now. there is an inherent danger in giving the radio stations a blanket permission to broadcast their own news. People who listen to the radio in rural areas are more gullible and can easily be misled if the news on FM is not objective, neutral, balanced and factual.
The present policy of the government, it seems, is a direct result of a bigger problem and that is a visible lack of “responsible journalism” amply highlighted by India’s private TV channels. And the irony is that most TV channel owners and senior editors are even against the idea of making the basic training in journalism mandatory for their reporters and anchors. So if the trend about “responsible journalism” in private TV channels is any indication, granting blanket permission to FM radio stations to run their own news shows can be disastrous.
And if you add to that “irresponsible” trend, the rampant corruption in the country and the latest phenomena of the so called “paid news” in the newspaper industry, it further complicates the concept of every FM station writing and broadcasting its own news show that can reach millions of illiterate Indians in rural areas. Agreed that they are educated enough to exercise their voting rights, but are they educated enough to differentiate between a factual and balanced news item from a planted one?
Some FM stations are optimistic about the Supreme Court’s notice on the issue to the government, but it’s futile to expect any favourable move by the government until after the next year’s parliamentary elections for obvious reasons.
(Author/news analyst Ravi M Khanna is currently freelancing after a 24-year stint with Voice Of America in Washington DC, as South Asia bureau chief)
Feedback: ravimohankhanna@gmail.com
