10-11-2011, 01:23 PM
[size="3"][url="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/edit-page/Take-it-easy/articleshow/10306738.cms"]Take it easy[/url] : TOI, Oct 11, 2011
[/size][indent][size="3"][quote name="The EDITOR, TOI"] In a bow to babudom and 1970s style censorship, the Union cabinet cleared on Friday a proposal empowering the information and broadcasting ministry not to renew licences of TV channels, if the ministry should deem programmes aired on them to be vulgar, obscene, anti-national et al. The pertinent question is: Can a modern 21st century government hand over a job as sensitive as media monitoring to the bureaucracy, which has its own vested interests to protect, besides having zero expertise in the subject?[/size]
[size="3"]The proposal is even more inexplicable given that there is already a functioning self-regulatory News Broadcasters Association, with its own redressal mechanism to check code of ethics and broadcasting standards violations. Rather than engage with this association and smoothen out tensions, the government now wants ministry bureaucrats to filter programmes. Such arbitrary censorship would be based on the censor's subjective interpretation of what he deems obscene or anti-national.[/size]
[size="3"]What is more disturbing is that the latest move comes at a time when the government generally seems to be going back on some of the UPA`s crowning achievements, which have transformed governance rules. The government now wants to tighten the RTI - which has promoted government transparency. The UPA government - at least on paper - is committed to promoting greater transparency of governance. But by trying to control the media, it is going back on one of its basic mandates. True, successive governments in the past had toyed with media censorship. But each time the proposals had met with resistance. The Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill, 2006, was widely opposed for its draconian 'inspector-raj' provisions, giving sweeping powers to the government and its representatives to control the media. In a democracy, the need for media regulation cannot be used as a fig leaf to promote state control.[/size]
[size="3"]As far as the bogey of obscene media content is concerned - let's not forget that consumers are the best judges of what is appropriate for viewing. India may be in the throes of change, yet it's essentially a conservative society. Smutty programmes do not have broad acceptance among viewers. Nor do advertisers want to lend their brand names to such programmes, as that would alienate their core constituencies. Above everything else, such censorship attempts are meaningless in the present digital age, where Net users have unbridled access to information and images. In this situation, self-regulation by professionals outside of the political and bureaucratic establishments can be the most effective media filter.[/quote][/size]
[/indent]
[/size][indent][size="3"][quote name="The EDITOR, TOI"] In a bow to babudom and 1970s style censorship, the Union cabinet cleared on Friday a proposal empowering the information and broadcasting ministry not to renew licences of TV channels, if the ministry should deem programmes aired on them to be vulgar, obscene, anti-national et al. The pertinent question is: Can a modern 21st century government hand over a job as sensitive as media monitoring to the bureaucracy, which has its own vested interests to protect, besides having zero expertise in the subject?[/size]
[size="3"]The proposal is even more inexplicable given that there is already a functioning self-regulatory News Broadcasters Association, with its own redressal mechanism to check code of ethics and broadcasting standards violations. Rather than engage with this association and smoothen out tensions, the government now wants ministry bureaucrats to filter programmes. Such arbitrary censorship would be based on the censor's subjective interpretation of what he deems obscene or anti-national.[/size]
[size="3"]What is more disturbing is that the latest move comes at a time when the government generally seems to be going back on some of the UPA`s crowning achievements, which have transformed governance rules. The government now wants to tighten the RTI - which has promoted government transparency. The UPA government - at least on paper - is committed to promoting greater transparency of governance. But by trying to control the media, it is going back on one of its basic mandates. True, successive governments in the past had toyed with media censorship. But each time the proposals had met with resistance. The Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill, 2006, was widely opposed for its draconian 'inspector-raj' provisions, giving sweeping powers to the government and its representatives to control the media. In a democracy, the need for media regulation cannot be used as a fig leaf to promote state control.[/size]
[size="3"]As far as the bogey of obscene media content is concerned - let's not forget that consumers are the best judges of what is appropriate for viewing. India may be in the throes of change, yet it's essentially a conservative society. Smutty programmes do not have broad acceptance among viewers. Nor do advertisers want to lend their brand names to such programmes, as that would alienate their core constituencies. Above everything else, such censorship attempts are meaningless in the present digital age, where Net users have unbridled access to information and images. In this situation, self-regulation by professionals outside of the political and bureaucratic establishments can be the most effective media filter.[/quote][/size]
[/indent]