The First Amendment; Chowla / Talib

The First Amendment and a free people. A weekly examination of civil liberties and the media in the United States and around the world. The program has produced cooperatively by WGBH Boston and the Institute for democratic communication at Boston University. The host of the program is the institute's director Dr. Bernard Rubin. This edition of The First Amendment and a free people is being recorded at broadcasting studios in New Delhi India. And I'm delighted to have two people who have a great deal of knowledge about Indian press developments in the electronic and print areas with me today. I have Mr. NL Charla formally additional director general of DU Darshan on the Indian television network and Mr. Rashid Tali the assistant editor of The Hindustan Times press I'll start with Mr. Tolley although as a general question answered as you will. What do you consider to be the crucial problems of press freedom in India today.

Yes thank you Professor Reuben. I feel that we have to define the press freedom as we go along in this program. But on a JetBlue basis I would say that an underdeveloped country has an underdeveloped press. Let me explain what I mean. The. Situation in India is that constitutionally we have a guaranteed free press and except for the two years 1970 577 when we had an emergency and pristine strip the press is officially and to radically free. However it does not work like that in practice. And I suppose this applies to the developing countries in general because what happens is that the restraints on the press are of the making of the people working in the press themselves.

It's a case of if you like self-imposed conformity which arises in part from the fact that many of us were involved in the struggle for national independence and we feel that the tasks before the government in a developing country already enormous and that we ought to go along with it we ought to cooperate with it to the extent possible. Now I must say also that although this attitude holds true in general that is there has been a welcome weakening of it as we have been. Getting removed from the date of independence in the 30 years there has been there have been times when there has been less self imposed conformity on the engine press and the journalist has felt free to say and do

what he likes. I think that's about as much as I will say at this point. So you feel that the instinct here is to try to develop the country and the journalists are very conscious of their role in it. Mr Charla How are the developments as you see them from the electronic media the radio and television side but may I give you a very brief introduction. We have a sound broadcasting has recorded radio for more than 50 years television also started in a very small very nearly 20 years ago. But television has still a very limited reach in this country. Fewer stations few transmission arts but radio is really the kind of medium which covers almost the entire country lity it d percent of d a 90 percent to publish. But more than that I think in order that our listeners appreciate what we are able to do

and we are what we are passing through. It was a government department and to the British it continued to be a government part a government owned government managed video and television and but didn't the Ministry of Information broadcasting it function with a certain amount of professional feed to infect it most of the International Conference is united member one of the ition Broadcasting Union conference held in Kuala Lumpur. We very justifiably said that of all the government owned and government managed broadcasting. All in get it your was perhaps the feast which is effect I think Mr. Taleb referred to a certain situation let's say a period of emergence. But if you decode the period of emergency of the government own

departments I think we had at the least the stitch and Mr. Talib who has been a participant in broadcasting would perhaps not extent but what does happen as a result of the emergency. What happened after the Magenta was lifted referring to the emergency imposed during Madam Gandhi's in its wild towards the end of the jeep and when the Gentile government came in and they had come the commitment of the people that they are going to free to do and television. Then after that we had to have a committee which went into this aspect of how radio and television could be made free from government control and the committee submitted its report and you mentioned in the other context the name of Mr Dog but this was recently this committee chair not the committee. And the committee submitted its report in about eight months time which is a good job done. And after

that it has been about a year now. Have you been discussing debating the government have been considering that approach and now a bill has been free which has been introduced in our parliament. In the mean by come to change of the government. Now hopefully in fact it has only very recently been announced by the new information Broadcasting Minister that he stands by the committee and off making a video and television feed from government control. But even at this stage may I say that the two are specs to the radio and television in a developing country. One it's true and it still can not be pilled simple entertainment. It has to perform certain functions of creating of edness educating people giving information. It's certain kind of a social

responsibility that funds on a national broadcast. And the second point is that when we think of autonomy off broadcasting and particularly if it's a monopoly protesting we it really can not dissociate it from to a pretty good system. If it is a political system like the one you have in your country I like the one we haven't good Britain it's one view of looking at the freedom of the media. But when we have a different system and which is still in the process of evolution we have as of now in a number of political parties. I would say even groups so to do compared our system are to think that our system should be the same as in Great Britain or as in your country I think would be very NDA so I would leave it to dis for the time being. Just for the edification of our listeners when you refer to the change of government we are broadcasting at the

start of August of 1979 and so many things will have happened in the weeks that have elapsed before this program is aired on National Public Radio. May I ask Mr. Tolley to begin a discussion. There were two years at least of the emergency in which there were press restrictions in every country when the press is held at bay for a period of a year or two or when it is threatened by various political forces as it has been in my own country in various administrations. Today for example many press people are concerned about some of the allegedly restrictive rulings of the United States Supreme Court about press rights and freedoms. Given that background of a great alertness awareness of the problem in a refreshing way what is your view of the people in other countries who say that in a developing society in a third world country especially the press should be guided. That you cannot tolerate certain freedoms. Mr. Talib.

I think you know when you have an extremist ideology like you'll get in the people's democracies. It is very easy to define what is the role of the press and indeed of the media. There it is to mobilize public opinion along the lines the government or the party in power wants. I see this problem from another point of view with the Western point of view and I find the bad talk in western societies which have now established themselves where there is a national consensus which keeps the certain issues beyond the pale of debate as it were. There again it is very easy to know that the press is the as it is sometimes called or the media are the third branch of the government

that their job is to constantly offer a watchdog function over the other arms and in fact indeed keep them on their toes. Both the executive and the legislature and some would say even the judiciary in countries like the United States and United Kingdom. Now I think in the developing countries they are faced with a real problem because we are trying to as I like to say time compress the process of development. And there are various issues that this thing throws up which affect all other things especially the question of press freedom. I feel that we have to try to arrive at a definition of the role of the media in these societies which is different from the two rules I just outlined. And what this third rule is this middle rule is very difficult for us to say because as I say it's easy to be

on the one extreme and it's easy to be on the other extreme. But just as in our economic policy we find that we cannot buy things like either communism on the one hand. Or a laissez faire or even the kind of mixed stick on me they have evolved in Western society. We cannot buy that kind of thing as a solution to our problems that we are innovating that we are evolving our own approaches of something which is mixed public and private sector. Now how mixed. How much what public and how much of private. These things we are beginning to try to sort out. Similarly in the field of media we have to try to find out where that middle line lies. And if we don't do that I'm afraid we run into trouble because I have found that with all the changes of government we had in India recently and with all their commitments to freedom and democracy when they have come to

the nitty gritty of it all they have come up with the same problem. They say we cannot allow the media to exercise a watchdog adversity function in these societies. And they say that it should be both an adversity and a friend of the government which is if you like a paradox in its in its own way. They sometimes say that we do not want opposition for opposition sake. And as I said we get around this difficulty partly by the elements I outlined in my first response namely by. Going along with the government only so far and no further. When things get very bad then the press begins to exercise its for freedom in a country like India and you can that the press can play a very effective role. Well Mr Charlie having having heard that and how do you look upon it now from the television experience that you have

had many people ask you to be positive. That's the key word there is floating around the world and the press should not be negative because of the consequences. Mr. Talmage said upon national development are you by by design positive. Do you try to avoid programming that would upset people inflame passions even if they are educated. No pushing the point that I think is being made on behalf of the developing countries are in our situation. The media have this social too. They have to be a bit of national problems. They are not the problems of a political party or a particular human being. I don't think anybody would deny that Mr. Knight who was a Democrat. Our first prime minister our first by Mr and Mr Knodell when he tried to define the role of radio and television he

said can be construed to somebody in those days in 50s. He said he would like the radio and television to be free but he would not like them to be a response. No it's very difficult to say via the Freedom Anson Baird irresponsibility begins but I think when you are faced with the kind of problem that we are faced with not only in terms of population not only in terms of the economic disparities but also the literacy percentage the problems of people access to the various sources of information. I give you a small example of one of the states in our country which is very enterprising and very forward looking comparatively progressive called Punjab. I was surprised only a few months ago that I went to a village that this particular area apart from the fact it is certain percentage of people are very poor. Somebody very rich fidgeted as in everything else and so on.

The information exposure to these people was so inadequate information was really helping only the rich. It was not helping the poor. It was the deponent people did not even know the dist that that is what is called a minimum wage for the leader but the point is whether or not media should try and educate these people make them aware of their own rights. Apart from that its possibilities. But this has nothing to do either but to a particular party out of it the preferred by it to Prime Minister. Whether it was used to dis I says Gandhi before that of Mr. Tensing now I think that the role of the media in a society cannot be overlooked and we have several problems now. When you are once cleared a little and if you have the atmosphere of freedom of the press. But Mr. Ricci to the present.

I don't think the electronic media even if it's government controlled tend to mean without a certain amount of freedom at all. Primarily because the people who have access to the newspapers and all to listen to the radio and what the television and it did feel that there's a great disparity bit of the credibility. So you have to have this certain common factor in terms of responsibility and I was I don't think it is possible to do imagine that radio and television even though it will be mean to some extent with and the greatest appreciation of government can be completely dominated and diverse from the rest of the information system in the country. Now you're both saying that while you're interested in political news and you follow the normal routine of all Western democracies of being critical adversarial that you you don't want to be dominated by that because you're a developing country and your main task is

Mr. Talib said to compress time to reach millions and hundreds of millions of people that you are not reaching at all or inadequately and to be a vital. Catalyst to change and that dominates your thinking more than it does in the developed society where the commercial factor is more prevalent. Miss Milly may I add something to my second answer here. I must first of all say that I may be on this in a bit of a minority. I'm not so sure that when Mr child I said that I'm representative of the Indian press that on this issue they would all accept the position that I'm taking. We have divisions even among journalists. There are people who would say that the only function that the press can perform in a democracy is that of an adversarial nature. And this applies irrespective of the stages of development. Best Really I find it

difficult to cope with that Teddy. I fall back. And so what is my answer to the problem. I fall back as I find on what may be heresy in the West I don't know but there has been discussion I've seen even in Western literature on the subject on what is called the social responsibility of the press. And I find that this Hitty of the social responsibility which has been discussed in American because on the subject as Professor Reuben is no doubt aware. This theory can very well be adapted to the needs of developing societies even within the parameters for freedom that I suggested especially remembering Professor Rubin that we have here a profession that journalism is a profession that I think as I understand it the profession is a closed group of individuals who have access to certain power by virtue of their

belonging to this profession. Now along with that if we can develop a sense of professional responsibility of ethics within the profession and the sense of ethics may vary from western society where for instance you can impose restraint upon yourselves as to the kind of things you may do even in the pursuit of your adverse Sariel function. For instance how much off the right to privacy of an individual you may invade. I'm struck by the by the similarity in interests of Americans who are concerned about the precedent of it and your two points of view. I don't see these as separate because we also have the same extremists concerns about extreme positions that Mr. Talent has and we are also very much concerned as witness the fact of the Giant Growth in recent years of public radio and television to have some. A palette of some some alternative to the incessant harangues from

the commercials or the development of programming for the commercial side. What what is your feeling to that kind of a statement that the press in in democracies whether they are developed technologically to a high degree or are developing technologically are very similar and that the distinctions that have been drawn between them are largely figments of imaginations or political view. Mr. charter Well I don't know whether this point is relevant to the question that you raised but I found for example even one of my visits abroad is a certain kind of human interest story like it would in fact in 1961 when I visit Chicago there was a very interesting case in the court a young boy trial was being

tried to go on having murdered a girl said he had seen it on the television this is what he did. And then subsequently in the video newscasts on that day and the next day there was one after the other dating the story for two whole building's social problems and so on. So this was one day of not only perhaps revealing what had happened or to daily shock the people but also to bring in the reaction to various people who were concerned that their family members and others. Now that kind of thing may not happen in our country. You see perhaps report the murder of newspapers would take the story forward to some extent they do or television might even ignored a story out of my make of it it is more coverage. In another socialist country perhaps it will not be picked up. In fact I was in one of the socialist countries in 1975 and been for 15 days I didn't see any

murder on the screen and I said to friend of mine is that what happens is that he said well that's a problem with the law and order jumpers some people are taking care of that. So why that was making was the dead can be a difference of opinion of what makes news. But then I agreed to do it. That is similarity in our approach to what should be achieved and what should be created as a kind of record just as among the people. But I think that what I was referring to and I agree with you is that while you take a position today because you are advocates of a democratic process you might take the opposition position tomorrow if convinced by anybody's argument and you might direct a change in programming to say that we think that we ought to follow this case to the nth degree with Report after report after report. Even though you are a socialist country in that the political factor of allegiance to General

socialism or to capitalism is really not. When the journalist attacks a story of a fundamental nature about farmers I know you're terribly interested in reaching the rural people of India. It is such a great problem here to reach them with the media and reach them effectively and hear from them as well that anything you can think of to do you will do regardless of system. But based upon your democratic You can still see all right. Take one minute of this to Charla you see if I give you the impression that the media even under government control like you do your television is has not reached critical of the functioning of videos of the government this are correct you are in fact we have been performing the true let's for a moment forget to breathe beautifully much and I'm even prepared to discuss Mrs Gandhi is it a minus this year and how they don't separate locations and one of

getting today to remember very vividly. If film made on television film made on Mother Theresa's but in Calcutta this talian woman who devoted herself to the poor balances Albanian Albanian she is me now. We had made a film for television. I had taken this film to Kuala Lumpur for a conference where it got the first prize. Not this film showed it great deal of squadron party people to resentment against the what has been done for them and what was wanted. Now this film has shown did and got the prize it was shown all over the Indian television and it perhaps are they can the people do what they were going to. So it is not at all. The Government could see them is bad that is not done. But the problem is D or objective whatever you want to achieve this is the kind of point that I was trying to build up.

I just want to add here that all that I have been saying is that when we evolve this carrot approach. Which would be applicable to a large number of countries of the Third World. I'm thinking in terms of self restraint so the restraint doesn't come from outside. It comes from within the individual from within the profession if you like in terms of ethics in terms of a sense of professional responsibility. And if we could create and develop journalists and media men of that kind maybe we would have something in common with you because I think your need in your society at another level of the argument is for the same kind of thing. Am I right. Absolutely. And of course the Institute for democratic communication has pretty much your view of ethics responsibility and social work and political involvement in the true sense. Going back to Aristotle and Plato and Socrates rather than in the latest news that happened in parliament or congress yesterday I am struck with one thing as I

talked with you that you could both take up residence in the United States and go into the journalist profession immediately and do the United States and good. And I thank you for it. And I'm again. Repeating that it's been my pleasure to have Mr NL Chara do dosh on the Indian television network and Mr Rushdie Tali the assistant editor of The Hindustan Times as my guest for this edition Bernard Reuben. The First Amendment and a free people a weekly examination of civil liberties and the media in the United States and around the world. The engineer for this broadcast was Margo Garrison. The program is produced by Greg Fitzgerald. This broadcast is produced cooperatively by WGBH Boston and the Institute for democratic communication at Boston University which was solely responsible for its content. This is the station program exchange.