It is no exaggeration to say the media represents the sector of the economy that is the envy of others because of the extremely buoyant growth rates witnessed over the last two decades, in an environment characterised by minimal or no regulation. The sole statutory, quasi-judicial body set up for media regulation is the Press Council of India (PCI). While it aims to preserve the freedom of the press and improve its standards, it has no way of imposing punishments for any violation. In the absence of any other government regulator, the focus has shifted to self-regulation by the media organisations, individually or collectively. Collective self-regulation has failed because it is neither universal nor enforceable. Individual self-regulation has also failed due to the prevailing of personal interest over public interest. It is relevant to note that, to an extent, the most effective de facto media regulator is advertisers and sponsors who determine the bulk of the revenue stream of our media industry.
When the government, the polity, the market and the industry are unable to provide for full-spectrum systemic regulation that protects consumer welfare and public interest, who will step in to address the gap?
As we debate the issue of media regulation, the following aspects need closer scrutiny:
First, the objective of regulation in democratic societies such as the US and France is to enhance diversity, competition and localism among media outlets and to promote public interest with a focus on upholding constitutional values, protecting minors and limiting advertising. Intrusive content regulation is minimised because those who are aggrieved can resort to legal means. Unfortunately, this doesn’t hold true for our justice delivery system. The time taken to settle court cases deters individual citizens, and even corporate entities, from seeking legal options and forcing the search for alternative tools of administrative justice and facilitation for grievance redressal.
Second, we have not had an informed debate in the country on the issues of multiple-ownership and cross-ownership nor a cogent national media policy that covers print, radio, television, cable, DTH platforms, film industry and mobile telephony.
Third, India is among the few democracies without active media watch groups, engaged in discerning prejudices and latent biases. For an industry that has over 50,000 newspapers and hundreds of television channels, systematic media criticism is non-existent.
Fourth, no discussion of media regulation can ignore the recent controversy on ‘paid news’. We need to introspect whether the strategy of relying on advertisement rather than subscription as the main revenue source has created a difficult set of ethical problems for the media industry as a whole. The inability of the industry and PCI to go public with its report on paid news is also another pointer to the problems of self regulation and the ‘culture of silence’ in the entire industry when it comes to self criticism.
Fifth, the structural biases of the development process have favoured urban areas over rural ones, the middle and upper classes over others who constitute the vast majority of our citizens. These biases have prompted the media industry to resort to “sunshine journalism” where the focus is on the glass that is quarter-full rather than that which is three quarters empty. When the media portrayal is of a life that is always good, optimistic, going with the tide of those with discretionary spending power and their causes and pet themes, the role of the media as a defender and upholder of public interest relegates to the background and its commercial persona takes over.
Sixth, no discussion of media regulation can ignore the slow erosion of the institution of the editor in the media organisations. When media space is treated as real estate or as airline seats for purpose of revenue maximisation strategies, and when media products are sold as jeans or soaps for marketing purposes, editors end up giving way to marketing departments.
One might ask, if the situation is so stark, what can be the way forward? A good starting point would be for all stakeholders of the media industry to realise that the ethical underpinning of professional journalism in the country has weakened. Allow me to recall in conclusion a remark of the eminent American journalist of yesteryear, Walter Lippmann. The real danger to the press, he said, springs not so much from the pressures and intimidation to which it may be subject, but from the sad fact that media persons can be captured and captivated by the company they keep, their constant exposure to the subtleties of power.
Edited excerpts from an address of Vice-President M Hamid Ansari at the Bhashayi Patrakarita Mahotsav (Prabhash Prasang) in Indore on July 15
