It8217;s in the balance

Objectivity. The Minister of Information and Broadcasting said rather loftily that Prasar Bharati no longer requires autonomy because it ...

Objectivity. The Minister of Information and Broadcasting said rather loftily that Prasar Bharati no longer requires autonomy because it has acquired 8220;objectivity8221; thanks to competition from private television. A tall claim, as tall as the Qutab Minar. Could it be true?

Consider, for a moment The Balanced View DD2. For two reasons: the programme8217;s name suggests impartiality, Objectivity with a capital O. More significantly, it8217;s a current affairs programme introduced after Mr.Mahajan8217;s assumption of office. So, the perfect test case for his assertion. The Balanced View, ostensibly, investigates the print media. In its first episode it looked at the reporting on Romesh Sharma and his reported links with politicians, including BJP8217;s Mrs.Sushma Swaraj who figured prominently in the show. A few weeks ago, it took up the serial Shaktimaan, allegedly responsible for the death of some children who supposedly imitated the stunts performed by its superhero, Mr.Mukesh Shaktimaan Khanna, also amember of the BJP. Is the programme playing defence attorney for BJP wallahs? That would be an unsubstantiated accusation. For a balanced view !, let8217;s take last Saturday8217;s topic which has no obvious political links: crime reporting. Anchor and journalist Kanwar Sandhu selected three cases to illustrate the 8220;insensitive8221; role played by the print media: the Monica-Rajiv murders, Rajan Pillai8217;s death and the Nanda-BMW-hit and run. In the first he targetted the sketch which appeared in the Times of India; both the newspaper8217;s reporter and an editor insisted it was a police sketch; for the police, Amod Kanth denied it. Then came Satish Jacob, a journalist and uncle to Rajiv Rajah.

There followed a pattern of questioning which continued with other guests: Nina Pillai, K.P.S.Gill. Did you, at times, feel disgusted with the Press? Can you recollect any particular story which was wrong? The Press is often accused of conducting 8220;trial by media8221;, did it happen in this case? Leading, loaded questions.Just like many of the comments made by the anchor: there is a 8220;view8221; that the media is 8220;insensitive8221;; in the 8220;infamous8221; BMW case there is 8220;talk8221; of a media 8220;witch hunt8221;; now the media is 8220;receiving flak8221;, is 8220;under severe attack8221;. There is a view, there is talk, an attack, etc. The 8220;sources8221; of these opinions are as invisible as those used by the print media one of the criticisms levelled against the latter in the show. It is nobody8217;s case that the media should not be criticised, analysed or held responsible for its misdemeanours. To that extent, the views of Kanth, Jacob, Pillai and Gill are valid; but they represent one side of the story. This is The Balanced View8217;s grave handicap, especially when its name suggests total fair play: it starts out by passing judgement on the Press, in absentia, and then sets out the evidence against the accused. It, therefore, commits the same offense, conducts the same 8220;trial by media8221; it condemns the Press for.

So much for objectivity. So much for thelack of it when there is no autonomy. Autonomy is not an object, it8217;s not an Act of Parliament, it8217;s a state of mind. That is what is missing at Prasar Bharati it goes missing from private channels too, but that8217;s another story. Otherwise, how does one explain the attitude of the Prasar Bharati Board? How has it failed to take note of this programme? Let8217;s be fair ?: The Balanced View is a symptom, not the cause 8212; it8217;s simply a manifestation of the illness. The Prasar Bharati Board was appointed to cure AIR/DD of such ailments. But it taken no action whatsoever. Admittedly, it has been handicapped by the loss of its chairman and other members, including the CEO. But it does still have a voice, it does still have a responsibility. It can, at least, say what it thinks: not just about autonomy but about the future of DD/AIR and plans, if any, that the members have for that future. Otherwise, why are they there? Many people are now saying autonomy is outdated; let the Board then be asked to examine thatargument, come up with an alternative blueprint that takes Prasar Bharati forward and further away from government control not backwards into its open arms. Otherwise, there8217;ll be no checks and balances only imbalances. And while we contemplate such antiquarians, CNN, BBC 8212; one a private channel, the other an autonomous public broadcaster 8212; are bringing Monica Lewinsky into your bedrooms. Put that on your pillow and sleep on it.