TV Editors set up a new body

New Delhi, 22nd August

The editors of broadcast media announce the setting up of a body to strengthen the values of objective and fair broadcast journalism and to protect and promote the freedom of expression. The editors of television channels feel there is a need to evolve healthy norms, promote training of professional journalists at all levels,

ensure dissemination of credible and constructive news content and to protect the right to freedom of expression, whenever threatened.

In pursuit of the above mentioned aims and objects we announce the setting up of a broadcast editors' organization under the name of Broadcast Editors' Association (BEA).

The office-bearers of the BEA are as follows:

1. Shazi Zaman                   (Star News)                         President

2. Arnab Goswami             (Times Now)                       Vice-President

3. Pankaj Pachauri             (NDTV)                                Vice-President

4. N K Singh                        (ETV)                                   General Secretary

5. Sudhir Chaudhary         (Live India)                         Treasurer

Members of Executive Committee:

Ashutosh (IBN-7), Vinay Tewari (CNN-IBN), Satish K Singh (ZEE TV), Ajit Anjum (News-24), Vinod Kapri (India TV), Sanjay Bragta (Sahara TV) and Pranjal Sharma (UTV).

The BEA will soon develop its own website so as to make direct media-public interaction possible. It will hold seminars and other modes of two-way interaction to receive feedback from civil society organizations and decision-makers in public domain.

Media gag proposal unlikely to be revived by UPA govt says TOI

It was Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's decisive intervention that put the proposed gags on media into cold storage as he over-ruled the views of junior ministers pushing for wide-ranging curbs on TV channels. Sources said the PM felt that the ministers had misread the post-Mumbai attacks "mood" and that while there was support for tough action against terrorism, it did not extend to sanitising or curtailing TV channels. With elections just round the corner, he did not want to raise a fresh controversy either. It is now unlikely that the proposal will be revived until the next government is in office despite the government having spoken of wide-ranging consultations with media organisations. And with it has gone, what officials see as an opportunity to arrive at an agreement on issues like televising operational details and conducting interviews with terrorists in hostage situations. more on this story
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/PMs_intervention_helped_channels_beat_gag_proposal/rssarticleshow/4003680.cms

Govt drops proposal to gag TV channels

The TIMES OF INDIA  reported today that government has dropped its plan to provide authorised video footage to TV channels during emergency situations.After Editors of TV Channels took up the issue with the Prime Minsiter Manmohan Singh the political establishment has blamed in on the babus. The TOI has quoted sources saying " It was only a suggestion by various agencies and did not have approval of the political establishment".  Editors had asked Prime Minister for the complete closure of the issue, though he did not promise to the editors on the closure of the issue, TOI report clearly indicates that government has given in.

Prime Minister assures TV Edtiors

Prime Minsiter Manmohan Singh has assured Editors of major TV Channels that government would not take any step that would compromise the freedom of media.The Editors said sprit of self regulation must prevail and hoped after today's meeting there would be a complete closure of the issue. Those who met PM on this evening behalf of TV jornalistsincluded Ajit Anjum (News 24), Ashutosh (IBN 7), Deepak Chourasia (Star News), N K Singh ( ETV), Pankaj Pachori (NDTV),Satish K Singh (Zee News),Shazi Zaman (Star News), Shailesh (Aaj Tak), Supriya Prasad (News 24),Rajdeep Sardesai ( IBN network) & Vinod Kapri (India TV).

TV Editors to meet Prime Minsiter today

Editors of TV Channels will meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh this evening. Prime minister had put the proposed media bill on hold after editors wrote him on monday. Editors had welcomed government's decision, but had asked for complte clousure of the issue.

Statement by TV Editors

“TV Editors welcomed government’s response and said they look forward to complete closure of this issue so that such regulation never comes into force"

Freedom of the press should not be compromised:Sonia Gandhi

The editors of major news channels met UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi this evening. she assured to bring this issue to government's notice.Mrs Gandhi told editors "the Congress party believed that the freedom of the press should not be compromised." She assured that a via media should be found to solve the problem.

Government puts the media bill on hold

The union government will not go ahead with the proposed changes in the cable network rule immdiately. Following the protest the Prime minister's office has issued a statement short while ago.Following is the text of the statement-

PM assures consultation on proposed changes in Cable Television Network Rules.

The Prime Minister has received several representations from the media agencies regarding certain proposed changes in the Cable Television Network Rules currently under consideration. He has assured that the matter will be taken up for finalization only after the widest possible consultation with all the stakeholders and eliciting their different points of view on the proposed changes.

Curb on media unacceptable:Advani

Leader of opposition L K Advani has said the curb on media are not acceptable. Mr Advani met editors of major news channels this afternoon. He reportedly said " I have faced emergency and will not accept it." The government is now under the pressure to withdraw the proposed changes in the cable network act. All the major politcal parties have opposed the proposed changes in the law. The editors will meet UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi at 6.30pm today.We will keep you posted on the outcome of meeting.

CPM Writes to PM over proposed regulation on media, asks government not to act in haste

CPM General Secretary Praksash Karat has asked prime Minister Manmohan singh not take take any step "to empower the government and the administration to further regulate the news channels". Mr karat has sent a letter to Prime Minister today over the proposed curbs on electronic media. Editors of major TV Channels had met Mr. Karat yesterday urging him to take up this issue with the government. Following is the text of letter sent by Mr Karat to Prime minister
*******************
January 14, 2009




Dear Dr. Manmohan Singh,


It is reported that the government is proposing an amendment to the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Rules. This is meant to regulate content in the electronic media.


Our Party is of the opinion that there should be no hasty step taken regarding media regulation. Our Party is of the view that apart from the self-regulatory mechanism put in place by the news channels, it is necessary to have co-regulation through an independent regulatory body.


How this is to be done has to be discussed and a common approach arrived at. Till then, no steps should be taken to empower the government and the administration to further regulate the news channels.


With regards,
Yours sincerely




(Prakash Karat)
General Secretary

Amar Singh opposes curb on electronic media

Samjawadi Party has opposed the proposed curbs on electronic media by the government. Editors of major news channels met Party General secrertry Amar Singh this afternoon. Mr Singh told the reporters after this meeting that curtailing media's freedom is unaccepatble & he will take up this issue with the prime minister.The editors will meet leader of opposition L K Advani & UPA chair person Sonia Gandhi later in the day. we will keep you posted on these meetings.

Return of censor blog in the TOI

'It's a return of censors'
14 Jan 2009, 0514 hrs IST, Himanshi Dhawan, TNN

NEW DELHI: With the government digging in its heels to push in amendments to the Cable Television Network Regulations Act, television channels have
struck back. Broadcasters have expressed their reservations on the proposed amendments on a recently created — returnofcensor.blogspot.com.
More on this story clickhttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Its_a_return_of_censors/articleshow/3975568.cms

TV Editors meet BJP & CPM Chiefs

TV editors met BJP president Rajnath Singh & CPM General Secretary Prakash Karat this evening regarding proposed government regulations on the electronic media. Both the leaders have said the UPA government has not taken them into confidence while proposing the amendments in the cable network (regulation) act. They have sought time to study the proposed regulations & promised to take suitable action. Another delegation met Janata dal united president Sharad Yadav. He has opposed such regulation & promised to take it up with the government.

TV Editors condemn proposed gag on electronic media

Top editors of all the major news channels met today to discuss the proposed amendments to the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act and the serious implications of this move. The editors unanimously agreed the proposed amendments are the most serious assault on the principles of free media and right to speech and expression. Expressing deep concern over the attempts to completely subjugate the media to government control, the editors have now decided to meet Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh to impress upon him to intervene in the matter.

As all of you know, the government’s proposed amendment of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Rules is aimed at reining in media in the name of coverage of anti-terror operations, sex, crimes, narco-analysis footage etc. The self-regulation attempts which were put in place by the news channels have been completely disregarded by the government and attempts are now being made to completely subjugate the media into virtually perform the role of government public relations wing.

As you are aware, once the notification to this effect is through (Regulation) Act, 1995 (as amended in 2003), the District Magistrates and Sub-divisional Magistrates besides Commissioners of police will have the power to block live transmission by any channel and confiscate transmission equipment.

The worst aspect of the proposal is the plan to provide visuals and footage through a nodal agency in such any situation deemed which is deemed “nationally important.” What it means is television channels can no longer cover communal riots and even agitations like the one seen in Rajasthan during the Gujjar Andolan etc.

Under the proposed amendments officers will have the power to decide whether repeat telecast of a footage is necessary (and thereby in the national interest) or not; whether any information is unauthenticated and therefore be blocked. These authorities will also decide whether any phone-in of a reporter and victim or their interviews disturbs public order or is against national interest.

The editors unanimously stressed the fact the existing laws already arm the government with substantial powers to legally act against channels which are violating the conditions laid out under the licensing agreements. There are instances where the authorities have invoked such powers to caution or penalize channels which are violating the rules. It was stressed the fact that the government still has decided to proceed and amend the law indicates the intention behind such a move is more to gag and disallow the media from performing its duties and not so much to create a penal provision against violators.

The editors, who have been raising this issue with all stakeholders across the country, expressed satisfaction at the overwhelming support it had received for its view. The Editors Guild of India, the apex body of all newspapers across India, is among those who have expressed their unstinted support of this stand.

The editors stated the government needs to take a mature and constitutional view of their proposed amendments and stressed why the amendments were almost a throwback to the era of Emergency. They added the government must not go ahead with the proposed amendments which would be the worst possible assault on the Fourth Estate, a critical role in the world’s largest and most vibrant democracy.

The Press Club of India calls for unified action aginst the law to curb media

The Press Club of India has assailed the measures of the Union Government to gag the electronic media by bringing in a strongly worded statement. Mr. Pushpendra Kulshrestha, Secretary General of the Press Club of India has called for a unified action by all freedom-loving persons to compel the Union Government to rescind the draconian measures.

The proposed measures to gag the electronic media have caused immense concern in the journalistic fraternity and among the believers in the freedom of expression.

As journalists, we believe that the media is watchdog to keep democracy and democratic principles alive. If instruments of the state begin to regulate us, the damage to democracy and all stakeholders in democracy would be irrepairable.

We are aware that our right to keep a vigil also brings with it a responsibility to function according to the highest standards of ethics and national interest. We firmly believe that in a democracy media needs self-regulation and not regulation. The electronic media fraternity has already made significant movement in this direction. In view of this, we urge the government to immediately suspend the proposed measures.

It would be very unfortunate if the government decides what should or what should not go on air. The proposed measures would give the government a handle to impose its will on media. We believe that responsibility should come from within the electronic media.

These measures would for all times taint this government as one that tried to impose draconian measures on media and forever remind us that the emergency is not yet a closed chapter in this country.

live and kicking : Uday Shankar

To argue that television did a bad job of covering the Mumbai attack is suddenly fashionable. The case is being made most vociferously by the political and the bureaucratic class in India. Short of accusing news channels of planning the attack with the terrorists, TV has been accused of pretty much everything else. So what exactly did TV do during those three days?
First, even though the terrorists targeted only four locations — the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, the Taj, the Oberoi and Nariman House — news channels multiplied the theatre of the attacks million-fold. Almost every one of the 85 million cable homes plus 5 million DTH homes in India behaved as if each of them was under attack.
When the Mumbai Police behaved like comic artists, the entire nation was shaking with rage. When the commando action was delayed, everyone was angry with the Home Minister and his bumbling department. When the navy commandos did their ‘filmy’ press conference in the backdrop of a continuing National Security Guards (NSG) gun-battle, even the most casual TV viewer figured out that it was a shameless attempt to grab credit. When Ratan Tata blasted the government for its tardy response mechanism, people nodded their heads in agreement. And when Vilasrao Deshmukh took his actor son and his director friend on a guided tour of the Taj, no one was left in any doubt that it was his only decisive contribution in those three days.
Now assume a scenario in which the channels are not allowed to cover a terrorist attack or have to submit their tapes to some censor agency for clearance. Can you imagine getting yourselves involved with something that you know has already happened? People drop everything to catch a live broadcast only because they know that what they are watching is happening at that moment. Live news has the power to remove the distance between the viewer and the participant or victim.
So did the news channels do a bad job? Let’s break this into two parts: one, did they make mistakes? Yes, they made some mistakes. Some of these were mistakes of ignorance, some mistakes of inexperience and some mistakes were made in the sheer rush of events. Two, what did these mistakes do to the rescue operation? Did they impair the response or enhance it? To answer this, let’s talk about another anti-terrorist operation that was concluded last week: terrorists had crossed into Poonch and had set up bunkers inside Indian territory. Did you even notice the news? Our security forces and intelligence agencies had completely missed it. We don’t even how long this was going on for — until one day we were told that our forces had launched a massive combing operation. The operation lasted for eight days and at the end of it, the government issued a brief, convenient message that the terrorists had all fled back into Pakistan.
The Mumbai attacks, on the other hand, forced the government’s hand. It was one of those rare occasions when all Indians insisted on accountability. As a news channel editor asked the other day, is the government supposed to monitor the media or should it be the other way round? That is the fundamental question. The government is determined to monitor the media so that it can censor pictures and soundbites that demand accountability from the government. You have to decide whether the next time there is a terrorist attack you’ll trust the government or the TV channels.
(Uday Shankar is CEO, Star India)
This article is published in Hindustan Times

Letter to the Prime Minister from TV Editors

12th January 2009


Mr. Manmohan Singh,
The Prime Minister of India.

Dear Manmohan Singhji,

We are sure you are aware that the proposed measures to gag the electronic media have caused immense disquiet in the journalistic fraternity and amongst all those who believe in the freedom of expression.

As editors, we believe that the media is the watchdog to keep democracy and democratic principles alive. If instruments of the state begin to regulate us, the damage to democracy and all stakeholders in democracy would be irreparable. It is all the more surprising that this is happening when you are directly holding charge of the ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

We are aware that our right to keep a vigil also brings with it a responsibility to function according to the highest standards of ethics and national interest. We firmly believe that in a democracy media needs self-regulation and not regulation. The electronic media fraternity has already made significant movement in this direction. In view of this, we urge you to immediately suspend the proposed measures.

We would like to personally meet and impress upon you the historical blunder that these measures would be. They would for all times taint this government as one that tried to impose draconian measures on media and forever remind us that the emergency is not yet a closed chapter in this country.

Hoping for an appointment at the earliest.


Best regards
1. Ajit Anjum, News 24
2. Arnab Goswami, Times Now
3. Ashutosh, IBN 7
4. Barkha Dutt, NDTV 24X7
5. Deepak Chaurasia, Star News
6. Milind Khandekar, Star News
7. N K Singh, ETV
8. Pankaj Pachauri, NDTV India
9. QW Naqwi, Aaj Tak
10. Rajdeep Sardesai, CNN IBN
11. Satish K Singh, Zee News
12. Shazi Zaman, Star News
13. Supriya Prasad, News 24
14. Vinay Tiwari, CNN IBN
15. Vinod Kapri, India TV

तलवार से मक्खी उड़ाने की तैयारी:शाज़ी जमां

अपनी ज़रूरत और सुविधा के मुताबिक फतवा खरीदा जा सकता है! संसद में सवाल पूछने और काम करवाने के लिए सांसद दोनों हाथों नोट बटोर सकते हैं! किसी बेगुनाह को मारने के लिए पुलिस वाले सुपारी ले सकते हैं और उस बेरहम कत्ल को बड़ी सहजता से एनकाउंटर का नाम दे सकते हैं! मेटरनिटी होम के डॉक्टर बच्चों की खरीद-फरोख्त कर सकते हैं! अनाथालयों में पल रहे मासूमों को खरीदकर गुनाह के रास्ते पर धकेला जा सकता है! इतना ही नहीं एक राष्ट्रीय पार्टी के अध्यक्ष कैमरे पर दिन-दहाड़े रिश्वत लेते हुए नज़र भी आ सकते हैं।
आपको इन तस्वीरों की याद दिलाने की ज़रूरत नहीं। पिछले कई बरसों में टीवी चैनलों पर ये तस्वीरें आपने अनगिनत बार देखी होंगी। इन ख़बरों ने देश को हिलाया था और सच परदा हटाया था। टीवी पत्रकार होने के नाते हमें इन ख़बरों पर नाज हैं। लेकिन ये ख़बरे हमारे जेहन में अचानक इसलिए बार-बार कौंध रही हैं क्योंकि न्यूज़ चैनलों के ख़िलाफ सत्ता के गलियारे में एक ख़तरनाक खेल चल रहा है। मुंबई पर आतंकवादी हमले के बाद टीवी चैनलों को बदनाम करने की सुनियोजित साजिश के तहत बकायदा एक अभियान चलाया रहा है। सरकारी हलकों से कंटेंट कोड की खुसफुसाहट लगातार सुनाई दे रही है। वही कोड जिसका मकसद पत्रकारिता की धार को पूरी तरह कुंद करना है और न्यूज़ चैनलों पर नकेल डालकर उन्हे पालतू बनाना है। कंटेंट कोड एक बेहद ख़तरनाक साजिश है और आंख मूंदकर इसका समर्थन करने से पहले ये समझ लेना चाहिए कि मीडिया और पूरे देश पर इसका असर क्या होगा।
निरंकुश सत्ता हमेशा ख़तरनाक होती है। निरंकुशता चाहे सरकार की हो, न्यायपालिका या फिर मीडिया की, वो अच्छी नहीं है। इतना हम भी समझते हैं कि किसी भी सभ्य समाज में मीडिया के लिए भी कोई ना कोई लक्ष्मण रेखा होनी चाहिए। लेकिन बड़ा सवाल है-- ये लक्ष्मण रेखा कौन खीचेगा। हम बचपन से पढ़ते आये हैं कि लोकहित में सरकार के हर कदम पर नज़र रखना मीडिया की जिम्मेदारी है। लोकतंत्र की ये एक बुनियादी शर्त है। लेकिन कंटेट कोड के ज़रिये उल्टी गंगा बहाने की तैयारी है। यानी मीडिया सरकार पर नहीं बल्कि सरकार मीडिया पर नज़र रखेगी। जब सरकार ये तय करने लगेगी कि पब्लिक इंट्रेस्ट क्या है, तो फिर तमाम चैनल दूरदर्शन जैसे बन जाएंगे। क्या पब्लिक कभी ये चाहेगी कि इस देश के सारे चैनल दूरदर्शन मार्का हो जायें।मैं दूरदर्शन जैसे सरकारी प्रसारण तंत्र के ख़िलाफ इसलिए नहीं हूं कि वो नीरस और उबाउ है, बल्कि असल में दूरदर्शन जनता के प्रति बिल्कुल भी उत्तरदायी नहीं है, जैसा कि इसे बताया जाता है।
मैं टीवी पत्रकारिता से जुड़े कुछ लोगों की सरकारी अधिकारियों से मुलाकात का एक दिलचस्प वाकया पेश करना चाहूंगा। इस मुलाकात में कुछ अधिकारियों ने ये शंका जाहिर की कि अपने काम करने के अंदाज़ से न्यूज़ चैनल दंगा करवा सकते हैं। इस पर मेरे एक पत्रकार मित्र ने जवाब दिया है-- ये क्षमता सिर्फ एक ही चैनल में है और वो है- दूरदर्शन। अपनी इस क्षमता का नमूना दूरदर्शन ने 1984 में इंदिरा गांधी की हत्या के बाद के कवरेज़ में पेश कर दी थी, जब भयंकर सिख विरोधी दंगे भड़के थे। ज़ाहिर है, जब सत्ता से जुड़े ऐसी समझ वाले लोग हमारी निगरानी करेंगे तो फिर उनपर नज़र कौन रखेगा।
हमें अपनी कमजोरियों का पता है। इसलिए न्यूज़ चैनलों ने सेल्फ रेगुलेशन की व्यवस्था बनाई है। कंधार विमान अपहरण कांड जैसे ही खत्म हुआ सरकार ने मीडिया को संयम बरतने के लिए धन्यवाद दिया। लेकिन उसके बाद जो कुछ हुआ उससे हमारे प्रति सरकार का नज़रिया बदल गया। क्या इसकी वजह ये थी कि न्यूज़ चैनल जनता के आक्रोश को सामने लाने का मंच बन गये? मुझे इसमें शक है। सच तो ये है कि पब्लिक के गुस्से की कहानी जब मीडिया के ज़रिये सामने आई और ये साफ हो गया कि पूरा तंत्र अपने नागरिकों की हिफाजत में नाकाम है, तो सरकार बुरी तरह हिल गई। जब हुक्मरान और सियासतदां हिले तो ऐसे-ऐसे बचकाने बयान सामने आये जो पहले कभी नहीं सुने गये। बतौर बानगी.. `ये लिपिस्टिक लाली लगाकर हमारी बहने प्रदर्शन करती हैं'--
इस तरह के बयान सत्ता और राजनीतिक तंत्र की नाकामी के अभूतपूर्व नमूने थे। 24 घंटे चलने वाले हमारे न्यूज़ चैनलों ने इन बयानों पर नेताओं की बखिया उधेड़कर रख दी।
26 नवंबर के आतंकवादी हमले के बाद सरकार ने चैनलों को सुझाव दिया कि वो इसके असर को दबा दें। क्या ये जनता के सच जानने, देखने और समझने के अधिकार का हनन था? हमने भी ये महसूस किया कि मुंबई वारदात की कवरेज़ से जुड़ी तस्वीरे दिखाने से पहले उन्हे आम आदमी की संवेदनशीलता की कसौटी पर कसा जाना चाहिए था। लेकिन क्या ये सरकार तय करेगी कि आम आदमी की संवेदनशीलता कैसी और कितनी होनी चाहिए? क्या हम सुरक्षा में हुई ऐतिहासिक चूक की वो तस्वीर हमेशा के लिए मिटा दें जो एक अरब लोगों के दिलो-दिमाग़ में कैद हो चुकी हैं। या फिर हम ये तय करे कि 26-11 को हम कभी नहीं भूलेंगे और ऐसी घटनाओं की पुनरावृति नहीं होने देंगे।
अगर सरकार ने न्यूज़ चैनलों पर कंटेट कोड लागू कर दिया तो आप वो तस्वीरे और ख़बरें नहीं देख पाएंगे जिनका जिक्र मैंने अपने लेख की शुरुआत में किया था। समझा जा सकता है कि कंटेट कोड के क्या नतीजे होंगे और इससे क्या हासिल होगा। (शाज़ी जमां स्टार न्यूज़ के संपादक हैं)

How State machinery seeks to deflect public anger from political class to TV media :N K Singh

Arbitrary rule has its basis, not in the strength of the state or the chief, but in the moral weakness of the individual, who submits almost without resistance to the domineering power.Friedrich Hatzel
* * * * *

The worst fears have come true. The Union Government is all set to amend Cable Television Networks (regulation) Rules to rein in media in the name of coverage of anti-terror operations, sex, crimes, narco-analysis footage”. Our self-regulation attempts did not dissuade an adamant Govt itching to shackle the TV media into submission on obtrusively invented pretext. We all know the reason—public abhorrence to the meta-stasized political class shown by us in post-Mumbai reaction stories.

The proposed amendment lays down some dos and don’ts. Once the notification to this effect is through --although it has to be cleared by Parliament under section 22(1) of the Cable Networks (Regulation ) Act,1995 (as amended in 2003), the District Magistrates and Sub-divisional Magistrates besides Commissioners of police will have the power to block live transmission by any channel and confiscate transmission equipment.

What can be termed as the severest assault on democracy is the proposal to provide feed to the media by a nodal agency in such `exigency’ situation meaning thereby that media will not be allowed to cover any such event –like communal riots, Gujjar Andolan and police firing at unarmed demonstrators. It is the Government that will tell us what to cover. Not to say that by implication no channel will now be able to cover Gujarat riots if Modi so decides (in the national interest ?). The State’s power will match that of any dictator in the matters of socalled “national interest”. Perhaps in independent India this is the first time such a draconian law is being proposed, albeit in the national interest.
attempts did not dissuade an adamant Govt itching to shackle the TV media into submission on obtrusively invented pretext. We all know the reason—public abhorrence to the meta-stasized political class shown by us in post-Mumbai reaction stories.

The proposed amendment lays down some dos and don’ts. Once the notification to this effect is through --although it has to be cleared by Parliament under section 22(1) of the Cable Networks (Regulation ) Act,1995 (as amended in 2003), the District Magistrates and Sub-divisional Magistrates besides Commissioners of police will have the power to block live transmission by any channel and confiscate transmission equipment.

What can be termed as the severest assault on democracy is the proposal to provide feed to the media by a nodal agency in such `exigency’ situation meaning thereby that media will not be allowed to cover any such event –like communal riots, Gujjar Andolan and police firing at unarmed demonstrators. It is the Government that will tell us what to cover. Not to say that by implication no channel will now be able to cover Gujarat riots if Modi so decides (in the national interest ?). The State’s power will match that of any dictator in the matters of socalled “national interest”. Perhaps in independent India this is the first time such a draconian law is being proposed, albeit in the national interest.

Under the amendment these officers will have the power to decide whether repeat telecast of a footage is necessary (and thereby in the national interest ) or not; whether any information is unauthenticated and therefore be blocked. These authorities will also decide whether any phone-in of a reporter and victim or their interviews disturbs public order or is against national interest.

Students of democratic system know that educating masses on issues so that public order and national interest remain intact is the intrinsic duty of political class. As this class has failed in this primary duty, it is trying to seek solution through gagging of media.

One can easily realize how anti-democracy these amendments are going to be particularly in the upcountry areas where vindictive political class and bureaucracy can shackle an ordinary reporter into submission on the pain of this draconian provisions law.

Now look at the genesis of this amendment and faulty Government argument:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In Mumbai operation (or in other similar situations), the terrorists were in their fiercest ferocity and the State might was in its aggressive best. No mature democracy can afford to keep mediaway from the scene for more than one reason. Ironically, it is general nature of state to restrict media on such occasions seeking justification on the grounds of national interest.

Two reasons why Media has a role:

When Gandhi was assassinated, the first announcement from none other than Prime Minister Nehru through AIR was: the killer was a Hindu named Nathu Ram Godse. Had this announcement not been made, the ensuing riots would have taken unimaginable toll.

Imagine the cases of police excesses in Pilibhit pilgrims encounter and Maliana massacre in the absence of media. The then DGP of UP in case of Pilibhit encounter (a case of mistaken identity by overenthusiastic police) sought to hush up the matter saying although some children (they were also part of pilgrims) were killed in `cross-fire’, the other killed were hardened terrorists. One newspaper exposed the case by giving minutest details of the pilgrims, many of whom were 80-year-old.

I would not say the same in war situations where two entities –our forces and that of enemy are clearly identified and their roles well carved out. Media can stay away from war front, and present to the public what is dished out by our forces. But not when state power is in its aggressive form and when there are three entities –state agencies, suspected terrorists and common men. Our concern is for the last entity.

Why media should be present on the spot `recording’ every happening
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Take situation 1 in Mumbai.

Remember Indian Navy attack on Thia fishing trawler recently. It was a clear case of mistaken identity. Suppose the same happens in Taj hotel on 27/11. Over-enthusiasm, casual approach to identify the enemy, inaptitude, pre-conceived notion about terrorist and his religion ---any or all of them together carry the potential to create the greatest havoc in human history. And to top it all, the State apparatus can make criminal attempt to camouflage the misdeed by branding hapless bearded man as terrorist by placing an AK-47 by the side of his body.

So we should have been there at the scene of occurrence.

Situation 2: Terrorists having seen the news on TV sets or were informed by their handlers from Karachi (that is what the allegation against the electronic media is) that they have been hemmed in and are being attacked both vitically and horizontally with weapons which have more killing range then their assault rifles may surrender finding their escape difficult. Many wars in the world history were won just on propaganda.

So we should have been there to support state machinery if it chooses to make strategic use of media in national interest.

The problem lies not with media airing situations live but with lack of rational thinking on the part of the state machinery.

Govt seeks to gag media
------------------------------
The I & B Advisory dated December 3 had sought to project electronic media as working against `national interest’ four times, directly or indirectly, in its five-point note. Now 48 hours later, we have newspaper stories `quoting sources’ that say NSG too has claimed media got in its way causing operational hazard leading to death of a Havildar”. The Government advisory does not carry `desired’ credibility but NSG rue does-- even if it may be a bureaucratic `plant’. Very subtly the powers-that-be have sought to divert post-Mumbai public anger against political class, mainly the ruling coalition, to media –bashing through its advisories and now through amendments in the Cable Act.

Riding the crest of engineered anti-media wave the Government is all set to issue “discipline channels” order in “national interest”. Media has to fight in the larger interest of “operational” democracy. Engineered though it is, the Government has succeeded in creating a palpable murmuring in the public with respect to our coverage.

We will have to effectively say that what we had done was in the best national interest. We will also have to demolish the basic premise that coverage led to death of Havildar.

The allegation that the Pakistan –based handlers got to know the strength of security forces deployed at Taj through Indian media’s live coverage is extremely puerile effort to pass the buck. Does it require a TV coverage to know that hundreds (if required thousands and lakhs) of NSG/Army jawans would be deployed? Does it require TV coverage to know that the operation of security forces would be both, vertical and horizontal? Does it require TV coverage to know that choppers would be pressed into service as a form of vertical operation? In any case the sound of rotor can be heard from a distance from than half a kilometer—vertically too. But the Government alleges that it was the live coverage that gave the terrorists a cue about operation. Ironically some editors who had scant experience of field reporting too buy this and take a defensive “on-the-one-hand” kind of position.

Were we privy to any operational details other than what was there in public view? The handlers from Pakistan could have or might have easily deployed one or two persons to report the minute-to-minute details as was being done by the media. Was it not the responsibility of the security forces to jam the mobiles immediately before the operation? They do it when a VIP with just Z plus security status moves around but not when Mumbai operation takes place. And finally choose to blame it on the media.


N K Singh
Political Editor, ETV,
a

चौथे खंभे को धराशायी करने की साजिशः सुप्रिय प्रसाद

लोकतंत्र के सबसे चौथे खंभे को उखाड़ने की कोशिशें सिर उठा रही हैं। इस खंभे को कमजोर करने की कोशिश कोई दुश्मन नहीं कर रहा है। मीडिया पर सरकारी सेंसरशिप थोपकर केंद्र सरकार उसे नख दंतविहीन बना देना चाहती है। अपने हक की लड़ाई लड़ रही जनता पर अगर सरकारी दमन हुआ और उसके फुटेज आपके पास हैं तो उसे आप दिखा नहीं पाएंगे। मुंबई पर हुए हमलों की कवरेज का बहाना बनाकर सरकार अपना छिपा एजेंडा लागू करना चाहती है। वो न्यूज चैनलों को अपना गुलाम बनाना चाहती है। अगर सरकार अपनी मंशा में कामयाब हो गई तो कोई दावा नहीं कर पाएगा कि सच दिखाते हैं हम। क्योंकि सच वही होगा, जो सरकार कहेगी। आपके फुटेज धरे के धरे रह जाएंगे। दंगा हो या आतंकवादी हमला। इमरजेंसी की हालत में सरकारी मशीनरी ज्यादातर मूक दर्शक बनी रहती है। सरकार चाहती है कि मीडिया भी उसी तरह मूक दर्शक बनी रहे। हाथ पर हाथ धरे तमाशा देखती रहे। ये वक्त हाथ पर हाथ धरकर बैठने का नहीं है। मीडिया पर सेंसरशिप लगाने की इस साजिश को नाकाम करने का वक्त है। (सुप्रिय प्रसाद न्यूज 24 चैनल के न्यूज डायरेक्टर हैं। )

पाक मीडिया हमसे ज्यादा आजादः विनोद कापड़ी

-सबसे ब़ड़ा सवाल ये है कि सरकार पर नजर रखने के लिए मीडिया बनी है या मीडिया पर नजर रखने के लिए सरकार बनी है। मीडिया का काम ही यही है कि वो सरकार पर नजर रखे, जनता की बात जनता तक पहुंचाए, सरकार को बताए कि वो ये गलत कर रही है। लेकिन यहां तो स्थिति बिल्कुल उलटी हो चुकी है। सरकार मीडिया को बता रही है कि ये गलत है और ये सही है। किसी भी लोकतांत्रिक व्यवस्था में इसे सही नहीं ठहराया जा सकता। आप पड़ोसी मुल्क पाकिस्तान की हालत देखिए। कितनी अराजकता है, लोकतंत्र नाम की चीज नहीं है, लेकिन वहां का मीडिया हमसे ज्यादा आजाद है। हमारी सरकार को क्या ये नहीं दिखाई देता। मीडिया पर सेंसरशिप का सरकारी ख्याल कतई लोकतांत्रिक नहीं है। ये प्रेस की आजादी पर हमला है।
(विनोद कापड़ी इंडिया टीवी के मैनेजिंग एडिटर हैं)

सरकार को इतनी जल्दी क्यों हैं -आशुतोष

इस रेगुलेशन से सरकारी मंशा पर सवाल खड़े होते हैं..। क्योंकि टीवी चैनल पर कुछ दिनों पहले ही पूर्व चीफ जस्टिस जेएस वर्मा के नेतृत्व में एक इमरजेंसी गाइड लाइन बनाई गई थी। सारे चैनलों ने इसे लागू करने की बात भी कही थी, लेकिन सरकार ने इस इमरजेंसी गाइडलाइन को ही सिरे से नकार दिया, जबकि सरकार को इस गाइडलाइन के तहत चैनलों को काम करने देना चाहिए, जो उसने नहीं किया। सवाल ये है कि सरकार इतनी जल्दी में क्यों है? वो सेल्फ रेग्यूलेशन के खिलाफ क्यों है? ये एक बड़ा सवाल है। (आशुतोष आईबीएन 7 के मैनेजिंग एडिटर हैं)

प्रेस की आजादी पर हमला-सतीश के सिंह

आजाद भारत के इतिहास में प्रेस की आजादी पर इससे बड़ा अंकुश लगाने की, इससे बड़ी कोशिश कभी नहीं हुई। सरकार न सिर्फ टीवी बल्कि प्रिंट और वेब मीडिया पर भी अपना अंकुश लगाना चाहती है। सरकार की ये कोशिश किसी मीडिया सेंसरशिप से कम नहीं है। प्रेस के लिए बाकायदा कानून हैं। अगर कोई विवाद की स्थिति होती है तो संस्था और पत्रकारों पर मुकदमे चलते ही हैं, लेकिन सरकार अब जो करने की कोशिश कर रही है वो प्रेस की आजादी पर हमला है, फंडामेंटल राइट्स के खिलाफ है। (सतीश के सिंह जी न्यूज के एडिटर हैं)

मीडिया का गला घोटने की कोशिश:अजित अंजुम

सरकार का इरादा टीवी चैनलों को रेगुलेट करना नहीं उन्हें अपने काबू में करना है ताकि कभी को ऐसी खबर जिससे सरकार की सेहत पर असर पड़े, चैनलों पर न चल पाए। अगर टीवी न्यूज चैनलों से मुंबई हमलों के दौरान कोई चूक हुई तो उसे सुधारने के लिए और भविष्य में ऐसी चूक न हो इसके लिए एनबीए ने अपनी गाइडलाइन जारी कर दी है। सभी न्यूज चैनलों के संपादकों के साथ बातचीत करने के बाद एनबीए आथारिटी के चेयरमैन जस्टिस जे एस वर्मा ने सेल्फ रेगुलेशन का ये गाइडलाइन लागू कर दिया है। फिर भी सरकार चैनलों सेंसरशिप की तैयारी कर रही है। ये मीडिया का गला घोंटने की कोशिश है। इसे नहीं मंजूर किया जाना चाहिए और जिस हद तक मुमकिन हो इसका विरोध किया जाना चाहिए,वरना वो दिन दूर नहीं जब कोई सरकारी बाबू और अफसर नेशनल इंट्रेस्ट के नाम पर किसी भी न्यूज चैनल की नकेल कसने में जुट जाएगा। फिर कभी भी गुजरात दंगों के दौरान जैसी रिपोर्टिंग आप सबने टीवी चैनलों पर देखी है ,नहीं देख पाएंगे। कभी भी सरकार या सरकारी तंत्र की नाकामी के खिलाफ जनता अगर सड़क पर उतरी और उसकी खबर को तवज्जो दी गयी तो उसे नेशनल इंट्रेस्ट के खिलाफ मानकर चैनल के खिलाफ कानूनी कार्रवाई कर दी जाएगी। हर सूबे और हर जिले का अफसर अपने -अपने ढंग से नेशनल इंट्रेस्ट को परिभाषित करेगा और अपने ढंग से इस्तेमाल करके मीडिया का गला घोंटेगा ।
( अजित अंजुम न्यूज़ २४ के सम्पादकीय प्रमुख हैं)

ये सेंसर हैं !- मिलिंद खांडेकर

सेंसर का नाम आपने बहुत दिनों से नही सुना , लेकिन इस सरकार के इरादे ठीक नही लगते अभी सिर्फ़ टीवी को रेगुलेट करने के नाम पर कानून बनाने की बात हो रही हैं। कानून का मतलब ये हुआ कि सिर्फ़ मुंबई जैसे हमले ही नही बल्कि गुजरात जैसे दंगो का कवरेज भी वैसे ही होगा जैसे सरकार चाहेगी। न तो हम अमरनाथ का आन्दोलन टीवी पर देख पाएंगे न ही पुलिस के जुल्म की तस्वीरें क्योंकि नेशनल इंटरेस्ट के नाम पर कुछ भी रोका जा सकता हैं । नेशनल इंटरेस्ट वो सरकार तय करेगी जो मुंबई में हमला नही रोक सकी।बात अगर टीवी से शुरू हुई हैं तो प्रिंट और इन्टरनेट तक भी जायेगी। अभी नही जागे तो बहुत देर हो जायेगी
(मिलिंद खांडेकर स्टार न्यूज़ के मेनेजिंग एडिटर हैं)
http://www।hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=HomePage&id=94263702-c6bb-408f-95ae-b1bc9a3461e3&&Headline=Return+of+the+Censor