Chapter 1: 1-8

Introduction 2-3

Introduction to World History 4-6

Introduction to Indian history 7

Status of press freedom worldwide 8

1
INTRODUCTION

Freedom of the press is the freedom of communication and expression through vehicles
including various electronic media and published materials. While such freedom mostly
implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state, its preservation may be
sought through constitutional or other legal protections.

With respect to governmental information, any government may distinguish which

materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of
information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from
disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. Many
governments are also subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation that
are used to define the ambit of national interest.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of
opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of
frontiers"

This philosophy is usually accompanied by legislation ensuring various degrees of

freedom of scientific research (known as scientific freedom), publishing, press and
printing the depth to which these laws are entrenched in a country's legal system can go
as far down as its constitution. The concept of freedom of speech is often covered by the
same laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to spoken and
published expression.

2
Besides legal definitions, some non-governmental organizations use other criteria to
judge the level of press freedom around the world:

• Reporters Without Borders considers the number of journalists murdered,

expelled or harassed, and the existence of a state monopoly on TV and radio, as
well as the existence of censorship and self-censorship in the media, and the
overall independence of media as well as the difficulties that foreign reporters
may face.
• The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) uses the tools of journalism to help
journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-
finding missions, and firsthand contacts in the field, including local working
journalists in countries around the world. CPJ shares information on breaking
cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the International
Freedom of Expression Exchange, a global e-mail network. CPJ also tracks
journalist deaths and detentions. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case;
researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each
death or imprisonment.
• Freedom House likewise studies the more general political and economic
environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of
dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist
in theory. So the concept of independence of the press is one closely linked with
the concept of press freedom.

3
HISTORY

Introduction to World History

England

The glorious revolution of 1688 in england established parliamentary over the crown and,
above all, the right of revolution. A major contributor to Western liberal theory was john
locke. Locke argued in tow trearises of government that the individual placed some of his
rights present in the state of nature in trusteeship with the soverign (government) in return
for protection of certain natural individual rights. A social contract was entered into by
the people.

Until 1694, england had an elaborate system of licensing. No publication was allowed
without the accompaniment of a government-granted license. Fifty years earlier, at a time
of civil war,john milton wrote his pamphlet arepagitica. In this work Milton argued
forcefully against this form of government censorship and parodied the idea, writing
"when as debtors and delinquents may walk abroad without a keeper, but unoffensive
books must not stir forth without a visible jailer in their title." Although at the time it did

4
little to halt the practice of licensing, it would be viewed later a significant milestone as
one of the most eloquent defenses of press freedom.

Milton's central argument was that the individual is capable of using reason and
distinguishing right from wrong, good from bad. In order to be able to exercise this ration
right, the individual must have unlimited access to the ideas of his fellow men in “a free
and open encounter." From Milton's writings developed the concept of the open
marketplace of ideas, the idea that when people argue against each other, the good
arguments will prevail. One form of speech that was widely restricted in England was
seditious libel, and laws were in place that made criticizing the government a crime. The
King was above public criticism and statements critical of the government were
forbidden, according to the English Court of the star chamber. Truth was not a defense to
seditious libel because the goal was to prevent and punish all condemnation of the
government.

John stuart mill approached the problem of authority versus liberty from the viewpoint of
a 19th century utilitarian: The individual has the right of expressing himself so long as he
does not harm other individuals. The good society is one in which the greatest number of
persons enjoy the greatest possible amount of happiness. Applying these general
principles of liberty to freedom of expression, Mill states that if we silence an opinion,
we may silence the truth. The individual freedom of expression is therefore essential to
the well-being of society.

Mill’s application of the general principles of liberty is expressed in his book On Liberty:
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and one, and only one person were of the
contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than
he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind".

Nazi Germany (1933-1945)

The dictatorship of Adolf Hitler largely suppressed freedom of the press through Joseph
Goebbels' Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. As the Ministry's name
implies, propaganda did not carry the negative connotations that it does today (or did in

5
the Allied countries); how-to manuals were openly distributed by that same ministry
explaining the craft of effective propaganda. The Ministry also acted as a central control-
point for all media, issuing orders as to what stories could be run and what stories would
be suppressed. Anyone involved in the film industry—from directors to the lowliest
assistant—had to sign an oath of loyalty to the Nazi Party, due to opinion-changing
power Goebbels perceived movies to have. (Goebbels himself maintained some personal
control over every single film made in Nazi Europe.) Journalists who crossed the
Propaganda Ministry were routinely imprisoned or shot as traitors.

Poland and Lithuania

Freedom of Press laws are first passed in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth in

Sweden

The world's first Freedom of the Press Act was introduced in Sweden in 1766.

Denmark-Norway

Between September 4, 1770 and October 7, 1771 the kingdom of Denmark-Norway had
the most unrestricted freedom of press of any country in Europe. This occurred during the
regime of Johann Friedrich Struensee, whose first act was to abolish the old censorship
laws. However, due to the great amount of mostly anonymous pamphlets published that
was critical and often slanderous towards Struensee's own regime, he reinstated some
restrictions regarding the freedom of press a year later, October 7, 1771

6
 Introduction to Indian history

India

The Indian Constitution, while not mentioning the word "press", provides for "the right
to freedom of speech and expression" (Article 19(1) a). However this right is subject to
restrictions under sub clause (2), whereby this freedom can be restricted for reasons of
"sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with
foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to
contempt, court, defamation, or incitement to an offense". Laws such as the Official
Secrets Act and Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act[10] (PoTA) have been used to limit
press freedom. Under PoTA, person could be detained for up to six months for being in
contact with a terrorist or terrorist group. PoTA was repealed in 2006, but the Official
Secrets Act 1923 continues.

7
For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major
constraint on press freedom. Indira Gandhi famously stated in 1975 that All India Radio
is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..."[11] With the
liberalization starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to
increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. Organizations like CNN-
IBN, NDTV and Times Now have been particularly influential, e.g. in bringing about the
resignation of powerful Haryana minister Venod Sharma.

Status of press freedom worldwide

8
 WORLD WIDE STATUS

Chapter2: 9-43

Freedom of Press 10-13

Different Scenario 13-27

9
 Goals 27-40

The press council of India 41-43

Freedom of the Press

Freedom of expression has always been emphasised as an essential basis for the
democratic functioning of a society. The reasons for this are: the right of an individual to
self-fulfillment, which right requires the communication of thought; the importance of
constantly attempting to attaint he truth, an attempt which is frustrated if information is
suppressed or comment blocked; the inherent democratic right to participate in decision-
making, which obviously implies the freedom to obtain, communicate and discuss

10
information,; and the practical importance of maintaining the precarious balance between
healthy cleavage and the necessary consensus; "coercion of expression is likely to be
ineffective (and)…. Conceals the real problems confronting a society… It is likely to
result in neglect of the grievances which are the actual basis of the unrest and thus
prevent their correction".* Especially because we are compelled to operate our
democracy indirectly, it is of great importance that the citizens should be enabled to
know what is happening in different regions and different sectors of the functioning of
the society, and to listen to different and alternative approaches and comments, so that
they can effectively participate in the process of self-government. If facts cannot be freely
presented and comments cannot be freely exchanged, there is no way in which the
citizens can even attempt to hold the rulers to account.

Freedom of the press worldwide according to Reporters Without Borders.

Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a ranking of countries in terms of their
freedom of the press. The Worldwide press freedom index list is based on responses to
surveys sent to journalists that are members of partner organisations of the RWB, as well
as related specialists such as researchers, jurists and human rights activists. The survey
asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media as well as other indirect
sources of pressure against the free press, such as non-governmental groups. RWB is
careful to note that the index only deals with press freedom, and does not measure the
quality of journalism.

In 2010, the countries where press was the most free were Finland, Iceland, Netherlands,
Norway and Sweden. The country with the least degree of press freedom was Eritrea,
followed by North Korea, Turkmenistan, Iran and Myanmar (Burma).[1]

Freedom of the Press is a yearly report by US-based non-governmental organization

Freedom House, measuring the level of freedom and editorial independence enjoyed by
the press in every nation and significant disputed territories around the world. Levels of

11
freedom are scored on a scale from 1 (most free) to 100 (least free). Depending on the
basics, the nations are then classified as "Free", "Partly Free", or "Not Free".

In 2009 Iceland, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden topped the list with North
Korea, Turkmenistan, Myanmar (Burma), Libya, Eritrea at the bottom.

Non-democratic states

According to Reporters Without Borders, more than a third of the world's people live in
countries where there is no press freedom. Overwhelmingly, these people live in
countries where there is no system of democracy or where there are serious deficiencies
in the democratic process. Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic
problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern
age, strict control of access to information is critical to the existence of most non-
democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To
this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote
the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress
(often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any
significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved
"government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the
fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of
considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to
their professional careers (firing, professional blacklisting) to death threats, kidnapping,
torture, and assassination. Reporters Without Borders reports that, in 2003, 42 journalists
lost their lives pursuing their profession and that, in the same year, at least 130 journalists
were in prison as a result of their occupational activities. In 2005, 63 journalists and 5
media assistants were killed worldwide.

A further dimensions to the freedom of expression is added by the existence of mass

society in which communication among citizens can take place only through the use of
media like the Press and broadcasting and not directly, except in a limited way. With

12
State monopoly over broadcasting which prevails both technical and, in the Indian
context, financial, the importance of the Press is even more crucial.

Our actual experience since Independence, and especially in the last decade or so, also
suggests that a free and vigilant Press is vital to restrain corruption and injustice at least
to the extent that public opinion can be roused as a result of press investigations and
comments. Recently a number of injustices and wrong-doings have been uncovered as a
result of the initiative taken by newspapers. Whether it is the question of various types of
bonded labour in different parts of the country, the misuse of powers by A. R. Antulay or
the existence of smuggling rackets on the West Coast, newspapers have served a very
useful purpose by exposing them. The fear that the Press will expose such wrong-doing is
a major restraint on potential wrong-doers.

Who Threatens Freedom? Owners Structure

Having accepted that the freedom of the Press is of vital importance especially in our
contest, the question arises: is this freedom threatened and, if so, by whom?

It has been frequently alleged, especially in India, that the freedom of the Press is in
danger because of the ownership of the newspaper industry and the predominance of
some newspaper groups and chains. It is also suggested that the editors and journalists
cannot have adequate freedom of collecting and disseminating facts and offering
comments as they are under the pressure of the capitalist owners. It is further pointed out
that free collection and dissemination of facts is not possible in the case of newspapers
which depend to a large extent on revenue from advertisements as the advertising
interests cannot but influence the presentation of news and comments. Unless this whole
structure of ownership and control in the newspaper industry, and also the manner of the
economic management of the Press, is changed, it is therefore suggested, the Press cannot
be really free.

How far are these arguments valid?

It should be conceded at the outset that, like any large private sector industry, the
newspaper industry cannot be influenced by the understanding and approach of those

13
who control it. With modern technology, large newspaper organisations enjoy various
economies of scale. Groups and chains of newspapers are therefore in a better position to
provide richer fare in their newspapers are bound to be businessmen/capitalists, and their
overall approach to the society and its problems cannot but be conditioned by this. That is
why we inevitably find that the Press which is commercially organised-not run by
political pro-business, pro-capitalist as well as usually a pro-Establishment viewpoint.
Few newspapers will endorse a philosophy which goes against the established they would
hardly raise their voice, or even offer investigative material, about the working of private
trade and industry. When those who own or control newspapers are also involved in other
lines of business, their stake in the stability of the system is so large that they would not
encourage anything which is likely to create problems in the smooth functioning of the
society. With maximum emphasis on stability, they would rather connive with oppression
and injustice. Unorthodox and anti-establishment vies may not find much place in the
columns of such newspapers, while national chauvinism-even jingoism-may come easily.
The recent controversy in a country like the United Kingdom with a long democratic
tradition about the somewhat subjective stances taken by the B.B.C. in the Falklands
crisis shows how difficult it is for the Press or the media to maintain objectivity. The days
that we can forget that appalling experience, when the freedom of the press as well as
many other freedoms were seriously endangered in the U.S.A.

No Workable Alternative

But what is the possible remedy? Public ownership of newspapers in effect meaning State
ownership? Is that what will ensure the freedom of the Press?
The idea has merely to be put forward to see how suicidal such a solution can be.

14
Cooperative ownership could be a possible alternative; but there are few examples
anywhere in the world of successful cooperative management of large newspaper
organisations, or of any large business establishments. A newspaper industry is an
increasingly large, technically complex and managerially challenging industry. Unless we
want the newspapers to be poorly produced as a result of continuos inefficiency in their
management, we can not but permit good and vigorous managers to control major units
in this industry. The choice is between having good newspapers even with the shortfalls
inevitably arising out of the inadequacies mentioned earlier, or having poor quality
newspapers. What our choice will be is obvious.

Competition The Best Policy

One should also point out that our experience in India is not that all those who own and
manage the newspaper industry are taking a uniform approach on important issues
relating to vital policy-making in the country. There are differences among them and
some do take a significantly anti-establishment line. Though they may not necessarily
support socialist or communist policies, they may permit a great deal of criticism of the
existing system and encourage information as well as comment along critical lines. The
degree of such criticism will vary. But our experience does not indicate that all capitalist
owners of newspapers will collaborate and operate in some kind of a collusion. In fact, to
the extent that there is competition for increasing circulation, a newspaper is bound to
attempt to ensure that it is not found wanting in investigating events and giving
information which competing newspapers may provide. The owners cannot therefore take
an approach which will reduce the circulation by insisting that it reflect his personal
viewpoint rather than attempting to present facts and other materials which the readers
would be interested in. A capitalist owner may not necessarily be actuated by any lofty
motives; but the possibility cannot be ignored that competing newspapers would forge
ahead if the paper is allowed to be too sectional or partial. Experience both in India and
abroad also suggests that only large newspaper organisations can resist powerful
institutions and persons. A small newspaper would institutions and persons. A small
newspaper would have found it difficult to face the wrath of a Nixon.

15
What is therefore of real importance is to ensure that a certain minimum degree of
competition exists in the newspaper world. It is true, as mentioned earlier, that, as in
many other industries, technology and other aspects give a significant advantage to large
scale organisations in the press industry. It is no longer possible for the number of
successful newspaper ventures to be very large. We can only have a limited degree of
competition and not anything approaching perfect competition. But this is the difficulty
in all modern industries. All that can and should be emphasised is that a reasonable
degree of competition should be attempted to be maintained.

This can be done in two ways: Firstly, in any effective circulation area which forms a
single market for newspapers, careful watch should be kept on dominant newspapers who
control a large proportion of the circulation. In the case of such newspapers the normal
provisions of the MRTP Act such as special permission being required for their major
expansion or setting up of new papers by them etc. should apply. Careful watch should
also be kept on the possibility of their indulging in monopolistic and unfair trade
practices. It has been already held that the MRTP Act applies to the newspaper industry.
What is necessary is to make sure that the provisions of the Act are streamlined and its
instruments given adequate teeth so that the anti-monopoly provisions can effectively
operate. This is necessary not only in the newspaper industry but in all industries. The
difficulty is that throughout the last ten years since the MRTP Act was put on the statute
book, the Government has not rally bothered to see that anti-monopoly provisions
become effective. In fact, the tendency of Government has been in opposite direction,
Viz, to favour the monopoly organisations.

As for large business houses controlling a number of industries and also newspapers, to
the extent that such houses represent a significant degree of concentration of economic
power, they would come within the purview of the break-up provisions under Section 27
of the MRTP Act. The government would therefore be in a position to have the
possibility of such breakup examined by the MRTP Commission and, if such a break-up
is advised in public interest, it can take steps in that direction. The difficulty is that the
Government has made no use of this section. The Government appears to be merely
wanting to have many powers with it so that it can threaten and intimidate those

16
enterprises, including newspaper ones, which are not ready to toe its line. It is significant
that the only instance where the Government thought worth looking at; it was only the
Indian Express, because it was proving to be a paper not easily amenable to the wishes of
those in power at that time. This inference is supported by the fact that, at the
Government's instance, R. N. Goenka was replaced as chairman of the Indian Express
group by K. K. Birla, and the Government preferred this arrangement in spite of latter's
connections with both a large business empire, and with the Hindustan Times. In thinking
of any special powers relating to the Press being given to Government, the very real
possibility of the powers being mainly used for arm-twisting for partisan interests should
not be overlooked.

Positive Assistance to Independent Papers

At the same time, it is important that steps are taken positively to make it possible for
independent papers to survive develop. Assistance to them should be provided through
general institutions meant to help the growth of independent entrepreneurs, including
small ones. The financial institutions as well as promoting organisations-such as the
National Small Industries Corporation-can be used for this purpose. Facilities such as
subsidised teleprinter services, and facilitating the setting up of small electronic presses,
could be other steps in this direction. The assistance should be granted in a manner where
no discrimination among individual papers can be easily made, and where the subsidised
facility cannot be misused and encashed. For this reason making available a marketable
commodity like newsprint at a specially cheaper price should not be supported.

The dependence of newspapers on advertisement revenue may go against the perspective

of some puritan minds about an ideal society. But in a world where mass persuasion is
becoming respectable even in communist countries like Hungary and Yugoslavia, we
cannot think of advertisement as a tainted source of revenue. At a time when the costs of
producing newspapers are rapidly raising, advertisement revenue is the only mechanism
which can keep the newspaper prices within reasonable limits. Any attempt by
Government to put a restriction to advertisement revenue has to be looked upon as an
indirect method of upsetting the economy of newspapers and thus an act which would

17
affect Press freedom adversely. To the extent that a newspaper has a large number of
sources from which advertisement revenue flows in, it is less likely to be influenced in its
coverage by the wishes of any one of them. A smaller newspaper is more likely to be
subject to the wishes of an important advertiser, including the Government. It is therefore
necessary to realise that larger appears are less likely to be influenced by advertisers.
Further, to the extent that the MRTP Act is effectively used, the power of any one
advertiser would be limited. Of course, if the Government chooses to continue to keep the
MRTP Act should be available to Government to curb undue concentration and misuse of
monopoly powers in the Press industry. It should also be obligatory for Government to
consult the MRTP Commission before any action under that Act is taken.

The State- The Main Threat

This insistence is necessary because experience all over the world, as well as our own
experience since Independence, suggest that the State remains the source of the most
potential threat to Press freedom. It cannot be overlooked that, within a short time after
passing the Constitution, those in power - who used to swear by Press freedom before
Independence-put in provisos to Article 19 (1) of the Constitution so as to clothe
Government with powers to curb Press freedom. This was defended on the ground that
these powers were likely to be necessary on occasions when the security of the State was
threatened; it was emphasised that the powers will not be normally used. But a special
legislation called the Press (Prevention of Objectionable Matters) Act was put on the
statute book soon thereafter in 1951. No steps were taken to remove the lacunae which
gave Government powers to intercept material going to the Press through the Posts and
Telegraphs. Some Chief Ministers thought it proper to take steps against newspapers
whose policy they did not like, whether it was a Morarji Desai in Bombay or a Charan
Singh in U. P.

A persistent attempt to curb Press freedom how ever really began only after 1969. Indira
Gandhi felt that the Press was too critical of her ways and she sought to change its
approach. Various threats were held out by Government and steps proposed to curb that
section of the Press which was thought to be the most independent. With the aid of some

18
native leftist organisations, a propaganda barrage was mounted against the Press as well
as the judiciary both of which appeared to be not easily amenable to the wishes of
Government. apparently the only reason why the idea of spreading the equity ownership
of newspaper companies especially among the workers and the journalists employed
therein was not pursued was the feeling that such a measure would give more power in
the hands of trade unions who were opposed to the ruling party. On the other hand, arm-
twisting of capitalist owners, especially of those who had many other industrial interests
and were not very much concerned with the freedom of the Press, was thought to be not
so difficult. The antipathy to the Press however continued and got further intensified,
especially as most of the important papers expressed their dislike of the acts of the ruling
establishment, and many of them advised the Prime Minster to resign after the Allahabad
High Court Judgement in 1975. The antipathy culminated in the pre-censorship imposed
in the country for the first time during the internal Emergency. That the pre censorship
was used for partisan ends is sufficiently exemplified by the data published as a result of
the various enquiries made in 1977-78.* The misuse of powers like pre-censorship was a
adequately envisaged by the fact that these powers were even used to black out some
unpleasant news about the criminal convictions of an actress, and of some businessmen.

The experience of the Emergency also provided enough evidence to show how weak-
kneed a very large part of the Indian Press was when it felt really threatened. One would
not have believed that, during the independence movement, a much larger proportion of
newspapers had faced difficulties and shown courage. The poor morale of many editors
and others concerned was aptly characterised by the Janata Government's Minster for
Information and Broadcasting who told the Press that, when they were only asked to
bend, they crawled! Nevertheless, there were brave exceptions; and it is important to note
who they were. Two of the so-called monopoly papers resisted encroachment on their
freedom and faced considerable risks. These were the Statesman and the Indian Express.
Of course even a more valiant attitude was shown by independent, small journals like
Sadhana (Marathi), Bhoomiputra (Gujrati), Seminar (a monthly journal) and Opinion (a
weekly sheet); but these were run by individuals or groups who had a commitment to
certain values and where the overall financial stake, the number of employees etc., was

19
not very large. A very large proportion of the regular Press offered little resistance and
gradually accepted a kind of self-censorship. That the ruling group was thinking of
controls over the Press as a permanent measure was indicated by the putting on the
statute book of the Prevention of Publication of Objectionable Matters Act in 1976. It
was also known that the spokesmen of Government were threatening newspapers about
"consequences", after the censorship was lifted and general elections announced. These
threats indicated what might have been in store for the Press in the Congress party had
won the elections in March 1977.

The Press began to act with great vigour almost as a rebound after the Emergency was
lifted in 1977, and especially after the change brought in as a result of the elections in
March 1977. The Janata Government and the short-lived Lok Dal Government, felt the
thrust of this vigorous assertion of independence by the Press. This was also the time
when the Press specially developed new traditions of investigative journalism, which has
now become a major feature of an increasing number of important newspapers.

Since January 1980, with the change of Government, the attitude of the Government of
India toward the Press has reverted back to one of antipathy. Many of the new State
Governments which came to power in the middle of 1980 have shown active hostility.
Instances of threats to the free functioning of the Press are not uncommon. There was the
instance in Bangalore when, as a result of the publication of a press report which was
disliked by the Chief Minister, there was a kind of gherao of important papers so as to
prevent their publication on one day and the police practically pleaded helplessness to do
anything about the matter. There was another instance of a former Chief Minister who
compared the Press to snakes and scorpions. The Tamil Nadu Government, belonging to
a different political party, has put special curbs on contacts between Government officials
and the Press, and has stiffened the Cr. P. C. in a manner which would make "scurrilous"
writing a nonbailable offence and also one where imprisonment on conviction is made
obligatory as a punishment. The Prime Minister herself has indicated more than once her
dislike of the manner in which what is called the National Press operates.

Hostile Attitude of Those in Power

20
The basic attitude of those who are in power has been one of wanting the Press to
conform. This is specially clear from the official attitude to the manner in which the
broadcasting media under direct Government control are to operate. The demand that
broadcasting media be separated from the direct tutelage of Government, and the work be
entrusted to an autonomous corporation, has been put forward for a long time. But this
has been resisted by all those who have been in political power at the Centre. The
Government of India had appointed in the 60's a committee (the Chanda Committee) to
go into this question and it recommended an autonomous set up for the All India Radio.
But the Government continued to ignore this recommendation. In fact, during the
Emergency, spokesmen of the Government continued to ignore this recommendation. In
fact, during the Emergency, spokesmen of the Government made it quite clear that they
thought it quite right that the broadcasting media should propagate only the official
viewpoint. The Prime Minister herself had clearly state in 1975 that All India Radio is "a
Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ… It is there to project
Government policies and Government views. It does not mean we do not give the views
of other people, but primarily its function is there to give the views of the Government of
India". The Prime Minister justified this by stating that "in no country in the world, in no
developing country, do they even allow anybody else to appear or any other viewpoint to
be projected'.

Though the Janata Government appointed a committee (B. G. Verghese Committee) to

examine this question, and the Committee recommended the setting up of an autonomous
body for taking charge of broadcasting, the Janata Government, and also the short-lived
Lok Dal Government, took no steps to pursue this recommendation and to make All India
Radio autonomous and largely free of Government control. This is an adequate indication
of the battles that may always have to be fought, whichever party is in power, to ensure
that media of mass communication are permitted to operate freely.

A more recent indication of the Government's indifference to the economic functioning

of the Press is provided by the Government's imposing an import duty on newsprint at a
time when various costs of the newspaper industry, including the newsprint prices in the
major supplying countries, have been rapidly escalating. To impose a duty on newsprint

21
which would further enhance the costs of producing newspapers, in a country where the
incomes of the common people are very low and where the circulation of newspapers is
still very small, is hardly calculated to ensure wider circulation of newspapers. The
proceeds of the wider circulation of newspapers. The proceeds of the import duty form
such a minor part of the Central Government's revenue that if the duty was not imposed it
would have meant no real difficulty for the Government. In spite of widespread demand
in the Press, the Government continues the import duty for a second year, only making it
specific instead of advalorem.

State Powerful in India

A further point of importance in this context is that, because of the necessity to ensure
planned development of our economy, considerable powers regarding various aspects of

22
the economy have been conferred on Government. With the attitude of the Government
of intolerance of criticism as indicated earlier, the possibility of the Government misusing
these powers against the newspapers whom it considers hostile is very real. Not only that
Government misusing these powers against the newspapers whom it considers hostile is
very real. Not only that Government has considerable powers which can be used at its
discretion under statutes like the IDRA and MRTP Act, but here are also other powers
such as under import control, the grant of credit through banks the bulk of whom are in
the public sector, and even services provided by public utilities like Posts and Telegraphs
(including telephones), and power supply. Normal credit facilities may be denied, power
supply may be cut off or made irregular (ostensibly on technical grounds), or postal and
Telegraphic facilities may be discriminatingly used, to harass newspapers whose policies
are disliked by those in positions of political power. Government advertisements and
advertisements by the large and expanding public sector business organisations may be
denied or they may be used in such a discriminating manner as to favour or disfavour
particular newspapers. The overall powers of the State may be used to create difficulties
for independent newspapers and news people. Even police protection may mysteriously
disappear when well organised mobs gherao newspaper offices and threaten it with
violence. Enough data are available to show that these are not merely theoretical
possibilities but realities which face the Indian Press. It is therefore clear that the main
threat to press freedom in India arises from the executive power of the State, both at the
Centre and in the States. What is likely is not so much a direct and overt act of
nationalisation as what may be culled salami tactics of putting curbs in an increasing and
steady manner through various obstructions and threats.

Legislators' Attitudes

It is also necessary not to ignore the fact that the traditions of democratic polity and
essential freedoms have not had a very long innings in India. Intolerance of inconvenient
speech or writing therefore comes easily to many people in the country. Enough data are
available even about happenings in recent years to illustrate this, Chhabirani episode in
Orissa being one of the most notorious ones. Investigative journalism, when it touches
some vested interest or the other-whether it is in politics, castes, property rights, trade

23
unions, or any other-is in special danger as a result of persistent threats of violence. It
would not be wrong to say that the greater the distance of the journal or the journalists
from metropolis the greater the risk, though it is not as if such danger is quite absent even
in metropolitan areas.

The intolerance of critical references is further exemplified in the attitude shown by many
legislators to the question of legislative privileges. Even though it is now more than 30
years since the Constitution was passed and the idea then was that the privileges of
legislatures would be codified within a few years, no legislature in India has yet taken
any steps in that direction and there appears to be almost a consensus among legislators
to avoid such codification. The result is that the possibility that a legislature may treat a
particular reference as an infringement of legislative privilege is a kind of Damocles'
sword on the heads of newspapers. It does not infrequently happen that legislators utter
obscenities, trade in abuses and generally behave in an undignified manner. If the
presiding officer expunges such words, or decides that nothing will go on record, the idea
is that publication of such part of the proceedings, even if it has taken place, is not to be
reported; and if it is, is may be treated as a contempt of the legislature. This is strange
logic indeed. What actually happens, is actually said, is treated as if it is wiped out by the
decision of the presiding officer and is not to be reported. Unlike in some foreign
legislatures such a sin the U.K., it is not an odd word here or there which is expunged but,
frequently, whole passages. A citizen who is present in the visitors' gallery is obviously a
witness to what happens; but those who are not present are not expected to be informed
through the Press of what actually happened. One does not understand by what logic such
an approach is taken. On the other hand, it is only proper that the citizen should have the
maximum access to information about what his representatives do, the manner in which
they behave, or misbehave.

Importance of Constitutional Amendment

All these difficulties in the way of ensuring that the Press can have the maximum
freedom to carry out its function of collecting facts about different facets of national life,

24
analysing them and commenting upon them so as to keep the general body of citizens in
our young democracy well informed show that the Press requires some special protection.
Many authorities have held that the Right to Freedom of Speech conferred by Article
19(1) of the Constitution is adequate to protect the freedom of the Press. Judicial
decisions have however made it clear that the Fundamental Rights are conferred only on
citizens and not on associations of citizens. In the present times, no newspaper or other
periodical can normally be brought out by individuals; it can only be brought out by
corporate bodies. Moreover, it has also been held by Courts that, in view of the
limitations put under Article 19 (2) etc., pre-censorship can be imposed on newspapers
even when the country is not faced by an Emergency due to external aggression or
internal rebellion or similar circumstances. That governmental authorities can be tempted
to use such powers purely for partisan purposes was adequately proved in 1975-76 and,
more recently, in Assam. There is also some uncertainty about whether some provisions
in the Indian Penal Code cannot be used as a coercive instrument against the Press. It
appears therefore necessary that a specific Constitutional amendment so as to confer the
right of Freedom on the Press in particular and on media of communication in general
needs to be taken up in right earnest. If the general body of citizens in a vast country like
ours is to be kept adequately informed both about the actual events and about alternative
approaches to meeting the country's problems, it is essential that the freedom of the
communication media is protected by a specific Constitutional provision to that effect.

Such a specific provision will enable newspapers and journalists to obtain judicial
protection from direct as well as indirect threats. It would not then be impossible for a
newspaper which may receive unfair treatment from those in charge of functions like
import control, power supply, bank credit or communication facilities to obtain judicial
redress if it can be shown that the discrimination is due to its being a newspaper which is
critical of those in power.

Codification of Legislative Privileges

A complementary measure will be to insist upon the codification of legislative privileges,

with the proviso that where a breach of privilege is alleged, the legislature should only be

25
permitted to file a complaint, the decision regarding whether contempt is proved and, if
so, the punishment to be awarded being left to a Court of Law. The idea that the
legislature should itself be both the accusor and the judge might have had a historical
reason in England; but there is not reason for such a fundamentally unjust approach to be
accepted in our context.

Press Needs To Improve

It may be asked: Would this be enough to ensure that the Press is left genuinely free to
carry out the functions that it must perform? Would it not be necessary to think of some
other, more positive, steps to ensure that the press does not remain a hand-maid of only
the powerful in the country?

The inadequacies of the Indian Press need not be connived at. There is no doubt that
private bussiness- and those who control it- are treated by most newspapers with
kidgloves. This partly because of the ownership of many newspapers and therefore the
philosophy of those who are appointed to senior journalistic positions. The trade union
side of industrial disputes, the approach of the political parties on the left side of the
political spectrum and the difficulties of the unprivileged and the dispossessed have
received far less attention than other smaller but influential sections and vested interests
in the vast bulk of our newspapers. It should, however, be said that the situation is
changing for the better. Competition, and also the increasing influence of professional
journalists, are making it difficult for newspapers to ignore these various aspects. It is
well known that the blindings at Bhagalpur, the treatment of workers as bonded servants
by many landed interests, the exploitation of child labour in slate factories, or of female
labour in bidi factories ore even of adult workers in asbestos factories have been brought
to light not by small newspapers but by large ones which are many times dubbed by
critics as belonging to the Monopoly or the Jute Press category. This tendency shows that
to the extent that at least some degree of competition can be ensured in every circulation
area chances are that there would be a fair degree of investigation of different types of
events.

26
A part of the answer to the difficulties lies in making it possible for independent
newspapers and especially periodicals to operate without too much handicap. But, even
then, such newspapers may not be as successful as the large ones operated as capitalist
undertakings. Their workers, including journalists, may have to work at a sacrifice. But
unless there are elements in the country which are ready to work with self sacrifice and
zeal for causes in which they believe, new and unorthodox ideas cannot develop and new
political groups cannot emerge. There have been examples of such efforts such as the
daily Shramik Vichar run by some trade union groups in Pune. There was even an
attempt at running a paper devoted to the requirements of the district of Pune which
however did not continue for long. Real entrepreneurship in this field would consist of
such efforts and, except for direct and discretionary subvention, various other steps can
be taken to help the whole category of such newspapers and periodicals. This would
make it possible for the larger newspapers to be kept on their toes.

Even though investigative journalism is fast developing in India, the quality of the Indian
Press in many respects leaves much to be desired. Even though, as a result of various
awards, the emoluments of journalists have considerably improved in the last few years,
adequate talent is not still attracted to this field. There is also a great deal of lethargy
which leads to large scale reproduction of speeches as well as gossip from the corridors
of power instead of well organised news. The tendency even of some of our top
newspapers to rely on articles from the foreign Press when dealing with world affairs
shows a lack of initiative in developing Indian talent for analysing world problems from
the Indian point of view.

With some exceptions, there has also not been enough effort to develop interest in news,
other information and comments on aspects of life other than politics, crime and sports.
Investigative news collection can be of great use in matters like the operation of Plan
programmes and projects. In some newspapers, useful reports of investigations in sectors
like power and irrigation have recently appeared. But this is still experimental and
confined only to a few papers. Such inadequacies can be overcome only with better
training, more competition and greater professionalisation. There are no short-cut
remedies for this.

27
The most serious inadequacy relating to the Indian Press is to be found in newspapers
published in Indian languages. Most of them are poorer in quality as compared to
newspapers in English. This is so even in respect of Indian language papers belonging to
same groups. This obviously happens because the managements of such groups continue
to think that the prestige of the group depends more on the English language newspapers
than on the Indian language ones. It is quite obvious that the number of those proficient
in English will not expand as rapidly as that of the literate in various Indian languages.
The demand for Indian language newspapers is already expanding faster and this trend
will be further accelerated in future. As the number of legislators who understand English
declines, it is essential in public interest and for the proper functioning of our democracy
that the quality of the more important Indian language newspapers improves rapidly.
Special steps such as the development of teleprinter services in Indian languages and
support to the adaptation of the best techniques for printing Indian language newspapers
should be taken by the Government so as to help.

GOAL

The Main Goal - Growth with Freedom

28
We have had a wrong set of priorities regarding the Press. Even the first Press
Commission appeared to have been more worried about what are called chain newspapers
rather than about the very inadequate circulation of all newspapers - chain and non-chain
- in the country. Even the so-called chain papers still hardly boast of a circulation which
would have any relevance to the numbers of people in our metropolitan and urban areas,
leave alone in the countryside. It needs to be emphasised that the topmost priority in India
should be to help all newspapers to develop both in terms of circulation and quality. It
will take all types-chain and non-chain, multi edition and single edition, group and non-
group, large kind of Press that the largest democracy in the world requires and deserves.
What should never be overlooked when thinking of the Press in the Indian context is that
it is only a free Press which can help develop a body of citizens who are well informed
both regarding current events and also about the problems facing the country; and the
alternatives available for tackling them. It is only such a Press that can enable a young
democracy like India to survive, and also help its development in a manner where social
justice is ensured and the interests of the common people served.

Personal liberty is the most fundamental of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under our
Constitution, Articles 19 to 22 deal with the different aspects of this basic right. Taken
together these four Articles form a charter of personal liberties which provide the
backbone of the chapter on Fundamental Rights. Of these, Article 19 is the most
important and it may rightly be called the key article embodying the basic freedoms
under the Constitution guaranteed to all citizens.

These are the right:

• to freedom of speech and expression;

• to assemble peaceably and without arms;

29
 • to form associations or unions;
• to move freely throughout the territory of India;
• to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;
• to practice any profession; or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of these freedoms in any democratic

society. Indeed, the very test of a democratic society is the extent to which these
freedoms are enjoyed by the citizens in general. These freedoms as a whole constitute the
liberty of the individual, and liberty is one of the most essential ingredients of human
happiness and progress. The most important among the inalienable rights of man,
according to the famous American Declaration of Independence, 1779, are "Life, Liberty
and the Pursuit of happiness". The Preamble of almost every Constitution declares the
same in one form or another as its objective. The Preamble of our Constitution proclaims
that one of its objectives is to secure liberty - liberty of thought, expression, belief and
worship.

The Constitutional provisions dealing with the right to freedom are the product of a
compromise of two extremes. Having achieved political freedom at great cost over many
years, the urge to exercise unfettered right to freedom was very much there. At the same
time, there was also the realisation that the State that has been brought into existence was
an infant State and if the newly won freedom was to be preserved by a stable political
order, it depended on the continued existence of that infant State which had yet to pass
through many tests and trials. Therefore, the State should be preserved even if that
entailed the abridgement to some extent of the rights guaranteed. The drafting Committee
therefore chose the golden mean of providing an enumeration of those rights that were
considered essential for the individual and at the same time putting such checks on them
as will ensure the security of the State. They thought that the working of these rights
depended on the genius of the Indian people, on how they developed their ideas of liberty
which at the drafting of the Constitution were in a rather uncertain state.

30
There had been much criticism, both within the Constituent assembly and outside, of the
omission of a specific reference to Freedom of the Press and the failure to guarantee it
along with the Freedom of Speech. The omission was considered a serious lapse on the
part of the Drafting Committee by the protagonists of a 'Free Press' as a separate right. No
doubt the freedom of the Press was one of the most precious rights for the, recognition of
which bitter political and constitutional battles had been fought in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries in Europe and America. The First Amendment of the American
Constitution, and most of the European Constitutions, embody the Freedom of the Press
as a separate right, nevertheless the Drafting Committee did not think it necessary to
incorporate a separate right of this nature among the Fundamental Rights.

Speaking on behalf of the Drafting Committee, its Chairman Dr. B.R. Ambedkar said that
the Press was merely another way of denoting an individual or a citizen. He said: "The
Press has no special rights which are not to be given or which are not to be exercised by
the citizen in his individual capacity. The editor of a press or the manager of a press are
ail citizens and therefore when they choose to write in newspapers they are merely
exercising their right of expression and in my judgment therefore, no special mention is
necessary of the Freedom of the Press at all. The word expression that is used in Article
19(1) is comprehensive enough to cover the Press.

Two fundamental rights are involved in the right to free speech and expression, namely,
(a) the right to receive news and views, (b) and the right to communicate news,
information and views. These rights depend largely on the freedom of all those involved
in the media to exercise their role as collectors and communicators of news and views,
without interference. Accordingly, the right to receive and to communicate is dependent
in the final analysis, on the provision of adequate safeguards for those engaged in the
gathering and the dissemination of information.

The role of the media in the society primarily depends upon the character of the society
and its impact on the freedom it enjoys, its access to the people and its credibility and
acceptability. Democracy requires an informed public opinion for its effective operation,
since the public opinion becomes the ultimate controller of social goals, laws and affairs

31
of the society. The spread of education and the development of newspaper, radio, and
television have made it possible for more people to be well informed about issues and
events in their society. In fact, the media can serve a vital link between the people and
those exercising power at various levels and ensure a responsive governance.

Democratic constitutions therefore have to guarantee freedom of the press to ensure free
flow of information. The citizens need information to understand the day to day affairs of
the society both on its civil and political side.

Over the years the press became so powerful that it soon acquired the status of "Fourth
Estate" as it was aptly described by the British politician Edmund Burke. It also became
so indispensable for the democratic functioning that Thomas Jefferson who was also the
third US President (1801-09) said, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have
a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, t should not
hesitate for-a moment to prefer the latter." For the same reason our first Prime Minister,
Jawaharlal Nehru declared: "I would rather have a completely free Press with all the
dangers involved in the wrong use of that freedom, than a suppressed or regulated Press."

Nehru might have had in mind what the great English philosopher John Stuart Mill who
wrote; "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and if one person were of the
contrary opinion, mankind would no more be justified in silencing that one person, than
he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind".

The transformation in the status and the power of the people from the subjects to the
rulers with authority, made a good deal of difference. The Press as a mass communicator,
as a self-assumed representative of the people, as their regular and constant spokesman
and as an unignorable intervener on their behalf became almost a natural ally of the
society and its inseparable projection.

This relationship between the Press and the people has yet another dimension. The voice
of the unrepresented sections of the society, their problems, grievances, hopes and
aspirations have to be heard and their participation in the governance ensured.

32
There is therefore, a need of a permanent organized mechanism which will ensure that
the governance of the country is according to the desires and needs at least of the
majority, if not of all. To the extent that the press represents the interests and the concerns
of the excluded as well, it fulfils the need of such a device. The Press can thus save the
representative democracy from being warped and its processes being distorted.

There are over 46,600(1999) newspapers on the register of the Registrar of Newspapers
(RNI). Since the RNI has no data with regard to the newspapers which have closed down,
even if one takes the number of surviving newspapers at 50% of that figure, we have in
this country over 23,000 newspapers which include dailies, weeklies and all other
periodicals. The total number of daisies increased from 4890 in 1998 to 5157 in 1999, an
increase of 5.23 percent. The total circulation of daily newspapers increased marginally
from 5,83,67,196 copies in 1988 to 5,88,04,203 in 1999, i.e. by less than one percent.

Out of all dailies and periodicals, about 15% are published in English while the rest are
published in various regional languages. The total readership of English newspapers is
about 11.89 million while that of the language newspapers is about 58.35 million. The
circulation data were furnished to RNI by 6,032 newspapers and periodicals. Of these
299 were “big”; 1,209 "medium" and 4524 "small". The big ones circulated 4,65,88,537
copies, the medium ones 4,86,41,347 copies and small ones 3,48,57,609 copies i.e. 35.81,
37.39 and 26-.80 percent of the total, respectively. The medium and small newspapers are
mostly language newspapers, and are published from district headquarters. Both English
and language newspapers are growing in number every year, in urban as well as rural
areas. The electronic media does not seem to have affected either the number, the
circulation or the readership of the print media.

The print media as a mass communicator can achieve what a nation builder can, by
educating, disciplining, motivating, exhorting and rewarding people. It can foster and
promote good, and expose and condemn evil. It can hold before the people, an ideal, and
castigate the deviant. It can promote tolerance, brotherhood and unity, and root out
intolerance, divisiveness, enmity and hatred. It can prevent conflicts and violence, and
build up peaceful relations, and respect for the rule of law. it can curb confrontation, and

33
help solve problems amicably. It can also build bridges of understanding between peoples
of different countries and particularly the neighboring countries and promote peaceful
relations and help avoid conflicts hot or cold.

The press can also help the nation to progress, and to usher in prosperity and happiness
for all. To this end, it can focus the attention of the people and of authorities that be, on
areas and the people which are in need of development and betterment It can discuss and
suggest needed measures, and also the best ways and means of implementing them, it can
highlight measures, schemes and projects planned by authorities at different levels and
depict their gains and failures. It can point out their non-implementation, as well as
delays, wastage and the malpractices in their implementation and operation. The press
can also invite the attention of the policy makers, to the need of schemes of social
welfare, for the weaker and vulnerable sections of the society, and in particular for the
scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes, women and children.

The press can also bring to the notice of the people achievements of individuals and
organizations including non-government organizations, in various fields. Through debate
and discussion, the Press can also help the country, to find the correct path of economic
development to attain the objectives of our Constitution, consistent with economic, social
and environ menial justice to all. The free flow of information and ideas is necessary to
make the right choice.

The history of the press shows that it was born to educate people about the happenings
which affected or were likely to affect them, and to agitate on their behalf, to ventilate
their grievances and to protect their interests. The press also assumed a certain code of
private and public conduct, which those in authority were bound to follow. Any deviation
from the assumed norms came in for a severe rebuke from the press. It helped to keep the
persons in power in check, and to the straight path. By discussing the standards of private
and public morals, It also held before the people at large a set of ethical guidelines, and
influenced, indirectly, their pattern of private and public behaviour. The press became the
mirror of the society for ail purposes, and not only for depicting individuals and events
making news.

34
The power of the press, as a mass preceptor and as a standard setter, was by and large
accepted and respected, till the black sheep in the press started abusing it, for their own
end. All power corrupts. The press could not be an exception to it.

Blackmailing, sensationalism, obscenity and vulgarism, entered the arena in some cases.
Realising the business potential of the press, some individuals and groups introduced
commercialism m it, and .with it, the commercial values, norms and practices. No holds
were barred before the altar of the Money Goddess; it was no longer a mere exercise of
the right of the freedom of speech and expression for this section. Primary consideration
was of business success. On account of this direction given by some, the people started
questioning the moral authority of the press to discipline others. This downward trend
continues till this day in most cases and for most of the time, at an ever increasing pace.
Hence, the credibility of the press and other media is increasingly being doubted by the
readers, listeners and viewers.

What is unfortunately forgotten is that, the freedom of the press is not only an aspect of
the individual's right to the freedom of speech and expression, but is essentially, of the
society's right to be informed. The freedom of the press is exercised for and on behalf of
the society, for without the reader, the press has no existence, it is therefore, the needs
and interests of the readers' susceptibilities and sensitivities, which have to be met by the
press. The moment the press asserts its right to trade or do business or practice the
profession of journalism, it attracts the restrictions enumerated in clause (61 of Article 19
of our Constitution. The protection given by clause (1) (a) of that Article can not save it
from those restrictions. The considerations for interfering with the right to free speech
and expression which are stated in Article 19 (2) are different from those for interfering
with the right to trade and do business or to practice a profession What is more, those
who practice commercial norms and ethics cannot claim moral authority to discipline
others. The press has therefore first to decide whether it exists mainly to exercise the right
of free speech and expression, or of trade and business

Time was, when the press in this country crusaded for social, religious and political
reforms, and for political independence as stated before. Today's causes mainly belong to

35
that strata of society which has hardly any representation in the press, and those who are
in the press, are rarely interested in these causes. To qualify to be an informer on behalf
of the society and to be its watch-dog, the press must represent the society as a whole;
and monitor the interests of all the sections. The social audit of the press cannot ignore
this vital aspect of its structure and functioning.

Even after the entry of radio and television, The Press has not lost its hold over the people
and continues to play its powerful role as an informer and educator, as a purveyor of
news and a moulder of views. Today, it has become a more powerful institution than the
other three organs of the State, for it can comment on and criticise the functioning of the
executive, legislature and the judiciary, it can make and mar individuals and institutions,
it can divide and destroy nations as well as build them, its reign and power are
overwhelmingly vast.

Corruption, nepotism and many other malpractices in the functioning of all those vested
with the public power, as well as the non-implementation and faulty implementation of
various schemes and projects, can be legitimately exposed through the columns of the
press, investigative journalism has not to be only an occasional phenomenon, nor has It to
be concentrated only on big scams and scandals, nor is it to be undertaken by big
newspapers alone. Even the small newspapers have to act as the watchdog of the society.
Big newspapers can and should give their assistance to the small ones in this behalf, and
secure their services for the purpose. The big newspapers can also extend their protective
umbrella to the small ones, by ensuring security for them on such occasions, by
highlighting their precarious condition and pressures exerted on them, it has also to be
noted in this connection that it is the small newspapers which have many a time brought
to light some important scams and scandals which were later on picked up and pursued
by the big newspapers. There is a constant need of such give and take between the small
and the big newspapers in all matters including the reportage on local and national
events.

36
The press can equally effectively function as a catalyst of change by proposing
developmental measures, schemes and projects of welfare of the people, by identifying
the neglected areas and the needy sections of the society.

The role of mass media including the press, in social change is indispensable. The major
mass media such as press, radio, TV, film and magazines do have to play their respective
roles, whether they are in the public sector or private sector. Following are the general
guidelines that the Indian mass media need to follow in bringing about the right social
change:

1. Media should provide accurate information on atl matters of public importance

2. Media should not only inform, educate and entertain people but also
motivate,even inspire them in participating in development oriented efforts.
3. It should create public opinion and provide a forum for debate and discussion to
frame the right public policy.
4. It should bring the changes that are takincj place around the people, to their
knowledge, telling them about their significance in their life.
5. The media can prepare the people to take up challenges facing the nation and in
time of crisis, they can become the guardian of public morals and sentiments.
When the country faces a crisis situation or internal or external emergency, the
media should not only be objective but helpful to the government in discharging
its duties.
6. It can educate the masses on new methods, new practices and new applications of
technology in all fields.
7. It can mobilise public in support of such national causes as family planning, adult
education, primary health care, eradication of blind faith and superstition, etc.
8. During natural disasters like earthquake, floods cyclones, etc. and man-made
disasters and accidents, media should be there first and report as fast as possible
to enable authorities and voluntary organisations and the people to undertake
swift rescue, relief and rehabilitation measures. It can also help, boost the morale
of the people to meet the challenge.

37
The press has the potential to do all this and many other things. That is why it is now
accepted as a provider of 'development input' and a catalyst for socio-economic
transformation. But the press should have the will to do it.

The press has also a very important role and influence for ensuring good governance of
the country. There are at least two essentials of an effective democratic regime. A well-
informed citizenry, and the accountability of all those who exercise public power and
expend public resources, whether they are political representatives or bureaucrats. The
press represents the people and articulates their grievances and problems, and acts as an
intermediary between the people and the authorities. As an intermediary, it has to give the
feedback from the people to the authorities and vice versa. To discharge this function, the
press must have an access to all the relevant information which concerns the people. The
access to information ensures transparency in the working of the government and of ail
public institutions enabling the press to expose errors of omissions and commissions on
their part. The fear of exposure and investigation itself goes a long way in ensuring good
governance.

It must further be realised that democracy implies participatory governance. What

ensures effective democracy is the means available to the people for participation in the
day to day affairs and administration of the society. The media is today the only means
available for this purpose. To enable people to participate in the day to day governance,
the press has therefore to apprise them all matters which are necessary for them to know
to take proper decisions and to question, the decisions taken by the authorities.

Good governance does not mean a mere clean and orderly governance. It also means a
governance which ensures to all, the needed goods and services, brings about social and
economic development of those areas and sections of the populace which are in need of
such development, removes the grievances and problems of the people, and provides an
efficient administration which achieves the maximum at the least possible cost in the
shortest possible period. To ensure governance which is corruption-free,-efficient,
delivering and caring, the administration has to be constantly under surveillance of an
institution which acts as the watchdog of the society and as a regular communicator with

38
all sections of the society. The media and particularly the press is best suited to perform
this task. Thus the press can play a vital role in ensuring a peoples' administration, if it
wills.

Our country has competed fifty three years of its political independence. Journalists have
played a valiant role during our struggle for independence, and were it not for courageous
journalism at ails levels, it is doubtful whether the message of our leaders would have
reached so far and so swiftly to the masses, in fact, most of our leaders themselves took
to journalism to reach the masses. But political freedom without economic freedom and
social justice is mockery. It is a mere shadow without substance. We have therefore now
to work for economic freedom. In fact, the battle for political freedom was essentially to
secure economic emancipation.

The beneficial effect of the press for promoting peace, unity and progress need hardly be
emphasized. The people particularly the semi-educated and uneducated, believe the
printed word as gospel truth. This belief in the printed word has both healthy as well as
adverse effects depending upon the credibility rating of the newspapers in the concerned
or targeted readership. While the exposure of scams and scandals and corruption and
criminalization helps cleanse the society, the publicity to constructive and nation building
work by the government, voluntary organizations and individuals boosts the morale of
the people, and creates models of action for others inspiring them to undertake similar
activities. At the same time, when man-made and natural disasters and untold hardships
and sufferings brought by them to the affected people, when instances of atrocities,
exploitation, cattiest and communalist warfare and massacres of innocent men, women
and children are brought to the notice of the people, they rouse the collective conscience
of the society and prompt them to render whatever assistance they can. The press when it
reports both good and bad activities of individuals and institutions and their achievements
in various fields from sports to science and from music to mathematics acts as model
setter for others and helps the society to progress and excel in different spheres of life.
When however, it swerves from its duties to act as the educator of the society, it also
exerts adverse impact on it.

39
The adverse impact of news papers is more on the children and adolescents who have
lower analytical abilities. The changes in values of the people of this country in the last
few decades, particularly with the onslaught of the cable television and more specifically
on the urban people, has been tremendous. Many foreign newspapers available in this
country in printed form or online, have also their impact on a section of the readers. This
section of the society has now developed a strong urge to adopt the western values.
Media can make or mar the lives of individuals. Its power can demolish the mightiest, in
view of the immense power of the media, most of the industrial houses own one or the
other media outlet. They use the clout of the media for furthering their business and
commercial interests. Media owned by political parties is used for propaganda and for
furthering their political interests. The use or the misuse of the media is more devastating
during the elections.

During the election time the highly polarised media does not report news but creates
news. In their eagerness to be the first in giving the news, newspapers often distribute
unverified news. The publications of pre-poll surveys without the relevant information on
who conducted the survey, the size of the sample selected, the margin of error etc. and
the publication of exit-poll surveys even before the last poll is over, has a considerable
impact on the voters, particularly those who are neutral and independent, and they are
always the majority.

There are some states and areas in our country, which are communally sensitive and
volatile. On a number of occasions, irresponsible reporting by the media itself has created
communal violence. The inflammatory news-reporting also aggravates tension and adds
fuel to fire which create law and order problems.

In India the press in particular and the media in general have been subject to increasing
pressures in recent years. Social and political discontents, economic shortages, corruption
and widening disparities have brought individuals and groups to the limits of tolerance.
Consensus has yielded to confrontation, and the inability to deal with emerging problems
in time has given rise to violence. With passions ruling high; the actors, whether

40
governments or aggrieved communities have resorted to propaganda, disinformation or
news management or even outright intimidation to assert their points of view.

Many cases adjudicated by the Press Council of India pertained to unjustified and
arbitrary denial of advertisements, accreditation and other facilities to the press,
harassment of the journalists by the police, the authorities and the goons and mafia. The
authorities and others resorted to these measures to browbeat the journalists and to
silence their critical voice by way of reprisal measures. There is more such harassment at
the local level and the journalists operating, particularly in the non-metropolitan towns
face constant danger from these elements. When the police themselves are the culprits in
this behalf or are in league with the culprits it becomes difficult for the journalists to
carry on their profession. The Press Council, in many an adjudication, had to direct the
concerned authorities to provide necessary security to either the press establishment or
the individual journalists.

The bureaucrats look at every outsider and more so at the press with traditional suspicion
and as prospective adversaries, forgetting that they are now operating in democracy and it
is the right of the people to be informed adequately and accurately. The result is, the press
is forced to rely on either one sided information or on secondary sources of information
and many times they become an easy prey to the planted information.

The Press Council of India

41
"The Press Council was established in 1978 to safeguard the freedom of the press against
threats of its violation originating from any source whatsoever...Whenever, there is
infringement or impingement of the freedom of the press and independence of the
newspaper, irrespective of the source of the threat, the jurisdiction of the Press Council is
attracted, if there is a violation of right to the liberty of the press, be that by the State,
State functionary, public authority, companies, individual or any person, real or fictional,
it will give jurisdiction to the Press Council to pronounce on the impropriety of the action
complained of... The independence of the editor is included in the independence of the
newspaper"

If anyone has a complaint against a newspaper he should first take it up with the editor or
other representative of the publication concerned. If the complaint is not resolved, it may
be referred to the Press Council of India. The complaint must be specific and in writing.
lf a newspaper or journalist is aggrieved by any action of any authority that may impinge
on the freedom of the press, he can also file a complaint with the Council. On receipt of a
complaint made to it or otherwise, if the Council has reason to believe that the respondent
has violated journalistic norms, then the Council, after giving an opportunity of being
heard, and keeping in view of the gravity of the misconduct committed, warms,
admonishes or censures the newspaper or disapproves the conduct of the editor or
journalist as the case may be and directs the respondent newspaper to publish the
Council's decision in its issue. Similarly, when the Council upholds the complaint of the
aggrieved newspaper or journalist, the Council directs the concerned government or
authority to take appropriate steps to redress the grievance of the complainant.

Hundreds of complaints are made to the Council every year and the Annual Reports of
the Council are replete with the decisions of the Council on those complaints. These
complaints involve top government authorities such as Chief Ministers, Cabinet
Ministers, both of the Centre and States, Senior Civil and police officers, heads of public
sector enterprises, newspapers, editors, correspondents or any other authority whose
misconduct comes within the jurisdiction of the Council.

42
The Council over the years has built up a code of ethics covering aspects of journalism
known as Norms of Journalistic Conduct. It is a comprehensive treatment of the subject.
Much of it has been built up case by case by the Council on the basis of its adjudication
of cases over the past few decades.

India is a democracy. According to a Freedom House report (2000) (Freedom House is a

well known research organisation) countries of the world are classified into three
categories; Free, Partly Free and Not free. The Report covers 192 nations of the world. Of
these, 85 are free, 60 partly free and 47 not free. India is included in the first category.
Press in this country is as free as any other free country. Its independence is however
threatened as in any other country by various forces and interests. It would therefore be
correct to say that press in our country is free but not always and in all cases independent.
This is due to the very nature of our democracy.

The great Greek philosopher Aristotle said that democracy is the bad government of the
many. He called the good government of the many by the term polity. Winston Churchill
once said that "of all forms of government democracy is the worst, but be added, it is
better than every other form. In a speech at Allahabad in 1948 Jawaharlal Nehru said:
"Democracy demands discipline, tolerance and mutual regard. Freedom demands respect
for the freedom of others, in a democracy changes are made by mutual discussion and
persuasion and not by violent means". In our Constituent Assembly Dr. Ambedkar said
that democracy can flourish only in a country where the spirit of constitutional morality
prevails. Quoting the famous Greek historian Grote, Ambedkar said that the diffusion of
constitutional morality not merely among the majority but throughout the whole
community is an indispensable condition of a free and democratic government because
any powerful and obstinate minority may render the working of free institutions
impracticable without being strong enough to conquer power for themselves. Only if the
generality of people are saturated by the spirit of constitutional morality democracy cart
flourish. Can we presume such a diffusion in this country'? Constitutional morality is not
a natural sentiment, it has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to
learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially
undemocratic.

43
Ambedkar said this fifty-four years ago. More than half a century has passed since then.
Yet we cannot claim that democracy in India has realised the ideal which Abraham
Lincoln, a great democrat, has stipulated, namely a government of the people, by the
people and for the people. Let us hope that India will steadily move towards that ideal
before long and the Press will play a beneficial role in the realisation of that ideal.

Chapter 3: 44-51

44
 Data Analysis 45-47

Detailed data and sub scores -2006 48

Detailed data and sub scores -2007 49

Detailed data and sub scores -2008 50

Data description and interpretation 51

Google and data recorded over freedom of press

45
Google compiled this data into a nice map visualization, so you can see the request
activity of different countries. Unfortunately, the visualization makes it difficult to get the
raw data. Luckily, our friends at Data Blog have done the work for us, and parsed the
country-level data into a downloadable spreadsheet. As I looked over the data I noticed
an interesting trend, many of the countries we consider to be the most “free” were
actually making the most requests—both in terms of user data and data removal. As such,
I thought it would be interesting to see the relationship between this data, and the
common measures of freedom used in political science.

To do so, I added two common metrics of freedom to the data: the Polity IV index for
level of democracy, and the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index. Where
available, I added this data to the 41 countries in the Google request data. Unfortunately,
in this initial push to transparency, of those 41 counties Google provides good data for
only 16 countries; specifically, these countries have the number of user data requests
made. That said, from this we can still observe an interesting pattern with respect to these
measures of freedom.

The first plot illustrates the relationship between a country’s Polity score, and the number
of requests made by each country for user data. Briefly, the Polity score is an estimate of
the level of democracy in a country, and ranges from -10 (total authoritarian rule) to 10
(full democracy). In the figure below. each country is also colored by the number of data
removal request received by Google, e.g., search result removal, YouTube content, etc.
Finally, logs were taken for both the number of user requests and data removal for scale.
Blue countries made 10 or fewer requests, which then moves up to 291 made Brazil.

46
The first item of note is that nearly all of the countries in the data score a 10 on the Polity
index, or are full democracies. This is likely an artifact of selection, as the more “free” a
country is the more data Google has on its citizens, and thus a greater opportunity make
requests. That said, there does appear to be clear segmentations between the group of
countries above 6 on the y-axis and those below it. Brazil and the United States are the
most active requesters and removers, while France appears to be requesting a lot of user
information, but not data removal. It is difficult to make substantive claims from these
results, but the clustering and coloring of different groups is quite interesting.

47
In this second plot the x-axis has been changed to the Press Freedom Index. Here, the
index is from 0 to 100; a country scoring a 0 has total press freedom, and a country
scoring a 100 has complete lack of freedom. As you can see, this more granular index
scaling provides some additional insights.

Freedom of the Press Historical Data

User-friendly tables with data from 2006-2008 are available below. we rated countries by
category, e.g. "Free," "Partly Free," or "Not Free," but did not provide numerical scores.
From 1994 onwards, data regarding both category designations and the more nuanced
numerical scores are available.

48