A Research Report On TELEVISION CENSORSHIP: A STUDY IN ROHINI

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF JOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATION

By-:

KANIKA BHASIN Enrolment No-1671922408

Under the Supervision of MR. NIKHIL GOUDA (Lecturer) Department of Journalism and Mass Communication Lingayas Lalita Devi Institute of Management & Sciences Mandi Road, Mandi, New Delhi-110047

DECLARATION This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree diploma. Signed: .. Date: .. Statement 1 This project is being submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for BJ (MC) from GGSIP University. Signed: .. Date: .. Statement 2 This project is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended. Signed: .. Date:

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Dissertation title TELEVISION CENSORSHIP: A STUDY IN ROHINI is bonafide & original research work done by KANIKA BHASIN, student of LLDIMS, GGSIP University, New Delhi, under my supervision and guidance. This subject on which this dissertation has been written, is a original contribution towards the discipline of Mass communication and Journalism and it has not previously formed the basis for the award of the Degree, Diploma, Associated ship & fellowship or other similar title to any candidate. This Dissertation represents entirely an independent research work of the candidate under my guidance. Date Place (Mr. Nikhil Gouda) Signature of guide

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This project work has been a great experience in assessing the impact of television censorship on general audience. This work would not have been possible without the help, cooperation, constructive suggestion and well wishes of many people. I would like to thank all of them, as I mention a few here.

I owe my profound respect to Mr. NIKHIL GOUDA of L.L.D.I.M.S., New Delhi, my project guide and express my deep sense of gratitude and indebtedness for their inspirations, valuable and scholarly guidance, imperative suggestions and personal attention at each stage of the Work. Their gamut of knowledge, dedication towards research, exemplary devotion and trust towards me has been unique and is the prime key behind the success of this project.

The personality of Mr. Gouda has been instrumental in blending an exciting spirit and atmosphere for research. It has been a great opportunity and experience to work with him, as I will forever cherish the deep interaction I had with him.

Finally, I am most grateful to my parents and friends for their moral support and blessings and for being an immense source of inspiration for me all through my life.

KANIKA BHASIN

INDEX

1.

INTRODUCTION
IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY REVIEW OF LITERATURE HYPOTHESIS RESEARCH DESIGN

2.

TELEVISION CENSORSHIP
WHAT IS CENSORSHIP? ACTS AND LAWS BAN ON CHANNELS VIOLATED PROGRAMMING

3. 4.

DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY ANNEXURE (QUESTIONNAIRE)

IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY

Earlier many researches have been done on this subject, but my research is to update the previous data collected in the researches. Therefore my research is important because it highlights the impact of television on children Television can be a powerful influence in developing value systems and shaping behavior. Unfortunately, much of today's television programming is violent. We see it everyday around us this kind of vulgarity on the television. And it is a fact to reckon that children are worst affected by this. In most of the countries protection of minors from inappropriate content is the key guiding principle for censorship. For example: Hundreds of studies of the effects of TV violence on children and teenagers have found that children may: Become "resistant" to the horror of violence Gradually accept aggression as a way to solve their troubles Imitate the violence they watch on television It is for these reasons that The ministry of Information and Broadcast made the Cable television regulation act. An Act to regulate the operation of cable television networks in the country, the Cable television networks (regulation) act came into force on September 29, 1994.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY As new technologies evolve and become a part of our daily lives, so do television shows and what people are allowed to view on a regular basis. Censorship, a word that seems to be causing quite some controversy over certain people may not be such a bad idea. The major objectives of the project are to answer the following: Is television censorship in India successful? Is it right for the government to ban the channel because it feels the moral need to do so? Should the government play the role of censor? Should the viewers be allowed to choose the content they want to see? Does censorship affect freedom of expression in any way?

REVIEW OF LITERATURE CHILDREN AND TELEVISION - IS CENSORSHIP REALLY NECESSARY?[1]

By Jan Gamm

The obvious answer to this question is, of course, yes it is absolutely imperative. All children will switch on a television and watch it regardless of content. Selectivity is something they learn in their teens but many younger children tend to gravitate to the screen and watch whatever happens to be on at the time, especially if they happen to be snacking on potato chips at the time. The after school hours are the most popular times for watching TV; that hour of rest between getting home from school and eating supper is the time when many children are drawn to the TV like a magnet, and sit there until they are physically swept up to do their homework. I have only one child and in fact started a family quite late in life, so it was a shock to me when I turned on children's television and found that, in my twenties and thirties Watch With Mother had been replaced by Grange Hill and The Snotbags. Shock was replaced with horror when I actually watched

ten minutes of these programs and found the content full of bad language, slang and offensive behaviour. There was no way I was going to allow my three year old to watch such gratuitous garbage, so the television was promptly turned off until I could collect some suitable material for her to watch on tape. There followed a number of years when my child watched pre-selected movies and recorded programs only. She watched children's TV at friend's homes only and by the time she was eight years old she had been sufficiently primed with respectability to be shocked at what passed for entertainment in other people's houses. Not that one would wish to be a prude about such things, and certainly when kids start approaching their teens they need to be aware of what is going on in the world. I do believe, however, that certain programming ethics are geared to boosting viewing figures only, and are in no way concerned with the development of children's cultural welfare. Program content is designed to shock and appal the viewer, because, let us face it, children love a bit of scary stuff or blood and guts to spice up an afternoon spent in the dreary confines of a

classroom. Of course they do - it is what kids do. There is no need to supply them with a surfeit of the stuff, though, and we must remember that we, as adults, are supposedly in charge of what our children see and when. At the very least we must strive to be aware of what is being consumed by our children in the way of entertainment, and remember that children sponge up not only information but impressions, language and styles of dressing, walking and speaking. TELEVISION CENSORSHIP [2]
By Jan Gamm Censorship is a sensitive issue. Certainly, anyone with a smattering of intelligence prefers to make a decision for themselves on what they wish to view. Some would support a total censorship ban, their thinking being that edited programming constitutes a violation of freedom. Practically, however, other matters must be taken into account. Audiences are comprised of a number of social groups, not all of whom wish to have the broader choice, preferring the screen to be free of profanity, sex and violence from the off. Those groups might include the elderly and those too young to make a formative decision. The argument might be that the very young have their parents to decide what they should be watching but in fact this is not always the case: some parents are still working

when their children arrive home from school and switch on the television. Such people are therefore dependent on the Censorship Board for a sensible compromise when it comes to admissible programming. Children are the most vulnerable members of the viewing public. One the television is switched on and a program is being viewed, few children will turn to another channel if the program being aired is unsuitable. Prurient content is almost irresistible to any child and even if it is scary, the child might remain glued to the screen until the program is ended, by which time the damage is done. The group most supportive of a total censorship ban are the twenty and thirty-somethings; young professionals and students who have a hunger for a daily diet of the uncensored and uncut.

The problem, of course, is one of degree. How far should censorship be allowed to monitor and control those whose goal in life is to shock audiences with a panoply of gore; terror; porn; torture and sleaze? Some argue that such programming should be admissible on certain channel settings, which of course could be closely supervised by parents or guardians. The sad fact is, however, that many irresponsible individuals with a parental role neglect this aspect of raising their children and often kids are left to decide for themselves whether a program is suitable or not.

The safest way is censorship: unpalatable as it might be for some, it is there for the protection of certain members of society. Those who want to follow a line unsuitable for others are free to pursue their entertainment in private. Violation of freedom should not come into it.

FILMS UNDER THE KNIFE

A recent censorship order by the Bombay high court ruled that the 'A' and 'U/A' content on television be blanked, particularly the films. So, the viewers would no more see actors mouthing abuses or cigarettes in a film being shown on cable television. The Indian government decided to take some action after a recent WHO study "held Bollywood responsible for glamorizing smoking". The Union Health and Family Welfare Ministry decided to ban smoking scenes and tobacco products in movies and television serials. No new films or TV programmes would portray smoking and old films must carry warnings if they do. The decision was taken on the request of the Information and Broadcasting Minister and the film industry, Union Health and Family Welfare Minister Anbumani Ramadoss announced to the media. He justified this move by saying that "Film actors have a lasting impact on the minds of children and young adults." Also since all adult content has been banned from television that means that even the award wining films

which may have adult themes will have chopped scenes and beeped dialogues. Indian filmmakers have condemned a governments move to ban images of smoking in films and on television from August as "absurd" Movie-makers said the move was an infringement of artistic expression and that films were the wrong target in the drive to curb smoking. Many filmmakers reasoned that this move would curtail the possibility of showing great movies on television. Its a well known fact that some of the greatest films world has ever known are about with adult themes and dark imaginations and they may even have varying degrees of graphic sexual content. The irony is that television will not be able to air them.

PUBLIC OPINION[3]
Once we turn on the TV, we can find many violent scenes. Many parents are concerned that these kinds of shows have a bad effect on children, so they want government to make a form of rating system. However, some people think this limits their civil liberties and are opposed to that, especially free speech supporters. They think if government tries to regulate programs, its censorship. They say the TV industry should be able to express what they want to. If not, they regard that as a limit on freedom of expression. This is a big issue now. Many parents don't want their children to be influenced by televised violence. They think

some of these programs are also trashy and disgusting, and they just want violence on TV to disappear. Although many free speech supporters can understand what many parents are thinking, they are still opposed to limits because they think once government begins to limit free speech, the limitations will increase. This is a big controversial problem. Some people might think that any form of rating or classifying system is censorship. They say these systems take away the right to free speech.. TV producers, for example, say it limits their creativity when they have to follow censorship rules. However, some TV producers only want to make money because it is a business for them. They often do not care if violent shows affect our society because they only want the audience. This argument that censorship limits the freedom of speech is a very controversial one because if the government or another institution does not try to control the kind of TV programs we have, people can show whatever they want, and sometimes programs that are not considered too violent for adults can be very bad for children. People should realize that they have free speech but with limits because we live together in society and we have to consider all the other people around us.

Freedom of expression is one of the most important civil liberties. Free speech, means that you have the right to express yourself and say whatever you want. For that reason, any limit to that right could fall into the category of censorship. However, sometimes, our rights have as a limit the rights of other people. To avoid conflict, there are laws to solve conflicts without violence, but every right has an obligation that means that you have to respect the rights of other people, so you should be the censor of your own behavior in order to avoid conflict with others. This is not a panacea, but it is the easiest way to live in community. I think a strong rating system could be censorship, but I also think that there are a lot of trashy programs that should be taken off the air. The television industry should show more creative programs instead of violent ones.

HYPOTHESIS

For now in todays scenario censorship of Television in India is not that successful, to that extent.

Content of Television which hinders the moral of the society need to be banned.

For society benefit , the Government of India should play the role of censor.

The viewers should not be allowed to choose the content they aspire to see.

Television censorship affects right to expression

RESEARCH DESIGN
A considerable amount of work has been done in this field and several articles are available on the internet about TELEVISION CENSORSHIP. So first we carried out a literature survey of the available data for collection of secondary information. Topic of study : TELEVISION CENSORSHIP: A STUDY IN ROHINI. Area of study DELHI), SECTOR-13, A- BLOCK Age Group : GENERAL AUDIENCE : ROHINI (NORTH

Method of data collection : I choose SURVEY METHOD for collecting my data as it gives the accurate Surveys provide an important source of basic knowledge. Because of the opportunity for obtaining knowledge, surveys have a wide variety of purposes, dealing with a variety of issues. Content can also vary, with focuses ranging from opinions and attitudes to behaviors and skills.

Sampling method
SAMPLING)

: My method of sampling

the data is NON-PROBABILITY SAMPLING (CONVENIENCE

INTRODUCTION
What is Censorship?

Censorship is suppression of speech or other communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body.[4] Censorship is the supervision and control of the information and ideas that are circulated among the people within a society. In modern times, censorship refers to the examination of books, periodicals, plays, films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other communication media for the purpose of altering or suppressing parts thought to be objectionable or offensive. The objectionable material may be considered immoral or obscene, heretical or blasphemous, seditious or treasonable, or injurious to the national security. Thus, the rationale for censorship is that it is necessary for the protection of the society.

TELEVISION CENSORSHIP
Broadcasting started at a time of spectrum scarcity, with broadcasters distributing a limited selection of television channels. Then came the development of satellite and cable technologies offering vastly more channel choice. Now digital transmission technologies offer not just more services but the ability to access content at times and in places we choose, with devices that are convenient to use. As new technologies evolve and become a part of our daily lives, so do television shows and what people are allowed to view on a regular basis. Numerous television channels show films, serials and other programs some of which contain sequences or events or shots that would be considered offensive or unacceptable by many. Every society has customs, taboos, or laws by which speech, play, dress, religious observance, and sexual expression are regulated. In India, Television today is a part of the consciousness of millions of households throughout the country, particularly the young, who spend hours watching a variety of programs. With more than 100 channels on offer for viewing, the Indian viewer today has lot of options than he had say in the 80s.

Theres such huge proliferation of television in the lives of people that Censorship, a word that seems to be causing quite some controversy has become a necessity for television.

ACTS AND LAWS

1) CABLE TELEVISION NETWORKS(REGULATION)

ACT, 1995
The cable networks (regulation) act encapsulates in itself many chapters relating to cable television in India. However, it is Section 20 that the government exercises its Power to prohibit operation of cable television network in public interest.

Section 20 states:
(1)Where the Central Government thinks it necessary or expedient so to do in public interest, it may prohibit the operation of any cable television network in such areas as it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf. (2) Where the Central Government thinks it necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of the(i) Sovereignty or integrity of India; or (ii) Security of India; or

(iii) Friendly relations of India with any foreign State; or (iv) Public order, decency or morality, It may, by order, regulate or prohibit the transmission or re-transmission of any channel or programme. (3) Where the Central Government considers that any programme of any channel is not in conformity with the prescribed programme code referred to in section 5 or the prescribed advertisement code referred to in section 6, it may by order, regulate or prohibit the transmission or re-transmission of such programme. Section 5 and 6 of the act state that: No person shall transmit or re-transmit through a cable service any programme unless such programme is in conformity with the prescribed programme/advertisement code

2) The programme code

The programme code as specified by the information and broadcast ministry reads as follows: (1)No programme should be carried in the cable service which a. Offends against good taste or decency b. Contain criticism of friendly countries c. Contains attack on religions or communities or visuals or words contemptuous of religious groups or which promote communal attitudes d. Contains anything obscene, defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths. e. Is likely to encourage or incite violence or contains anything against maintenance of law and order or which promote anti-national attitudes. f. Contains anything amounting to contempt of court. g. Contains aspersions against the integrity of the President and judiciary h. Contains anything affecting the integrity of the Nation i. Criticizes, maligns or slanders any individuals in person or certain groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country. j. Encourages superstition or blind belief. k. Denigrates women through the depiction in any manner of the figure of a woman, her form or body or any part thereof in such a way as to have the effect of being indecent, or derogatory to women, or is likely to

deprave, corrupt or injure the public morality or morals. l. Denigrates children m. Contain visuals or words reflect a slandering, ironical and snobbish attitude in the portrayal of certain ethnic, linguistic and regional groups. n. Contravenes the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952.

(2) The cable operator should strive to carry porgrammes in his cables service which project women in a positive, leadership role of sobriety, moral and character building qualities. (3) Programmes meant for adults should normally be carried in the cable service after 11 p.m. and before 6.a.m. (4) Care should be taken to ensure that programmes meant for children do not contain any bad language or explicit scenes of violence. (5) Programmes unsuitable for children must be carried in the cable service at times when the largest numbers of children are viewing.

3) The advertisement code

The advertisement code governs that:

(1)Advertising carried in the cable service shall be so designed as to conform to the laws of the country and should not offend morality, decency and religious susceptibilities of the subscribers. (2) No advertisement shall be permitted which (i) Derides any race, caste, colour, creed and nationality (ii) Is against any provision of the Constitution of India (iii) Tends to incite people to crime, cause disorder or violence or breach of law or glorifies violence or obscenity in any way. (iv) Presents criminality as desirable (v) Exploits the national emblem, or any part of the Constitution or the person or personality of a national leader or a State dignitary (vi) In its depiction of women violates the Constitutional guarantees to all citizens. In particular, no advertisement shall be permitted which projects a derogatory image of women. Women must be portrayed in a manner that emphasises passive, submissive qualities and encourages

them to play a subordinate, secondary role in the family and society. The cable operator shall ensure that the portrayal of the female form, in the programmes carried in his cable service is tasteful and aesthetic and is within the well established norms of good taste and decency. (vii) Exploits social evils like dowry, child marriage (3) No advertisement shall be permitted the objects whereof are wholly or mainly of a religious or political nature, advertisement must not be directed towards any religious or political end. (4) The goods or services advertised shall not suffer from any defect or deficiency as mentioned in Consumer Protection Act, 1986. (5) No advertisement shall contain references which are likely to lead the public to infer that the product advertised or any of its ingredients has some special or miraculous or super-natural property or quality, which is difficult of being proved. (6) The picture and the audible matter of the advertisement shall not be excessively `loud. (7) No advertisement which endangers the safety of children or creates in them many interest in unhealthy practises or shows them begging or in an undignified or indecent manner shall not be carried in he cable service.

(8) Indecent, vulgar, suggestive, repulsive or offensive themes or treatment shall be avoided in all advertisements. (9) No advertisement which violates the standards of practise for advertising agencies as approved by the Advertising Agencies Association of India, Bombay and form time to time shall be carried in the cable service. (10) All advertisement should be clearly distinguishable from the programme and should not in any manner interfere with the programme viz. Use of lower part of screen to carry captions, static or moving alongside the programme.

THE BAN ON CHANNELS

Many channels in India have been under the ire of the ministry of Information and Broadcast for showing objectionable content under the cable regulations act. FTV, a cable channel, was banned in February 2002, for showing too much flesh, but the decision was reversed a week later when the channel promised to adhere more closely to Indian sensibilities. Dasmunshi stirred a controversy in January 2007 when he banned AXN channel for airing the programme titled The Worlds Sexiest Advertisements. Later he even mentioned that he was examining Fashion TV for its adult content. Other channels that were banned apart from AXN and FTV were: PTV: One of the first channels to face prohibition orders. The Kargil war was on and the then I&B Minister Pramod Mahajan justified the ban in a writeup published in this newspaper on June 30, '99. TB6: Arun Jaitley, one of Mahajan's successors in the Ministry banned the Russian late night channel that served adult fare. Others: In May 2005, Mr. Jaipal Reddy prohibited transmission/re-transmission of: BlueKiss, BlueKiss Express, BlueKiss Promo, and TBL-XXX, and banned Free X-TV in October the same year.

VIOLATED PROGRAMMING/ADVERTISING CODE

Keeping its eye on everything being telecast and broadcast on television, the ministry of information and broadcast has kept its content regulation tabs on various channels, news or entertainment alike. The Ministry even issued Show Cause Notices to the various satellite Television Channels for telecasting objectionable programmes for the year 200406. They are:

S.No.

Name of the Programme

1. MH1, ETC, Channel [V], B4U, Balle Balle, iTV, MTV for telecasting songs Bin Tere Sanam, Chadati Jawani, Kabhi Aar Kabhi Paar, Leke Pehla Pehla Pyar, Meri Beri Ke Ber. 2. Zee News Channel for telecasting a programme titled Kaal Kapal Mahakal. 3. India TV for telecasting a programme on private activities of MPs and MLAs. 4. India TV for telecasting news item on sexual involvement of priest of the Swaminarayan Temple.

5. FTV for telecasting several programmes, which are violative of the Programme Code. 6. Zoom TV for telecasting a programme titled Dangerous telecast from Monday to Thursday at 11:00 p.m. 7. Trendz TV for telecasting programmes namely Lingerie Show etc. 8. In Digital Channel for telecasting an adult film, i.e. A certified film by CBFC titled Khawahish. 9. Teja TV for telecasting a programme Kamasutra. 10. Zee TV for telecasting program Item Bomb. 11. FTV for telecasting obscene programme on 09.12.05. 12. Maa TV for telecasting programmes titled Kamasutra, Manmadha Samrajyam, Samaram Samayam and Sarasm. 13. Zoom TV for telecasting trailers of films titled Fun, Sheesha, Shabd and Chahat which are certified as A by CBFC.

14. ETC for telecasting trailers of films titled Fun, Sheesha, Shabd and Chahat which are certified as A by CBFC. 15. Zee TV for telecast of a news item regarding alleged phone tapping of Justice (Retd.) S.N.Variava. 16. MTV for telecast of objectionable songs from Hindi films Aashiq Banaya Aapne and Zeher. 17. Zee News for telecast of programme Deshdroh.

In June, Six Indian music channels had been directed to apologies for showing obscene content. They had to display that apology in a scrolling marquee on the channels for three days. This apart the ministry also issued show cause notices to various satellite channels for telecasting the objectionable advertisements like Roop Amrit, Frenchie-X, Hayward 5000 Soda, McDowells No.1 Soda, Smirnoffs Cassettes /CDs, Bacardi Blast Cassettes and CDs, Royal Challenge Premium Sparkling Water, Kingfisher Mineral Water, Paan Parag Paan Masala, Mahak Chaini Chaini, Gopal Zarda for the year 2005-06.

DATA COLLECTION
Q1. Do you watch television?

YES 40 100%

NO -

Sales

PEOPLE WHO WATCH TELEVISION PEOPLE WHO DON'T WATCH TELEVISION

Q2. Are you aware of the meaning of censorship?

YES 40 100%

NO -

Sales

PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW ABOUT CENSORSHIP PEOPLE WHO KNOW ABOUT CENSORSHIP

Q3. Have you seen any of these objectionable content on television? Violent Erotic Verbal abuse Nudity Pornographic Defamatory (in terms of religion, ethics, morality or politics) NO 6 15%

YES 34 85%

Sales

PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEEN SOME OBJECTIONABLE CONTENT ON TELEVISION PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT SEEN ANY OBJECTIONABLE CONTENT ON TELEVISION

Q4. Do you think that there should be content regulation or censorship for Television? YES 24 60% NO 16 40%

Sales

CONTENT REGULATION & CENSORSHIP SHOULD BE ALLOWED CONTENT REGULATION & CENSORSHIP SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED

Q5. Do you feel that the government has any role in censorship? YES 28 70% NO 12 30%

Sales

GOVERNMENT PLAYS ROLE IN CENSORSHIP GOVERNMENT PLAYS NO ROLE IN CENSORSHIP

Q6. Was the government justified when it banned the famous Channel AXN just because it telecast an adult show? YES 15 37.5% NO 25 62.5%

Sales

GOVERNMENT WAS RIGHT FOR BANNING AXN GOVERNMENT WAS NOT RIGHT FOR BANNING AXN

Q7. Do you feel that the programme code as made by the ministry of information and broadcast is affecting the freedom of expression of the media? YES 28 70% NO 12 30%

Sales

PROGRAMME CODE AFFECTS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION OF MEDIA PROGRAMME CODE DOESN'T AFFECTS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION OF MEDIA

Q8. Do you think that the viewers should be given the discretion to choose the content they want to see? Support your answer with a reason. YES 28 80% NO 12 20%

Sales

VIEWERS SHOULD BE GIVEN DISCRETION TO CHOOSE THE CONTENT VIEWERS SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN DISCRETION TO CHOOSE THE CONTENT

Q9. Do you think TV Censorship has been successful? YES 14 35% NO 26 65%

Sales

TV CENSORSHIP IN SUCCESSFUL TV CENSORSHIP IN NOT SUCCESSFUL

Q10. Are you aware of the acts and rules relating to the television censorship? YES 8 20% NO 32 80%

Sales

PEOPLE AWARE OF RULES REGARDING TV CENSORSHIP PEOPLE NOT AWARE OF RULES REGARDING TV CENSORSHIP

Q11. Do you like the idea of self regulation and censorship? YES 28 80% NO 12 20%

Sales

PEOPLE WHO LIKE IDEA OF SELF REGULATION AND CENSORSHIP PEOPLE WHO DONT LIKE IDEA OF SELF REGULATION AND CENSORSHIP

DATA ANALYSIS
Q-1 According to chart 1, the result came out to be what was expected i.e, 40 out of 40 people said that they watch television on regular basis whether its parents or youth.

Q-2 With the reference of chart 2, we came to know that every one is aware of the meaning of censorship, the result came out to be 100% positive. There was no need to explain the meaning of censorship as in todays scenario meaning of television censorship is known to everyone. Q-3 According to chart 3, we get to know that 34 out of 4o people have seen contents like Violent Erotic Verbal abuse Nudity Pornographic Defamatory (in terms of religion, ethics, morality or politics) on television whereas 6 people were saying that they have not seen any objectionable content on television. Q-4 Chart 4 illustrates that ,24 out of 40 people in the public opinion survey support television censorship and they think that some amount of content regulation is necessary on television. 14 out of these 24 were under 30 years of age; therefore youth also feels the need of some sort of censorship.

Q-5 In chart 5, it is stated clearly that 28 out of 40 people thinks that government plays some role in censorship whether directly or indirectly.

Q-6 According to chart 6, However, it is surprising to note that 62.5% of the respondents feel that the government is not right in banning AXN channel because it telecasted an adult show.

Q-7 According to chart 7, 28 out of 40 people feel that the programme code as made by the Ministry of Information and Broadcast was affecting the freedom of expression of the media. Approximately 30% of the respondents who felt this way belonged to the media industry.

Q-8 According to chart 8, The respondents were felt that as viewers they should be asked, in fact given the discretion to choose the content they want to see. As large as 80% of the respondents felt that people in India are mature enough to decide what they wish to see.

Q-9 According to chart 9, Majority of the respondents also felt that the various laws, acts and regulations have not

been successful to curtail obscenity, vulgarity or violence on television. They felt that censorship is not the correct way to curtail obscenity on television because till now all the attempts of regulation have been futile attempts.

Q-10 According to chart 10, Among the 40 respondents only 20% were aware of the various acts and rules relating to Television censorship. As much as 80% of the respondents had no clue about the cable network regulation act and the recently proposed Broadcast bill.

Q-11 According to chart 11, On being asked about the idea of self regulation and censorship, as much as 80% liked the idea. People thought that there are so many complexities and controversies involved when the government plays the role of a censor that the best possible solution at present is self-censorship.

CONCLUSION

Television censorship because is not just aimed at children and teens. It is aimed at an entire country. And it is indeed debatable to impose television censorship on people who have the right to vote, drive or smoke at the age of 18 but they dont have the freedom to watch what they want on their television sets. Also, the concepts of obscenity or vulgarity are relative to our society. And the big question is who draws the line between decency and objectionable. It cannot be the imposing laws of the government. The survey also supports the fact that the moves of curtailing obscenity and violence by the government have not worked and Television censorship has just ended as a tool in the political spectrum. A major reason of television censorship being eyewash is the dubious stand of the government. The government bans showing of smoking on television but does not ban the production of tobacco products. It chops off important scenes in an award winning movie being shown on television just because it may have a few offensive words or dark themes. The underlining fact that is to be understood is that the viewer is the real censor because the remote control ultimately lies in his hands.

The reason that there is some level of obscenity or sexuality on television is because there is a demand for it. Television is a huge industry where demands create supply and not vice-versa. That doesnt mean that television be left in anarchy but at the same time proposing a broadcast bill which gives sweeping powers to the government to control media is not the solution. Television is the medium of art and expression .Art is humanity's search for truth and selfawareness. And a free society is based on the principle that every individual has the right to decide what art or entertainment he wants or doesn't want to receive or create. The best possible solution is self-regulation. The survey too suggests the same that Self-regulation is the need of the hour. For that to happen what needs to be done is the institution of a broad-based public body filled with enlightened persons who have distinguished themselves in the arts, appointed by a transparent procedure, which looks at television programming and advises producers and scriptwriters on what they consider would have harmful effects on the young. The autonomous body creates a content code based on the principle of self-regulation. The solution to the problem will be to ensure that systems are put in place whereby all viewer ship segments are

satisfied and broadcasters are alerted to plan their programming sensibly. Guidelines cannot be the same for each and every channel. Therefore a system has to be put in place whereby viewer ship segments are segregated, masses are sensitized to what children can see and cannot see and broadcasters disciplined about the timings of adult programmes. This way, there would be no ban on channels or shows; neither would the freedom of expression be curtailed.

SUGGESSTIONS
Some ideas for future research for television censorship is that these concerns about violence in the media have been around way before television was even introduced. Nevertheless, there have been numerous studies, research, and conferences done over the years on television, but the issue still remains. Researchers do acknowledge that violence portrayed on television is a potential danger. One issue is clear though, our focus on television violence should not take attention away from other significant causes of violence in our country such as: drugs, inadequate parenting, availability of weapons, unemployment, etc. It is hard to report on how violent television effects society, since television affects different people in different ways. There is a significant problem with violence on television that we as a society are going to have to acknowledge and face.

ANNEXTURE

QUESTIONNAIRE
Topic: TELEVISION CENSORSHIP A STUDY IN ROHINI Objectives: The major objectives of the project are to answer
the following: Is television censorship in India successful? Is it right for the government to ban the channel because it feels the moral need to do so? Should the government play the role of censor? Should the viewers be allowed to choose the content they want to see? Does censorship affect freedom of expression in any way?

Declaration: I, KANIKA BHASIN hereby declare that this

questionnaire will be used for educational purpose only. Name: Age: Gender: Profession: Educational Qualification: Q1. Do you watch television? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q2. Are you aware of the meaning of censorship? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q3. Have you seen any of these objectionable content on television? Violent Erotic Verbal abuse Nudity Pornographic Defamatory (in terms of religion, ethics, morality or politics) NO [ ]

YES [ ]

Q4. Do you think that there should be content regulation or censorship for Television? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q5. Do you feel that the government has any role in censorship? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q6. Was the government justified when it banned the famous Channel AXN just because it telecast an adult show? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q7. Do you feel that the programme code as made by the ministry of information and broadcast is affecting the freedom of expression of the media? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q8. Do you think that the viewers should be given the discretion to choose the content they want to see? Support your answer with a reason. YES [ ] NO [ ] ......................................................................................................... ...... Q9. Do you think TV Censorship has been successful? YES [ ] NO [ ] CANT SAY [ ]

Q10. Are you aware of the acts and rules relating to the television censorship? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Q11. Do you like the idea of self regulation and censorship? YES [ ] NO [ ]

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Children and Television - Is Censorship Really

Necessary? Retrieved November , 2002, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Children-and-Television---IsCensorship-Really-Necessary?&id=962931

[2] Television Censorship Retrieved November , 2002,

from http://ezinearticles.com/?TelevisionCensorship&id=2301107
[3] Public opinion Retrieved November , 2002, from

http://www.topics-mag.com/edition12/media-ratings.htm [4] Retrieved November, 2002, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

Websites www.indiantelevision.in www.historymatters.gmu.edu www.dnaindia.com www.timesofindia.indiatimes.com