|
NEW
DELHI: Information and Broadcasting secretary Asha Swarup
today expressed satisfaction that almost all stakeholders
were agreeable to the need of a Broadcast Regulator and a
Content Code, even though many felt that the Code should come
through self-regulation.
She said that the government was still committed to bringing
in both the Broadcast Regulation Services Bill as well as
the Content Code, but was not ‘possessive’ about
these documents and was prepared to hold discussions and agree
on a Code that was acceptable to all.
She
welcomed the announcement by the News Broadcasters Association
that it was preparing a Content Code of its own, noting that
this had happened only after the Government had talked of
it.
Clearly, she said all stakeholders felt the need for a Code
since the existing Programme Code and the Advertising Code
under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995
had failed to serve the situation as it existed today.
Addressing a colloquium on Private Broadcasting and Public
Responsibility held as part of the ongoing International Festival
and Forum of Documentary Films and Television for Children
in the capital, Swarup said the government would not have
even considered a Code of any kind if the media had developed
on expected lines. Unfortunately, the difference between news
and other content on news channels had become blurred.
She also said that the onus on the Bill or the Code fell on
the government since it was her ministry which is blamed every
time there is a violation of decency. Members of the public
on the one hand and Parliamentary Committees on the other
do not talk to the offending channel, but immediately question
the ministry on why it is not taking adequate action.
She
stressed that the Regulator as envisaged in the present draft
Bill would be appointed by a Committee which would not be
part of the ministry, and therefore the Regulator would function
in an autonomous fashion much as the chairman of the Press
Council of India. All sectors have regulators, and she could
not understand the opposition to a similar post in broadcasting.
Veteran broadcaster and NASSCOM chairman Kiran Karnik said
there was general agreement that regulation of Content was
dangerous, but said it was unfortunate that the broadcasting
industry never involved civil society organizations while
finalising their views in this regard.
Karnik
said there would always be content that was not agreeable
to many, and therefore the answer lay in making better programming
instead of preventing what was already coming. Perhaps the
introduction of subscriber-based broadcasting through conditional
access system and DTH would automatically lead to better content.
He said it was the ‘tabloidisation’ of the channels
which was making many people shudder.
Tam India CEO L V Krishnan admitted that the TV meters covered
only around 30 million of the country’s population and
was confined to urban areas. But this was only meant to be
sample surveys. He agreed that the set-top boxes may help
tailor content, even as he emphasized how news channels had
brought many smaller issues to the fore.
Pankaj Pachauri of NDTV said the main crisis arose because
channels did not have enough news and, therefore, drift to
other subjects. Terming this as lazy marketing and lazy journalism,
he said there was no dispute about a Regulator and it was
only the Code that many found objectionable. The channels
should draw up their own code.
CNN-IBN editor-in-chief Rajdeep Sardesai said there was need
for public-private partnership to resolve issues like the
role of broadcasters, otherwise the private channels were
bound to be either too defensive or too aggressive. He also
said there was need to define news channels and reality channels
separately, and ensure each stuck to the content for which
it was licensed.
Aaj Tak news director Q W Naqvi agreed on the need for a differentiation
between news and reality channels, and said market forces
often made news channels show things that others found offensive,
such as things bordering on superstition.
Abhijeet Dasgupta of International Public Television (INPUT)
said credibility had been given a complete backseat in today’s
scenario. He said the entire news channel scenario was decided
by the need to sell and survive which were ruled by sex, sensationalism
and superstition.
PSBT Managing Trustee Rajiv Mehrotra said the issues relating
to Regulation and Content had to be resolved for the healthy
growth of the TV news industry which was barely a decade old.
|
