media sandhya

[Guest guest]

Pioneer 16th July 2002

India’s dissident intellectual elite

 

By Sandhya Jain

 

A report in a daily newspaper alleging that the Centre has decided to “go after”

Time magazine correspondents in India by denying them official access seems an

appropriate occasion to introspect on the nature of contemporary journalism and

the merits of arguments raised in the controversy over FDI in the print media.

 

As a member of the Central Press Accreditation Committee (CPAC) who was present

at last Friday’s meeting, I must say I am amazed at the story for a number of

reasons (The Times of India, 13 July 2002). It appears that the newspaper

learnt about the deliberations from the “buzz” generated in media circles as a

result of the unexpected turn of events that day. Yet, for reasons best known

to itself, it has taken gross liberties with the facts and presented them in a

manner prejudicial to serving government officers who cannot defend themselves.

Further, the story is sought to be validated through comments from the

spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs who was not present there,

rather than clarified through CPAC members. Most astonishing, however, is the

fact that the newspaper seems to regard honest nationalism as politically

incorrect and unacceptable, and has been unable to conceal its distaste for it.

 

 

As the matter is extremely sensitive and involves journalistic ethics, among

other issues, besides impacting upon India’s standing abroad, I feel duty-bound

to put some of the discussions on record, so that readers may draw their own

conclusions. I am particularly keen to dispel the canard that Mr. Perry is

being hounded as revenge for his tasteless article on the Prime Minister. In

fact, several CPAC members pointedly endorsed the concept of freedom of the

press and asserted Mr. Perry’s right to criticize the Prime Minister or any

other minister in any language that his magazine sees fit to publish. At the

same time, members felt the issue of nationhood cannot be treated lightly.

 

This was the second meeting of the CPAC, and matters were proceeding smoothly

till a certain Indian publication attracted adverse comment and was put on

hold. This made members alert, and a few cases later it was the turn of Mr.

Perry and his colleague, Ms. Tessa Laughton. His name sent a twitter around the

room. At this stage the issue rose whether there are any guidelines governing

the conduct of foreign journalists on the issue of the country’s territorial

sovereignty, or if they have freedom to challenge the same.

 

Readers will be aware that it is not uncommon to come across offensive

references to ‘India-held Kashmir’ or even ‘India-claimed Kashmir’ in foreign

newspapers, magazines and news channels. However, the Time magazine has of late

been depicting Kashmir as a separate country, in maps as well as articles. The

magazine simply takes no cognizance of the fact that Jammu & Kashmir is an

integral part of India. This is surely a new low.

 

I pointed out that the preparation of a map showing Jammu & Kashmir as

independent territory would have been done in America, where the magazine is

printed. This implies a mischievous editorial policy, which cannot be easily

ignored. I asked how long an Indian correspondent could last in the United

States if his newspaper published a map showing Texas as a separate country?

 

As members digested this, their anger grew as territorial sovereignty is

intimately linked with nationalism. There was resentment at the “colonial

arrogance” of foreign journals and journalists and felt need to pull them down

a peg or two. Certainly, there was complete unanimity that the territorial

boundaries of India cannot be a matter for foreign journalists to adjudicate

upon. It was also felt that the magazine itself was responsible for the

misdemeanour, and that this was far more serious than the wayward conduct of an

individual correspondent.

 

When some members suggested denial of accreditation, the Principal Information

Officer, Mrs. N.J. Krishna, became quite perturbed over the emerging hardline

and sought to defuse matters. Perhaps she feared that the government would be

accused of vendetta against Mr. Perry for his unflattering article against Mr.

Vajpayee; the news story has certainly lived up to her expectations. Anyway,

Mrs. Krishna explained that according to existing procedures, he had been

provided accreditation facilities at the recommendation of the Foreign and Home

Ministries till the end of the year, and the matter had only come to the CPAC

for ratification.

 

This inflamed members who felt that while foreign journalists should certainly

be helped with temporary accreditation cards to facilitate their work and free

movement, they should not be given preferential treatment denied to Indian

mediamen. What is more, the recommendations of the Foreign and Home Ministries

have hitherto been of a routine nature, particularly in the case of such

prestigious publications as Time. Hence, these need to be updated in the light

of the CPAC’s deliberations.

 

It was felt that by refusing to validate Mr. Perry’s accreditation, the

committee would send a strong message to all foreign mediamen that Indian

journalists frown upon deliberate insults to their national sovereignty. It was

reiterated that foreign mediamen are free to criticize the government and its

policies, but they cannot humiliate the Indian nation. A representative of the

Foreign Ministry agreed to refer the CPAC’s concerns to her Ministry and return

with a view at the next meeting. The CPAC deferred the ratification of the

accreditation of both the Time correspondents, and this is where the matter now

rests.

 

The more I think about it, the more I feel that our concerted action was

justified, and entirely in consonance with the spirit of the Indian

constitution and the law of the land. I am quite unable to comprehend the

servility of mainline publications when faced with white supremacist

intellectual terrorism. Till a decade ago, the publication of a map depicting

Jammu & Kashmir as independent territory would have sparked off a furore in

leading newspapers, so much so that political parties would have been compelled

to demonstrate against it. Today, the cosmopolitanism of some newspapers has

reached such exalted heights that nationalism is a dirty word while territorial

sovereignty is questionable and negotiable. This is particularly true of

publications intimately associated with the political ambitions of a lady of

foreign origin.

 

In this context, I am struck by the paradox that sections of the media most

distinguished by the depths of their hostility to the civilizational ethos of

India should be so virulently opposed to the introduction of foreign direct

investment (FDI) in the print media. The most common argument touted – that

this would dilute national sovereignty – stands rubbished in the light of the

abject kowtowing to the Time magazine. Those who argue that foreign investors

will necessarily be white owners of media houses who will arm-twist editorial

policy to suit their needs, should throw some light on the near-compulsive

hostility of leading publications towards the country’s Hindu majority and its

legitimate concerns.

 

Of course, the most asinine argument against FDI is that it will pollute the

country’s cultural values by gross depictions of sex and women. Newspapers that

propagate the crass culture of mindless party-goers in place of developmental

issues, and offer “how-to” advisories on physical intimacy, must refrain from

calling the kettle black.

 

Discover your Indian Roots at - http://www.esamskriti.comLong Live Sanathan /

Kshatriya Dharam. Become an Intellectual KshatriyaGenerate Positive Vibrations

lifelong worldwide.Aap ka din mangalmaya rahe or Shubh dinam astu or Have a

Nice DayUnity preceedes Strength Synchronize your efforts, avoid

duplication.THINK, ACT, INFLUENCEShare the Wealth, to Un write

back.Knowledge, Wealth, Happiness are meant to be sharedBe Open Minded, pick up

what yu like from the worldBe Thick skinned, internalize criticism, do what yu

think is rightLet not the power of your enemy deter yu, fortitude is what the

Geeta teachesStop cribbing, ACTION is what the Indian scriptures talk aboutTake

the battle into the enemy camp, SET THE AGENDA, be proactiveIn an argument, no

emotions, be detached, get yr facts right, then attack with the precision of a

missile