The Indian government’s plans to spend US$32 million on a media university
modelled on the state-run Communication University of China has come under
fire, with critics alarmed that the world’s biggest democracy should seek
inspiration on media matters from a one-party state.
The new media school – to be
run by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry – is hoped to be running in
three years. It will function as an umbrella organisation for all Indian
universities offering media and film studies.
A ministry official said the
main goal was to address the growing communication needs of the country by
training skilled, world-class professionals. “The Beijing model fits in well
with our scheme of things,” he added.
Sources said the idea for
the media school came from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself, who is
known for his astute communication skills.
Modi, 64, used a recent
speech to push for more professionalism among India’s journalists.
“There is some race,
competition taking place in the media. The print media is competing with the
electronic media and the social media. I feel it’s best in the interests of the
nation if the media carries out criticism and thereby ensures refining of the
country’s overall system. If media confines itself to levelling allegations, we
would lose our power as a nation,” Modi said.
But the template of the Communication
University of China – a school established in 1954, with most of its alumna
working for state-run media – has raised the hackles of those already in the
media.
“Much of the Chinese media
functions as the government’s mouthpiece with little scope for conflicting
opinions,” said prominent journalist Manoj Joshi. “It is intriguing that India,
with its robust journalistic traditions and a vibrant and free press feels the
need to follow an illiberal model.”
Others worried about whether
a government-run school would foster a diverse range of viewpoints among its
students.
“Conceptually, nobody can
object to the government running a media university. It’s good to enhance the
teaching process, syllabus and functioning standards of media schools,” said Asian
Age, editorial cartoonist Sudhir Tailang.
“However, if the agenda is
to mass produce media persons who can toe the government line, or peddle
right-wing ideology, such a formula augurs ill for a thriving democracy.”
India’s state-run TV channel
Doordarshan and the All India Radio station, which are known for pushing the
government line, have had their ratings eroded over the years by
privately-owned TV and radio channels.
“Why doesn’t the government
launch a school to train its ministers first?” asked one prominent editor, who
asked to remain anonymous. “Their policies and governance impact far more lives
and in a far more direct manner.”
The furore over the media
university comes amid wider fears about the state of press freedom in India.
Recently, a 19-year-old
student was arrested and jailed in northern India for posting a quote on
Facebook that he attributed to a local minister, who denied making the comment.
Episodes of bans on art,
films, books or even eating beef, under the pretext of religion or indecency,
have been widespread.
Indian authorities also came
under fire for banning the domestic broadcast of the BBC documentary India’s Daughter by British filmmaker Leslee Udwin.
The documentary included an interview with one of the attackers who took part
in the notorious 2012 gang rape of student Jyoti Singh, who was thrown from a
bus and died after her ordeal.
India was ranked 136 out of
180 nations worldwide in terms of press freedom in 2015. In the annual World
Press Freedom Index produced by Reporters Without Borders, India’s “abuse
score” – which reflects the intensity of violent harassment faced by
journalists – was 59.58. That compares to Sri Lanka’s score of 40.6, Pakistan’s
64.91 and China’s 89.64.
No comments:
Post a Comment