So, a fourth committee’s recommendations just before the general elections for the revival of a beleaguered white elephant called Prasar Bharati – first it was the Sengupta Committee in 1996, and then Narayanmurthy Committee and Bakshi Committee (both in 2000); now, it is the Sam Pitroda-headed Committee of seven experts comprising of academics, broadcasting veterans, film work bigwigs and senior government officials.
In an administrative set up, where committees outnumber their efficacy, one wonders what another would do to help the largest public broadcaster in the country to come up to speed. That Prasar Bharati was set up by an Act of Parliament ostensibly to cut away Doordarshan television network and All India Radio from “government control” and the autonomy thus granted is more in name than functioning, is a matter of concern. It is evident that such umbilical chords stay, considering that the Sam Pitroda Committee was set up to “examine its relationship with the government”.
Furthermore, one wonders at this juncture as to what happened to the recommendations of the past three committees and their recommendations, because barely any heed has been paid to them. Till now
Apprehensions that the latest Committee’s recommendations may also fall on deaf ears is quite loud. In fact, the lawmakers themselves have taken note of the lack of intent on the part of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) towards the overhaul of the public broadcaster. In December 2012, a parliamentary standing committee was quite strong in its castigation of the Ministry for its “non-serious” approach towards the reforms. In its note, the parliamentary panel pointed out that despite its directive that the government should work with the Sam Pitroda Committee to review the institutional framework of Prasar Bharati, the Ministry had only playing pass-the-buck with the public broadcaster.
If there is a Catch 22 situation best exemplified, one fears, it’s actually what Prasar Bharati is today and what the Sam Pitroda Committee recommends.
The Committee must be given full marks in its well-rounded advise to the government. And the central factor to the recommendations has been to grant ‘real’, ‘visible’ and ‘workable’ autonomy to the public broadcaster.
The slew of recommendations for Prasar Bharati comprise, among other things, todevelop its own funding mechanism with financial accountability; power to frame its own rules and regulations for its employees; give it complete ownership of its assets and human resource to make Prasar Bharati administratively and financially autonomous; build the Prasar Bharati board into a professional managed body; a sub-committee of the Prasar Bharati board which will also act as a regulatory body to ensure public accountability of all content broadcast on its television and radio network; and, set up a global broadcaster on the lines of the British Broadcasting Corporation to tap the international broadcasting market.
Great! One is bound to say. This looks like a fool-proof plan to rehabilitate this nearly 17-year-old giant. However, administrative dogmatism, political narrow outlook and inertia at the same time, lack of timelines and intent could make the recommendations only an expert’s analysis on paper.
Most often the theory of autonomy remains only that; in practice, rarely does the government let go. With Prasar Bharati, the situation has been quite dichotomous – autonomy in character but very much controlled by successive governments. In the Interim Budget 2014, the broadcaster has been allocated grants-in-aid of Rs 2,331.58 crore, a marginal increase from the Rs 2,098.56 crore in 2013-14. The government has made a provision of Rs 200 crore from internal and extrabudgetary resources for Prasar Bharati, while the total plan outlay for broadcasting is Rs 641.58 crore. The funds include allocations of salary and related expenditure of Prasar Bharati employees. This is interesting, because on December 20th last year, the I&B Ministry has announced it will invest Rs 3,500 crore on upgrading Prasar Bharati’s broadcast infrastructure and network development, especially in border areas.
The revamp of Prasar Bharati lies more in the overhaul of its links with thegovernment rather than itself. That, as the Sam Pitroda Committee points out, one of the primary functions of the concerned ministry – read the government – is to oversee and monitor Prasar Bharati, goes against all objectives based on which the Prasar Bharati Act was passed in Parliament in 1997. It is imperative for the public broadcaster to loosen such controls for the sake of autonomy and, more importantly, accountability.
The relationship between the I&B Ministry and the broadcaster “should not be one of superior and subordinate as is currently the case, but more akin to that between the Reserve Bank of India and the Ministry of Finance or that between the Comptroller and Auditor General of India and the Ministry of Finance,” says Sevanti Ninan, in her piece, ‘Biting the bullet on Prasar Bharati’, published on the Republic Day in The Hoot, a premium online media watcher in the subcontinent.
Another key concern that ails Prasar Bharati is content. As per the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990, Section 12 under “Functions and Powers of Corporation” highlights one of its primary task relates to “safeguarding the citizen’s right to be informed freely, truthfully and objectively on all matters of public interest, national or international, and presenting a fair and balanced flow of information including contrasting views without advocating any opinion or ideology of its own”.
This is the focal differential between Prasar Bharati and commercial broadcasters who must do all they can to grab eyeballs and compete against one another to stay ahead in the game of TRPs and thus attract advertisements for sustenance. Whereas Prasar Bharati’s first and foremost duty is to serve the citizen of the country, irrespective of which remote corner or what economic class of the society he or she belongs to, what it cost to reach him or her, its private counterparts’ pursuit is solely profits.
In spite of its KRAs, Prasar Bharati has not truly been successful in reaching out to the citizens of the country with relevant information. Instead, most often than not, the broadcaster till now has served the Union government of India rather than the citizens themselves. Understandably, Ninan wonders why Doordarshan has no specialised channel on farm, dairy and animal husbandry despite the fact that the majority of India’s population is engaged in agriculture.
Indeed, why? Obviously, between serving the interests of the government in power and trying to retain its autonomous identity, the lines got obfuscated and serving the citizen was all but forgotten.
Therefore, the future and relevance of Prasar Bharati lies in four sea-changes – it has to be truly free of government control; it has to have an effective funding apparatus for itself, it has to reach out to a larger audience-base so as to be able to reach out to the audience within; and, a complete booster dose to the content it creates.
Late in December last year, media reports informed the Centre had initiated steps to set up the Prasar Bharati Recruitment Board to address the critical manpower shortage in the public broadcaster. In New Year, the Press Trust of India filed a report on the public broadcaster having locked horns with I&B Ministry over appointment rules, particularly on who should have the final say in the appointment and removal of the chairperson and members.
Such rifts have never been new and skeptics are again proved right.
Time to put an end to such occurrences, otherwise, just like the efforts to improve DD News came to naught, the vicious circle of inaction will continue.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
