People's Democracy

IN a swift and stealthy move, the Vajpayee government has thrown open the vital print media to foreign ownership and control. The decision to amend the cabinet resolution of 1955 prohibiting foreign ownership of the print media has been taken despite widespread opposition to the move from political parties, professional media organisations and public opinion.

No single policy decision concerning foreign investment has such damaging implications for India's sovereignty and democratic system as the BJP-led government's opening up of the print media.

Only three months ago, the parliamentary standing committee on information technology had rejected the proposal to allow foreign print media or foreign direct investment in the print media. The standing committee which is chaired by Somnath Chatterjee adopted its report after hearing the views of all sections. Significantly, it was the BJP members of parliament in the committee who lobbied hard for allowing entry of foreign capital in the print media. The most vocal advocate was Narendra Mohan, a BJP Rajya Sabha MP who also happens to be the owner of the Hindi daily, Dainik Jagran. Another BJP MP, Balbir K Punj who is also known for his RSS connections argued for opening up the print media. But despite their best efforts, they found themselves in a minority.

The minister for information and broadcasting, Sushma Swaraj has been trying hard to get the 1955 cabinet resolution reversed. She even forwarded a letter from five editors including Narendra Mohan to the committee chairman asking that the committee consider their views.

The Indian print media as it has developed, is integral to the democratic system existing since independence. Before independence, a number of Indian newspapers emerged which championed the freedom struggle and espoused nationalist views. The print media has expanded in all Indian languages and today there is a readership of 180 million (18 crores) for Indian newspapers and magazines. Every important political and social issue of the day is debated and diverse views reflected in the columns of the newspapers. The attempt to suppress press freedom during the emergency in 1975-77 was seen as a direct attack on this democratic tradition and it boomeranged on the Congress rulers.

What the BJP has now done is much worse. In the world today, there are global media giants who dominate the media and information flows. One of the biggest media companies is the AOL-Time Warner which at the time of its merger was estimated to be worth $ 165 million. There is the media empire of Rupert Murdoch who has taken over some of the major newspapers in Britain.

Allowing foreign media companies into the Indian print media would mean entry of such powerful media conglomerates and their taking over control. The safeguards touted by the new policy to protect Indian interests are meaningless. Limiting foreign equity upto 26 per cent cannot stop control being exercised by the foreign agencies. Big companies are controlled with much less stake in shares. The other condition that three-fourths of the board of directors and key editorial positions should be resident Indians is also no guarantee to prevent policies of foreign companies being implemented. In India, all the multinationals have Indians in key positions who loyally carry out the dictates of their bosses in their headquarters.

The argument put out by a minority of newspaper owners and editors favouring foreign entry is that some Indian monopoly newspaper houses do not want new players to enter is also an irrelevant issue. The problem of media monopoly in India has to be tackled separately. But this problem cannot be solved by allowing much bigger foreign monopolies to come in and take over the Indian media.

The CPI(M) has always advocated checks on the growth of monopolies in the media and has been demanding that cross media ownership should also be disallowed as in other countries like Australia and Canada.

A common reason cited in support of foreign capital in the print media is that foreign television channels are already beamed into India. Why should the print media be sacrosanct? The decision to allow foreign companies to operate in the electronic media was wrong in the first place. There is an urgent need to regulate the operation of foreign channels in India. Further, whether it be print or electronic media, there should be no foreign capital/ownership in Indian media enterprises.

Finally, the role of the newspapers and print media is more directly connected with the evolution of the democratic political system and it should remain outside the purview of foreign agencies.

The fastest growing segment of the print media in India are the regional language newspapers. Of these, the biggest chunk is the Hindi publications. Foreign investment will not confine itself to the English dailies and publications but make a beeline for the fast growing Hindi and regional language categories. It is here that the values purveyed by the foreign media monopolies will directly enter the political process through the Indian language publications.

In the political system existing in our country, it is possible for newspapers to play a democratic and secular role, or promote communal and reactionary values. In the build up to the Babri Masjid demolition and afterwards, some of the major Hindi newspapers played an inflammatory role which was noted in a report prepared by the Press Council. With the injection of foreign capital, various influences which will be inimical to India's sovereignty and democratic system can be apprehended. Most of the western media monopolies have no compunctions in purveying sex and violence to push up their profits. This will come along with the mixture of imperialist propaganda and attempts to subvert whatever independent views the Indian print media has upheld.

Already a significant chunk of Indian newspapers purvey rightwing views. This is in tune with the rightward shift which has taken place in Indian politics in the last one decade. Already the coverage of international events and views in Indian newspapers is dominated by what is supplied by the western news agencies like AP, Reuters and AFP. Foreign media entry would mean further elimination of news and views which are not western biased. The logic of liberalisation and opening up of the Indian economy will now extend to every vital sector and institution.

The BJP is displaying growing intolerance to an independent media. The way Tehelka and its business associates are being browbeaten are a portent of harsher steps against a non-compliant media. The BJP and the Vajpayee government condemned the fair coverage of the Gujarat violence as biased and blamed the "English media" for vilifying the VHP and Narendra Modi. The invitation to foreign companies to enter the print media is meant to cow down an independent press and undermine the whole concept of press freedom. As N Ram pertinently pointed out earlier, the constitution provides freedom of expression and other fundamental liberties for Indian citizens. It is not expandable to foreign monopolies to misuse these freedoms.

True to its reactionary nature, the RSS has now come out endorsing the government's decision to open the print media. More and more Hindutva looks towards imperialist patronage for advancing its goals in India.

The erosion of the Indian print media's independence and vitality is thus a matter of grave concern for all Indian citizens.

It is important not to give up the battle against this new incursion of Indian democracy and sovereignty. The Indian Newspaper Society which is the representative body of all Indian newspaper owners has come out against the Vajpayee government's decision. Most of the major political parties including some of the allies of the BJP in the NDA have opposed the decision. It is necessary to build up a broad-based campaign to mobilise public opinion against this dangerous step. Along with that, all opposition parties should work in concert to take up the matter in parliament to see that this step is disapproved of. Parliament should come out against this pernicious decision.