Freedom of Expression
By Proloy Bagchi
Ram Chandra Guha, a free-thinker and historian who has authored numerous books on Indian history and random societal matters, recently enumerated eight reasons why Indians cannot speak freely. He says India is a 50-50 democracy. It is democratic only in a few respects and not so, in many others. The country is free in respect of conduct of free and fair elections and free movement of people within. However, it is only partly democratic in other ways: “The democratic deficit” that largely occurs is in the area of freedom of expression.
According to him, there are eight ways freedom of expression is being threatened. Analysing the whole gamut of connected issues, Guha cites retention of archaic British-era laws, a faulty judicial system where the lower courts, particularly, are too eager to entertain petitions seeking ban on individual films, books and a variety of works of art, the rise of identity politics, especially of the regional kind, behaviour of the police force which generally sides with the “goondas”(goons), pusillanimity of the ruling class in decision making, particularly when votes are at stake and dependence of the media on Government for advertisements as some of the ways in which freedom of expression has been brought under threat, even curtailed.
Guha’s analysis is unexceptionable. The last aspect is of specific concern, as I have had personal experience, like perhaps many others. Importantly, I also noted only recently, the Supreme Court directed the Rajasthan Government to release government advertisements to Rajasthan Patrika, one of the biggest newspaper group in the country with 37 editions across States and a readership stated to be over 1.25 crore.
According to the daily, the State government had violated its own advertisement policy and was discriminating against the group. It elaborated saying the group had received 34.12% government ads in 2015, but the percentage had dropped to 1.26 this year. Its counsel alleged the Government was being vindictive because some articles were critical of it, and the action was a ‘direct assault on freedom of press’.
This prompts me to my share my experience, about the denial of my right of expressing my views on local and other wider issues. I am a casual writer after retirement from the Government of India. To start with, the lack of civic amenities in Bhopal provoked me to write letters to the editor of the Central Chronicle,then the only English language newspaper in Bhopal with substantial local content but with limited circulation. Twenty years ago, public bodies and other utilities were far more inept than today and there was much to write about. Most of the times, the letters would not have any effect but some would go home and yield results. That itself gave a great deal of satisfaction.
The postal system was reasonably good in those days and my letters on local issues would get published within two or three days. The ones I sent on wider issues to The Statesman in Calcutta would take five or six days to be published if the newspaper’s editor Irani then happened to put his seal of approval. I was gratified to see that some of my letters would occasionally lead the letters column on the Centre Page. That was a huge matter for me, and I would indulge in some slapping of my own back. The electronic media had till then not made the kind of inroads in journalism as now. The Statesman was then in a healthy state and used to be published from New Delhi and Calcutta and its Centre Page occasionally used to carry letters of readers in two whole columns.
Soon the Hindustan Times came to town. The newspaper had a four-page city supplement which used to cover political, social news as also news from the world of fine arts and sports. Its editor then, Zaidi had a different kind of take on journalism. He once happened to tell me that both newspaper and city would gain and become richer if the local thinking people were given a platform. And he did that and, as far as I am concerned, there was never an occasion when my piece did not find the light of day in the Supplement.
Articles from Late Mahesh Buch, Kripal Dhillon, former DG Police who was hugely concerned about the deteriorating quality of life in the city, Prof. Zamiruddin Ahmed who has a flair for writing in English as well as Urdu, RJ Khurana, retired chief of Joint Intelligence Committee of India and so on were published. I too joined them and my first article entitled “The Dying Lake”, was promptly published with photographs and all. It was an outright criticism of the way the Upper Lake, a great asset of the city, was being managed.
My honeymoon with the Hindustan Times continued for over five years till that editor left. Since then the editorial policy seems to have changed and the paper wouldn’t publish unsolicited articles. Even the Times of India, which later started publishing from the town, adopted similar policy. It was not clear whether this posture of the newspapers was adopted of their own accord or the management received directions from the local government. Now, however, it seems the print media is under threat of losing government ads were it ever to publish comments and opinion pieces that happen to be against it.
So we, all of us who happen to have opinions of our own and can ventilate them in our writings were effectively gagged. For some time, I was terribly annoyed and peeved but could do nothing about it. Everyone who used to read my columns would ask why I discontinued writing. I could only shrug my shoulders and say my lips were effectively sealed. Sadly, the healthy Bhopal supplement that HT used to bring out was scrapped and in its place what they came out with was nothing better than a rag to me. The same goes for the supplement Bhopal Live of the ToI – having more of Bollyood news than of Bhopal.
Print media, whether managed by corporate world or run on their own juice, are financially very vulnerable. While private sector ads seem to be running riot these days yet most of the papers hugely depend on government advertisements. Government is, therefore, a great beneficent for the promoters of print media. Scarce is a newspaper that cares little for the government ads. The net result is that a reader has no way to have his opinion published.
Most people would have noticed that even the column of “Letters to the editor” has been scrapped. What has been provided is space for a measly few words through what they call “feedback”. So, even if one boils within with rage one cannot communicate it to the people through opinion pieces or letters to the editor
Guha very rightly says that the dependence of media on government advertisements is especially “acute in the regional and sub-regional press. The State and political parties can and do coerce, suppress and put barriers in the way of independent reporters and reportage.” Quite logically, therefore, the guillotine fell on us and we were all gagged. Our freedom of expression flew out of the window, forcing many of us to move over to social media. — INFA