DC DEBATE: Waves in the airwaves

DD has been used as a mouthpiece- D Raja

The Constitution of India is the fundamental law of the country and it is a guide for one and all. It is a doctrine that determines the work of not only the citizen but also the government. The central theme of the Constitution is that India is a democratic republic and all citizens are equal. It does not allow discrimination in any form, be it caste, colour, creed or religion. The government and the public broadcasters must uphold the basic principles of the Constitution. The government has to act in the spirit of the Constitution.

All India Radio and Doordarshan are public broadcasters and to enhance their neutrality and functions we have the Prasar Bharati which is there to ensure their professional autonomy and efficiency. These public broadcasters draw their financial support from the government. In fact, there is also a demand that they get their funds from the consolidated fund of India. While they get their financial support from the government, the public broadcasters cannot be biased against any one ideology, group or political party. That is where the Constitution comes into picture and makes it incumbent upon the public broadcasters to uphold the secular, democratic, republic identity of the country.

Information and broadcasting minister Prakash Javadekar’s argument, that private channels decide how they will broadcast a certain news, and that’s why Doordarshan can also decide similarly is absolutely unacceptable and wrong. It is a very weak and incorrect justification by the minister since DD is not a private channel. It is a public channel and a public broadcaster.

This is the first time that DD has been used as a mouthpiece and it is a very disquietening trend. Tomorrow any religious or cultural organisation can also do the same. There is no end to the trend that the Bharatiya Janata Party has started. Ever since the BJP has come to power, and even during its election campaign, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has been influencing its decisions. This means that the RSS is influencing the functioning of the government and it is the RSS which is, in fact, trying to get a grip on the different parts of the state apparatus, which includes broadcasting and telecasting. This is very dangerous and needs to be condemned and opposed vociferously.

What is worrisome is the fact that the RSS ideology is different from the spirit of the Indian Constitution which makes India a secular democratic republic. The RSS speaks of a “Hindutva nation” which reflects a fascist, divisive and communal ideology. So to allow the RSS to hold the reigns of the government and allow it to control various state apparatus, which includes the public broadcasters, is totally unacceptable and condemnable.

India wants to listen to Mr Bhagwat- Rakesh Sinha

An executive editor of a prominent national channel met me on my way to Nagpur and I was surprised at his excitement at covering the Vijayadashami speech of the RSS Sarsanghchalak. All prominent news channels, including the BBC, were in Nagpur to cover the Vijayadashami programme. The magnitude of RSS’ influence on politics, society and culture can no longer be ignored, and it is imperative that the old conventional parameters of defining the Sangh be changed.

Doordarshan, too, telecast Mohan Bhagwat’s speech, infuriating a section of the “intelligentsia” who are congenital RSS-baiters. For them the very term RSS symbolises fascism, communalism, anti-minorityism and all such adjectives available in the dictionary. It is not their fault; they’ve been born and groomed in an intellectual climate sworn to anti-RSSism. It is difficult, therefore, for them to accept the RSS as a legitimate body.
Post-Independence intellectual discourse has been a victim of infantile disorder, according utterly misplaced importance to perception rather than facts. This is a discourse that denies space to an organisation whose impact on society, culture and politics has been growing phenomenally — thousands of its people have been engaged in the task of nation building leaving home and hearths. When the Nehru government launched its food campaign in the early 1950s, the then food secretary approached the PM for permission to solicit RSS cooperation, and the Sangh cooperated. Nehru’s ban on the Sangh and subsequent repression could not deter it from cooperating with the government for the people’s cause. Nehru realised the Sangh’s worth more than once in his life. The 1962 humiliation and his earlier experience with the RSS during the period made him invite the Sangh to the Republic Day parade in 1963.

The contents of Mr Bhagwat’s speech call for revision of both the theory and practice of the concept of modernity and market-oriented values of life and policies. It is one of post-independent India’s best speeches. Mr Bhagwat’s last Vijayadashami speech was a clarion call to ensure 100 per cent voting. The RSS vowed to liberate the country from its democratic deficit and succeeded. Mr Bhagwat represents no mere letterhead organisation, but one with the biggest social base with dynamic social action. It is instructive that even Maoists do not target RSS activities in tribal belts. The obvious reason is their organic popularity. The nation wants to listen to Mr Bhagwat, follow his advice and act according to his appeal. The Indian media must recognise the unmistakable message — the Nehruvian idea and era have come to an end. Night is not prolonged by even a minute simply because some choose to be in deliberate slumber.