[cr-india]KANCHAM KUMAR: Mixed signals... history of radio broadcasting policy in India

[Frederick Noronha (FN)]

Mixed Signals: A History of Radio Broadcasting Policy in India

Kanchan Kumar
	
The principles and practices of broadcasting as they have existed and
evolved in India are audibly reflected in the key issues that the media
planners and policy makers have sought to resolve at different times in more
than 75 years of its existence now.

The discourses and imperatives at any given time with regard to Indian
broadcasting have been quite in conflict with each other. The state's
monopoly over broadcasting is under attack, while anxiety is being expressed
for regulating the invasion from satellite because of its perceived impact
on national culture and cultural identities.

While private broadcasters are seeking free market for media, and consumers
are demanding the right to choose, there is worry over the increasing
commercialization and homogenization of media content that is thwarting its
public service function. However, a temporal perspective of the history of
broadcasting in India shows that certain vital concerns have been ignored
over several eras though they find a consistent mention in the reports of
various committees periodically appointed by the Government of India to
examine media-related issues. Some such perennial questions relate to
people's access to communication technologies and content, audience
participation for perpetuating plurality of ideas and facilitating
self-representation through popular and community based media. These
subjects are discernible in the fascinating debates on the nature of
appropriate media policy in India and are conceptualized in documents that
should ideally form the underpinnings of the broadcasting scenario in the
country.

An analysis of the broadcasting form and functioning in India reveals that
the attempts to address such persistent inadequacies or to balance the
dilemmas facing broadcasting have been marked by pressures other than those
of public service and the pressing demands by civil society.  As a result,
broadcasting in our country continues to be governed by the archaic Indian
Telegraph Act of 1885 and the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1933 and
regulated through an assortment of legislation that have been scripted as
expedient populist measures by suave politicians to tackle high priority
short-term demands. There exists nothing in the form of a comprehensive
policy that takes into account the contradictory pulls of the concerns
surrounding broadcasting in India and places its role within the context of
new socio-political and techno-economic realities.

An example of how governments appropriate and co-opt fervent concerns and
give them an interpretation that is convenient to their political interests
is the recent public policy pronouncement to grant 'community broadcasting'
licenses to established universities, colleges and schools. This decision to
allow setting up FM transmitters to run radio stations in the campuses is
being projected as a move to open up the broadcasting sector for non-profit
social sector by allowing community radio stations. While the policy
pronouncement is not unwelcome as it dilutes somewhat the hegemony of the
state and market over broadcasting, but to open it up for an urban,
educated, elite coterie in areas that are already well served by media
betrays the fundamental philosophy behind community radio as the world
understands it today. The historical philosophy of community radio is to use
this medium as the voice of the voiceless, the mouthpiece of oppressed
people and generally as a tool for development (AMARC, 1998).

It is mere tokenism to say that these stations would provide space for
development and change-oriented content. If it does not enable the
marginalized, rural or poor populace to disseminate their own messages and
to challenge the mainstream understanding of social issues, the whole
purpose is lost. But the government is content with postponing the critical
decision of allowing autonomous broadcasting spaces to communities and the
social sector as that entails re-distribution of power and control over
media resources and technologies. The history of the broadcasting system in
India is witness to the fact that one of the main factors that perpetuates
status quo is the desire of the state to retain control. In fact, the
attitude of successive governments even after more than half a century of
Independence has unmistakable traces of the norms set by the British who
introduced organized broadcasting in the country.

The Legacy of Indian Broadcasting
 
The first regular radio service was inaugurated in India by the Indian
Broadcasting Company (IBC) with the opening of the Bombay Station on July
23, 1927 . The then Viceroy of India, Lord Irwin inaugurated this 1.5 KW
station with an effective range of 30 miles (48 kms.). This came about seven
months after the creation of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in
the UK in January 1927 as a publicly funded organization with John Reith as
its first Director General. Indian broadcasting has borrowed much of its
programming pattern, philosophy and even talent for development from the
Corporation. However, except for the first two years and eight months, when
broadcasting was operated as a commercial venture, it has been under
government control in India till recently when it has taken on the avatar of
a Public Corporation.

It is interesting to observe the similarities between the maiden Report on
the Progress of Broadcasting in India issued from the office of the first
Controller of Broadcasting, Government of India, Lionel Fielden on June 3,
1939 and the content categories of statistics in the Annual Report of All
India Radio published by Prasar Bharati in 2002. This goes to show that the
parameters to validate performance and define what "puts national
broadcasting on a proper footing" do not seem to have undergone any
prominent changes even after Independence. The interests of the British
government largely guided the expansion of radio during the colonial period
and importance was given to the economic, strategic, engineering and
administrative aspects. In this report, Fielden included "a historical
survey of broadcasting in India" as "no separate report on Indian
Broadcasting had previously been issued" The prototypes of such reports
passed on from our colonizers to the present heads of government are modeled
to project the top-down 'reach' of the medium, which is sought to be
justified in terms of growth, spread, coverage of area and of population,
listenership percentages, programming patterns and the number of languages
of broadcast.

The Indian Broadcasting Company started in 1927, went into liquidation by
March 1930. Fielden's report ascribes this failure to high prices of
receiving sets at Rs.500 for a four valve set, an undercapitalized company,
and to "Indian conditions and traditions" that were "by no means as
favourable to the rapid growth of broadcasting as those of the west"
(Fielden, 1939:3). Ironically, he also acknowledges later, that slow
increase of licensed listeners could have been owing to the small coverage
radius of the two stations (the second 1.5 KW station was started in
Calcutta in August 1927) and successive curtailment of expenditure by the
government resulting in low standard of programmes. A decisive factor he
says was "undoubtedly the great difficulty in collecting both the licence
fees and the 'tribute'" (Fielden, 1939:3).

In April 1930, Government of India took over broadcasting following
"universal" representations for action from existing license holders and
dealers of wireless equipment who were stuck with stockpiles of broadcasting
kits and it was placed in the Department of Industries and Labour as 'Indian
State Broadcasting Service'. To deal with the alleged evasion of payment of
license fee and to monitor possession of wireless gear, the Indian Wireless
Telegraphy Act of 1933 was brought into force, which made the possession of
radio receivers and wireless equipment without a license an offense.

The Indian Government's current monopoly over radio and television
broadcasting derives from this Act together with the Indian Telegraph Act,
1885 (and its subsequent amendments) which gives exclusive privileges of the
establishment, maintenance and working of wireless apparatus to the Centre.
With these two laws and some other means of obtaining sufficient revenue in
place, broadcasting turned into a profitable venture by 1934, and the
"government felt justified in embarking on a policy of development"
(Fielden, 1939: 6).  As the years 1931-34 had seen an increase in the
listenership of radio although there were no new stations added and no
improvements in programming. Fielden attributes this spurt to the starting
of the Empire service of the BBC in December 1932 and "the consequent
purchase of sets by a large number of Europeans in India" (Fielden, 1939:
2).

Fielden himself arrived in India in the year 1935 with the brief to work out
the development scheme for Indian broadcasting for which Rs.20 lakh, (later
raised to Rs.40 lakh) were allotted. He and H.L. Kirke, technical expert
from BBC, felt that the amount was disproportionately inadequate for a
country like India, In Europe which may be compared with India from point of
view of size and coverage, there are over 100 high and medium power
stations, representing a total cost of 10 crore rupees. From this it is
clear that the service, which can be given to India for a sum of 40 lakhs,
will be poor (Fielden, 1939:11).

Their report made recommendations for expansion of broadcasting to rural
areas, stating that though Indian State Broadcasting Service was more a
commercial than social service, "the idea of self-supporting service was
wrong and Government should devote the limited funds available to
'unremunerative' stations in rural areas." The emphasis on planning they
felt would initially bring funds "only from the sophisticated listeners who
can pay for their entertainment," but there was a possibility to "provide a
service both for the towns and for the villages; which has within it the
seed of development on a self-supporting basis" (Fielden, 1939:13). January
1, 1936 saw the setting up of the 20 KW Delhi station from 18, Alipur road
as the first new center under the new scheme of expansion and development of
Indian Broadcasting.  On June 8, 1936, the nomenclature of the Indian State
Broadcasting Service changed to All India Radio (AIR) . Ahmed Shah Bokhari
joined AIR as Station Director in March 1936 on deputation from the
Government College Lahore and became the Deputy Controller of Broadcasting
in June 1936 and C.W.  Goyder, another expert from BBC, became AIR's first
chief Engineer in August 1936.  Goyder, who differed with Kirke's plan for
medium wave transmitters, is remembered for the short wave coverage of the
entire country, which he achieved with Fielden's backing by 1938 (Luthra,
1986; Baruah, 1983). Walter Kaufman, Director of Western Music programmes in
Bombay, composed AIR's signature tune in the year 1936 (MIB, 1978).

Broadcasting began in India as a private amateur venture, but even after it
rolled into the hands of the British Government, they gave Indian princely
states the right to construct and use transmitters and to collect fees for
receiving sets as stipulated in the Government of India Act 1935. This is an
amusing historical nugget because after Independence, though the Indian
Government has emulated British rules, guidelines and planned approaches to
broadcasting, it has kept broadcasting firmly in the hands of the Government
at the Centre (Ninan, 1998). Bokhari succeeded Fielden as the Controller in
1940 and was at the helm of AIR till almost the end of war. With the
declaration of the World War II all expansion plans were stayed but urgent
steps were taken to increase the hours of transmission of centralized news
bulletins in various Indian Languages (totaling 27 in a day) to counter Nazi
propaganda and to promote the allied cause (Luthra, 1986; MIB 1978).

In 1937 AIR was transferred from the Department of Labour and Industries to
the Department of Communications. It was relocated to the Department of
Information and Broadcasting, set up in 1941, which, after Independence,
became the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) in 1947. AIR moved
to its new Broadcasting House in Parliament Street in February 1943 and in
the same year, the Controller of Broadcasting designation was changed to
Director General (Baruah, 1983; Chatterji, 1991). On June 3, 1947 Viceroy
Lord Mountbatten, Jawaharlal Nehru and Mohammad Ali Jinnah made their
historic broadcasts on the partition of India. The transfer of Power on the
midnight of August 14-15, 1947 was broadcast live with Jawaharlal Nehru's
famous speech "Tryst with Destiny" which is preserved in the archives of AIR
(Baruah, 1983). The first and the only time Gandhiji visited the
Broadcasting House in Delhi was on Diwali in 1947 when he addressed refugees
at the Kurukshetra camp (Luthra, 1986).

The responsibility of the broadcasting to 'serve' the public through
programmes that 'inform, educate and entertain' was part of the
paternalistic Reithean legacy with which AIR set out after independence to
'improve' the masses by giving them not what they sought to hear but what
they ought to hear. As affirmed by all the ensuing Annual Reports of AIR and
also posted on its website, the objectives of broadcasting in India seek to
"provide information, education and wholesome entertainment, keeping in view
the motto, Bahujan Hitaya; Bahujan Sukhaya i.e. the benefit and happiness of
large sections of the people," and strive to "produce and transit varied
programmes designed to awaken, inform, enlighten, educate, entertain and
enrich all sections of the people, with due regard to the fact that the
national broadcast audience consists of a whole series of public" (AIR
website).

With a view to realize these objectives, a regime of planned development of
broadcasting to cover the country, as kicked off by Fielden and reworked by
Goyder, was brought back to life. Over the years, with allocation of funds
made in all subsequent Five Year Plans (FYPs), All India Radio has developed
into "one of the largest media networks in the world" and boasts today of a
network of 209 broadcasting centres (which include 113 regional and 76 local
radio stations) and 149 medium wave, 55 high frequency (SW) and 131 FM
transmitters. The broadcast coverage of 89.66% by area is received by 98.84%
of the people in 24 languages and 146 dialects in home service. AIR
broadcasts in 26 (10 Indian and 16 foreign) languages in its external
services. As against a mere 2,75,955 receiving sets in 1947, now there are
about 12.5 crore (7.1 crore FM sets) radio sets in about 11.7 crore radio
households in the country with the number of average actual listeners of AIR
on any day in radio homes all over India estimated at 30.4 crore (Prasar
Bharati, 2002).


Planned Growth of Infrastructure

The history of the growth of broadcasting network and expansion of its
coverage is chronicled in the All India Radio annual reports, in books ,
almost all of which have been written by former AIR officials, and in a
couple of government publications. The reports of committees set up from
time to time to review the status of broadcasting in India also recount
major landmarks in its progress.

The first formal review of the working of the official media in India came
about with the appointment by MIB of a committee under the chairmanship of
Asok K. Chanda, former Auditor General, Government of India, in 1964 to,
among other things, "examine and evaluate the operations, policies,
programmes and production of the various media units of the ministry." It
was a time when there "had been persistent criticism both in Parliament and
the press of the deficiencies of All India Radio," and also "a belated
realization in official quarters that the media of mass communication had
largely failed to inform, educate and entertain the people and to enlist
their co- operation in fulfilling the plans of social and economic
development" (MIB, 1966:2). At the time when the Chanda Committee submitted
its report on Radio and Television (April 18, 1966), All India Radio (AIR)
had acquired a fairly extensive setup with the MIB embarking on a two-phase
plan for expansion of broadcasting service. In the initial phase, with
Sardar Vallabhai Patel, the first and ostensibly the most influential
Minister for Information & Broadcasting, at the helm of affairs, a scheme to
build up 'pilot' stations with one KW medium wave transmitters was taken up
to expand radio broadcasting infrastructure in state capitals and in border
areas and to include the linguistic and cultural areas that had remained
uncovered.

At the time of Independence, the AIR network had six stations located at
Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, Lucknow and Tiruchirapalli. While the
Baroda station was taken over in 1948, in 1950, all the other four 'native'
stations belonging to former princely states, Hyderabad, Aurangabad, Mysore
and Trivandrum were integrated with AIR. By 1950, the number of stations had
risen from 11 to 25 and AIR network was in a position to serve listeners in
all regional languages but could embrace only 21% of the country's
population and 12% of its area (Baruah, 1983).  The Staff Training Institute
was started in July 1948 to impart in-service training to various cadres of
the programme and administrative staff of AIR and Doordarshan.  Broadcasting
along with post, telegraphs, telephones and wireless was placed in the Union
List of the Seventh Schedule on January 26, 1950 under the newly effective
Constitution of India.

In the second phase of AIR network expansion, which became part of the Five
Year Plan (FYP), the existing stations were upgraded or replaced by stations
of higher power (MIB, 1966). It is interesting to note that during the first
FYP period, six new radio stations were opened and a few stations closed
down keeping the number of broadcasting centers almost constant at 26, by
the end of the plan. Several low-power transmitters were up-graded, although
no new transmitters were set up. Though the numbers remained unchanged, the
reach of broadcasting swelled manifold covering 46% of population and 31% in
terms of area (Prasar Bharati, 2002). Several high power medium and short
wave transmitters were installed during the second FYP and the third FYP
undertook to execute an ambitious medium wave expansion scheme with the
primary objective to extend the AIR network to the whole country.

In the years subsequent to independence, India had ventured out to become
progressive and industrialized in keeping with the west-inspired dominant
paradigm of development of the 1950s through 1970s. Mass media were seen as
instruments to change the mind-set of the people and to create a climate for
modernization and development through centralized economic planning,
large-scale industrialization and the expansion of basic communication
infrastructure (Lerner, 1958; Schramm, 1964; Rogers, 1976). The Chanda
Committee endorsed this view and expressed its dissatisfaction with the
place given to the development of mass communication in India. It felt that
the media had not been adequately harnessed for informing, educating and
enthusing people to participate actively in the social and economic
development programmes. The Committee observed that radio had not been
accorded priority with respect to the allocations made in successive plans:
despite its own evaluation that the plans have failed to evoke the expected
response in the country, the Planning Commission has persistently overlooked
the potentiality of radio in enlisting public cooperation in implementing
plans and programmes designed to bring progress and prosperity to the
community. In continuing to regard broadcasting as a routine function of the
state and giving it routine treatment, the Commission has also ignored the
experience of other countries, which have accelerated the pace of
development by imaginative use of radio and television (MIB, 1966:10).

Commenting on the policies and plans of the technical coverage of AIR, the
Committee reiterated the need for additional measures to facilitate wider
coverage and stressed the need for a "reasoned" review of the direction of
quantitative expansion, in order to ensure a balanced growth of AIR network,
selection of ideal locations and procurement of standardized equipment which
may even be indigenously produced.  We have found that neither the location
of the transmitters nor their procurement is always determined on technical
considerations. Regional pressures for transmitters have often lead to the
choice of unsuitable locations for the coverage intended. Similarly,
political considerations have intervened in the selection of sources of
supply (MIB, 1966:33).

The report pointed out that lack of funds and faulty orientation were
factors inhibiting the potential of AIR's rural broadcasts and the impact of
its external services.  Its transmitters and studio equipment are
insufficient, largely obsolete or obsolescent, its broadcasts cannot even
reach the sensitive areas of North East Frontier, let alone project the
correct image of India overseas or counteract unfriendly propaganda, and its
planning and administrative staff are lacking in vision and imagination
(MIB, 1966: 12).

The Chanda Committee pointed out that deficiencies, both of the instruments
of transmission and reception, were rendering rural services ineffective.
Community listening was suffering on account of maintenance of receiving
sets. It suggested that to make coverage of rural areas meaningful mass
production of low cost transistorized sets and their distribution was
essential . The report emphasized that for qualitative improvement of
coverage; at least two-channel transmission be provided in all regions. The
report recommended that low-power transmitters be installed in each compact
agricultural area that would primarily deliver services for Ministry of
Health, Agriculture and Education. It suggested that such local transmitters
could operate on frequency modulation (FM), which AIR was proposing to
introduce only in the Metros, and that a plan to manufacture FM receiving
sets also be drawn up simultaneously.

In countries so large and varied as India, most states have groups with
different cultures, customs and traditions. The Stations should be placed to
cater to their divergent needs and requirements. Yet, for example, the
Ranchi Station located at the center of the tribal belt of Chhota Nagpur can
provide only snippets of song and drama for tribal community. The
Commissioner of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has complained that
All India Radio has not given much time and attention to the tribal people
(MIB, 1966:29).

However, it was only in July 1977 that the first FM service started from
Madras and it was not until October 30, 1984 that the first local station
was established at Nagercoil in Tamil Nadu. The lacuna observed in the
working of the Planning and Development unit of AIR was that on one hand,
advice of technical staff was overlooked by higher officials to accommodate
political factors, while on the other, no programme official was associated
with the structuring of a broadcasting center. Hence the stations were being
built without any insight into the scope and objectives of its programmes
leaving very little flexibility for programme planners who had to fit their
content to the available facilities.

National, Commercial and Rural Broadcasts

The Chanda Committee castigated AIR's programme policy in the two decades of
its functioning after Independence on the grounds that the government was
overlooking development imperatives and that a technical infrastructure
built with public resources was being misused for propaganda of public
policy and as a vehicle for setting political agendas. Centralization and
bureaucratization were resulting in improper selection of talent, curbing of
staff enterprise for adventurous programmes, inadequate remuneration to
artists and indifference in content, quality and presentation of programmes
The inquiries by the Committee brought to the forefront what listeners long
knew, that AIR programmes were dull and drab and low on variety.  They did
not engage with contentious political matters or even those of civic
consequence. A "psychology of conformity" prevailed in AIR as recruitment of
directing staff ensured unquestioning compliance, influential people
monopolized talks and discussions and even among them, eminent people
critical of administrative policies were avoided (MIB, 1966).

Other visible trends during this period were the remodelling of programmes
towards a new nationalist image, a countrywide broadcast of national
programmes and the promotion of Hindi as the national language. On July
1952, the first National Programme of Music went on air. In October the same
year the National Orchestra (Vadya Vrinda) was set up in Delhi under the
conductorship of Pandit Ravi Shankar.  The Carnatic Violin-player T.K.
Jairam later joined the orchestra as the second conductor (Baruah 1983). The
National Programme of talks (English) went on air in April 1953. Regional
news bulletins were started from Lucknow (Hindi) and Nagpur (Marathi) on
April 15, 1953. National Programmes of operas, plays and features were
started in 1956 and AIR came to be known as Akashvani from 1957 (Prasar
Bharati 2002). On January 25, 1958, an unusual but short-lived experiment in
the use of folk media for social communication was launched as an annual
festival 'Songs of Nation Builders' in which folk musicians and dancers from
different parts of India presented songs with a developmental content
(Baruah, 1983).

B.V. Keskar, country's longest serving minister of information and
broadcasting for 10 years from 1952, patronized Indian classical and folk
music and harboured an unconcealed aversion for 'cheap and vulgar' film
music . As AIR's classical music content rose to nearly 50%, Indians
switched to Radio Ceylon's commercial service that played all the film songs
that AIR's holier than thou dignity and conformation to 'good taste' and
serious purpose did not permit (Page and Crawley, 2001). The Indian
government was slow in responding to the challenges of foreign competition
posed by Radio Ceylon (a phenomenon repeated with television in the 1990s)
but eventually did launch an entertainment channel, Vividh Bharati,
broadcasting Indian film music and other entertainment fare on October 3,
1957. Commercial advertising was introduced in the Bombay-Pune Nagpur chain
of Vividh Bharati stations 10 years later, in 1967 (Baruah, 1983). This had
been one of the major recommendations of the Chanda Committee. At present
there are 36 Vividh Bharati and Commercial Broadcasting Stations operating
in the country (Prasar Bharati, 2002).  Chanda Committee attributed the lack
popularity of AIR programmes also to the absence of any system for audience
research to gauge the extent and quality of listening of each programme that
should ideally form the basis of policy decisions by planners for making
programmes effective and appealing.
 
Listener's research is an integral part of most broadcasting systems. Without a 
continuous and intimate touch with its audience a broadcasting system cannot 
fulfil the purpose for which it exists nor can it ensure maximum listening to its 
programmes in preference to others. Without a review, money and effort might be 
wasted in producing programmes, which do not attract listening. There is also the 
attendant risk of listeners tuning in into other broadcasts, which have undesirable 
features both morally and politically (MIB, 1966:58).

This lack of systematic survey of preferences of listeners or of the impact
of broadcasts was even more pronounced in case of rural services. The
Committee ascertained that absence of news, views and feedback along with
undue publicity of government policies had made rural programmes
unattractive and villagers were unable to identify with them owing to
pedantic and stilted language and references to peculiar agricultural inputs
and chemicals.

The earliest attempts at rural broadcasting go back to 1935, when private
stations in North-West Frontier Province and the United Provinces started
programmes for rural audiences. AIR incorporated these stations into its
network and rural programmes were started at Delhi, Madras and Lucknow
stations in 1936, 1938 and 1939 respectively (Mathur and Neurath, 1959).
Rural service became an integral component of all AIR stations from 1965
when Farm & Home Units were also established in 10 AIR stations to provide
suitable technical support to farmers. Now all regional stations house these
units and rural broadcasts are a crucial output of AIR (Baruah, 1983;
Chatterji, 1991).
 
AIR's broadcasting to rural areas was designed essentially to garner support
for the national enterprise of all-round development, to carry information
of practical use to villagers, widen knowledge of national ideals and to
provide entertainment (Mathur and Neurath, 1959). The broadcasts used
regional languages and local dialects and were meant for community rather
than individual listening. Provision was also made in the five-year plans to
provide community listening sets in villages. Though the number of receiving
sets had escalated to 150,000 by 1965-66, this scheme did not thrive because
of problems of replacement of batteries and maintenance of receiving sets.
By the 1970s the transistor revolution had taken over and the scheme was
withdrawn (Chatterji, 1991).

Although the use of radio for development was a cornerstone of public
service broadcasting policy in India, no attempt to solicit people's
participation even in the form of feedback, was made till 1956 when, an
experiment in Farm Radio Forums was conducted with the assistance of UNESCO
in 150 villages across five districts of Maharashtra.  It was based on a
Canadian model and was designed to establish two- way communication between
village audiences and programmer producers of the radio station. The theme
of the rural radio forums was "Listen, Discuss, Act!" (Singhal and Rogers,
2001:70).  A pioneering effort for its time, "radio farm forum as an agent
for transmission of knowledge proved to be a success beyond expectation"
(Mathur and Neurath, 1959:105) and was "very successful in communicating
knowledge of agricultural techniques and encouraging participation in
decision making" (Page and Crawley, 2001: 328).

Between 1959 and 1964 the movement gained strength and it was claimed that
there were 7,500 forums in 30 odd radio stations in the country in 1964
after which nothing is heard about them (Chatterji, 1991). AIR failed to
capitalize on lessons learnt from the farm forums project and it remained
just an experiment (like the SITE and Kheda projects in case of television
later) in development potential of community involvement in media. However,
the Chanda Committee evokes the success of Farm Radio Forums to institute
faith in radio's enormous potential to carry developmental messages to poor,
rural Indian households and that "given the right approach and the
opportunity to discuss and find solutions to local problems, the farmer is
receptive to new ideas and techniques" (MIB, 1966:11).

These observations were validated in the 1960s when AIR played a pivotal
role in disseminating information of new techniques and practices to propel
the Green Revolution. It served as a link between the agriculture extension
service and farmers.  Its experimental broadcasts from Trichinopoly station
in 1966 launched in the fertile rice growing areas of Tamil Nadu helped
persuade farmers to adopt high yielding varieties of rice. It led to the new
variety becoming known as 'Radio Paddy'" (Page and Crawley, 2001).

Media Misuse & Quest for Autonomy 

The Chanda Committee attributed the failure of AIR to give "purpose and
substance" to the programmes and to reflect the development imperatives of
national reconstruction to organizational deficiencies, inadequate financial
resources and over- centralization.

It is not possible in the Indian context for a creative medium like
broadcasting to flourish under a regiment (sic) of departmental rules and
regulations. It is only through an institutional change that AIR can be
liberated from the present rigid financial and administrative procedures of
Government (MIB, 1966:177).

The committee recommended the setting up of two separate autonomous public
corporations for radio and television. The attempt was to reconcile autonomy
with control by endowing AIR (and Doordarshan) with sufficient liberty in
financial and managerial matters, while retaining clearly defined areas of
regulation by the state.  The Committee was averse to AIR being employed as
an instrument of the government and also to it being entrusted into private
hands. It is notable that the Committee was in favour of allowing
Universities, Municipal Corporations, and State Governments to install
transmitters. All these proposals were "carefully considered" in 1970 by the
government, but it was declared that, "the present is not an opportune time
to consider the conversion of AIR into an autonomous corporation".  However,
TV was separated from AIR under the name, "Doordarshan" on April 1, 1976
(MIB, 1978).

AIR was blatantly misused as 'a government organ'  during the national
emergency in 1975. In her address to the AIR station directors on September
9, 1975, Indira Gandhi said,

	while anybody is in government service, they are bound to obey the
	orders of the government. If they feel that the government policy is
	not right, they are unable to obey, they have some other views which
	they want to express, nobody is stopping them from resigning and
	joining any organization where they will have that freedom (GOI,
	1977:8).
 
Several constraints were imposed on radio and television, the 'AIR code'
(for broadcasters) was declared obsolete and there was a clampdown on
oppositional views. The then minister of Information and Broadcasting, V.C.
Shulkla, instructed AIR Station Directors that AIR was not a forum run by
the government to debate on the conflicting ideologies but to make people
"understand" government policies.  Further, as governments were run by
parties, media must reflect the policies of the party in power. Credibility
took a backseat, as AIR became a propaganda tool for the prime minister and
her policies, but proved counter-productive during the elections as it
further precipitated the existing demand for autonomy for the government-run
media.

After the termination of Emergency, the country's first non-Congress
government pledged "genuine autonomy " to the electronic media. The White
Paper on the Misuse of the Mass Media was commissioned, followed by the
constitution of a Working Group headed by former newspaper editor, B.G.
Verghese, in August 1977 to look into autonomy for the electronic media. The
group was mandated: To examine the functional, financial and legal aspects
of the proposal to give full autonomy to Akashvani and Doordarshan,
consistent with accountability to Parliament, keeping in mind the different
forms of autonomous organizations existing in other democratic countries in
the matters of broadcasting (MIB, 1978:7, 37).

The Working Group proposed the formation of an autonomous National
Broadcasting Trust, Akash Bharati, "a non-profit making body, an essential
public service licensed to operate under a Parliamentary Charter and
accountable to the Parliament" (MIB, 1978: 21). The apex of the Trust was to
consist of a board of trustees (nyasis), between 12 and 21 in number, drawn
from among eminent men and women sensitive towards the role of the media.

Attributing the haphazard growth of broadcast media to the absence of a
well- defined national communication policy, the Group observed that the
commitment to "open government," "a dialogue with the people," the thrust
towards participative development from below, and decentralization in
political and economic decision making imply the need for democratizing
communications through a "transfer of power."

As mass media, radio and television must fit into a wider perception of a national 
communication policy or philosophy. Such a policy would be presumed to 
envisage a web of vertical and lateral communication designed to facilitate the 
transmission of informational, educational, and cultural messages not merely from 
government to people but from people to government. People to people, masses to 
decision-makers, rural to urban, the young to the rest and so on, at all levels and as 
a circular flow with switches for cross-cultural exchange. Dissenting voices and 
minority voices must be heard to complete the true harmony of national debate 
and expression (MIB, 1978:18).

The Working Group was not in favour of two separate trusts for Radio and TV
though it urged for a distinctive identity for the two mass media under an
integrated Charter of Akash Bharati. Among the specific aims of the trust,
the Group included the task to produce and transmit varied programmes
designed for all sections of the people. It emphasized that "mass" does not
necessarily imply a "monolithic or homogeneous" national audience and that
the trend in the world was towards catering to area and culture specific
minority audiences (MIB, 1978). The Group also identified that the trust
should be authorized to grant licenses to franchise stations through a Board
for education and extension broadcasts. These educational stations would not
broadcast news bulletins of their own and not take up any commercial
broadcasting.

The misuse of media as a publicity vehicle had not ceased even during the
tenure of a government that had promoted autonomy for broadcast media.
However, in terms of opening up the media, it did introduce party election
broadcasts in May 1977, fifteen years after the Election Commission had
recommended their transmission (Thomas, 1990). A watered down Akash Bharati
Bill was introduced in Parliament, but it lapsed after the dissolution of
the Lok Sabha in 1979 when the Government fell.  When the Congress
government returned to power in 1980, it decided against freeing the media
from government control, and instead, heralded an era of commercialization
even before the satellite invasion of the 1990s. With the ninth Asian Games
in 1982 began a move to set up transmitters and to switch to colour on
television. The expansion of television in the country entered a new phase
as the multinationals and Indian monopolies started dictating terms.

This period witnessed more directives from the government in the form of
policy guidelines. In 1980, an advisory committee headed by G Parthasarathi
was created for restructuring media organization to facilitate a more
professional outlook.  News Policy for Broadcast Media released in May 1982
was one of the products of this committee and the guidelines therein are
followed to this day (Ninan, 1998). These cover wide-ranging topics related
to news coverage particularly those considered crucial for national
development, national integration and maintenance of communal peace (MIB,
1982). The document outlines some themes that require special coverage, one
of them being the achievements and problems of development and lays emphasis
on the use of AIR and Doordarshan newsgathering apparatus "to make a
deliberate effort to explore new areas of development and nation building
news.  People's participation in such activities should be duly highlighted
as also the significant work being done by voluntary agencies" (MIB,
1982:3).

In December 1982, a Working Group on Software for Doordarshan headed by P.C.
Joshi was appointed to "prepare a software plan for Doordarshan, taking into
consideration the main objectives of television in assisting in the process
of social and economic development of the country and to act as an effective
medium for providing information, education and entertainment" (MIB,
1985:7). Besides suggesting several steps for restoring the development
function of television, the Working Group's report, An Indian Personality
for Television, drew attention to the frequent use of national communication
framework to present "a Delhi-centric view of India." It offered insights
into opportunities and dangers of the technology-led communication
revolution and emphasized the need to evolve "our own version of
communication revolution." The report commented extensively on how
"communication should help to create a participatory model of development, a
participatory rural community in which information flows not only downwards,
from governments to the people but also upwards from people to the
government" (MIB 1985, Vol. 2: 30). The report refers to the German
dramatist, Brecht's statement about radio being equally relevant for
television and urges for changing television to "receive as well to
transmit," and "to let the listener speak as well as to hear" with a view to
"turning the audience not only into pupils but into teachers."

Annotating McLuhan, the report says, "any software which does not evolve out
of some form of public participation is weak in authenticity and appeal,"
and hence the need for incorporating "an intimate, participatory
down-upwards orientation" in television and for encouraging "people to be
participants in the process of generating software" (MIB, 1985:13). The
counsels of the working group hold good for radio too, but the copies of
this public document are not available easily for reference in the
departments concerned. Neither the recommendations of Verghese Committee nor
those of the Joshi Committee to render radio and television independent and
to discourage their misuse by the government were implemented.

Prasar Bharati Bill vs. Political Will

Nothing was done to facilitate autonomy till about 1989 when a non-Congress
government, in order to keep its campaign promise of autonomy for state
media, opened Akash Bharati for reconsideration. The bill that was produced
in Parliament was called Prasar Bharati. It differed in significant ways
from the exercise undertaken 11 years earlier by the Verghese Committee and
illustrating how thinking on the subject of autonomy for the government
media had evolved.  The first was envisaged as a trust, the second as a
corporation.  Akash Bharati provided for trustees, Prasar Bharati for a
board of governors (Ninan, 1998).

The Akash Bharati Bill recommended granting broadcast franchise licenses to
Universities and other educational institutions through its Licensing Board,
while the Prasar Bharati Bill of 1989. Both the drafts were similar in terms
of the objectives of serving the rural, illiterate, underprivileged
populations, providing adequate coverage to languages of various regions of
the country, informing and stimulating national consciousness in regard to
the status and problems of women, and keeping in mind the needs and
interests of young, social and cultural minorities, the tribal population
(Thomas, 1990). The autonomy granted by the Bill that was finally passed in
1990 was watered down by among other things, the supplementary provision for
incorporation of a parliamentary committee to oversee the functioning of the
Corporation. Parliament passed this Bill, but the Government fell before it
could be notified. This Act was then kept in cold storage for seven years
till it was notified in 1997.

On the autonomy front, no advancement was made by the Congress government to
execute Prasar Bharati, as amendments to the Act were still not complete.
The Ministry that had been avoiding putting its own house in order with
respect to granting autonomy sprang into action as cable-delivered foreign
satellite channels started making rapid inroads into the country in the
1990s. The exigency for autonomy was expressed for becoming competitive and
commercially up-market as also the need for monitoring the use of airwaves
(discussed in ensuing section of the article). The Government abruptly laid
down the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act in March 1995 to
regulate cable television and to influence cable distribution in favour of
Doordarshan. Though AIR was not facing competition from private
broadcasters, these developments were sending loud and clear signals that it
was time to sit up and take notice.

Meanwhile, a high power committee that had been appointed in 1995 to remodel
the role, organization, and functions of Prasar Bharati in the context of
the influx of foreign satellite channels in the 1990s furnished its report.
This committee, (MIB, 1996a) headed by Dr. Nitish Sengupta, put forward a
provision, to be included in the Prasar Bharati Act, for an Independent
Radio and Television Authority of India to grant licenses to domestic or
foreign satellite channels and permit them to uplink from Indian soil
(Ninan, 1998). The committee's recommendations with respect to Prasar
Bharati sought to dispense with the changes introduced in the 1989 draft
before the Bill was finalized in 1990. In order to cope with unprecedented
reduction in budgetary support from the government, the MIB decided to
refurbish the system for marketing commercial time on Doordarshan and All
India Radio. A committee headed by Siddhartha Sen set out to examine the
needs of both advertisers and viewers and the adaptations that were
warranted to make the prevailing system in Doordarshan and AIR commercially
effectual (MIB, 1996b).

In July 1997, the United Front Government decided to notify Prasar Bharati,
which had been languishing since August 1990. The Sengupta Committee
recommendations were overlooked and what came about was diluted autonomy.
The Act MIB, 1996c) was brought into force on September 15, 1997 and Prasar
Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) was established on November 23,
1997.  Amendments to augment autonomy conferred by it were made in October
1997 by introducing some of the changes suggested by the Sengupta Committee. 
Hostilities with the MIB, controversies, conflicts at the top-level, dearth
of funds, unframed rules and regulations for recruitments, and control by
government cadre have marked the period following the setting up of Prasar
Bharati. With just over half of the members nominated to its Board, it is
being looked at "as a signboard more than a board." No significant changes
are visible in the working pattern of AIR, except an elongation in the chain
of command. It still continues to be centralized and bureaucratic in its
functioning and retains its role and reputation as a propaganda tool for the
government.

Both AIR and Doordarshan support an enormous structure that keeps growing
endlessly as a medium, but in terms of messages, there is minimal
manoeuvrability and negligible scope for innovative programming as "big
people continue to address small people." They are unable to meet with the
diverse expectations of different sections of the society or play a
constructive role in social change or nation building efforts. With the
macro-level media environment increasingly becoming challenging and
competitive owing to the effects of globalization and commercialization, the
role of Prasar Bharati as a Public Service Broadcaster becomes even more
relevant. But the lack of political will and faulty application appears to
be killing an otherwise workable proposition.

An attempt to revitalize the role of Prasar Bharati in the status of a
Public Service Broadcaster was made by setting up of the Prasar Bharati
Review Committee that submitted its report on May 20, 2000. The Committee
was of the opinion that: The public service broadcaster plays a key role in
any society, especially, in a large and thriving democracy. It must be a
part of 'civil society', independent of and distinct from the government. In
fact, the public service broadcaster must act as one of the bedrocks of
society, and seek to continuously enlarge the so-called 'public sphere. It
must play host to informed debate, provide space for alternative and
dissenting viewpoints, be a voice of the voiceless and give substance to the
phrase "participatory democracy" (MIB, 2000a: 16).

The Committee reiterated that market forces cannot be expected to take care
of these objectives and for Prasar Bharati, as the public broadcaster,
revenue maximization need not be an immediate goal and advertising revenue
earned should not be the only yardstick for judging its performance:
Alternative indices-related to audience size and share programme content and
impact, channel reach and loyalty- are more meaningful and must be used
(MIB, 2000a: 81).

The Committee suggested several amendments to the Prasar Bharati Act 1990 to
enable it to survive in a highly competitive environment created by global
media technology and to create public service content of highest quality.
The Committee reiterated its faith in decentralization and devolution and in
its recommendations and emphasized that the local stations must involve
local groups and voluntary organizations in programme production. It also
recommended giving serious consideration to:

	the franchising of local radio stations by Prasar Bharati to
	selected local community and voluntary groups on an experimental
	basis. Now that FM radio has been privatized, we do hope that the
	long-standing opposition and aversion to such a worthwhile step will
	fade away (MIB, 2000a: 37).

Liberalization, Privatization and Regulation of media

The broadcasting dialogue assumed an altogether new dimension with the
advent of cable operators and the beaming of satellite channels by Hong
Kong-based STAR TV into India in the year 1991. Conditions for broadcasting
changed radically (Pavarala and Kuamr, 2001a). Faced with the eventuality of
private sector competition, autonomy, genuine or otherwise, for state-owned
media seemed inevitable. At the same time, the governments were faced with a
new set of questions, which they were quite ill equipped to resolve. What
should be the structure of regulatory system to take account of the invasion
via satellites, and of the new media technologies? What was to be the fate
of national (read political) objectives?  Competition in programming as well
as commerce or advertising was another unfamiliar territory. All these
concerns coupled with a few other landmark developments saw the revival of
some of the critical issues concerning broadcasting in India after three
decades of unimplemented good intentions. In February 1995, the Supreme
Court delivered a historic judgment in Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting v. Cricket Association of Bengal. The Court ruled that:
Airwaves constitute public property and must be utilized for advancing
public good (Operative part of Judgement available on MIB Website).

The spirit of the judgment was to spell the end of the government monopoly
of broadcasting. But it was not in favour of deregulation of airwaves for
use by the private business firms. It stated that, "no individual had a
right to utilize them (airwaves) at his choice and pleasure and for purposes
of his choice including profit." In two separate concurring judgments, the
Court said the right of free speech guaranteed by article 19(1)(a) did not
include the right to use airwaves which were public property.

>From the standpoint of Article 19(1)(a) what is paramount is the right of the 
listeners and viewers and not the right of the broadcaster—whether the
broadcaster is the State, public corporation or a private individual or
body.

While the freedom guaranteed by Article 19(1(a) does include the right to
receive and impart information, no one can claim the fundamental right to do
so by using or employing public property.  Only where the statute permits
him to use the public property, then only -- and subject to such conditions
and restrictions as the law may impose -- he can use the public property,
viz., airwaves.  In other words, Article 19(1)(a) does not enable a citizen
to impart his information, views and opinion by using the airwaves.  He can
do so without using the airwaves (As cited in MIB, 1996d).

Broadcasting media as a whole should promote freedom of expression and
speech and, therefore, should be able to enjoy freedom from Government
monopoly and control subject to certain regulation by a public body. In this
connection, the Court decreed:

	The broadcasting media should be under the control of the public as
	distinct from Government. This is the command implicit in Article
	19(1)(a). It should be operated by a public statutory corporation or
	corporations (As cited in MIB, 1997).

The judgement did not, however, endorse dismantling of controls. Private
broadcasting, if permitted, cannot be left to the market forces. It needs to
be regulated in the larger public interest. The observations of the Supreme
Court in this regard are as follows:

	The airwaves or frequencies are a public property. Their use has to
	be controlled and regulated by a public authority in the interests
	of the public and to prevent the invasion of their rights (As cited
	in MIB, 1997).

The judgment ordered the Central Government to "take immediate steps to
establish an autonomous public authority to control and regulate the use of
the airwaves." The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting set about
drafting broadcasting legislation that would establish a broadcast authority
and open up the airwaves to private parties, individuals, and public bodies
wishing to enter the field of broadcasting and telecasting.

While this exercise to place the role of Broadcasting Authority of India in
the context of a comprehensive Broadcast Law was still being carried out, a
parliamentary subcommittee formulated a working paper on national media
policy in March 1996. The objectives of this draft media policy included
several of those that have been asserted in earlier laws and reports (MIB,
1996e). The newer concerns mentioned related to those that warned against
permitting growth of monopoly in any media, and expressed themselves in
favour of restricting cross-media ownership. The working paper took a stand
against permitting direct or indirect foreign equity participation in
private broadcasting companies (Ninan, 1998). The subcommittee laid emphasis
on the setting up of non-commercial broadcasting stations to be run by
universities, educational institutions, panchayats, local bodies, state
governments, etc.  It was in favour of allowing state and local governments
and NGOs to enter the field of broadcasting.

It was only in 1997 that some urgency was expressed for a broadcasting law
for India, "in view of the impending start of the much more powerful digital
Direct to Home (DTH) services any time by the next year" (MIB, 1997). In May
1997, the Broadcast Bill for setting up a Broadcasting Authority of India
was introduced in parliament. It corroborated the fundamental principles of
all the earlier efforts to reposition Broadcasting in India. The
Broadcasting Bill 1997 may in fact be seen as a confluence of the major
imperatives derived from constitutional clauses, committee reports,
judgments, and policy statements concerning broadcasting in India. But, the
government fell again and the draft Broadcasting Bill along with the working
paper on media policy remains a major piece of unfinished business till
today.

On the radio front, in July 1999, it was announced that private companies
registeredin India would be allowed to set up 101 independent FM stations
in 40 cities. Of the 148 frequencies identified for 40 centres, 40 have been
reserved for educational channels to be operated by the Human Resource
Development Ministry without payment of any license fee (MIB, 2002). The
auction of FM frequencies in favour of the open-market lobby is a perverted
interpretation of the Supreme Court Judgement. None of the recommendations
favouring alternative media practices in the country seem to be
materializing in the near future, as the government has now decided to
tackle the issue of convergence of telecommunications, information
technology and electronic media before announcing a comprehensive policy
that will cover the entire communications sector.

The Draft Convergence bill proposes the setting up of a Communications 
Commission of India on the lines of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 
in the U.S. to manage, plan and monitor spectrum for non-strategic and commercial 
usage of communication infrastructure. The Commission would also grant licenses 
while exercising some (among several other) of the following principles:

	o that communication services are made available at affordable cost
	to all uncovered areas including the rural, remote, hilly and tribal
	areas;

	o that there is increasing access to information for greater
	empowerment of citizens and towards economic development; 

	o that quality, plurality, diversity and choice of services are
        promoted.  (MIB, 2000b: Clause 19)

As the country still awaits a comprehensive media policy and a broadcast law
to enable democratization of media, efforts are on for carving out an
alternative media sector in India, which would neither be state-run nor
market-driven. The groups advocating community radio as part of the movement
for an alternative public realm can only hope that the permission to use
radio for development goals at the community level and to represent the
priorities of the vulnerable would be granted soon.

Conclusion 

Radio broadcasting in free India endeavoured to shape up in the mould of
Public Service Broadcasting.  According to communication scholar Dennis
McQuail the idea of 'public service' broadcasting encompasses eight
principles: Geographical universality of provision and reception; the aim of
providing for all tastes and interests; catering for minorities; having a
concern for national identity and community; keeping broadcasting
independent from government and vested interests; having some element of
direct funding from the public (thus not only from advertisers); encouraging
competition in programmes and not just for audiences; and encouraging the
freedom of broadcasters (McQuail 1994:126)

However, the state-controlled broadcasting in India ended up following what
Herman and Chomsky (1988) sketch out as 'the propaganda model' where media
serve "to mobilize support for the special interests that dominate the state
and private activity," becoming a propaganda tool for government policies
and actions. In countries where the levers of power are in the hands of a
state bureaucracy, the monopolistic control over media, often supplemented
by official censorship, makes it clear that the media serve the ends of a
dominant elite (Herman and Chomsky, 1988:1).

With liberalization of the economy in India, broadcasting witnessed backdoor
and reluctant privatization, but eventually, as Kiran Karnik, CEO, Discovery
Channel, opines, forces of commercialization prevailed, leading to a shift
towards empty entertainment (Sen, 2000).  As Stephen Barnard points out, The
classical argument against commercialization of mass communication media is
that pursuit of advertising revenues encourages programming assumed to
appeal to the greatest number, thereby marginalizing less popular tastes and
interests. It creates an environment most conducive to reception of
advertising message, leading to programming that is undemanding,
unchallenging and pacifying (Barnard 2000: 51).

Technology-led globalization of media did not do anything to change the
order of things for broadcasting in India. It led to the concentration of
ownership in a handful of transnational media conglomerates, further
diminishing the freedom and diversity of information.  As cultural
homogenization became the order of the day, the uniformity of the content
rendered meaningless the increase in the number of information sources
(Pavarala and Kumar, 2001b).  As a result, the shrinking of democratic
spaces has weakened civil society, allowing the state and the market to have
unfettered control over the minds of the people.  These concerns have been
articulated in several reports of committees set up to examine the status of
broadcasting in India and also in numerous policy documents. In spite of
plainly stated objectives, little has been done to re-orient broadcasting to
produce meaningful content that dovetails rather than emulates current
practices of commercial radio, and addresses the developmental, social,
cultural, communal and democratic imperatives of the country.  No effort has
been made to ensure that the weakest and the vulnerable are empowered
through access and control of media- technologies. For instance, All India
Radio's 76 Local Radio Stations (LRS) were mandated to produce field-based
programmes with accent on local problems, news and views, and local talent. 
The organization's annual report states: What distinguishes the Local Radio
from the regional network is its down to earth, intimate approach. The
programmes of the local radio are area specific. They are flexible and
spontaneous enough to enable the station to function as the mouthpiece of
the local community (Prasar Bharati, 2002).

In reality, however, owing to inherent deficiencies of a bureaucratic system
these stations only replicate the style of working and even the programming
patterns of a regional station.  Their staff is ill equipped to run them in
a manner that is democratic and participatory.

Even as the well-intentioned state broadcaster is frozen into inaction,
commercial broadcasting has revived a plummeting medium. But the latter's
agenda to accumulate profits renders it incapable of exploiting the
potential of the medium for development.  Radio, designated by several as a
medium of the poor, seems to have been hijacked by the elites, propelling a
number of civil society organizations to articulate the need for
alternatives in the form of popular and community-based media. The community
radio initiatives by several groups across India for a share of the
airwaves, which are 'public property', are one significant indication of
this popular resistance.  The major barrier in ushering a vibrant community
radio sector in India appears to be the perception that it poses a threat to
the power structure.  This perception is based on what White (1994) calls a
zero-sum notion of 'distributive' power. If, as she suggests, power is
understood as 'generative', where by different groups can generate their own
sources of power necessary to accomplish social, cultural and community
objectives, this fear about loss of control could be seen as misplaced. 
Radio must, therefore, be looked at as a tool for empowerment, an
appropriate technology to conscientize and build capacities of communities
to become active participants in development.
						kanchankumar7 at rediffmail.com
References

AMARC (1998). "What is Community Radio?" 
www.amarc.org/AMARC/AMARC_En/amarc/intro3htm

Barnard, Stephen (2000). Studying Radio, London: Arnold.

Baruah, U.L. (1983). This is All India Radio. New Delhi: Publications Division, MIB.

Chatterji, P.C. (1991). Broadcasting in India. New Delhi: Sage.

Chomsky, Noam and Edward S. Herman (1988). Manufacturing Consent. Pantheon 
Books: New York.

Fielden, Lionel (1939). Report on the Progress of Broadcasting in India. Shimla: 
Government of India Press. 

Fielden, Lionel (1960). The Natural Bent. London: Andre Deutsch.

Government of India. (1977). White Paper on Misuse of Mass Media during the 
Internal Emergency, New Delhi.

Lelyveld, David (1996). "Upon the Subdominant: Administering Music on All India 
Radio" in Carol A. Breckenridge (ed.) Consuming Modernity. Delhi: Oxford 
University Press.

Lerner, Daniel (1958). The Passing of Traditional Society. Glencoe, Illinois: Free 
Press.

Luthra, H.R. (1986) Indian Broadcasting, New Delhi: Publications Division, MIB.

Mathur, J.C. and Paul Neurath (1959) An Indian Experiment in Farm Radio Forums. 
Paris: UNESCO.

McQuail (1994). Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. 3rd ed., London: 
Sage.

MIB (Ministry of Information and Broadcasting) (1966). Report of the Committee on 
Broadcasting and Information Media. New Delhi.

------- (1978). Akash Bharati: Report of the Working Group on Autonomy for 
Akashvani and Doordarshan. New Delhi.

------- (1982) News Policy for Broadcast Media: Guidelines prepared by Advisory 
Committee on Official Media. New Delhi. 

------- (1985) An Indian Personality For Television: Report Of The Working Group 
On Software For Doordarshan. New Delhi.

------- (1995). Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act. New Delhi. 

------- (1996a). Report on Prasar Bharati (Nitish Sengupta Committee). New Delhi.

------- (1996b) Report of the Expert Committee on the Marketing of Commercial Time 
of AIR and DD (Siddhartha Sen Committee). New Delhi.

------- (1996c). Prasar Bharati Act 1990. New Delhi.

------- (1996d) Broadcasting Bill: Issues & Perspectives. New Delhi.

------- (1996e). National Media Policy (A Working Paper Submitted by the 
Parliamentary Sub-committee). New Delhi.

------- (1997). The Broadcasting Bill, New Delhi. 

------- (2000a). Prasar Bharati Review Committee Report, New Delhi: 
http://mib.nic.in/nicpart/pbcont.html

------- (2000b). The Draft Communication Convergence Bill 2000. www.mib.nic.in

------- (2002) Mass Media 2002. New Delhi: Publications Division.

Ninan, Sevanti (1998). "History of Indian Broadcasting Reform." in Monroe E. Price 
and Stefaan G.Verhulst (eds.) Broadcasting Reform in India. New Delhi: Oxford 
University Press.

Official website of All India Radio, India: www.allindiaradio.com

Official website of Ministry of Information and Broadcasting: www.mib.nic.in

Page, David and William Crawley (2001). Satellites Over South Asia. New Delhi: 
Sage.

Pavarala, Vinod and Kanchan Kumar (2001a). "Broadcasting in India: New Roles and 
Regulations," in Vidura, Vol. 38, No. 3, July-September.

Pavarala, Vinod and Kanchan Kumar (2001b). "Legislating for Community Radio: 
Policy Framework from Other Countries." In Voices for Change: A Journal on 
Communication for Development, vol.5, no.1, May: 13-17.

Prasar Bharati (2002). All India Radio 2002. New Delhi.

Rogers, Everett M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovations.  New York: The Free Press.

Sanjay, B. P. (1991). "Broadcasting Policy in India: An Outsider's view," a paper 
presented in the technical symposium-cum-exhibition by Broadcasting Engineering 
Society: New Delhi December 7-8.

Schramm, Wilbur (1964). Mass Media and National Development: The Role of 
Information in the Developing Countries. California: Stanford University Press.

Singhal, Arvind and Everett M. Rogers, (2001). India's Communication Revolution. 
New Delhi: Sage.

Supreme Court Judgement (1995). Ministry of Information and Broadcasting v. 
Cricket Association of Bengal. Official website of MIB: 
http://www.mib.nic.in/information&b/POLICY/frames.htm

Sen (2000).  "An Interview with Kiran Karnik," in Alternative Media Times Vol.1 
Issue3.

Thomas, T.K. (ed.) (1990) Autonomy for the Electronic Media: A National Debate on 
the Prasar Bharati Bill.  Konark Publishers.

White S.A.and Patel, P.K. (1994) "The Concept of Participation: Turning Rhetoric to 
Reality" in White, S.A., Nair, K.S. and Ascroft, J. (eds.) Participatory 
Communication, New Delhi:  Sage Publications.

[I gratefully acknowledge the intellectual advice and support I have
received for writing this article from Dr. Vinod Pavarala, University of
Hyderabad. This is a part of my doctoral research work on the perspectives
and prospects of community radio in India. I wish to thank the DDG (A), the
Director, Audience Research Unit and Director, Policy of AIR; and the
Librarian, Research, Reference and Training Division, MIB who helped me in
accessing relevant documents for this paper.]

Notes

According to the Akash Bharati report, the inauguration of IBC's Bombay
station was reported in the Times of India in a banner headline, reading
"Viceroy Inaugurates a Wireless Era for India."

According to H.R. Luthra, Nehru, in 1948, had advocated in favour of a set
up approximating the BBC public corporation model.  Letters of appointment
of Akashvani staff have always included the stipulation that they are liable
to transfer at any time to the service under a Public Corporation.

An expression borrowed from the Chanda Committee report.

According to H.R. Luthra and the Akash Bharati Report, on the same day, the
programme journal Indian Radio Time was redesigned and named The Indian
Listener. It remained unchanged for the next 22 years, when it became
Akashvani.

The story of how the name "All India Radio" came to be coined is related by
Fielden in his autobiography, The Natural Bent (Fielden, 1960).

With A. S. Bokhari's brother Z.A. Bokhari becoming the station director,
critics could not resist labelling AIR the Bokhari Brothers Corporation
(BBC) (Luthra, 1986).

External Services broadcasts started at this time, the first broadcast
commencing on October 1, 1939.

According to the Chanda Committee report, the number of radio licences had
doubled from 2,75,955 in 1947 to 5, 46,319 in 1950.

These include, Broadcasting in India by G.C. Awasthy, All about AIR and
Broadcasting and the People by Mehra Masani, Tangled Tapes by K.S. Mullick,
Radio Programmes of All India Radio by Pamela Philipose, What Ails Indian
Broadcasting by K.S. Duggal.

Chanda Committee report points out that many countries including the UK and
Canada have found it necessary to institute periodic reviews of their
broadcasting systems by independent committees but it has not been so in
India. H.R. Luthra cites it as a case in point that the BBC during its 40
years had been reported upon by four expert commissions: Crawford Committee
(1925), Ullswater Committee (1935), Beveridge Committee (1950) and
Pilkington Committee.

In his book, My Reminiscences of Sardar Patel, Mr. V. Shanker, his private
secretary, mentions that one of the first steps taken by Sardar Patel to
'clean up' radio was to prohibit musicians 'whose private lives were a
public scandal'. Some regarded this as a measure directed against Muslim
women artists.

These included the Shillong, Baroda, Amritsar, and Mysore stations.

The observes that, in both the first and the second FYP, allocation to
broadcasting was about one- tenth of one percent of the total resources
while it was reduced to one-eighth of the total resources in the third plan.
 
Also see Sanjay (1991), for an account of the problems that arose for rural
listeners as manufacture of reception sets was left entirely to market
forces.

Dr. Keskar is said to have explained that Akashvani was a kind of an
all-India name and trademark for All India Radio and the word had been taken
from Kannada where it was originally used for the Mysore station during the
British days.

Also see David Lelyveld (1996) on how under Patel and even more so under
Keskar, measures were taken to assure that the "Hindu' side would prevail in
music on AIR.

Cited in Thomas, 1990: 4 

As stated in the Extracts of Smt. Indira Gandhi's address to the Conference
of AIR Station Directors on Sept 9, 1975.  See Appendix 6, Page 13 in MIB,
1977.

The report attributes this expression to Yashpal (1983). 

B.G. Verghese in an interview with the author.

Ibid.

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India constituted a
Committee on November 22,1999 comprising N. R. Narayanamurthy, Chairman &
Chief Executive, Infosys; Kiran Karnik, Managing Director, Discovery
Communications India; Shunu, Chairman & Chief Executive, Quadra Advisory,
Marketing Consultant; R. C. Mishra, Jt. Secretary (Broadcasting, Ministry of
I&B); Rajeeva Ratna Shah, Chief Executive, Prasar Bharati, Special Invitee;
to carry out a comprehensive review of Prasar Bharati.