While the country's newspapers are run under the Press and Publications Act of 1973, there has been no such law to run private television and radio centres. Concerned quarters have long been demanding a broadcast law for the electronic media.
The government has, however, chosen to come up with a broadcast policy for private television channels and radio stations rather than a law. The draft policy is scheduled to be placed before the cabinet for approval today. Though persons involved in the sector were consulted, the draft policy does not reflect their views. According to the policy, no statement or picture that may tarnish the image of a government official with judicial powers can be broadcast. Deputy Commissioners have such powers. Even if they violate the law, this cannot be aired as it goes against the policy. What a travesty!
No one will oppose the provision against broadcasting false and misleading news, nor will anyone object to the clause against airing programmes that go against public interest or are anti-state in content. But there can be no justification in making it compulsory for private television and radio to broadcast the speeches of the head of state and head of government as well as other important government programmes. The government can prohibit the broadcast of unlawful material, but it cannot impose rules for the media to broadcast anything under compulsion. The policy speaks against airing statements or pictures that may demean the image of the armed forces and law enforcement agencies. To all appearances, this is a precursor to granting indemnity to certain institutions. How can a person working in an institution be differentiated from the institution itself?
The policy speaks of setting up a Broadcast Commission. It is imperative to know how this commission will be formed, who its members will be, what will be its functions and so on. This policy aims at tying up the hands and feet of the media. Such a restrictive policy is totally unacceptable.