Self Regulation-Does it really work?

Television in India particularly Broadcast media enjoys unfettered distinction.  In 1959 when Doordarshan was first launched till the advent of Cable Television in the mid 90’s broadcast services was a government owned enterprise. Basically Doordarshan was the government’s mouth-piece. As long as it enjoyed a monopoly in the air wave people had no choice but to accept it.  But the dawn of 24 hour news channels opened new vistas. News content was unregulated by the government and people craved for more of the “real thing”. Channels like NDTV, Star News, Aaj Tak delivered hard core truth to the audiences and in return earned their respect. The broadcast media played a major role in ensuring justice for ordinary people like Jessica Lal, Priyadarshini Mattoo who were victims not only in life but even after death at the hands of corrupt bureaucrats who did their best to prevent justice from being delivered by pulling the strings on their marionettes. But slowly as we progressed into the 21^st century news became more of business than a pillar of democracy.  Cases like those of Uma Khurana, Aarushi Talwar murder and Mumbai Terror Attacks shamed the ideals of the fourth estate. Inexperienced and in some cases corrupt journalists tried to settle personal scores through the media. The government had since a long time proposed to formulate a bill to regulate the contents of news channels which have been met with vehement opposition. The government has been accused of trying to gag the media. In the past the government of India has faced flak from the public in the aftermath of sting operations carried out in public interest. But with time sting operations became a trend than a necessity to ensure justice and equality. The detractors of the Broadcast Services Regulation Bill have proposed that the media organizations themselves regulate the content of the news, a proposal that was met with benevolence by the government after much debate. Till now the self-regulatory authorities of the media bodies have set up and engaged in grievances redress of their own.

We cannot ignore the government’s concern about the unregulated content that is being aired by the broadcast media organizations. True that the government might want to edit any content that negatively reflects on it but we also have to take into consideration that within the media bodies itself there are scores of people with vested interest. The same people who accuse the government of being draconian might have an ulterior motive in preventing the Broadcast Services Regulation Bill from becoming a law. There is very little discussion about the power of the media amongst common people. Broadcast media has an uncanny ability to mess with people’s head and spoon-feed certain information from which it stands to benefit.  A large majority of the population tends to believe whatever they are being told without analyzing the pros and cons. Self regulation in such circumstances appears farcical. Therefore a balance between the two parties needs to be reached. An independent body can be set up to probe and verify the arguments of both parties. Regulation is best when done by a third independent party. That way transparency can be ensured and people will have access to genuine information. But the proposed third party should feature members from neutral background to preserve the sanctity of such an organization.