indiantelevision.com
internal Power Search

INCLUSION OF COMMUNITY BROADCASTING IN THE BROADCASTING BILL 1997 Recommendations to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on non-profit community broadcasting. Prepared by VOICES in consultation with broadcasting and development professionals and the National Law School of India, Bangalore. VOICES is a development communication organization. One of our key thrust area is Community Radio and we have been working in this issue for the past four years. This includes, Bangalore Declaration on Radio, Airing community related programs from AIRs Chitradurga FM station, and lobbying for promotion of CR at ministerial and local level. Respected H'nble Minister With the ongoing technological revolution, information plays a crucial role in bringing people together and enables them to make informed choices. The right of free speech and expression includes the right to receive and impart information. For ensuring the Indian citizens’ right to free speech and information, it is necessary that they have the benefit of plurality of views and access to range of options to public issues.1 The national goals of an Indian broadcasting policy have to be unique keeping in mind the diverse citizenary and the need for the peoples participation in a democracy. The Joshi Commission (1982) recommended a decentralized system of broadcasting , stressing upon the need for access, participation, local autonomy and control training and public service as the basis for broadcasting future of India. Thus any broadcasting policy must carry with it the onus to safeguard the citizen’s right be informed, transmit varied programes to awaken, inform, enlighten, educate, enrich and entertain all sections of the people and serve the rural and urban illiterate and underprivileged populations, keeping in mind the special needs and interests of the young women, social and cultural minorities, the tribal populations and those residing in the backward areas.2 The Broadcasting Bill, 1997 must be analyzed in this light to see if it fulfils these national objectives. Analysis of the Provisions of the Broadcasting Bill Section 16(2) talks about granting licensee to institutions which provide, education, environment protection and community service under a restricted bid system as notified by the regulations. There is some ambiguity in the terms used here: What type of institutes can be considered eligible ? Private institutions, non-profit institutions or community broadcasting services ? The South African Independent Broadcasting Authority Act 153 of 1993 defines a community broadcasting service as - one which is fully controlled by non-profit entity and operated for non-profitable purposes: serves a particular community: encourages members of the community served by it to participate in the selection and provisions of the programs to be broadcast: may be funded buy donations, grants, sponsorship or advertising or membership fees.3 This kind of clarity of definition is required. There must be cogent differentiation between a private broadcasting service operated for profit and non-profit community broadcasting which can fall under Section 16(2) Suggested Amendments To Clauses DEFINATIONS Section 2 of the Bill should therefore include of both running thus: 2(zt) "Private Broadcasting Service" means a broadcasting service operated for profit and controlled by an entity which is not a public broadcasting licensee. 2(zu) "Community Broadcasting Service" means a non-profit broadcasting service which caters to the needs of geographically bounded group of persons having a definite ascertainable common interest, subject to Section 25(2) and which is permitted to raise funds to meet operational costs through donations, grants, sponsorships, membership fees, advertising or a combination of aforementioned. FUNCTIONS OF THE AUTHORITY Section 7 of the Bill deals with the Functions of the Authority. This section lays no positive obligation on the Authority to promote a diverse range of services on national, local, and regional level which would cater to the different cultural language groups and communities. It must be seen that a healthy balance is maintained between the different electronic media so that it does not lead to the marginilization of radio which is the only medium of information for 70 per cent of rural India and covers 9o per cent of the geographical area. Promotion of community-based non-profit developmental radio, which is characterized by active participation of the community the process of creating news, information, entertainment, and culturally relevant material with emphasis on local issues and concerns, should be one of the responsibilities of the Authority. An addition should be included under section 7, to come after 7(iii) to read as: 7(iv) To promote broadcasting through low cost terrestrial radio and protect the interests and concerns of local communities. GRANT OF LICENSES Section 16(2) may read as: Notwithstanding anything contained in dub-section(1), the Authority may grant licences to such institutions as may be notified for terrestrial broadcasting services through restricted bids or on payment of nominal fee that may be determined by the regulations. The proviso 16(2) should be broadened in the public interest, to read: -Provided that no institution shall be notified under this sub-section unless the object of such institutions is to promote education, community service, environment protection, health awareness, women’s empowerment or cultural expression. RESTRICTIONS ON HOLDING LISCENCES Part I, Clause 4 of the schedule disqualifies publicly funded bodies from obtaining licence. This brings under its purview universities and other educational institutions as well as co-operatives. These should be exempt, bearing in mind the need for youth participation in media and deployment of media for promoting education. The Varadan Report (1991) had in fact enunciated that preference to be given to public bodies like universities, co-operative institutions etc., if they apply for licences. The proviso to Clause 4 here should read as: · Provided that this disqualification does not apply to the universities and other educational institutions and co-operatives. · Provided that the disqualified under this clause shall not apply to the a community broadcasting service. STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS One of the objects of this Bill is to meet the challenges proposed by the invasion of the skies by direct satellite broadcasting by foreign entities and it has addressed this issue. However, the main object remains to keep India’s democratic traditions alive and keep its diverse citizens well informed and this issue needs a closer look.. For instance deregulation in the USA is not synonymous with the total abrogation of government regulation: media laws can liberate this neo-liberal communication policy initiative by not ignoring matters vital to public interest and community participation in India. The last sentence of the statement number 3 of this section should read as: This can be provided by facilitating private broadcasting and broadcasting services which enable access and participation by the citizens of the Country. The role of broadcasting is all the more important in providing information and access to media so that people can participate in the process of nation building. In the unique conditions of India, terrestrial radio has the widest audience.. Thus the Bill seeks to encourage and create conditions for the development of community radio. SIGNATORIES Ms Sucharita Eashwar Ex Director-VOICES, Bangalore Dr. K.E Eapen International communication expert and Scholar Mr. N Kalayan Raman ASC Enterprises, New Delhi Dr. Michael Traber United Theological College, Bangalore. Mr. A R Pasha Cinematics , Bangalore Ms Ammu Joseph Freelance journalist, Bangalore Ms M T Rukhmini Family Planning Association of India, Bangalore Ms N Lakshmi Concerned for Working Children, Bangalore Ms N Bhatia Indian Express, Bangalore Ms Amula Seethanaman, Indian Express, Bangalore Ms Raji Reddy Bangalore Ms Vijayashree Rajaram, Jyothi Nivas College, Bangalore Ms Preetha Mount Carmel College, Bangalore Ms Udaya Mount Carmel, Bangalore Ms Vinaya Mount Carmel, Bangalore Ms Puja Mount Carmel, Bangalore Ms Bhavana Thakur National Law School of India, Bangalore Mr M A S Rajan I A S(Retd) Formerly Add. Chief Secretary, Karnataka, Ms Indubai Ramesh Director of Commercial Broadcasting(Retd), AIR Bangalore Ms K E Eapen Bangalore Mr Chandra Mouli, AIR, Bangalore Mr Sam Emmanuel Media Centre, Bangalore Mr T N Munniswamy FPAI, Gauribidanur Mr Prem James FEBA, Bangalore Mr Simon Verghese Deccan Herald, Bangalore Ms Prachi Bhuchar Indian Express, Bangalore Mr Sowmya Bharadwaj Jyothi Nivas College, Bangalore Ms Neerja Mount Carmel College, Bangalore Ms Shalini Mount Carmel College, Bangalore Ms Winnie Mount Carmel College, Bangalore Ms Mayura Mount Carmel College, Bangalore VOICES is Bangalore based non-profit development communication organization.One of our key thrust area is promoting community radio and have been into it for the past 4 and half years now. We came up with Bangalore Decleration om radio in 1996. We also aired programs exclusively on local issues on FM in Chitradurga, courtesy AIR, in 1999 and plan to set up a CR in Kolar. Our address is VOICES,165,9TH CROSS,STAGE-I, INDIRANAGAR,BANGALORE-650 038 TEL# 080-521 3902-3 FAX# 080-521 3901 EMAIL voices@vsnl.com
Mahesh Acharya <voices@vsnl.com>
Bangalore, Karnataka India - Thursday, February 24, 2000 at 22:36:56 (PST)

I AM A CABLE OPERATOR. THERE IS AN ACT TO REGULATE THE CABLE TV NETWORKS.BUT IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT.THERE ARE MANY YOUTHS WHO MAY BE UNEMPLOYED AND HAVE INVESTED HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THIS BUSINESS.THEY ARE EARNING THEIR LIVELIHOOD OUT OF THIS.CABLE TV NETWORKS REGULATIONS ACT-1995 DOES NOT PROTECT ANY CABLE OPERATORS FROM BEING HARASSED BY THE SUBSCRIBERS,PAY CHANNELS AND THE BAD COMPETETORS( FELLOW CABLE OPERATORS). MAJOR PROBLEM WE ARE FACING EVERY DAY IS ABOUT OUR AREA OF OPERATION.I think the unregulated Cable TV industryshould be regulated. In most of the placesonly GOONDAs, Thugs and Dirty Politicians are having ownership of these and they try everything possible to wipe out their law abiding goodcompetitors. NEW BROADCAST BILL SHOULD INCLUDE THE AREA OF OPERATION AND CONTROL OVER PAY CHANNELS & THE BAD PAY MASTER SUBSCRIBERS.BRAODCAST BILL SHOULD PROTECT THE LAW ABIDING CABLE OPERATORS AND MEANWHILE CABLE TV SUBSCRIBERS ALSO.
R.S.PATILKULKARNI <rspk@satyam.net.in>
DHARWAD, KARNATAKA India - Saturday, January 22, 2000 at 04:07:59 (PST)

I AM A CABLE OPERATOR. THERE IS AN ACT TO REGULATE THE CABLE TV NETWORKS.BUT IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT.THERE ARE MANY YOUTHS WHO MAY BE UNEMPLOYED AND HAVE INVESTED HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THIS BUSINESS.THEY ARE EARNING THEIR LIVELIHOOD OUT OF THIS.CABLE TV NETWORKS REGULATIONS ACT-1995 DOES NOT PROTECT ANY CABLE OPERATORS FROM BEING HARASSED BY THE SUBSCRIBERS,PAY CHANNELS AND THE BAD COMPETETORS( FELLOW CABLE OPERATORS). MAJOR PROBLEM WE ARE FACING EVERY DAY IS ABOUT OUR AREA OF OPERATION.I think the unregulated Cable TV industryshould be regulated. In most of the placesonly GOONDAs, Thugs and Dirty Politicians are having ownership of these and they try everything possible to wipe out their law abiding goodcompetitors. NEW BROADCAST BILL SHOULD INCLUDE THE AREA OF OPERATION AND CONTROL OVER PAY CHANNELS & THE BAD PAY MASTER SUBSCRIBERS.BRAODCAST BILL SHOULD PROTECT THE LAW ABIDING CABLE OPERATORS AND MEANWHILE CABLE TV SUBSCRIBERS ALSO.
R.S.PATILKULKARNI <rspk@satyam.net.in>
DHARWAD, KARNATAKA India - Saturday, January 22, 2000 at 04:06:22 (PST)

To Whom Ever May Concern: One of the main concern regarding growth of broadcasting is the separation of Broadcasting and Distribution. World over in its infancy stage all the progressing countries have not allowed the Cross Ownership of Broadcasting and Distribution. If allowed, a monololistic distributer can and will ristrict the upstart Broadcasters in their tracks. Take the US as example, it is after over 30 years the cross ownership of two streams is allowed only in last 5 years. One should study these and formulate any policies regarding this. Even the DTH, if not lienced and not made nutral will surely affect the growth of the Broadcast Media. I think DTH should be looked at in tandem with Cable laws. Once again, one needs to really look at the issue of cross ownership of Broadcasting and Distribution. I encourage the policy makers to study the developments in some of the developed markets. Thank you for the opportunity to voice of my opinion.
Vishnu Patel <vishnupatel>
mumbai, maharashtra India - Monday, November 22, 1999 at 23:31:38 (PST)

I represent an organisation in Bangalore called VOICES. This is a non-profit orgnisation working towards decentralised communication and citizen's access to the media. VOICES has been actively involved in a community radio programme for the last three years. In 1998 VOICES launched it's first community radio show called Namma Dhwani (our Voices) in Holalkere, a village in Karnataka. Since then VOICES has conducted projects in Kolar and Chitradurga in Karnataka. Our request to the Minister is for a separate provision in the Broadcast Bill for Community Radio. We think that a separate provision is necessary since a clear distinction must be made between commercial broadcasting services and community radio.In this respect there should be a separate nominal license fee for community radio broadcasters. Institutions and groups working with developmental and organisational goals must also be made eligible for licenses to set up community radio stations. We hope that the Minister will look into this matter and ensure that Community radio is duly represented in the Broadcast Bill.
Shilpa Jacobie<voices@vsnl.com>
Bangalore, Karnataka India - Sunday, November 21, 1999 at 22:03:33 (PST)

Prasarbharati is of no use to the govt or the people today. Let us remember that it was thought of, when only AIR and DD were in existance and they were really misused by the then Government. After all the government as everywhere else in the world, needs a vehicle for propogating its views. Let AIR and DD be with the Government. Let the private operators be given a chance to have their say on their own channels. In a poor country like India, it is essential to have private radio as much as private TV. How come nobody is thinking of that? Small radio stations, owned by communities, to reflect the language, aspirations and music of the community are essential today. The top down pattern of even the private tv opearators will be disliked after a while. Let us have small private radio stations.
Indu Ramesh <ramind@vsnl.com>
Bangalore, Karnataka India - Wednesday, November 17, 1999 at 06:33:37 (PST)

I would like cable TV operators to sort out their operations and give me a box which will allow me to watch what I want to watch. The govt should make cable operators responsible for this rather than just waiting for the winds of change take it in that direction. I have heard thre is this box called an addressable box which can allow us to watch what I want to. This is the box I'm referring to. There should be DTH restrictions excepting pornography should be allowed on the service late into the ngiht and with parental control systems in place. Foreigners should be allowed to come in as partners of Indian companies to upgrade our technology in television. We have very skilled people here but we need the direction which the government and foreigners can give. Let's catch up with the US and UK markets now and get digital television in place, why keep reinventing the wheel everytime; that's the advantage we have of beginning late. We can catch up that much faster. I hope the authorities are listening.Thanks Anirudh Chatterjee
Anirudh Chatterjee <tvlover@mailindia.com>
Calcutta, West Bengal India - Thursday, November 11, 1999 at 20:32:12 (PST)

I would like to see foreign and Indian broadcasters having some controls on the programming and advertising side. Nobody is really selecting programming responsibily. the basic idea is to broadcast programmes that make pots of money or that hopefully will. A regulator like the TRAI would help TV broadcasters to be less adventorous. But please give it muscle unlike the TRAI is.ThankyouRoad skater
Road skater <rs@indiamail.com>
Delhi, Delhi India - Monday, November 08, 1999 at 08:30:46 (PST)

# The foreign equity in Indian broadcasting can be allowed upto 49% without any hestiation, since Broadcasting segment also require huge funds as other sector for its growth. There is no relevance in restricting the foreign equity less than 49% for investment proposal.# DTH must be allowed immediately in India. Politicians play dirty game in DTH without understanding the nature of technology, since DTH is already operating in India in c-band for the past 7-8 years. Then, what is the point in banning it in the Ku-band alone. DTH must be allowed in PROPERITORY TECHNOLOGY formet with a licence to two to three operators nationaly, since the nature of investment is very high and returns will take not less than 5 years to reach break-even. DTH operator must be able to provide Hardware like off-set small dish, LNB and decoders at free of cost to customers alongwith INTERNET service as value-added service.So that, they can expect to cover good number of customers, otherwise DTH will not be successful in present Indian scenrio. Totally, DD is unfit to provide DTH service in any form, it is irrelevant to allow DD for 5 years as monopoly. It will destory the entire concept of DTH in Indian market.# Cable tv must be regulated to avoid unhealthy competition in the sector. The licence to two operator per telecom circle can be a ideal solution to bring down the present controvery.# Eventhough wireless cable losts its relevence now, it can be allowed on trial basis, since DTH will destroy MMDS sector, if it is opened alogwith DTH operations. It is like, MOBILE PHONE segment has now, reduced the importance of PAGERS everywhere in India.
R. MANOHARAN <sharcstar@vsnl.com>www.sharcstar.com
COIMBATORE, Tamil Nadu India - Saturday, November 06, 1999 at 21:54:08 (PST)

Prasar Bharati is needed and should it be autonomous.We have to give freedom to Broadcasting sector by getting rid of bloody politican and gondas.Learn somethings which are good in US thanalways find bad thing with them.Goverment has no business in business
Indian <indian2@hotmail.com>
India - Friday, November 05, 1999 at 09:53:29 (PST)

I think the unregulated Cable TV industryshould be regulated. In most of the placesonly GOONDAs, Thugs and Dirty Politicians are having ownership of these and they try everythingpossible to wipe out their law abiding goodcompetitors.
Rick Janarthanam <Alert_bodyshoper@hotmail.com>
Chennai, TamilNadu India - Friday, November 05, 1999 at 07:01:20 (PST)