Free Speech: An Endangered Species in India; R. Prasad

434 Free Speech: An Endangered Species in India by Rayasam ~ Prasad ,'T he government must have realized the folly of making an attempt to steal through parliament a piece of legislation that sought to deny 800 million people of this land the right of expression," said H. K. Dua, editor of Hindustan Times. He was referring to an anti-defamation bill that came close to be coming law in the summer of 1988. According to India Today, the ruling Congress (I) Party pushed the bill through parliament with the help of its "brute majority." This bill placed the entire burden of proof on the accused in defamation suits. If a politician or bureaucrat disliked what was written in a news paper, he could use poorly defined terms (which were included in the bill) like "grossly indecent," "scurrilous," or "intended for blackmail" to cook up charges against the journalist. The bill also provided for summary trials and prescribed a minimum period of imprisonment for journalists who wrote "defamatory matter."

In the past, few Indians questioned whether it was proper for government to control the flow of information in a democracy. This bill shocked many out of their complacency. After a month long struggle-which included a three-mile protest march-the anti-defamation bill was withdrawn. By their silent acquiescence, the majority of Indians have empowered their government to at tain complete control over the broadcast media. The government created the Information and Broadcasting Ministry shortly after India gained Mr. Prasad, who immigrated from India in 1975, is a freelance writer in Atlanta, Georgia. independence in 1947.This ministry inherited the nation's only radio network, which it has operat ed ever since. No other radio stations are al lowed. When television became the dominant mass medium, the same pattern was repeated. In addition, the Indian government produces news footage that must be shown in every theater be fore the main feature.

Politicians and bureaucrats turned radio and television into propaganda outlets for the govern ment. All India Radio was nicknamed "All-Indi ra Radio" during the reign of Prime Minister In dira Gandhi. In arecent interview, Krishna Kumar, Minister of State in the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, said: "The government's achievements have to be projected. This is the le gitimate work of the Information and Broadcast ing Ministry." Indian television bombards the viewer with im ages of prosperity. Almost every day, cabinet members are shown opening steel millsor switch ing on irrigation dams. But if the country is pro gressing at such a rapid pace, why are so many Indians livingin utter poverty? Officials use the same media to blame uncon trollable forces such as droughts, overpopulation, lack of natural resources, or even plots by foreign governments to explain the problems at home.

Opposing arguments are not to be heard. Kumar also claims that Indian television has to empha size values like secularism. At 9:30 each Sunday morning, this high-sounding ideal acquires a hol low tone. This is when hundreds of millionsof In dians gather around their television sets to watch the Hindu epic, Ramayan. All the voices that protested this governmental promotion of one re435 Demonstrators protesting the Indian government's control of media. ligion over others have been drowned out. Print media serve the Indian public as an alter native to government-controlled radio and televi sion. This is not to say that the newspapers are entirely free. The ruling party holds substantial control over the written word through its ability to allocate newsprint, government advertising revenues, and even leases on newspaper build ings. A few journalists have tried to maintain their independence. But they are well aware that dissidents are usually brought into line by private and public harassments.

Indian politicians, however, aren't happy with their partial control over the newspapers. Embar rassed by repeated disclosures, such as the recent arms-purchase scandals, the Congress (I) Party tried to pass the anti-defamation bill and incorpo rate the print medium into their propaganda ma chine. Some people argue that India, with its overwhelming poverty and illiteracy, has no use for ideas like free speech. However, they delude themselves into believing that surrendering these rights will somehow produce economic prosperi ty and social equity. In any country without a free press, corpora tions-which provide badly needed capital and technology-will be at the mercy of an all-power ful bureaucracy. In the event of a dispute, govern ment officials can easily prevent investors from presenting their side of the story. When Indira Gandhi kicked IBM out of India, for example, there was hardly any protest.

Newspapers in India, which must compete for readers, do a much better job of reporting than radio or television. Literate Indians look to news papers for accurate information. Privatization of the broadcast media would extend this ability to the 60 percent of Indians who can neither read nor write. D 436 Who Is Destroying the World'sForests? by Gregory E Rehmke T ime began its January 2, 1989, "Planet of the Year" issue with a two-page photo of a burning Brazilian forest, and declared: "Man is recklessly wiping out life on earth." A February 23, 1989, Rolling Stone article, "The Scorched Earth," shows cattle in the state of Rondonia in western Brazil nibbling at still-smol dering shrubs. Government -sponsored television advertise ments, says Rolling Stone, encourage impover ished Brazilians "to seek their fortune in the farming, ranching, mining, lumber and hydroelec tric projects under way in Rondonia." The article explains that the 900-mile Highway BR-364, fi nanced by.the World Bank, cheaply transports settlers to Rondonia from urban areas.