Mediated Politics or Media-ized Public?

Introduction

This review will analyze the communicative powers of media in the post liberalized India since 1990. It will focus on the role played essentially by media in shaping up of the public opinion in 21st Century India. The vital questions to be researched will be, whether the public are free to think in the second largest democracy of the world? How does the generation after the Liberalization-Privatization-Globalization (LPG) era think about the political future of the country? What is the particular role played by the media in the said context? Does the opinion of the public differ according to the socio-economic patterns? Do the media consider these socio-economic patterns while representing the public? Is it the 21st Century media-ized public or the politics being mediated to serve the narrow interest of the political parties? Lastly, this review will look into the agenda-setting functions of the social strata and their interdependence. From this point the review will try to examine whether there prevails a ‘Vicious Circle of Dependence’ between the political communication (in any form) and media.

From Press to Media
India was the first country to emerge from colonial rule after World War II . The second largest democracy in the world, gained its ‘Political Independence’, if not economic, from the colonial rule of the British, in 1947. This independence resulted in the partition of India on religious demographics which gave rise to the cancerous element of communal approach that is carried and reflected through generations still today. The Republic of India adopted the secular constitution while nurturing the communal minds in latent form. Inheritance of dominance since 200 years of British Colonial rule has been one of the deep rooted cultural adoptions in Independent India. Indian press-radio is also a fruit of this cultural inheritance. The first Indian newspaper, the Calcutta General Advertise or the Bengal Gazette, was published in January 1780. It was published by James Augustus Hickey, who came to be known as the “father of Indian press”. The first newspaper in Indian language published in 1818 was Samachar Darpan in Bengali. Then it took about 150 years more to initiate the sound broadcasting through private radio clubs in 1927, until 1936 when a governmental initiative was taken to establish the All India Radio (AIR) with the aim to inform, educate and entertain the masses. At the time of Independence in 1947 AIR had a total of six stations and covered 2.5% of the area, serving only 11% of the population. Today AIR has a total of 232 broadcasting centres and covers 99.14% of the population. The rural India still today depends on the radio as the primary source of information. Again with the first screening of the moving pictures by Auguste and Louis Lumiere in 1895 in Bombay, began the age of audio-video era in India. However it was not until 1965 that total broadcasting followed. The television service and radio monopoly ran under AIR till 1976, after which Doordarshan was established as a broadcasting organization to manage television separately.

It was not until 1991 that the private channels entered the Indian market. This was precisely the time when the entire Indian economy and so the media characteristic began to change. The structural adjustment loan taken from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by the Indian Government, as referred by Steve Derne, “the terms of which demanded a devaluation of the Indian rupee, the lifting of most restrictions on foreign investment, and the elimination of licensing requirements in all but a few industries.” This ushered in a new era of Indian Economy, indicated as “Golden Summer” by businessman Das, which is however a debated issue. It is true that a veritable euphoria, on the introduction of economic reforms in 1991 by Narasimha Rao Government, grasped the Indian minds. Something new and bright is going to happen was the shadow created by the Pseudo Capitalist State controlled media. ‘End to poverty’ was the image projected by media. But now after nineteen years of economic reforms no hosannas are sung anymore anywhere.

It was the transition period for media also. The economic force along with the technological advancement marked the modification of press to media. The most significant transformation in Indian context was its relation to people. The press was basically for the literate but the media paved the way for consumption by both the literate and the illiterate. It bridged the gap to give rise to the new media-ized public. Those who were not pen-literate became digital-literate. This was the phase which was totally utilized by the media to propagate the visions of the ruling class in India.

Media-ized Public
It was in 1922, Lippmann wrote that “Freedom of thought & speech presents itself in a new light and raises new problems because of the discovery that opinion can be manufactured.” Though written eighty eight years ago, these words are still significant today. The public in India has limited access to the facts and the minds are full of preconceived images of gaining Independence from the British colonial rule under the leadership of Indian National Congress Party. The prejudiced minds have limited light to focus on the distorted public affairs, reasons of economic decline, decelerating employment growth, rise in unemployment, and rural poverty, declining work participation rate and limited educational scope even after 60 years of gaining Political Independence. Behind the Shinning India there is a Shivering India, a story untold by the media for economic and political benefits. The question that demands answer is, whether, the public are conscious enough to visualize this symbiotic relationship between the news media and the government? Are they able to identify whether a given political act is socially beneficial or harmful?

The fact is that the public are swept by the mediated politics. Their opinion are framed and contextualized by the media without giving the scope to have a logical public opinion. The parliament elections in India since April, 1952 confirm this fact in precedence. The ruling class has always tried to keep control over the state and media has been a dedicated medium for the same. In a society communication becomes information when it acquires the characteristics of knowledge. This information keeps on floating (any medium) through the society but is conditioned by the politically dominated communication network operative in the society. Therefore in a capitalist society, as viewed by Karl Marx and Antonio Gramsci, this information gets transformed into a marketable commodity. The mass media (any) carries this political communication to the public. Again the cost incurred in the carriage is huge. Thus the inevitable question comes in, “With no ads, who would pay for the media? The good fairy?” It’s for the profit in business that the media operators are in the market. Thus to serve the corporate interest becomes an obligation if not compulsion for the media. Therefore the ‘Vicious Circle of Dependence’ (VOD) grows in between the political communication and the media (in any form). The public generally do not come across the politicians or the public issue but get the media images, representations and issues about political thoughts, public issues and politicians. However the public is considered both as a subject and an object. The opinion polls before the general elections in India, makes public an object to find out their motives. Again this public when consumes the media, participate in the debates become a subject in the society.

Technology transfer or Cultural Imperialism
In India, since 1952, the VOD has been operative all through to generate mediated public opinion. It was primarily the face of the Indian National Congress (INC) as the ‘Father of gaining Independence’ for India that was vigorously propagated by the media. In June 1975 the media also faced the first attack when Emergency was declared by Indira Gandhi led INC government. It continued till March 1977. The period marked press censorship, arrests of journalists , torture. The news were censored, however there were instances of rejection by the newspapers, to print censored news. The ongoing imbroglio in Indian politics and the continuing attack on its democratic and secular character marked this turbulent era. There were efforts to redefine the power relationships on the basis of new technological innovations. The PARAM supercomputers and satellite television were the initial examples of US-led technology transfer. However there were resistances against the power exercises, growing up within the cross-section of the society. The period between1982-92 contains numerous examples of peasant rebellions and also the resistances against the so-called elitist bias of the Indian government.

This period of the 1980’s was also vital for the Indian media. New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) coined by UNESCO and propagated vehemently by the MacBride Commission report left deep impact in India media and politics. This report included its prime objective to bring in a balance in the flow of information between the North and the South. In India at the time of emergency, this issue of NWICO came in. Indira Gandhi was an ardent supporter of the NWICO like that of President Suharto of Indonesia and Kenneth Kaunda, former president of Zambia. They all utilized this NWICO propagation for their narrow political benefits. In India the instance of centralized media policy framed by Indira Gandhi was also a fruit of NWICO. The inherent contradiction of arresting journalists on one hand and propagating alternative media in the name of NWICO marked the mockery of mediated politics. This was the time when the new form of cultural imperialism began to “translate its rhetoric into reality”

It was since the 1980’s that the process of economic liberalization in India was slowly making its way. The new form of colonialism, with a furnished outlook continued till 1991. It was the Gulf War crisis that flowed away all the foreign exchange reserves and the Indian Government led by P.V. Narahsimha Rao “turned to the IMF for a bail-out” , bringing an end to India’s path of self-reliance. This period of 1990’s followed industrial recession, declining per capita output levels, falling rate of foodgrains production. The only two achievements were, ‘low rate of inflation and comfortable level of foreign exchange reserves.’ However little of the facts were reflected in the media. The government took hold of the media, propagating ‘liberalisation and globalization with a human face.’ But it can be argued with instances that liberalization can never have a human face and globalization can only aggravate the plight of the public. The body of truth never coincided with the body of news to make a picture of reality for public to act upon it . ‘People were fully reluctant to confer on newspaper its fully idealized role. The newspaper could act as the watchdog of government, but the government also was asked to be a watchdog of the press.’ Both Dewy and Chomsky adhered to the view, citizens has to be conscious and must be able to recognize the manipulations by the government and the media in order to protect thyself and the democratic practices of the society. But in India the public opinion is expressed through top-down strategies, there is less scope for an individual to analyze the political aspects before forming an opinion.

A country with, more than 1,187,877,813 populations, many religious practices, caste system, have really undergone difficulty in stabilizing its political democracy. The criminalization of politics and the corruption has been the main concern of the Republic. With the advanced technological merging of the media with politics after 1991, the social structure, the class outlook began to take a new turn in India. The political parties make close hidden ties with the private media channels and invest lots of money. Even the corporate sectors invest and have the capability to change the news demography. The bankruptcy of the Fourth-Estate as compared to the whole world is also not a different phenomenon in India. Media’s unconditional subjugation to the commercial interest overlooking the publics, have caused hindrance in pertaining democratic character of the society. After implementation of LPG, the media’s role became centralized. Now the media’s role was not only to deliver news but also impart imported culture in local form. The new Entertainment Industry was set up to manufacture culture within the society, which was an innovative way for ‘manufacturing consent’.

Recently the media and entertainment industry in India has suffered a slowdown due to global financial crisis. But it has, as a whole, according to Federation of Indian Chambers & Commerce Industry (FICCI), registered a growth of around 1.3% in 2009 as compared to 12% in 2008. Again the “Broadcast and television sector comprises over 43% of the overall Rs.5.87-lakh-crore media and entertainment sector.” This confines itself to the fact that the emergence of the global network capitalism is increasingly accumulating the political, economic and cultural capital on transnational network organizations that make up the use of new technologies to invade Third World countries like India. The greater concentration and centralization of capital by combining the market and new information technology is also a new form of exerting cultural imperialism. But public in general while consuming the news, are unaware of these hidden policies, neither are they interested to intervene with an inquisitive mind. Lippmann viewed this situation as, “It is the insertion between man and his environment of a pseudo-environment.” This review will like to modify this concept of pseudo-environment as the derivative of history. In India the political tradition holds back to Indian National Congress from the time of Independence. This traditional hooking was rightly utilized by the media. The political campaigns took the form of advertisements, tabloids, leaflets, pamphlets to manufacture public opinion adhering to stereotype .
The General Election in 1999 changed the political scenario in India. The failure of the Left democratic alternative to form a government in 1996 paved the way for the rise of Hindu fascist force to capture power in 1999. For the first time a non-secular government, run on the notion of Hinduism, was established in 1999. There were big investments in media coverage and hype set out by the media in favour of BJP led NDA Government. The caption of ‘Shining India’ was used by NDA to regain its power in 2004. The entire mass media with exception of few were used to propagate this slogan. The attack on secular India hit hard. The target was mainly the urban public. The speech delivered by the First Prime Minister of India, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru “Tryst with Destiny” gained its relevance again after 60years of Independence, where he mentioned: “All of us, to whatever religion we may belong, are equally the children of India rights, privileges and obligations.” However there was again a shift noticed during the six general elections in India between 1989 and 2004 (except 1991 abnormal election) and the people’s verdict was in favour of coalition government.
The media played interesting roles in this period and tried vehemently to keep the tradition of INC as the leader of the coalition. There have been debates over the role of the media but freeing media from the state constraints and private corporate conditions was never made an issue. It was not about making the media democratic but on the contrary the feudal dynastic factor went on engulfing the morals. This review will introduce a second new term ‘Democratic Feudalism’ to describe the contemporary characteristics of media. The semi feudal- semi capitalist structure of Indian economy has profound influence on media and politics. Though LPG gave rise to a ‘new middle-class lifestyle’ through advertisements, popular television serials and movies, the class division in India went on increasing. The new media also sets up news package or entertainment, in the form of fabricated broadcasting, targeting the different classes with a single motive to reap profits. The gullible public consumes the package unquestioned. In this regard Dewy was of the view that, “Popular opinion is little troubled by questions of logical consistency”
To conclude this review reiterates the words of Steve Derne:
“In some ways culture, class, family, and gender were significantly transformed, but in many ways transformations were only modest and continuities were of the greatest significance. Globalization has increased consumerism and layered new meanings on top of the old ones that Indians continue to use to understand class and gender hierarchies. But despite new media messages about family life, globalization has failed to transform the gender and family arrangements of the ordinary middle class Indians who have been unable to take off with the global economy.”

Maoists: Bringing an end to Political Democracy

The political democracy in India today i the others shattered by the movements of the "Maoists". The ideology of Mao is also under threat in the hands of GOONS. We can refer back to John Dewey who who was of the opinion that there exists a relation between the political and social democracy and one is influenced by the other. Political disturbances are mounting pressures upon the public and the public remains indecisive.I just want to share my view and get the opinion to this post regarding the readers observation.

Blogger Buzz: Blogger integrates with Amazon Associates

Blogger Buzz: Blogger integrates with Amazon Associates

21st Century voters...

Do the young mass feel it relevant to vote?

"The democratic public is still largely inchoate and unorganised"

John Dewy said in 1927...what do you feel in this 21st century???

We are living in a global village..as is thought of...but whose village...who can enter this INFLATED VILLAGE? Where is the key?I believe "the people" who have enough money...dictionarized as Capitalists..really have the key to this global village!!!

In this blog I just want to have some answers to the questions I am covered with. I feel the PUBLIC, in the real sense of the term, are not exposed to this global village but continue to live to survive. We talk about democracies, change of Government, politics,but forget to get the opinion of those people who matters the most in the developmental process.Is democracy only what we call 'a voting right' to form a government, to rule a country? Or democracy represents the interviews,news,gossips in media channels to enhance a TRP? Because at the end of the day a media channel has to reap its profits by selling its news in the market. The general public do not have any idea regarding the recipe of the news sold in the market.

I feel this debate of Dewy has to go long with reference to Gramsci...I expect some comments to be added so that this blogg becomes a debate in itself!!!

When unequal & jobless growth becomes the order of day,When inequality & poverty is at the zenith in the whole country,When the Governments tie up with rich, corporate and land lords and ignore the common man and failed completely in solving their problems, Always there has been only 1 saviour, one who consistently voices for the poor and common man Who Fights for them, fights with them, sacrifices their own lives for the poor Not only as opposition or as people’s movements But also when in power in the state governments within their limited powers and permanent discrimination by the Central governments. Which other states have implemented land reforms extensively ?Which other states have democratic decentralization occurring in the exact sense?Which other states focus on education, health, providing employment & removing poverty ? Please see the attachment for more details ONLY LEFT governments of West Bengal, Tripura & Kerala can give the answers for all these. VOTE FOR LEFT VOTE FOR a THIRD ALTERNATIVE supported by the LEFT To provide succor and relief to the poor and common man.