Varghese Committee 2

6.
Policies and Guidelines related to Doordarshan: 1984-

2009
This chapter relates to the first objective of the study which is:
• To identify, enumerate and analyse the change, if any, in the policies and
guidelines related to Doordarshan during the period under study.
National broadcasters, owned by the State and funded through public money, have
historically formed a vital component of the broadcasting sector. In many countries, a
State-owned broadcasting organisation supported by public funding was in the past
the only national broadcast medium (Mendel, 2011)179. Over the years, though, new
forms of privately-owned broadcast organizations have acquired prominence.
India’s experience with broadcasting services and policies affects almost one-fifth of
the world’s population, and hence is important in its own right (McDowell, 1997)180.
Policies shaping the production and distribution of audio-visual services have
undergone tremendous changes since the 1990s with the availability of satellite based
signals. This chapter presents an analysis of government policies relevant to public
broadcasting and Doordarshan’s own strategies during the study period.
6.1 Autonomy and independence
All India Radio (AIR) and Doordarshan were departments directly controlled by the
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting until 1997 when the Prasar Bharati Act,
1990 came into force. The issue of giving autonomy to AIR and Doordarshan has had
a long history with the Ashok Chanda Committee proposing autonomy way back in
1964. This committee, the first one to examine concerns related to radio and
television in the country was called the ‘Committee on Broadcasting and Information
Media’. It was set up in 1964.
179
Mendel, Toby (2011). Public Service Broadcasting: A Comparative Legal Survey. Paris:
UNESCO.
180
McDowell, Stephen, D. (1997). Globalisation and policy choice: Television and
audiovisual services policies in India. Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 19, 151-172.
70
The Chanda Committee had observed:
“It is not possible in the Indian context for a creative medium like broadcasting to
flourish under a regime of departmental rules and regulations. It is only by
institutional change that AIR can be liberated from the present rigid financial and
administrative procedures of government” (Chanda Committee report as cited in
Verghese, 1978, p.5).181
The committee had recommended that television be separated from Akashvani. This
was implemented in 1976 when television was separated from Akashvani and given a
new name - Doordarshan. However, another significant suggestion of the Chanda
committee on creating two autonomous corporations to run radio and television were
not accepted.
The second review of broadcasting in India was undertaken by the Working Group on
Autonomy for Akashvani and Doordarshan, popularly known as the Verghese
Committee in 1977-78. The Verghese Committee was set up in the aftermath of
Emergency imposed in 1975 during which some of the most blatant violations of
freedom of speech occurred in independent India’s history.
The Verghese Committee recommended the creation of a National Broadcast Trust

(NBT) to be run as a non-profit making body, an essential public service licensed to
operate under a Parliamentary charter and accountable to Parliament (Verghese, 1978,
p.20).
Significantly the Verghese Committee had recommended the National Broadcast Trust
to be established by an Act of Parliament. At the same time, the committee reiterated
that autonomy of the public corporation and its independence from government
control be entrenched in the constitution so that it cannot be abridged (Verghese,
1978, p. 39).
181
Verghese, B.G. (1978). Akash Bharti – National Broadcast Trust: Report of the Working
Group on Autonomy for Akashvani and Doordarshan. New Delhi: Ministry of Information
and Broadcasting, Government of India.
71
When asked to give feedback about Doordarshan’s autonomy, respondents have
pointed to different kinds of autonomy that a creative organisation like Doordarshan
needs. These include – financial autonomy, functional autonomy, personnel autonomy
and programming autonomy. It is significant to note that in the context of
programming, the need for autonomy was expressed more for news. News is believed
to be the segment the government wants to control the most. Some respondents
mentioned that the regional stations enjoyed some autonomy in terms of
programming. As Bhaskar Ghose, former Director-General (DG) of Doordarshan
mentioned in Doordarshan Days that the regional kendras were the focal point of
television in their respective states before the commencement of the National
Programme. These regional centres of television provided content of immediate
relevance to the viewers and therefore were very popular (Ghose, 2005, p.135).182
Majority of the respondents acknowledged, including those who have worked with
Doordarshan that the organisation has never enjoyed real autonomy. B.G. Verghese183,
chairman of the ‘Working Group on Autonomy for Akashvani and Doordarshan’ set
up in 1977 that gave a radical prescription of constitutional autonomy for
Doordarshan, remarked: “The fact is that it (Prasar Bharati) has never had autonomy,
it is a sad case of infanticide - killed at birth by every single government – Congress,
BJP and all the others that followed”.
Present CEO, Prasar Bharati, Jawhar Sircar articulated that with the setting up of this
body, the ownership was transferred to it from the Ministry of Information &
Broadcasting. “At that time it was conceived to be an autonomous body. But the main
flaw in that, while giving autonomy they said you have to come back for references
for every major thing. The good part of that was otherwise it could go on spending
anything and become a white elephant. But the bad part of it was that most
bureaucrats and some ministers used it as a power wielding tool that you sing my
language or else I won’t give you money”.
182
Ghose, Bhaskar (2005). Doordarshan Days.New Delhi: Penguin Books.
183
Personal interview with B.G. Verghese
72
A senior bureaucrat184 at the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on the
condition of anonymity had this to say about autonomy of Prasar Bharati: “The
autonomy granted was only on paper. The government continues to have a very strong
hold over both Doordarshan and All India Radio. So my assessment is that the
creation of Prasar Bharati has not helped much.”
A crucial aspect here is financial autonomy. The key question that came up was
whether an organization can enjoy an autonomous stature unless it has financial
independence. At present Prasar Bharati (of which Doordarshan is a constituent) is
funded by budgetary grants and Internal and External Budgetary Resources (IEBR).
The plan funds for Prasar Bharati are allocated by the Planning Commission which
are used in areas of content creation and procurement of equipment. The non-plan
funds cover employee salaries given in the form of grants-in-aid from the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting (Pitroda Committee Report, 2014, p.121).185
Every year since its inception in 1997, Prasar Bharati has received financial assistance
from the government to cover a substantial part of its operating expenses. These funds
are provided as grants-in-aid to the organization. The amount received under this head
in the years 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 were INR 1170, 1518, 1270 and 1730 crore
respectively (ibid, p. 122).
There is considerable dependence on the government for meeting capital expenditure

as well as operating expenses. A number of respondents felt that till the time,
dependence on government for finances doesn’t reduce, it will be difficult to achieve
complete autonomy for Prasar Bharati.
However, B.G. Verghese argued otherwise. He did not agree with a dichotomy
between government funding and autonomy of the corporation. He cited examples of
other constitutional bodies such as the Supreme Court, the Comptroller and Auditor
184
Personal interview with ADG in Ministry of Information & Broadcasting
185
Report of the Expert Commiittee on Prasar Bharati, Ministry of Information &
Broadcasting, January, 2014 – Sam Pitroda Committee Report Report
73
General of India (CAG) among others to vouch for Doordarshan’s autonomy.
Verghese186 noted:
“There is a totally fallacious notion that revenue is held by these (government) people,
so they will run Prasar Bharati. The Government pays so he who has the piper calls
the tune. But that is not true. Parliament pays and it is the Parliament that approves the
budget, it is not the government. So the CAG must be independent, the information
commissioners must be independent but Doordarshan must be under the government.”
That is absolute hypocrisy, claims Verghese.
Bhaskar Ghose187 noted that before the creation of Prasar Bharati, DG, Doordarshan
had greater financial powers because the Doordarshan Code which the Ministry of
Finance had approved said the following: “The Director-General shall have the
powers of a Central Minister”. That is the extent of powers they gave to the DG but
such provisions were watered down later on.
Reaffirming Verghese’s recommendation, Ghose argues that the Constitution will

have to be amended in order to guarantee financial autonomy to the organization to
give it the same status as constitutional bodies such as Union Public Services
Commission (UPSC), CAG, and Supreme Court among others.
In the context of autonomy, another issue which featured prominently was that of
personnel autonomy. Since the creation of Prasar Bharati, there has been no clarity on
recruitment policies. Before Prasar Bharati came into being, UPSC was in-charge of
making recruitment to both All India Radio and Doordarshan on similar lines with
other government directorates. With the setting up of Prasar Bharati in 1997, UPSC
stopped recruiting for these two organizations as Prasar Bharati was now a statutory
body. Since 1997, no recruitment took place for 16 years in Prasar Bharati for regular
vacancies.
Media critic and columnist Shailaja Bajpai188 from The Indian Express pointed that
the news section of Doordarshan is manned by people from the Indian Information
186
Personal interview with respondent
187
Personal interview with Bhaskar Ghose, former DG, Doordarshan
188
Personal interview with Shailaja Bajpai, Media critic, The Indian Express
74
Service (IIS). These personnel not being professional journalists have a different
approach to news making and editing.
Former DG, Doordarshan who also served as Additional Secretary in the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting, Rathikant Basu189 raised serious objections to the
approach of bringing government servants into Doordarshan on short tenures. He
remarked:
“The Government needs to make sure that Doordarshan is an independent body. The
concept of sending government officers on deputation is not helping. If I am an IAS190
officer working in Doordarshan for some time, I will be more concerned about my
next promotion than the channel. That affects the organization. So if I come with the
government’s mandate of generating more resources - that will be my sole aim
because that is what the government has asked me to do at Doordarshan. A person
coming on deputation to Doordarshan with such a mandate will be concerned with
his/her personal goals and not abstract things such as ‘quality’ for Doordarshan
programmes.”
Commenting on attempts by politicians to influence Doordarshan, former DG Shiv

Sharma191 said: “One day a minister asked me what ails Delhi TV (as Doordarshan
was known in those days)? I said, sir, the first problem is that it is located in Delhi.
Anybody who feels he/she is important feels it is his/her right to interfere.”
Ninan (1995)192 stated that the government had used the medium of television for
overt propaganda whenever it faced a crisis, be it a political crisis such as corruption
scams, or national security conflict such as rise of secessionist movements in Punjab
and Kashmir.
A discussion on autonomy of Doordarshan is incomplete without a reference to the

Prasar Bharati Act and Prasar Bharati – the organization which was set up to provide
189
Personal interview with Rathikant Basu, former DG and Additional Secretary, Ministry of
I&B
190
Indian Administrative Service
191
Personal interview with Shiv Sharma, former DG, Doordarshan
192
Ninan, S. (1995).Through the Magic Window: Television and Change in India. New Delhi:
Penguin.
75
an autonomous structure to both Doordarshan and All India Radio. The next section
elaborates on the same.
6.2 Prasar Bharati – the organization
More than half the respondents expressed serious doubts over the autonomous status
of Prasar Bharati. As former DG, Bhaskar Ghose193 observed: “Look at Prasar Bharati
today, what is it? Does it have real autonomy? It is still very preachy of the
government. Everyone knows that. Nobody thinks that Doordarshan News is any fair
today then it was before Prasar Bharati.”
One of the major reasons attributed for the failure of Prasar Bharati as an autonomous
corporation was the aspect of financial dependence on the government. Some of the
other failures of Prasar Bharati were described as follows:
1. Failure to come up with recruitment rules for more than 15 years since its
creation.
2. Inefficient people sent to Prasar Bharati Corporation especially the Board.
3. Inability to formulate and express a vision for public service broadcasting in
the country.
4. Failure to come up with clear guidelines on personnel issues.
A quarter of the respondents felt that things were better off in the days before Prasar
Bharati. As former Deputy Director-General (Programming), Basharat Ahmed194
argued: “My feeling is that making Prasar Bharati was the biggest blunder in the sense
you have an additional controller now. Earlier you knew you were a government
servant, the ministry is controlling you that is it. Now Prasar Bharati is supposed to be
independent which it is not, it is absolutely not autonomous. Even a section officer
can overrule the findings of Prasar Bharati Corporation.”
A small section though felt that the creation of Prasar Bharati was a noble idea but it
should have been implemented much earlier than its actual enforcement. Questions
were also raised regarding the kind of people who have been brought into the
193
194
Personal interview with Basharat Ahmed, Former DDG (Programming)
76
corporation over the years. Additional Director-General (Administration and Finance),
V.K. Jain195, though felt that some degree of independence has come with the
establishment of Prasar Bharati. He stated: “Things are a little better with Prasar
Bharati as in the CEO is now a statutory appointee. He cannot be removed for five
years. So there is autonomy but it has brought its own share of difficulties. The
positives are the neutrality that has come in news; we are more balanced and credible
today than before.”
6.3 The Prasar Bharati Act
A few suggestions were also made regarding the Prasar Bharati Act. Opinion seemed
to be that the Prasar Bharati Act is poorly drafted and perhaps its time to re-examine
some of its provisions.
It is significant to note that since its enforcement in 1997, three committees have been
set up by successive union governments to examine the Act and suggest
modifications. Important observations and recommendations of these committee
reports are discussed below.
The Nitesh Sengupta Committee, 1995

This group was set up by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vide a
notification dated 28th December, 1995 under the Chairmanship of Dr. N.K.Sengupta
to review the provisions of Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act,
1990 and to make recommendations regarding the restructuring of Prasar Bharati. The
report was submitted in 1996.
The Group said that they attach paramount importance to public service broadcasting
– in its broadest sense. “The presence of mere frothy entertainment, fun and frolic can
only amuse for a while but cannot meet the real desires of people unless the fare
offered is imbued with social purpose. We believe broadcasting has a higher purpose
than the constant drive to reach out to the largest possible number of people,
flattening out in the process disparate audiences into a homogeneous mass of buyers.
195
Personal interview with V.K. Jain, ADG (Administration& Finance)
77
Crass commercialisation hinders variety in approach and style, resulting in mere
variation of the same theme”, noted the committee (Sengupta Committee Report,
1996, 5.2).196
It made some important observations to bring in ‘real’ autonomy for Prasar Bharati
some of which are discussed in Table 3.1. It made the case for decentralization i.e. to
give more power to regional stations to work independently without having to look up
to the headquarters for day-to-day issues.
Taking cognizance of the landmark Supreme Court judgment on freedom of airwaves,

it proposed a Radio and Television Authority of India (RTAI). RTAI was proposed as
a regulator which would give licenses to both domestic and foreign players, receive
complaints from aggrieved parties, make sure licensees follow the broadcast code and
advertising code, and impose penalties if the same is breached.
In short, it had proposed an independent regulator to take care of issues foreseen in

the future. The Sengupta Committee had clearly ruled out inclusion of members of
Parliament in such a regulatory body. It was supposed to have one president and 10
other members known for eminence in public life. Prasar Bharati was also supposed
to come under this regulatory body as far as the complaints function was considered.
The Shunu Sen Committee, 2000

A high-level committee was set up on November 23, 2000 by the government to
review the working of Prasar Bharati. It comprised of high-profile public luminaries
such as Discovery Channel India Chief, Kiran Karnik, marketing consultant Shunu
Sen, and Infosys Chief Executive Officer N.R. Narayanamurthy. Shunu Sen was
appointed as chairman of the committee.
The committee was asked to carry out a comprehensive review and make
recommendations about organisational structure and legal framework “keeping in
196
Report of the Nitesh Sengupta Committee on Prasar Bharati, Ministry of Information &
Broadcasting, August, 1996 – Dr. N.K. Sengupta Committee report
78
view the responsibilities of a public service broadcaster and to ensure quality,
credibility and professionalism” (Sen Committee Report, 2000, p.4).197
The Sen committee made a number of suggestions to revamp Prasar Bharati which
would have required making amendments to the Prasar Bharati Act, 1990. The
committee observed that “the Act appears to have been put together in haste, and in a
very different environment. The Act reflects – inadvertently perhaps – the desire of
the Central Government to continue to play an active role, by way of approvals and
rule making, in Prasar Bharati (ibid, p. 49).”
The committee recommended that the government distance itself from Prasar Bharati
and give it the freedom and flexibility required to produce high quality public service
programming. It maintained that a public service broadcaster must be completely
independent in three key areas namely, structure, financing, and personnel policies.
The Sen committee articulated that Prasar Bharati should try to become self-sufficient
within five years. It further advised not to depend on government financing in the
long term in order to strengthen financial independence. In the area of personnel
management, the suggestion offered was to transfer the entire staff to Prasar Bharati.
This would ensure that they become Prasar Bharati employees and not remain
government servants. It opposed the deputation of government employees to Prasar
Bharati (examples include IIS, PIB staff) as well as deputation from the private sector.
According to the committee, such deputations were often counter-productive besides
being against the principle of autonomy.
Sam Pitroda Committee Report

An expert committee was set up to review the functioning of Prasar Bharati on
January 28, 2013 by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. It was headed by
Sam Pitroda, Advisor to the Prime Minister of India on Public Information
Infrastructure and Innovation.
197
Report of the Review Committee on the working of Prasar Bharati, Ministry of Information
& Broadcasting, 2000 – Shunu Sen Committee Report.
79
The committee was tasked with reviewing the institutional framework of Prasar
Bharati, including its relationship with Government, its continuing role as a public
broadcaster and measures needed to ensure technical up-gradation of the organisation.
It made a number of observations about the flawed nature of the Act itself that
belittles the cause of autonomy.
The Pitroda committee seconded the opinion of the Shunu Sen Committee on
parliamentary control as opposed to government control for Prasar Bharati. It
lamented the absence of a Parliamentary committee as stipulated under Section 13 of
the Prasar Bharati Act198.
It also noted with disdain the absence of a Broadcasting Council which was to be
created under Section 15 of the Act. The Broadcasting Council was supposed to act as
an ombudsman for All India Radio and Doordarshan.
The committee also pointed out that the stated objective to provide autonomy to AIR
and DD was negated by provisions of the Prasar Bharati Act itself. For example, it
noted that a number of rulemaking powers of Prasar Bharati have been made
subservient to government approval. Even before sending an officer on foreign
deputation, Prasar Bharati has to seek approval from the government (Pitroda
Committee Report, 2014, p.15).199
Talking about news and current affairs, the committee noted that such programmes are
planned, edited, and managed by officers belonging to the Indian Information Service
(IIS), over which Prasar Bharati has absolutely no control. Their deployment in Prasar
Bharati along with specific place of posting is tightly controlled by the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting which can also call them back. The committee
observed that such a system runs counter to the concept of autonomy.
198
Broadcasting, January, 2014 – Sam Pitroda Committee Report Report
199
Sam Pitroda Committee Report
80
Some of the major recommendations of the three committees are listed below:
• Prasar Bharati’s vision must be to become a genuine public broadcaster as
opposed to a government broadcaster.
• Prasar Bharati while being accountable to the Parliament for broader policy
direction must be independent on all operational and tactical decisions.
• Prasar Bharati must become independent of government funding in the long-
term.
• Prasar Bharati must change the composition of its board so that employees of
Prasar Bharati are not on the board. The Sen committee went as far to say that having
employees on the board of Prasar Bharati could undermine the authority of the Chief
Executive (p. 49).200
The table below gives a comparative analysis of recommendations made by the three
committees on key sections of the Prasar Bharati Act.
Table 6.1 Review of Prasar Bharati Act – Summary of major recommendations made
by the Nitesh, Sen and Pitroda Committee
S.No. Section of the Act Nitesh Sengupta Shunu Sen Sam Pitroda
Committee Committee Committee
1. Section 3(2)-Establishment and • In due course of
composition of Corporation time the
possibility of
The Corporation shall be a body converting it into
corporate by the name a company should
aforesaid, having perpetual be explored on
succession and a common seal commercial
with power to acquire, hold and considerations.
dispose of property, both
movable and immovable, and to
contract, and shall by the said
name sue and be sued.
2. Section 3(5) Composition of • Recommended a • Only full-time
Prasar Bharati Board full-time chairman member of the
The Board shall consist of: as opposed to a Prasar Bharati
a Chairman, part-time Board should be
200
Shunu Sen Committee Report
81
one Executive Member, chairman in the the Chief
one Member (Finance), interest of Executive.
one Member (Personnel), ensuring true
six part time members, autonomy. • Recommended
Director General (Akashvani), • Called for against the idea
ex-officio; merging the post of employee
Director-General of executive representation on
(Doordarshan), ex-officio; member into the Board.
one representative of the Union chairman to create • Suggested that it
Ministry of Information and one post. would be better
Broadcasting, to be nominated • Proposed to have a Staff
by that Ministry; and renaming of DG council with
Two representatives of the (Doordarshan) as better
employees of the Corporation, Managing representation
of whom one shall be elected by Director from various
the engineering staff from (Doordarshan) departments to
amongst themselves and one • Suggested provide employee
shall be elected by the other inclusion of one participation in
employee from amongst member each for management
themselves. (programme
planning) & • Representative
member, from the Ministry
(technical of Information
planning). and Broadcasting
• Representation of to the Board
employees on the should not be
board not below the rank of
encouraged Joint Secretary.
because such a
proposal is fraught • Replace the word
with serious chairman with
complications. chairperson as a
first step towards
making the Act
gender sensitive.
3. Section 10(1) – Establishment • The Sengupta
of Recruitment Boards Committee said
The Corporation shall in such that the Chief
manner and subject to such Executive must
conditions and restrictions as be involved in the
may be prescribed, establish for selection and
the purposes of section 9, one or recruitment
82
more Recruitment Boards process.
consisting wholly of persons
other than the Members,
officers and other employees of
the Corporation.
4. Section 11- Transfer of service • The Corporation • Recommended • Suggested
of existing employees to will decide that the transfer of amendments to
Corporation whether the IIS any employee to make provision
(1) All officers and employees officers should be Prasar Bharati for absorption of
recruited for the purposes of allowed on should be done Govt. employees
Akashwani or Doordarshan deputation or not only after the in Prasar Bharati
before the appointed day and in as the committee express consent of after appropriate
service in the corporation as on felt a sense of the Chief screening
the 1st day of April, involvement and Executive. process.
2000, shall be on deemed belonging is
deputation to the Corporation essential for the • Strongly opposed • Employees
with effect from the 1st day of corporation. Birds the deputation of should be given
April, 2000, and shall so of passage idea government the option to
continue till their retirement. not to be employees to revert to the
(2) The provision of sub-section encouraged. Prasar Bharati. government or
(1) shall also apply to the • Existing become Prasar
members of the Indian government Bharati
Information Service who have employees on employees.
been working in Akashvani or deputation should
Doordarshan immediately be given an option
before the appointedday. to join Prasar
Bharati or to
remain in
government.
5. Section 12 (5) – Functions and • The Committee • The Committee

Powers of Corporation observed that the said that it is not
For the purposes of ensuring Prasar Bharati desirable that
that adequate time is made Corporation the Central
available for the promotion of should be entitled government set
the objectives set out in this to decide on its such limits.
section, the Central own on this issue
Government shall have the without
power to determine the consulting the
maximum limit of broadcast Central
time in respect of the Government.
advertisement.
83
6. Section 13(1) - Parliamentary • Existing • In view of the • Urged for the
Committee parliamentary presence of a urgent creation
standing Standing of a
There shall be constituted a committee on Committee on Parliamentary
Committee consisting of 22 communication Communication, Committee.
Members of Parliament, of can oversee this it is redundant to
whom 15 from the House of the function. have another • Prasar Bharati
People to be elected by the • Let the annual parliamentary to be
Members thereof and 07 from Report of the committee to accountable to
the Council of States to be Corporation be oversee the Parliament
elected by the Members thereof presented in front functioning of through this
to oversee that the Corporation of both house of Prasar Bharati. Committee and
discharges its functions in the Parliament so not to the
accordance with the provision that any issues Ministry of
of this Act and, in particular, therein can be Information and
the objectives set out in section discussed at Broadcasting.
12 and submit a report thereon length.
to Parliament.
7. Section 14(1) - Establishment • Proposed an • Argued in favour • Highlighted the
of Broadcasting Council alternate Radio of a single need for
and Television complaints immediate
There shall be established, by Authority of India mechanism for setting up of a
notification, to be known as the (RTAI) as an all broadcasters regulatory body.
Broadcasting Council, to independent body to be set up
receive and consider complaints to issues licenses, separately under • This body would
referred to in section 15 and to set rules of the aegis of the be a sub-
advise the Corporation in the contract and also Broadcasting committee of the
discharge of its functions in look into Authority. Prasar Bharati
accordance with the objectives complaints and Board consisting
set out in section 12. take action. of three
independent
14(2)The Broadcasting Council
members who
shall consist of:
• The Sengupta would be the
(i) a President and 10 other Committee argued final arbiter on
members to be appointed by the against the any disputes.
President of India from amongst inclusion of
persons of eminence in public Members of
life; Parliament in the
(ii) Four Members of Broadcasting
Parliament, of whom 2 from the Council saying it
House of the People to be would not be
nominated by the Speaker desirable.
84
thereof and 2 from the Council
of States to be nominated by the
Chairman thereof.
8. Section 15 – Jurisdiction of and • The Committee
the procedure to be followed by was against this
Broadcasting Council clause; saying that
the same authority
Clause (4): If the complaint is should not be both
found to be justified either a player and an
wholly or in part, the umpire. Proposed
Broadcasting Council shall the RTAI, an
advise the Executive Member to independent body
take appropriate action. to take appropriate
action.
(5) If the Executive Member
• Emphasized that
is unable to accept the
the RTAI and
recommendation of the
Prasar Bharati
Broadcasting Council, he shall
have to be two
place such recommendation
separate bodies.
before the Board for its decision
thereon.
9. Section 16 – Transfer of assets, • Assets of
liabilities, etc. of Central Akashvani and
Government to Corporation Doordarshan
owned by
As from the appointed day, Central
(a)all property and assets which Government
immediately before that day which were to be
vested in the Central transferred as
Government for the purpose of per this
Akashvani or Doordarshan or provision have
both shall stand transferred to not been
the Corporation on such terms transferred till
and conditions as may be date. This needs
determined by the Central to be done at the
Government and the book value earliest.
of all such property and assets
shall be treated as the capital
provided by the Central
Government to the Corporation.
10. Section 24 – Power of Central • Felt that this will
85
Government to obtain give the Central
Information Government
sweeping power
The Central Government may to get involved in
require the Corporation to the day-to-day
furnish such information as that functioning of the
Government may consider corporation and
necessary. thereby make the
concept of
‘autonomy’
meaningless.
• Only financial
information
should be shared
and could be
asked for on
similar lines with
the BBC in UK.
11. Section 32 – Power to make • Section 32 gives
rules powers to the
Central
(1) The Central Government Governmentto
may, by notification, make rules make rules
for all or any of the following relating to
matters, namely: salaries and
(a) the salaries and allowances allowances of
and conditions of service in whole time
respect of leave, pension (if members,
any), provident fund and other allowances to
matters in relation to the Whole- part time
time Members. (b) the members,
allowances payable to the conditions of
Chairman and Part-time service of
Members employees,
(c) The control, restrictions and manner and
conditions subject to which the conditions for
Corporation may appoint establishing
officers and other employees. Recruitment
(d) The manner in which and board, etc.
the conditions and restrictions
subject to which a Recruitment • This section
Board may be established. needs
86
amendment so as
to give complete
authority to
Prasar Bharati
handle human
resource and
personnel issues.
Source: Sengupta Committee Report, 1996; Sen Committee Report, 2000; Pitroda Committee
Report, 2014.
6.4 Interference from Government
A number of respondents especially those who are working or have worked with
Doordarshan were asked to talk about instances of government interference in their
working, if any. While some said there was no major interference, others pointed out
areas where interference of government is prominent and regular. Based on an
analysis of their responses, news came out as the most important area which the
government attempts to influence and control. These are detailed in Figure 6.1.
Figure 6.1 Major areas of government interference
Appointment of Commissioing of
News
Director-General programmes
Sending governemnt
Paternalistic attitude
officers on deputation
towards DD and AIR
to DD
Government interference in appointment to key posts came out as a concern. Senior

professionals mentioned that Director-Generals who did not fall in line were removed.
Talking about the negative impact of such arbitrary decisions by the government,
87
former Director (Programmes), Doordarshan, Ashok Ogra201 noted, “If you treat
Director-Generals like tenure-based government jobs then you do not build the
organization. If the DG is doing well, he has the talent, give him time, by the time he
is able to come up with a long term strategy he is shifted.
Former DG, Doordarshan, Bhaskar Ghose202 recollected that many a times it was not
just the ministry rather politicians of all kinds – ministers from other ministries as
well as Members of Parliament who wanted to influence Doordarshan and its
coverage. He also spoke about the political class’s interference in the commissioning
of programmes to independent producers. In such cases, pressure would be exerted to
approve certain serials despite them being mediocre.
News was a genre that was particularly mentioned by the respondents as one which
faces maximum scrutiny and attempts to control by the government. Former Head of
News Division, Indira Mansingh203 observed, “P.V. Narasimha Rao had a very strict
office (PMO). There was a person in his office, who just wouldn’t let anything go
directly without a clearance when it concerned the ruling party. There was a stage
when the script had to be sent to him before it could go on air.”
Former news presenter at Doordarshan, Sunit Tandon204 explained how the audio-
visual media was misused for propaganda during days of the emergency. However, he
feels that with the onset of coalition governments at the centre, there has been no large
scale control of Doordarshan or instances of it being used as a propaganda machine
because it was not one party that was in power. Most other respondents, however, did
not see any such trend and felt that there is still a very strong inclination to influence
and control news.
201
Personal interview with Ashok Ogra, Former Director, Programmes, Doordarshan &
former Vice-president, Discovery Channel, India
202
203
Personal interview with Indira Mansingh, Former Head, Doordarshan News
204
Personal interview with Sunit Tandon, former news presenter, Doordarshan
88
Rathikant Basu205 observed that the practice of sending government officers on
deputation to Doordarshan has to stop to safeguard autonomy of the organization. He
observed that such practices were having a debilitating impact on the organization.
6.5 Funding public service broadcasting
Opinion seems to be divided on the best possible mode of funding the public
broadcaster - Doordarshan. More than half of the respondents felt that Doordarshan
needs to have a guaranteed source of revenue either in the form of government grants
or some other form of public money.
Government budgetary grant is the primary source of sustaining Doordarshan in the

present scheme of things. Till 1976, Doordarshan and All India Radio were funded by
a license fee on the lines of public broadcasters such as the BBC. License fees – a tax
linked to ownership of receivers have been the historical form of financing public
broadcasting (WRTVC, 2001).206
In 1976, the license fee was abolished and commercials began to be accepted in order
to increase revenue. The Akashvani and Doordarshan (Commercial Services Revenue)
non-lapsable fund was created in 1977. This fund commonly known as the Non-
Lapsable Fund (NLF) is derived from the net advertising revenue. The fund was
originally intended to bring about improvements in software generation.
Subsequently, it was also used for facilitating improvements in hardware and for
training needs (Sengupta Committee Report, 1996, 4.2).207
Former Director-General of Doordarshan, Bhaskar Ghose208 expressed strong

disapproval of the decision to scrap the license fee. In his view, having a guaranteed
source of income is a must for public service broadcasting. Reflecting on the decision
to introduce advertising on Doordarshan, he says:
205
206
WRTVC (2001).Public Broadcasting: How? Why? Paris: UNESCO
207
Dr. Nitesh Sengupta Committee Report, 1996, 4.2
208
89
“Indira Gandhi as the prime minister was against letting them bring in advertising on
Doordarshan. She said government will pay for the government channel and there is
not going to be any advertising. Then she reluctantly agreed but said that the money
(generated from advertising) will not go to fund Doordarshan. This money will go
towards a fund that she set up called the Non-Lapsable Fund (NLF), the proceeds of
which will be utilized for the betterment of television - for making better programs.”
Dr. N. Bhaskara Rao209, founder chairperson of the Centre for Media Studies, New
Delhi, identifies the decision to introduce commercial revenue in Doordarshan as one
of the major milestones in its history. He said:
“I was also part of the ministry at a critical juncture starting 1974. I and the deputy
minister at that time opposed the idea of introducing commercials. Unfortunately just
at that time when the decision was taken, emergency was declared. V.C. Shukla
became the Information and Broadcasting minister and his outlook was very different
than his predecessor.”
The decision to scrap the license fee is seen as a major turning point for public service
broadcasting in India. It is believed to have closed the door on Doordarshan’s (and
AIR’s) ability to get a substantial and regular source of funds that were not affecting
any other government resource.
The license fee is considered to be the best method of funding public service
broadcasting because it is largely independent of government or commercial
pressures. This model ensures that it is the people who pay for the public broadcaster,
not the government, so the finances of the entity do not form part of the government’s
annual spending reviews (Banerjee & Seneviratne, 2005, p. 115).210
The 1980s was a period of rapid expansion for Doordarshan. Advertising eventually
opened up on Doordarshan supported by a heavy mix of entertainment programming
209
Personal interview with Dr. N. Bhaskara Rao, Chairperson, Centre for Media Studies
210
Banerjee, I., & Seneviratne, K. (Eds.) (2005).Public Service Broadcasting: A Best
Practices Sourcebook. Singapore: UNESCO.
90
on offer. McDowell211 (1997) noted that the decision to introduce colour television
was influenced by the commercial appeal of the more attractive medium (p.158).
By 1994, the Government ordered Doordarshan to raise its own resources for future
expansion (Ninan, 1995212; Rodrigues, 2010213; & Sinha, 1998214). Author Nikhil
Sinha remarked that this new commercial mandate gradually began to change
Doordarshan’s perception of its primary constituents.
Reflecting on the impact of this decision on Doordarshan’s priorities, Rathikant

Basu215 who spearheaded Doordarshan during the critical period of the 1990s
observed:
“While in 1993 the revenues of Doordarshan had plummeted to Rs. 300 crores, by
1995-96 it doubled. And government grants were also becoming limited. Every time
the budgetary allocation was being planned, the Planning Commission would tell us
to generate our own resources. We were told to make our ends meet. Since revenue
became an important consideration, it led to more and more entertainment
programming on Doordarshan.”
Highlighting the centrality of funding for good programming, Shekhar Chowdhury216,

former Deputy Director-General and presently consultant with DD National says,
“Budgets are shrinking day by day. For making good programmes you need good
budgets and good producers. These three things go together - good programmes, good
budgets and good producers. These factors lead to viewership of shows.”
211
McDowell, Stephen D. (1997). Globalization and policy choice: Television and audiovisual
services policies in India. Media, Culture & Society, Vol.19, 151-172.
212
Ibid
213
Rodrigues, U.M. (2010). Public Service Broadcasting in India: Doordarshan’s Legacy. In
Ranganathan, M., & Rodrigues, U.M. (Eds.), Indian Media in a Globalised World. New
Delhi: Sage Publications.
214
Sinha, Nikhil (1998). Doordarshan, Public Service Broadcasting and the impact of
Globalization: A short history. In Price, M.E., & Verhulst, S.G. (Eds.), Broadcasting Reform
in India: Media Law from a Global Perspective, (pp. 22-40). New Delhi: Oxford University
Press.
215
216
Personal interview with Shekhar Chowdhury, former DDG, Programming
91
A major challenge faced by public broadcasters around the world is the strain on
public resources for broadcasting. Michael Tracey in his book The Decline and Fall of
Public Service Broadcasting predicts that the “notion of paying for television from the
public treasury will become increasingly rare, replaced by commercial funding and
direct payment”217 (p. 34). Similar views were expressed by some respondents who
felt that in a developing country like India, there are always going to be more
compelling priorities for the government in place of broadcasting.
Rajiv Mehrotra218, Managing Trusteeof the Public Service Broadcasting Trust

(PSBT), while commenting on the difficulty to allocate government funds for public
broadcasting said: “We are a developing country so we cannot expect the government
to make the kind of public investment that happens in other countries. In a democracy,
there are different concerns to take care of. Parliament has to choose between building
hospitals and sustaining public service broadcasting in the country. So these are
competing priorities. So how can you neglect health and devote funds to public
service broadcasting though I may feel it is equally important.” He feels that greater
government support is an impractical suggestion.
Not everyone, though, agreed with such comparisons and argued that broadcasting is
also an essential public service that must be supported. Media scholar and present
Vice-chancellor of the Shiv Nadar University, Nikhil Sinha219 remarked while making
a case for public funds for public broadcasting:
“There are two approaches to this question. Yes, government funds are limited but the
government spends on all kinds of things. You have to prioritize. If you feel that
broadcasting is of vital national interest then surely you need to prioritize it over say
running a five-star hotel which the government also does. So it’s a matter of allocation
of funds. Can the government find the money to run public broadcasting, of course it
can. So I don’t buy that argument.”
217
Tracey, M (1998). The Decline and Fall of Public Service Broadcasting. New York:
Oxford University Press.
218
Personal interview with Rajiv Mehrotra, Managing Trustee, PSBT
219
Personal interview with Nikhil Sinha, Media academician
92
It is this area which has seen maximum debate in public service broadcasting – best
possible and feasible methods to fund public broadcasting. Most international public
broadcasters fulfill their mission using a mix of external resources and own resources.
Public broadcasters worldwide use different levels of public and own funds and there
is no universal model available. BBC, for instance, depends upon licensing fee for its
entire revenue and with no share from advertisements. Australian Broadcasting
Corporation (ABC) gets 85% of its funding from government and 15% is self-
generated, mostly from merchandising. Al Jazeera too is financed mostly from
government grants with limited advertisements (Pitroda Committee Report, 2014)220.
Commercial funding in the form of advertisement generated revenue brings its own
set of concerns for a public broadcaster. A McKinsey Report prepared for BBC titled
‘Public Service Broadcasters around the World’ in 1999 found that higher the
advertising figure as a proportion of total revenues, the less distinctive a public
broadcaster is likely to be. The report made a strong case for the license fee route of
funding for public service broadcasting as it provides the most stable long-term
funding source. Such funding can then enable the public broadcaster to invest in new
services, new technology, and new types of programming (McKinsey, 1999, p.5).221
The report also outlined the characteristics of an ideal funding model for public
service broadcasting which should be as follows:
1. Substantial enough to cover a true competitor to commercial channels;
2. Independent from undue government or other influences;
3. Predictable over the medium term;
4. Growing at a similar or faster pace than the public service broadcaster’s costs;
and
5. Sufficiently simple and equitable so that it can be administered with the
minimum of political controversy.
A number of respondents asserted that a license-fee like model is ideal for public
220
Broadcasting, January, 2014 – Sam Pitroda Committee Report
221
McKinsey, (1999).Public Service Broadcasters around the world. A McKinsey Report for
the BBC, January, 1999.
93
service broadcasting in India though some expressed doubts about its viability in a
developing country like India. Nikhil Sinha222 observed: “In countries like India
license fee does raise the issue of affordability. It does raise the issue of marginalizing
those parts of the viewership who otherwise could not afford to pay for the license. So
I am not a big fan of the idea that in a country like India you got to have television
licenses because, I think, it runs the risk of not making it available to everybody.”
Ashok Jailkhani223, former Additional Director General (ADG), Programming,

reiterated the need for a guaranteed source of income for Doordarshan:
“All over the world, there are public broadcasters and they have a guaranteed source
of funding. We had proposed license fee for Doordarshan but that decision is not
politically viable. For a genuine public service broadcaster to fulfill its mandate, some
kind of guarantee of revenue is needed; be it in the form of license fee, some tax, or
some other source. You need a constant source of revenue.”
Media scholar and co-author of Indian Media in a Globalised World, Usha

Rodrigues224 arguing in favour of greater funding for public broadcasting rejects the
idea of government not being able to allocate enough funds. She reminds that
government has no money of its own; it is public money that is used to fund
Doordarshan. “Now when we talk about funding of Doordarshan in India or in any of
the developing countries they see it as being government funded rather than the words
being used – it is tax-payer funded. Government doesn’t own any money it gets
money from the taxpayers. So, whenever, we talk about public service broadcasting in
Australia, it is referred to as tax-payer funded public service broadcaster. So the whole
onus or the burden shifts from it being funded by somebody rather than it being
funded by all of us together.” She claims that public broadcasters free of commercial
interests have generally done better.
Former DG Rathikant Basu225 felt that if the public broadcaster in India wants to
222
223
Personal interview with Ashok Jailkhani, former ADG, Programming
224
Personal interview with Prof. Usha M. Rodrigues, Media academician & co-author of
Indian Media in a Globalised World
225
94
compete with commercial players then it has to get some kind of advertising revenue.
According to him, license fee will not be sufficient to cover all costs; it may be able to
sustain just the pure public service kind of programmes.
A number of alternative measures were also suggested by respondents for generating

revenue for public service broadcasting. Some of these included:
• Imposing a tax on purchase of television sets,
• Making private channels pay a fee for using the airwaves (a public resource)
and use that money for public service broadcasting, and/or
• Asking private channels to provide a certain percentage of public service
programming.
Some respondents suggested that a public broadcaster needs a source of revenue

independent both of the market as well as the vagaries of the political system,
something on the lines of a license fee which fund major public broadcasters around
the world.
The table below details funding patterns of major public service broadcasters around
the world.
Table 6.2 Sources of funds of major public service broadcasters in the world226
S. No. Name of Broadcaster Mode of funding
1. United Kingdom – BBC Primary source – TV license fee (97%)
2. Australia –ABC Primary source - Special parliamentary
appropriation
3. Canada - CBC Primary source - Direct annual grants
Other sources - advertising, subscriptions,
property rentals.
4. France – France Television Primary source – annual license fee paid by
TV owners
Other sources – direct public transfers,
advertising (decreasing every year) and
sponsorship of programmes, selling audio-
visual works.
226
Source: Banerjee & Seneviratne (2005); & Mendel (2011)
95
5. Japan – NHK Primary source - Receiver’s (license) fee
(96%)
Minor share coming from programme
revenues and financial income
6. Poland – Polish Television License fee (30%); interest for late payment of
fee; fines for non-payment of license fee
*35% of the populace exempt from paying due
to old age, disability or poverty. Evasion of
license fee payment is common.
7. South African Broadcasting Primary source – advertising and sponsorship
Corporation (76%)
Other sources – television license fee (18%)
small amounts from direct government grants
8. Germany – ARD & ZDF Primary source – license fee
Other sources – limited commercial
advertising
9. Thailand – Thai PBS Tax on liquor and tobacco products
Other sources – donations, income from
intellectual property rights, and interest earned
on its resources
Expenses of Prasar Bharati

As mentioned above, at present Prasar Bharati (of which Doordarshan is a
constituent) is funded by budgetary grants and Internal and External Budgetary
Resources. The plan funds for Prasar Bharati are allocated by the Planning
Commission. The plan funds used by Prasar Bharti require furnishing of utilization
certificates.
Every year since its inception (1997), Prasar Bharati has received financial assistance
from the government to cover a substantial part of its operating expenses. These funds
are provided as grants-in-aid to the organization. The amount received under this head
in the years 2010, 2011, 2012 & 2013 were INR 1170, 1518, 1270 and 1730 crore
respectively (Pitroda Committee Report, p. 122).227
Therefore, Doordarshan is dependent on the government for funding its capital

expenditure as well as meeting operating expenses. The government pays the salary
bill for all employees but major part of operational expenses has to be met by Prasar
Bharati through self-generation of revenues. A substantial proportion of revenue also
227
Pitroda Committee Report, 2014.
96
comes from the government, from the programmes it creates and broadcasts for
different ministries of the government.
Prasar Bharati makes annual revenues of Rs. 1400 to 1500 crore most of which comes
through advertising. But the operational expenses outweigh the earnings at Rs. 2000
crore. The operational costs include maintenance, software expenses and marketing.
Out of the revenues earned, bulk of it goes to run the terrestrial network on to which
20-22 million subscribers are hooked (Business Standard, 2012).228
Doordarshan has a network of 1415 transmitters spread across the country (57% of
these are located in the tribal and border areas). Out of 33 TV channels, only 2
channels - DD National and DD News are available in terrestrial mode. The terrestrial
setup allows Doordarshan to achieve 82% geographical coverage and 92% population
coverage (Pitroda Committee Report, pp.35-36).229
A number of Doordarshan officials admitted that maintaining the terrestrial network is

a huge cost for them. ADG (Engineering) H.K. Wadhwa, explained that they have to
send engineers on periodic visits to these places for service and repair, all of which
adds up to the operational costs230.
Since a major portion of revenue goes for the terrestrial network, very little is left for
programming. Only about Rs. 300 crore is spent on software development, or a mere
one-fifth of the total cost. In contrast, private channels spend more than half their
expenditure on procuring software (Business Standard, 2012)231. Former Director-
General of Doordarshan, Tripurari Sharan232 acknowledged such concerns: “The
major part of our revenue goes into operational expenses. After that we are left with
very little money for programming. We do not have the flexibility enjoyed by the
private channels.”
228
Das Gupta, S. & Mitra, S. (2012, October 24). Prasar Bharati: Can Sircar turn it around?
The Business Standard.
229
230
Personal interview with H.K. Wadhwa, ADG (Engineering)
231
Das Gupta, S. & Mitra, S. (2012, October 24). Prasar Bharati: Can Sircar turn it
around?The Business Standard.
232
Personal interview with former DG Doordarshan, Tripurari Sharan
97
According to V.K. Jain233, ADG (Admin &Finance) this is a major constraint which
unfairly differentiates Doordarshan from other channels: “The major part of the cost is
maintaining the terrestrial network. We have a vast terrestrial network. Huge
infrastructure is involved in that and that is part of our operational expenses. To run
this network, we have to maintain a vast network of engineers. That is also a cost.
This is not matching with the private channels. They do not have such costs.”
Some respondents also felt that it is time to switch over to satellite-based distribution
platforms and do away with the terrestrial network. Former Director, Delhi
Doordarshan Brij Bakshi234 expressed that Doordarshan has to pay attention to its
distribution platform. He feels terrestrial is no more as relevant as before and
therefore, Doordarshan must embrace new distribution technologies.
ADG (Programming), Ranjan P. Thakur235 made a passionate call for replacing

terrestrial with satellite based platforms such as Direct-to-Home (DTH). He said:
“Terrestrial broadcasting is dying, why does the country spend 2000 crores on
terrestrial when nobody is watching? Why can’t DTH replace that?” He believes that
today’s generation is aspirational and they would not want to watch just two channels
which Doordarshan’s terrestrial network offers. Therefore, the future is not in
terrestrial, he conceded.
The ‘Expert Group on Technology’ within the ambit of the Sam Pitroda-led committee
which made key recommendations in the area of technology, suggested a move to
satellite transmission (DD Direct) as primary mode of transmission. They
recommended that DD should switch off analog terrestrial and adopt DD Direct (a
free DTH service offered by Doordarshan) as primary mode of transmission (p.26). It
was further argued that the switchover from terrestrial to satellite will meet all
requirements of the public broadcaster and also improve overall user experience.
The Sam Pitroda committee further noted that the switch over to satellite will be cost-
effective as it will allow Prasar Bharati achieve annual saving of approximately Rs.
233
234
Personal interview with Brij Bakshi, former Head and ADG, Delhi Doordarshan
235
Personal interview with Ranjan P. Thakur, ADG, Programming
98
635 crores of operational expenses towards maintenance and operations (p. 27).236
6.6 Advertising and Doordarshan
As discussed above, Doordarshan was funded by license fees till the year 1976 when
this was scrapped and a decision was taken to introduce advertising on television.
Bhaskar Ghose237 categorises this as the biggest blunder in the history of public
service broadcasting. He added that when advertising was introduced, the priorities
were different for the public broadcaster as compared to today’s day and age.
Ghose claimed that it was decided to use the money coming in from advertising for
the betterment of television – for bringing in better software and programmes. But
eventually the better programme part of it got sidelined. Better programmes were
interpreted in a very large sense, so it got invested for the means of making such
programmes. Consequently, the money was spent on purchase of equipment - better
cameras, better lights, and others from the evolving world of television equipment.
Initially, advertisers did not take much interest in Doordarshan as the content was
mostly educational and informative. Introduction of colour television in 1982 and the
national programme (that made same telecasts all over the country possible) changed
all that. Advertisers woke up to the possibility of making their products known across
the nation through a single medium.
The decade of 1980s was a period of expansion for Doordarshan. Hum Log telecast as
the first soap opera was a sponsored programme. The phenomenal success of Hum
Log paved the way for a decade devoted to entertainment programming. Advertisers
were particularly interested in entertainment programmes because these were a hit
with middle class audiences, the consumers advertisers were looking for. By 1990-
91, Doordarshan’s advertising revenue had shot up to Rs. 2.53 billion from a modest
Rs. 80.8 million in 1980-81 (Mehta, 2008, p. 156)238.
236
237
238
Mehta, Nalin (2008). India on Television: How Satellite News Channels have changed the
way we think and act? New Delhi: Harper Collins.
99
Respondents who worked with Doordarshan during these days claimed that such
trends started the process of commercialisation of the public broadcaster. Basharat
Ahmed239 admitted, “The commercial considerations didn’t creep in after satellite
television, it just became more mind boggling. There was certain amount of
commercial consideration even before but they remained in the background. We were
running sponsored programmes on television in the 1980s which were generating
good revenue.” He feels that it is only with the coming of private television that
commercial considerations started dictating terms on television.
Rathikant Basu240 believes that dependence on commercial revenue had the outcome
of making Doordarshan more audience-oriented. He said by the mid-1990s,
Doordarshan had gone ahead of other channels both in terms of ratings as well as
commercial revenues. He doesn’t hold the organization responsible for this shift
towards commercialisation as he feels it had become an imperative then. He noted:
“this was a time when the government asked DD to generate more revenues and,
therefore, we had to become audience oriented. All depends on the priorities set by the
government. If government says you need to earn more money then we have to follow
that path.”
The private channels were able to overtake Doordarshan in the next few years as the
favourite choice for advertisers. Consequently, Doordarshan’s share of television
advertising dropped from 78% in 1989 to 68% in 1993 (Ninan, 1995)241. The advent
of satellite television gave advertisers more options. Eventually, television’s share in
overall advertising spend increased relative to other mediums. By 2004, television’s
share tripled to almost 41% while the share of print had come down to 47% (Mehta,
2008, p. 157)242. At present Prasar Bharati (including both AIR and DD), has less than
239
240
241
Ninan, S. (1995).Through the Magic Window: Television and Change in India. New Delhi:
Penguin.
242
way we think and act? New Delhi: Harper Collins
100
10% share of the Rs. 15,000 crore earned by broadcasters every year through
advertising (Business Standard, 2012)243.
Table 6.3 Doordarshan’s Commercial Revenue

Year Rupees (in million)
1976-77 7.70
1980-81 80.80
1984-85 314.30
1988-89 1612.60
1992-93 3602.30
1996-97 5727.30
2000-01 6375.10
2005-06 9600.00
Source: ddindia.net, 2003 & exchange4media.com as cited in Rodrigues (2010)
However, the scramble for advertising money resulted in changes in programme

content on television, feel many. Respondents acknowledged that advertisers bring
their own interests to the table and tend to be very demanding in their requirements in
order to get more and more people watch the programmes.
Rajiv Mehrotra244 articulated that due to the dependence of television industry on

advertising, programming with significant public service content will always lose to
mass entertainment. He explained: “we are trying to restructure the ratings system
because it does not cover rural consumers. They (the advertisers) are interested in
consumers and in that definition rural people do not fit in. The advertisers are not
interested in rural areas. They do not want to place an ad in a programme whose
primary viewership may be in the rural areas.”
243
Das Gupta, S. & Mitra, S. (2012, October 24). Prasar Bharati: Can Sircar turn it around?
The Business Standard.
244
101
He seemed to be making a valid point which other researchers have also shown
through their work. Mehta (2008)245 explained that Indian television channels derive
roughly 70% of their revenues from advertising and the rest from subscription which
is the reverse of what happens in the more advanced western nations. Bulk of
subscription revenues are siphoned by cable operators as they control the last mile of
distribution of satellite channels and tend to under-report their subscriber base.
This situation is likely to change with the introduction of mandatory digital reception
of television signals. The 142-million TV market in India is one of the largest in the
world along with China and Brazil but broadcasters do not earn profits. One big
reason is that just about 15 to 20 per cent of the money cable operators collect comes
back to broadcasters. Once all TV homes are digitised, it is expected to release
Rs.10,000-15,000 crore into the business annually (Khandekar, 2012)246. With greater
earnings from subscription, it is expected that broadcasters will be less receptive to
the commercial pressures of advertising.
Mehrotra247 feels Doordarshan tends to be the biggest loser in the present ratings war
since most of its audiences belong to small towns and rural areas which do not attract
advertisers. However, Doordarshan benefited from these trends in the early days of
satellite television. Basharat Ahmed gives the example of DD Metro with its smartly
packaged entertainment programming that attracted a good deal of advertising in the
1990s.
Realising the importance of selling its airtime better, Doordarshan set up the
marketing division in the year 2000. Till then it was selling time slots through vendors
(middlemen) who would sell airtime in the market where DD had become a faceless
entity. Reflecting on the challenging task of selling Doordarshan, Head of the
245
way we think and act? New Delhi: Harper Collins
246
Khandekar, Vanita Kohli (2012). The painful path to digitizing TV.The Business Standard.
Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/vanita-kohli-khandekar-
the-painful-path-to-digitising-tv-112031300101_1.html
247
102
marketing division, Vijayalaxmi Chhabra248 said: “it was very challenging because by
that time the private channels had already established themselves. From 500 crores a
year, we started earning 1200 crores a year within a period of four-five years.”
She is a strong proponent of the idea of attracting advertising for good quality
programming. She reasoned: “the key thing today is that making money is as
important as doing public broadcasting. Nobody can today look down upon money
making.” According to her the marketing division at Prasar Bharati is making a very
important contribution since the government funding has reduced over the years. She
also credited the division for changing the impression of Doordarshan in the minds of
advertisers as the garib, bichara channel or the‘poor man’s channel’.
6.7 Organizational issues in Doordarshan
While talking to people within and outside Doordarshan, the researcher realized that
there are a number of structural and organizational issues that hamper working of the
public broadcaster. In the preceding sections, structural issues such as autonomy and
financial structure have been discussed based on data collected from primary and
secondary sources. This sub-section will dwell on other such structural aspects related
to Doordarshan which have a bearing on its performance.
During interactions with incumbent as well as retired Doordarshan employees, a

number of organizational issues were blamed for the lackluster performance of the
network. It is significant to note that even independent experts, media critics, and
academicians who have worked closely with public broadcasting in the country have
echoed such concerns.
As early as in 1985, the ‘Working Group on Software for Doordarshan’ also known as
the Joshi Committee (headed by P.C. Joshi) had come across “a widespread feeling of
frustration and resentment among members of the staff at the stagnation in their
salaries and at the absence of promotional avenues.” The committee had
recommended bringing in sound policies of recruitment and personnel management. It
248
Personal interview with Vijaylakshmi Chhabra, former Head, Marketing Division, Prasar
Bharti, 2013
103
had also suggested a review of salary scales and promotional avenues of all categories
of staff responsible for software (Joshi Committee Report, 1985, pp.197-198)249.
Human Resource (HR) and personnel related issues were raised by almost everyone
serving in Doordarshan as an impediment. The most pertinent concern voiced by
close to two-thirds of the respondents was the lack of fresh blood in the organization.
As mentioned earlier, for 16 years there was no recruitment to full-time posts in
Doordarshan. At the same time, it must be noted that Prasar Bharati is the largest
public broadcasting organization in the world in terms of its reach, as well as in the
number of full-time employees that it has – 31,500 (both AIR and DD) (Pitroda
Committee Report, 2014)250.
The ‘Report of the Expert Group on HR and Organization’ under the aegis of the Sam
Pitroda-led committee made some sharp observations in this area. It recommended a
drastic overhaul of HR systems and processes within Prasar Bharati. They highlighted
a number of issues in the staffing structure and composition of different wings. The
committee noted that almost 80% of the posts are concentrated in the categories of
Group C and D which perform support functions (ibid).
Table 6.4 Distribution of employees

Employees in the administration wing
Group Sanctioned Filled up Vacant
strength
Group A 29 20 9
Group B 262 162 100
Group C 3165 2644 521
Group D 2188 1658 530
4484
Source: Report of the Expert Group on Prasar Bharati, 2014
Out of a total of 4484 filled up positions, only 20 are for Group A officers and 162 for
Group B officers. Most of the other posts are for support functions including those of
249
Joshi, P.C. (1985). An Indian Personality for Television: Report of the Working Group on
Software on Doordarshan. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting,
Government of India.
250
Pitroda Committee Report, 2014
104
UDCs251, LDCs252, drivers, multi-tasking assistants, security guards, etc (Pitroda
Committee Report, p.144).
A number of respondents lamented serious lacuna in the HR policies of the

organization having a devastating impact on employee morale and performance.
Relevant excerpts from different conversations are presented below.
Jawhar Sircar, CEO of Prasar Bharati, articulated “Now while downsizing is a good
thing, but in 20 years if you don’t have a new engineer, who comes from the post-
1990 generation, how do you expect him to understand IT253? How we expect them to
understand social media? They are engineers – they understand terrestrial and with
great difficulty they understood satellite. But anything beyond satellite and terrestrial
is forbidden254.”
Ananya Banerjee255, former ADG (Programming), noted: “During the 1980s and
1990s, the average age in Doordarshan used to be 35. Now the new young in
Doordarshan is 50 years. There has been no recruitment for so many years, no
induction of fresh talent. So you stagnate when you do not let fresh blood come in.”
Responding to criticisms of Doordarshan being an overstaffed organization, Ranjan P.

Thakur256 says: “We are actually short of manpower. After 1997, there was no
recruitment. For sixteen years we haven’t recruited anybody. The youngest man in
Doordarshan is 50 years old. So we are terribly short of programming officers. Out of
35 ADGs required in the system, there are only six. Out of 100 DDGs required, there
are only ten. So where is the manpower?”
The need to induct fresh talent was eloquently summed up by former DG, Shiv
Sharma257. He recalled: “I was shocked to see that the people who I had recruited as
251
Upper Division Clerks
252
Lower Division Clerks
253
Information Technology
254
Personal interview with Jawhar Sircar, CEO, Prasar Bharati
255
Personal interview with Ananya Banerjee, former ADG (Programming)
256
257
105
programme executives and producers in 1990-1991 are still in the same post. There
have been no promotions. It is the oldest television organization of this country run
only by the old and perhaps only for the old. They have no new ideas. You need
young people. You need a constant flow of young blood because it is a creative
medium. Creativity doesn’t last long.”
He argued that television is a demanding medium. A television producer does one

programme a day, and perhaps 30 programmes a month. It is difficult to sustain
creativity in such a work culture over long periods. He also pointed out that most
people in Doordarshan today are staring at their retirement. Hence, they will have
limited energy and creativity left to serve a vibrant and constantly changing medium
as television.
Shiv Sharma also noted with disdain the tendency to bring in retired people as
consultants in Doordarshan. He feels that as a consultant, one is not accountable,
hence, this practice should be discontinued by Doordarshan. It is significant to note
that in recent times the print media too has pointed to such unwelcome trends in the
public broadcaster.
An article in the English daily Hindustan Times reports that Prasar Bharati, has on its
rolls an army of "consultants" who are paid handsomely, but many have rather vague
job profiles. For example, one consultant’s job is to conduct official lunch and dinner
apart from overseeing security issues for which he is paid a monthly salary of
Rs.3,330. The report mentions another consultant’s job profile with DD Urdu drawing
a salary of Rs. 1 lakh a month whose primary task is to run a panel that collects
suggestions from “highly reputed individuals” on programme quality. Over 200 such
consultants were working in various capacities in Prasar Bharati, Doordarshan and All
India Radio; this was revealed by former I&B minister Manish Tewari while
responding to a Parliament question (Hindustan Times, 2013)258.
258
Haq, Zia (2013, December 13). Well paid Prasar Bharati consultants do odd jobs.
Hindustan Times.Retrieved from
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/well-paid-prasar-bharti-consultants-do-odd-
jobs/article1-1162295.aspx
106
The Shunu Sen Committee (2000) made some harsh observations on the state of
affairs in Doordarshan in the context of manpower:
“The programming content and production service, particularly in Doordarshan, is in
a state of disarray. The system does not reward creativity and the most creative
elements are not allowed to come to the fore. There has been no direct recruitment of
Programme Executives (PEXs) since 1990, Transmission Executives (TREXs) since
1994. No regular promotion or new induction at the Station Director and Assistant
Station Director level has taken place since 1991. (Sen Committee Report, p.25)259.
The committee felt that due to such factors, there was overall stagnation in the
organization. Also such stagnation has resulted in enormous frustration amongst the
cadre particularly the programme cadre. “As a result, the entire organization lacks
élan, creative vigour and vital energy” (ibid).
The Sam Pitroda-led committee also noted that human resources are a neglected
function in Prasar Bharati. In its diagnosis of causes for the dismal state of affairs, the
committee cited a number of important factors.
Ever since the creation of Prasar Bharati key policy decisions were delayed including
those on recruitment. The Prasar Bharati Act was passed in 1990 but came into force
from the date of notification which happened many years later in 1997. Till that time,
Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) used to conduct recruitment for both AIR
and DD. Ever since the creation of Prasar Bharati, UPSC stopped recruitment to the
services for AIR and DD since these two units now belonged to Prasar Bharati which
was a statutory body. As per the Prasar Bharati Act, hiring was now to be done by a
Recruitment Board specially constituted for this purpose by the Prasar Bharati Board.
The Indian Broadcasting (Programming) Service was created in 1990 with officers
inducted from the programming wing. It was supposed to provide leadership to the
programming wing. But after the initial constitution of the service, no further
recruitment has taken place. As noted above, UPSC too stopped recruitment process
for Doordarshan. Along with a freeze on fresh recruitment, regular promotions of
259
Sen Committee Report, 2000
107
different cadres slowed down and eventually stopped for many cadres partly due to
disputes, litigation, and most decisively due to the non-constitution of the Prasar
Bharati Recruitment Board (Pitroda Committee Report, p. 143)260.
The Pitroda-led committee further notes that during the decade 2001-2010, about
7700 vacancies arose, out of which about 2000 were filled through sporadic
recruitment. Another issue brought to light by the report is that the organization is
clearly overfilled with engineering staff. The following table highlights the same.
Table 6.5 Composition of the work force

Engineering Wing Programming Wing Administration
(including News) Wing
Total filled up posts 14049 5918 11654
% of Total filled up 44.4% 18.7% 36.9%
posts
Source: Report of the Expert Group on Prasar Bharati, 2014
In terms of composition of human resources, 44.4% of the employees work on the

Engineering aspects, 36.9% in Administrative support services and only 18.7% in the
core function of Programming. The committee further notes that 956 court cases
related to service matters are pending in different courts (CAT, Lower Courts, High
Courts, and the Supreme Court) pointing to severe inefficiencies in the HR function
(Pitroda Committee Report, p. 147).
Former CEO, Prasar Bharati R.R. Shah261 noticed the same during his tenure: “The
organization had become engineering driven. By doing so, it had lost its focus. If it
had to become a genuine public broadcaster, it had to be a programme organization.
Everything else be it finance or engineering had to be support functions. The
programming aspect of Prasar Bharati was the weakest link. If they want to compete
with the private channels, the programme function has to be focussed upon.”
In December 2013, in a major step towards addressing the issue of critical manpower
260
Pitroda Committee Report, 2014
261
Personal interview with R.R. Shah, former CEO, Prasar Bharati
108
shortage, the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting initiated the process to set up
Prasar Bharati Recruitment Board. As per the Ministry’s proposal there would be 45
positions created to set up the board which will employ personnel exclusively for
Doordarshan and AIR. The posts include assistant station directors, engineering
assistants, programme executives, transmission executives, technicians,
camerapersons, production assistants and administrative staff (Economic Times,
2013)262.
Noted media critic and author Sevanti Ninan263 while expressing her views on the
state of affairs in Doordarshan had this to say: “It is a completely demoralized place.
They haven’t recruited properly and the management is very poor. Look at all the
scandals that have surfaced in recent times, it is a very corrupt organization.”
Another key issue that came forth with regard to Doordarshan is the lack of training
for its staff particularly the programme staff. Former Director, Delhi Doordarshan,
Brij Bakshi264 stated: “I think the staff hasn’t been trained with new formats. A
producer is doing some odd job in a regional station. He is doing commissioning, he
is handling commercials, and he is not trained in all that.”
Ashok Ogra265 who was Director, Programmes at Doordarshan and later became Vice-
President at Discovery Channel expressed concern at the lack of opportunities for
staff in Doordarshan. He argued that Doordarshan as an organization failed to update
the knowledge, skills, and creative skills of its employees.
He further said, “The innovation comes only when you expose your staff to different
forms of programme making. You recruit a person, train him at the Film and
Television Institute for six months, and then you don’t give him anything (training)
till he retires. Once in a while somebody is sent abroad for five-ten days but there is
no institutionalized training framework within Doordarshan which could train staff on
262
Economic Times, (2013, December, 22). I&B ministry initiates steps to set up Prasar
Bharati Recruitment Board.The Economic Times.
263
Personal interview with Sevanti Ninan, media critic & author of Through the Magic
Window: Television and Change in India
264
265
109
a regular.” Put together these factors, according to him, have put a brake on the way
DD otherwise ought to have developed.
In the news unit, the main personnel issue has always been a rift between the editors
who belong to the Indian Information Service (they are generally on deputation to
Prasar Bharati) and the reporters who are Doordarshan employees. As former Head of
the News Division, Indira Mansingh266 recalled; “The editors came primarily from the
Information Service and there was a face-off between the reporters and the editors.
The reporters felt that they have been professionally trained to be reporters whereas
the editors were just bureaucrats from the Information Service. Now, that is
unfortunate because some were trained in television.”
To sum up, the sense that the researcher got from Doordarshan's staff is that human
resource aspects were severely neglected and mismanaged in Doordarshan. While the
key concern today is the lack of new talent in the organization; other issues such as
lack of incentives for good work, a bureaucratic work culture that stifles creativity,
absence of career enhancement mechanisms, slow decision making, and lack of
operational freedom, were voiced as some of the other issues that need urgent
attention. It is significant to note here that such organizational issues have a bearing
on the performance of a public broadcaster and its ability to cope with emerging
challenges. While other areas such as autonomy and funding have seen a number of
changes with mixed outcomes, the HR and personnel aspects have not seen much
change during the study period. Unfortunately, in this case, the status quo has hurt
Doordarshan’s image as well as its working.
6.8 Issues and concerns
Apart from organizational issues, interaction with respondents revealed a number of

other challenges in doing public service broadcasting in the country. A summary of
the concerns expressed by various stakeholders are discussed below with an objective
of understanding their impact on public service broadcasting.
266
110
The most disturbing element regarding India’s public service broadcasting in the eyes
of its people remains government control over Doordarshan. It was felt that there is
too much government control. Doordarshan seems to be an organization bestowed
with incredible talent especially in the days before private television but robbed of its
sheen due to government interference and lack of autonomy and independence.
Ashok Ogra267 stated that it is the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting that has
failed the talent of Doordarshan by not supporting the broadcaster in its most
challenging times.
Bhaskar Ghose268 was more candid in admitting that Doordarshan is seen as

governmental within the establishment. He said that it is seen by the bureaucrats as a
tool to propagate the government’s achievements. “They want to show the great
achievements of the different ministries. It is in fact doing that kind of thing. And it is
doing it in a sneaky, underhand way by pretending it is news, it’s not news.”
Daya Thussu269, Professor of International Communication at the University of

Westminster observed that “the absence of Doordarshan in the global media sphere
can be ascribed to bureaucratic apathy and inefficiency.” Similar thoughts were
expressed by media scholar Robin Jeffrey who had argued that inability to put the
Prasar Bharati Bill, 1990 into force when it was passed was a major failure. According
to him, issues such as autonomy and funding should have been sorted long before the
arrival of satellite television.
Jeffrey (2006)270 reiterated that a well-funded public broadcaster could have given
India a global media presence. He believes that the talent was always there but fears
about the potential of the electronic medium along with the temptation to control it
never allowed Indian broadcasting to break free, think and act creatively, take
innovative risks, and importantly to come on its own.
267
268
269
Personal interview with Prof. Daya Thussu, media academician
270
Jeffrey, Robin (2006). The Mahatma didn’t like the movies and why it matters: Indian
Broadcasting Policy, 1920s-1990s. In Mehta, Nalin (Ed.) (2009), Television in India:
Satellites, Politics and Cultural Change. New York: Routledge.
111
On joining as CEO, Prasar Bharati, Jawhar Sircar found that the 'attitudes embedded
within DD are antithetical to broadcasting'. He claims that as an organization, DD
places emphasis on thorough compliance with government rules. He explains the
situation: “Operational rules that were meant for a government department went on
and anybody with some initiative or idea of good work was penalized for having
crossed the red line. So the best of programmers started fleeing, many of the best
programme heads left Doordarshan. So, DD went through this great exodus.”
Another challenge voiced strongly was the lack of clear vision for Doordarshan.
Majority of respondents felt that the government could never decide how to position
the channel.
Singhal and Rogers (2001)271 articulated a similar concern in their work. They felt
that the biggest failure of Indian policy was in its inability to formulate a clear
strategy on public service broadcasting. They held that the focus of Indian
broadcasting has largely been on hardware expansion and on quantitative targets
instead of qualitative aspects such as programme relevance, appropriateness and
effects. To them, the story of public broadcasting in India is replete with governmental
delays, political apathy and missed opportunities (p.98).
Author of the book Indian Media Business, Vanita Kohli-Khandekar272 said it is high
time that the government decides whether they want Doordarshan to compete with
private broadcasters or make it a genuine public service broadcaster.
Vijaylakshmi Chhabra273 who manages the difficult task of selling Doordarshan’s

airtime believes this lack of direction and vision prevails in the regional channels too.
She says that since the DD platform has a number of channels it is important to define
the target audience for each.
271
Singhal, A, & Rogers, Everett M. (2001).India’s Communication Revolution: From Bullock
Carts to Cyber Marts. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
272
273
112
Sevanti Ninan274 too laments the absence of a sense of purpose in Doordarshan which
she felt affects its programming. Coupled with corruption and patronage in
commissioning of programmes, this translates into ignorance about messages that are
being delivered through Doordarshan’s programming.
The Shunu Sen Committee in its report had noticed such vagueness in channel
positioning and therefore, made specific recommendations in this regard. The
committee noted, “Prasar Bharati operates a large number of radio and TV channels.
While some have a clear definition, target audience, and positioning, others seem to
have no clear identity.” They recommended that each channel should have a clearly
defined identity and positioning, so that each channel is the specific choice for a type
of viewer (Sen Commiittee Report, p.18)275.
Lack of continuity both in terms of policy as well as in the top management came out
as a cause of concern. Some respondents stated that bringing in IAS officers for
leadership positions doesn't always work. As Shiv Sharma276 observed: “Most of the
positions in Prasar Bharati are filled by IAS officers. Nothing wrong with that but the
problem is you can’t be selling steel one day and then move to something like this. It
is not purely an administrative job.”
The ‘sarkaari way of doing things’ as media scholar Professor Arvind Singhal277
mentioned is another major concern that emerges out of the discussion. Brij Bakshi278
mentioned: “I do not think money was a problem for making programmes. But how to
use that money is a problem. You are caught in the procedures. Every decision of
yours is questioned.”
Former news presenter on DD, Sunit Tandon279 held that governmental procedures
kill the creative pursuit which is an intrinsic problem with all government efforts in
274
275
Sen Committee Report, 2000
276
277
Personal interview with Prof. Arvind Singhal, media academician & co-author of India’s
Communication Revolution: From Bullock Carts to Cyber Marts.
278
279
113
creativity. He and few others referred to the tender system as a bottleneck. This
system begins with issuing tenders, call for quotations and then selecting the lowest
quotation. Respondents argue that for creative works one cannot follow procedures
which are used in engineering and construction work as a precedent.
6.9 Public Service Broadcasting in India
The research made an attempt to understand if the contours of public service

broadcasting in India have changed over the years. An attempt was made to explore
the understanding of public service broadcasting in India. This section gives an
overview of India’s record in public service broadcasting and the shifts that have
taken place over the years.
Doordarshan as a public broadcaster

In his exhaustive work The Decline and Fall of Public Service Broadcasting, Michael
Tracey says that in a public system, television producers acquire money to make
programmes. In a commercial system they make programmes to acquire money. This
little epigram according to Tracey articulates the divergence of basic principles, the
different philosophical assumptions, on which broadcasting is built (Tracey, 1998,
p.18)280.
Neither commercial nor State-controlled, public broadcasting’s only raison d’être is

public service. It is the public’s broadcasting organization; it speaks to everyone as a
citizen. Public broadcasters encourage access to and participation in public life. They
develop knowledge, broaden horizons and enable people to better understand
themselves by better understanding the world and others (WRTVC)281.
On the question of Doordarshan’s performance as a public broadcaster mixed

reactions was obtained. Some respondents, particularly those who have occupied very
senior positions in the organisation felt that Doordarshan does not represent a genuine
public broadcaster.
280
Tracey, Michael (1998). The decline and fall of Public Service Broadcasting.Oxford
University Press.
281
WRTVC (2001).Public Broadcasting: How? Why? Paris: UNESCO
114
Former Director-General, Bhaskar Ghose282 admitted that India has never had public
service broadcasting. The fundamental reasons for this, according to him, are lack of
autonomy and constitutionally guaranteed funding. He categorically stated, “We never
had public service broadcasting. To do that they must all get together and amend the
constitution and provide for funds directly to this body like the UPSC gets money
from the constitution. Similarly, Prasar Bharati under the Constitution will get a
certain amount annually which would not be subject to discussion in the Parliament.
Then it would be independent and that would be the foundation of public service
broadcasting.”
The question of financing is an important one and has been at the forefront of the
debates on public service broadcasting worldwide. One of the key principles of public
service broadcasting is that it should be distanced from all vested interests. Tracey
(1998) outlines this principle by saying that programmes can best serve the public
with excellence and diversity when they are produced from within a structure of
independence. 'Programmes funded by advertising necessarily have their character
influenced in some shape or form by the demand to maximise the garnering of
consumers whereas programmes directly funded by the government tend to reflect the
tone of their master’s voice' (p.31)283.
Ranjan P. Thakur284 said that India has violated two fundamental principles of public
service broadcasting and hence it cannot be in the same league as some of the other
West European public broadcasters. He admitted “we are not a public broadcaster; we
have pretences of being a public broadcaster.”
According to him, ministerial control as opposed to parliamentary control and

dependence on commercial revenue for survival are the key factors that have
prevented Doordarshan’s from being a true public broadcaster. He argued: “We have
282
283
University Press.
284
115
ministerial control unlike what the Act285 envisages in terms of Parliamentary
Committee and the broadcasting council which have not been set up. Secondly, our
strings are attached. We have to depend for our operational money on commercial
revenue. That is the fundamental compromise we have already made. That means I
have to make money even to pay my electricity bills, travel costs and production of
programmers. My capital expenses and salary may come from the government; that
doesn’t make me non-commercial. Once I start bothering about every ad, my nature
has changed fundamentally.”
Media scholar Usha Rodrigues286 also highlighted this dichotomy in the practice of
public service broadcasting in India. She remarked that “Doordarshan has become a
government channel while trying to do as good as a commercial channel.”
Financing of public broadcasting institutions is an important aspect since the sources

of financing may enhance or diminish the public broadcaster’s ability to carry out its
mandate. In the Indian context, license fees were abolished in 1976 and advertising
was introduced as an alternative source of funds. The government continues to pay for
capital expenses of the public broadcaster. However, as discussed earlier, the extent of
funding has reduced over the years.
As discussed in Chapter 3, a number of authors have articulated that governments

across the world are reluctant to fund public broadcasters from general revenue. This
change in heart of governments the world over has also been attributed to the climate
of economic rationalization, privatization and globalization (Rodrigues, 2010).287
In the past two decades, public broadcasting has been forced to confront the
ideological prominence of the market in broadcasting. Tracey (1998) says that during
285
Prasar Bharati Act, 1990
286
287
Rodrigues, U.M. (2010). Public Service Broadcasting in India: Doordarshan’s Legacy. In
Ranganathan, M., & Rodrigues, U.M. (Eds.), Indian Media in a Globalised World. New
Delhi: Sage Publications.
116
this period the challenge to the very idea of public culture, or in its minimalist form
the public interest, has become widespread and strident (Tracey, 1998, p.47)288.
The increased dependence on commercial revenues as a source of income is supposed

to have impacted the mandate of Doordarshan. Rathikant Basu289 correlated the
increased reliance on advertising with the shift in focus towards entertainment as
opposed to information and education as priority areas for DD. Since entertainment
programmes were perceived to bring in greater revenue, they became the cynosure of
the organisation during the mid-1990s. He feels that true public service broadcasting
doesn’t depend on advertising.
The other side of the debate is Doordarshan’s continued dependence on government

funds which has not allowed it to come on its own. This is more so, since the extent of
funding depends on the wishes of the government of the day and therefore remain
unpredictable. This, however, does not stop the government from influencing
Doordarshan’s agenda.
Sevanti Ninan290 pointed out how government funding has a strong imprint on
Doordarshan’s programming. According to her, “What DD does is not so much public
service broadcasting today as publicity for government programmes. Take its
agriculture programme, it will be about the schemes, look at the development
programmes, it is about NREGA291. It is all about government schemes. That is not
education.” She feels DD sees its mandate as amplifying the government’s publicity
network. According to her that is not the most intelligent definition of public service
broadcasting.
288
University Press.
289
290
291
National Rural Employment Guarantee Act – now known as the Mahatma Gandhi National
Rural Employment Guarantee Act is a policy initiative of the Government of India that
guarantees hundred days of wage-employment in a year to a rural household whose adult
members volunteer to do unskilled manual work.
117
Media critic Shailaja Bajpai292 conceded that this is not new for Doordarshan.
According to her, from the very beginning the idea of introducing television was to
transmit the government’s point of view. They never saw it as public service
broadcasting and that is the way it has grown over the years. She argues: “It
(Doordarshan) was seen as a government tool, I think we have to be very clear about
that. At no stage the government felt otherwise and it continues till today. There is a
very parochial sense which the government thinks that the first job of DD and AIR is
to put out government policies, information about what the government is doing.”
There is a perception in the government that since the private channels do not inform
people about government’s policies, Doordarshan must do so and this reasoning has
continued since its very inception.
The researcher tried to examine such concerns and understand from Doordarshan's
staff what according to them public service broadcasting is. Shailaja Bajpai’s assertion
proved correct as a number of employees agreed that it is indeed Doordarshan’s
mandate to give the government’s point of view since no other player will project
what the government is doing.
Former CEO, Prasar Bharati, R.R. Shah293 countered by saying that the government
needs a channel as its mouthpiece to correct the distortions and misinformation being
circulated by the privately-owned news media. He, therefore, recommends that DD
News should be kept with the government as its own channel and the rest of the DD
platform could continue to be a public broadcaster.
Successive governments have tried to control Doordarshan in their own ways in terms
of appointments to the post of DG, influencing operational decisions as well as
regulating the flow of money to the organisation for its needs. Tripurari Sharan294
identified this as a trend in India – “a disinclination of government to let go of the
public broadcaster”. According to him, the public broadcasting institution is seen as
292
293
294
118
an official organ which is in stark contrast to the conceptions of public service
broadcasting at the global level.
B.G. Verghese295 too agreed that there is no public service broadcasting in India. He
says: “We have no public service broadcasting. And it seems to me that nobody wants
it. Every government thinks that it should be their trumpet because the newspapers are
all private and the private channels report against the ruling party.”
Usha Rodrigues296 attributed such failures of public service broadcasting to the

historical circumstances in which public broadcasting originated and evolved in India.
She said that comparing India with BBC of UK or the ABC of Australia in unfair
because as compared to these countries India is still a nascent democracy. She
elaborated that in the west public service broadcasters were established as a counter to
the negative aspects of commercial or private media, whereas, in India, public service
broadcasting was established even before the negative aspects came into being.
According to her: “Public service broadcasting started (in India) as a broadcasting

service to help in the development of the country, now development - by which
standard of development, whose definition are we applying and what does that mean?
All that got a little lost and since the government was funding it, they thought they are
the best source to define development and economic growth.” This in her view has
been a major issue with public broadcasting in India.
Page and Crawley (2001)297 had argued that in South Asia broadcasting was seen as a
vehicle for setting out the preferred ideology of the state. According to them, this also
explains why governments in South Asia treated satellite television with much
importance since they were keen to control information and opinion being circulated
through television.
295
296
297
Page, D., & Crawley, W. (2001).Satellites over South Asia: Broadcasting Culture and the
Public Interest. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
119
Therefore, it comes out that the public broadcaster in India, Doordarshan faces twin
problems. On one hand, government continues to pay part of its expenses in a manner
but it is not constitutionally guaranteed, on the other hand, it is unwilling to give
complete budgetary support to the public broadcaster. This leaves Doordarshan at the
mercy of market forces in broadcasting. Ranjan P. Thakur298 categorised this situation
by saying that “we are the worst of both the models” by being neither fully
commercial nor completely independent of the government.
6.10 Understanding of ‘public’ and public service broadcasting in India
Since the global range of experience in public broadcasting is so varied and complex,
there is no standard definition of what constitutes the ideal form of public service
broadcasting. 'Public broadcasting is a structure of ambition, a belief that the sheer
presence of broadcasting must be used to nurture society, to proffer the opportunity to
society and its inhabitants to be better served than by systems which primarily seek
consumers for advertisers' (Tracey, 1998, p. 18)299.
Public service is defined 'as a meeting place where all citizens are welcome and
considered equals. It is an information and education tool, accessible to all and meant
for all, whatever their social or economic status. Its mandate is not restricted to
information and cultural development – public broadcasting must also appeal to the
imagination, and entertain. But it does so with a concern for quality that distinguishes
it from commercial broadcasting' (WRTVC, 2001)300.
It is important to note that public service broadcasting models have developed due to
inherent weaknesses of two dominant broadcasting systems – the state-controlled
broadcasting model and the profit-oriented commercial model. As Usha M.
301
Rodrigues remarked, in India, public service broadcasting evolved in splendid
isolation of any other model of broadcasting as there was no commercial broadcaster
during its inception. It, therefore, becomes important to explore what does public
298
299
University Press.
300
WRTVC (2001).Public Broadcasting. Why? How? Paris: UNESCO
301
120
broadcasting mean to the people who have been practising it or associated with it. The
researcher tried to gauge the understanding of public service broadcasting. The results
are discussed below.
Four key ideas about public service broadcasting emerged from the discussion with
respondents. These are as follows:
i. Socially responsible and accountable to the people,
ii. Development orientation,
iii. Distinctive programming, and
iv. Commitment to cater to the citizen and not just the consumer.
Social Responsibility and Accountability

As mentioned in Chapter 2, social responsibility theory remain a key ideological
framework for public broadcasting institutions across the world. Therefore, it does not
come as a surprise that a number of respondents mentioned that the hallmark of a
public broadcaster is to be socially responsible.
Ashok Jailkhani302 said that as a public broadcaster, one has to be responsible. In

similar vein, marketing head, Vijaylakshmi Chhabra303 argued that a public
broadcaster cannot afford to be frivolous like the private channels. It has to concern
itself with the impact of programming and curtail harmful repercussions, if any.
In terms of accountability, respondents suggested that a public broadcaster has to be

accountable to the people. It was interesting to note that some DD personnel used the
term people and parliament interchangeably. For them, being accountable to people is
a natural extension of parliamentary accountability since parliament represents the
people of India in all its diversity.
302
303
121
A platform for Development Communication
As discussed earlier, public service broadcasting originated in developing countries
with specific goals; one of them being - to help in development efforts initiated in
these countries post-independence.
Understandably then, achieving the development and nation building objectives came
out as key characteristics of public broadcasters. In the words of Vijaylakshmi
Chhabra, public service broadcasting is all about upholding the constitution – making
people aware of their constitutional rights.
SM Khan304, Director-General (News) feels development issues such as “rural

development, maintaining communal harmony, gender development” are important
constituents of Doordarshan’s mandate. He noted that it is important to inform people
about government’s policies and programmes. However, critics respond by saying that
there is a thin line between informing people about government schemes and
becoming the publicity organ for the government of the day.
This definition of development is discredited by some experts. Such conceptions of

public service broadcasting reminds of the Development Media theory. Critics of the
Development Media approach hold that inherent in this theory is the acceptance of
economic development as a virtuous objective to be attained. Further, such notions
often related with the task of ‘nation-building’ under the garb of which individual and
press freedoms were often subordinated to collective ends.
Mazzarella (2012)305 categorised the official approach to broadcasting in India as

distinctly top-down. 'The state’s communication policy rested on the axiom that
information, rather than structural change, was the most essential ingredient required
for India to modernize: disseminating development information would lead to change
in the attitudes of Indians, and this attitudinal change would, in turn, lead to a change
in their practices' (Mankekar, 1999 as cited in Mazzarella, 2012).
304
Personal interview with S.M. Khan, former DG (News)
305
Mazzarella, W (2012). ‘Reality must improve’: The perversity of expertise and the
belatedness of Indian development television. Global Media and Communication.Vol. 8(3),
215-241.
122
The experience of public service broadcasting in India seems to suggest that
development communication often ends up in taking a biased and uncritical stand
towards government policies. This does not augur well for a diverse country like
India. This is more so as many point out that the state may not be the best guarantor of
the public interest in all its diversity.
Nikhil Sinha306 challenges the central role assigned to the government in India in
major spheres of human life. He said: “We have a presumption that the government in
fact or the state is the only representative of the people. I think there was a basic
philosophical issue that somehow only the state is the true representative of the
public, of the citizen. That I think was a flawed assumption that ran through Indian
policy making in the early years.”
Senior officials in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting who have worked
with the news division of Prasar Bharati felt that for development stories, adequate
space is provided only by Doordarshan as such news stories concerning rural areas
will never be covered by the private news channels. According to them this is true
public service broadcasting.
Few respondents also lent credence to the nation-building project of public service
broadcasting. Ashok Jailkhani307 argued that Doordarshan by reaching out to people in
the border areas and militancy infested regions is doing real public service. While
discussing the meaning of public service broadcasting, instances of efforts at national
integration in Kashmir and the North-East were mentioned as evidence of
Doordarshan’s credentials as a good public service broadcaster.
Such notions, however, appear to be out of tune in the present scenario. Nikhil
Sinha308 held that public service broadcasting does not have the same meaning today
as when television was first introduced in the country. He believes that at that time
public service broadcasting was very much connected to the idea of development
306
307
308
123
efforts, the process of nation building, and unification of the country culturally,
economically and politically. He admitted that in today’s time “some of these
imperatives have fallen away. We are not as concerned about nation building and
cultural unification of the country as we were in the 1960s and 70s.”
Media authors have attributed the ‘nation building project’ of public broadcasting in
India being influenced by communal riots that took place in the aftermath of partition
of the country. Jeffrey, in his analysis, of the historical failures of Indian broadcasting
policy, had noted that when India became independent the British handed over
broadcasting as a government department to the national leadership. Further, fears of
an inflammable social fabric of India stifled the potential of radio and television to
educate and communicate (Jeffrey, 2006)309.
Distinctive Programming
Another key feature of public service broadcasting outlined by the respondents was to
do diverse range of programmes to cater to all kinds of tastes and interests irrespective
of the commercial gain involved.
Ashok Jailkhani summed up this sentiment: “Public service broadcasting caters to

diverse tastes of people. At the same time it has to live up to the tastes of people.” A
number of respondents also expressed that it is the public broadcaster’s job to
encourage classical and folk art and music forms, not merely show popular culture.
Jailkhani feels that Doordarshan is playing an important role in sustaining folk art in
different regions of the country which would have otherwise become extinct.
Bhaskar Ghose310 categorized such programming by Doordarshan as healthy

entertainment. For him, public service broadcasting is not about being preachy, telling
people what to do and what not to do but about providing information and
entertainment but in a manner which does not compromise with basic values. He
309
Jeffrey, Robin (2006). The Mahatma didn’t like the movies and why it matters: Indian
Broadcasting Policy, 1920s-1990s. In Mehta, Nalin (Ed.) (2009), Television in India:
Satellites, Politics and Cultural Change. New York: Routledge.
310
124
elaborated, “It is entertainment but entertainment within the bounds of civility and
information, news given to you within the bound of ethical reportage. No false stories,
no made up stories, and at the same time a little bit of education.” He also stressed on
the need to do in-house programmes for a public broadcaster, only then it can ensure
that the above mentioned elements are carried in its programming.
In this context, the performance of the regional stations is mentioned with pride by
some respondents. Rathikant Basu311 held that real public service is being done by the
regional channels as they provide a forum to showcase local art, culture and heritage.
This is an absolute essential, something which a national broadcaster can never do;
India being a culturally diverse nation with various sub-cultures of different regions.
Rajiv Mehrotra312 added that a public broadcaster “has to promote values, it has to be
credible, independent, has to take care of the disadvantaged and the marginalized
sections and their interests.” Few respondents also expressed that public broadcasting
in the country needs to offer a platform to the vast repertoire of documentary films in
India in order to throw light on issues neglected by the mainstream media.
Catering to the Citizen, not just the Consumer

A very important principle of public service broadcasting stressed upon by some
respondents who have worked closely with Doordarshan is that it should serve all
citizens of the nation.
According to Rajiv Mehrotra, public service broadcasting occupies the middle space
between government broadcasting and commercial broadcasting. He distinguished
between public broadcasting and commercial broadcasting by saying: “The focus of
commercial broadcasting is on consumers who are attractive to the advertisers. Public
service broadcasting needs to focus on the needs of the disadvantaged, the
disenfranchised; they are not the consumers. It is this section’s interest that no body is
willing to fund. Public service broadcasting needs to reflect the concerns and agenda
of this section of the society.”
311
312
125
Similar views are expressed by B.G. Verghese313 who didn’t find any fault in the
commercial channels’ priority to serve the consumer. However, he made an important
distinction between the two models: “The public service broadcaster is expected to
cater to the citizen. To my mind that is an absolutely critical point. All consumers are
citizens but not all citizens are consumers.”
Nikhil Sinha314 articulated similar concerns about commercial broadcasting and stated
that it is the marginal sections of society that should benefit most out of public
broadcasting. B.G. Verghese raised some fundamental aspects about the nature of the
‘public’ in public service broadcasting. He explained: “Public is the people….we the
people of India, the extraordinary diversity of India. Men, women, children, old,
young, rural, urban, all communities, caste, fishermen, mountain dwellers,
handicapped, cricket lovers, scientists, farmers, all are public. So your public is not
one. It is everywhere.”
Verghese believes that this conception of the ‘public’ is understood neither in

Doordarshan nor in the government. He wasn't off the mark as such definitions of
public service broadcasting and its ‘public’ was provided only by people outside
Doordarshan i.e. academicians and experts barring a handful of retired DD
professionals.
Hence, an analysis of the responses to the question ‘what constitutes public service
broadcasting’ needs mention here. Firstly, people working in Doordarshan equate
public service broadcasting with the Development Media theory. Also, there is an
attempt to equate the term ‘public interest’ with national interest. This understanding
has received much criticism since it has the danger of reducing the public broadcaster
to a government mouthpiece besides ignoring regional aspirations.
Banerjee & Seneviratne (2005)315 hold that state-owned broadcasting systems cannot
be referred to as public service broadcasters. They say that this misconception stems
313
314
315
Banerjee, I., & Seneviratne, K. (Eds.) (2005).Public Service Broadcasting: A Best
Practices Sourcebook. Singapore: UNESCO.
126
from the fact that very few countries in the world have genuine public service
broadcasting as most others have state broadcasting systems.
While state-controlled broadcasting systems are known to fulfill certain public service
functions, their control by governments, mode of funding, lack of independence and
impartiality in programming and management, prevent them from being identified as
genuine public service broadcasters (Banerjee & Seneviratne, 2005, p. 15)316.
Further, analysis of responses also demonstrate that while there is understanding of

social responsibility of the public broadcaster and the need to provide distinctive and
diversified programming, there does not seem to be a clear notion of the ‘public’ for
whom the broadcasts are generated.
A number of texts on public service broadcasting suggest that identification of the

‘real public’ is of crucial importance for public service broadcasters. Hoggart suggests
that “there are some minorities who do not necessarily have either great purchasing
power or much political clout. They are minorities not of taste but of the accidents of
nature: the disabled, the blind, the deaf, the immigrants, the very old and very young,
and the indigent” (Hoggart as cited in Tracey, 1998).317
6.11 Assessment of Doordarshan as a public broadcaster
Besides assessing Doordarshan's staff understanding of public service broadcasting,

an attempt was made to explore their assessment of its role as a public service
broadcaster. Special emphasis was laid on understanding if the role and mandate of
the public broadcaster has changed over the years especially with the onset of the
private television revolution.
Most respondents agreed that Doodarshan has performed fairly well in its role as a
public service broadcaster. However, majority of them conceded that the public
service function of Doordarshan has been compromised over the years due to
316
Ibid
317
Tracey, Michael (1998). The Decline and fall of Public Service Broadcasting.Oxford
University Press.
127
commercial considerations and market pressures. Many of them acknowledged that
Doordarshan has taken some excellent public service initiatives in the past.
Basharat Ahmed318 expressed that Doordarshan performed a brilliant role as a public

broadcaster by undertaking experiments such as SITE and made efforts to provide
healthy entertainment to everyone. Dr. N. Bhaskara Rao319 reiterated that television in
India was introduced keeping in mind a needs-based approach to cater to the most
marginalized sections of society. He, however, feels that by 1991 there was a
paradigm shift in the economic policies which was a turning point for Doordarshan.
Many others shared the same opinion that Doordarshan has been forced to edge away
from its core mandate of public service broadcasting and catering to the poorest of the
poor. B.G. Verghese320 feels that Doordarshan does public service programming
sporadically and not on a regular basis. He said that asking DD to become like the
private channels is not a valid proposition.
Similar views were expressed by Bhaskar Ghose321 who blamed the government
including the Planning Commission for putting it into the same league as the private
channels by making it compete for advertising for survival. He noted, “Only an
absolute hypocrite would say that there is public service broadcasting; where you are
in the highest levels of the government making this body confirm to the very image of
Star Plus and Zee TV.”
Academician Nikhil Sinha322 explained this dilemma eloquently: “Indian public

service broadcasting by confirming to market pressures and demands and in its
acceptance of advertising as a source of revenue has then been forced to compete with
commercial broadcasting for the audience. They have been forced to compete for
advertising dollars. In doing that, I think, its (Doordarshan’s) ability to serve the
318
319
320
321
322
128
marginal sections of public, its information dissemination role, its role in the
development process, all have suffered over the years.”
He advised that Doordarshan should abandon the idea of trying to compete with
commercial entities and instead focus on programming which no one else does. He
cautioned against following the US model where the term has been appropriated for
‘providing the public what they want’. In his view, that is where the definition of
‘public service broadcasting’ has gone wrong for public broadcasters.
The idea of ‘providing the public what they want’ has been critiqued by scholars.
Tracey (1998) shows the other side of this supposedly democratic claim by saying that
“in reality, there is a hidden paternalism in market-dominated systems as commercial
providers offer what they interpret as the things that the public wants/needs. The result
is, on the whole, populism without intelligence (p.49)323”.
Ranjan P. Thakur324 articulated that it is high time for Doordarshan to come out of its
confused state. He feels that “there is no point competing with a Star, Zee or Sony.
They will always beat you at the game; whatever you might do, you will always be a
distant fifth, sixth or seventh. This game is simply not winnable.”
The opinion here seems to be that Doordarshan should not try to copy others.
Rathikant Basu325 under whose leadership, the Metro channel made great strides in
popular entertainment programming said that Doordarshan should stop producing
such content which is not its USP326. He feels that to earn revenues, one has to make
‘popular’ programmes which (in today’s competitive scenario) often results in seeking
the lowest common denominator to get more audiences. As a result the quality level
drops down.
323
Tracey, Michael (1998). The Decline and fall of Public Service Broadcasting.Oxford
University Press.
324
325
326
Unique selling proposition
129
Professor Usha M. Rodrigues327 cited the example of Australia where due to the
credibility of the public broadcaster – ABC, people fight for it whenever questions are
raised on the future of public service broadcasting. She insists that the public
broadcaster in India “instead of focusing on competing with the commercial media
needs to create a niche of its own, pick up the areas in which it would be
distinguishable from other organizations and keep that neutral stand which sometimes
the commercial media cannot keep.”
However, not everyone agrees that Doordarshan has compromised its public service
role. Ashok Jailkhani328 said that Doordarshan continues to fulfill the mandate of
public service broadcasting. Rajiv Mehrotra329 insisted it is Doordarshan alone which
caters to a certain extent to the disadvantaged and the disenfranchised. He countered
criticism by saying: “The language that is used (in Doordarshan), the sub-culture that
is shown is far closer to the people than that used by the private channels. With a
commercial idea in mind, the private channels put out something very different. Now
if you advertise an Audi Car worth 20 lakhs, who can buy that kind of car; that gives
you some idea of the target audience of the show or the channel. When you show ads
of holiday in the US; who can afford that kind of a holiday? So for that programme,
content has to be designed keeping in mind who can buy that kind of a holiday
package. But what about the Aam Aadmi (the common man)?”
He feels that there is a concerted effort to diminish All India Radio and Doordarshan.
According to him, DD has much larger audiences in absolute numbers than the private
channels but audience research data provided by TAM does not reflect this since bulk
of the viewership measuring meters are placed in urban and semi-urban areas.
Former news presenter Sunit Tandon330 believes that given its constraints,
Doordarshan has done reasonably well though it could have done ‘ten times better’.
He explained that limited budgets for programmes and inability to find right people
327
328
329
330
130
for the right job have been major roadblocks towards achieving better results for
Doordarshan.
Former ADG (Programming), Usha Bhasin331 elaborated the new initiatives taken by
Doordarshan in the new millennium to strengthen its public service role. She cited the
case of the Development Communication Division which was set up in 2001 to cater
to the communication needs of government ministries and departments as well as
NGOs. Under its umbrella, a number of public service broadcasting initiatives have
been undertaken (discussed in the following chapter).
Bhasin refuted allegations of Doordarshan becoming entertainment-oriented by saying

that the network provides entertainment within the desirable social milieu. According
to her, the Development Communication Division has made efforts to mainstream
public service broadcasting. There have been instances of programmes with social
messages such as HIV/AIDS being telecast on prime time yet being successful. She
claimed: “We are making an attempt to create a bridge between public service
broadcasting and commercial interests. So they are not two banks of a river where
they say the twain shall never meet.”
Tripurari Sharan332 too objected to criticism levelled against Doordarshan by saying

that it has a fairly complex mandate. He said there are mandatory requirements to
fulfil being a public broadcaster; at the same time, it has to generate commercial
revenues to sustain its operations leading to contradictions in the mandate. People
from the news division too refuted criticism of Doordarshan by saying that it is the
only channel that tries to meet people’s expectations in their own language and
dialect. Rajiv Mehrotra333 feels that people in Doordarshan need to articulate the
dichotomy between doing high quality programming and soliciting advertising
revenue, and they must combat pressure to put commercially viable programmes.
331
Personal interview with Usha Bhasin, founder-Director of the Development
Communication Division and former ADG, Programing
332
333
131
This brings us to another important dimension of public service broadcasting – the
relationship between good public service programming and earning commercial
revenue. This is discussed in the next section.
6.12 Public service bbroadcasting and commercial revenue
Opinion appeared to be split on the question of whether quality public service

broadcasting can go together with earning commercial revenues. Rajiv Mehrotra
believes that good quality programmes and being commercially viable do not
necessarily go together given the Indian context. According to him, good quality
public service programmes will not find the kind of affluent audiences that advertisers
look for.
Nikhil Sinha334 feels that the kind of programming needed in India which can be used
for public good has no room in a system that is “dependent on delivering audiences to
advertisers. So if you are not part of an audience that is of relevance to advertisers,
your interests are not going to be served by the system.”
Not everyone agrees to such assertions though. Ashok Ogra335 who was Vice-
President at Discovery Channel during the 1990s held that good quality programmes
can also attract decent advertising. He observed, “I do not necessarily see a dichotomy
in public broadcasting attracting ads. Discovery channel where I worked does get
advertising. The issue is do you allow content to be hijacked by the considerations of
advertising?” As long as that doesn’t happen, he feels, it is okay to accept ads for
programmes.
Ogra further comments that presently there exists only popularity shows on television
and no public service broadcasting. It is up to Doordarshan to occupy that space. Usha
Bhasin, offered examples which the Development Communication Division took to
mainstream public service broadcasting. She doesn’t agree with the view that a public
broadcaster should only do information-oriented programming as even DD audiences
have a right to entertainment.
334
335
132
Some others felt that in the changed circumstances, commercial revenue cannot be
shunned by public service broadcasters. Globally, too, there has been a trend towards
decreased public funding of public broadcasters.
Vijaylakshmi Chhabra336 who is overseeing the responsibility of selling airtime for

Doordarshan asserted that there is no conflict between doing good quality
programming and commercial success. She believes that if programmes are of good
quality, they will always find an audience. She cited the example of Aamir Khan-
hosted show Satyamev Jayate (SJ) which despite its apparent public service content
secured advertising and sponsorship. However, about SJ, some respondents claimed
that the show did well, not so much because of its high quality content, but more
because of star presence.
The subject of public service broadcasting and its practice in India drew mixed
reactions and some flak. Respondents were asked to outline what role they see for
television in the country; in particular, if they see need of a public broadcaster in
India. Their responses offer some insight about a desirable television landscape in
India.
6.13 Need for public service broadcasting
Nikhil Sinha337 said that the very idea of public service broadcasting was to fulfil
those requirements of the general public which a market-driven mechanism will not
do. Bhaskar Ghose338 believes every country, every society needs public service
broadcasting but it is difficult to get a genuine public broadcaster because then it has
to be financed differently, by an agency other than the government or commercial
advertising.
336
337
338
133
Shiv Sharma339 reminded that the entire infrastructure of All India Radio and
Doordarshan, have been built on public money and therefore, must be used for public
good. S.M. Khan340 explained that to counter the disinformation spread by private
news channels, a public broadcaster is a must in a multi-cultural and diverse nation
such as ours.
Former news presenter Sunit Tandon341 argued on similar lines. He blamed the private
news media for creating hype around events. He feels that in a cluttered news market,
a public broadcaster will do the balancing act by indulging in responsible reporting,
curbing sensationalism, and following journalistic principles of objectivity, accuracy
and fairness.
Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Supriya Sahu342

asserts that public broadcasting is relevant despite the growth of the private media in
India. She claimed: “The importance of public service broadcasting can never be
underestimated. Important messages on livelihood, women empowerment, among
several others are disseminated through it. There are no commercial motives in its
objectives, whereas, the private channels are completely driven by commercial
motives. That’s the essential difference between the two. No one can question the
relevance of public service broadcasting.”
Former DG, Doordarshan, S.Y. Quraishi343 said that our country today needs public
service broadcasting more than ever before since no other network is concerned about
public service programming. He believes that presence of a strong public service
broadcaster will mitigate harmful influences of private television in the country.
Media scholar Usha M. Rodrigues344 believes that there will always be need for a
public broadcaster in a country like India. This is because “(a) it is a large country, (b)
because of the diversity, and (c) people’s accessibility to the media is still quite
339
340
341
342
Personal interview with Supriya Sahu, Joint Secretary, Ministry of I&B, (2012)
343
Personal interview with Dr. S.Y. Quraishi, Former DG, Doordarshan
344
134
uneven despite all the progress.” More importantly, she said, there are some issues
which the commercial media would never touch so to that extent the public service
broadcaster is needed. According to her, the main concern for the public service
broadcaster is to command enough respect so that audiences will fight for its survival
as they do in countries such as UK and Australia.
Similar views are expressed by Vanita Kohli-Khandekar345 who explains how in

countries such as UK, Norway, Sweden and Canada, the public broadcasters have set
a benchmark in quality. She feels that there is a certain kind of programming which
commercial broadcasters will never be interested in since there may not be enough
commercial gain in doing such programmes. A public broadcaster must do such
programmes.
However, increasingly it is being stated the world over that public broadcasting need
not restrict itself to producing the type of programmes other services are not interested
in, aiming at audiences neglected by others, or dealing with subjects ignored by
others. It should try to do things differently, without excluding any genre.
Professor Arvind Singhal346 while commenting on the role that television should play
in India explains that it should “provide voice to the unheard, raise debate and
dialogue around difficult questions, and have impeccable integrity of purpose.”
6.14Perception of Doordarshan
Respondents, both within and outside the organization were asked about their
perception of Doordarshan as a broadcaster. The following charts map the perception
of Doordarshan in the eyes of respondents. Retired Doordarshan officials were also
considered as 'people outside Doordarshan' whereas the other category maps the
perception of people currently serving in Doordarshan.
345
Personal interview with Vanita Kohli-Khandekar, media author and consulting editor,
TheBusiness Standard
346
135
Figure 6.2 Perception of Doordarshan amongst outsiders
Government
Confused propaganda
about its machine
mission
Poor
programming -
boring channel
When asked about their perception of Doordarshan, interesting insights were

obtained. A large majority of the respondents felt that Doordarshan resembles more a
government channel than a genuine public service broadcaster. Media academician
Professor Daya K. Thussu347 held: “It is important to distinguish between state
broadcaster and public service broadcaster. I would argue that Doordarshan still
remains - at least ideologically a state broadcaster, which entails obvious limitations
on how it covers contentious issues.”
Rajiv Mehrotra348, from the Public Service Broadcasting Trust cautioned: “Public
broadcasting has to be truly independent of the state otherwise it can never have the
credibility of a public broadcaster. That has not been the case in India.”
Professor Usha M. Rodrigues349 who has done a lot of research on Indian television
put forth the dichotomy that Doordarshan is facing in terms of competing with the
private channels while remaining a public broadcaster. For her “Doordarshan has
become a government channel while trying to do as good as a commercial channel.”
347
348
349
136
Prominent media author and critic Sevanti Ninan350 feels that nobody in Doordarshan
has a sense of purpose. She articulated, “It is just an inept organization today. It is not
serving any purpose. Nobody knows what purpose it serves. Nobody is looking at
these issues.”
Here are some of the words that were used to describe Doordarshan by people outside
the DD fraternity:
Figure 6.3 Words used to describe Doordarshan
His masters
voice -
government
channel
Government
Irrelevant in
service
urban India
broadcaster
Doordarshan
Not relevant in
entertainment Sarkaari
space
State broadcaster
350
137
Figure 6.4 Perception of Doordarshan amongst staff members
Responsible
Does socially and balanced
relevant news
programming provider
Caters to all parts

of India
Doordarshan’s own staff from various divisions had completely different set of
notions about the organization. Majority of respondents from Doordarshan seemed to
suggest that DD is a very responsible organization when it comes to news. Excerpts
from some of the conversations are described below.
“I would say DD was a very responsible organization. You knew that information was
power and you cannot garb news even say for stock market news. Why should we
favour any particular company or agency? There was a very strong sense that you got
to have fair coverage of news.”
- Indira Mansingh351, former Head, Doordarshan News
“I would say Doordarshan as a public broadcaster minus sensation is successful. They

will not do hit and run stories.”
- Alok Deshwal352, News Editor, DD News, 1996-2003
“With constant transmission, the actual national integration has been done by
Doordarshan. The young generation watched educational programmes. Nobody has
touched this particular point but if you do a survey on all the students of Delhi
351
352
Personal interview with Alok Deshwal, former news editor, DD News, 1996-2003
138
University and other universities, you will see that the youth from J&K and North-
East were motivated because of Doordarshan.”
- Chetan Vyas353, Consultant, DD National
Refuting allegations that Doordarshan’s coverage of government’s schemes makes it a

government propaganda machine, Director-General of News division, S.M. Khan354
said: “We have to inform the masses about various schemes of the government. We
also have to take feedback from people about those schemes. This is not propaganda.
We are as free as anyone else but we have to inform. We also find fault with the
government. But it is our responsibility to put forth the schemes and policies of the
government for the people because nobody else is interested in doing that.”
Another key point mentioned by Doordarshan staff members was that theirs is the
only platform that offers socially-relevant programming. As former news editor
Bhupendra Kainthola355 explained: “Doordarshan continues to do a lot of
development stories, the ones which private news channels would never really touch.”
Hence, it can be observed that there is sharp contrast between views held by people
outside Doordarshan and those who belong to the organization. While people outside
find Doordarshan a government channel or a state broadcaster, the staff within doesn’t
see anything wrong in Doordarshan providing coverage to government activities and
policies. For them such coverage is essential and part of the mandate of a public
service broadcaster. Further, they pride on their news saying that it gives the audience
facts-based news without unnecessary opinion and sensationalism. Some of the
respondents said that private channels, too, have their own hidden agendas due to
commercial pressures.
353
Personal interview with Chetan Vyas, former Deputy Director, Programming & Consultant,
DD National (at present)
354
355
Personal interview with Bhupendra Kainthola, Assistant News Editor & News editor, DD
News, 1991-2004
139
6.15 Discussion
It is important to put the findings in context so as to arrive at a conclusion. To reach

big audiences, public broadcasters are forced the world over, to give the masses what
they want – more entertainment. A number of public broadcasters today compete
aggressively with their commercial competitors to retain audience share by providing
the ‘audiences what they want’. Syvertsen356 (2003) believes that as public
broadcasters move further into the market and compete more aggressively in new
fields, they will continue to be the target of criticism that they are not really providing
an alternative to commercial television. Consequently a case will be made for
reducing or doing away with taxpayer funding for public service broadcasters.
In the realm of policy, several authors have given their prognosis for the failures of
public broadcasting in India which is discussed below.
Mc Dowell (1997)357 claims that the policy aspect has been a weak link. He says that
the audio-visual policies adopted in India have emphasized state control and the
creation of audiences for advertisers, and have been less consistent with an approach
promoting participation in development. According to him, the policies pursued in
India ‘have not responded adequately to calls for greater public and non-profit access
to airwaves. A more autonomous public service television has tacitly been rejected
through these choices’.
Page & Crawley (2001)358 in their analysis of South Asian broadcasters observe that
public service broadcasting in India cannot survive unless there is new thinking about
what its aims and content should be. Commenting on South Asia, the authors
remarked that the state broadcasters in order to exploit the full commercial potential
of a broadcasting infrastructure built over so many years – did not realize that such an
exercise will put into question the whole ethos of broadcasting.
356
Syvertsen, Trine (2003). Challenges to Public Television in the era of Convergence and
Commercialization.Television and New Media, Vol. 4(2), 155-175.
357
McDowell, Stephen, D. (1997). Globalisation and policy choice: Television and
audiovisual services policies in India. Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 19, 151-172.
358
Page, D., & Crawley, W. (2001).Satellites over South Asia: Broadcasting Culture and the
Public Interest. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
140
Rajagopal (2009)359 too argues on similar lines. He says more media in India has not
necessarily meant more enlightenment, nor has autonomy from government control
improved programming content in the way it was expected to. At the same time, he
reiterates the need for a genuinely autonomous public media, atleast partially
insulated from market pressures.
N. Bhaskara Rao360, of the Centre for Media Studies, says that expecting DD to be a
public service broadcaster in isolation of the broadcast scene is an unworkable and
unfair position. He adds that the public service broadcaster cannot be left at the mercy
of market forces or expected to fight (an unequal) competition and with irrelevant
benchmarks.
359
Rajagopal, Arvind (2009). The Indian Public Sphere: Readings in Media History. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
360
Rao, N. Bhaskara. The Dilemma of Public Service Broadcasting.Unpublished paper of the
Centre for Media Studies, New Delhi.
141

Varghese Committee 2

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Varghese Committee 2

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

6.

Policies and Guidelines related to Doordarshan: 1984-

6.1 Autonomy and independence

The Verghese Committee recommended the creation of a National Broadcast Trust

There is considerable dependence on the government for meeting capital expenditure

Reaffirming Verghese’s recommendation, Ghose argues that the Constitution will

Commenting on attempts by politicians to influence Doordarshan, former DG Shiv

A discussion on autonomy of Doordarshan is incomplete without a reference to the

6.2 Prasar Bharati – the organization

6.3 The Prasar Bharati Act

The Nitesh Sengupta Committee, 1995

Taking cognizance of the landmark Supreme Court judgment on freedom of airwaves,

In short, it had proposed an independent regulator to take care of issues foreseen in

The Shunu Sen Committee, 2000

Sam Pitroda Committee Report

5. Section 12 (5) – Functions and • The Committee • The Committee

6.4 Interference from Government

Figure 6.1 Major areas of government interference

Government interference in appointment to key posts came out as a concern. Senior

6.5 Funding public service broadcasting

Government budgetary grant is the primary source of sustaining Doordarshan in the

Former Director-General of Doordarshan, Bhaskar Ghose208 expressed strong

Reflecting on the impact of this decision on Doordarshan’s priorities, Rathikant

Highlighting the centrality of funding for good programming, Shekhar Chowdhury216,

Rajiv Mehrotra218, Managing Trusteeof the Public Service Broadcasting Trust

Ashok Jailkhani223, former Additional Director General (ADG), Programming,

Media scholar and co-author of Indian Media in a Globalised World, Usha

A number of alternative measures were also suggested by respondents for generating

Some respondents suggested that a public broadcaster needs a source of revenue

Expenses of Prasar Bharati

Therefore, Doordarshan is dependent on the government for funding its capital

A number of Doordarshan officials admitted that maintaining the terrestrial network is

ADG (Programming), Ranjan P. Thakur235 made a passionate call for replacing

6.6 Advertising and Doordarshan

Table 6.3 Doordarshan’s Commercial Revenue

However, the scramble for advertising money resulted in changes in programme

Rajiv Mehrotra244 articulated that due to the dependence of television industry on

6.7 Organizational issues in Doordarshan

During interactions with incumbent as well as retired Doordarshan employees, a

Table 6.4 Distribution of employees

A number of respondents lamented serious lacuna in the HR policies of the

Responding to criticisms of Doordarshan being an overstaffed organization, Ranjan P.

He argued that television is a demanding medium. A television producer does one

Table 6.5 Composition of the work force

In terms of composition of human resources, 44.4% of the employees work on the

6.8 Issues and concerns

Apart from organizational issues, interaction with respondents revealed a number of

Bhaskar Ghose268 was more candid in admitting that Doordarshan is seen as

Daya Thussu269, Professor of International Communication at the University of

Vijaylakshmi Chhabra273 who manages the difficult task of selling Doordarshan’s

6.9 Public Service Broadcasting in India

The research made an attempt to understand if the contours of public service

Doordarshan as a public broadcaster

Neither commercial nor State-controlled, public broadcasting’s only raison d’être is

On the question of Doordarshan’s performance as a public broadcaster mixed

According to him, ministerial control as opposed to parliamentary control and

Financing of public broadcasting institutions is an important aspect since the sources

As discussed in Chapter 3, a number of authors have articulated that governments

The increased dependence on commercial revenues as a source of income is supposed

The other side of the debate is Doordarshan’s continued dependence on government

Usha Rodrigues296 attributed such failures of public service broadcasting to the

According to her: “Public service broadcasting started (in India) as a broadcasting

6.10 Understanding of ‘public’ and public service broadcasting in India

Social Responsibility and Accountability