Around the time when protests against the killing of Arunachalese student Nido Tania were making it to the front pages of dailies, another piece of news from the Northeastern state went largely unnoticed. It is a development that should have us just as worried as the racist assault on Tania. In an event that accentuates the perilous state of press freedom in Arunachal Pradesh, readers had to do without any papers for five days beginning February 14. The presses resumed rolling only when the CM, Nabam Tuki, stepped in and promised to do more to protect the independence of the media.
Trouble began when the deputy commissioner of Capital Complex in Itanagar, Mige Kamki, allowed representatives from the Students Union Movement of Arunachal (SUMA) to protest near the office of The Arunachal Times. The dispute arose after SUMA members expressed unhappiness about not being given enough credit for having worked to have a recent economic blockade that was put in place in Assam against Arunachal Pradesh lifted. This followed clashes in January that left 11 persons dead over an ‘encroachment’ dispute. The Arunachal Press Club, on the other hand, put out a release accusing SUMA members of spreading “highly provocative stories” against the media and “inciting people against the press”.
In a state where institutional mechanisms to protect the freedom of the press are, at best, weak, the state’s acquiescence to a group that has sought to challenge the freedom of the press came as a shock. And with good reason. In July 2012, gunmen shot at the associate editor of The Arunachal Times, Tongam Rina, outside her office. The brazen attack, which left her seriously injured, has only deepened concerns about the safety of journalists in the state, more so because her assaulters have not been punished yet.
Protesting employees of the closed Prime News in Guwahati. (Photograph by Nava Thakuria)
“Journalists are often under immense pressure from different groups to give them coverage, but protection mechanisms in the state to protect journalists and the work they do are still at a budding stage,” says Mukul Pathak, assistant secretary of the Arunachal Pradesh Union of Working Journalists. Pathak himself was beaten up and his camera damaged in 2011 while covering two warring youth groups. “Justice is rarely done is most cases and we have lost faith in the present system. Mediapersons need a secure environment to do their work,” he adds.
While many concede that controlling threats from insurgent groups may be difficult, they say allowing a students’ body to try and intimidate the media plumbs newer depths. “It is a sad reflection of the state of affairs,” says Suhas Chakma of the Asian Centre for Human Rights. “That student union leaders should be allowed to intimidate the press is a reflection that governance doesn’t exist.” Chakma criticises the Press Council of India for having failed to speak up on issues concerning media freedom. “The chairperson will regularly speak on subjects like death penalty but not on his core mandate,” he adds. PCI chairperson Markandey Katju said he issued a statement on February 19, urging the disputants to come to a resolution. However, it came after a settlement was arrived at on the evening of February 18.
Pradip Phanjoubam, group editor of Imphal Free Press, says he is cognizant of the hurdles the government faces in cracking down on insurgent groups who often attack the media. “The government tried posting security officers in media offices but it proved counterproductive as it kept some of the contacts away,” he says. The solution to this aspect of the problem, most agree, can only come with the resolution of the larger problem of insurgency. “But the government can and must act more sternly in cases where security personnel are the perpetrators. So far it has taken token measures against some of them, like suspensions,” he adds.
Recently in Manipur, a similar crisis as the one in Arunachal hit the media in September 2013 when threats issued by a group unhappy about its statements not being printed forced newspaper distributors to keep off their work and kept newspapers away from stands. As is usual in these parts, an agreement was arrived at eight days later and police deployed at media offices.
The media industry in Assam has also been through a turbulent phase in recent months. First, there was the closure of Seven Sisters Post and Bengali daily Sakalbela, both part of the controversial Sarada group, in April 2013. A few months later in September, Prime News, a news channel owned by the Brahmaputra Infrastructure Private Limited, announced an abrupt closure and rendered around 170 employees jobless. Aggrieved employees, in a letter to Union information and broadcasting minister Manish Tewari, had alleged that “despite a lot of stories...about the channel being closed down or sold over, the employees were kept in the dark about everything. The management never gave any clear answer to the queries of the employees”. They learnt of the impending closure on September 30, a day before it was actually implemented.
This highlights the peculiar problems of a region where there’s a profusion of news channels but inadequate sources of advertising revenue to sustain them. “There are seven news channels and all of them are free-to-air. They may have fared better if they had expanded their coverage to include news from elsewhere in the region but all of them are just Assam-specific and there’s not enough generation of advertisement revenue,” says Nava Thakuria, secretary of the Journalists Forum of Assam (JFA). The problem for news channels is compounded further by unregulated cable distributors, who often demand “indiscrimnatory” charges from channels. “For instance, they will ask for Rs 2 crore as distribution charges from Prime News as it was owned by an infrastructure businessman, but will ask for much less from News Live, which is owned by a politician’s wife,” he adds. The JFA has written to Tewari, asking him to ensure that cable operators apply uniform rates and that their collections are made more transparent.
Caught between the worst of militancy and economic woes, the Northeast remains one of the most challenging places for any journalist to work in.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Free Enterprise sometimes does not lead to right results in outlier markets. A business run media that is funded through subscriptions and advertisements will not be sustainable in NE India.
What is alternative? One could think of Social Media and activist journalism of citizens.But for that to work, good transportation and communication links are needed. Here the onus is on the Governement of India. The recent railway budget has for instance disappointed in failing to invest more in new rail links and rail lines for NE India. Sad.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT