“If people knew how hard I worked to get my mastery, it wouldn't seem so wonderful at all.”---Michelangelo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

“I write only to free myself from my pain.”  
            --- Vittoria Colonna (Soulmate of Michelangelo)

Pain is indispensable in creating the art, more than that of quest of pleasure. This statement may be contested successfully. But just take a look at the lives of great artists adored for centuries. They were more felicitated because of simplicity, elegance and class of their art and also for their legendary sufferings which carved out the path for enlightened attainment of the virtue of heritage which has always remained contemporary, though historical still leaping for the restoration of the future sensitivity. 

Hugo Boss said, “Art and fashion have always gone hand in hand. Sometimes radical and shocking, sometimes traditional and conservative, both are judged according to subjective standards of taste. Each represents in its own way the moods and spirit of the times. They stimulate the senses and create objects of desire as fetishes of an affluent society and legacies of culture.” Why we should care to study art history? Do we not have any urgent tasks ahead of updating social networks and skimming through page 3 novels? Why should we visit museums? Are we so free out of our schedule to visit periodically to malls and multiplexes? What is takes to create a ordinary looking painting which in a sense extraordinary because it can change perceptions of the elite class to interpret the world in a manner like never before? So, this ordinary of tomorrow becomes classic heritage of tomorrow. This radical point of view of aesthetics becomes the majoritarian perspective of beauty in the coming days. “If the economic expression of neoliberalism is sharper inequality, and its political expression deregulation and privatization, then its cultural expression is surely unrestrained consumerism.” And we all in today`s world only see art as an object to be worthy about discussions of galleries and auctions; nothing beyond that. 

“Contemporary art still defines itself against mass culture, and necessarily so because of its shunning of mass production, which has a further effect on its subject-matter. Marx argued that production and consumption are bound together to the point of unity. Not only does one depend upon and complete the other, but production always involves consumption (for instance, of raw materials), and consumption production (for instance, eating sustains the labouring body). Both making and selling are unusually controlled in the art market. Dealers often sign exclusive contracts with artists who are then encouraged or instructed to produce particular kinds, sizes, and numbers of work. How often has one seen in commercial galleries decorative and wall-bound spin-offs of some apparently recalcitrant anti-commercial installation? For obvious reasons, these urgings usually remain secret. Buyers are vetted for their commitment to collecting, since it can be dangerous to an artist’s reputation or even to the market as a whole to have a sudden and unexpected sale of work. There is less regulation in the so-called ‘secondary market’ of the auction houses, but even there the market is hardly free. Aside from scandals about systematic price-fixing, reserve prices are set below which works will not sell, and bidding is manipulated by collectors and dealers.”

“The situation is most starkly illustrated with art made in reproducible media; artists can cheaply produce photographs, CDs, or videos in large numbers, and try to achieve wide ownership of their work. Yet the great majority of them produce tiny editions, each piece being accompanied by a certificate of authentication, for very high prices. Ownership of such a piece grants status to the collector, and reciprocally the price paid grants status to the work. This is the defining characteristic of art as against other areas of high culture: drama, the concert or opera achieve exclusivity through requiring that an audience be present at a live performance (and of course high art can do this, too); other forms – novels, poetry, music, and film – produce objects that are industrially fabricated in large numbers and are widely owned. Only in high art is the core business the production of rare or unique objects that can only be owned by the very wealthy, whether they are states, businesses, or individuals.” [1]

“Bottom-line: Art is borderless. Thinking causes over-seriousness and the deflation of fun and beauty, which are equated with aesthetic pleasure. To think means to think too much, and is in conflict with experiencing (which is thought of in binary terms and is thus associated with feeling, i.e., feeling/experiencing vs. thinking).”  “Today`s situation is marked, however, by distinct tensions and contradictions. We have seen that art’s uselessness – its main use – is being sullied by the particular needs of government and business. In a linked development, art’s elitism is challenged by the attempt to widen its appeal: business values art for its exclusivity, while states are generally interested in the opposite, and wish to widen its ambit. Finally art’s means of production, increasingly technological, have come into conflict with its archaic relations of production. The question of art’s use takes us back, naturally, to art’s freedom. That the very concerns of art – creativity, enlightenment, criticality, self-criticism – are as instrumentally grounded as what they serve to conceal – business, state triage, and war – is the consideration that must be concealed. And it can be, because the local liberation offered in the production of art, and its enjoyment, are genuine. Bourdieu cites a letter by Flaubert on art’s freedom: That is why I love Art. There, at least, everything is freedom, in this world of fictions. There one is satisfied, does everything, is both a king and his subjects, active and passive, victim and priest. No limits; humanity is for you a puppet with bells you make ring at the end of his sentence like a buffoon with a kick.” 

The Psychology and method of inquiry about history of art and biography are discussed in depth by Liebert who throws light on life of Michelangelo.[2] Liebert explores the events in his life so as to build the logic about the connections of psychological instability, mental uncertainty and dynamic developments in life generating repeated cycle of pain responsible for his art, known today worldwide. He claims that there is pattern in work of great artist`s lives which make the creation of classic art an inevitable event. He has envisaged study of this pattern in the frames as: a) Repetition of same inner conflicts in successive works by artists. b) The basis for artist`s choice of a specific work from antiquity as inspiration for formal structure of particular creation. & c) Interpretation of artist`s unconscious motives that contribute to distinctive creative solution. So, let it be. We are going to look further deeper how this happens/happened.

“Creative art, neurotic symptoms and dreams all draw upon repressed more primitive thoughts. It is after all, artist alone, who is able to make constructive contact with this conflicted material being overwhelmed by it. Placing emphasis on ego strengths of artist, it can be said that, artist is distinguished not by specific nature or depth of his/her inner conflicts, nor by trauma in his early history. Rather he/she is distinguished by their capacity to sublimate unacceptable drives by expressing them creatively in images. He/she is also pressed by a need to communicate with and be responded to by others through symbolic medium.  Liebert says that Michelangelo has always been very abstemious in his way of life, taking food more out of necessity than for pleasure. He used to say, “However rich I may have, I have always lived like a poor man.”  

If an unconscious conflict is sufficiently strong to be a major determinant of distinctive aspects of any particular work of art, it will reappear as a discernible influence in other works by artist. Unconscious conflicts gives great art but is rarely resolved by successful artist`s sublimation forever.  During the time around his father`s death he wrote:

            “I live in my own death; If I see right

            My life with an unhappy lot is happy;

            If ignorant how to live on death and worry

            Enter this fire, where I am destroyed and burnt.”

In a letter to friend Niccolo Martell in 1541, Michelangelo writes: “I am a poor fellow, and of little worth, plodding along in that art which god has assigned to me, in order to prolong my life as long as I can.” In another letter to friend Luca Martini he says: “I am an old man and death has robbed me of dreams of youths---may those who do not know what age old means bear it with what patience they may when they reach it, because it cannot be imagined beforehand.

            My age is now detached,

            From desire, blind and deaf;

            I make my peace with death,

            Since I am tired and near the end of speech.”

To conclude by paying tribute to Michelangelo, let’s have a feel of a sonnet written by him in 1533-34, which I consider is the essence of his painful life giving all of us the gift of “Forever Creative Heritage.”

            “I with your beautiful eyes see gentle light,

            While mine are so blind I never can,

            With your feet, on my back bear a burden.

            While mine are crippled, and have no such habit.

            Having no feathers, on your wings my flight,

            By your keen wits, forever drawn toward heaven,

As you decide it I am flushed and wan,

Cold in the Sun, at the cold solstice hot.

           

My wishes are within your will alone,

Within your heart are my ideas shaped,

When you have taken breath, then I can speak.

It seems that I am the lonely moon,

Which our eyes fail to see heaven,

Except the fraction of it that the sun may strike.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------

---

[1]  Stallabrass, Julian, and Julian Stallabrass. Contemporary Art: A Very Short Introduction. Very short introductions, 146. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print.

[2]  Liebert, Robert S. Michelangelo, a Psychoanalytic Study of His Life and Images. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983. Print.

[3] Michelangelo, Buonarroti, Creighton Gilbert, and Robert N. Linscott. Complete Poems and Selected Letters of Michelangelo. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1980. Print. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Judgement Day about National Security Strategy is no more a matter of planning, it has arrived!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senior strategic intellectual Brahma Chellany recently mounted scathing attack on the “Governance Record” of the Indian state citing the deterioration of it has resulted as a biggest Security Threat ever. He says, “India confronts several pressing national security threats. But only one of them — political corruption — poses an existential threat to the state, which in reality has degenerated into a republic of mega-scandals. The pervasive misuse of public office for private gain is an evil, eating into the vitals of the state, sapping India's strength. When important decisions, from arms procurement to policy changes, are often tainted by corrupt considerations, it is inevitable that national security will get compromised. If India today is widely seen as a soft state, much of the blame must be pinned on the corrupt and the compromised that lead it. Such ‘softening' of India has made the country a tempting target for those seeking to undermine its security.”

 When India gained independence in 1947, the members of the Constituent Assembly took oath dedicating them for the quest of attaining the self-righteous place in the world and further for promotion of world peace and welfare of mankind. This was the historical base of India`s outlook towards the relation of outer world with the domestic policies and can be aptly described in the terms of “Enlightened Self-Interest” which seems to be guiding India`s recent initiatives in the realms of foreign policy making. How far India was successful in realization of the goal of this ‘enlightened self-interest’ is a matter of historical inquiry.

 What does the framing of India`s Security Strategy really means? Is it all about Defense Policy, Security Policy, Strategic Policy, Foreign Policy? There are big changes taking around all of us. The challenges in front of nation are urging to redefine the engagement with the continents and the countries. These are the moments to reflect on the past, these are the moments to visualize the future. By looking at the governance record of the Indian state in last 20 years we cannot resist ourselves from mentioning what Charles Dickens said, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way."

Change is inevitable. When we are talking about India to be a third largest economy in coming few years, it is inevitable that the diverse, versatile and all round kaleidoscopic dimensions of the national security strategy should entail multi pronged approach. A security strategy means mobilization of all national resources to achieve a political objective kept in front of nation. This is a grand exercise about how nation strike balances between means and ends. When we talk about managing resources and objectives in a grand way, fundamentally there is always room for change. Resources dwindle and resurge. We cannot abandon old and at the same time there should be no sympathy, mercy and scope for obscurantism. 

So apart from Defense Modernization, reassessment of non-alignment policy and adapt and guide the changing global geopolitical order, comprehensive domestic policies which can assure the Good Governance and developing capability to anticipate and respond to the dynamic and long lasting changes around us is the priority in front of such likely evolving Grand Doctrine of National Security Strategy. There should be prolonged, informed debate about the foreign, defense, security policies in the country. This enduring debate will certainly permeate, subvert the conventional wisdom in such a way that it will help to generate new ideas about prospective policy making. Questioning current policy must be the priority because questioning alone can make the discourse immune from complacency and stagnation in the dynamically spiraling stratosphere of the security environment of the country, domestically and internationally. Therefore it is very crucial to look back and check the contours of the foreign policy. There is a great deal of grave urgency to historicize the foreign policy of India. 

This brings us to the question of how think tanks influence all this process of journey of germination of idea towards blooming flower of policy. There are five areas in which India`s foreign/defense/security policy needs to look so as to have relook towards the changing strategic discourse and reality around the world. A) Challenge of consolidating Space and Territory. While doing this, there is a great deal of significance attached to generation of new resources, ideas, capabilities. There is need to break the confusion and persistent confusion between cooperation and regional integration. In the changing world, posing the problem in different possible ways and posing new questions is more important than dwelling great amount of time in debating the details of policy making. The age-old system of thinking is no more sustainable. 

The south Asian region is the most profound ring of strategic realignment, encirclement and geopolitical entanglement. What are the impacts of the initiatives of players like NATO, Russia and China will have on the south Asian region?   B) Structure of Foreign Policy- Ideas of nonalignment has undergone radical transformation. The energy and context for the conduct of this non-aligned foreign policy comes from the backdrop of start of the cold war. The relevance and references for continuing of that policy has lost all possible reasons to do so. Conducting international affairs in independent way is no more possible in today`s world; especially when India is poised to emerge as a responsible power or is expected to play a crucial role because of great success of Indian democracy, diversity and dedication towards the human welfare and civil rights of Liberty, Fraternity and Equality.  Attitudes of the policy making must be fundamentally different compared to the past.   C)  Attitudes towards power: Our approach towards the world has been greatly defined by the ethos and values of Indian Freedom Struggle.  The nation states liberal and progressive understanding has gone through consistent pressures, shocks and upheavals. Nature of International Relations is very brutal. There is scope for idealistic thinking but there is no scope to act upon them. 

D) Attitudes towards world order: So we have to face the diploma and struggle between moral politics & Indian thinking vis-a-vis pragmatic geopolitics deeply rooted in coalition, alliances of the forces along with the technicalities of international institutions.  India`s historical approach towards world has been influenced by perception of global order as transcendental, super national power. Nation went through different alternate phases which believed in intervention-non intervention strategies. India also stood against exploitation done in South Africa and in other countries. Country has always been pursuing the values of promotion of democracy. There is train compartment metaphor to explain behaviour of players who seek power status and mentality who enter the club of powerful players. No passenger inside full train compartment will allow the people running on the platform to enter the compartment even though realizing fully its own status some time ago on the same platform. There should not be any confusion about the approach “to do it or not to do it.” So India have to apply and enforce its prudence and judgement for the multilateral institutions and international policy making in different coalitions. 

E) Attitude towards political values: Is democracy a defining value of Indian existence. The country has to determine what are the consequences of conduct of foreign policy in the framework of promotion of democracy in the first, second and third world. India was anti-colonial state. Is India anti-imperialist? Does India wish to represent the third world in international fora? What are the guarantees that the changes desired will be brought in the line of quest of democracy. Will India intervene whenever there is unilateral invasion or threat to the democracy? These are the questions by which India needs to ascertain its status among the comity of the nations of east and west. These are the questions of power and alignment. History has taught us that circumstances matter rather than high philosophical thoughts. Any initiative on the front of introspecting the strategic discourse should be reflective, critical, self questioning and frightfulness.  Can we afford to have wishy-washy strategy? Can we afford to lose the opportunity to initiate and engage the dialogue process with pluralistic society across the world? Are we ready to distinguish the vital political ideology of the domestic discourse from that of vital interests of the nation state? Are we ready to locate this vastly dangerous chasm? 

What is the relation between foreign policy and strategy? Both are daintily not same. Upendra Bakshi very delicately deals with the virtues of judging about political situation. Though he is talking about capacity of delivering judgment, they are still relevant for understanding the necessary virtues to judge international situations. He says, “Judging is an act of will and that act arises through the political activity of ‘balancing’ and ‘conciliating’ conflicting interests (or repression). The taming, the disciplining of that political will, the will to power, is, ultimately enduring problem of human civilization. Informed evaluation of political action, a continuing expose of reality as it is untinged by ideal visions, proposing agenda of alternatives and the capacity to enter into an effective dialogue with those who wield power by those who do not are, ultimately, the basic ingredients in any exercise in the taming of political will in a free society. There are no doubt other strategies: terror, insurgency or revolution. Each one has to choose. And the choice is very, very difficult. That is why great Einstein had to acknowledge that ‘politics is harder than physics’. At any rate, the critic of the court is engaged in a phenomenon no less complex than nuclear physics; and he remains as responsible for its benign and sinister consequences as the scientist.” 

The urgency in the quest for Grand Security Strategy has arrived due to the systemic changes in the international order which is being visualized as 'Post American World.' The transformation in first decade of twenty first century marked by weakening of USA due to two wars and financial crisis has hinted to subtle, unavoidable, irreversible changes in the parity amongst economic, military and technological powers of the world. Identifying these changes without falling prey to the stagnating thoughts, rigid cold war mentality and by responding the responsible power status of the vast country like India remains the fundamental challenge ahead of strategic community. In last ten years political leaders led by former Prime Minister Vajpayee and current PM Dr. Singh have innovated more than compared to that of vast thickets of realists/liberal/centrist or any other kind of Strategic think tanks/commentators/thinkers. So, pivotal aberration in the thinking of scholars being the reluctance to invite/appreciate/debate new ideas. Radical ideas often come from minority group of thinkers. Defining various paradigm shifts in the making, analyzing/describing the nature of changes in the process, providing the diverse cause, effect framework and providing fresh solutions remain at the core of think tank`s role. Scholars need to do their work properly before complaining to the establishment that they have not initiated enough regarding the foreign policy and security policies. 

Again I cannot resist myself to refer to what Upendra Bakshi said while he was dealing with the scholars. Though his comment was about the legal scholars, the matter of integrity remains convergent in all walks of life. He opines, "This leaves us with legal scholars. My tribe too has been trigger happy. We look at the decisions of the court from time to time and criticize the court or praise it. We are in no hurry to analyze the court`s normative output. We, quite frankly, have more leisure than justices of the Supreme Court and most of us make use of that leisure in a creative grasp of the realities of judicial process only episodically. More than the politician and the lawyer , the lagal scholar`s responsibilities are gravest. It falls to his lot to study the court as an institution, not just a factory manufacturing legal and constitutional norms. What is worse, it also falls to his lot to develop a theory of evaluation of the judicial role. He has to develop a body of standards by which he evaluates the work of judges and courts. This is so difficult and daunting a task that some of us just do not want to do it."  Same goes with the Strategic Thinking in India. Senior Analyst Dr. C. Raja Mohan during the four days conference in IDSA highlighted this issue time and again to create the atmosphere of open, innovative and versatile debate in this direction.

We will continue to see what are the grand elementary evolutionary characters of the National Security Strategy are, in coming few days. (to be continued...)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Science Communication Safari: Elephant as per Each one`s Convinience !!!

Public Communication of Science and Technology 2010

“…Do not believe on whatever you are told or you  yourself have imagined it, unless you testify it. Do not believe whatever your teacher says just because you respect him, but believe only after your own examination and analysis; it would be your guiding factor that will never let you down. Even do not believe on whatever I say, unless you have tested it with due experimentation as a goldsmith does for testing of gold by putting it in fire!…”

--- Gautama Buddha

11^th Public Communication Science and Technology Conference concluded in New Delhi recently. The focal theme was ‘Science Communication Without Frontiers’. Five Scientific Sessions with the following Sub Themes were organized as follows.

Sessions related to ‘A Critical Review of Science Communication in the World’ conversed about science communication having different functions in industrialized and developing countries. What are some of the new national approaches being taken in different countries, and how do they compare? Sessions related to ‘Science Communication Studies & Research’ focused on practical aspects linking the theory of science communication to practice, including novel and innovative practices, techniques and models of science communication, besides teaching science engagement to scientists and communicators.                                          

 Sessions related to ‘Role of Science Centres & Science Museums’ elaborated on case studies and success stories on various aspects of science centres and museums. It will include discussions on science cities, mobile and fixed science exhibitions, science circus, science cafe and planetariums, etc. Sessions related to ‘Science Communication through Mass Media’ discussed  S&T coverage in mass media, including new media approaches. How can media be employed to promote societal dialogue rather than one way dissemination a in a media society?  Sessions related to ‘Globalizing & Localizing Science Communication’ examined the global issues with local significance and vice versa, while focussing on networking efforts at global, regional and local levels to encourage flow of contents, policies, methods and practices in science communication and their institutionalization.

In the inaugural speech, former President Dr. A.P.J.Abdul Kalam said that, “The purpose of science is to understand the nature where we live. The role of science communication is no longer limited by communication bandwidth but the imagination bandwidth of scientists.” He suggested three important tasks for the experts engaged in science communication:  To make all citizens, particularly those in remote and rural areas (e.g. India has 700 million rural population) to feel excitement about science; To make all the citizens to know about the advances of science and their role in the society in economic and health development and to bring more and more of fruits of science within the reach of their daily lives while being sensitive to the sustainability of our planet and our responsibility towards it and To motivate the students and entice them to embrace science as a profession. Also there are many young inventors and imaginative citizens (including from remote rural areas), sometimes without a formal training, who can be brought to public attention and encouraged.

Then Dr. Kalam appealed to prepare for Missions for Science Communication by outlining the possible agenda in front of the scholars and practitioners of the Science Communication. Key elements out of his vision are: 

a)     Bringing out a document and may be a website, on the number of science communicators available different regions, nations and states and in different languages. Based on this data, efforts should be made to treble the available science communicators across the length and breadth of the country in multiple languages within the next three years.

b)     Like the discovery channel, there is a need to establish science channel through innovative communication methodology. It would cover a vast array of innovations, researches and interesting scientific facts.

c)      Promoting systems science education among the youth and experienced for enabling informed debate on public policy leading to development oriented decision making.

d)     Generating the content for primary and secondary level science education and putting it up on an open source web based media, which can be available in multiple languages

e)     Bringing out at least ten volumes on researched biographical information of scientists from different parts of the world within the next three years. These biographies must pay particular attention to describe the interest and enthusiasm shown by the young scientist in learning and applying science. These stories will motivate the younger generation to take up science as a carrier.

f)       Bringing out “Science & Technology Daily” newspaper which can internet based, open source and contributed by the best of the scientific community and written in user friend language.

g)     Publishing case studies from experiences from the work novel/innovative work of educational institutes, universities as to how exposure to imaginative simple experiments increase the broad base of scientific education in the country.

While modern science and technology is now accepted everywhere as an integral part of one`s everyday living, few ever stop and think about the obligations which rest on the users of the benefits of science and technology. The most important of these understanding of the scientific method and the development of the scientific outlook. Scientific method rejects revelation as a means of discovering truth and substitutes itself by techniques of observation, experimentation and deduction. Once it has permeated at every level of existence, method of science must become a way of life and it should not be construed as a mere knowledge system but a way of thinking. 

The term scientific temper is an attractive one having brevity and comprehensiveness. This indicates all the hues of man`s thinking and rational having adjective of scientific. Responsibilities of scientist and non-scientist must be considered when we talk about scientific temper. For demography like us having huge disparity of wealth, education, technology and social recognition is also starved of rare but very much achievable scientific professionalism by every day common sense embedded in our quest for survival and bread-butter. The challenge lies in developing the willingness to work out, to understand the basic concepts, discovering and eschewing those which are in conflict with basic common sense and every day reason. 

One of the ways, therefore, a man can develop his/her rationality is by conscious study and debate with self and others. Everyone will be benefited by the energised discussion. One has to have opinion leaving behind passive attitude. The exercise of scientific temper or scientific humanism is not only relevant to the intellectually and economically developed nation, but it is more than important for the emerging, developing, least developed countries. It gives a unique capability to induce a awakening thought to the fallen societies by making a vast population a creative force for the much needed transformation where every citizen has equal role to play. 

Obscurantism has pervaded in all walks of our society. Today obscurantism may be considered as encompassing across in terms of communalism, unscientific ideas and beliefs, superstitions and dogmas, blind adherence to religion, customs, convention and tradition. Across the decades and centuries of history full of social, political, economic conflicts scientific knowledge was not assessable to all the people. Science progresses through the leaps and bounds of the efforts of the few and by debatable reasons most of the others who were party to the progress, did not or to put in a better way could not accept the validity of the discoveries, inventions, and innovations always. Reasons being arguments of the scientific discovery are not comprehensible common people. So role of education in eradicating obscurantism is paramount. 

Scientific temper could lead to the better appreciation of the impact of science and technology on society and thereby provide the kind of atmosphere needed for S&T to flourish along with their recognition. Much of the S&T done today requires expenditure of public funds directly or indirectly, and utilization of it requires permeation of the scientific temper in the masses.  

So one cannot resist to recall the person who gifted this world the term ‘Scientific Temper’ which was later incorporated in our constitution in form of fundamental duty to pursue unlike all other nations all over.  Clause (h) of the Article 51A of the Constitution of India which deals with the Fundamental duties proclaims that to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform. Thus Jawaharlal Nehru contemplated and acted, “Our age is a different one. It is an age of disillusion, of doubt and uncertainty and questionaning; it is an age of disillusion, of doubt and uncertainty and questioning. We can no longer accept many of the ancient beliefs and customs; we have no more faith in them, in Asia or in Europe or in America. So, we search for new ways, question each other and debate and quarrel and evolve any number of ísm’ and philosophies. As in the days of Socrates, we live in an age of questioning, but the questioning is not confined to a city like Athens; it is worldwide.”    

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"If wishes were horses then beggars would ride." - Regulation, Autonomy and Independence of Media !

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is media the fourth estate or they are romanticizing by reflecting the ‘Delusions of Grandeur?’ Those who control media control minds. Media regulation in India is currently at a crossroads. Exciting transformations have been occurring in the manner in which media and entertainment is accessed and consumed. Traditionally, television, print and radio were the primary sources of information and entertainment dissemination. Increasingly, new technologies, particularly the Internet and mobile telephony, transform the media landscape.  Information and communications technologies (ICTs) not only change how people and organizations access information, communicate and perform their daily operations, but they also provide India with a powerful tool to advance and achieve its societal goals – in areas as broad as economic reform, education and environmental preservation.  However, the potential of the media is dependent on having a policy environment that allows for the technology to be used and developed for beneficial purposes while limiting potential abuses.

Regulation? Self-Regulation? Co-regulation? Communication and regulation is difficult marriage. Crux lies in the fact that who regulates, how much and what? If we held the laws of capitalism to be true then the competition between media industry should benefit the consumers and audiences. But if we look back in retrospect the journey of Indian media, print and largely electronic media has not lived upto this presumption. India has witnessed a transformative transition from one public broadcasting channel in 1991 to more than 600 channels in 2010, 100 out of those being news channels. This is the age of trivialization, sensationalization, masquerading of news content and also of political, economic pornography. 

India being a great success story of democracy is being witnessing different dimensions of democratization one after other. When regulation is required? When there is something excess than the required. It may indicate towards crossing the certain ethical, legal, societal value boundaries. There is no such thing like common value. Everyone has his/her own interpretation of the common value/type of civil society/societal norms about the decency. 

Legal scholars and veterans in media say that regulation is not only about saying ‘No’. But going beyond that it is about creating the possibilities about engaging the media houses in preventing, stopping and arriving at the consensus about the feasible mechanisms about penalizing the unlawful activities. There should be an formal/informal arrangement to incite/inspire the broadcasters so as to convey crude things in soft manner. Much of the part of the regulation is not about rules. Rather it is about the understanding the concerns of the law enforcement agencies and taking steps to address those concerns. So, there must be sufficient incentive to improve upon the current work. 

Result of self regulation will be lasting one. Voltaire has shown the way in the respect of how one should behave? He says that, “I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it." In other words, everyone thinks alike but none thinks much. Freedom of speech is not expressly provided; it has to be exercised with the responsibility and restraint. Even though there are sufficient restrictions to exercise this right, one has to look that in context of right to life and also in the light of larger duty towards society. One cannot exist without each other.

What are the possibilities in which self-regulation could work. Compared to OffComm, FCC we have no regulation in India and situation is fastly turning into lousy one.  Rights and duties both are self regulated. As one senior news editor from reputed news channel put it, “Work of editor, anchor or production unit chief is like foot soldier. They have no time to think about the issues about law and ethics. So one should greatly admire and appreciate amount of pressure under which people work and still able to influence the outcome of the pending investigations, lax implementation of the provisions for law and order. 26/11 coverage and Ayodhya verdict telecast were great success stories as far as self-regulation is concerned. In that respect it remains to be seen that whether Indian media has evolved or not. But observers agree that during the President Obama visit different questions were asked and variety of significant issues were raised. 

All over the world, the debates about freedom of the speech and inter-alia in India, has been influenced by First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. It says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Ultimately government cannot wash hands off its responsibility about regulation. It has to take into consideration rights of different vulnerable groups in the society like women, children, minorities, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Disabled Persons by ensuring their representation at the regulatory body; either self-regulatory or body which will enforce regulations from government side. Any type of regulatory mechanism will be really fruitful and transparent when they could lead by examples and complete the required job of monitoring, reporting, verification, litigation and punishment within certain time frame. 

Industry leaders believe or claim that consumer is the king and they eventually decide the content. But many disagree. Because there is no formal mechanism by which audience can influence by way of interacting or feedback so as to determine the fate of the planning of the production either entertainment or news. This is all the outcome of market research results being incorporated into the real time content creation. It is true that today in India, every citizen on average spends three hours a day for watching TV telecast. TV is engaging the society of today in unique manner which no medium has engaged previously. Because of TV values systems are changing. Girls have been exposed to modern environment, opportunities, education. Children are having variety of knowledge and entertainment sources. Housewives are being held hostage by cultural soap operas. Youths are being bombarded with the pornography. 

Sociologists which in a funny way say that, “Ours is a discipline which is not of immediate use. But we need such schools of thoughts which may be of long term use by envisioning and analyzing the processes and actors in the media sector.” In the times of Paid News and Telephone Leaks controversy, today credibility is biggest issue in regulation of media. It should be admitted that there are limits to the argument of saying that “We can regulate for ourselves.” Whatever we sow, we reap likewise. These are the times when social media are looking to overtake the traditional media and even electronic media in shaping the opinion. Journalist Daniel Pearl`s murder, proliferation of Danish cartoons on the internet and mobile filming and spreading  of Saddam Husain’s hanging are best examples of how social media could overcome the electronic media which is increasingly being cited as the member of the club of the traditional media along with the print and the radio.  

Place of media in India has special significance considering the diversity of the demography and diversity of the media. We are debating the question about possible mechanism to nurture ‘Culture of Compliance’ Vs developing ‘Culture of Responsibility.’ The relations between news content producers, commercial content producers, advertisers, marketing companies definitely influence the quality of coverage and analysis of the media. 

Why censorship is significant? In the country like India with vast disparities and diversity, educational, cultural and economic divide; censorship is directly related to state of the human development index India is struggling to attain upto a mark. There is no doubt that Indian media and corporate specialize the flaunting the rules. There is no will or wish to sustain sense of responsibility. There seems to be candid benchmarks of double standards. Very few media houses have their own standards of self regulation like MINT Business Newspaper has. It is not surprising that the habits of drinking, smoking and then driving is not easy to go even after public law and threats of enforcements. So, it seems difficult to believe that media houses will follow the regulatory principles. 

Search engines, social media, mobile transactions in texts and call are increasingly helping national governments to address the user behavior and also to implement the Open Government Policies of the government of the land. Investment in the Public Information Infrastructure is the key element to bridge the conversation between the ruling class and the people who are ruled. From ideas to policy is the way forward. People have various grievances. Emergency of right to information emerged as a greatest weapon for addressing the grievances of the citizens in the efficient manner. Today information is not limited to one boundary or sovereign country. It is crossing boundaries within a matter of seconds. So tracking this journey of information holds the key to solve many vexing issues for the civil society, investigative agencies, governments, courts, media planners and for everyone. Internet Freedom, Censorship in China, Wiki-leaks Controversy, Telephone tapping controversy in India are some of the examples of how information is being used/leaked/regulated/sanctioned for official/unofficial purposes. 

International governance of the internet is being talked about in more vigorous manner like never before. An enforcement of multilateral negotiations is the key to the solution. Will social media be taken into account while formulating the communication policy or it is the traditional media and other media platforms really hold the key to influence the thinking of the policymakers? New traits of policy-making are being envisioned. Sunshine Policy, Public Diplomacy, stand about whistle-blowing, Wiki-leaks, embedded journalists and likewise cases, and so many other issues really dominating the discussion.

So we have to understand the issues of porous boundaries between technology and medium, private and public, ethics and policy, business and social, being serious and fun. This is the age of hyper-transparency. New roles of government are being imagined. Some of them have already been operationalised to some extent in some countries. KM enabled Govt, E-Govt, Agile Govt. In the first stage of this transformation giving public necessary information was necessary and felt sufficient. In the second phase of the information revolution, inviting public comment for the feedback felt significant for improvement of the services. In the third phase, real time consultation and conversation has been considered important for the larger process aiming at particular results and goals. 

So, how governments could do screening of these messages. Firstly they can filter, rate, tag then profiling, then remixing, modifying, then composing original applications, then creating opportunities of collaboration, then upgrading towards mobile & web platform and finally online and offline consultation. There are different content formats through which these all processes are operated. Blogs, Feeds, Wikis, Social Networks, Tagging, Content Sharing, KM Methods, Collaborative Content etc. These all processes must be executed considering the behavioral patterns of the Lurkers, Predators, Spammers, Trawlers, Thought leaders, Advisors, Fixers. Connectivity, Content, Community, Culture, Cooperation, Capacity, Commerce, Capital are new buzz-terms of the new frame of relationship between media and society. 

RTI has, upto a great extent, contributed to the realization of freedom of information leading to reforms, grievance redressal and strengthening of democracy. RTI exposes clandestine deals, arbitrary decisions, manipulations, embezzlement. RTI has greatly minimized the negative repercussions of the Official Secrets Act 1923. Apart from efficacy of Law arrived due to social movements and political initiative always lagged behind the state of the art technology. In a way, technology always outstrips Law. So response has to be real time. It is well recognized fact that technology creates openness and awareness. Even though there are journalists privileges.  So the conflict is between need of regulation and privacy. In the age of callousness, carelessness and foolishness this conflict is getting even murkier and murkier. If you believe the nation`s policies are being designed in the bedrooms, is it right to enter the bedrooms? Increasingly, many people are saying that you should. 

What is national security? What is boundary line between public life and private life? What is the discretion of the journalists for using fair/unfair means in investigation? What is definition of corruption? Tehelka was classic example where there was corruption, issue of national security, a sting operation, a use of money, a use of women for luring politicians, character assassination through the expose of recordings. Defending the rights of the journalists was the big issue at that point of time and no media organization came to the rescue or help of journalists of Tehelka to help or to issue a personal bond. 

Australia, UK, USA, Germany, Spain are the leading countries where there are established functional media regulatory bodies with certain amount of teeth, legal privilege to take action against ill intentioned media broadcasting, printing or airing of the content. Today India stands on the verge enacting amendments in its Copyright Act so as to sound familiar with Digital Millennium Copyrights Act. In a more assertive fashion ICT media/content/technology is being viewed, deployed and planned for different purposes of Disaster Management, Human Rights Protection, Health care, Transparency, Education, Environment, Social Inclusion, Access to Capital, Cultural Preservation and for all Millennium Development Goals. 

Issue of Public Broadcasting remains critical. Few years before it was Public Broadcaster who was getting flak. These days it is private broadcasters which are being criticized and being held to the account. Indian government is not allocating enough money for Prasarbharati. Government is expecting Prasarbharati to raise some money by themselves without realizing that Prasarbharati has very few skills, professional approach, competitive agenda and incentive driven quest of excellence. So, ultimately it ends up imitating the commercial private media. So, apart from prevalent political interference, Public Broadcaster is lacking in quality of the content also. It has to redefine its position and significance of its role in the realm of the media cosmos. So, it remains to be seen whether spectrum of Independence will have a last laugh, or Hunter of regulation or Fountain of Freedom of Expression or Roller of Profit making market? Let us see.

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ref: 

Conference on Comparative Perspectives on Media Regulation and Society 

by Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy, University of Oxford

In collaboration with:

National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata

National Law University, Delhi

Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania

Media partner:

Star TV

December 14-15, 2010

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

‘The Al Jazeera Effect and the Power of Collaboration beyond Monologue and Dialogue’- How the New Global Media are Reshaping World Politics!

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

William J. Fulbright argued that “In the long course of history, having people who understand your thought is much greater security than another submarine.” Or as John Stuart Mill put it, “A neighbor, not being an ally or an associate, since he is never engaged in any common undertaking for joint benefit, is therefore only a rival.” A focus on relationship building at every level is what can and should separate public diplomacy from propaganda, lobbying, and public relations. 

Today, a greatly expanded number of private groups and actors are participating in outreach initiatives across borders. Transnational monologues, dialogues, and partnerships take place every day, both within and outside of the boundaries of official government-initiated or -sponsored public diplomacy. These private initiatives can complement and/or provide models for formal state public diplomacy strategies—or, in certain circumstances, undermine the government’s goals. Governments should be actively aware of and responsive to this alternator competing communication flows to encourage and/or support positive developments and to correct misinformation and engage in dialogue when necessary.

Using facts to reach to the truth. This has been the mission of journalism since its inception few hundred years ago. Controlling, managing and regulating the media content is one of the favourite strategies of both dictators and so called liberal democratic governments across the world to achieve desired results? Is it possible anymore? With concept of Public Diplomacy being mounted by the various nations, no longer the response for a foreign policy initiative is a matter of time. Because events are happening dynamically. It was traditional culture to assume that experts had the facts thus to engaging them will lead to the discovery of truth. But today no more. There are as many experts out there as many people are carrying mobile phones, internet connection, direct to home TV connection, access to community radio and modern digitally convergent technologies. 

This is the competitive world of news media. This is the news business world. More than that this is the world believing in sharing. This is the world affirming their right to know by exercising the technologies at their disposal to write letters to the editor of the foreign press or circulate the crucial health related information outside country by text messages if their domestic government is not allowing to defend the freedom of information and thus inviting larger crisis.  There is sophistication out there in sharing information because people who have these technologies have been upgrading the standard and quality of living due to whatever opportunity coming at their doorstep; due to globalization, due to democracy or due to education.

 

So, sharing information, sharing content like music files, photographs, presentations, documents, research knowledge, arts and cultural images, movies is great metaphor for Public Diplomacy or what originally envisaged by the world Glasnost pioneered by Mikhail Gorbachev. Speed of reporting, accessing the information and accessing the impact of the news is not only the issue. The amount in which people are able to influence the course of events going to be reported by shear strength of social media and reach to the mass media they have makes it near impossible to predict the flow of events, let alone flow of information. Remember, Agra Summit?  President Pervez Musharraf used the breakfast tables to address the global print and electronic media live, so as to give Indian diplomatic establishment a lesson of ideal real time strategic initiative in Public Diplomacy.

 

Television being event based dynamic medium, Public Diplomacy cannot be unilateral communication. Edmund Gullion, the pioneer of the term Public Diplomacy defined it in following words which later world witnessed through the telecast of different wars by CNN: “Public Diplomacy is the influence of public attitudes on the formation and execution of foreign policies. It encompasses dimensions of international relations beyond traditional diplomacy . . . [including] the cultivation by governments of public opinion in other countries; the interaction of private groups and interests in one country  with those of another . . . (and) the transnational flow of information and ideas.” Therefore PD has to be performed through the multimedia engagement because limitations to the clarity, credibility and increasing cacophony of particular media may destroy whole diplomatic mission.

 

 

Power has been becoming more fragile, vulnerable and brittle.  The power of mobile has begun to show its effect.  As one Reuters report says: “Cheap 'go-anywhere' cameras and phones are challenging the credibility of governments, corporations and the traditional media. Increasingly routinely, a cheap, "go-anywhere" camera or mobile phone challenges the credibility of the massive human and financial resources of a government or corporation in an acute crisis. The long-held conventional wisdom of a gulf in time and quality between the news that signals an event and the whole truth eventually emerging is fast being eliminated. The new lightweight technologies available to almost anyone mean a new capacity for instant scrutiny and accountability that is way beyond the narrower, assumed power and influence of the traditional media. The core implications are twofold. First, this new technical reality has dramatically foreshortened the news and information cycle from a few hours to often no more than a few minutes. Second, those cell phones and digital cameras of the proliferation of new "information doers" have swiftly modified and broadened the assumed definitions of the media landscape in a crisis. The new ubiquitous transparency they create sheds light where it is often assumed officially there will be dark.”

 

All these developments are creating deficit of legitimacy because there is flattening of information across the globe. Public information space has grown enormously beyond the power of fourth estate. Systems of institutions in the democracy and media are set up for old style of thinking. Everyone out there is journalist. Then media has to find a way out to accommodate those voices otherwise credibility of the Public Diplomacy initiatives and legitimacy of the media will be under question. So, there is no benefit of doubt will be given to the establishment. The buzzwords in every foreign policy capital is “Its media dammit!” 

 

 

 

Nick Gowing, a chief Presenter of the BBC has completed the study about the contemporary challenges being faced by Media and Government Institutions. He elaborates how the power of state to control citizens has declined. The real challenges are challenges of real time. Exponential technological changes are redefining, broadening and fragmenting the media landscape in dramatic ways. This impacts directly and profoundly by way of two new realities; first on assumptions on media of crisis and second nature of power. In a crisis, there is a relentless and unforgiving trend towards an ever greater information transparency. In the most remote and hostile locations of the world, hundreds and millions of electronic eyes and ears are creating capacity for scrutiny and new demands for accountability. It is way beyond the assumed power and influence of the traditional media. This global electronic reach catches institutions unaware and surprises it with what it reveals. 

 

Gowing further says, “These dramatic changes in the information dynamic have created not just a Tyranny of Time but also a Tyranny of Time Line. Today, time lines of media action and institutional reaction are terribly out of sync. The moment any crisis incidence takes place there is an imperative to fill the resultant information space not within hours but within minutes. Competition to be an ‘information doer’ is immensely ruthless and unforgiving. Too frequently media and government institutions are unwilling to even contemplate or plan for the possibility of improbable ‘Black Swan’ event that will undermine their perceived power and effectiveness. The immediate policy challenge is to enter information space with self-confidence and assertiveness as the media do however incomplete the official understanding about the enormity of what is unfolding. The institutional systems and mindsets are neither prepared nor in place to match the flow of information disseminated by information doers. The relative passivity is compounded by latent but inappropriate fear of entering the space due to the inherent risks of being wrong or too hasty about the nature of the crisis. 

But to describe these ‘information doers’ or ‘motivated amateurs’ as a ‘citizen journalist’ is a long way to go. The more appropriated process to describe these proactive initiatives by citizens would be related to ‘social media’ which do not employ the traditional mediated process of journalism. The best high value brands in the traditional media will always want to check facts and mediate scrupulously the material these new ‘information doers’ provide in order to protect their brand reputation. The intent and technological capacity to manipulate or deceive from anywhere in this digital world is well proven. In the end, any semantic differences over the phrase or label to describe should come second to accepting that they are increasingly significant, contributing, ad-hoc members of media matrix which is now broader, deeper and more multi-layered. 

Each of these three “layers” of public diplomacy—monologue, dialogue, and collaboration—is essential at certain times and under certain situations. Nothing can match the poetry, clarity, emotional power, and memorability of a beautifully crafted speech or proclamation. Nothing helps build mutual understanding as well as a thoughtful dialogue. And nothing creates a sense of trust and mutual respect as fully as a meaningful collaboration. In today’s world, however, while monologue is an essential advocacy tool that public diplomacy practitioners can and must use to raise awareness about their country’s policies, identities, or values, deliberate advocacy is only a small component of the messages flowing across borders. The nature of the global communications environment makes it inevitable that (sometimes for better, sometimes for worse) one-way messages are transmitted transnationally on a daily, hourly, and even minute-to-minute basis. 

Such communications, more often than not, take place outside the boundaries of formal public diplomacy programs. Popular entertainment products, global news flows, and the private circulation of information (and often misinformation) about the domestic sphere are just a few among many critical factors in shaping national reputations. There are many times when thoughtless or inadvertent forms of monologues, including those by private actors, or by public actors in private moments, contribute to a country’s reputation abroad. Messages designed for domestic or private consumption may well reach international audiences who will interpret (or misinterpret) them according to their own experiences, cultures, and political needs. 

While dialogue between cultures is an admirable goal, it begins with dialogue between individuals, whether they are representatives of governments or private citizens meeting in a hotel conference room or an online chat room.  Contact is generally most effective when four conditions are met: (a) Participants have equal status or ability to participate, (b) They have common goals such as a sports team or the improvement of a neighborhood association, (3) The contact is free from competition between their respective groups, and (4) the contact is supported by social norms and/or community authority. 

Collaborative projects almost without exception include dialogue between participants and stakeholders, but they also include concrete and typically easily identifiable goals and outcomes that provide a useful basis and structure upon which to form more lasting relationships.  The benefits of collaboration have been recognized by a number of leading scholars across a range of conditions. Research into team building, business cooperation, social capital, conflict prevention, democracy building, and development all point to the potentially transformative power of collaborative endeavors for public diplomatic relationships. 

States that are the most economically prosperous and socially cohesive, with the highest governmental approval ratings, are overwhelmingly rich in “cross-cutting social capital” (i.e. groups and voluntary associations that cut across class, race, ethnic, and religious lines). Moreover, states and/or regions of states with failed governments that had flourishing bridging social capital were more prosperous and more likely to implement coping strategies that helped to ameliorate the problems of governmental breakdown (e.g., community run schools, health clinics, and barter programs).

In this world of economic, political, and cultural interdependence, monologue, dialogue, and collaboration, when appropriately practiced, are all essential tools for effective public diplomacy, both online and offline.  Public Diplomacy is by its nature transparent, but it cannot be contrasted with traditional diplomacy as an activity which by definition serves only good ends. A more diffuse, difficult-to-measure goal is relationship building—the cultivation of ties with decision-makers and opinion leaders from various sectors of society. Traditionally this could have been done on the cocktail circuit, but power in modern societies is much more distributed and networking has to be more active and more strategic. Measuring success here would entail measuring access to, and gauging the disposition of, the target group. Even more long-term and diffuse in purpose are the most “public” events of PD: cultural programs and academic exchanges, outreach, media relations, and the activities that would be gathered under the out-of-favour term “branding.” If you host a film festival, you can quantify the publicity received and the audience in attendance, but the effect of such events is cumulative and “payoffs” are long-term.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Ref:

-> Public Diplomacy in the Information Age, Conference by Ministry of External Affairs, 10^th Dec. 2010, New Delhi

-> Geoffrey Cowan and Amelia Arsenault, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2008 616: 10, ‘Public Diplomacy Moving from Monologue to Dialogue to Collaboration: The Three Layers of Public Diplomacy’)

-> Mark McDowell, Public Diplomacy at the Crossroads: Definitions and Challenges in an “Open Source” Era, The Fletcher Forum Of World Affairs; Vol. 32:3 Special Edition 2008

-> Gowling, Nick. 'Skyful of Lies' and Black Swans: The New Tyranny of Shifting Information Power in Crises. RISJ challenges. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, 2009. Print.

-------------------------------------------------------