Sach ka Saamna and others generate need for regulations

American politicians and financial houses supported free economy for almost five decades. They had phenomenal success of the American financial institutions as evidence to prove their point. These companies were apparently self regulating themselves and working for the benefits of the shareholders. It seemed perfectly fine until one day nearly all of them collapsed together and needed support from tax payers for their day-to-day operations. Now the same American politicians are talking for tougher regulations for the financial market.

I have not a big fan of television and do not watch it very often so I have been alien to what is happening on the cable television for the TRPs. Each of these cable network wants more and more viewers at the cost of anything. Until now these cable channels have got free hand from the government to show whatever they want to produce but now some of the channels have gone to far in exploiting this freedom. At the moment, these channels have to follow only guidelines prescribed in Cable Television Network (regulation) Act 1995. This act was brought to stop some of the foreign channels (e.g. FTV, etc) being broadcasted freely to the public. I remember in my city some of the people burnt down their TV set when these programmes broadcast initially almost 15 years back. This act gave teeth to the I&B ministry and it worked fine till recently.

Now the time has changed again and there is challenge to stop the abuse of freedom by the Cable Networks. The channels response to the production of these reality programs (e.g. Sach Ka Saamna, Dadagiri, Bal Vivah, Rakhi Sawant ka ... etc) are very similar. They choose one or more of the following defence arguments. Any combination of these arguments seem very convincing but if we try to look deeper these are hollow arguments and does not serve any purpose on ground for masses. Lets discuss each of them.

1. It follows the guidelines of the Cable Act 1995. The guidelines of the Cable Act 1995 are irrelevant to what they are producing. This act had some other purpose (to stop free semi-porn channels) when in-acted rather than regulating the content. As the challenges before the I&B ministry are different so this law need to be amended. These programs are promoting cheap mentality that no responsible producer should produce but it is debatable if they are responsible.

2. There is freedom for the viewer to change channel and not watch. where is the choice if someone wants to change the channel. All the channels are competing in producing low grade programs. People can shut the TV at all, that is the only option left. But people do not buy TV or cable connection to shut the TV.

3. Program is air at late night time. Is this really late night at 10 PM? A large number of people who have access to electricity sleep between 11-12 PM or even later. And when there is advertising all the day and week for a particular program that is aired 10PM and Vinod Kambli says that he did not have good relationship with Sachin, how can people miss that program? No mater next week it might be TV start talking about watching male striptease and adultery.

4. There is warning and children should not watch this program. When does Indian children and parents started to bother to read or listen such warnings? Do all the programs rated by any independent body? There is no such mechanism in place. So how does we or even the producer of the program know which program is suitable for children or even adults?

5. Khajuraho has more nude sculpture than our program. Khajuraho is not about nudity and vulgarity. It is pure art. Any sensible person who has interest in art must know that vulgarity and art do not go together even though both can have nudity.

6. This format of program is very popular internationally. Program should be made for the taste of the local culture, tradition and needs. People should know what is happening in the world and how the other cultures are but there is no need to bombard common masses with something that is not normal or acceptable in other, so-called advanced, societies.

7. There are so many channels today, how to regulate them? Regulation does not mean censorship of each and every program. A independent regularity body means that when a case is brought to the bodies attention, it can check and judge the program against some pre-defined standards and guidelines. This regulatory body will need resources but there are so many channels why not charge a small amount to each channel for maintenance of the regulatory body?

Our observation shows that current system has inadequate powers to stop channels from producing unbearable and non-sense programs and this generate need for an independent regulatory body for Cable channels in India.