DD's Modi Interview: Prasar Again Writes to I&B Ministry

NEW DELHI | MAY 11, 2014

http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=840447

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/lok-sabha-elections-2014/news/DDs-Modi-interview-Prasar-again-writes-to-information-and-broadcasting-ministry/articleshow/34968293.cms

Source: (1) news.outlookindia

            (2) timesofindia.indiatimes

Public broadcaster Prasar Bharati has again sought an assurance from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry that its recommendations would not be ignored if an inquiry is held into the controversial editing of Doordarshan's Narendra Modi interview.

Sources said that Prasar Bharati's Principal Advisor V A M Hussain has written a letter to I&B Secretary Bimal Julka in which he has cited several instances where Prasar Bharati's requests were turned down or kept pending by the government.

Referring to these instances, the senior Prasar Bharati official said that it is because of these "historical reasons" that an assurance is needed "so that well-meaning action would not result in public humiliation".

This is the second time that the public broadcaster has written to the I&B Ministry seeking an assurance.

Doordarshan had on April 26 interviewed BJP's Prime Ministerial candidate at Gandhinagar and then telecast it the next day.

However, remarks made by Modi on Priyanka Gandhi and his claims of proximity with Congress leader Ahmed Patel were edited out by DD, but that became public through the social media, triggering a row.

Following the controversy, Prasar Bharati CEO Jawhar Sircar wrote to the I&B Ministry, saying Prasar Bharati had no control over top officials in News wings of DD and AIR so the ministry should tell clearly whether it would abide by a "neutral" enquiry.

The I&B Ministry had then suggested that Prasar Bharati should seek the views of its board on whether an inquiry is needed. Apparently not satisfied with the ministry's stance, the public broadcaster has reiterated its demand.

"The fundamental question is that until the ministry satisfies the Board of Prasar Bharati that in this instant case, MIB would not ignore PB's recommendation, PB would not be in a position to simply 'mark time' and be dishonoured by calling for a public enquiry into a controversial matter, and then be held responsible for its inability to take action in terms of this enquiry," Hussain said in the letter.

Hussain listed several instances in which Prasar Bharati's voice was not heard in cases related to transfer of senior officials in the News wings.

He said that an officer continued to be posted in a station for an "unheard of" 23 years and when the issue was taken up by Prasar Bharati CEO, the ministry refused to accept the request.

He said that Prasar Bharati had also taken up the issue of another officer who was posted in the same station for 14 years but was rebuffed.

In his letter, the Prasar Bharati official also mentioned that many proposals or recommendations written by the public broadcaster to the ministry were kept pending for several months without any consultation.

The letter said that correspondence by CEO and Prasar Bharati for the induction of Member (Personnel) and DGs to be put in the consultative process by the ministry were not even acknowledged by the I&B ministry and no response was sent.

Hussain said that Prasar Bharati CEO had personally requested the ministry to permit DG (News) to accept the deputation visit to Asian Pacific Broadcasting Union where modern development and technology were discussed but was refused. He said that several other well-meaning proposals were also turned down.

"It is very clear that Prasar Bharati is pained at the indifferent attitude of MIB and its signals that it would not part with the slightest iota of control and supervision," Hussain said while seeking an assurance from the ministry on the issue of an inquiry into the Modi interview.

While Prasar Bharati and the I&B Ministry spar to over the issue of conducting an inquiry, DD News, which had telecast the interview, has maintained that "there was no deliberate editing or omission of any portion of the interview".

"Wherever editing was done was for technical reasons and during post production. There was no interference or control from any authority in the entire process," it had said in a statement.