Fostering informed choices: Ethical challenges for the Fourth Estate
(Convocation address by Ms Aruna Roy, Magasaysay Award winner and social activist)

Ms. Aruna Roy, Magasaysay Award winner
and social activist

Our common heritage

It is May 2004. If we look back on the 20th Century it is with a curious mix of wonder and horror. Momentous events no longer only affect people where they occur, but have an increasing impact all over the world.

Let us look at a few major international and national events at random. There have been great innovations in peoples' politics- the Russian Revolution and the globalisation of the communist ideal; the Indian independence movement, civil disobedience, and the politics of Mahatma Gandhi and Mandela; Nehru and the politics of non -alignment; freedom from colonial rule and accepting democracy as a mode of governance. These have been fresh ways of dealing with the difficult task of fighting subjugation and oppression, and building new societies and nations.

The quantum leap in science and in its applied form as technology, has seen man's increasing dominance over nature, with the apparent power to defy its laws.

Unlike Icarus we fly, and fly quicker and further making dormant dreams come true. Human beings have walked on the moon, circled the earth, and made forays far into space. Technology has made millions of lives better.

The discoveries in medicine, in communication, have changed every aspect of our lives. Telephone lines and the internet have made the world a smaller place. Television has carried visual images that could not even have been obtained in a lifetime of travel. Even the cultural heritage is now global. There is Picasso and Balasaraswati, Tagore and Marquez, and immense creativity in the realm of culture. Wonder in the discovery of the cinema and the emerging access to creative talents in all the languages of the world. It is an endless list.

But we have also had indefinable horrors. There were two world wars and modern pogroms and genocide, which began with Hitler and still continue- even in this sub-continent- sparing no country or specific group. There have been atomic bombs that cruelly maimed and wantonly destroyed people and continue to threaten the existence of this planet. We have the continuing use of might over right , with the support of money and religion. The "Gods" continue to War. We have not grown out of the bind of superstition, and the parochialism of caste, colour, creed and class. There is limitless wealth and endemic poverty. There is a new economic order with its own ruthless God- whose name is "profit", not to be confused with Prophet- and at whose altar we sacrifice people who stand in its way! The new rulers build global empires converting people into consumers, with the singular purpose of pushing their products. This also is an endless list.

We are caught in conflicting world views and in a time warp. We hang between having achieved the impossible, moved closer to the stars on the one hand, and the extraordinary descent into irrationality and violence and an alienation with our own values, on the other. At points in time we find we have regressed from humanism and reason, to the narrowest confines of dogma.

Facing Current Concerns: The human challenge of interpretation and understanding

The last 100 years with all its wonders have left us confused about the application of ideas. More fundamentally, we are confused and unsure about the proponents and creators, as well as the custodians and bearers of these ideas.

The challenge before the ordinary citizen today is to find a way to understand many of these ongoing processes and then make individual and collective choices. We have a scenario where democracy is the popularly and widely accepted mode of governance. Functioning democracies require an informed citizenry intervening and deciding on not just the leadership, but expressing their opinion on matters affecting the State. While there are many competing interests to confuse the issue, the bigger challenges in reaching a rational understanding, comes from the increasing domination of a uni-polar uni-linear world view. Events - past and present - are repackaged and reinterpreted so that the opportunity for people to think for themselves is being reduced by a variety of subtle, but effective strategies.

The ruling establishment the world over subscribes to a remarkably similar world- view. The space that nationalist movements offered in interpreting events differently has been replaced by a general collusion of the ruling elite around the world. This is combined with a sophisticated strategy of buying over all voices of fundamental opposition and dissent. It is now understood that crude methods of preventing access to information and the right to expression will prove counterproductive. The far more effective means of achieving the same end is to create a veneer of freedom, while ensuring this freedom remains within the norms of established acceptability. The voices of dissent do not need to be snuffed out. They are just not given a platform , and are most often drowned out by the "chosen" noises of "free expression". Information, which is one of the most powerful tools to fight injustice, is itself being rendered ineffective, through misinformation, disinformation, counter information, and most importantly, the bombardment of irrelevant information. How does one fight for information in an age of information overload?

Challenges in the age of information overload

This is the information age. We are told that information is the biggest commodity- with the internet, mass media, and concerned hardware products being sold as the most essential requirement for every household. We are "informed" that information is available at the touch of a button and at the glance at a screen. It is in fact true that there is more information than we can absorb or use. However, the important factor we need to consider is identify the information we can use to increase our understanding. Create platforms available for democratic debate so that our points of view are heard. Do see if they have an impact on decision making. To identify those who will help process this information. Make it understandable, sift the grain from the chaff, and help determine whether critical information is available at all. To define and accept common norms which will help determine the ethics of the use of this information. We will have to evaluate whether the information brokers, managers, facilitators are able to discharge their responsibility to act as the conscience of the people . To know which gods will they choose to serve. To be able to show from whom they should in fact obtain their mandate?

These are the critical and important questions for the fourth estate to answer. Considering its diminishing role as a powerful, independent, ethically committed conveyor of the truth. There have always been questions about the independence of the media in the age of market controls and media manipulations by the State. But the more critical question is whether there is a fourth estate at all!

There can be no doubt about the need for an independent agency, dealing with information to give people an opportunity to be truly informed. However, this is not the responsibility of the media alone. Just as democracy without ethics is reduced to crass majoritanism, and leadership without ethics is plain power brokering, journalism without ethics becomes the worst form of reducing information and ideas into a commodity.

In the information age, the role of the media is even more versatile and critical. For democracy to function, and to make sure that leaders are accountable, you need a vigilant body practiced in the art of information gathering, analysis, and dissemination. To comment on the ethics of the leadership of a political system, you need to be sure of the ethics of the critic. The burden on the critic is, in fact even greater.

Leadership in Politics, and the public sphere

Debates about leadership will never end nor will there be any agreement about its specifics. Nevertheless, the recognition of a leader in the normal sense, has always something to do with the nature of that leader's relationship with the ethics of a self defined ideology. From Lenin, Gandhi, Roosevelt to Nelson Mandela, in a long list of persons whom the world recognizes as deserving, the question of ethical commitment has been an important reason for their standing and respect.

The notion of leadership in a democracy is a tricky one. The participation of people in decision making is riddled with complex questions. It means a genuine sharing of power, where the leader has to saddle the dichotomy of peoples concerns, with the practicality of governance. In this process, a strong ethical society based on the rule of law and a progressive middle class ,have played an important role. The role the media plays in determining the quality of leadership, is not confined to the behavior and ethics of individual leaders, but also extends to what the media projects as quality leadership. The media for instance, has to accept its share of the responsibility for the emergence of a series of entertainers as star politicians. It is not only newspapers and the mass media who are peddling entertainment as news, but in this election more than ever before in India, politics has been reduced to little more than entertainment. Both the print and electronic media have taken the lead in creating this atmosphere. In such a situation, is there any scope for "fostering an informed choice?"

The public sphere and the fourth estate

The fourth estate, with its origins in the middle class, has lost its way in superficialities and manipulations. Distinguishing itself from the government, the ruling elite, and even the people, the fourth estate was supposed to function as an independent guide and arbitrator of ideas and debate.To report, explain, analyze, highlight, critique and expose the deeds and misdeeds of not just the ruling elite and the people, but use of the public sphere itself. The only reference point for carrying out this most privileged function could be a strong principles to help maintain its role as not just a watchdog, but also a creator and protector of democratic spaces.

Ethics in public life needs support and even guidance from public spirited people. It needs too a fair, committed and critical support from the media, giving a voice to reason, fairness and justice. Edmund Burke and his defense of the Begum of Oudh, which led to the impeachment of Warren Hastings, has stood out as one such example. It is interesting that Carlyle who has been the acknowledged creator of the phrase "the fourth estate", seemed to be ascribing the term to Edmund Burke who described it nearly 100 years ago. "Burke said there were Three Estates in Parliament; but, in the Reporters' Gallery yonder, there sat a Fourth Estate more important than they all. It is not a figure of speech, or a witty saying; it is a literal fact, .... Printing, which comes necessarily out of Writing, I say often, is equivalent to Democracy: invent Writing, Democracy is inevitable. ..... Whoever can speak, speaking now to the whole nation, becomes a power, a branch of government, with inalienable weight in law-making, in all acts of authority. It matters not what rank he has, what revenues or garnitures: the requisite thing is that he have a tongue which others will listen to; this and nothing more is requisite." Carlyle (1905) pp.349

While Burke and Carlyle made the distinction between the three estates in Parliament and the fourth one "in the viewers gallery", they were already making references to them being a "branch of government..." The creative tension between an independent media and forms of power and authority is critical to its being the conscience of the public sphere.

However, as people have seen in the growing collusion between the State and the media, the space for an independent and honest presenter of news begins to be lost. The media controlled by private market forces is even more open to manipulation of money and business interests, the key determinants of neo-liberal globalisation. As the State, business interests, and the media join forces, the search for new custodians of the public sphere must begin from both within and outside the media.

The State and the Media

We all know and see the stark contrast in today's India, where the public vision is blocked not only by the larger than life hoardings of leaders who are without any principles, but their overwhelming control over the minds of people who barter with, and write about power. The role of the media in making heroes of politicians is well known. The question the media will also have to ask of itself is , "What role have I/we played in this charade which has become a nightmare called politics?"

Despite the media's contention that they have to take a more "objective" role, every piece of reporting makes a statement. This covers the entire electronic media, and the hierarchy of newspaper management, from the owner to the stringer. Increasingly, the management of most papers, is taking more strongly biased positions in favour of collusion politics. We see and hear more of the activities of those who define power as personal gain-whether to position, money or glamour- than of the lakhs of individuals who with all their limitations have lived and are living a life contributing to make India a better place.

The state and the information establishment

Activists have long been aware of the coercive and at times, co-optive capacities of the State. In the case of the media, the State is rarely forced to use coercive tactics. One sees the States tendency to bribe, and the medias propensity to accept. It has enough to offer in terms of lucrative benefits, to ensure that its point of view is well represented and certain critics are neutralized. Plots and houses at highly concessional rates, frequent jaunts, lavish entertainment and straightforward money transactions are some of the common and effective practices of bribing the media.

The market driven media

Government controls the media through individuals, and in occasional cases through ideological friends in the management. But in the case of the market, the entire set of controls by definition lie with private ownership. The media nurtures and promotes the market, and the market defines the role of media. This is not dissimilar to the statements often made by the Indian bureaucrat, who blames the politician for everything. Often glossing over the increasing betrayal of the people by the bureaucracy itself, in assenting to and carrying out un-constitutional and unlawful acts.

The commercialisation of the fourth estate has greatly undermined its independence. The media thrives on the advertisement contracts released by the government. Certain smaller newspapers survive only on such ads. A new term called the "advertorial" has surfaced as a crude attempt to pass a publicity piece off as an article. Even more shocking are the confirmed reports of editorial and even news space in certain papers being bought by parties and candidates.

Today the media is selling not just a series of products, but is in fact proactively pushing a way of life where news itself is a product. People by definition are no more than passive consumers. In this scenario how does one even begin to talk about values and principles. Perhaps we need to do more than talk. This fast disappearing breed of truly independent journalists, need the support of a strong code of ethics for survival.

The ascent and decline of the written word

In a country where the written word is still under valued and most of the neo-literate are just able to follow news headlines, Carlyle's statement about the power of the print media may seem true but distant. The poor have been seen and heard only through struggle and protest. Their voices have been fortified by the non-violent civil disobedience tradition we have got from Gandhi, or the more militant modes evolved for fighting exploitation and the ruthlessness of the ruling classes. However, media, especially the language print media, has more often than not, has taken sympathetic pro-establishment positions. More newspapers are now being read by ordinary people in small towns and villages, where the written word and its power has been a weapon of the privileged . However, the growing avid readership is now caught, between the desire to seek information and news beyond their immediate confines, and the limited often narrow interpretation of facts, passed off as the truth itself. The alternatives offered in the mainstream Hindi press also miserably fail to reflect the plurality of opinion and the depth of democratic debate that actually exists in the country. As a result, most often only one point of view reflecting the dominant rural middle class positions is presented.

Strangely enough, the influence of the metro press on these newspapers seems to be confined to reporting on matters like fashion shows and the personal lives of rock stars - something that has absolutely no meaning to rural readers. The metropolitan print media, trivialises the importance of the serious concerns of citizens by shifting to entertainment and gossip in the name of politics and scandals. Yet, the newspaper is read from the first page to the last , by and influences a population of first generation literates eager for news.

The divide between the languages- where is the bridge?

It has been difficult for the average reader to distinguish between misinformation and news. This is most starkly visible in the reporting on Gujarat. The divide between the English and the electronic media in contrast with the Gujarati press, has shown us some of the inner contradictions within the media. Diametrically opposite reports of the same set of events can only be resolved by a commitment to follow a common set of ethical norms. The contribution of the English and electronic media to expose communalism and stem the genocide, is a landmark in its history. But if we look at the emerging readership, the decisive numbers in a democracy, the attention shifts to the language media and its readership. Why are there such wide divides between the two? Why do the schools of journalism such as this one not cater to the language press?

There is also the need to give space to serious thought. If current pre-occupations become pegs for serious discussion, there is a ready and avid readership and the potential to foster healthy democratic debate. Even the question of the need for ethical norms can be debated in the press and on television. It can be a relevant and topical issue if it is broached imaginatively. As in fact it has been in the Right to Information Campaign.

Democracy and the peoples right to choose

Democracy is in fact much more than just the right to choose. In simplistic terms it is the guarantee of a general election. The nature of the electoral process however defective, is a great deal better than any other form of government. However it is a necessary but not sufficient condition for governance. So much so, that in the last two decades, critics of democracy have sprung up every where. It is not uncommon nowadays to hear the youth praise Hitler and express a desire of having a leader like him! They are victims of a system that has promised them equality and not taken much cognizance of it in real life. Suppressed through caste and class, they think that the fault lies with the political system. They perhaps do not understand that they end up supporting and perpetuating greater inequalities, when their frustration makes them tools to be used for crass political ends.

The problem lies in the complete pauperization of the political process. Over the last year, the peasant and workers organization I work with in Rajasthan called the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) has undertaken several "truck yatras." Called the "Jan Nithi" and "jan Adhikar Yatra" , 40 to 50 volunteers traveled through several districts in Rajasthan in the back of a truck. One objective was to lampoon political yatras themselves. Street theatre, music and other forms of cultural expression were used to take the debate about democracy and participatory governance to the people. The yatras have been extremely useful in starting genuine debates, emanating from the common person's concern over their future, and the future of the country.

One of the popular stories that the Yatra used effectively was the Rajasthani folk story of the "Kanda and Juthi" or "the King who offered a choice." The story goes, that once there was a King who liked to be fair. He always asked the offender to choose the form of punishment. When one such offender was brought to him in court, he offered him a choice. How would he like to be punished - get clobbered with a shoe on his head a hundred times or, eat a hundred onions ? The offender was quick to opt for the onions. Who would want to be beaten with a shoe in the full gaze of the entire court? After the tenth onion, mouth blistering and raw, he called a halt to the onions, and begged to be beaten instead. The head felt reasonably strong. The beating began, but raw and bleeding he could not take it after the 8th blow. He begged to be allowed to eat the remaining onions. The story has it, that so it went on, till he had eaten a hundred onions and been hit a hundred times on the head.

Our political predicament today is mostly like that of the offender. We have an apparent choice. It is there to beguile us into a sense of being in control. In actual fact, the controls do not lie with us. The fundamental difference between the story and our reality, lies in the fact that we can try and change the predicament, if we want to. We will have to counter the desire of the middle class to take it easy and let the battle be fought by proxy. There is an appropriate modern Hindi adage that says: "There is a need for another Bhagat Singh to be born, BUT in my neighbor's house!! We will have to address the complete failure of most political parties to deal with ethics and ideological commitment.

The politics of merely gaining power has narrow concerns. When things do not go their way, criminalisation, casteism and communalism are the aces up their sleeve. We have to define our collective role to counter this, evolve alternative politics. We have to create our own choices. Apparent choices between the caste candidate and the selfish criminal , leave us with a democracy which functions on the lowest common denominator- of a professed but choiceless choice. The ethical question is an interesting one, because it always has a flip side. It questions your commitment , the so called neutrality, to report without comment .

Questions of journalistic ethics cannot be answered by the insistence on neutrality. Activist journalism is often ethical journalism, and needs encouragement. Information includes analysis. It can help people make informed choices. In a personal and professional sense, even when you are reporting on democracy and democratic modes you do have a commitment to enrich democratic thought. Democracy is increasingly being seen as nothing more than a numbers game. If there is a majority, it is assumed all other factors are secondary. Even the manipulations to procure majority support are legitimised by the final answer that majority support has been obtained. We cannot allow such "majoritarianism" to take over our values and shape our destiny. The arguments of legitimizing the crass manipulations in Gujarat on this basis, poses a threat to democracy itself. A single voice of conscience, like that of the Best Bakery case, can and should shake dominant majorities and make a fundamental difference. Systematically undermining the rule of law, and reducing the space for protest is bound to result in basic distortions. It will lead us to a fascist system, where even the haves' will end up losing the freedoms they now enjoy. The poor are still struggling to be heard and seen. But members of privileged groups, are willing to blind ourselves to the most vulgar form and abuse of power, just to secure self interest.

Democracy and the Public Sphere

When people don't find space for their concerns in the mainstream media individually or collectively, they have no choice but to create the space themselves. Even if the fourth Estate is currently a misnomer because of the lack of independence of the media, the need for a platform which comments on the dialogue between the government, the people, and the ruling elite is crucial. It is up to movements to work to build such alternative platforms that might in some way contribute to playing the role of the fourth estate.

In the course of this talk I will draw on the experiences of a ten year long struggle of ordinary people in central Rajasthan to use information to establish the truth, and fight age long exploitation. It is one of many examples of how a peoples group can combine with elements in the mainstream media to define the critical role of the "fourth estate."

Reclaiming the public sphere- the peoples right to information

What the Right to Information Campaign has been able to do, is to bring many strands of dissent together into a common demand for accountability from democratic leadership and the government. A simple and ordinary question - "where are the accounts for money spent in my name ?" created havoc. There were sharp reactions to being questioned, -a hang over of the feudal past, entrenched caste hierarchies and colonialism. There was the fear of exposure from a highly corrupt and unethical bureaucracy. Whether the Chief Minister or the Sarpanch, both had to relate to and engage with the real responsibility of power and position. The political leader and the civil servant were caught in the huge hiatus between the pomposity and self righteousness of their statements and the lies they enacted and lived.

Tackling the power divides- The common person and the predicament of powerlessness

Equality, by and large, has remained a theoretical concept in rural and urban India. The traditional hierarchies of caste and feudalism have been overlaid with that of class, market and profit driven priorities. The predicament of the common person is that they were and are still not heard. Their identity is as a vote, a target, a beneficiary, a passive receiver, to be manipulated and used for a larger purpose. They are largely seen as an inefficient cog in the wheel of development. Schooling has been more in name than in content. History has been distorted and handed down. The larger world has come to them only in the form of economic oppression and irrelevant items of consumption. It is not surprising therefore that they should seek their identity in the most immediate and parochial sense and identify with caste and religion. Where despite all the negatives there is the comfort of communication and apparent mutual respect. At the time of elections a sense of importance comes and goes, as ephemeral as a chimera - the monsoon cloud that comes with a sense of promise and leaves without a drop of water.

Who sets the terms of reference- who sets the agenda?- who acts, who reacts- who reports

In our public discourse it becomes important to ask these questions. Who is setting the agenda for the debate? Is it the politician, the media who create the event, or people. The mainstream press have for too long reported the priorities of a small minority who have set the agenda for public debate. The rest of us seem to be following and reacting most of the time. That is why it is important that we highlight issues and create platforms, where the events create their own channel of communication until mainstream media is forced to listen and report.

Breaking the silence- dalits, women, endemic poverty of the rural poor

In a scenario of perpetual want, and the control of local power politics, democracy has made inroads. People understand democratic power in creating governments, but they are trapped in caste politics. There has been no social revolution which has touched caste and other traditions, repressive values and work styles. In States like Kerala, West Bengal and in Maharashtra,for example, social revolutions have strengthened political understanding and enabled people to enter the new world with greater awareness . But even in these States, the inroads of corruption and criminalisation could not be stopped. In Maharashtra, despite Jyotibhai Phule and Ambedkar, upper castes still largely dominate the political spaces and set the agenda for public discourse.

Women have set some agendas in Rajasthan despite the great controls exercised through social norms and the feudal tradition. They have fought against sati, rape and come together to oppose them. But voting patterns are still male dominated where women conform to male authority. Women have become more visible in politics, but the genuine debates on equality that they have been part of, have been partially subsumed by mainstream power politics.

Dalits have , now to some extent got access to land, though they have not got the power to till it and often, still continue with caste occupations. In Rajasthan, dalit women can now wear jewellery, but often cannot access water sources. They are still the target of physical assault. They are most often the targets of rape and abuse. The men can now sit on cycles, but in cases like that of Chakwada, the whole Berwa( leather workers) community was denied access to the village tank. The Dalits in Chakwada have now fought their way to the right to use the water. But the public disapproval of the dominant communities continues. Now while the dalits use the tank, the others do not!!

Dalits have access to the Atrocities Act, and do sometimes manage to obtain conviction orders. But the statue of Manu is erected within the precinct of the High Court in Jaipur, while the statue of Ambedkar stands outside the boundary wall of the court at the circle!! Most Dalits in Rajasthan do not understand the significance of this symbolism, leave alone the denial of constitutional norms by the presence of such an anomaly. The Higher judiciary has shown no discomfort, and continues to protect dalits from atrocities under the watchful gaze of Manu.

Breaking the conspiracy of silence

The country still has hope as long as this conspiracy of silence is continually broken. At the van guard of this are various groups and individuals who have made it their business to ensure that these matters are brought into the public domain. From the well known figure of Arundhati Roy with her courage and tenacity, to the significant protest by Bhanwari against rape in Bhateri, people continue to speak out.

The underprivileged, the displaced, the homeless, the minorities, the women, the dalits, and those who live by their conscience repeatedly break this silence. Major issues like rape get the attention of the press and media, and there is a good story line. What does not get into print is the day to day perversions and the gnawing pain of violence, which does not qualify to be a dramatic offence, but kills quietly. The dalit atrocities when there are killings, burning and maiming get attention. The every day humiliation dalits undergo while fetching water to drinking tea in separate cups in the chai shop, is not news. The media says- it has been covered before!

Breaking the silence, with the right to know The Right to Information (RTI) movement like many of the other peoples movements in this country is part of an attempt to break this silence. But the RTI campaign, is even more about finding effective means to question and get answers from the ruling class. That is why the irate Sarpanch threatened to kill himself, if the MKSS continued to ask for the right to see the financial documents of the Panchayat.

The response to a Satyendra Dubey was a gun shot that took his life. The lawyer in Beawar swore that the right would never be acceded by a government, how could it agree to slice out its heart and show it to you, rotten as it is. That is why in Delhi, the goons came to disturb and disperse people attending a Public Hearing. That is why the right to see records of governance is scary, because it will break this silence, galvanise the people and force the rulers to publicly take cognizance of the lies and deceit. Little wonder than that the state uses repression to answer any questioning or protest.

Yet without transparency and enforcing accountability, there can be no democratic governance worth the name.

Democracy, Plurality, and the Establishment: The threat to plurality

Till the happenings in Ayodhya in 1992 and those in Gujarat in 2002, most of us just assumed that the country would bumble along and re- settle after the upheavals . Many of us still felt that notwithstanding the Emergency in 1975 and the anti-sikh riots in 1984, the country's systems of justice and indeed the State itself would not allow, or be participant in anti-constitutional activities. The shock that ran through 'progressive' India after Gujarat has made many of us despair of ever being able to rectify the problem. Wide cracks have since become visible. Custodians of the rule of law, that one took so much for granted, and the instruments of governance one grudgingly believed would deliver, have gone beyond the pale. Senior bureaucrats along with so called political leaders are now masters of double talk, consorts of blatant distortion of the law, participants in corruption, criminalisation and communalism. They dictate terms of how the nation should be run.

But the determination to protest and struggle and repair has become more urgent. This urgency has given many of us in India a sense of determination to examine the role of the State in a current context. There is a need to redefine it in lay terms, so that ordinary people can participate in moulding their kind of democracy, where the plurality of their views are given the space to be acknowledged and heard.

Space for democratic debate - the dangers of Gujarat

The first casualty in any destruction of democratic values is the right to freedom of expression. A vociferous and destructive minority takes control over democratic space. This leads to an agenda of destruction and a tutored passivity of civil society. There is no way people are willing to hear the voice of reason. Those who keep silent and thereby condone any act of violation of human and fundamental rights, are a party to the crime. The use of the language media to misinform and perpetuate acts of violence in Gujarat are well documented. Amongst NRIs In the USA and the UK , these papers have become the gospel. There was not enough of a counter from other language papers. There needs to be an equally persistent and determined campaign to expose the real intent of fascist forces.

In public places, the actual geographic and physical space has been shrinking. The Boat Club is no longer available for peaceful protestors in Delhi. The Ramlila grounds are not either, and even space outside Rajghat ,is out of bounds for even those who use non-violent civil disobedience as a means of protest. The Jantar Mantar is an animal pen, where all protestors huddle together. Shouting slogans at each other, while so called civil society buys and sells or hurtles around in JanPath or Connaught place. In Jaipur those who come with their tales of woe or to raise issues of democratic protest have been thrown out of the Statue Circle because they destroy the beauty of the place! The media does not really take up the issue. The loss of places of protest is the first testing ground for the spread of fascist controls.

The Bajrang Dal and the VHP tear and destroy what they do not like from their parochial, communal point of view. Medha Patkar, gets beaten up because she speaks for peace, Malika Sarabhai is threatened for similar reasons. Shabnam Hashmi, and Teesta Satlewad are also threatened and roughed up, as are a group of young students traveling with the message of peace. The media report when it makes dramatic news. When it is the poor who are at the receiving end, the silence is deafening. The mushrooming of controlling acts like POTA and other government orders are condoned by the media, by virtue of the absence of sustained protest.

Even Tehelka a media group, when it was persecuted, found itself with its back against the wall. Its middle class support was withdrawn because of fear of reprisals. Ethical norms of the public sphere- Towards redefining power The MKSS effort began with the belief that people can become powerful and control their own destiny. It has to based on a recognition of that power and the creative use of it. The organisation was born out of a struggle for control over common property resources, under the actual control of a Rajput landlord and the local mafia.

In the formative years of the MKSS, the sensitive reporting and support of journalists like Rajni Bakshi and Bharat Dogra, was of immense help; as was their understanding in respecting our request for acknowledging the role of the collective. The presence of both these unusual journalists at critical times helped break the barrier of indifference of the Government and carry our voice to a larger audience. The success of this struggle, laid the foundations of the subsequent efforts of the MKSS. The process led on to two major minimum wage struggles and hunger strikes.

In 1991 a hunger strike for payment of statutory minimum wages in government works ended successfully. It was helped immensely by the front page report of the agitation in the Times of India by Usha Rai, including reporting the decision of the Government of India to withhold a Rs.100 crore instalment of JRY funds to the State Government because of its non payment of minimum wages. The struggle helped the few workers on JRY works in Bhim procure minimum wages. The report by Usha Rai along with a subsequent editorial that she insisted be written, helped lakhs of workers across the state benefit from the decision.

We had begun to understand from the very beginning, that even small connections with journalists who could fight for space, could take the battle far beyond our limited scope of operations. These were also journalists who were not wary of making critical comments about the struggles, helping us realize the value of not just journalism, but the potential power of the fourth estate.

The right to information Campaign- whose perspective?

The Right to information Campaign in Central Rajasthan was born out of a poor peoples struggle for justice. As it unfolded, it changed the discourse of what had been a theoretical and academic issue for over four decades in India. In fact the slogan- the right to know , the right to live- was first used by Prabhash Joshi in his editorial piece in the Jan Satta in 1996. In 1994, the MKSS struggling for long with the right to a minimum wage, realized that without information there would be no wage, food, clothing, shelter. The money that came for development was being siphoned off by the bureaucracy and the politician , leaving the poor exactly where they were. The demand to know the accounts of the Panchayat, set the MKSS off on a long journey for truth, equality and justice.

When Mohanji, Chunni Singh, Bhuri Ya, Lal Singh, Sushila, Kheema Ram, Shankar and many others came back after every agitation, having confronted the double speak and lies of the civil service, they were insistent that the records must be brought out. Else they, the people would always be declared "liars" and those actually lying and cheating, would claim the high moral ground of truth. The first Public Hearing was held on the 2nd of December in 1994, at a place called Kot Kirana in District Pali, Rajasthan. This small gathering of about 1500 people established the trend of the future campaign.

The poor and the middle class came together to protest against the local mafia, set up the tent and arranged for the stay of the activists, withstanding tremendous pressure and potential violence. The Panel of Citizens-an academician, an activist and a development worker, traveled long to make it to the Public Hearing. The press were contacted and several requests were made that they attend. Eventually, the lone reporter from the Navbharat Times, Ajmer came with some reluctance. The Government invited to the Public Hearing, represented by the BDO and the CID sat 500 yards away. Events unfolded and more than a hundred "ordinary citizens "including the poor, came to testify against the theft and cheating of the poor, and the village. Records of payment of money to individuals were proved to be lies. Dead peoples names were found on muster rolls. A "Patrwar Khana" stood dumb witness at the back. No doors and windows,or roof but billed for them. Audited, accounted, and shown as "complete" on paper. Liquor was plied on the weak and gullible and the ex MLA and deputy speaker of the State Assembly connived with the police to bully and threaten.

In the public Hearing facts were stated and proved. A demand was raised for the transparency of development records, the fixing of accountability of the government officials, for the need for a public audit process and for redressal through the stolen money being returned to the people and the village. The perspective of a right was born where it was most needed. But as the campaign moved on, the Chief Minister at the time, Bhairon Singh Shekawat, was forced to declare - while on the Panchayat Campaign trail-that he would give the people the Right to Information. He later made a commitment in the Assembly through an assurance on the floor of the house. This was reported on the front page of the Dainik Navjyoti.. a Hindi daily published from Ajmer.

The fledgling campaign took copies of the text of the assurance and demanded its implementation. The Campaign entered the larger arena of a movement. The State wide campaign, got wide spread support. Nikhil Chakravarty and Kuldip Nayyar, Ajit Bhattacharji and Prabhash Joshi amongst many others came to Beawar to support the dharna. The Press Institute and the Press Council extended support to the Campaign. Lawyers, ex-civil servants, ex members of the bench, the editors of newspapers, acvtivists and a long list of people rendered active support.

Connecting with the media- the common ground of information activists

The reporting of these incidents in the press and the continuing interest of people in the area forced the Chief Minister to respond, for two reasons. Democracy in India, despite all its limitations, has forced the ruling elite to take cognizance of popular protest , demands and action. They may see it only as a means of getting less or more votes, but they cannot ignore it. They react in a number of ways, ranging from response within the process of law, to using State power to suppress or mafia groups to kill.

The CM's reaction to the protest, in the form of an assurance first in campaign meetings for the Panchayat polls and later in the Assembly, initiated the beginnings of a debate of the right to know. This debate was also placed within the framework of a democratic right, defining the relationship of accountability of the neta to the assembly and eventually to the voter in the state. The reporting of this incident on the front page of the Dainink Navjyoti , a daily newspaper published from Ajmer, was a landmark in the movement. That piece of reportage brought the issue center stage and enabled the struggle to enlarge the debate to cover the issues of democratic and constitutional rights. The press and the bourgeoisie, always pre-occupied with issues of graft and corruption were also drawn to listen and address an issue which for the poor was one of survival. That is why the campaign slogan, "The right to know, the right to live," defined the boundaries of the struggle for the poor.

But the others also had a vested interest in the information being disclosed: it meant infrastructure development, jobs, medical attention without bribes, it meant a struggle for a more ethical and easier life. The National Campaign for the Right to Information was born in August 1996. In a series of events and a Dharna , which lasted for 53 days in Jaipur, the Right to Information came to stay. It became a basic issue of democratic concern and political action had to take cognizance of it. A series of Public Hearings laid the grounds for it to be acknowledged and addressed by the government. The Press and the journalists unions joined the struggle and the movement was born.

Since then nine State Acts have come into force. Central legislation has been passed but not notified. A number of diverse interest groups have taken up the struggle and there are independent groups who took up the cause, in many places. In Tamil nadu it was at the initiative of the MIDS, in Goa, it was the journalists, in MP it was a progressive civil servant, in Karnataka, activist groups took it up. In Maharashtra, poor quality legislation was passed, and citizens struggle led to the Maharashtra Right to Information Act being replaced by new legislation which is considered amongst the best anywhere. But the issue in India has remained a peoples issue. Even the press have joined the campaign as citizens. This has allowed for a plurality of association and participation, along with a focus on the interests of ordinary people.

The multiplier effect

peoples participation in the struggle has come after the dissemination of information and the understanding people have gained about the contradictions in the system, and the nature of manipulation of facts, figures and money meant for them. This has a more direct and immediate impact than anything else on peoples lives. It is a wage, a school building, rations, medicine in the hospital, the safe delivery of a child. In the first Public Hearing / Jan Sunwai held on the 2nd of December 1994, the tremendous interest, courage and persistence of the people to have their voice heard and to force the Government to respond , created shock ripples which rocked the complacency of the bureaucracy. Their immediate reaction was to close ranks and to deny information to anyone outside the government.

The reaction of the elected representatives, the lower level bureaucracy and the local mafia confirmed how important secrecy was to enable unchecked corruption. The people responded with a stubborn resolve to keep the campaign going till the legal entitlement was obtained. The rest is local history. The lone reporter of the Nav Bharat Times who was persuaded to come for the first public hearing, saw the potential of this being "news", and the relationship with the press began.

The press has proved extremely useful to the campaign at several points. For the media, the right to information is a bread and butter issue. When the Kargil "war" was on, there was much discussion from within the media of the "force multiplier effect" of the media. It is a pity that these discussions do not take place in the context of the war on poverty or injustice, where the impact of the media can be even greater than in a war being fought with a foreign army. In an issue like the right to information, there is the potential for the media to join forces with information activists to not only breach the walls of secrecy, but run sustained campaigns to uncover the truth, and finally give people a chance to take more informed decisions.

Movement or peoples politics and the Right to Information Campaign

What began as a poor peoples enquiry regarding non-payment of minimum wages by the MKSS, has now become a national campaign and a nation-wide concern. The issues of transparency and the right to know are not new to India. There have been periodic demands for them from the press and even from within the government during the prime ministership of V.P.Singh. What this campaign has done is to make it a peoples tool . Any quarrel with the monolith of the State and the mafia is fraught with personal fears.

The contribution of this campaign, of ordinary citizens of central Rajasthan, is the evolution and sharpening of a very simple tool to break systematically and consistently at the criminal nexus, which works under the cover of a self defined democratic process. Disclosure of the details of corruption have made the ethical debate sharper. If we look at the difference in peoples participation before and after Tehelka, or the series of Public Hearings on corruption in Rajasthan, the quality of questioning has changed.

In Rajasthan the persistent disclosure of the malfunctioning of the Government and its deliberate and ruthless exploitation of resources meant for the ordinary person, have become a common persons concern. It also enabled a shift in peoples attitudes from cynicism and apathy about the misuse of government funds, to indignation and an assertion of collective ownership of State resources. The first set of Public Hearings in December 1994-early 1995, could not be ignored even by the BJP Government, then in power.

The accessing of information, even without the support of legal enactments at that time, systematically and rationally disclosed the nature of manipulation. This enabled people to work out their own methods of demanding information and understanding the need for accountability. Democracy at work- creating information, packaging information, disseminating information If democracy is about citizens making informed choices, then citizens participation in the whole business of information gathering, processing, and its numerous uses is extremely important to its basic health and well being.

The Right to Information Campaign has shown how important it is to be able to sift, classify and understand information. The critical role of information in a democracy is now clear not only to us who are seen as information activists, but also to many ordinary people in our area. It remains the duty of people like you and me, who have some interest and experience of dealing with information to ensure that we pass on our understanding, and enable ordinary citizens to see themselves as information activists. Otherwise we limit ourselves to being information brokers, and like all brokers, will become susceptible to using information selectively to serve a narrow objective, or a vested interest.

Our struggles in Rajasthan show that there are several kinds of information that can help a citizen make an informed choice. The records at the public hearings much like the Tehelka tapes, only helped give proof and sanctity to what was public knowledge. It forced the system to publicly acknowledge the injustice and examine its role in the perpetuation of them. Some information is a revelation, and helps mould opinion. The quantum of wheat in Government godowns and the export of wheat at subsidized prices are examples of such revelations.

This one piece of information helped people to mobilize and later expose the lack of intent of the State. Where information is already in the public domain, the nature of reporting can give it importance and determine its impact. The contrast of the space and emphasis given to the Best Bakery judgment by the English and Hindi Press is a case in point. The Shining India campaign is yet another example of information and its (mis)use.

To understand and expose propaganda is also the duty of the media, for the most important counter to the misuse of information is the incisive analysis of its packaging and motives. This is even more important in fighting the most diabolical use of misinformation of the kind spread deliberately by fascist forces, whether in Gujarat today, or in Germany sixty years ago. To counter the abuse and misuse of information has to be part of the most basic code of ethics of the fourth estate.

Pluralism and the role of information

There can be no democracy without pluralism. But it is so particularly in India, where the definition of an Indian can be made only with a list of exceptions. We are a pluralistic nation in every possible way. If there are attempts to divide us on the basis of any of the indicators , we will be a nation divided. But religion and caste already responsible for inequity and divisive forces in Indian history will dismember us even more. Plurality is a basic necessity for the survival of this nation. There can be no pluralism without commitment from rational citizens of India to maintain the rule of law. It is the right to life and liberty and the dignity of the individual's basic right to choose.

But the media has an equally important role. In calling itself the fourth estate, it defines its own responsibility. Not to a political party but to the nature of ethical governance enshrined in the constitution. The greatest victim of all dogmatic and fundamentalist activity is democracy, peace and the common citizen's right to live. The 'fourth estate' has an important responsibility to play the powerful role of a watchdog in a democracy. Information is important for a number of reasons. Each group with competing interests sees its use for its own purpose. However, in a democracy, it has the potential to facilitate the discussion on the common grounds of rationality. It will involve give and take. But when discussion and debate take place on the basis of the free flow of relevant information with a commitment to ethics, then we begin to understand that our individual well being lies in our common future.