Community Radio Policies in South Asia: A Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach [1st ed.] 9789811556289, 9789811556296

Citation preview

PALGRAVE STUDIES IN COMMUNICATION FOR SOCIAL CHANGE

Community Radio Policies in South Asia A Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach

Preeti Raghunath

Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change Series Editors Pradip Thomas University of Queensland Brisbane, Australia Elske van de Fliert University of Queensland Australia

Communication for Social Change (CSC) is a defined field of academic enquiry that is explicitly transdisciplinary and that has been shaped by a variety of theoretical inputs from a variety of traditions, from sociology and development to social movement studies. The leveraging of communication, information and the media in social change is the basis for a global industry that is supported by governments, development aid agencies, foundations, and international and local NGOs. It is also the basis for multiple interventions at grassroots levels, with participatory communication processes and community media making a difference through raising awareness, mobilising communities, strengthening empowerment and contributing to local change. This series on Communication for Social Change intentionally provides the space for critical writings in CSC theory, practice, policy, strategy and methods. It fills a gap in the field by exploring new thinking, institutional critiques and innovative methods. It offers the opportunity for scholars and practitioners to engage with CSC as both an industry and as a local practice, shaped by political economy as much as by local cultural needs. The series explicitly intends to highlight, critique and explore the gaps between ideological promise, institutional performance and realities of practice. More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14642

Preeti Raghunath

Community Radio Policies in South Asia A Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach

Preeti Raghunath Symbiosis Institute of Media and Communication (SIMC) Symbiosis International University (SIU) Pune, India

Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change ISBN 978-981-15-5628-9    ISBN 978-981-15-5629-6 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: Science History Images / Alamy Stock Photo Cover design: eStudio Calamar This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-­01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

To Daddy and Ma, for giving it their all, and for being my first Teachers

Preface

The study of media policymaking is both extremely gratifying and equally challenging. The growing number of research centres with a focus on media policies makes one believe that the venture is feasible. Surprisingly, there is a lack of a more sustained focus on one of the more important areas of communication research, in that it is a study of how an important non-state actor as the media is governed internationally and within national borders, as also the processes of policymaking for such an actor. More concerning is the lack of reflexive scholarship on media policies and policymaking from the Global South at large, and South Asia in particular. A region with tremendous potential for growth and an equally volatile journey, makes South Asia important for any study of the media. The history of communication and media research is teeming with studies on agriculture and extension, development, film and culture studies, based in the region. I felt that it was about time for the region to reclaim some space in the area of global media policy studies, especially given the history of participation ranging from the NWICO debates to the WSIS processes. Community radio becomes a site that registers these markers of heterogeneity, the thickness of culture, claims and contestations over power and resources, and the interfacing of the region with the rest of the world and its politics. The normative element that is focused on questions of sustainable development, reclamation of space for the truly voiceless, communication rights for the most marginalised, and a policy process that reflects these realities made the intent behind the study very compelling and vii

viii 

PREFACE

uncompromising. Equally importantly, critical studies, as an assortment of theoretical strands and strains that work with these realities, only offered itself as a natural go-to, for this study. The resultant, combined with a love for a heterogeneous, chaotic, diverse yet unified region in its search for ‘the ultimate destiny’, egged me to take on this study of community radio policymaking in South Asia. Numerous individuals and experiences have shaped my thinking and praxis over the years. My experiences in journalism and corporate communication practice, in a city that became the face of information technology in a globalising India, acquainted me with its underside—with the aspirational average BPO worker; a news organisation that relied heavily on political funding in one instance, marketing in the second, and one caught in the throes of delivering ‘breaking news’ every other hour in the third. These experiences helped me grasp the vagaries of the field of media and communication in its practicalities. Academic endeavours such as this are a luxury in the face of such everyday realities, a constant reminder to take the hard path of praxis seriously and with utmost commitment. This work is the product of such a commitment, love, and labour. I hope it engages you as much as it enthralled me. Pune, India

Preeti Raghunath

Acknowledgement

This book is dedicated to my Daddy, K. Raghunath, to whom I owe everything, for initiating me into education as a child, for being the first person to have faith in my abilities, and for believing in me. My education has been made possible only because of his vision and hard work in sending me to the best of institutions, at the cost of many other things. One among the many teachable moments was him returning after singing with his music troupe, ‘Ehsaan mere dil pe tumhara hai doston…’, a song of friendship, peace, and brotherhood, in Hyderabad’s Old City. If I’m able to comprehend the incredibly difficult physical, mental, and emotional journey he undertook, I’d retire a grateful person. This book is dedicated to my mother, Malathi, for teaching me the golden principle that what we know is just a handful in comparison to what is out there. I’m deeply indebted to her for single-handedly handling everything and never once discouraging me. I’m eternally grateful to my parents for instilling in me the quest for knowledge, values of humanism, and the freedom to pursue them. This book is the testimony to their will and is the culmination of the goodwill, tenacity, and support of many incredible individuals. This book would have never taken the shape that it has, if not for the cooperation and kindness of close to a 100 policy actors from Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh, who agreed to be interviewed and talked to. I’m deeply indebted to each of them for sharing so freely and eloquently their individual and collective journeys of many years in making and shaping policies for community radio in these countries. I have only deep gratitude that many of them chose to take time out of their busy schedules and ix

x 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

meet a rank stranger from another country with little introduction many a time, and at the short notice that my fieldtrips could afford. Their reflective narrations on the many facets of their policymaking experiences certainly shaped my thinking and comprehension of the cultures of governance in the part of the world that I reside in, the praxis of which I have had the strong desire to learn about and understand, for years. A good portion of the empirical data in this book is based on my doctoral research thesis, completed at the University of Hyderabad, India. I’m grateful to the faculty at the Department of Communication at UoH, for constantly pushing the envelope and for imbuing the department with richness and rigour. I’d like to thank the team at the UNESCO Chair on Community Media, where I was a Research Assistant in the initial years of my PhD. I’m grateful to the non-teaching staff at the Department for easing our work on a lot of fronts. I’m also grateful to the researchers at the department for bringing vibrancy to its research climate. My heartfelt gratitude and respect goes to the teachers who taught me during my Masters at the School of International Studies (SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), for imparting education that went beyond the walls of the classrooms, instilling the spirit of inquiry and a sense of public-­ oriented reasoning, and for introducing me to theoretical entry-points, an understanding of which provoked me to meander for the years that followed and find my own bent. I owe a lot of my understanding of politics, society, economy, and everything else in between, to the innumerable conversations had over cups of chai at both my alma maters. In particular, the movement for justice for Rohit Vemula has had an indelible impact on my own intellectual and emotional bearings. I cherish my association with the Symbiosis Institute of Media and Communication (SIMC), where I teach and research. The warmth of my colleagues  and congenial atmosphere have been conducive to research, and the bright students bring joy to my teaching endeavour.  I’m grateful to the University Grants Commission, India, for their Junior and Senior Research Fellowships, without which I would not have attempted a PhD, and this book. I’m grateful to the Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute, for the funding that allowed me to participate and learn media policy, and also for enabling me to present the initial portions of my work. I’m very thankful to the International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR), especially

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

xi

the Global Media Policy Working Group, for their research funding and opportunity to grow. I’m grateful to the Indian Council for Social Sciences Research (ICSSR) for funding my Data Collection Abroad, in the three countries barring India. I’m also thankful to the International Public Policy Association (IPPA) for their Asian Scholar Grant, for facilitating my participation in their annual conference that allowed me to meet and converse with the very proponents of deliberative policy studies and analysis. I would like to place on record my gratitude to Prof. Monroe Price of the Annenberg School of Communication, University of Pennsylvania, for conversations early on into my PhD. I’m thankful to Paula Chakravartty, Vipul Mudgal and Arne Hintz for their early reviews of the book. I’m very grateful to Sandeep Kaur and her team at Palgrave Macmillan/ Springer Nature, for being so stress-free and gently taking the publication process along, in a professional manner. Thanks to Sandeep for believing in my work. I’m happy that this book features as part of the prestigious Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change series, edited by Pradip Thomas and Elske van de Fliert.  I’m thankful for the many friendships that I have garnered during the past three decades. I’m grateful to my family for cheering me on; Arun, for deciding to turn into a responsible adult from being a troublesome brat— thank you for being there when it really mattered, and Chan, for the love and liberation. Again, this thesis is for my parents, who never failed to encourage me and gave it their all.

Praise for Community Radio Policies in South Asia “Drawing from field-based research in Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Sri Lanka, Preeti Raghunath has written an original and nuanced analysis of the multifaceted “bottom-up” process of media policy-making and contestation that will resonate across many postcolonial societies. Theoretically, the “Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach” taken by the author, moves our analyses of media policy and comparative media politics forward, beyond the Eurocentric normative underpinnings that often confine discussions about the media, democracy and civil society.” —Paula Chakravartty, New York University “In this timely, informative and deeply engaging book, Preeti Raghunath unravels the romance of radio for social change. Her repertoire covers everything from history to prevailing practices and from policies to possibilities. This critically acclaimed work follows a down-to-earth approach and reveals an intimate understanding of community radio in South Asia. Well-grounded in media research, the author seems committed to the cause of community access of airwaves for a better tomorrow.” —Vipul Mudgal, Director, Common Cause, and Head, Inclusive Media for Change “Community Radio Policies in South Asia offers a fascinating account of the processes and dynamics that have shaped the policy environment of community media in the region. Through its deliberative policy ecology approach, and based on a wealth of ethnographic insights, it explores the roles of actors, venues, norms, narratives and interests, as well as the intersections of the local, national and global. The book manages to unpack the complex layers of policy development in competent and lively fashion and provides a holistic understanding of governance.” —Arne Hintz, Cardiff University, and Co-Director, Data Justice Lab

Contents

1 Media Policy Studies and Community Media  1 Media Policy Studies   3 Theorising Media Policy   4 Critical Media Policy Studies  11 Historicising Media Policy: Criticality, Normativity, and Publicness  13 Defining and Theorising Community Media  17 Community Radio—Policy Documents and Policy Environments  22 Rationale and Approach  27 Charting the Theoretical Landscape and Points of Inquiry  28 Intersecting Theoretical Influences  34 Why?: The Research Objectives  35 The Inquiry: Key Foci of the Study  35 Research Design  36 Advancing Critical Media Policy Studies: Towards Deliberative Policy Analysis  37 Chapter Scheme  39 Bibliography  41 2 The Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach to Media Policy 47 Cartography: Mapping Region and Research in South Asia  48 The Data Confesses: Constructing a Theory from the Ground  66 Bibliography  80

xv

xvi 

Contents

3 The Postcolony and Its Radio 87 Mapping Historicity, Constructing Histories, and the Critical Policy Imperative  87 Critical Historiography, Ethnography, and Policy Histories  90 I. Colonial South Asia and Broadcasting Imperialism: A Dialogue  91 II. Decolonisation and Radio in South Asia: Conjunctures, Changes, and Continuities 110 Conclusion 136 Bibliography 137 4 A Glocal Public Sphere: Opening up of Radio to Communities in South Asia145 Modernisation and Community Radio in South Asia 147 Independent Radio on Air in South Asia 157 Understanding Cultures of Governance 164 Airwaves as Public Property 169 ‘The Basket Case for Development’ 174 Negotiating Airwaves 180 Ushering in South Asia’s First Community Radio Policy 183 Narratives of Policy Transfer and Epistemic Cooperation 186 Discussion: A Glocal Public Sphere in South Asia 189 Bibliography 190 5 Plural Policy Actors and Narratives of Practice193 Unravelling Actor Stances 193 Community Broadcasters in Sri Lanka 194 Diversified Policy Actors Beyond the Nepalese State 199 State, International Development, Market in Sri Lanka 212 Indian Civil Society and the Community Radio Policy 218 International Development, Action, and Advocacy for CR 224 The Indian Government and Its Multiple Anchors 229 Understanding Domestic and International Realities in Bangladesh 235 Sustaining the CR Policy 242 Conclusion: A Reflexive Note on Policy Actors 250 Bibliography 251

 Contents 

xvii

6 Liminality, Sustainability, and the State255 Conflict, Liminality, Space: Civil War and Broadcasting in Sri Lanka 256 Community Radio and Politics of Transition in Nepal: Foreign Aid, Politicisation, and Legitimacy Crisis 259 The State and Community Radio: A Look at India 274 The Bangladeshi Idea of Community Radio: Epistemes and Forms 278 Conclusion 285 Discussion 288 Bibliography 289 7 A Critical Comparative Ecology: Connectedness, Contestation, Comparativity291 Comparing and Synthesising Theory and Praxis: Critical Theory and Community Radio Policies in South Asia 293 Doing Media Policy Studies: The Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach 305 Bibliography 309 Appendix A: Interview Guide—Sri Lanka311 Appendix B: Interview Guide—Nepal317 Appendix C: Interview Guide—India325 Appendix D: Interview Guide—Bangladesh331 Bibliography339 Index363

Abbreviations

ABGEP ACLAB ACORAB (Nepal) AID AIR AL AM AMARC AMIC ASEAN AT&T BAN BAP BBC BJP BNNRC BNP BTRC CAB CBO CDC (Bangladesh) CEMCA

Area-Based Growth and Equity Programme Alliance for Cooperation and Legal Aid Bangladesh Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (Nepal) Alternative for India Development All India Radio Awami League Amplitude Modulation Association Mondiale des Radiodiffuseurs Communautaires (World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters) Asian Media Information Centre Association for South East Asian Nations American Telephone and Telegraph Company Broadcasters Association of Nepal Broadcasting Administration Programmes British Broadcasting Corporation Bharatiya Janata Party Bangladesh Network for NGOs in Radio and Communication Bangladesh Nationalist Party Bangladesh Telecom Regulatory Commission Cricket Association of Bengal Community-Based Organisations Centre for Development Communication (Bangladesh) Commonwealth Educational Media Centre for Asia

xix

xx 

ABBREVIATIONS

CEO CIN (Nepal) CPB CPN-UML CR CRA (India) CRF CRFC CRSC CRSS CSDS DANIDA DAVP DFID DRR DRS ECFC EDAA EMPC FAO FCC FCRS GDP GOPA IAMCR–GMP

Chief Executive Officer Community Information Network (Nepal) Corporation for Public Broadcasting Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist Community Radio Community Radio Association (India) Community Radio Forum Community Radio Facilitation Centre Community Radio Support Centre Community Radio Support Scheme Centre for Study of Developing Societies Danish International Development Agency Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity Department for International Development Disaster Risk Reduction Direct Reception Systems Empowerment of the Coastal Fishing Communities Ek Duniya Anek Awaaz Electronic Media Production Centre Food and Agriculture Organisation Federal Communications Commission Federation of Community Radio Stations Gross Domestic Product Grant of Permission Agreement International Association of Media and Community Research–Global Media Policy ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights IEC Information-Education-Communication IGNOU (India) Indira Gandhi National Open University (India) IMC Inter-Ministerial Committee INC Indian National Congress INGOs International Non-Governmental Organisations INTRAC International NGO Training and Research Centre IPDC International Programme for the Development of Communication IPR Intellectual Property Rights IT Information Technology ITU International Telecommunications Union JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency JVP Janatha Vimukthi Perumuna KCR Kothmale Community Radio KMVS Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan

 ABBREVIATIONS 

KPI KW LKR LPFM LTTE MCR MDGs MHA (India) MHz MIB (India) MIC MLA MMC MoCIT (India) MoIC (Nepal) MW MYRADA NAC NAM NASA NASPRII NBA (Bangladesh) NBC (Bangladesh) NCPRI NEFEJ NES NFI NGO NIEO NPI (Nepal) NWICO OfCom UK PRIA PSB RTI SAARC SAC (India) SACFA SAMAJ SDGs

xxi

Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia (Indonesian Broadcasting Commission) Kilo Watt Lankan Rupee Low-Power Frequency Modulation Liberation Tigers for Tamil Eelam Mahaweli Community Radio Millennium Development Goals Ministry of Home Affairs (India) Mega Hertz Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India) Ministry of Information and Communication Martial Law Administrator (Bangladesh) Mass-Line Media Centre Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (India) Ministry of Information and Communication (Nepal) Mega Watt Mysore Resettlement and Development Agency National Advisory Council Non-Aligned Movement National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Strategy for Accelerated Poverty Reduction II National Broadcasting Authority (Bangladesh) National Broadcasting Corporation (Bangladesh) National Convention for Peoples’ Right to Information Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists New Education Service National Foundation for India Non-Governmental Organisation New International Economic Order National Press Institute (Nepal) New World Information and Communication Order Office of Communication United Kingdom Participatory Research Institute of Asia Public Service Broadcasting Right to Information South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation Space Applications Centre (India) Standing Advisory Committee for Frequency Allocation South Asian Multidisciplinary Academic Journal Sustainable Development Goals

xxii 

ABBREVIATIONS

SEAC SERP SIC SIRM SITE SLBC TRAI TRC (Sri Lanka) UCR UN UNDP UNESCO UNF UNICEF UNP UPC USAID VDC VOs VoT WACC WOL WPC WSIS YAEF

South-East Asian Command Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty SAARC Information Centre Save Independent Radio Movement Satellite Instructional Television Experiment Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of India Telecom Regulatory Commission (Sri Lanka) Uva Community Radio United Nations United Nations Development Programme United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation United National Front United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund United National Party Uva Provincial Council United States Agency for International Development Village Development Committee Village Organisations Voice of Tigers World Association for Christian Communication Wireless Operating License Wireless Planning and Coordination World Summit on Information Society Youth Awareness Environmental Forum

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Articles, Conventions, and Principles on Legislations related to Community Radio Broadcasting 23 Table 4.1 Key milestones in the history of community radio in South Asia 148

xxiii

CHAPTER 1

Media Policy Studies and Community Media

I took the train from Colombo to Kandy in Sri Lanka, which often features on the list of the most beautiful train rides in the world. Upon alighting in Kandy, I met Sunil Wijesinghe in a tiny stationery shop tucked between small nondescript shops lined up on the road to the Peradeniya University. Wijesinghe, a former employee of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC), is one of the early community radio (CR) broadcasters in South Asia. Now managing the shop, he sat down to relate the story of South Asia’s first community radio station1 (or community-based radio station, as the debate rages on). Cut to a roadside bench in Kathmandu. The stories being narrated by Raghu Mainali, the Nepalese community radio activist par excellence, were those of the days of the King’s takeover of Radio Sagarmatha’s station and confiscation of equipment. And of an open truck shaped like a radio, atop which speeches and performances as part of the rally for the Save Independent Radio Movement (SIRM) were carried out. Nepal’s vibrant community radio scene amid civil war makes for a story for the history book! Pan to the waters of Munshiganj in Bangladesh, where the bedenaari, the women of the bede community, live on boats near the shores of the local water body. They are part of the listeners group that Radio Bikrampur 1   Find more on this narrative in my long-form journalistic writing for the Himal Southasian’s special issue on ‘Growing Media, Shrinking Spaces’, June, Vol. 27 (2).

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_1

1

2 

P. RAGHUNATH

FM 99.2 counts among its community. The country, often ravaged by floods and cyclones, is home to a planned community radio sector, often drawing on sustainability and phased growth of the CRs, as cornerstones. Cut back to Colombo, to the International airport outside which I met and chatted with Samanmalee Swarnalatha, the feisty activist who narrated stories of standing tall to pressure from local radio authorities, funders, and the state, on behalf of Saru Praja FM’s community. Her stories showcased the state of community-centric radio on the pioneer island, just a little less than three decades hence. For me, the train ride, the truck, the boats, and the airplane symbolised some constitutive moments (Collier and Collier 1991) that flagged off diverse journeys that are integral to the story of media in South Asia. The above narrative sets the tone for numerous realities that community radio encounters in South Asia today—that of some past glories, glimpses of people’s activism for their right to free speech, an ever-changing media landscape, and sustainable growth as a concern. This book is a critical study of policies and policymaking for community radio in four countries of South Asia, namely, Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh. The book delves into the praxis of policy, recounting episodes and narratives from policy actors who bring their own values, stances, epistemes, and even ideologies. The interplay of all varied facets of the policy process for community radio in Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh makes for well-fleshed out narratives and policy stories from South Asia. South Asia is home to diverse media systems, in congruence with the larger political, economic, social, cultural, and legal contexts. This book explores and explicates the policies and policymaking for community radio in the region. The region emerges as integral to the study, lending its own particularities to it. From localised geographic features to divergences in the degrees of democratic politics between the countries that occupy and make up the region, South Asia emerges as a character in this expansive policy ethnography. Media in South Asia has been studied with various underpinnings—developmentalist, postcolonial, and even orientalist vantage points. This book, as will be demonstrated in the chapters ahead, seeks to engage with the modern phenomenon of community radio in South Asia, piecing together a critical policy ethnography focused on the region. The deliberative policy ecology approach, expounded in Chap. 2 of this book, emerges as the heuristic device that houses and guides such a study.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

3

This chapter presents an overview of the broad fields of inquiry that this book concerns itself with—that of media policy studies and community media. By bringing together relevant literature on these broad fields of study, this chapter sets the stage for the forthcoming chapters that delve into the ethnography of policies and policymaking for community radio in South Asia. The first part of this chapter provides an understanding of the field of Media Policy. It looks into the theorising of media policy, inclusive of the many elements and points of interrogation that goes into the defining of the field. The chapter then presents the critical study of media policies, including the historicising of such a study. This is followed by a section that provides an understanding of how community media has been defined and theorised and how such forms of media have been approached in terms of thematic appreciation. The chapter then moves on to provide an overview of the policy documents such as legislations and regulations, as well as the policy environments for community radio across the world. The chapter then provides the rationale and approach to the present research endeavour and moves on to provide an overview of the many theoretical strands that inform this study, posing questions, objectives, and points of inquiry at the start of the study undertaken. The chapter ends with an overview of the ones to follow.

Media Policy Studies To say that media policy as a field of media and communication research has been under-theorised over decades of the discipline’s growth is no hyperbole.2 Media policy research is often conceived of as administrative research, relegated to a corner in the larger machinery and study of government, industry, or international organisations. The rudiments of the field have received very little attention in comparison to the cultural, social, and economic dimensions of studies in media and communication research. From the study of industries, to that of particular cultures, and from dimensions of development studies to health communication, media research has grown and thrived in its multidisciplinary offerings. Such studies have drawn on the humanities and social sciences research traditions, besides other multidisciplinary interfacing with the sciences. 2  A version of this literature went into a chapter authored by me on the Indian policy scenario titled, ‘Deliberating Community Radio in India: A Policy Ethnography’, in the edited volume, ‘Community Radio in South Asia: Reclaiming the Airwaves’ (Raghunath 2020).

4 

P. RAGHUNATH

However, studies on media policy, with roots in post-Second World War media research, have been seen as instruments that accompany such offerings. It is only in the last decade and a half that one can see media policy research gaining ground in Europe and North America. In the non-West, like in South Asia for instance, media policy research came to be identified with the State and its national priorities initially and with the programme of globalisation and the spread of the culture industries, after the 1990s. The term ‘media policy’ came to be connected with the policies adopted by corporations and organisations in their dealings with the media. In other words, an organisation would chart out a ‘media policy’, as part of its public relations activities and interface with the media. Further, research in the field sought to look at how the mass media influenced public policy, becoming another arena that associated itself with the term. It encompassed representation of research in the media to influence various public policies across fields. As a stand-alone field of research, media policy studies has only been gaining ground in recent times, located as it is at the intersections of global media studies, governance studies, and public policy research. In such a scenario, it is now opportune to ruminate on drawing the broad contours of the field of Media Policy: How does one define Media Policy as a field, and media policy replete with its action-oriented underpinnings? What follows is an immersion into the many facets that go into defining the field of Media Policy, while the action-oriented underpinnings of the term would find explication further ahead in the chapter.

Theorising Media Policy Efforts at theorising media policy take into account the many facets of the process, including the conundrum with defining what media policy is and separating the area of study from other studies on media. The Definitional Problem Defining media policy is fraught with difficulty, given the ambiguity of what the constituent elements are and how they come together as ‘policy’. Des Freedman talks about how there is no such thing as a ‘singular’ media policy that can be said to represent all those mechanisms that streamline media structures and systems. Media policies exist in plurality, reflecting the diversity of media systems from print to broadcast and now, the new

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

5

media, the multiplicity of settings in which they are produced and the variety of actors that impinge upon the formulation of policies. Media policy is, at best, says Freedman, an umbrella term to refer to a wide range of discourses and methods that impact the functioning of media. It is also not accurately descriptive of a multi-layered heterogeneous setup (Freedman 2008: 2). Sandra Braman (2004), discussing what she calls the definitional problem, brings to attention the evolving meaning of the phrase ‘media policy’. Braman goes on to highlight the key parameters to define media policy for the twenty-first century. Among them, she writes: (a) the definition should be valid and must map on to empirical reality, (b) it must be comprehensive to include all settings, actors, processes, flows of information within its ambit, (c) it must be theoretically broad to permit various frames of reference, must be methodologically operationalisable, thereby drawing on accepted methods scientifically examining policy, and finally, (d) it must be translatable in the sense that new developments should be translatable into the language of ‘legacy law’.3 Drawing on these parameters that make a good definition of media policy, Braman states that media policy in its broadest sense is co-extant with the field of information policy, which involves issues that arise at every stage of an information production chain that includes information creation, processing, flows, and use (Braman 2004: 179). The Myth of Neutrality Scholars like Marc Raboy, Des Freedman, Paula Chakravartty, and Kathryn Sarikakis examine the myth of neutrality that plagues the theorising of media policy. Drawing on Streeter’s observation that it is only the English language that allows for a distinction between the words ‘politics’ and ‘policy’, Chakravartty and Sarikakis critique Harold Lasswell’s conception of policy as an apolitical process. Upholding the ‘moral superiority’ of the bureaucratic policymaking process, Lasswell suggests that the process is free of political influences and is non-partisan by nature. However, Samarajiva and Shields (1990) at a later date highlighted Daniel Lerner’s and Lasswell’s roles in formulating policies for the US government for propaganda in the Middle East during the Cold War, indicating that the 3  Legacy law refers to already existent legal frameworks, within which new policy formulations are likely to find articulation in order to embed them in terms of the already familiar.

6 

P. RAGHUNATH

vantage points from which policies are made are never neutral and are laden with intrinsic values and motives. These debates notwithstanding, it is important to note that Chakravartty and Sarikakis assert that a separation of politics from policy is not only artificial, but also ideologically loaded in that it rather inaccurately allows for neutrality. It also does not serve the purpose of critical reflections on the processes and contexts that shape policy (Chakravartty and Sarikakis 2006). The coming of the ‘Information Society’ and the accompanying international governance structures only ensured that media policy is further embedded in ‘multilateral politics and the debates that surround it’ (Raboy 2007: 346). Des Freedman talks about going beyond seeing media policy as either depoliticised or technologically determined. He, instead, sees it as an arena where competing political leanings, ideological standpoints, and power plays operate. Policymaking becomes political when some viewpoints get preference over others. Critical reflections on policy call for unearthing those marginalised viewpoints (Freedman 2008: 5–6). Similarly, Chakravartty and Sarikakis note that their work on media policy and globalisation seeks to take into account not just voices that pronounce specific media policies, but also those that oppose the dominance of certain viewpoints. Dissenting voices, they say, are very much part of the study of media policy (Chakravartty and Sarikakis 2006). McQuail (1992) notes that media policy is grounded in the political and cultural dimensions of communication processes. Media policymaking, then, is anything but a neutral, apolitical process. It operates in, and emerges out of, specific circumstances that are created due to the interaction of varied actors across levels, with diverse intentions and influences at play. Going Beyond the Technological Imperative Much of the academic research on media policy has been technology-­ centric. By stressing on technology as the force that ‘creates’ media, the study of media policy has historically demarcated policies on the basis of medium-specific policymaking. This style of studying medium-specific policies in silos is now redundant, with the coming of digital technology and Web 2.0 (and now, Web 3.0) that has led to the blurring of boundaries between mediums and producing the producer-consumer. Braman (2004) talks about the blurring of medium, function, industry, and genre, with the coming of digital technologies, not to mention the convergence of communication styles. She also traces the evolution of technology, from

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

7

tools to technology to meta-technology. Braman brings to notice the difficulty in ensuring that policy is commensurate with improvements in technology because of the time lag in understanding new technology from a regulatory perspective and implementing policies to address it. Constant innovation only accentuates the problem. While understanding newer forms of technology is important for conceptualising media policy, there is a need to go beyond that. Marc Raboy (2007) draws our attention to how technologies are not neutral but emerge out of particular political circumstances. The changes that accompany the advancements and spread of technology would not be equally accessible to all and would have varying impacts on diverse groups (Freeman and Soete 1997). In addition to this, technology is itself transformed, depending on who uses it. Jesús Martín-Barbero (2001) suggests that technology allows itself to be moulded according to civil society groups’ attempts to operationalise value systems in policies, just like it allows states to mould it according to national interests. Michael Litschka (2019) draws on the capabilities approach put forth by Amartya Sen, to study the political economy of media capabilities, under the larger canopy of media policy. Multi-layered Settings and Plurality of Actors Media policy today, consistent with all the advances in global governance mechanisms, does not work solely within the ambit of the nation-state. From the 1970s when the ‘Third World’ came together and spearheaded the call for the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) to the coming together of civil society at the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) at Tunis, in 2005, there has been a huge shift in processes of media policymaking. The levels of analysis are now stacked, with multiple layers of settings and embedded actors playing crucial roles in influencing the making of media policy. The shift from the ‘international’ to the ‘global’ is a case in point, with non-state actors, activist groups, academics, and civil society being part of global governance mechanisms in varied capacities. This is seen in the inclusion of civil society in the Internet Governance forum proceedings, for instance. Similarly, the negotiations between India and Pakistan now have track-two dialogues like the Chaophraya Dialogues. Braman (2004) highlights the definitional problem in studying media policy and suggests that it is imperative to go beyond the actions of formal actors. Braman expands the policy landscape

8 

P. RAGHUNATH

by drawing our attention to invisible and latent policymaking, the former emanating from influential sources like presidential orders and the latter, as the spill-over side-effects of policy decisions in other areas. Braman provides a useful concept when she talks about going beyond the ‘venue-­ based approach’ to studying media policy. The venue-based approach examines how media policies are being made and implemented from a particular ‘venue’, like a government department. Media policy, Braman says, increasingly is becoming venue-agnostic, with a range of actors and institutions influencing and adding to framing of policies from varied organisational setups—international, national, non-governmental, academic, regional, and more. Even when one studies formal institutional regulatory frameworks, Braman looks at how media policies are mostly spread across ministries in the sense that ministries dealing with Information Technology, Communication, and Security are all implicated in the pronouncement of a policy. Today, policy cannot be said to be formulated and implemented by a particular Ministry. Policy is, instead, a site for competing forces and actors wielding their powers at various settings at different levels. These non-formal mechanisms occurring on the fringes of formal policymaking must be incorporated into the study of media policy. Freedman, while comparing the neoliberal and liberal pluralist models of media policies, talks about how policy is indeed formulated by the government department in question. However, it is also formulated in boardrooms, passageways where lobbyists congregate, academic conferences, seminars where stakeholders assemble, and think tanks where reforms are suggested (2008: 23). His work is interspersed with interviews of policymaking authorities, one of whom is the former media adviser to Tony Blair. He quotes Lance Price, a former media advisor to Blair, who talks about feeling the presence of Rupert Murdoch all along, even though his voice wasn’t heard. It is difficult to account for influences such as these and that makes defining the field of media policy rather difficult. Petros Iosifidis looks at how policy and regulations have been ‘professionalised’ and quotes Schlesinger (2009) who points out that think tanks, experts’ groupings like policy advisers, and industry players have all contributed to the professionalisation of policymaking (Iosifidis 2011). Iosifidis focuses on the supranational level, which is where media policymaking ‘is increasingly taking place’, especially due to the process of globalisation, networking, and development of technologies. Given this context, he draws on Castells (2010), who identifies three capacities— technological capacity, institutional capacity, and organisational capacity.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

9

Advancements in technology are complemented by the capacity of institutions, be it national or supranational, who seek to re-­regulate, liberalise, or control these technologies to ensure that they retain control over media and communication activities. Organisational capacity refers to the ability of groups and organisations to come together and use digital technologies to network seamlessly. Mansell and Raboy quote Kingdon (1984) in defining media policymaking as a process of persuasion and argumentation that takes place within a complex system of actors and institutions (Mansell and Raboy 2011: 4). They also draw on the works and experiences of the Euromedia Group, on behalf of whom McQuail and Siune (1986) wrote: No actor is really completely in control; they all share control over issues affecting their interests, and therefore depend on support in order to fulfill their wishes. Any public policy can be considered as an intermediate moment between two successive states of the field that institutional structure has to regulate. (Quoted in Mansell and Raboy 2011: 4)

Clearly, the ambiguity, pushes, and pulls of who is a ‘legitimate’ actor embedded in the ‘right’ setting make defining the field of media policy a gruelling task. The Mapping Global Media Policy project undertaken by the Global Media Policy Working Group of the International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR) is one such attempt. The project employs mapping as a methodological tool to understand the complexity of actors, processes, settings, influences, and objectives of the process of policymaking in the various components of Global Media Policy. Global Media Policy—The Mapping Project The Mapping Project of the Global Media Policy Working Group of the IAMCR attempts to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of the media policymaking processes taking place at varied levels. The project examines various issues pertinent to global media policy, the diversity of actors who operate in different circumstances and settings, the venues where policymaking in all its forms takes place, the processes of policymaking across all levels, and finally, the connections between actors, issues, venues, and processes (Raboy and Padovani 2010). All along, they employ the term ‘multiplicity’, derived from the idea of convergence, to define each of these elements in order to ensure inclusiveness.

10 

P. RAGHUNATH

Raboy and Padovani contend that ‘time’ and ‘space’ construct how realities are experienced by various actors, alluding to Harvey’s concept of ‘time-space compression’ (1989). They see these realities as constructed by ‘space of place’ and ‘space of flows’, wherein physical manifestations of situations are expanded through technologies, drawing on Castells (1996), and as an interplay between the different ‘scapes’ discussed by Appadurai (1996). Therefore, the ‘global’ in Global Media Policy refers to the multi-­ layered, multi-dimensional facets of media and communication governance. The processes involved in this governance could take place in local, regional, national, supra-national, extra-national settings, multilateral fora and beyond. While these require the mediation of the state, these processes could also take place in arenas where individuals, communities, groups, and bodies interact, going beyond the dimension of the nation-­ state (Raboy and Padovani 2010: 10). By ‘media’, they refer to all those spaces that allow for human communication. In the light of technological advancements, these spaces are converged and diverse, a mix of traditional and modern means, enabling diverse peoples to communicate. Raboy and Padovani include technical infrastructure from spectrum to Internet servers and the inter-operation of infrastructures that increasingly allow/control communication today. They also include the coexistence and use of varied media platforms, a conception that is larger in its purview in comparison to a media ‘sector’. They also bring in the concept of the media system, within the purview of ‘media’, as also media content, media usage, and normative elements pertinent to these realms. Thus, they conceptualise a comprehensive, broad schema when they refer to ‘media’ in Global Media Policy. In seeking to define ‘policy’, Raboy and Padovani draw our attention to the manner in which the term ‘governance’ has evolved over time, to expand horizontally and vertically, thereby also accommodating ‘governance without government’ (Rosenau and Czempiel 1992), wherein governance goes beyond the ambit of the nation-state to other actors. For the purpose of the project, they refer to ‘policy’ as encompassing all processes, formal and informal, invisible, latent, and conspicuous, in which actors are engaged in varied capacities. They also allow room for individual cognition, in comprehending and implementing policy, besides including epistemic communities4 in the process.  Peter Haas (1992) has defined an epistemic community as ‘a network of professionals with recognised expertise and competence in a particular domain and an authoritative claim to policy relevant knowledge within that domain or issue-area’ (1992: 3). 4

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

11

Therefore, Global Media Policy, in short, is conceptualised as: The multiplicity of configurations of interdependent but operationally autonomous actors that are involved, with different degrees of autonomy and power, in processes of formal or informal character, at different and sometimes overlapping levels—from the local to the supra-national and global—in policy-oriented processes in the domain of media and communication, including infrastructural, content, usage, normative and governing aspects. (Raboy and Padovani 2010: 16)

Des Freedman (2014), in writing about media policy and the media industries, makes a case for a critical study of media policies, by doing away with the artificial boundaries that are drawn between the aesthetic and creative aspects of media industries, and the structures that govern the formulation and making of such aesthetics, and indeed its functioning. Media policy, then, is a stance that influences and indeed governs the widest range of media in its myriad forms and structures and the many practices that come to characterise them. Freedman (ibid.) calls for going beyond the administrative approach to the study inequalities that get embedded in such spaces and the everyday activities that the space is etched with.

Critical Media Policy Studies Research carried out in the field of Media Policy has often been devoted to the study of policy documents and legislations, especially demarcating them on the basis of particular media, technology used, carriage, and content. This narrow approach to studying media policy undermines the diverse processes, actors, settings, and social underpinnings that determine the formulation of a policy and its inscription in law, eventually, through legislative practices. Stemming from this understanding, there has been growing interest in the field, with recent works over the last decade challenging the narrow conceptualisation of Media Policy. These efforts at defining the emergence of Media Policy as a field of study allow for an understanding that is contemporary. However, the action-oriented underpinnings of media policy can only be ascertained with an understanding of the present as contingent on histories, replete with the structures of historically consolidated power, strategies of accumulation, efforts of subversions, and repertoires of domination and

12 

P. RAGHUNATH

resistance that come to characterise the defining of the field. In other words, the defining of the field of Media Policy is incomplete without the action-­oriented underpinnings that come to characterise the practice of media policy, in pushing boundaries and opening up black boxes that seek to limit the scope of the field of study. Research in Media Policy now attempts to include the many levels of processes, the varied kinds of actors, the diversity of settings, and the normative elements that collectively construct media policy (Iosifidis 2011; Raboy and Padovani 2010; Freedman 2008; Chakravartty and Sarikakis 2006; van Cuilenburg and McQuail 2003). This renewed interest in the Media Policy Studies has researchers adopting various theoretical frameworks, from constructivism to critical political economy and post-­ structuralism to postcolonialism, to engage with the field (Carpentier 2011; Raboy and Padovani 2010; Freedman 2008; Chakravartty and Sarikakis 2006), besides charting out histories of the field (Chakravartty and Sarikakis 2006; van Cuilenburg and McQuail 2003). Studying media policy attains importance in communication as well as public policy studies since it defines the communicative space within which public deliberations and discourses take place. It is in recognition of this that the recent Consortium on Media Policy Studies (COMPASS) in the US has been conceptualised as an exercise in bringing media policy scholarship and practice together (2017). Media policy, therefore, impacts the extent of information availability to aid such discourses, aids decision-­ making institutions and procedures, and offers tools to implement other policies (Braman 2004). In this endeavour, critical theories of the many generations and variances gain importance. Critical theory, rooted in the promise of emancipatory politics and liberation, offers potent ground in which to locate the study of media policy, in order to unravel forms of power and domination, institutional dynamics, and continuities and changes in these dynamics. Media policy, as the space that governs media systems and structures, assumes importance as the ground upon which rules and norms of their operation are built. It then becomes incumbent that one draws up a historicised understanding of the field in order to understanding the shifting contours and the normative underpinnings of such efforts. Towards this end, a historicised understanding of media policy is presented, albeit drawn from a North American and European experience of the temporal.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

13

Historicising Media Policy: Criticality, Normativity, and Publicness While the present currents in the field of media policy are documented and researched upon by the efforts of the Global Media Policy Working Group, media policy has, over the century, seen paradigm shifts in the way nation-states and international bodies have approached it. How did nation-states conceptualise media policies during different phases, especially during the two World Wars? How did the birth of international bodies affect the state in realising its prerogative in the realm of media policy? At what point did informal actors and non-formal settings enter the media policyscape? Studies attempting to detail the histories of media systems and media policy, more often than not, emerge from and reflect on the Western world’s tryst with media policy (van Cuilenburg and McQuail 2003; Hallin and Mancini 2004). Attempts to study media policy in the developing world are often focused on studying the developmentalist orientation of such policy, looking at dominant and alternative paradigms of development tied to the efforts of national governments and international development organisations. Paula Chakravartty and Kathryn Sarikakis (2006) aim to go beyond the developmentalist framework and incorporate a critical political economy approach to study the role of the state in media policymaking and trace the institutional changes with the coming of globalisation. Similarly, Mansell and Raboy (2011) historicise Global Media and Communication Policy from the coming of the telegraph to the current, alternative WSIS model of governance. Jan van Cuilenburg and Denis McQuail (2003) examine three paradigmatic shifts in communication and media policies in the US and Western Europe. The first phase maps media policy from the emergence of the communications industry in the mid-nineteenth century to the end of the Second World War. The technologies that emerged in this phase were the electric telegraph, telephony, and the wireless. This phase was characterised by the transition from a time of ‘no policy’ to media policy that was a collection of ad hoc measures, as piecemeal efforts towards no clear goal. The political function of communications was rather unregulated, with the press functioning under the norm of freedom of expression. While in the US, this phase saw the consolidation of monopoly in telegraph (Western Union) and telephony (AT&T) and led to government-­regulated private monopoly, the European model was to do with turning

14 

P. RAGHUNATH

communication technologies into public utilities, thereby giving way to state monopoly. In both cases, communications came to be seen as a strategic activity. Mansell and Raboy refer to the geopolitical and ideological currents during the period, with the rise and subsequent fall of the Keynesian welfare state and the post-Second World War emergence of an international consensus on human rights (Mansell and Raboy 2011). The second paradigm maps the time frame from the end of the Second World War to the disintegration of the erstwhile Soviet Union and the spread of neoliberalism. This phase saw the coming of radio and television, clearly signalling a focus on electronic media. The Second World War had ended and nations were recuperating from the aftermath of the War. The institutionalisation of the UN heralded nascent conceptions of an international community. Therefore, this phase was dominated by socio-political objectives, rather than economic imperatives. The significance of the mass media was comprehended in the political and social spheres, and therefore, the focus of broadcasting was on public good. In the US, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) new requirements for fairness and diversity signified a step in this direction. In Europe, the focus was on dismantling economic concentration, and providing for a free and responsible press, upholding ideas of diversity in ownership and content. However, in the Eastern bloc, the spread of socialism continued, with the state exercising control over the media. In the newly independent countries, the focus was on co-opting the media in the service of the developmentalist agendas such as nation-building of governments. In many parts of the world, newer forms of alternative media, like localised radio projects, and participatory video ventures were developed. This was also the phase in which the need for the NWICO was articulated by the Third World, to ensure parity in the flow and reception of information. While that was on the content front, the International Telecommunications Union’s (ITU) Maitland Report emphasised the imbalance in telecommunications expansion between the developed and the developing worlds and thus was focused on technology. The third paradigm, according to van Cuilenburg and McQuail, pertains to the current period, when digital technologies have brought about enormous changes, blurring lines between the different media sectors. Convergence and digitisation is the order of the day, with the historical demarcation between Content and Carrier technologies increasingly diminishing after the 1995 ITU-UNESCO joint exercise on ‘The Right to Communicate—At What Price?’ The so-called end of ideology with the

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

15

disintegration of the erstwhile Soviet Union ushered in an era of pragmatism and populism, where neoliberal market tendencies drive policy. Major corporations and states are key actors in the policymaking arena. The policy shift in multilateral politics took place, what with the aggressive stance of the US government, leading to deregulation (or ‘re-regulation’, as Chakravartty and Sarikakis call it), the setting up of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the agreement on market access for basic telecom services. While van Cuilenburg and McQuail stop with their account of the all-­ pervasive forces of neoliberalism, the year 2008 saw some of the biggest economies of the world facing economic recession, with many still recuperating from it. In similar vein, the WSIS and the space occupied by civil society groups as key actors in the policy arena are important developments. The current situation only brings renewed attention to the normative guidelines put forth by van Cuilenburg and McQuail, for future communications policymaking. The turn towards the normative is evident across disciplines. It is seen from the normative turn in studying international relations by seeking to dismantle a state-centric approach and privileging human security, to the laying down of normative cornerstones for media and communications policy. The next section examines some key normative elements that scholars think are imperative for a media policy that is not only inclusive in its definition, but also in its functioning. Resurgence of the Normative Recent works on media policy and regulation have seen the ‘resurgence’ of analyses seeking to inquire into how the normative gets codified in policy. Resurgence, because of normative concerns like public interest and public good, freedom of expression, and the like have long since been driving forces of media policy historically, as discussed in the earlier section. Philip Napoli (2001) suggests that the idea of ‘public interest’ has a long and contentious history in communications policymaking. It is Contentious, because of the ambiguity the term embodies. Public interest could, on the one hand, refer to normative principles like diversity and pluralism, access, accountability, and so on. On the other hand, when applied in the realm of economics, it could easily read as public interest that manifests in terms of the free market and public choice. While the latter justifies deregulation, the former construct only attaches the state with added responsibility of ensuring the upholding of ‘public interest’.

16 

P. RAGHUNATH

Then, can regulatory interventions in the free market be justified on public interest grounds? (Iosifidis 2011) Where is this interest manifest? How does one evaluate the real public interest in competing manifestations? How does one verify the extent to which a particular policy is in public interest? Iosifidis draws on the three different conceptions of public interest offered by Downs (1962). The first refers to the will and interest of the majority. However, this approach has been critiqued for equating the notion of public interest as an aggregate of private interests and the idea of public interest that is a larger normative notion. The second conception looks at how public interest gets defined by measuring it against an absolute value, not taking into account what the public really wants. There is an inherent danger in this conception of public interest as it could be used to justify authoritarian practices. The third conception of public interest is ‘pragmatic’ in that it takes into account the outcomes of the policymaking of political bodies to be public interest. Here, the benefits of actions may not be visible immediately but is implemented keeping in mind the ‘common good’ in the long run. Denis McQuail (1992) defines public interest as the informational, cultural, and social benefits to the wider society, which go beyond the immediate, particular, and individual interests. He also sees the term as an umbrella concept, encompassing normative principles like diversity and pluralism, access, accountability, freedom of speech and expression, and the right to communication. The principle of public interest acts as a guidepost for policymakers and policy analysts, to review the functioning of a particular policy by levelling it up against the larger interest of the public. Iosifidis quotes Melody’s (1990) account of the importance of public interest in the information society that draws from the historical notion of certain industries and businesses recognised in law and custom as ‘business affected with a public interest’. The media business is often measured up the scale of public interest, to check ownership patterns, diversity of content, and so on. In laying down the agenda for future communications policy, van Cuilenburg and McQuail draw on three key principles: (a) Freedom of communication refers to positive and negative freedoms, with the former dealing with policies for content and access to information and the latter referring to policies that work towards regulating the media structure and the conduct of businesses; (b) Access refers to the ability of individuals and groups to be able to acquire information. Restricted access goes against the freedom to be able to send and receive communication; (c) Control

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

17

and Accountability refer to two sides of the same coin—public interest versus personal rights. The fine line that demarcates where one’s rights end and where the larger good begins should be inscribed in the way policy functions. These normative principles are often perceived through the lenses of theoretical frameworks, to analyse structures, systems, and the functioning of these principles. This understanding of media policy, the normative touchstones, and its historicised account allow for a study of the policies and policymaking of community radio, which is the form of media as defined that this book deals with. The post-2015 world is now witnessing the fortification and consolidation of the Westphalian nation-state. But what we are also witnessing is the privatisation of public policy. Private entities and platforms like Uber and Ola, as also intermediaries like Facebook among others, are now recruiting public policy heads and have public affairs teams to interface with the government. This gains importance, especially in light of the Cambridge Analytics-like fiascos, which have digital companies whose liabilities are only being debated and drawn out today, in devising strategies as well as engaging in diplomacy with the governments that host them. With the coming of data protection with all its localisation requisites, digital companies will now invest a lot more in infrastructure for public policy, and this will further shape the ambit of media policy, something that studies in media policy must take cognisance of.

Defining and Theorising Community Media Community Radio responds to the needs of the community it serves, contributing to its development within progressive perspectives in favour of social change. Community radio strives to democratize communication through democratic participation in different forms in accordance with each specific social context. -World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) 1988

Community media have taken different trajectories of growth in various countries worldwide, from pirate radios in the UK to non-commercial broadcasters in the US and from ethnic radios in Canada to citizen’s media in Colombia. Every individual community media enterprise has a distinct point of origin, objectives, and way of functioning. Therefore, attempts to define community media also reflect diversity. However, some broad characteristics and patterns of initiation and operation, values, and norms of

18 

P. RAGHUNATH

this form of media can be observed. Community media are those media that are democratising, serving the identity efforts of a community in an increasingly globalised world while subverting the effects of transnational corporatisation of communication. Community Media have been seen as the alternative wherein autonomy, identity, and cultural heterogeneity find expression. These forms of media that are appropriated by groups to serve as sites for expression, engagement, and redressal have been defined in varying terms. Kevin Howley (2005) locates community media in perspectives of media democratisation, in the phase of cultural globalisation and as a site with potential for effective forms of socio-cultural mediation. Drawing from the above explication of the rather diverse forms of community media, one could outline some key defining features of such media: (a) not-for-profit, (b) serve defined community of people, (c) managed and owned by the community, (d) editorially independent of government and state influences, and (e) promote the right to communicate and allow for free flow of communication. Community media have been theorised from various vantage points— focused on the space it occupies in the larger media system, on the forms of people who come together to make them, or on the basis of normative considerations that come to characterise such media. This sub-section looks at some such theoretical engagements with the idea of community media, from many of these vantage points. Globalisation: Community media have been approached from the vantage point of the phenomenon of globalisation, which led to the expansion and transfer of capital and know-how, as well as industry players. Scholars of community media focus on how globalisation has led to the marginalisation of local media channels and products. The coming of foreign media and its offerings has meant that they take over local industries and markets, creative products and forge their own aesthetics. Scholars suggest that community media occupy sites in a media landscape that serve as guardians of local cultures and aesthetics, linguistic diversity, and forms of expression, as opposed to the homogenising tendencies fostered by globalisation. Development: Drawing on theories of dependency, as well as pragmatics of information imbalances, scholars have defined community media as media related to development ideals. By drawing of development communication scholarship, community media have been seen as media for development, aiding processes of development seen in international flow

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

19

of funding, as well as in national development prerogatives. A lot of times, community media figure in the media mix of development organisations, often as part of their development programmes and projects. The NGO-­ isation of development itself has also reflected in the community media space. Communication Rights: Another vantage point from which community media have been approached, are as sites that uphold communication rights. The communication rights paradigm has been crucial in touching upon the human rights facet of communication processes, recognising communication as one such right. Scholars of this tradition look at community media as spaces that foster freedom of expression and the inalienable right of communities to voice their opinions and articulate causes and concerns. Communities’ abilities to find representation in the media landscape are a concern expressed by scholars, who take activist stances on the rights of communities to own and make their own media. Scholars have also approached such forms of localised media through varied nomenclature, depending on the angle they approach the defining of such media from. Olga Bailey et al (2007) aim to construct a typology of theories to locate forms of such media as ‘community media’, ‘alternative media’, ‘civil society media’, and ‘rhizomatic media’ and, in doing so, reflect upon structures, elements of participation that such media encourage, besides acting as counter public spheres to the dominant public sphere facilitated by the mainstream media. The first approach looks at such media as serving a community. Bailey et al (2007: 7–15) go on to talk about the idea of ‘community’, explicating the diverse ways in which the term has been conceptualised. Drawing on Tonnies’ (1957) distinction between community and society and Williams’ (1976) definition of community, Bailey et al identify that it is close bonds that make members of a community feel connected, as opposed to other loose forms of organisation. The authors then talk about community going beyond geography and ethnicity, but ones that share other kinds of affinities, like a community of interest or a community of practice. Bailey et al. also elucidate the idea of virtual communities, not bound by place, as an example. Similarly, the emphasis on the subjective construction of community, as seen in communities of interest or communities of practice, is also outlined. Access and participation emerge as key characteristics of media that seek to serve the community. Participation brings in elements of dialogism and reciprocity, while Bailey et al draw on the UNESCO’s involvement in the NWICO debate, to explicate the idea of access. Media that serve the

20 

P. RAGHUNATH

community are then two-way with provision for technological access to both sides of communicators. The downside of this approach, the authors says, is the lack of community interest or technological access to genuine two-­way communication, in which case, the media would mirror mainstream media. Bailey et al (2007: 15–20) explicate the second form of media, as an alternative to the mainstream. Drawing on Chris Atton (2002) and John Downing (2001), the authors state that such media are typically small scale and serve in opposition to the dominant ideology of the day. These media are counter-hegemonic and provide an alternative vision. The mainstream media, they contend, produce realities that are preferred by a commercial logic, often naturalising them to be the reality. Defined by a negative relationship with the mainstream media, the authors write that since the media that are seen as alternative may change with changes in the larger media landscape, societal context is inseparable from the meaning of alternative media. These media are independent of the state and market, facilitate horizontal communication, and are oriented towards the disadvantaged. The formats used and created by the alternative media are not necessarily ‘professional’ and, therefore, set themselves apart from the production values of the mainstream media. Bailey et al suggest that when placed in direct competition to the mainstream, it becomes difficult for alternative media to survive or withhold the onslaught of questions related to its existence and credibility. The third approach is that of conceptualising such media as civil society media (2007: 20–26). By conceptualising alternative media as independent of the state and the market, the author posits that such media as linked to civil society. Drawing the diverse definitions and relationships that the three entities, that is, the state, the market, and the civil society, have with each other as explicated by Hegel, Marx, and Gramsci, the author suggests that they exists not independent of each other, but in complex interdependence. They cite Servaes (1999: 260) to say that by positing alternative media as a component of civil society, one can conceive of it as the third space. They also draw on Wasko and Mosco (1992: 13) to suggest that alternative media, while being part of civil society, are more than just an ordinary part of it because they are democratising agents, which they do through the media. Such media create and allow disadvantaged groups, often without access to the mainstream, the space to articulate their own issues and practices. These media, again, lose out

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

21

when made to compete with the mainstream, since they do not lay claim to commercial advertising revenue like the latter. The fourth of the typology conceptualises alternative media as rhizomes. Drawing on Deleuze and Guattari (1987), Bailey et al make use of the metaphor of the rhizome, juxtaposing it with arbolic thinking. Arbolic thinking is ‘linear, hierarchic, and sedentary’ (Bailey et al. 2007: 26–30) and represents the state. The rhizome, on the other hand, is ‘non-linear, anarchic, and nomadic’ (ibid.). The networked nature of the rhizome is enunciated, only rendered better defined by the idea of multiplicity and growth, with numerous entry-points. Rhizomatic media are, therefore, characterised by interconnectedness, at one manifesting in the local as also being part of translocal networks (Carpentier 2007). This approach steers clear of dualities and dichotomies that come to characterise alternative media. Situated at the crossroads of the state and the market, as well as globalising forces, these media allow for fluidity, in the face of turgid stratification. These media also emerge and grow at different times, in the midst of activism or protests, and go silent, adopting another form to suit other kinds of anarchist activities, challenging the status quo. Their elusiveness makes it difficult for policymakers to demarcate, make policies, and regulate them. Other approaches include Chris Atton’s (2002) reflection on the difference between alternative and radical media. Atton posits that alternative media serve as a ‘blanket term’, offering a wider space to incorporate multiple facets of media including radical media. Alternate media provide access to groups and ideas that are marginalised and have no space and means of expression. Atton presents a range of examples of leaflets and writings of alternative media. Marked by unconventional content and distinctly different production values, alternative media are concerned with its socio-cultural context, as well as the subject matter that goes into the contents of its writing and broadcasts. In writing about radical media, Atton draws on Downing’s (1984: 17) writings on anarchist and liberating media. The spaces bring in contributions from as many interested parties as possible, allowing for multiple voices and viewpoints to come across. They retain their independence, even while being partisan. Radical media privilege movements over institutions. Alternative and radical media are marked by their commitment to social transformation and mobilisation. Atton’s (2015) edited volume also lists out Herbert Pimlott’s (2015: 32) chapter on vanguard media, as a form of alternative and community media. He talks about the need for alternative media to move beyond

22 

P. RAGHUNATH

being solely ‘tactical’ media, to embracing strategic communication, as vanguard media. Clemencia Rodriguez’s (2001) conception of ‘citizens’ media’ draws on Mouffe’s (1992) idea of ‘citizen’ as not the product of liberal democracies that grant the status of citizenship. Instead, a ‘citizen’ would be defined by day-to-day political participation. Citizen’s media, then, are communication spaces where citizens can learn to manipulate their own languages, codes, signs, and symbols, empowering them to name the world in their own terms (Rodriguez 2011: 24). Policies for community media, and radio in particular, are legal instruments that find articulation in policy documents, among other iterative sites. These documents and guidelines serve as comparative guidelines and benchmarks, besides providing the normative framework enshrined on paper. What follows is an overview of the niche area that this book focuses on—community radio policy.

Community Radio—Policy Documents and Policy Environments International conventions and agreements are replete with clauses and principles pertaining to community broadcasting and hence convey normative principles that are globally understood as essential to Community Radio. The introductory chapter of the UNESCO document (2003) titled ‘Legislation of Community Radio Broadcasting: Comparative study of the legislation of 13 countries’ provides a good starting point to acquaint oneself with international principles and legal norms. Here is a snapshot of some important articles from conventions and agreements, adapted from the document (2003: 7–9) (Table 1.1): Community radio draws from these principles that assert the right to freedom of expression and democratisation of media. Principle 7 of the Charter of Community and Citizen Radio Broadcasters, prepared by the AMARC, in 1988 says: Community and citizen radio broadcasters cannot be regulated by unconstitutional means, such as the arbitrary establishment of minimum power levels, the ban on the sale of advertising or the establishment of networks, or the restriction, without technical reasons, on the number of frequencies assigned per locality or region. (AMARC 1988)

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

23

Table 1.1  Articles, Conventions, and Principles on Legislations related to Community Radio Broadcasting Articles and Conventions

Principles

Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, orally, in writing, or in print, in the form of art or through any other media of his choice. The right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television, or cinema enterprises. Freedom of expression in all its forms and manifestations is a fundamental and inalienable right of all individuals.

Article 19.1, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 13.3, American Convention on Human Rights

Article 10.1, European Convention on Human Rights

Inter-American Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression New Communications Strategy adopted by the UNESCO General Conference in 1989 Torremolinos Treaty, ITU; Article 33, International Telecommunication Convention Ibero-American Meeting on Community Radio, 1996

A free, pluralist, and independent press is an essential component of every democratic society.

Radio frequencies internationally recognised as the common heritage of humanity.

CR defined as that form of broadcasting which, taking as its starting point the tastes and interests of the community, broadened the exercise of democracy in society. Article 9, African Charter on Provide for every individual’s right to receive information Human and Peoples’ Rights and participate in decision-making. (continued)

24 

P. RAGHUNATH

Table 1.1 (continued) Articles and Conventions

Principles

Windhoek, Alma-Ata, Santiago, San’a and Sofia declarations

The creation and maintenance of and support for a free, pluralist, and independent press are essential for the development of democracy and for economic development. People should be active and critical participants in their social reality and should be able to communicate their ideas and opinions. The Right to Communicate is a universal human right which serves and underpins all other human rights and which must be preserved and extended in the context of rapidly changing information and communication technologies.

People’s Communication Charter, 1999 Clause 1, Milan Declaration on Communication and Human Rights, 1998

However, the lack of proper enabling legislation is the single principal barrier to community radio’s social impact (AMARC 2007). Policies under which CR operate are very diverse across countries. What follows is a very brief overview of CR policy scenarios across continents, before moving on to understand policies and policymaking for CR in South Asia in the upcoming chapters. In Latin America, where community radio is said to have originated in the Bolivian coalmines, the scenario for community radio is progressive than most other regions. Mapping CR policy in Latin America, Arne Hintz shows how CR is a popular medium, due to its local embeddedness (Hintz 2011). Toby Mendel (2013) suggests that Colombia, even a decade ago, was home to about 850 community radio stations. Clemencia Rodriguez’s iconic work on citizens’ media in the country presents the community radio landscape in the country in great detail. The region, despite shifts in regulatory structures and practices, continues to showcase the sway that community radio has, as a medium that does not require literacy and as a local popular medium. Community Radio policies in North America presents a better picture, with Canada encouraging CR through funds and subsidies. The country’s CR policy talks about three distinct forms of CR—campus, community, and ethnic radios. The Broadcasting Act of 1991 governs CR in Canada and the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission, which is a single public autonomous body, was set up to

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

25

look into all issues pertinent to broadcasting and telecommunications. Linguistic, cultural, and ethnic diversity is at the heart of Canadian community radio. The US has had a long history with community radio, which emerged as distinct from commercial and public service radios. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) were set up in 1934 and 1967, respectively, to cater to the effective allocation and functioning of radio (Pavarala and Malik 2007; UNESCO 2003). Efforts towards legalising low-power FMs (LPFM) were seen in 2000, when the FCC tried to legalise such FMs. However, the bigger players in the sector staunchly opposed this move. The Community Radio Act signed in 2010 paved the way for the legalisation of LPFMs, following which hundreds of CR stations have come up in the country. Europe presents a diverse picture when it comes to the CR regulatory landscape. It is estimated that there are over 2000 operational community radios in Europe and the UK (Buckley 2009). CR in Western Europe took the form of ‘pirate’ radio in the 1960s and 1970s, when regulatory frameworks in Europe were still conservative. The following decades saw the liberalisation of the radio sector, allowing for community broadcasting. France was one of the first countries to incorporate a legal framework for the functioning of community radios and also provide for a funding model. CR in France started in the 1970s, when the state has a monopoly on state broadcasting, as unlicensed free radios (radios libres). It was in 1982 that the Law on Audio-Visual Communication, No. 82-652, enabled the opening up of the broadcasting sector to private players. Community radio in the Netherlands is called ‘local broadcasting’. Though experiments in local broadcasting were initiated in the 1970s, a law passed in 1983 recognised local broadcasting as part of the public service broadcasting sector. This was limited to cable broadcasting and the Media Act of 1987 allowed for local radio broadcasting. Laws and amendments passed in 2008 and 2009 ensured that ‘local authorities fund those costs of maintaining the local broadcaster that are not met from other sources’ (Buckley 2009). In the UK, the Communications Act of 2003 and the Community Radio Order of 2004 allowed for community broadcasting, and OfCom, the regulatory authority, has been granting licenses since 2004. The 2003 Act also set up a Community Radio Fund with a mixed funding model in place. However, the annual report of 2008–2009 of the OfCom mentions

26 

P. RAGHUNATH

that about 40% of the stations operate on deficit (Pavarala and Malik 2007; Buckley 2000). CRs in Central and Eastern Europe operate under very restrictive environments or are non-existent. Australia is home to an enabling policy environment that recognises CR as a third-tier of broadcasting, as set out in the Broadcasting Services Act of 1992. The two principles operational in CR policy in Australia are that the CR must be a non-profit venture oriented to a community’s interests and needs and that it should reflect community participation. The focus, like Canada, is on cultural and ethnic identities and promoting diversity. Recent developments in Australia, however, point to efforts at curbing public funding for CR, with some rollback taking place. The CR landscape in Asia is very diverse. CR in countries of South Asia is still a recent phenomenon, with very few of them having a formal CR policy in place. In Southeast Asia, community broadcasting has taken place under the aegis of state broadcasting. Thailand is home to thousands of CR stations that were considered illegal, with the state and the military wielding ‘dual monopoly’ over radio frequencies. In 1997, a civilian government drafted a new constitution that recognised people’s right to communicate and also allowed for the setting up of an independent regulatory authority that would oversee the allocation of radio frequencies. The Organisation of Frequency Wave Allocation and Supervision of Radio Broadcasting, Television and Telecommunications Enterprises Act of 2000 called for the setting aside of 20% of frequencies for community broadcasting. However, the Thai Army ensured that the regulatory authority was not set up. The coup of 2006 saw the military junta taking over and passing the New Broadcasting Act of 2008, which revoked the old law, and stipulated that broadcasters had to procure licenses from a broadcast regulator to be set up by the state. The junta created an atmosphere that was all the more controlling, with CRs having to air military news three times a day. The situation has led to controlled content creation and far fewer CRs (Elliott 2010). In Indonesia, the new broadcasting law of 2002 provided for the establishment of the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI—Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia) and for the recognition of community radio (Buckley 2008; Pavarala and Malik 2007). CR in Africa engages deeply with linguistic and ethnic diversity and with Bush Radio in Cape Town and Radio Unitra in Umtata being the early CRs. The South African Broadcasting Corporation was the only broadcaster for about half a century and South Africa’s Apartheid-era

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

27

Constitution did not contain so much as a clause on freedom of expression. Post-apartheid, the country’s Constitution (1993) enshrines freedom of expression and public interest as paramount, by providing a three-tier system of broadcasting comprising state, private, and community radio. The Independent Broadcast Authority was set up to ensure the freeing up of the country’s airwaves. Further, the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa 2000 Act led to the establishment of an independent body to regulate broadcasting and telecommunications. The Electronic Communications Act of 2006 and the South African Broadcasting Act of 1999 contain provisions for licensing community broadcasting services in South Africa (Buckley 2008; Pavarala and Malik 2007). In East Africa, community radio entered the media landscape in 1982, with Homa Bay CR in Kenya. One could call it community-based radio since it was established by the government and funded by UNESCO. The amended Kenya Communications Act of 2008 recognises community radio and places emphasis on the involvement of the community in programme production (Javuru 2011). Javuru (ibid.) writes that Uganda has three community radio stations, namely, Mama FM, Radio Apac, and Kagadi-Kibale Community Radio. He writes that radio in the country is mostly regulated by market and political forces (2011: 4). Media policies in the country are often used to keep in line those who tend to step out of line, he says. The license fees are a deterrent to many, he writes. While policy documents are important to the study of media policy, practice emerges as a key contributor to research on media policy and community radio.

Rationale and Approach While the above description of the policy environments across countries and continents provides an illustrative reference of policy prescriptions for CR, I have sought to go beyond this approach, to focus on the making of policies for CR from the ground-up. This allows a researcher to go beyond top-down policy straitjackets to understand the various stakeholders involved and their vantage points, in the policy process for CR in the four countries that form a part of this study, namely, Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh. As will be elucidated in the next chapter, this provides for opportunity to deploy an anthropological approach to the study of global media policies in general and to the study of policymaking for CR in

28 

P. RAGHUNATH

particular, to understand the various actors across the global-local spectrum, the norms and values they espouse, the rationalities and rhetoric that emerge, and the Connectedness, Contestation, and Comparativity, that is inherent to the process of media policymaking. By focusing on the practice of policy, this approach seeks to look at the methods, mechanisms, and manoeuvres undertaken by policy actors in rallying around these norms and values, rationalities, and rhetoric. Spread across seven chapters, including the present chapter, this book presents an expansive policy ethnography, conducted over three years. Ultimately, this research endeavour seeks to locate itself in the critical media policy studies project that is rooted in emancipatory politics, and its pursuance and praxis.

Charting the Theoretical Landscape and Points of Inquiry Price and Reus-Smith (2009) draw on George and Campbell (1990), Hoffman (1991), and Lapid (1989) to outline points of departure between modern and critical theorising. When applied to the proposed study, it helps understand the differences between modern and critical approaches to studying policy. The epistemological foundations of this study emerge from a critical studies perspective, questioning the efficacy of a positivist conceptualising of policy that characterises traditional policy studies. The latter approaches policies as emerging out of closed-door bureaucratic structures, with an aim to improve conditions addressed by the policy. Such studies privilege the state actor, and policy documents become the points of analyses of ethical and knowledge claims, thereby producing and reproducing structures of domination. Critical approaches to policy analysis, on the other hand, delve into post-positivist, value-laden policy analyses. Diverse viewpoints and knowledge claims become imperative to such an understanding of policy. Ontologically, while traditional policy analysis situates the understanding and interpretation of a policy in the hands of the policymaker, critical approaches to policy analysis attach importance to the social construction of identities and action—how a variety of actors from diverse standpoints with varying degrees of power interpret, act on, and practice policy in diverse ways. The critical policy approach to the study of global media policy allows us to address an ontology that is constructed from the ground-up and is intersectional. Methodologically, quantitative measurements of policy outcomes and policy

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

29

document-­oriented studies are typical of traditional policy analysis, going by a standardised scientific method. Critical approaches to policy studies advocate a plurality of approaches in generating knowledge. Normatively, while traditional policy analysis is associated with value-neutral theorising, critical approaches to the study of policy call for the dissolution of structures of domination. The current research endeavour notes five intersecting theoretical strands that may inform the process and practice of policymaking for CR in South Asia. Each of these theoretical entry-points provides their own set of questions and intersects in providing the critical lens with which to delve into the study of CR policies and policymaking in the larger South Asian region. It may be noted, however, that this theoretical landscape emerged from literature review conducted prior to the fieldwork for this research and provided epistemological entry-points. As explained later in the section on method and methodology, the grounded theory approach deployed in the current research allows for coding and thematic engagement with data emerging from the policy ethnography. Critical Political Economy The Critical Political Economy approach serves as a befitting theoretical framework to approach issues of media economics. The paradigm is different from the classical political economy approach in that critical political economy offers a critique of the impact of market mechanisms and the economy on society, while classical political economy considers market forces as a positive trend offering enhanced choice for consumers (Iosifidis 2011: 97). The critical political economy paradigm posits that the flow of capital impacts the functioning of media negatively, thereby giving rise to media businesses that perpetuate a hegemonic communication order, marginalising diverse viewpoints and shutting out dissenting voices. Critical political economists are concerned with patterns of cross-media ownership and funding, diversity and pluralism in the production of content, underlying ideologies and hegemonic discourses propagated through content, and so on (Herman and Chomsky 1998). Ben Bagdikian (1992) notes that in the period between 1983 and the early 1990s the number of major media companies had declined from 50 to less than 20 due to mergers in the (US) industry, a trend that shows no sign of decreasing. Similarly, Edward Herman and Robert McChesney (1997) reiterate that the world’s communication markets are dominated by a handful of companies,

30 

P. RAGHUNATH

forming a global oligarchy. Vincent Mosco (1996) argues that political economy studies concern themselves with three issues: an analysis of historical transformations and social shifts; an examination of the social world as a whole, in which the media occupy a large part; and the promotion of social values and the democratisation of media systems. The critical political economy tradition is also deployed by Chakravartty and Sarikakis (2006) to study the manner in which telecommunications policy and broadcasting policy function in a world that is increasingly being described as the information society. The critical political economy approach offers a useful framework to study patterns of media ownership, which is a very pertinent concern for those making the case for community media. The lack of media pluralism, with consolidation by conglomerates being the order of the day, is often the starting point for understanding who finds representation in the media and who does not. Some questions of relevance to the proposed study from the critical political economy approach are: Who owns the broadcast media (radio) industries? How are these owners implicated in the formulation of CR policy? How do these owners with a global presence negotiate with international organisations like the ITU and the UN? How do global conglomerates impinge upon national CR policies? What kind of a policy environment emerges as a result of the state’s reaction to their lobbying efforts? What kind of a role does the civil society play in such negotiations and to what degree? Post-structuralism Post-structuralist readings of media policy tend to look at ‘power’ and its penetration in all aspects of life. Foucault’s governmentality is often used to study the all-pervasive force of power that is mobile and multi-­ dimensional. Braman (2009) suggests that governmentality is driven by cultural habits and predispositions that enable and sustain both governance and government. She looks at how governmentality operates in the form of legal consciousness wherein individuals are active participants in constructing law and legality, the idea of cultural citizenship wherein individuals as well as groups ‘own’ diverse cultures and therefore, live them. Nico Carpentier (2011) draws on Foucault’s conception of power as productive, as practiced and not possessed. Foucault, Carpentier says, detaches the outcome of an actor’s power play from the actor’s intentions. He identifies dominance as well as resistance to be components of the exercise of

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

31

power. Carpentier also reflects on the conception of discourse and meaning creation put forth by Stuart Hall, Ernesto Laclau, and Chantal Mouffe. This accounts not only for plurality of experiences, but also for the multitudes of meanings produced every time negotiation with one’s subjective reality takes place. In the context of media policy, policy can then be seen as performance, with every performance emanating from a particular discourse producing a diverse range of meanings and ‘policy outcomes’. How, then, does one account for a synthesis of these outcomes? Carpentier alludes to Laclau and Mouffe, who posit that the Gramscian notion of hegemony is useful in synthesising outcomes and linking different identities and lived realities into a common project. Mouffe also talks about how every hegemonic order is susceptible to being challenged by counter-­ hegemonic practices, only further producing diverse articulations. While conventional schools of political science privilege either actors or structures in their accounts, post-structuralist modes of political analysis tend to avoid such a dichotomisation by offering a language or discourse-­ analytical perspective which acknowledges the importance of structural phenomena and contexts for the understanding of politics, without reducing actors to ‘outcomes of structures’. From a post-structuralist perspective, subjects or actors cannot be viewed as the origin of social relations, because they depend on specific discursive conditions of possibility (Gottweis 2003). Constructivism As a corollary in more ways than one to Post-structuralist questions of negotiating power, Constructivism comprises various strands, of which the two denser groups are conventional constructivism and critical constructivism. The latter is closer to post-structuralism in that it talks of fluid identities of actors and allows for their agency, despite their embeddedness in situations that determine their actions. The discourses that emanate from such socially constructed settings also allow permeability and are not strictly structural in that sense. This helps in accounting for a mix of rationalism (agency) and relativism (socially constructed realities). Alexander Wendt’s (1992) claim that ‘anarchy is what states make of it’ has helped study norms that govern policymaking. Mansell and Raboy (2011) quote Ruggie (1975) who, in examining well-established theoretical traditions in global policy analysis, suggests the need to go beyond state-state relations and exogenous institutions. Constructivism differs from

32 

P. RAGHUNATH

post-­structuralism in that it does not focus on the all-pervasiveness of language and the power-knowledge nexus. Instead, it still allows for rootedness of actors in a given set of constructed settings, with the understanding that reality exists beyond those socially constructed settings. Both constructivism and post-structuralism offer grounds to understand the (a) social construction of policy, in particular social, political, and historical settings, and (b) inscription and re-inscription of power(s) through policy documentation, interpretation, and experience. They help answer these questions: Whose knowledge gets inscribed as the CR policy? Whom do policy structures allow to partake in policymaking in the strict sense? How do those who are excluded from such structures negotiate their way into the process? How do communities and individuals interpret and operationalise policies, making them their own? Postcolonialism and Decoloniality Postcolonialism also offers substantive ground to study media policy, especially in studying the media policies being formed in and emanating from the global South. Alhassan and Chakravartty (2011) attempt to trace how the postcolonial nation-state has conceptualised media policy from the developmentalist paradigm, owing to its tryst with colonialism and the perceived imperative to ‘catch up’. Therefore, the decades following the declarations of independence of once colonised nations saw them extend nationalist, developmentalist objectives. Martín-Barbero (1993: 165) points out that the postcolonial state appropriated modernising technologies of communication in part to realise this self-proclaimed mandate of development. Today, after experiencing two decades of neoliberalism in a globalising world, the postcolonial nation-state continues to seek refuge in the discourse of development, in order to justify its role in the light of penetrating market forces. Alhassan and Chakravartty also talk about how capital has infiltrated civil society, the arena where non-mainstream voices seek to find articulation. Rampant NGO-isation (Jenkins 2001) of the political landscape is characteristic of this penetration, wherein funds flow from donors situated in the developed world, to make up for the lack of technical expertise in the developing countries to take up projects of good governance. Thus, the promotion of those rights which would hold state organisations accountable, enforce property rights, and provide incentives for individuals to engage in the right to participate in the market became the object of civil society training and expertise (Alhassan and Chakravartty

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

33

2011). This NGO-isation of the political landscape embraced by development donors tends purposely to conflate social movement criticisms of the violence of the development state with neoliberal economic orthodoxy (Jenkins 2001). As an intertwined process, Decoloniality here is understood as the condition and process of epistemic decolonisation (Mignolo and Escobar 2010; Bhambra 2014), inherent to the process of democratisation of the media landscape, from past and present imperial and colonising systemic attributes. This is evidenced in the plurality of a country’s media landscape. It is an ongoing process, seen in the continual negotiations with the political and socio-economic systems that come to occupy a country’s media landscape. The study of CR policy in South Asia gains immensely from postcolonial theory since it allows us to investigate into this conflation of forces, and the manner in which power is negotiated between the state and neoliberal forces, to justify the role of the postcolonial state. It helps answer these questions: Who are the international actors who negotiate with the state and on what grounds? How do ‘experts’ from the developed world view and approach the postcolonial state? How do neoliberal policies impinge upon this process? As a corollary, decolonisation theory helps decode processes of interactive negotiations. It helps ask questions like what are the prevalent colonising structures? What are the processes of negotiation with these structures like? What mechanisms and methods are adopted by negotiating actors? How do they articulate decolonising ideas? Critical Security Studies Critical security studies go beyond concerns of national security and develop the notion of human security instead. Human security is conceived as the umbrella term for subjects of non-traditional security like economic and political security, food security, health security, environment security, and the like. It displaces rhetoric of national security concerns and brings the individual, community, and society into focus. Often, the state lays down that a particular event, geographical area, or a group of individuals are security threats. The theory of securitisation says that an issue is not inherently a security issue. It is made a security issue by the social construction of security. Operating from the position of the privileged actor, the state escalates issues and occurrences from the realm of normal politics to emergency politics, thereby securitising it. Ole Waever (1995: 55) defines security as a speech act in which by uttering ‘security’, the state

34 

P. RAGHUNATH

could conceive of and implement policies pertinent to areas that are ‘security concerns’. Scholars have pointed out that there is substantial evidence that the media coverage follows the interpretative frame offered by political elites. Once the phrase ‘national security’ can be uttered with some degree of legitimacy, the mainstream press is likely to adopt a patriotic pose (Herman and Chomsky 1998). De-securitisation refers to the process that reverses securitisation. It brings issues escalated to the realm of emergency politics back to the realm of normal politics, and rehabilitates and repatriates the destroyed into newer post-securitisation settings. This theoretical entry-point is useful in understanding how the state, employing the rhetoric of national security and through a selective operation of the CR policy, labels entire regions as ‘disturbed’ and denies licenses. Similarly, in conflict and post-conflict situations, the security angle is swiftly enforced to formulate media policies that restrict and control access to make and receive media. It is also useful in understanding how certain situations that are ‘security concerns’ like natural disasters are treated differently by the state, allowing a different interpretation of the CR policy. It helps approach questions like: How much space does ‘security’ occupy in the CR discourse? How are policies differently operationalised in areas cited as security concerns? Do cases exist of CR being used to subvert this rhetoric and to build peace?

Intersecting Theoretical Influences The above elucidation of five theoretical strands informed my modes of understanding the South Asian region and in framing the research objectives and design. As detailed above, each theoretical strand provided its own questions and entry-points of inquiry. While these points of inquiry (detailed below) were useful in preparation prior to entering the field, the field, as is the case with any anthropological enquiry, presented dense and thick data. From this point, drawing from the experiences of policy actors, it allowed for a ground-up construction of the policy process for CR in the region. Using Grounded Theory, I was able to construct a theoretical framework called the Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach to study media policies, in general, and in South Asia, in particular. As will be elucidated in the next chapter, the critical policy ethnography undertaken by me allowed for reflexive engagement with field data. This permitted the construction of the Deliberative Policy Ecology framework as a critical media policy theory, using Grounded Theory.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

35

Why?: The Research Objectives The research objectives of the proposed study are outlined here: • To understand how political, economic, social, and cultural factors influence media policy, particularly Community Radio Policy, in India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. • To explore how policies with respect to CR are crafted in said countries, with an effort towards understanding the various norms, values, and discourses associated by various policy actors with CR. • To understand connectedness and comparativity of CR policies in said countries, bringing to light unifying and differentiating strands running along the formulation and implementation of CR policies in these countries.

The Inquiry: Key Foci of the Study The study seeks to address the following research questions: • What kind of media systems/models do the select countries provide for, given their political, economic, social, and cultural settings? • What are the dominant ideologies, forces, and normative principles that these media systems foster? • How do universally shared definitive characteristics of community media get operationalised in these contexts? • What are the parameters that enable a comparative study of CR policies across the select countries? • What are the unifying elements of CR policymaking across the units of comparison? • How do the contexts in which policies get made determine variance between policies? • How do policies pertinent to CR get made in each of these contexts?—Key formal and informal actors across levels; venues where they interact; processes, mechanisms, and trajectories that policy negotiations take; competing interests/ideologies/normative principles in the fray. • How do the other media policies, like Copyright/IPR, Spectrum Allocation Plans, Information Technology policy, Digitisation, and so on, impact the CR Policy and its implementation?

36 

P. RAGHUNATH

• How have discourses around CR policies been constructed with reference to ‘disturbed areas’, conflict and post-conflict regions? • How have policies been made operational with reference to such situations? • With reference to these situations, who are the key actors involved in CR policymaking processes, how and where do they negotiate, what are the value systems they draw on, how do they contribute to the discourse on CR?

Research Design Mapping The Mapping framework provided by the Global Mapping Project (GMP) of the International Association for Media and Community Research (IAMCR) served as a useful starting point in identifying key actors and stakeholders that are integral to the policy landscape of community radio in all four countries that are the focus of this study (Raboy and Padovani 2010). Initially, a desk review was carried out to identify individuals and organisations and their publicly understood and stated roles in the community radio policy space. This was then supplemented with information that emerged from snowball sampling carried out as part of the policy ethnography conducted by me. I was further involved in contributing to the virtual database of the IAMCR-GMP project that then generated visual maps using graphic tools, on policy actors, their stated roles, and areas of functioning. • Actors and Networks (with different degrees of autonomy and power, informal and formal, across local-regional-national-­ global levels) • Venues (popular platforms and forums, physical and virtual spaces of negotiation) • Processes (technical formal processes like applying for licenses and interactions between ministries and bodies, to informal processes of negotiation and solidarity-building) • Interests and Normative Concerns (premises put forth by various actors, their standpoints, norms governing their behaviour; normative elements specific to community media policymaking and how they play out in negotiations)

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

37

• Mapping and review of Media Policies that impact the functioning of CR (CR/Broadcasting Policy, related policies like Copyright/IPR, IT and Digitisation, Spectrum Allocation Plan, and so on; outlining formal and informal processes leading to CR broadcasting) • Geographical Mapping of regions within countries where policies may work differently • Statistical mapping of licenses granted, spectrum allocation plans, and other technical aspects pertinent to CR sectors in the countries • Mapping of social, economic, political, and cultural contexts, as well as the media ecology in which CR functions in the countries • Mapping the historiography of the CR sector in each of the countries (key players, landmark dates and occurrences, key challenges, and opportunities) Critical Discourse Analysis • Study of policy documents and other documentary evidences, debates, and discourses surrounding issues on CR over the years, including but not limited to reportage across media avenues, minutes of meetings, and documents emerging out of discussions and deliberations.

Advancing Critical Media Policy Studies: Towards Deliberative Policy Analysis The above research design and modality of analysis allows for a critical study of the practice of media policymaking in South Asia. This research concerns itself with the policymaking for community radio in the region. The connectedness, comparisons, and contestations, as explicated in the next chapter and inherent to the policymaking for CR in South Asia, make for an interesting exercise in underscoring the dimension of deliberation in the process. By focusing on the practice (Wagenaar and Cook 2003) inherent to the policy process, the above outline provides an overview of the action-oriented underpinnings of policy, even as they emerge from and lead to the (re)construction of ideas and norms. This allows us to trace the mobility of ideas and how they get (re)institutionalised over time with multiple iterations. It also permits pegging policy to the pragmatics on ground, shifting to a bottom-up process and leading to more sound policy

38 

P. RAGHUNATH

formulations based on listening as well as speaking, both key aspects of deliberation. The chapters ahead showcase the discursive dimensions (Dryzek 1994) of the policy process for CR, bringing to the fore the potency in the expansion of the ideational and the non-material, even in the face of the material institutionalisation of policy activities through documents and institutional pragmatics. Drawing from such an understanding, Deliberative Policy Analysis, as a strand of critical policy analysis, is rooted in a post-positivist approach to policy, going beyond the divide between policy knowledge and politics, that has been the approach of traditional policy studies (Hajer and Wagenaar 2003). It places on the mantle, the interconnectedness and networked nature of policymaking today, and goes beyond dichotomous thinking, to bring to the fore the range of conversations or deliberations that transpire in the layers that make institutional systems, trans-­ institutional deals, ‘transient and informal arrangements’ (ibid: 1) that go beyond the strictly institutional approaches to studying policy. Rooted in interpretive analysis of policy, deliberative policy analysis recognises the humans involved in a policy space, their practice of policy, their conversations, conflicts, reasoning, values, and norms, as well as their narratives and stories. Drawing from such an understanding, this book allows for an advancement of the enterprise of Deliberative Policy Analysis on three fronts: (a) As a way of making policy, it becomes an exercise in criticality, examining the deliberative potential in the media policymaking process, and the entrenched structures of power that determine such a potential; (b) As a methodological process, critical policy ethnography in itself becomes an exercise in deliberation, allowing the researcher to go beyond the confines of traditional technocratic policymaking, to locate the critical policy research endeavour in deliberating among the various stakeholders, especially aimed at a bottom-up process of policymaking, instead of studying up by analysing elite discourses; (c) As an analytic tool, Deliberative Policy Analysis allows to study the various principles, processes, practices, and performances of actor-interactions in a policy environment. This multi-­ levelled understanding allows to build a deliberative-analytic pedagogy towards defining future research in the realm of Deliberative Policy Studies. The chapters that follow allow for engagement with this kind of policy analysis and theory-building, as a way of conducting critical media policy research.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

39

Chapter Scheme The chapters that follow the present one allow for an engagement with the policy ethnography for CR in South Asia. Chapter 2 presents the cartography of the region and research undertaken in this book. It lays out the regional location for the study, providing a description of South Asia and the countries that come to occupy it. The geographic, demographic, political, socio-economic, cultural aspects as well as the governance structures, civil society, and media development in the four countries of South Asia that form a part of this study are presented. The chapter goes on to engage theoretically with the idea of comparativity and its prospects and delimits. The chapter then presents the research questions, research design, and an explication of the methodology of policy ethnography as a distinct anthropological approach to the study of media policy, adopted by me for the critical study of community radio policies and policymaking in South Asia. The next part of the chapter focuses on the main theoretical framework and contribution of this book, the Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach. The chapter provides a theoretical exposition and working out of the Approach, drawing from literature and presenting the arguments that allow for the fleshing out of and making a case for the Deliberative Policy Ecology as a distinct theoretical stance with which to analyse policies and policymaking, without reifying the Ecology. It then moves on to understanding deliberation in the Ecology, as well as an understanding of the deliberative potential in such a heuristic. The chapter then opens up the Ecology to the three thematic chapters that follow. Chapter 3 presents a historiography of radio governance in South Asia, starting with the early 1920s, when radio was introduced into the region. Presenting micro-histories, the chapter blends important occurrences with respect to radio in South Asia, with corresponding shifts in international geopolitics and the media policy ecology. It starts with a dialogue between colonial South Asia and broadcasting imperialism, presenting periodic phases in the broadcasting of radio in the region. The chapter then moves to country-wise post-colonial histories, presenting those of India, East Pakistan/Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. The chapter ends with a note on similarities and differences in defining ‘ethnological moments’ in the life of a post-colony. Chapter 4 explicates the Glocal Public Sphere in South Asia, providing the story of the initiation of community radio in South Asia, starting with the Sri Lankan experience. The chapter charts the terrain of community

40 

P. RAGHUNATH

radio histories from all the four countries that form a part of this research. The Sri Lankan experience of modernisation and community radio, the Nepalese experience of independent radio on air, understanding Legalese in the context of Sri Lanka, the Indian case of approaching airwaves as public property, and the Bangladeshi case of being the basket for development and its linkages with community radio are themes explored in this chapter. Chapter 5 looks at the plural policy actors and the diverse narratives of practice that emanate from their action. The chapter starts with unravelling various actor dispositions, delving into the scale as well as the ontology. The chapter then moves on to provide an in vivo understanding of community broadcasting in Sri Lanka, providing an understanding of the epistemic forms and manifestations it took in the country. Going beyond the idea of the Nepalese state, the chapter sheds light on the diversified policy actors in the Himalayan country. Interconnections between the state, international development, and the market in Sri Lanka are chalked out, next. The chapter moves to look at post-2002 activism and civil society in India, followed by an understanding of the multiple anchors of the Indian government and its many Ministries and agencies involved in the policy process for community radio. The domestic and international realities of Bangladesh are explored next, to the extent that they manifest in the policy space for community radio. The chapter ends with an exploration of the perceptions, performances, and practices of sustaining the community radio policy in Sri Lanka. Chapter 6 looks at liminality, sustainability, and the State. The chapter delves into the theme of conflict, liminality, and space, looking at the civil war and broadcasting in Sri Lanka. The politics of transition in civil war-­ ridden Nepal is then explicated, drawing on inferences on foreign aid, politicisation, and the legitimacy crisis. The chapter then looks at the State and community radio in India, followed by the epistemes and forms taken by community radio in Bangladesh. Throughout these chapters, the various policy actors and their constructions of community radio, and of each other, contextual descriptions, and documents provide for an understanding of the pushes and pulls of the policymaking process for community radio in these four countries of South Asia. Chapter 7 provides a concluding analysis of the policies and policymaking for community radio in the four countries under study. By drawing on connectedness, contestation, competition, and comparativity, the chapter

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

41

goes on to note key aspects of the cultures and processes of governance and policymaking for the airwaves in the South Asian region. Offering theoretical analysis explicated with examples drawn from the book, the chapter synthesises the data drawn from the policy ethnography with critical theorising, to add to empirical work in the domain of critical media policy studies. The chapter then ties together the Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach, enlisting and reiterating its characteristic features, reflecting on the manner in which it has been carried out in this book. The book, through these seven chapters, aims to contribute to the broad fields of global media studies, media policy studies, community media, media in South Asia, and comparative media studies. It also seeks to present a first-of-its-kind expansive critical policy ethnography in communication and media studies, as the chapters ahead will demonstrate. The subsequent chapters will, among other things, present the region and research, rich data and analyses on the history, defining moments, politics, and practices of community radio policies and policymaking in South Asia.

Bibliography Alhassan, A., & Chakravartty, P. (2011). Postcolonial Media Policy Under the Long Shadow of Empire. In R.  Mansell & M.  Raboy (Eds.), Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. AMARC. (1988). Charter of Community and Citizen Radio Broadcasting. AMARC. (2007). Community Radio Impact Evaluation. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Atton, C. (2002). Alternative Media. London: Sage Publications. Atton, C. (Ed.). (2015). The Routledge Companion to Alternative and Community Media. Routledge. Bagdikian, B. (1992). The Media Monopoly. Boston: Beacon Press. Bailey, O. (2007). Four Approaches to Alternative Media. In O.  Bailey, B.  Cammaerts, & N.  Carpentier (Eds.), Understanding Alternative Media. New York: Open University Press. Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Introduction. Connected Sociologies (pp. 1–16). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Bloomsbury Collections. Braman, S. (2004). Where has Media Policy Gone? Defining the Field in the Twenty-First Century. Communication Law and Policy, 9(2), 153–182. Braman, S. (2009). Change of State: Information, Policy, and Power. Cambridge: MIT Press. Buckley, S. (2000). Radio’s New Horizons: Democracy and Popular Communication in the Digital Age. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 3(2), 180–187.

42 

P. RAGHUNATH

Buckley, S. (2009). Third Pillar of Media Pluralism: Community Broadcasting in the UK and Europe, LSE. Buckley, S., Duer, K., Mendel, T., O’Siochru, S., Price, M., & Raboy, M. (2008). Accountability Policy, Law, and Regulation. Washington, DC: World Bank. Carpentier, N. (2007). Expanding Community Media Beyond the Confinements of Locality. Trans-localism and the Growth of the Communicative Rhizome, Media and Change. In E.  Vartanova (Ed.), The Media and Changes. Moscow: MediaMir. Carpentier, N. (2011). Policy’s Hubris: Power, Fantasy, and the Limits of (Global) Media Policy Interventions. In R. Mansell & M. Raboy (Eds.), Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society, Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture (Vol. I). Oxford: Blackwell. Castells, M. (2010). The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance. In D.  Thussu (Ed.), International Communication: A Reader. London: Routledge. Chakravartty, P., & Sarikakis, K. (2006). Media Policy and Globalization. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Collier, R. B., & Collier, D. (1991). Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. COMPASS (Consortium on Media Policy Studies). (2017). About Us. Retrieved from http://compassconsortium.org/ Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press. Downing, J. (1984). Radical Media: The Political Experience of Alternative Communication. The South End Press. Downing, J. (2001). Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social Movements. New York: Sage. Downs, A. (1962). The Public Interest: Its Meaning in a Democracy. Social Research, 29(1), 1–36. Dryzek, J. (1994). Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge University Press. Elliott, P. W. (2010). Another Radio is Possible: Thai Community Radio from the Grass Roots to the Global. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 8(1). Freedman, D. (2008). The Politics of Media Policy. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Freedman, D. (2014). Media Policy Research and the Media Industries. Media Industries, 1(1), 11–15. Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The Economics of Industrial Innovation. London: Pinter Publishers.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

43

George, J., & Campbell, D. (1990). Patterns of Dissent and Celebration of Difference: Critical Social Theory and International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 34(3), 269–294. Gottweis, H. (2003). Theoretical Strategies of Poststructuralist Policy Analysis: Towards an Analytics of Government. In M. A. Hajer & H. Wagenaar (Eds.), Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. New York: Cambridge University Press. Haas, P. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization, 46(1) Knowledge, Power, and International Policy Coordination. 1–35. Hajer, M.  A., & Wagenaar, H. (Eds.). (2003). Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. New  York: Cambridge University Press. Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon. Herman, E. S., & McChesney, R. (1997). Global Media: The New Missionaries of Global Capitalism. A&C Black. Hintz, A. (2011). From Media Niche to Policy Spotlight: Mapping Community-­ Media Policy Change in Latin America. Canadian Journal of Communication, 36(1), 147–159. Hoffman, M. (1991). Restructuring, Reconstruction, Reinscription, Rearticulation: Four Voices in Critical International Theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 20(2), 169–185. Howley, K. (2005). Community Media: People, Places, and Communication Technologies. New York: Cambridge University Press. Iosifidis, P. (2011). Global Media and Communication Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Javuru, K. (2011). Community Radio in East Africa; For or by the community? In J.  Gordon (Ed.), Community Radio in the Twenty First Century. Oxford: Peter Lang. Jenkins, R. (2001). Mistaking ‘Governance’ for ‘Politics’. In S.  Kaviraj & S. Khilnani (Eds.), Civil Society: History and Possibilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins Press. Lapid, Y. (1989). The Third Debate: On the Prospects of International Theory in a Post-positivist Era. International Studies Quarterly, 33(3), 235–254.

44 

P. RAGHUNATH

Litschka, M. (2019). The Political Economy of Media Capabilities: The Capability Approach in Media Policy. Journal of Information Policy, 9, 79–110. Mansell, R., & Raboy, M. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Martín-Barbero, J. (1993). Communication, Culture and Hegemony: From Media to Mediation. London: Sage Publications. Martín-Barbero, J. (2001). The Processes: From nationalisms to Transnationalisms. In M.  G. Durham & D.  M. Kellner (Eds.), Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks. Malden: Blackwell. McQuail, D. (1992). Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: Sage Publications. McQuail, D., & Siune, K. (Eds.). (1986). New Media Politics: Comparative Perspectives in Western Europe. Sage Publications. Melody, W.  H. (1990). Communication Policy in the Global Information Economy: Whither the Public Interest? In M.  Ferguson (Ed.), Public Communication: The New Imperatives. London: Sage. Mendel, T. (2013). Tuning into development: international comparative survey of community broadcasting regulation. Paris: UNESCO. Mignolo, W., & Escobar, A. (2010). Globalization and the Decolonial Option. UK: Routledge. Mosco, V. (1996). The Political Economy of Communication: Rethinking and Renewal. Mouffe, C., & Laclau, E. (1992). Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community. Verso. Napoli, P. (2001). Foundations of Communications Policy: Principles and Process in the Regulation of Electronic Media. New York: Hampton Press. Pavarala, V., & Malik, K.  K. (2007). Other Voices: The Struggle for Community Radio in India. Sage Publications. Pimlott, H. (2015). Vanguard Media: The Promise of Strategic Communication? In C.  Atton (Ed.), The Routledge of Alternative and Community Media. New York: Routledge. Price, R., & Reus-Smit, C. (2009). Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism. In S.  Chan & C.  Moore (Eds.), Approaches to International Relation, Volume Two: Critical Approaches to International Relations: Themes and Theories. London: Sage Publications. Raboy, M. (2007). Part V: Broadening media discourses: Global media policy — defining the field. Global Media and Communication, 3(3), 343–347. Raboy, M., & Padovani, C. (2010). Mapping Global Media Policy: Concepts, Frameworks, Methods. Communication, Culture and Critique, 3(2), 150–169. Raghunath, P. (2020). Deliberating community radio in India: A policy ethnography. In K.  K. Malik & V.  Pavarala (Eds.), Community Radio in South Asia: Reclaiming the Airwaves. Routledge.

1  MEDIA POLICY STUDIES AND COMMUNITY MEDIA 

45

Rodriguez, C. (2001). Fissures in the Mediascape: An International Study of Citizens’ Media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Rodriguez, C. (2011). Citizens’ Media Against Armed Conflict: Disrupting Violence in Colombia. University of Minnesota Press. Rosenau, J., & Czempiel, E. (Eds.). (1992). Government Without Governance: Order and Change in World Politics. London: Cambridge University Press. Ruggie, J.  G. (1975). International Responses to Technology: Concepts and Trends. International Organization, 29(3), 557–583. Samarajiva, R., & Shields, P. (1990). Integration, Telecommunication, and Development: Power in the Paradigms. Journal of Communication, 40(3), 84–105. Schlesinger, P. (2009). The Politics of Media and Cultural Policy. Media@LSE Electronic Working Papers. Servaes, J. (1999). Communication for Development: One World, Multiple Cultures. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Tonnies, F. (1957). Community and Society. Harper and Row. UNESCO. (2003). Legislation on Community Radio Broadcasting: Comparative Study of the Legislation of 13 Countries. UNESCO. UNESCO. (2013). Legislation on Community Radio Broadcasting: Comparative Study of the Legislation of 13 Countries. Paris: UNESCO. van Cuilenburg, J., & McQuail, D. (2003). Media Policy Paradigm Shifts: Towards a New Communications Policy Paradigm. European Journal of Communication, 18(2), 181–207. Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and Desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz (Ed.), On Security (pp. 46–86). New York: Columbia University Press. Wagenaar, H., & Cook, S. D. N. (2003). Understanding policy practices: Action, dialectic and deliberation in policy analysis In M.A.  Hajer. In H.  Wagenaar (Ed.), Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society (pp. 139–171). Wasko, J., & Mosco, V. (Eds.). (1992). Democratic Communications in the Information Age. Toronto: Garamond Press. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425. Williams, R. (1976). Keywords. Oxford University Press.

CHAPTER 2

The Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach to Media Policy

The previous chapter presented various theoretical frameworks that offered key questions to the research undertaken in this book. This chapter1 proposes a theoretical approach to the study of communication and media policies and policymaking, taking into account the various policy actors involved in such a process, the norms they espouse, and the rationalities they lay claim to, in deciphering and pushing for their own interests and intent in the policy process. The chapter begins by laying out the regional focus of this book, notes on comparative analysis, the research design and questions that provoked this research endeavour, and the theoretical approach called Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach that emerges out of Grounded Theory deployed in this research. The chapter works out the theoretical terrain of this Approach, opening up the Ecology to characteristic policy interactions that are taken up in the chapters that follow.

1  Parts of this chapter were presented at the 3rd International Public Policy Association’s (IPPA) annual conference, at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_2

47

48 

P. RAGHUNATH

Cartography: Mapping Region and Research in South Asia The broadcasting media scenario in South Asia is informed by the many diverse paths that media have taken in the region, often in conjunction with and reflective of the journeys taken by the young nation-states that make the region. Home to about one-fourth of the world’s population, the region is home to myriad forms of broadcasting media, ranging from state-controlled broadcasters to public service broadcasters and private media channels to community-led broadcasting endeavours. These divergent broadcasting systems render complexity to the regional study of such systems, defying over-simplification and generalisation. This section maps the terrain of research for the book, presenting the regional focus of the book. It explores the idea of Connectedness, by presenting South Asia as the spatial focus of this research endeavour. A brief overview of the political, social, economic, and cultural contexts, civil society, and media development is presented in this section. Setting the Stage: Connectedness S outh Asia: The Region Approaching South Asia for this research is informed by the experiences Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh have had with community radio (CR). However, it becomes imperative to explicate how the space and histories of the region that these four countries inhabit are constructed. An issue on the Idea of South Asia, published by the South Asian Multidisciplinary Academic Journal (SAMAJ), presents the various ways in which the region has been constructed. Mohammad-Arif (2014) suggests lack of reflexive scholarship on the notion of South Asia. In other words, he suggests that the contours of the geography, history, cultures, languages, and other facets and understanding of the region that constitutes South Asia have not been revisited for a reflexive engagement with the idea. He goes on to trace the genealogy of postcolonial ‘South Asia’ to the US tradition of area studies, owing to interest in ideas of Indic civilisation and strategic interests that the US had vis-à-vis India and Pakistan— being an exogenous idea to the region, in both cases. He draws attention to notions of historical and cultural continuities between the diverse populations of the region, though admittedly not cut off from Southeast Asia.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

49

He also talks of institutional structures like South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), which have laid claim to the identity of a regional community. He lays out everyday constructions of South Asia, from social, linguistic, and cultural practices and continuities between different groups across state-established borders, to art and movies that could be said to have a distinct South Asian sensibility. He then goes on to put forth his argument of reconstructing South Asia from Below, suggesting that while there exist strategic tensions and geography-essentialising actions, it is often accompanied by peoples’ deliberation in the region. He writes about the Peoples’ SAARC, ‘a network of organisations from regional “civil societies”’, created in the mid-1990s, comprising peoples’ movements on various issues of the region, and quotes from the Declaration: ‘We, the people of South Asia, not only share a contiguous geographical space but also a social and cultural history that shapes our lifestyles, belief systems, cultural particularities, material practices and social relationships…There is a similarity in our life practices…On the other hand, the unique diversity of our region in all aspects has enriched the common heritage, and we celebrate a sustained history of mutual respect for one another’ (Mohammad-Arif 2014). This research is informed by this understanding of South Asia from the ground-up. While it draws on the people-centric focus of this definition, it is not bound by the regional institutional apparatus that the SAARC is. The last decade has seen the invocation of the regional institutional architectures of diverse kinds, beyond the SAARC.  The Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) is one such regional organisation that has gained traction. Similarly, the substantive shift in the defining of the Asia-Pacific as the Indo-Pacific is another development that reshapes our understanding of the region, in terms of intra- and inter-regional flows, and the interface with Oceania and the world. Therefore, the idea of Connectedness of histories and societies (Subrahmanyam 1997; Bhambra 2014) is a useful lens through which one could view this construction of South Asia, allowing for a harking back to colonial times when the landmass was not demarcated by the borders of today, as well as the near-futuristic defining of the region in terms of a larger corpus of land and water. What follows is a brief overview of the region, touching upon the political, social, economic, and cultural contexts, civil society, and media development:

50 

P. RAGHUNATH

Geography and Demography: South Asia is nestled between the Eurasian region and East Asia, comprising a large peninsular region, bordered by land in the north and the Indian Ocean in the south. The region, according to official definitions, comprises eight countries, namely, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. The region is the most populous in the world and is home to roughly 25% of the world population. The region has a gross domestic product (GDP) of $3.12 trillion. Cultures—Plural Articulations: The region is home to a diverse array of languages, cultures, and religions. While the constitutions of the countries in the region list a few languages as official ones, there exist numerous other ‘dialects’ that contribute immensely to the linguistic landscape of the region. Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, and Jainism form a big part of the religious mosaic and cultural practices, besides various other spiritual and religious bodies and movements, defined and undefined. Political Systems—Democracies, Transitions, and Beyond: The South Asian region is home to diverse modern political systems, most of which have been shaped by the interactions between the Westphalian nation-state and the region’s long-standing experiences with varied political regimes. India is the largest democracy in the region, and the world, in terms of representative and electoral politics. Barring the Emergency of 1975–1977, the country has witnessed democratic governments governing at the state and central levels, in accordance with its federal structure. Nepal’s political history is marked by the rule of the Hindu monarchy and the Panchayat system, on the one hand, and peoples’ revolutions, on the other, leading to long phases of instability amid negotiations. Sri Lanka became independent in 1948 and remained a Dominion until 1972, when it became a Republic. The country experienced a long civil war fought on ethnic lines between the Sri Lankan Tamils and the Sinhalese. Pakistan became an Islamic Republic in 1947, partitioned from the larger British India. The country has since experienced democratic governance interspersed with military coups for substantial periods of time. Bangladesh, as East Bengal, was created in 1905. In the postcolonial era, the country was first part of Pakistan and became an independent nation after the Liberation War of 1971, fought on linguistic lines. The country has also experienced military coups and democratic governments. Afghanistan has been a pivotal entry-point to South Asia, connecting the region to West Asia. The country has, over the last five decades, witnessed the growth of externally funded terrorist organisations, invasions by the US military, and turn

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

51

towards democracy. The small mountainous country of Bhutan is a constitutional monarchy since almost a decade now, from an absolute monarchy, and has had deep links with neighbouring India, especially in defining its engagement during the latter’s British colonial period. Maldives is a group of islands in the Indian Ocean, with ecological factors playing a huge role in deciding the contours of the country that constitute its present boundaries. After the end of British rule in 1965, the country has been a republic, has also witnessed a 30-year rule by President Gayoom, and, more recently, has seen political unrest on religious lines. Social and Economic Systems: The countries in the region, owing to a largely common past, have interconnected social systems with similar characteristics. Communitarian and patron-client relations define the functioning of social structures, often reflected in the cultures of governance in the region. The caste system, as a form of structuration, is a significant defining aspect of social relations in the region. This is often also reflected in the distribution of economic resources. The countries in the region took to varying degrees of liberalisation, starting with Sri Lanka in the late 1970s. Most of the economies in the region now pursue policies of liberalisation, and the region is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. India emerges as a strong economic power in the region, catering about 82% of the region’s economic output. Civil Society and Media Development: Owing to the plurality of languages and relatively lower levels of literacy, various forms of media exist in the region. Print media has had a long history in the region, owing to its development during the colonial times, playing a huge role in the movements for decolonisation and independence in the region. Broadcasting systems, first in the form of radio, entered the region during the colonial times as well. Radio, as the repository of oral cultures and histories, is popular, in its private, public, and community forms. Television, besides the public broadcaster, saw a boom alongside the liberalisation of economies. Internet, though having not made considerable inroads yet, is popular and accessed on mobile devices, besides other computer systems. Understanding Comparativity From Connectedness, this chapter now  moves to understanding Comparison. Policy analyses, across disciplines, have been conducted using various methodologies—from zeroing in on variables that enable their quantitative measurement to qualitative analyses of policy

52 

P. RAGHUNATH

frameworks. Any kind of policy study that attempts to go beyond solely studying a singular policy phenomenon in its own setting within a particular time-frame, to encompass a geographic region or to study two or more policies together or even delve into studying a particular policy across time periods, can lend itself to a comparative policy analysis. The field of policy analysis comprises two broad approaches—area studies or the studying of a particular policy in its context in a specific time-frame and comparative studies or the study of policies across time-space dimensions to help evolve comparisons (Bereday 1964). While the former helps undertake in-depth study of a particular policy phenomenon embedded in its own time and space considerations, the latter helps reflect on typologies and parameters that are brought in, to study policies.  hy Comparative Analysis?: Prospects and Pitfalls W Hallin and Mancini (2004), reflecting on the state of comparative media studies, contend that not much work has been carried out since the ‘Four Theories of the Press’ and that existing work on linkages between political and media systems focuses largely on journalism and the news media and not as much on media policy and law. The authors then go on to explicate the need for comparative analysis. One of the functions of Comparative Analysis is that it helps in concept formation and clarification. The method helps navigate through complex systems, by bringing to light variations and similarities. This helps steer clear of ethnocentrism and universalising tendencies of scholarship that delve into particular settings, thereby going beyond generalisations (Bendix 1963), and conceptual narrowness. The comparative method also helps in ‘denaturalising’ aspects of media systems that are otherwise thought of as natural to those systems, thereby rendering the invisible visible (Blumler and Gurevitch 1995). The second function that Comparative Analysis performs is that of enabling the understanding of causal inferences. In other words, the causes of particular phenomenon, the identification of variables as independent and dependent, and the study of media scenarios as co-evolutionary are all rendered possible because of the comparative method. The authors draw on Durkheim (1965) to suggest that the only means of demonstrating that one phenomenon is the cause of the other is to compare the cases where they are simultaneously present or absent. The authors themselves go beyond the identification of certain variables of the political system as determinants of a particular media system, and instead look at the two systems as co-­ evolutionary and as contributory to each other. They justify their selection

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

53

of Western Europe and North America as their sites of comparative analysis, by citing that a region-bound comparison is likely to result in ‘a reasonably comparable set of cases’ (2004: 7). With respect to media law and policy studies, Verhulst and Price (2008) draw on the need for comparative studies, especially in the context of a globalising world where technological advancement, growing interaction between countries, and convergence of policies together contribute to hybrid systems in national contexts. The authors identify micro-­comparison and macro-comparison as two different strands of comparative policy analysis, with the former being the realm of the legal scholar, who looks at laws belonging to the same legal family albeit in a single jurisdiction. Macro-­ comparisons are conducted by the social scientist, who perceives the legal system as having considerable influence on society and community. The latter form of comparison involves studying laws across different jurisdictions and acquainting oneself with diverse socio-political and legal setups. The authors also outline other approaches to the comparative study of policy, namely, vertical and horizontal methods of comparison. While the vertical method looks at a particular policy across diverse economic and technological settings, the horizontal method analyses policy in similar economic and technological setups, with variations in outputs owing to diverse socio-political and legal contexts of operations. An important contribution from the authors comes in the form of four important aspects of comparative research they identify, as key to informing future work: (a) Understanding patterns of uniformity and diversity across the units of comparison, especially by outlining variations across cases of homogeneity; (b) Understanding the difference between the rhetoric emerging out of research projects situated in a particular ideological standpoint and the reality of legal and policy frameworks across units with variance2; (c) The use of metaphors to describe certain phenomena and models that could be seen as worthy of replication, while being useful in that they simplify comparison, are also laden with pitfalls. The authors contend that they tend to over-simplify phenomena, thereby leaving behind the actual conditions of legal and policy operations; (d) There exists an inherent danger in comparative policy analyses—that of extrapolating a model or metaphor as the success story, to an alien setup. The

2  The authors also highlight the importance of understanding legal operations within their contextual settings.

54 

P. RAGHUNATH

authors caution that this is a pitfall that the researcher needs to be guarded against, in drawing up recommendations emerging out of analyses. Defining Comparability Comparative policy analyses across disciplines and sectors of operation have been undertaken in various ways, across space-time determinants. Studies delving into comparative political analysis throw up some key methods and issues. Pennings et al. (2006) outline the basics of conducting comparative studies. They discuss the different approaches that have been deployed to conduct comparative analysis, namely, cross-national, which engages with the geographic, and cross-sectional, which engages with the historic. The authors also stress the importance of drafting the right research design to aid comparative research. Selection of the right units of comparison, with evidences for possible similarities and differences that the study could yield, while also engaging with the contexts that the phenomenon under study operate in are all important for a truly comparative research. Charles Ragin (1987), writing about comparative analysis in the social sciences, talks about the qualitative-quantitative divide, that he says, surfaces most prominently in comparative analysis. He draws attention to the case study method as a useful one, in conducting comparative analysis, given its ability to accommodate details, complexities, and histories. However, this method obstructs a clear-cut inter-case comparison, facilitating an in-depth case analysis better instead. Charles Tilly (1984) presents four types of comparisons: individualising, universalising, variation-finding, and encompassing comparison. Individualising comparison, Tilly says, would help zero in on the peculiarities of each case under comparison. Universalising comparison extrapolates rules for particular phenomena across cases. Variation-finding comparison brings to the fore degrees of differentiation by focusing on differences between the phenomena under study. Encompassing comparison takes a look at comparison beyond macro-lenses, ‘placing different instances within the same system on the way to explaining their characteristics as a function of their varying relationships to the system as a whole’ (1984: 83). Tilly’s focus on historicised social science comparative research is useful for this research project, since it allows to account for plural histories of each of the countries under study. Another common method in conducting comparative analysis seems to be the variable-identification method, wherein variables (dependent, intervening, and independent) are identified across units of comparison to highlight similarities and differences, causalities, and consequences.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

55

While conducting a comparative analysis of foreign policy behaviour, Andriole et al. (1975) outline some key considerations that a researcher conducting comparative policy analysis must incorporate in the study: (a) Comprehensiveness, referring to the identification of composite sets of both internal and external variables, while also looking at the entire spectrum of the levels of analysis from the individual to the global; (b) Comparability, which emerges out of comprehending the ‘types’ of states and policies one is dealing with. This aspect contributes to the construction of typologies that are mutually exclusive, multi-dimensional, and exhaustive; (c) Operationalisability, or ensuring that variables that emerge from typologies identified can be empirically validated against the cases under study; (d) Public Policy relevance, which attains importance especially in the study of Media Policy, due to the normative dimensions that often get associated with the media—as integral to a democratic system. Researchers conducting comparative foreign policy analysis have identified variable clusters and tried to understand the levels of analysis and the power-psychology-politics-processes composites.  ethodological Nationalism Versus Methodological Glocalism M The postmodern turn,3 the coming of globalisation, and the failure of grand theory in explaining diverse phenomena have all challenged the idea of identifying the nation-state as the unit of analysis. With the transnational or the global impinging on the national, researchers find it difficult to justify the selection of countries, as the unit of comparison. However, the post-2015 world is currently witness to the growing fortification and consolidation of the state, some calling it post-globalisation (Flew 2020). The last few years have seen the growth of right-wing populism and “hyper-nationalist” leaders in countries like the US, India, Brazil and the like. Similarly, a post-Brexit world and now, a world that grapples with the global pandemic COVID-19 is set to perhaps leave us with semblances of a new world order that cedes to the State and associated newer norms of diplomacy. Most policy research endeavours, unlike other areas of social research, cannot do away with studying the state for obvious reasons: the state continues to play a key role in policy formulation and is the main actor when it comes to policy implementation. 3  Douglas Kellner writes about the connection between the postmodern turn (Best and Kellner 1997) and globalisation (2002), where he posits that the transitional period is a longdrawn one laden with numerous micro-experiences.

56 

P. RAGHUNATH

Methodological Nationalism Ernest Gellner (1983) is one of the important theorists to have identified the nation-state as the key unit of methodological focus, owing to his understanding that the nation gains validity as a result of industrialisation and the complex division of labour it brings with it (Iosifidis 2011: 108). Methodological nationalism is an effort in explaining and justifying modernity by legitimising the nation-state as the unit of analysis. Gellnerian methodological nationalism is linked to and criticised for having elucidated the evolutionary nature of the collectivity that the nation-state becomes. In other words, the approach sees the nation as a culmination of the unfolding of historical events, in an evolutionary manner. Literature on comparative social policy analysis, for instance, is replete with studies on policies of welfare states, which are essentially cross-­ national in nature. This emerges from the understanding that while forces of globalisation, regionalisation, and marketisation create seemingly uniform structures, realised experiences are often determined by state implementation of policies within the socio-political and cultural trajectory undertaken by each nation-state (Kennett 2001, 2004). Methodological nationalism has often been critiqued for being a reductionist analytic device with which to study the modern phenomenon of nation and nationalism. It, then, becomes important to examine non-state actors working with the state, the market-state dynamics, ideas of voluntarism, and external forces impinging on national policymaking (Baldock et al. 1999). The work of Esping-Andersen (1990) also throws up interesting ideas related to ‘regime theory’, which studies the diverse patterns of social relations that come to characterise a particular national regime (Kennett 2001). This overview of comparative social policy studies provides a key take-­ away: social sciences research is replete with studies that provide descriptions of country-wise experiences of a phenomenon under study; however, what makes a study ‘comparative’ is the evolution of a common analytic framework that recognises overarching principles pertinent to the phenomenon under study and realised experiences that need to be grouped under typologies. This includes the identification of comparable data, identifying appropriate functional equivalents and achieving adequate sensitivity towards the different historical and cultural contexts in which national social policies are embedded (Kennett 2004: 94). Sonia Livingstone (2003) explores the challenges confounding cross-­ national media research, calling it ‘impossible yet necessary’. Some key considerations include the selection of countries, methodological standardisation across countries and origin of categories, relation between

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

57

data and theory, system sensitivity, and place of interpretation and contextualising research. She also outlines the four-fold typology pertinent to cross-national research put forth by Kohn (1989): (a) nation as the object of study, which facilitates an in-depth study of a country but does not go deeper into comparisons; (b) nation as the context of study, wherein the nations become prototypes to study the varying degrees of applicability of a universal phenomenon; (c) nation as the unit of study, which looks at the internal variance between nations on various parameters, yielding multi-­ dimensional comparisons; and (d) nation as a component of the larger transnational or global system, wherein globalising forces and their effects are looked at, across nations. This is a rather useful conception, to weigh options in terms of situating one’s research. Therefore, comparative cross-national policy research can be deemed to be a useful framework only when it accomplishes the following: goes beyond conceptualising the nation in a deterministic fashion by incorporating the study of other important actors and transnational forces at work; attempts to study grey areas like the applicability of policy to geographical areas that are often excluded from the mainstream; and contextualises the parameters of comparison just enough to go beyond conducting a uni-­ dimensional study and falling short of universalising tendencies.  eyond the Nation?: Methodological Glocalism B The idea of Methodological Glocalism (Holton 2005; Axford 2013) helps understand and navigate the phenomenon of globalisation, not as a subjugation of local cultures, but as one that shapes and is shaped by them. By deploying this methodological lens, the researcher is granted the leeway to understand the competing and complementary forces of globalised and localised cultures, and their negotiations with national agendas of countries, all of which shape everyday engagements in a (post) globalised world. Methodological glocalism helps understand hybridisation (Bhabha 1994) as against homogenisation (Roudometof 2015), helps negotiate communitarian ideals and cosmopolitan reality(ies), the subjectivities of globalisation, and provides fertile ground in which to locate the critical study of global media policy. This allows to understand how the state becomes the referent object of the policy enterprise, but is subject to negotiations from other actors across the global-local spectrum, allowing for the more non-essentialist, fluid phenomena to be recognised. It also helps locate the idea of mobilities of people (Urry 2000) along the glocal axis, something that is at the heart of the critical media policy endeavour. Mobilities help track and trace an understanding of change that is often

58 

P. RAGHUNATH

brought about by the pronouncement and implementation of a media policy. A critical media policy endeavour helps study these shifts and changes, thereby engaging with the idea of mobilities quite directly. In the present research, as discussed above, the focus on South Asia provides a regional lens with which to study the politics of policymaking for community radio. As the first section lays down, this research steers clear of an essentialised understanding of the region, seeing it instead, as space-making (Massey 2005) by varied actors along the global-local spectrum. This warrants and validates Methodological Glocalism as a tool, even in a cross-country study, to get acquainted with the rise of regional networks and associational endeavours that go beyond national borders.  ealing with Multicausality and Correlations D While the above description is to do with the identifying of linkages between causes and effects, policy spaces are often marked by complexities that defy simplistic cause-and-effect models. This can be attributed to the context-dependency of policies, which bring in a number of factors into consideration (Franzese 2007; Rothman and Greenland 2005). Multiple causes help piece together a comprehensive picture, especially when studied over time. This also helps highlight possible correlations between the multiple causes and policy moves, depending on the dispositions of various policy actors, and their claims to rationality and accompanying rhetoric, and the motives/causes that inform such moves. Context-conditionality helps provide the larger ground in which to locate these multiple policy actor dispositions. This helps attribute policy action to uncertainties, endogeneity, and externalities. However, this only increases the prospects of lending such action to comparativity, thereby calling for context-­specific studies that plough through complexities and, however, do not reify such conditions. Critical Policy Ethnography: The Method to the Madness The regional lens brings in Connectedness as seen in commonalities in the region, and Comparison is hinged on difference, Contestation is another element that can be gleaned from this research endeavour. The method and methodology adopted help sample this aspect as inherent to the policymaking for community radio in the region.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

59

Multi-sitedness The concept of multi-sited ethnography is most famously associated with Marcus (1995), whose work on this form of ethnography sought to go beyond the closed, bound, systemic study that is typically attributed to Malinowskian ethnographic research, to the more open-ended one embracing changes in the wake of globalisation. In advancing a critique of traditional ethnography, he made a case for embracing the more multidisciplinary offerings that anthropological work could have, something that gains utility for this research. Critics contend that it becomes difficult to define multi-sitedness and propose ideas like that of a single discontinuous site (Hage 2005) and critique the idea of ‘traversing’ multiple sites without embedding oneself fully (Hannerz 2003). Taking into account these debates, I chose to conceive of spaces for this ethnography as multi-sited, but fluid, unbound, and not closed off. To elaborate, the ‘deliberative spaces’ that I embedded myself in spanned the only seeming dichotomies of virtual and real, formal and informal venues, and government and non-government actors. The principle, process, and practice of deliberation underpin the activity in all such spaces, with each rendering its own characteristic features towards defining the discursive nature of such spaces. This dimension attains importance in the current study, since it was deemed imperative for me to be present and peg ethnography to key informal policy venues that are conceived as sites integral to the policy process for CR. As elaborated upon in the previous chapter, informal sites like regional and national conferences and seminars, track-­ two dialogues, and meetings between international donor agencies and their local development partners serve as deliberative sites for the policy process, among others (Braman 2004; Raboy and Padovani 2010). An elaboration on these deliberative sites, as conceived for this research follows. ‘Deliberative Sites’ for CR Policy Ethnography Drawing from the understanding of deliberative spaces as fora integral to deliberative systems and democracy, what follows is an unpacking of the definition of ‘deliberative spaces’ (Fischer 1995; Hajer 1995) for the policy ethnography in Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh.

60 

P. RAGHUNATH

The digital archive of cr-india4 hosted by The Sarai Programme at the Centre for Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi, is one such virtual deliberative space that offered access to discussions around community radio in the region and beyond. The cr-india archive houses discussions that go back to January 2002 and are replete with deliberations around clarification of concepts, announcements, and updates on community radio, resolution of queries, and discussions on the approaches of governments across the region, among other things. The participants in these discussions have primarily been community radio enthusiasts, activists, and academics from diverse spheres of activity and have played an instrumental part in propelling demands for opening of the airwaves for community radio in India and the region. I sifted through this repository in no structured manner, making notes and going back to certain posts every now and then. Informal venues like the Kathmandu workshop held in 2002 served not just as a site for deliberation and rational exchange of ideas, but also served as a networking space for policy interactions. Informal venues such as workshops and seminars continue to be an important part of the CR policy process. During the course of the research, I was part of two such regional seminars that offered rich ground not only for the initial exploration of emerging ideas, but also allowed for access to key actors who continue to be part of the epistemic community for policymaking in their respective countries, besides the larger region. Two South Asia-wide seminars conducted in 2013 served as venues that allowed for introductions and initial interactions with policy advocacy groups, international donor agencies, government representatives, and media practitioners. The first seminar was ‘Voices for Change and Peace: Taking Stock of Community Radio in South Asia’, jointly organised by the UNESCO Chair on Community Media and AMARC Asia-Pacific, in New Delhi, in January 2013. The Seminar on ‘Enhancing the Role of Community Radio and Promoting Positive Social Change’, organised jointly by the SAARC Information Centre and AMARC Asia-Pacific in Kathmandu, in September 2013, emerged as the second such venue. Focused, intensive ethnographic study was then conducted in each of the countries being researched. The spatial sites for this component of ethnography were the capital cities of Colombo, Kathmandu, New Delhi, 4  The digital repository can be accessed here: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/cr-india_ mail.sarai.net/.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

61

and Dhaka, which are home to government ministries and bodies, headquarters of international donor agencies and advocacy groups, and the larger media landscape. In addition, I was also able to travel to Kandy in Sri Lanka, areas like Dhulikhel and Badegaon (Godawari area) that are a few hours each from Kathmandu in Nepal, Bangalore, Chennai, and Hyderabad in India, and Munshiganj in Bangladesh. As is typical of focused, intensive ethnographic research (Knoblauch 2005), the endeavour yielded large amount of data in proportion to the number of days spent in the field. Audio recording of interviews was done, to supplement field observations and notes. From the initial interactions that emerged out of the seminars, I went on to connect with and interview some key policy actors. Through the process of snowball sampling, more such policy actors across groups and affiliations were contacted. In carrying out a policy ethnography, I took care to ensure that diverse historical narratives of CR policymaking, wherever they existed, were brought in. Critical policy histories, in the form of micro-histories (Brewer 2010) or diverse historical narratives from policy actors, are key to moving away from single-­ narrative histories that often get fortified as the dominant narrative thereby ensconcing other experiences. Keeping this in mind, the chapters lay out thick description (Geertz 1973) of experiential narratives constructed from the vantage points of various policy actors. At junctures where multiple temporalities that arise out of the interplay of narrating from memory, the fluidity of experiences, and interactions with me emerge, the narrative would indicate the same. This would help account for micro-­ histories that often negate linear descriptions and are also often left out of official historical narratives. Though the independent community radio scene in Nepal was a pioneering one that dates back to the decade before the discussions on the cr-india virtual space, the country’s experience was cited and discussed about many a time. The Bangladesh Network for NGOs in Radio and Communication (BNNRC) of Bangladesh was part of many a discussion, reflecting on CR at the regional level, in the mailing list. Sri Lanka’s experiments with early community-based radio and Internet radio were also frequently referenced in discussions. The mailing list emerged as an important space. At the seminar in New Delhi, participants and CR stakeholders from the region were seen sharing country-based experiences. The seminar saw participation of Indian officials from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, besides Right to Information activists. The regional seminar

62 

P. RAGHUNATH

held in Kathmandu, by virtue of being organised in Nepal’s capital city, attracted a good number of Nepalese stakeholders and allowed me to delve into the discourses around and constructions of community radio policy in the country, besides the others. The seminar also saw the participation of the SAARC Information Centre in a big way, allowing for further interaction with government officials involved with broadcasting from these countries. In Nepal, a total of 31 interviews were conducted and visits to three community radio stations, namely, Radio Sagarmatha (Kathmandu), Radio Namo Buddha (Dhulikhel), and ECR FM (Godawari Area) were undertaken, besides informal conversations with media practitioners and representatives of international organisations. This was done in September 2013. Similarly, in India, 21 interviews were conducted with various stakeholders including officials spread across various ministries involved with CR and CR stations. Visits were made to Radio Sangham (Medak District, Telangana), Radio Active (Bangalore), Gurgaon Ki Awaaz (Gurgaon), Chanderi Ki Awaaz (Madhya Pradesh), Radio Dhadkan (Uttar Pradesh), Lalit Lokvani (Uttar Pradesh), and Anna FM (Chennai), among others. These interviews and visits were made between 2013 and 2015, only made possible since it is my country of residence and citizenship. In Sri Lanka, 14 interviews were conducted in February 2014, besides informal conversations with former officials and employees of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation, associated with the running of community-based radio formerly, in various capacities. I had to visit Bangladesh twice, on account of street violence amid a tense political situation in the country in November 2013. I visited the country again in March 2014. Over the two field trips, 25 interviews were conducted with various officials again, besides visits to Radio Bikrampur and EC Bangladesh (both in Munshiganj), as also informal conversations with aid agencies and donors. In all, close to a 100 policy actors were interviewed and spoken to, for in-depth interviews or informal discussions, over a period of three years, between early 2013 and late 2015. All along, care was taken to ensure that divergent organisations and informal groups that operated in the policy landscape were interviewed in order to allow for multiplicity of perspectives and constructions of community radio policies in all four countries. Interview guides were prepared and customised for each kind of policy actor, across each of the countries. The research questions outlined earlier in this chapter enabled the conducting of semi-structured, in-depth conversational interviews. These

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

63

interviews were mostly conducted in the natural settings of the policy actors, which allowed me to grasp the spatial settings that allowed for policy work for community radio. For instance, interviews with government officials in their respective Ministries allowed me to observe aspects like filing system for policies, the layout of different Ministries and official spaces, and bureaucratic hierarchies. Similarly, these settings displayed rather conspicuously, various interactions that were part of the advocacy network for community radio. For instance, the partnerships between advocacy groups and their international donor agencies, and their understanding and vision for community radio in Nepal and Bangladesh, could easily be retrieved from glancing at wall-posters and organisational publication material that were on display, during visits to the offices of these policy actors. Multi-situatedness Ethical Considerations: Nationality, Citizenship, Power I was aware of the perceived skewed power dynamics and geopolitics of the relations between the countries in the region, and hence took utmost care to define to the government officials in these countries, my role in an academic inquiry. Common ethical protocol of explanation of the research endeavour, procuring interviewee consent, and preference with respect to anonymity were followed diligently. Following from this effort, I deemed it appropriate to cite the policy actor’s official title in place of their individual names in most cases, especially when they act as representatives for their organisations. This allows for maintaining anonymity while understanding their positioning in the policy landscape for community radio in the four countries. However, in the case of individuals who have driven key policy changes by virtue of their individual official position, activism, or personality-driven efforts, individual names would be cited. This allows the researcher to account for personality-driven policy manoeuvres and shifts, a characteristic feature of policy processes in the larger South Asian region. The Researcher in Ethnography: Intersectionality and Reflexivity I was extremely sensitive to the multiplicity of identities I embody, and the many locations I operated in, all at once. Location as a standpoint allows to understand spatiality and region as constituting the epistemological entry-points for the researcher. The construction of South Asia for this

64 

P. RAGHUNATH

research endeavour has been done in an endogenous fashion, from the inside, in terms of location and perception. It, therefore, accounts for the lived experience of the researcher herself. My many identities, as an urban, city-bred, upper caste, middle-class female researcher, born in a world that was to see the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent ushering in of liberalisation in India, the economic meltdown of 2008, and the striking of the global pandemic COVID-19, provide a multi-faceted experiential understanding of global, national, and local politics, societal functioning, multiculturalism, and political economy alongside the idea of the region, only shaped in a big way by my public university education. Massey’s (1999) conception of relational space was a useful way of defining the researcher’s location. Locations emerge as concentric and overlapping circles starting from my academic location, to the larger South Asian region at the other end. This allowed me to conceptualise my approach to the policy ethnography for CR.  My location in the South Indian city of Hyderabad, provided for an understanding of working on media policy away from the administrative nerve-centre of New Delhi. My Indian nationality was an important consideration in conducting fieldwork in Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Bangladesh. I was aware and sensitive to perceptions of being a foreigner along the corridors of power in government offices in Colombo, Kathmandu, and Dhaka. For instance, some interactions with government officials did bring to light perceptions that Indian industries were seen as backed by the Indian government’s policies, in capturing local markets including media markets, in Nepal. Similarly, I was watchful of perceptions of my linguistic identity during the course of gaining entry to government offices in Colombo, especially in light of the country’s transition over the last decade of post-civil war politics and governance. Further, I was careful to understand the politics of language in Bangladesh and the country’s bilateral ties with India in 2014 when I conducted my fieldwork. I took care to explain my academic research endeavour to interviewees with affiliations from across the political spectrum. These negotiations were part of my everyday engagement during the course of my fieldwork. The above understanding of my location as concentric and overlapping circles acknowledges intersecting influences, complex interactions, and allows for reflexivity that is multi-vector. This mirrors the practice of policymaking itself, which is a complex activity. Ethnography entails a reflexive interaction with the universe being studied, taking into account the lived experiences of the researcher herself, even as she studies the lived

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

65

experiences of the subjects of her research. This gains further importance in a critical policy ethnography, since it entails interacting with actors from the domain of policymaking, as well as for the objects and conditions for which said policy is made. I was reflexive and conscious of my position as a researcher critically studying policymaking for CR in South Asia, with my primary obligation to the many people who formed part of my ethnography. By this time, I was able to be part of the policy revision for CR in India, in a reflexive manner, elaborated upon further in Chap.  6 ahead. My writing and research on media policy and community radio in South Asia continued in a reflexive manner till the publication of this book. During this time, I was networking and updating the many policy actors who were part of my ethnography in the region on the progress on my research  and publication. Analysis I ensured that analytic notes were made throughout the process of observation and data collection, at deliberative sites and during the course of field trips. These notes were written between interviews and at the end of each day of fieldwork, to make a quick record of analytic conjectures emerging from first impressions in the field. Similarly, I took care to constantly shuttle between policy actors holding divergent viewpoints and made sure to ask questions of them that enabled them to reflect on issues/ points of contestations with the other actors. This exercise was made possible by noting down the epistemic entry-points, rationales behind norms evoked, and helped arrive at each actor’s justification for them in accordance with contextual explanations. Interviews conducted as part of the policy ethnography were transcribed word-by-word. Even as I was transcribing, I made paragraph-by-paragraph notes on the side and indulged in constant comparison (Glaser and Strauss 1967) at three levels: between diverse policy actors within the same country, between the contextual settings of the four countries themselves, and between policy actors across the boundaries of the four countries that form the setting for the study. The version of Grounded Theory5 method as put forward by Charmaz (2006) was a useful guide in aiding the coding and analysis of research. 5  Grounded Theory was first proposed by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss, in their work, The Discovery of Grounded Theory, in 1967.

66 

P. RAGHUNATH

Drawing from a constructivist worldview, she writes: ‘A contextualized grounded theory can start with sensitizing concepts that address such concepts as power, global reach, and difference and end with inductive analyses that theorize connections between local worlds and larger social structures’ (2006: 133). Further, her description of analysis from the ground-up helped evolve codes, categories, and concepts for the research endeavour at hand. The chapters that follow are structured internally in no similar manner, allowing to acquaint with the diversity and difference of each of the countries’ experiences with policymaking for CR. The chapters allow for a chronological arrangement keeping with time, and movement across space, in the laying out of country-specific narratives. Therefore, the internal structuring of chapters is such that there is movement and jumps from one country to another and perhaps back to the same country, before moving on to engage with a third country without linearity in space. The structuring logic is to convey policy stories as they occur, instead of demarcating in accordance with the spatial logic of country-wise narratives.

The Data Confesses: Constructing a Theory from the Ground The study of policy, traditionally, has focussed on an essentialist study of the state as the key policy actor. Such a study facilitated the state as the key repository of ‘scientific’ knowledge and with the means to advance it through policy mechanisms, towards what the state perceived as the best course of action in its own interest. This has been understood to be a systemic, naturally ordained course of action. However, over the last three decades especially, due to increasing interest in the study of actors other than the state and their activities as part of the policy process, the critical study of policy has been key in dismantling this perceived pre-ordained nature of the state. Constructivism is one such theoretical lens that seeks to occupy the middle-ground between either kinds of reductionism—of the state or of other actors and processes. In facilitating an appreciation for diverse paradigms of knowledge (Kuhn 1962), the middle range theory seeks to explore how various actors construct reality. This has been furthered towards incorporating the social conditions in which these actors operate and the means through which they advance their constructions of reality. Extrapolating this to the critical study of policy, constructivism

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

67

offers fertile ground in studying the various actors involved in the policy process. This, it does, by allowing for the study of their rationalities in constructing their social reality with respect to the policy issue at hand, with each advancing those plural rationalities through dialogue and then deliberation, consistent with the Habermasian tradition of communicative action. These multiple rationalities that emerge in the policy space could be accessed in deliberative sites, steering clear of dichotomies of formal and informal, real and virtual, government and non-government venues. Policy actors rally around their own rationalities that are supported by forwarding constructions of epistemes, through various actions that are deliberative. Critics of the constructivist tradition are quick to point that while social constructions of realities abound, the singular ‘reality’ that these multiple actors have to contend with are to do with structures and systemic characteristics. The dialectics of reconciling the structure, contexts, and constructs of realities allow the researcher to go beyond a closed systemic approach in search of an inclusive heuristic device. In enabling this critical study of policy, numerous frameworks have been advanced by scholars, to capture these diverse facets of the policy process. What follows is an exploration of a few such frameworks that facilitate a critical study of policy. Utility of Transnational Advocacy Networks Keck and Sikkink (1998) argue for a transnational advocacy network approach in studying human rights norms and their acceptance and implementation by states. Through their five-phase ‘spiral model’ and their concept of the ‘boomerang effect’, the proponents present the stages and actions through which domestic groups collaborate with international actors, bypassing repressive states, to introduce and institutionalise human rights norms that are recognised and laid down internationally. The five phases include a repressive state, denial, tactical concessions, internalisation of human rights norms and practices, and rule-consistent behaviour. The approach, while useful in presenting how international actors and domestic actors collaborate, does not necessarily allow the researcher to look at the rationalities adopted by these actors. The idea of ‘similar discourse’ indulged in by transnational and domestic actors does not allow to explore the intricacies of their constructions of each other and perceived rationalities of the norms they pursue. While the instrumental rationality of the repressive state is assumedly clear, that of the transnational advocacy

68 

P. RAGHUNATH

coalition is not. It may be argued that in writing about human rights norms, the authors assume a universality that these norms are identified with, and hence, these rationalities in question do not need to be explored. However, this turns into an infirmity if the approach has to be extrapolated to the study of other phenomena of transnational collective action, like the making of communication and media policies. In addition to this, the approach is drawn up to understand the workings of a state that represses human rights, thereby seen as authoritarian. For instance, in the case of state reluctance in opening up airwaves for community radio, it becomes important to understand the historical and socio-cultural contexts for such reluctance. A post- or crypto-colonial condition, as evidenced from the states in South Asia under study, serves as the backdrop for understanding state behaviour and its construction of other actors in the community radio space. Again, by bypassing the need to understand the rationalities of the state and its construction of other actors and phenomena, the approach does not provide fertile ground to study the policy process associated with community radio. Further, new technology emerges as an entrant in the policy process for community radio. State scepticism of new technology, especially in light of a post- or crypto-­ colonial past, is seen as a recurring theme in the policy process in the Global South. Technological advancement brings with it newer actors, rationalities, and perceptions, thereby rendering the transnational advocacy network approach short of complete utility. However, the last three phases of the ‘spiral model’ that explicate the process of state socialisation into the norms advocated by the transnational-domestic actor coalition is a rather useful analytic tool and could be retained to study the process of the shift in actor perceptions and actions. The transnational advocacy network approach provides some useful tools that could enable the study of policy processes, but falls short of a more universal applicability. Utility of Advocacy Coalition Framework The Advocacy Coalition Framework is a nuanced, useful framework to understand and describe policy processes. Advanced by Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993), the framework systematically lays down various components of a policy subsystem, which is the central component of the study. From typifying various levels of policy beliefs among policy actors, to presenting primary and secondary factors in mapping policy changes over time, the ACF allows for a detailed study of the policy process. The

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

69

framework allows for the researcher to observe the policy subsystem over a time period, to study shifts in policy. Moreover, the framework also allows to access scientific knowledge and its transfer in the policy process. The ACF, however, presents a systemic account of the policy process and its components. From well-defined subsystems to drawing up causal relationships, the framework, while helping identify key aspects of the policy process, presents a developed cause-and-effect model. This, the framework owes to its origins in attempting to lay out scientific processes involved in policymaking beyond the ‘stages’ model. In addition to this, the framework does not explicitly take into account the entry of new policy actors or advance understandings of transnational policy actors who may enter the subsystem as an affiliated strategy instead of as the primary one. By attaching great importance to shared ‘beliefs’, the framework does not take into account other factors, which might also contribute to dismantling of or change in beliefs and the varying degree of association the coalition members may have, even with the three-tier system of beliefs. Further, the Advocacy  Coalition  Framework focuses primarily on coalitions as key actors, thereby allowing little room for alternative typologies of non-state policy actors. The framework, however, could be a useful analytic device in identifying layers of policy beliefs, systemic/subsystemic factors, and tracking policy over time. Utility of Epistemic Communities The concept of epistemic communities (Holzner 1968; Haas 1992) seeks to highlight the role of ‘knowledge’ in the policy process. Members of an epistemic community gain legitimacy in the policy process by virtue of the knowledge they possess, in relation to the policy situation at hand. Epistemic communities are not solely domestic and could include transnational actors, who transfer knowledge on various aspects of the policy under study. The shortcoming of the concept is that it does not take into account the transformation of the epistemic community in question. Toke (1999) contends that Haas attaches too much importance to expert knowledge and indicates that this suggests a positivist leaning. However, Cross (2013) and Dunlop (2002) disagree and suggest that Haas’ idea of expert knowledge refers to a shared paradigm of knowledge among members of the epistemic community and does not indicate any positivist undertones. While Cross (2013) does talk about ‘uncertainty’, as a characteristic of the epistemic community, one does not have a framework to

70 

P. RAGHUNATH

take refuge in, when it comes to tracking the transformation of the epistemic community over time. Sebenius (1992) draws attention to the existence of other interest groups in the fray, and how Haas’ framework does not take into account the ‘political astuteness’ required of the epistemic community to compete or educate and bring on board these other actors. Usually, it is understood that the epistemic community loses its importance in the policy process once the transfer of knowledge occurs. It may also be added that the paradigm of knowledge in question may become commonplace and hence not require the expertise of the community. It then becomes imperative to understand how the epistemic community transforms itself to continue to stay relevant in the policy process, which itself could have been transformed by virtue of changes in the context in which it is located. Further, the introduction of competing ‘epistemes’ could also be an interesting addition to the study of these communities, though the proponents do not specifically negate the existence of competing epistemic communities. Adding the temporal, spatial factors emanating from the contextual setting in which these communities operate could be a way to advance the concept in studying policy. The concept is useful, especially in a constructivist study of policy. Utility of Social Movements Theorising The theorising of social movements (old and new) have been useful in allowing the researcher to study policy shifts over time, in embracing fluid identities, and in going beyond the turgid stratification of people. Such theorising helps understand progression of policy groupings and the communities they work for and with, in terms of mobilisation, using policy and advocacy efforts, shifts in social capital, amplification of policy dialogue, adequate capture of policy spaces, intelligent utilisation of policy windows (Kingdon 1984), and the influence of the policy groups in terms of identified ‘target audiences’ and/or goals. Foweraker (1995), in writing about social movements in Latin America, talks about the manner in which New Social Movements theorising has been successful in categorising and theorising any societal move and dissent as a new social movement, when it may not be the case. He suggests that in Latin America, the material conditions that support social movements are hard to come by, due to poverty and lack of resources. However, he suggests that there might exist pre-social movements or what may be called social mobilisation. His work makes a case for defining new social movements with care

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

71

and precision, instead of using it like a blanket term for all mobilisation activities. Social movement theorising is useful in attending to the economic (labour movements), cultural and social (identities and subcultures, among other aspects) dimensions, but one is left bereft of a mechanism to map shifts in magnitude, resource utilisation (unless one uses a complementary theory of resource mobilisation), and shifts in agency or loyalties, especially with the latter shaping social movements on ground. Civil and/or Political Societies serve as larger connections with which each of these kinds of policy groupings operates. Serving as sites that operate out of the ambit of the State or Market, civil society is a useful concept in understanding the democratic participation of ‘civilians’ and ‘citizens’ in matters of public concern. Civil society formations are diverse, and those in the Global South do not resemble their counterparts in the Global North, especially in light of the disbursal of international aid, localised forms of politics, formation of elite groupings, and so on. Political society in postcolonial settings has been privileged by thinkers like Partha Chatterjee (1993, 2011). He suggests that the concept of civil society is connected to the process of modernisation, while political society is more about the popular recourse to survival. However, Chatterjee’s conceptualisation is dualistic and does not provide a unified theory of a people and their activity that does not subscribe to the State or the Market. Constructivist and Ecological Approaches: Towards a Continuum The concept of ecology stems from the natural sciences and is generically understood as the relation of entities to the environment they operate in. This environment is understood as the ‘natural world’, a given organisational structure that is then submitted to its interaction with entities belonging to the structure. From this a priori understanding, an ecology is often essentialised as the ‘reality’ that is then made sense of, by entities native to it. In the social science research endeavour, beyond its association with the study of environment, the generic concept of ecology has traditionally been deployed to allude to the interconnectedness of political, social, economic, and other systemic factors (Russett 1967). Most studies in political ecology (Perrault et al. 2015) have focussed on unravelling structures of power, many offering materialist accounts of class relations and marginalisation, as key foci. Similarly, studies in organisational sociology (Hannan and Freeman 1977), McLaughlin (2001) says, have focussed on organisations’ inability to impact any change on the

72 

P. RAGHUNATH

environment in which they operate, in response to those espousing rational choice theory. Early work on cultural ecology (Steward 1955) focussed on adaptation of culture to the environment, enlisting processes in a manner of evolutionary undertones. Media ecologists Innis (1950) and McLuhan (1962) presented technological deterministic accounts of the communication process, placing technology’s influence on society on the mantle. With its focus on structures and power dynamics, traditionally, the ecological approach had steered clear of the messiness of everyday human activities (Taylor and Wilson 2004). These activities are often a resultant of continuous engagement amongst (1) various types of actors; (2) multiple strands of rationalities emanating from them; and (3) the interactions that these rationalities facilitate—both amongst them and with the larger contexts that are also inclusive of systemic practices which are themselves a product of human agency, in which the operate. Recent work embracing the ecological approach takes cognisance of these competing rationalities and their contexts. Vernon Smith (2007), in his work on the constructivist and ecological rationalities in economics, delves into the interaction of the two approaches in studying the ‘environment’, ‘institutions’, and ‘behaviour’. He draws on Hayek (1952), who spoke of how ‘our current perception results from a relationship between external impulses and our past experience of similar conditions’, highlighting interaction between human agency, historical structures that are also a result of human action, and externalities. In a similar vein, McLaughlin (2001), in studying the ecological approach to organisational sociology, underscores the shortcomings of ‘adaptionists’ and constructivists, making a call for a synthesis of the two approaches in a bid to better explain organisational dynamics. Hearn and Foth (2007) talk of communicative ecologies as constituted by three layers: the technology layer, the social layer, and the discursive layer. Heynen and Van Sant (2015) and Loftus (2015), in their work linking political ecology and activism of many shades, draw attention to the need for political ecology to engage with the politics of the everyday. Loftus, in particular, calls for a dialectical pedagogy in approaching ecology. His call for a focus on praxis is consistent with the current research project’s grounding in the grounded theory approach. Similarly, Norman (2002), in his work on visual perception, delves into experimental analyses of ‘the two theories of perception’, and takes stock of calls for reconciliation of the two. He draws on his earlier work to suggest that the dichotomy be seen as a ‘continuum’ (1983).

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

73

Advancing Policy Ecology: The Grounded Theory approach (Charmaz 2006) deployed in this research on policymaking for community radio broadcasting in South Asia allows for the building of a ground-up theory. Drawing from the earlier critique of the utility and limitations of each of the relevant conceptual frameworks for the critical study of CR policy, it seems to be a useful exercise to attempt the construction of a larger theoretical schema that draws on the utilities offered by the frameworks, but helps synthesise aspects of policy processes that are not fully explained by them. By collapsing the aforementioned frameworks into a larger schema, aspects of the CR policy processes under study that could be explained by said frameworks are taken care of, while also allowing room for the unexplained, more fluid phenomena to emerge. Next, the above description of advances in integrating rational claims-making as espoused by constructivists and ecologists allows to draw on ‘ecology’ as a space for understanding the policy continuum. From this understanding, I advance the analytic heuristic device of a Policy Ecology. The Policy Ecology houses the policy continuum, which itself is an iterative deliberative-dialectical process emerging out of constructions of policy actors—of themselves and other actors, and competing rhetoric and rationalities, operational in spatio-­ temporal contexts that bring in socio-economic, political, and cultural aspects. The idea of a continuum allows for the temporal non-fixity of constructions by policy actors in their given contexts, since it accounts for iterations and reiterations of ideas, norms, rhetoric, and rationalities, as advanced by them in their activities over time, in the policy space. Further, these iterations and reiterations continue to figure in the instrumental documents aspect of the policy process, as evidenced in amendments of policy documents, both in official and in non-official advocacy efforts. All these activities in the policy space or ‘ecology’ allow for the study of the deliberation in an ecology, drawing on Habermasian communicative action. Deliberative Policy Ecology: Theorists of deliberative systems and institutional design point to heuristic devices to conceptualise the ontological proportions of deliberative practices. For instance, ‘policy networks’, ‘advocacy coalitions’, ‘epistemic communities’, and ‘communities of practice’ are all policy architectures that one can utilise in studying policy processes. However, they provide for a systemic study, which is often left short-charged owing to the entry and re-entry of newer actors, challenges, technological advances, and opportunities. Instead, I propose an inclusive heuristic of the Deliberative Policy Ecology (DPE), as the opening up of

74 

P. RAGHUNATH

closed and bounded systems to externalities like the entry and agency of newer policy actors, or uncertainties brought about by ecosystem-bound shifts and complexities. This helps synthesise policy architectures and subsystemic attributes, while also cutting across political systems of differing natures. This section delves into exploring the theatre of advocacy and negotiation for community radio, towards a nuanced contextual construction (Best 1989) of the Policy Ecology, in this endeavour, which is understood as a multi-faceted process, inclusive of the cognitive and social dimensions of construction of ideas, identities, and their iterations of and by policy actors with the socio-political context serving as the backdrop; and the material construction of policy instruments and deliberative spaces to facilitate the transfer of certain ideas and norms towards furthering the cause of community radio. A Deliberative Policy Ecology subsumes advocacy coalitions, institutions, and transnational advocacy networks, all the while accounting for shifts in the policy ecology due to shifts in the larger political, socio-economic structures in which policymaking happens. For instance, where there existed an epistemic community, it could morph into another kind of policy actor over time, given contextual factors. In such cases, the idea of a Policy Ecology accounts for those shifts and factors, while maintaining a sense of continuity. A Policy Ecology, hence, is an organic, ground-up understanding of the various elements of the policy process. The focus of the Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach is on uncovering shifts in terms of social status, the evolution of newer elites, shifting dynamics of power in terms of overthrows, shake-ups and subsequent consolidation, and subversive efforts. The Approach is nuanced and helps flesh out policy deliberation through the laying out of narratives and thick description based on fieldwork in the four South Asian countries under study. Policy Ecology as a  heuristic device and the Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach also help locate the idea of a South Asian public sphere as will be discussed in Chap. 4, as one that is open, and is characterised by interdependence and reflexivity. This conceptualisation can be seen in the manner in which this research has been formulated, foregrounding openness, instead of resorting to explanatory analytical devices like the ones mentioned above. It offers better applicability in explaining the degree of deliberative practices even in quasi-/semi democracies. This allows to underscore the practice of deliberation as an exercise undertaken by a multitude of policy actors, irrespective of official recognition or formal

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

75

authority. As seen in Chap. 5, it also helps account for efforts, by actors across scales, made in pushing the policy envelope and public discourse towards further democratisation, across political settings and not solely in liberal democracies, opening up avenues for Deliberative Policy Analysis manifold. As Chap. 6 and its focus on the liminal and policymaking suggests, deliberation in the Policy Ecology is marked by conditions of civil war, and post-conflict realities, influencing the scope and potential for deliberation in South Asia. What follows is an exploration of deliberation in the Policy Ecology, to help explicate and synthesise the conceptual apparatus of the Approach. Deliberation in the Policy Ecology ‘Deliberation’ has been dealt with in several ways, in theoretical literature. Most famously emanating and associated with Habermasian ideas of the ideal speech condition and communicative action, as well as John Rawls’ conception of justice, deliberation has found currency in political theory over the last three decades. Dryzek (2000) writes about the deliberative turn in the theorising of democracy, in the early 1990s. In his earlier work, he differentiated between discursive and deliberative democracy, with the former being a larger discourse-oriented setup in comparison to the latter’s more focused take on communicative action. Bohman (2006) expands on the idea of epistemic pluralism, by suggesting that bringing in diverse perspectives is key to deliberative democracy. Drawing on Dewey, Bohman indicates that a multi-perspectival approach to democracy is most inclusive and action-oriented. He presents the conditions in which a fully developed deliberate ideal can be fully achieved. First, he suggests that the goal for a specific end of the exercise of deliberation be laid out, in order to provide a pathway to work towards. Next, he suggests that the process of deliberation is an important aspect to consider, bringing under focus the kind of process in place and tying it to the envisaged deliberative end, working towards an enhanced epistemic value of deliberation. Further, he stresses on the conditions under which deliberation takes place, for it to be qualitatively superior and better developed. Finally, he also focuses on the application of deliberation under specific social and economic circumstances, accounting for cultural pluralism and inclusivity. Bohman’s conceptualisation of the attributes and factors in understanding the practice of deliberation helps orient it to a fully realisable end.

76 

P. RAGHUNATH

Elstub (2010) adopts a generational approach (not linear in time) and suggests that a third generation of deliberative democracy scholarship was emerging, writing at the end of the first decade of the 2000s. His latest work (2016) talks about four generations of deliberative democracy theorists. The first generation of deliberative democracy theorists, he suggests, focused on normative theorising, including reason-giving as a mode of exchanging information and deliberation, in a democracy. They were, however, challenged by the second generation of deliberative democracy theorists, who went beyond the seeming narrow conceptualisation of reason-­giving, to include aspects pertinent to more antagonistic positions and conversations attuned to complex offerings and plural settings in diverse democracies. The focus of this generation was on diversity and plurality of various kinds of deliberation. The third generation of deliberative democracy scholars, Elstub suggests, focused on the shortcomings of the second generation, namely, the lack of empirical scholarship and institutional design of deliberative spaces and forums. Spaces like mini-publics and instruments of deliberation like deliberative polls (Fishkin 1995) to access public opinion are examples of the more micro-approach adopted by this generation of theorists. Elstub says that now, the next generation of scholarship focuses more on the systemic turn in the study of deliberative democracy. Mansbridge et al. (2012) provide arguments for the systemic turn in the study of deliberative democracy. They argue that a systemic turn helps scale up the conceptualisation of deliberative democracy to a larger surface area. They define a system as, ‘a set of distinguishable, differentiated, but to some degree interdependent parts, often with distributed functions and a division of labour, connected in such a way as to form a complex whole. It requires both differentiation and integration among the parts. It requires some functional division of labour, so that some parts do work that others cannot do as well. And it requires some relational interdependence, so that a change in one component will bring about changes in some others’ (2012: 4). A systemic approach also helps delineate various parts of the whole, including division of labour, which is a useful conception.  aking a Case for the Ecological Approach M The study of deliberative democracy and its institutional design has been preoccupations to scholars of democracy and political science in general, for three decades now. The systemic turn that Elstub et al. (2016) talk

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

77

about is one that came with the expansion of the empirical sites of studying and ‘capturing’ deliberation in the study of settings for deliberative democracy. The focus on institutional design and instruments of deliberation has meant that the systemic turn has been pronounced. Drawing from Habermasian two-level deliberation, to Dryzek’s focus on public deliberation across differences, the systemic turn catapults deliberative democratic theorising to newer venues. Stevenson and Dryzek (2014), in their work on deliberative democracy, call for a systemic understanding of deliberation. They lay out seven components of such a system: private sphere, public space, empowered space, transmission, accountability, meta-­deliberation, and decisiveness. Dryzek (2010), in his previous work on deliberative democracy, suggests that the concept has been tied to the liberal democratic state, and he chooses to go beyond this understanding to locate his concept of deliberation across political settings. Gathering from this understanding of deliberation as an exercise of human agency and not solely a systemic attribute, I argue that deliberation would be better placed in the understanding of a Policy Ecology as advanced above. In doing so, deliberation could be attributed to factors and contexts beyond the confines of a structuralist enterprise. It would be inclusive of cause-and-effect models, but would go beyond them to accommodate the more messier entities and details of a robust democracy in action, with deliberation as being an element that is conspicuously present across such settings. I define a robust democracy as one that is not neatly packaged into silos, but as one that works out differences through civil, ethical modes of translation of ideas and deliberative engagement. As my empirical research will show through the chapters that follow the present one, such civil contestation, especially in transitional societies moving towards attaining the status of a fuller democracy, is one that is prone to external influences and investments of time and finances. The lack of a totalising temporal reality in these societies makes a case and space for possible conversation across temporalities, all of which are important attributes of moving towards deliberation. The chapters showcase the manner in which deliberation does or does not happen in particular circumstances and contexts, owing to numerous factors. They present an empirical study of how deliberation does or does not come about in such societies and how diverse actors have their own impact on policy processes, in the process of working towards furthering democracy. Work on transnational democracy by scholars like Bohman (2007) is useful at this juncture. Transnationalism does not necessarily fall into

78 

P. RAGHUNATH

containers of a system or structure, always being more fluid and pliable to finding ‘outliers’ to the system or structure, embracing the unconventional and less-defined, in grainy detail. It helps embrace the heuristic of an ecology in more fulfilling ways; the latter finds openings and pathways that negotiate the obdurate. Bohman talks about moving from the demos to the demoi, a plural articulation of the political subject, as against the former, which is unitary and constricted by the national system. He argues that the current global sphere is characterised by transnational democracy, replete with interdependence and coexistence. Bohman contends that in the global moment at the time of his writing, it is either the State that becomes powerful or the external forces that enter the State. The idea of transnational democracy, thus, is in synchronisation with the heuristic of an unbounded, open Ecology that takes cognisance of externalities, as put forward earlier in this chapter. This is similar to the idea of transnational public spheres put forth by Fraser (2007) and Volkmer (2014), as elaborated upon in the discussion of Chap. 4 of this book. Qualifying Deliberation Dryzek (2000) cautions against the use of the term deliberation to define everything related to communication in a democracy. In a bid to provide an overall understanding of deliberation, he lists out communicative practices that may not be part of the definition of deliberation. For instance, Sanders’ conception of testimony is one that pursues the ideal of radical egalitarianism, speaking in the tongue of the communicator and revealing the communicator’s personal side. Similar to this, Dryzek says, is Young’s (1996) conception of storytelling, where the communicator’s story is narrated and gains importance by virtue of being located in particular circumstances and needs to be communicated to those who do not share the situation. The other kinds of communication that she focuses on are rhetoric and greeting. Rhetoric has been seen as a corruption of deliberative spaces and opportunities (Chambers 2009), since it can promote manipulation and speech that can induce negative reactions. Dryzek suggests that in real discursive (not deliberative) settings, these various forms of communication can coexist. Nowhere is the qualification of deliberation more prominent than in the differentiation of this form of communication from strategic communication. Elstub (2008) suggests that this difference became key to early works on Habermasian deliberative democracy, especially in qualifying the point at which communication transcends strategic interests to move

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

79

towards becoming deliberation. The author advances the idea that deliberation could also occur in non-deliberative spaces and that it becomes important to capture the sequence of deliberation. Seyla Benhabib (2002) advances a two-track model of deliberation, speaking about an official public sphere and an unofficial one, with the former comprising the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary as also political parties and the latter comprising the more ‘cultural’ institutions like social movements and associational forms of democracy. She talks about the need to locate democracy and conversations in both spheres, and not just the former. She also makes a case for legal pluralism, freedom to associate and exit, and a universal theory of democracy, in line with principles of a liberal democracy. Gutmann and Thompson (1996, 2004) present their version of deliberative democracy theorising, by focusing on moral disagreements in the American public sphere. They speak of an ‘economy of moral disagreement’, wherein citizens are as accommodative as possible, of their opponents’ disagreements and arguments, even while they stand their own ground and without dismissing their own moral convictions. They also suggest that the theory of deliberative democracy becomes a critique of its practice, when the most marginalised and the least empowered are unable to engage in deliberation. Deliberation as an Epistemology Deliberation as communicative action has been conceptualisation by varied scholars, as showcased above. However, it has received scant attention as an epistemological premise. Deliberation as an epistemology, and a way of approaching knowledge claims and related meaning-making is premised on inter-subjectivities, which are critical to address difference, power, and concerns of post-structuralists through deliberative processes. Mansbridge et  al. (2012), in conceptualising a deliberative system, suggest that it is ‘one that encompasses a talk-based approach to political conflict and problem-­solving—through arguing, demonstrating, expressing, and persuading’ (2012: 4–5). While problem-solving is seen as a requisite of a deliberative system, a critical pedagogy does not necessitate the same. Criticality as an epistemological nuance entails the enunciation of the texture of a deliberative policy ecology through a critical appreciation of power, structures of domination and impingement, and violence. Such an epistemological approach would then be appreciative of and enable the study of policy silences (Freedman

80 

P. RAGHUNATH

2010), helping theorise silence as a resultant of structural violence and also as an act of active resistance and dissent. Such an epistemology helps understand and appreciate trust in a deliberative process in the ecology and helps explore and lay out reciprocity as dialectics. In the present critical study of policymaking, it helps locate spaces of agonistic democracy and ground-up policymaking in the Ecology, while also engaging with Habermasian ideas of the speech act and communicative action.  eliberative Potential in a Policy Ecology D The potential for deliberation in a Deliberative Policy Ecology is marked by the scope for reflexivity, especially in the anthropological sense, since the current study is an ethnography of policy. Escobar (1993) talks about the limits of reflexivity, in terms of the larger practice and politics of anthropology, and ethnography. While he talks about reflexivity of the researcher, the epistemic intervention is also useful in conceptualising reflexivity in the Policy Ecology itself. The deliberative potential in the Policy Ecology is marked by (a) the ability of the interlocutors to be reflexive of their individual roles as speakers and deliberators, (b) contextual attributes that include the regional, the cultural, the sociality, and spatiality, (c) larger aspects like questions of power, governance structures, and the cultures and relations between policy actors they engender. This book, in the chapters that follow, permit the exposition of such a Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach to the study of media policy, allowing to slice up and sample the varied ethnographic offerings of their lived experiences set in larger political, socio-economic, and cultural contexts.

Bibliography Andriole, S.  J., Wilkenfelf, J., & Hopple, G. (1975). A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Foreign Policy Behavior. International Studies Quarterly, 19(2), 160–198. Axford, B. (2013). Theories of Globalization. Polity Press. Baldock, J., Mittion, L., Manning, N., & Vickerstaff, S. (Eds.). (1999). Social Policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Bendix, R. (1963). Concepts and Generalizations in Comparative Sociological Studies. American Sociological Review, 28(4), 532–539. Benhabib, S. (2002). The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

81

Bereday, G. (1964). Comparative Method in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Best, J. (Ed.). (1989). Images of Issues: Typifying Contemporary Social Problems. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1997). The Postmodern Turn. New York: The Guilford Press. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Introduction. Connected Sociologies (pp. 1–16). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Bloomsbury Collections. Blumler, J., & Gurevitch, M. (1995). Towards a Comparative Framework for Political Communication Research. In J. Blumler & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), The Crisis of Public Communication. New York: Routledge. Bohman, J. (2006). Deliberative Democracy and the Epistemic Benefits of Diversity. Episteme, 3(3), 175–191. Bohman, J. (2007). Democracy across Borders: From Dêmos to Dêmoi. MIT Press. Braman, S. (2004). Where has Media Policy Gone? Defining the Field in the Twenty-First Century. Communication Law and Policy, 9(2), 153–182. Brewer, J. (2010). Microhistory and the Histories of Everyday Life. Cultural and Social History, 7(1), 87–109. Chambers, S. (2009). Rhetoric and the Public Sphere: Has Deliberative Democracy Abandoned Mass Democracy? Political Theory, 37(3), 323–350. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage Publications. Chatterjee, P. (1993). The Nation and Its Fragments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chatterjee, P. (2011). Lineages of Political Society: Studies in Postcolonial Democracy. Columbia University Press. Cross, M.’a. D. (2013). Rethinking Epistemic Communities Twenty Years Later. Review of International Studies, 39(1), 137–160. Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford University Press. Dryzek, J. (2010). Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Democracy. Oxford University Press. Dunlop, C. (2002). Epistemic Communities: A Reply to Toke. Politics, 20(3), 137–144. Durkheim, E. (1965). The Rules of Sociological Method. New York: Free Press. Elstub, S. (2008). Towards a Deliberative and Associational Democracy. Edinburgh University Press. Elstub, S. (2010). The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy. Political Science Review, 8(3), 291–307. Elstub, S., Ercan, S., & Mendonça, R. F. (2016). Editorial Introduction: The Fourth Generation of Deliberative Democracy. Critical Policy Studies, 10(2), 139–151.

82 

P. RAGHUNATH

Escobar, A. (1993). The Limits of Reflexivity: Politics in Anthropology’s Postwriting Culture Era. Journal of Anthropological Research, 49, 377–391. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Fischer, F. (1995). Evaluating Public Policy. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Fishkin, J. (1995). The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy. Yale University Press. Flew, T. (2020). Globalization, Neo-globalization and Post-globalization: The Challenge of Populism and the Return of the National. Global Media and Communication, 16(1). Foweraker, J. (1995). Theorizing Social Movements. Pluto Press. Franzese, R., Jr. (2007). Context Matters: The Challenge of Multicausality, Context-Conditionality, and Endogeneity for Empirical Evaluation of Positive Theory in Comparative Politics. In C. Boix & S. C. Stokes (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fraser, N. (2007). Transnational Public Sphere: Transnationalizing the Public Sphere: On the Legitimacy and Efficacy of Public Opinion in a Post-Westphalian World. Theory Culture & Society, 24(4), 7–30. Freedman, D. (2010). Media Policy Silences: The Hidden Face of Communications Decision Making. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 15(3), 344–361. Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books. Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Haas, P. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization, 46(1) Knowledge, Power, and International Policy Coordination. 1–35. Hage, G. (2005). A Not So Multi-sited Ethnography of a Not So Imagined Community. Anthropological Theory, 5(4), 463–475. Hajer, M. (1995). The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The Population Ecology of Organisations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964. Hannerz, U. (2003). Being There... and There... and There!: Reflections on Multi-Site Ethnography. Ethnography, 4(2), 201–216.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

83

Hayek, F. (1952). The Sensory Order: An Inquiry into the Foundations of Theoretical Psychology. The University of Chicago Press. Hearn, G. N., & Foth, M. (2007). Communicative Ecologies: Editorial Preface. Electronic Journal of Communication, 17(1–2), 2–6. Heynen, N., & Van Sant, L. (2015). Political Ecologies of Activism and Direct Action Politics. In T. Perrault et al. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. New York: Routledge. Holton, R. (2005). Making Globalisation. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Education. Holzner, B. (1968). Reality Construction in Society. Cambridge: Schenkman. Innis, H. (1950). Empire and Communications. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Iosifidis, P. (2011). Global Media and Communication Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Cornell University Press. Kennett, P. (Ed.). (2001). Comparative Social Policy: Theory and Research. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Kennett, P. (Ed.). (2004). A Handbook of Comparative Social Policy. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins Press. Knoblauch, H. (2005). Focused Ethnography. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(3), 44. Kohn, M. (1989). Introduction. In M. L. Kohn (Ed.), Cross-National Research in Sociology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Livingstone, S. (2003). On the Challenges of Cross-National Comparative Media Research. European Journal of Communication, 18, 477–500. Loftus, A. (2015). Political Ecology as Praxis. In T.  Perreault, G.  Bridge, & J.  McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. London: Routledge. Mansbridge, J., et al. (2012). Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. Cambridge University Press. Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117. Massey, D. (1999). Power-geometries and the Politics of Space–time. Heidelberg: Department of Geography, University of Heidelberg. Massey, D. (2005). For Space. London: Sage Publications. McLaughlin, P. (2001). Toward an Ecology of Social Action: Merging the Ecological and Constructivist Traditions. Human Ecology Review, 8(2), 12–28. McLuhan, M. (1962). Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. University of Toronto Press.

84 

P. RAGHUNATH

Mohammed-Arif, A. (2014). Introduction. Imaginations and Constructions of South Asia: An Enchanting Abstraction? South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal (SAMAJ), 10, 1–27. Norman, J. (1983). Are the Direct and Indirect Theories of Perception Incompatible? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 729–731. Norman, J. (2002). Two Visual Systems and Two Theories of Perception: An Attempt to Reconcile the Constructivist and Ecological Approaches. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 25, 73–144. Pennings, P., Keman, H., & Kleinnijenhuis, J. (2006). Doing Research in Political Science: An Introduction to Comparative Methods and Statistics. London: Sage Publications. Perrault, T., Bridge, G., & McCarthy, J. (Eds.). (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. London: Routledge. Raboy, M., & Padovani, C. (2010). Mapping Global Media Policy: Concepts, Frameworks, Methods. Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(2), 150–169. Ragin, C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Rothman, K., & Greenland, S. (2005). Causation and Causal Inference in Epidemiology. American Journal of Public Health, 95(1), S144–S150. The Coronado Conference: Scientific Evidence and Public Policy Paper. Roudometof, V. (2015). The Glocal and Global Studies. Globalizations, 12(5), 774–787. Russett, B. M. (1967). The Ecology of Future International Politics. International Studies Quarterly, 11(1), 12–31. Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Assessment, Revisions, and Implications for Scholars and Practitioners. In P.  Sabatier & H.  Jenkins-Smith (Eds.), Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach (pp. 211–235). Boulder: Westview Press. Sebenius, J.  K. (1992). Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review. Management Science, 38(1), 18–38. Smith, V. (2007). Rationality in Economics: Constructivist and Ecological Forms. Cambridge University Press. Stevenson, H., & Dryzek, J. (2014). Democratizing Global Climate Governance. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Steward, J. (1955). Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution. University of Illinois Press. Subrahmanyam, S. (1997). Connected Histories: Notes Towards a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia. Modern Asian Studies, 31(3), Special Issue: The Eurasian Context of the Early Modern History of Mainland South East Asia, 1400–1800, 735–762. Taylor, L., & Wilson, F. (2004). The Messiness of Everyday Life: Exploring Key Themes in Latin American Citizenship Studies Introduction. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 23(2), 154–164.

2  THE DELIBERATIVE POLICY ECOLOGY APPROACH TO MEDIA POLICY 

85

Tilly, C. (1984). Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New  York: Russell Sage Foundation. Toke, D. (1999). Epistemic Communities and Environmental Groups. Politics, 19(2), 97–102. Urry, J. (2000). Sociology Beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-First Century. London: Routledge. Verhulst, S., & Price, M. (2008). Comparative Media Law Research and its Impact on Policy. International Journal of Communication, 2, 406–420. Volkmer, I. (2014). The Global Public Sphere: Public Communication in the Age of Reflective Interdependence. Cambridge: Polity Press. Young, I.  M. (1996). Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy. In S.  Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

CHAPTER 3

The Postcolony and Its Radio

Mapping Historicity, Constructing Histories, and the Critical Policy Imperative Writing historiographies is a contentious affair, with conceptual and methodological considerations yielding strings of connections and associations and points of departure and difference. The difficulty with constructing histories has to do with the many contestations the researcher has to grapple with, including stitching together conceptions of temporality and the constitution of spatiality for the research endeavour at hand. Historians have conceptualised human progression through time in various ways, including Kantian and Hegelian teleological and linear explanations, ‘Eastern’ and ‘native’ cyclical constructions, Kuhnian paradigmatic shifts, to aggregated notions of multiple temporalities existing simultaneously, as suggested by Reinhart Koselleck.1 Hirsch and Stewart (2005), in Introduction: Ethnographies of Historicity, talk about the difference between ‘history’ and ‘historicity’, elaborating on the former as nestled in Western cultural particularism and the latter as being more spacious and accommodating of multiple cross-cultural constructions of histories. The authors also suggest that ethnography is an 1  Jordheim (2012) fleshes out an analysis of the German historian’s concept of multiple temporalities in his paper, ‘Against Periodization: Koselleck’s Theory of Multiple Temporalities’.

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_3

87

88 

P. RAGHUNATH

investigation of sociality (Ingold 1996), as analogous to the notion of historicity, which helps turn the focus on to social mobility as opposed to static social being. They write, ‘Our use of “historicity” is analogous in that it draws attention to the connections between past, present and future without the assumption that events/time are a line between happenings “adding up” to history. Whereas “history” isolates the past, historicity focuses on the complex temporal nexus of past-present-future. Historicity, in our formulation, concerns the ongoing social production of accounts of pasts and futures’ (p. 262). In The Writing of History (1988), de Certeau dwells on the notion of historicity and the practise of writing historiographies as the modern traveller’s act. In encountering the ‘New World’, the traveller sharpens his pencil, and scalpel, to write and render structure. This production of written history is an active engagement in inventing the Other, the space that is otherwise heterogeneous and plural. De Certeau focuses on the everyday practise of the continuous re-inscription and re-negotiation of newer manifestations of the Other, across time. An integral aspect of this continuous process of constructing histories, for de Certeau, is the interface between the Orality of the Other and the writing of the traveller. This practise of interpreting the Other and rendering them intelligible to ‘modernity’ is rendered possible by scripting the heterogeneous encounter into a two-dimensional plane. However, this is hardly a singular event, for orality continues beyond the initial encounter, to intersect repeatedly with the written word, time and again. This description of divergent conceptions of historicity has to do with the constitution of spatial geographies, which emerge as distinct vantage points from which to construct histories. De Certeau (1984), in The Practice of Everyday Life, draws a distinction between the notions of ‘place’ and ‘space’, conceiving of the former as an already existent, stable plane and the latter as a practised place. Commenting on modern cartography, he suggests that early books of maps were books of history, were pictorial representations of a personal journey, and were not standardised autonomous maps that came with modern exploration. He places human action at the centre of the present-day constructions of spatiality by indicating that they are multifarious, for they comprise human constructions of space even in the midst of concretised places, which themselves are a product of continual human action. His idea of negotiating ‘tactics’ as opposed to the state’s ‘strategy’ is a useful way of looking at how policy deliberations

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

89

negotiate space. It also allows for an understanding of the dialectics of this interplay of power and subversive efforts. De Certeau’s ideas are integral to this chapter’s focus on South Asia’s encounter with Radio, the modern2 repository of orality (Avery 2006; Cohen et al. 2009). By understanding the correspondence of historicity with the oral, this chapter seeks to unravel the structures of power and doxa (Bourdieu 1977) as embedded and naturalised in the region’s governance machineries. Towards that end, the region’s tryst with colonial broadcasting becomes imperative to this research on community radio (CR) policy, in order to understand the colonial broadcasting policy apparatus that produced a certain knowledge of the colonial subjects. Bandyopadhyay (2015: 68) quotes Warren Hastings as having written in 1785, ‘Every accumulation of knowledge is useful to the state: …it attracts and conciliates distant affections; it lessens the weight of the chain by which the natives are held in subjection; and it imprints on the hearts of our own countrymen the sense and obligation of benevolence.’ The historian goes on to suggest that the resultant Orientalist discourse that was hinged on the rhetoric of kinship and love produced and codified a certain kind of knowledge of the heterogeneous Indian society to fit the Western canon and legitimated it, obliterating context-specific socio-cultural orality. Bandyopadhyay indicates that this ‘ultimately prepared the ground for the rejection of Orientalism as a policy of governance’ (ibid.). I deem it imperative to note at this juncture that the above description is to do with the initiation of the colonial apparatus of governance in the eighteenth century; the entry of the modern technology of radio in the region was two centuries hence. Numerous uprisings and calls for greater autonomy had emerged by then across South Asia, even as the British made strategic efforts to quell them by introducing the telegraph and the railways as tools for modernisation. Sosale (2014), in her work on the introduction of the Telegraph by the British in the Indian Ocean Region, draws on Potter’s (2007) work in studying the colonial British government’s communication efforts using a network heuristic. Her work, she writes, seeks to draw back linkages to the colonial era, which she sees as the progenitor of globalisation, and British ideas of modernisation and 2  There exist contestations between historians on whether pre-colonial South Asia was premodern or was modern in a non-Western way. These debates notwithstanding, one can safely suggest that the modern technology of radio emerged as a site for newer negotiations with modernity in the region, since the 1920s.

90 

P. RAGHUNATH

development as evident in the colonial governance apparatus, only to become more pronounced in a postcolonial world. The introduction of radio, therefore, should be seen in light of the impetus that the international, geopolitical, economic, and social contexts provided various individuals and groups, including British and South Asian elites and radio enthusiasts, British officials working in South Asia, those calling for greater autonomy and freedom on both sides, and the colonial government’s responses, against the backdrop of the establishment of diverse broadcasting systems across the world. This description covers three of the four present-day modern nation-states under study, namely, Sri Lanka, India, and Bangladesh, albeit their divergent experiences with British colonialism. The latter two shall, for the purpose of nuanced description, be identified as the subcontinent, and the former, as the island,3 both being parts of South Asia with divergent experiences with British colonialism. The history of the Nepalese monarchy’s relations with the British colonial rule in the Indian subcontinent indicates a prevalence of what could be called crypto-colonialism (Herzfeld 2002) and is elaborated upon further ahead in the chapter. The continuities promulgated by this Western form of canonisation and codification, and challenges to them in the form of deliberate efforts towards democratisation over decades, inform the study of community radio policy in South Asia. At this juncture, a note on the method that informs this chapter’s focus on colonial and postcolonial South Asia’s tryst with radio, and later, community radio, is warranted.

Critical Historiography, Ethnography, and Policy Histories The critical policy project accounts for a plurality of narratives, by incorporating them as legitimate voices driving policy, alongside dominant narratives. This it does, by privileging other policy histories and weaving them together with what are official policy stories. Critical historiography (Berger 1996) as a method to the study of policy is premised on the emancipatory potential in making space for writing history from below. The ethnographic method allows for accessing these lived experiences of 3  The use of this descriptor is not to draw on island ethnography that was rooted in the colonial enterprise. Sri Lanka, as the island, should be seen as the crossroads for influences carried to it by the oceans.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

91

negotiating policy, providing for embeddedness in deliberative sites and interaction with plural policy advocates who push the envelope constantly by calling attention to their own norms and values, as explicated in the previous chapter. Their policy efforts help negotiate stabilised practices of knowledge production (Rancière 1998) that the enterprise of official historiography is. Brewer (2014), in writing about historicising critical policy analysis, draws our attention to Ginzburg (1980) work on micro-histories, where he ‘attempts to reconstruct the thinking and literary world of a late sixteenth-century common miller in northeastern Italy, named “Mennocchio”’ (Brewer 2014: 282). In linking this concept of micro-­ histories to the unravelling of plural policy histories, the researcher is allowed to access the everyday messiness that results from the straitjacketing of top-down policy prescriptions to those that the said policy seeks to affect, over time. Brewer (2014) writes, ‘Microhistories often take as their subject a single event or person immersed in a rich and complex social and cultural conjuncture. This approach offers important methodological options for those who wish to unpack the complexity of policy production and interpretation’, and quotes Lather (2006: 789), saying, ‘via exploration of the ambiguity, fragmentation, undecidabilities, fluidities, hyperrealities and incoherencies of a world in process.’ Such an understanding sets the stage for engaging with a variety of policy actors, besides the state, their intent and interests, norms, values, and vantage points, in the writing of critical historiographies.

I. Colonial South Asia and Broadcasting Imperialism: A Dialogue This section attempts to engage with South Asian broadcasting history, set in the larger contexts in which the entry of radio into the region occurred, in the 1920s.4 The larger socio-economic, legal-political, and cultural environment, as glimpsed from previous research, facilitates a historicised understanding of the four South Asian countries under study. This is, as noted above, seen in the larger international and geostrategic dispositions of the milieu under study. Thussu (2000) writes about the strategic potential that the Western countries envisaged in the modern technology of radio, in 1902, when the 4  Airing Imperium: A Historiography of Radio Governance in South Asia’, forthcoming in the Journal Global Media and Communication, Sage Publications.

92 

P. RAGHUNATH

first radio transmissions occurred after Marconi ‘harnessed the new discovery of electromagnetism to make the first wireless transatlantic telegraph transmission, with support from naval armament companies and newspaper groups’ (2000: 18). He describes the near monopoly the British had on account of the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of Great Britain that dominated international telegraph exchanges and disallowed nonMarconi transmitters from responding to signals. In 1906, the Berlin Conference on Wireless Telegraphy was held, where ‘the first multilateral agreements on radiotelegraphy was signed and the International Radiotelegraph Union was born’ (ibid.). In the era of naval warfare, the British Empire held near-complete ownership of underground cables and also held sway by means of diplomatic censorship of messages travelling through its cables. This came to be challenged by other European countries and the US, who deliberated on radio frequency allocation and minimising of interference. In 1912, Thussu writes, stations broadcasting across national borders had to register their usage of a particular wavelength with the International Radiotelegraph Union. This emerged, however, as a prerogative of countries and companies that possessed capital and technology. By 1917, Soviet Russia had mobilised the airwaves for state broadcasting, proclaiming radio waves as an official state institution (Hale 1975). Following this, the radio came to be a colony of propaganda and ideologising by the colonial powers and commercial broadcasting by the US. All the same, South Asia’s history with radio provides an interesting account of the interactions and negotiations between radio enthusiasts in South Asia and Britain and early ideas and norms associated with radio broadcasting. Contrary to works that have focussed on the central pull of Imperial broadcasting, this historicised account chooses to focus on the chaos and crisis, competing rationalities and contexts amidst which radio developed in the South Asian region. It brings to light the competing constructs of (1) capital-driven commercial broadcasting and the local radio enterprise, (2) international geopolitics and public service in South Asia, (3) imperium and village broadcasting, and (4) the dynamics of security between the colonial state apparatus, on the one hand, and the notion of human security, on the other, as played out on radio in pre-independent South Asia. This section, reflecting on these aspects in considerable detail, draws heavily on the works of Alasdair Pinkerton (2008), Joselyn Zivin (1994, 1998, 1999), Brayne (1929), Simon Potter (2012), and gleanings in their work of the autobiographical writings of Lionel Fielden (1960) and John Reith (1949), the First Broadcasting Controller of All India Radio (AIR)

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

93

and the General Manager of the British Broadcasting Corporation, respectively, besides some official documents cited in these works, pertaining to the goings-on in British South Asia and its broadcasting. 

1920–1926: Experiments, Enterprise, and Empire

In South Asia, the first noted radio transmission took place as an experiment in Bombay, in British India, in 1920.5 This was followed by another experiment by the Bombay Radio Club, in 1921, and more sustained broadcasting by the Radio Club of Calcutta, in late 1923. In erstwhile Ceylon, the British commissioned a feasibility study to assess the potential for local radio broadcasts, in 1921. Edward Harper, a radio enthusiast, was appointed as the Chief Engineer of the Ceylon Telegraph Office and was able to generate enough support to initiate the Ceylon Wireless Club, comprising radio advocates who suggested the usage of existent wireless technology in the island, for broadcast transmission (Brady 2005). The first experimental broadcast took place at the YMCA building, in Colombo, in 1924. Meanwhile, the Bombay Radio Club initiated broadcast in the subcontinent, as also in Madras, by the Madras Presidency Radio Club. According to Shortwave Central,6 in 1925, in addition to the radio broadcasting station at the Telegraph Office, a long-wave transmitter at the Colombo Radio Station VPB was also modified for radio broadcasting. Towards the end of 1925, the British governor, Sir Hugh Clifford, officially inaugurated Colombo Radio (with the call name Colombo Calling). The following year, the first medium-wave transmitter of 1¾ kW for radio broadcasting was established at Welikada, a suburb of Ceylon. These developments in South Asia were congruent with the geostrategic and commercial currents of the time, as enunciated above. However, a hitherto unexplored connection with regard to the subcontinent was the introduction of dyarchy, by the Montague-Chelmsford reforms of 1917 and the Government of India Act of 1919. These developments were, for  Pinkerton (2008) provides information on Gianchand Motwane, an early radio entrepreneur and enthusiast and founding member of the Bombay Presidency Radio Club, as having first recorded a radio transmission in the Indian subcontinent, in 1920. He points to www. chicago-radio.net, which reads, ‘Mr. Motwane rigged up his own radio-transmitter and started broadcasting under the sign of “2-KC” through the Bombay Presidency Radio Club Ltd., of which he was one of the founder-members. He thus became the first person to embark on broadcasting in India’. 6  The blog tracks broadcast and amateur radio. The blogpost, ‘The Story of Radio Broadcasting in Ceylon’ was accessed on September 21, 2016. 5

94 

P. RAGHUNATH

the first time, aimed at progressively allowing provincial governance towards the realisation of self-government as part of the British Empire. Wilson (2003) writes about the British colonial rule in Ceylon, reflecting on the strategic manner in which communal representation was implemented on the island. ‘A further factor was the need for the colonial power to be kept informed of the needs and views of the peoples it governed. However elementary their structure, Britain nevertheless utilised legislative and executive councils which were communally constructed and based on a restricted franchise. In this way representatives of the Sinhalese, Ceylon Tamil, European, and, later, Muslim and Indian communities met together to deliberate and then to advise the colonial governor. The experience of such political meetings engendered a togetherness and an elitism held by a sense of ‘Englishness’ among the westernised middle class. Governor Sir Henry McCallum created a legislative seat for this class in 1911 designated “the Educated Ceylonese Member”’, he writes. The formation of the Ceylon National Congress in 1919, which was headed by a Ceylon Tamil, led to the continuity of communal representation in the reforms of 1921 and 1924, he adds (2003: 172). These connections become important in aiding an understanding of the constructions of broadcasting among the various actors involved in administration of the colonial broadcasting policy apparatus—the set of actions, and what could now be construed as policy manoeuvres, that were part of propelling a distinct set of ideas and implications for broadcasting in South Asia. Analogous to these developments was the formation of the British Broadcasting Company, as a Limited Company and a joint venture between the British and the Americans, in 1922. This venture incorporated the business interests of Marconi’s company and other American businesses like General Motors and AT&T.  Pinkerton (2008) points to Briggs’ (1985) work on the early years of the BBC and writes, ‘The remit of the company was to establish a national network of radio transmitters— by integrating many of the transmitting stations owned by the shareholding companies—and to provide, critically, a national broadcasting service’ (2008: 169). The early experiments with the airwaves were, as evinced above, conducted in an entrepreneurial spirit of diverse proportions. On the one hand, commercial interests were key in formulating the US system of broadcasting. Similarly, European experiences denoted radio being driven by geostrategic considerations. On the other hand, an entrepreneurial

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

95

spirit is evident amongst those who experimented with smaller test transmission and trials in South Asia. The British broadcasting, however, was to undergo a shift in identity, with the recommendations of the Crawford Committee on Broadcasting, in 1925. Prior to this, John Reith had already been propagating ideas on public service broadcasting. The Committee had proposed, writes Pinkerton (2008: 171), a trusteeship model of a public corporation. This led to the British Broadcasting Corporation becoming a public broadcaster, in 1926. This was also the time when the Labour strike took place, prompting the government to attempt using the BBC to quell the strikers. However, Reith is said to have blockaded such efforts, disallowing the broadcaster from turning into a tool for state propaganda, despite fears of a ‘Bolshevik-type revolution’ (Briggs 1961). As Pinkerton (2008: 170–171) notes, Reith’s active lobbying, at various stages, by repeatedly invoking the ‘British model’ founded on ideas of a centralised, licensed monopoly is a recurrent trope in the subcontinent’s pre-independence broadcasting history. By 1926, the British government had grown wary of the manner in which various radio experiments in the subcontinent were setting up and shutting shop rapidly and felt the need for formalising the nascent broadcasting system. Reith’s role as an actor in pushing for certain norms and ideas for the broadcasting setup in South Asia would only become more pronounced in the following years. Chandrika Kaul (2014) talks about how the need to regulate radio and actions flowing from that stand would become a leitmotif, with concerns being expressed over a possible unrestricted monopoly. She writes that this was expressed by the Department of Industries and Labour that, ‘regulated control is essential to the success of broadcasting’ (2014: 126). She further writes about how the Government of India (GoI) informed the India Office and quotes the Contract of Agreement between Indian Broadcasting Company (IBC) and S/S, September 13, 1926, pp. 714–721, annexure A. encl. in C. McWatters, GoI, to Under S/S, January 27, 1927, L/PJ/8/118, IOLR as, ‘provision has thus been more for complete control by the Government’. She also indicates that the interwar years saw a general decline in capital investment, also affecting the widespread propagation of radio during the time. She reiterates that private commercial broadcasting failed in the subcontinent, owing to the undercapitalisation of the IBC.

96 



P. RAGHUNATH

1927–1930: Milestones, Miscues, and Manoeuvres

The year 1927 emerged an important year for radio internationally and in South Asia. Outside of the region, three significant developments took place. The US saw the promulgation of the Radio Act of 1927, which paved way for commercial broadcasting in the country, supported advertising revenue (McChesney 1993). Britain saw the setting up of the BBC as a non-profit public service broadcasting monopoly (ibid.). The same year, the World Radio Conference held in Washington saw private companies push for ‘an agreement that allowed them to continue developing their use of the spectrum, without regard to possible signal interference for other countries’ (Thussu 2000). Thussu quotes Luther (1988) to suggest that by inscribing their demands into an international treaty, the companies had a direct role in formulating international law, ‘including the principle of allocating specific wavelengths for particular purposes’ (2000: 26). The conference also reinforced the domination of the US and Europe on international radio spectrum. Back in South Asia, 1927 saw the discontinuation of the Madras unit, which was handed over to the Madras Corporation. However, the same year, the Bombay and Calcutta Radio Clubs joined hands to form the Indian Broadcasting Company (IBC), as a commercial broadcasting venture, with Marconi being a major stakeholder. This was the first such venture that was a culmination of the preceding years of experiments with broadcasting, writes Pinkerton (2008). He draws on Gupta’s work on post-First World War economics of British India (2002) to indicate the broadcasting policy adopted by the Government of India (GoI) in New Delhi. This policy was guided by the Retrenchment Committee, which was focussed on reducing post-War spending. Even as Reith lobbied and made a direct petition (Reith) for a British public service model for the subcontinent in the India Office back in London, the finance officers at the GoI proposed to provide support for the application made by the IBC, as a monopoly. However, Pinkerton (2008) points to ‘a potential rift’ and divergent viewpoints emerging between the India Office and the GoI, citing the correspondence between Lord Birkenhead, the Secretary of State for India, and Lord Irwin, the Viceroy of India. Reith’s lobbying, he says, seemed to have found some favour with the London office. Pinkerton (2008: 171) cites a private letter enlisted IOR/L/PO/3/1: Broadcasting Policy and dated July 15, 1926, from Lord Birkenhead to Lord Irwin that reads as follows:

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

97

Though we can hardly expect in India anything like the phenomenal growth of broadcasting that has taken place in this country in the last few years; there seems no reason why it should not advance fairly rapidly, and if properly handled might eventually have a profound effect in a country where means of wide and rapid dissemination of news are now so limited. If broadcasting can be made to reach the villager in his own language, the assistance which would be afforded to Government, provided a proper control over the programme is exercised, in spreading accurate information and combating dangerous unfounded rumours would be great.

Analysing this piece of communication, Pinkerton (2008: 172) cites another identical internal memorandum enlisted IOR/L/P&J/8/118: Broadcasting in India: Policy, and dated July 15, 1926, that had been circulated within the India Office in London. He suggests that Birkenhead’s concerns in the letter above stemmed from growing wariness within the India Office with respect to the geostrategic and political potential that radio broadcasting could have in the subcontinent, especially in the remote Frontier Provinces. As a response, Lord Irwin wrote, in a private letter on the same subject, enlisted IOR/L/PO/3/1 and dated September 9, 1926: Up to the present day the policy of the Government has been to leave broadcasting to develop naturally under private enterprise. (ibid.)

Consequentially, the agreement between the GoI and the IBC was granted in September 1926, as a commercial Indian enterprise, with a five-­ year monopoly. In Broadcasting in India: Report on the Progress of Broadcasting in India (1939), Lionel Fielden, India’s first Controller of Broadcasting, wrote about Lord Irwin’s inaugural speech at the first radio broadcast station in the subcontinent: The Viceroy Lord Irwin, addressing the gathered crowds and an expectant wireless audience, heralded this “new application of science” as a blessing and a boon of real value to the far-flung populations who would be brought within earshot of the IBC’s output.

With the coming of the IBC which held the monopoly, all other experimental and amateur broadcasting units had to shut down. During this time, Reith continued to connect with British businesspersons who were interested in selling radio equipment and were alert to the potential in the probable new market in the subcontinent. Even as these shifts in the

98 

P. RAGHUNATH

broadcasting policy were aimed at the urban population, there were parallel notions emerging on radio broadcasting in the villages of the subcontinent. Zivin (1998) draws attentions to what she terms, the Guardians7 and the Gandhians, both of which were groups that focussed on the Village as the site that held together Indian tradition. These developments may be seen in the backdrop of the Simon Commission of 1927, the Nehru Report of 1927 calling for self-government with Dominion Status, and the call for Purna Swaraj or Complete Independence, by the nationalist movement in 1930. The Guardians were the British officials who felt a sense of being custodians towards their subjects and saw villages as idyllic units of tradition that was mired in ‘backwardness’ and ‘social ills’. Zivin (1994) cites a ‘Minutes of an informal conference of representatives of Departments of Government of India’, enlisted Home (Pol) 217/27 and dated August 8, 1927, to suggest that the IBC could start relaying educational programmes to villages via community receivers, from the Bombay and Calcutta units. The conference minutes reveal, as quoted by Zivin, that ‘news and discourses in local vernaculars, and songs and instrumental music’, could be overseen by the local governments, and the control over broadcasting content would ultimately lie in the hands of the government. Zivin (1994: 116) draws attention to how the Home Department, among other government departments, was anxious over the airing of content over independent units. She goes on to say that the conservative central administration also did not want to spend money on costly social good experimentation. However, the government could not refute independent educational programmes since education was under the provincial list, as per the 1919 Act that had inscribed dyarchy. Meanwhile, in London, retired ICS officers and officials who had a romantic vision for the village in the subcontinent came together to form the Indian Village Welfare Association. This parallel development of village-related broadcasting is described further ahead. Radio also made its way into Nepal, in 1929, when the Nepalese Rana monarchy procured radio sets for the royal family and their close circuit of friends. However, their listening habits are not clearly known (Banerjee and Logan 2008). Meanwhile, the IBC was to last only three years, for the station failed to become financially operable. Apart from being seriously undercapitalised by the GoI, as admitted by Eric Dunstan, a former BBC 7  Zivin draws this moniker from Philip Mason’s ‘The Men Who Ruled India: The Guardians’, published in 1954.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

99

employee who took charge of broadcasting in the subcontinent (Pinkerton 2008: 174), the company also failed to garner enough purchasers of radio licenses and to cater to a potential subscriber base spread across the length and breadth of the subcontinent. Ultimately, the IBC was pronounced officially bankrupt, and the GoI stepped in to buy off the company and place it under the control of the Department of Labour and Industry (Fielden 1939). Pinkerton makes a crucial point about this process, indicating this to be a major shift in the government’s broadcasting policy. Since the end of the First World War, and the subsequent experimentation with the spread of radio, the British colonial government’s policies, he says, were hinged on considerations by the post-War Entrenchment Committee. Now, the IBC became a wing of the government and assumed an identity that would almost satiate Reith’s ideas on broadcasting—as a public service (2008: 175). The dialogue between Lord Birkenhead and Lord Irwin, the role of John Reith, Lord Irwin’s speech, and the shift in the colonial government’s stance, all go on to highlight: (1) the diverse considerations that went into the formulation of a broadcasting policy between the India Office and GoI, for broadcasting in the subcontinent; (2) the invocation of certain notions associated with radio broadcasting, many of which would become established as norms for the South Asian broadcasting enterprise; (3) the multiple temporalities that existed, glimpsed through the divergent locations and experiences of various groups concerned with modern radio broadcasting; (4) constructions of the South Asian listener populace by various elites in India and Britain; and (5) the contextual realities of pursuing radio broadcasting in the subcontinent. To be sure, these analytic conjectures should be seen in the larger geostrategic and fiscal environment of the first decade since the culmination of the First World War. These deliberations on norms set in motion by colonial broadcasting would continue to recur at various junctures of the region’s tryst with broadcasting. 

1929–1935: Imperium and the Village

As noted earlier, the end of the first decade of radio broadcasting in the subcontinent also saw village broadcasting beginning to make an entry. Brayne was an official in the Punjab Province, a key frontal region for the Empire. Writing in 1929, he perceived the village as idyllic units of traditional life, but one wrought with social evils—something that needed British intervention, to be rectified. Zivin (1994: 109) writes, as District

100 

P. RAGHUNATH

Collector of Gurgaon, Brayne implemented the ‘village uplift’ project, aimed at agriculture reform, scientific ‘selection’ of seeds and cattle, uplift of village girls who would learn ‘home science’ to maintain their homes well, and so on. She calls him the ‘progenitor of both, of post-war “development” schemes and of the Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s’ (ibid.). As a pioneer in the area of village broadcasting and publicity, Brayne was joined by Hardinge, who was part of various orientalist societies8 and was also keenly interested in similar British paternalist programmes of radio usage. He began an amateur station at the YMCA in Lahore, in 1931, as part of remaking village India. Strickland was another retired ICS officer in London, who was interested in radio broadcasting, also in Palestine and East Africa. He held the opinion that village broadcasting would help the local government make a close connection with the mentality and the language of their community audience (1994: 120). This group, also part of the Indian Village Welfare Association (IVWA), saw the village as the backbone of India, where the peasant masses needed to be enlightened through education, news, and emergency information. Zivin suggests that the wireless was seen as the ‘miracle of the West’, writing about their construction of ‘peasant India’. Interestingly, the British Home department was attached to the publicity office, a fact that was ridiculed as antagonistic to the principle of Indianisation of the bureaucracy, which was set in motion after the First World War. The public opinion in the subcontinent saw it as a means of surveillance (1994: 35–36). Coatman, the conservative head of the Directorate of Publicity and Information, felt that broadcasting ought to be under the control of the centre, since he feared it would be used for anti-imperial purposes. Beyond these constructs of the idyllic village that ensconced tradition, the need for helping the masses emerge out of their haplessness, the radio being seen as the injector of modernity, and the emphasis on the centrality of censoring and monitoring such broadcasting, there also existed the notion of safeguarding the public space. Zivin (1994: 122) observes that, in Britain, the coming of radio broadcasting meant that listening became a domestic habit, in one’s private space. However, it was felt that this could not be extrapolated to the subcontinent, since it would not fit into the peasant society. The author also notes that a BBC magazine article that appeared in 1927 reflected on the role played by radio in domesticating 8  Orientalist societies and publications like The Asiatic Review started gaining importance since the establishment of the Indian National Congress, in 1885.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

101

the listening context in Britain, as a check against mob mentality that may play havoc in times of anti-war and revolutionary sentiments. ‘A different model was required, more appropriate to peasant India. Rural broadcasting was to be heard out in the open, as was the necessary correlate of having but a single receiver, but rather than being a limitation this technological practicality intersected with official convictions about the primacy of public space’, writes Zivin (1994: 123). These constructions of the peasant folk of the subcontinent also reveal the construction of the spatiality of broadcasting, which in itself was also linked to the economic contexts across geographies. The urban space that inhabited the Anglophile elites who could purchase radio licenses and access radio broadcasting is contrasted with constructions of the rural and its despondent populace who could be connected with, via uplift programming. The imperium was imprinted on the idyllic village, only made more obvious by a BBC memo on Indian broadcasting, enlisted IOR L/I/l/445 and dated September 26, 1928, which suggested that the British had borrowed the communal listening model from Soviet Russia but did not impose it as state propaganda. Zivin quotes the memo, saying ‘The one great difference between Russian and Indian conditions, the BBC warned, was that “in the latter the hand of the Government must not be obvious”’. Even as these experiments in the countryside inducted broadcasting norms that would find continuity years later, the Indian State Broadcasting Service (ISBS), which was formed after the colonial government’s takeover of the IBC, was beginning to cause worry due to low licensing of radio sets. The Great Depression of 1929 had raised concerns in the Department of Labour and Industry over the potential in wireless broadcasting, Pinkerton (2008: 176) writes. He indicates that while they wanted to close it down, the Federation of British Industry was concerned over losing out to foreign commercial broadcasters, like those from the US, especially after they were convinced of the potential market in the subcontinent, by Reith. This situation began to change with the initiation of the BBC Empire Service in 1932, which brought further changes to the broadcasting landscape in the subcontinent. Catering to Anglophiles in urban areas, comprising both educated Indians and the English, the Empire service led to the increase in the number of radio licenses in the subcontinent. However, Fielden (1939) suggested that though the Empire service succeeded in attracting the Anglophiles, it did little to reach out to the masses. Concomitantly, what the Empire service was successful in doing was integrating the colonies, provinces, and dominions in the

102 

P. RAGHUNATH

subcontinent and beyond to the soundscape of the British Empire (Pinkerton 2008: 178). H. R. Luthra (1986) talks about the installation of community receivers, which took place in the early 1930s. Pon. Thangamani (2000) writes that there seems to be a contention as to whether this was initiated in Bhiwandi in Thana District, in 1933 (Luthra 1986: 324), or by the Corporation of Madras, in 1930 (Thangamani 2000: 135). By 1939, the number of radio licenses in the subcontinent had increased ten-fold, marking the second decade of radio broadcasting well above the first. However, 1935 brought in a marked shift in British governance of the subcontinent. The Government of India Act of 1935 replaced dyarchy promulgated by the previous Act of 1919, allowing for provincial government, which was put in place by the elections held in 1937. 

1934–1941: Provincialising Radio

Pinkerton (2008: 182) claims that the BBC had well gone beyond its role as the ‘proprietor of Empire broadcasting’, in selecting Eric Dunstan to take charge of the IBC or in advancing rural broadcasting in the subcontinent. John Reith, as the proponent of public broadcasting and the actor behind lobbying for the IBC, also established contact with Viceroy Willingdon and had pushed for state broadcasting in the subcontinent. The latter was more than amenable; in 1934, he asked for suggestions for a suitable candidate to take charge of the ISBS. Pinkerton also narrates the contestation between the Home department in the India Office and the GoI, on the one hand, and the Willingdon, on the other. In a letter addressed to Reith, enlisted BBC WAC E1/896/2 and dated September 7, 1934, Willingdon suggested, among other things expected of the candidate taking charge of the ISBS, ‘He will need great tact, and a complete sympathy with the Indian point of view and with Indian aesthetic standards which may at first be strange to him’. The Home department found objection with this, with the GoI’s Director of Public Information writing to his counterpart in the India Office in a letter enlisted BBC WAC E1/896/2: The man we need as our Controller of Broadcasting is someone with an adaptable mind, who is capable of feeling at home in India and being keenly interested in her problems, but we definitely want to avoid a man with ‘a complete sympathy with the Indian point of view’ as I fear this phrase might

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

103

be interpreted in the BBC offices. Personally, I would prefer what might be described as ‘a concealed die-hard’. (Pinkerton 2008: 183)

This very real contestation between concerns of the Empire over relinquishing degrees of control over the subjects and the need to engage with them, a recurrent leitmotif in policy, was to continue well into the postcolonial milieu with state concerns over national security becoming the raison d’etre. Zivin cites a note by Coatman, at the North Regional BBC on ‘Broadcasting in India’, enlisted Home (Pol) 240/27 and dated July 28, 1934, where he states that the radio should be a ‘master unifying element’, paving way to a ‘homogenous Indian nation’ (1994: 102). The author suggests that broadcasting was ‘more imagined than actual, before the Second World War’ (ibid.). In 1934, Reith had himself nurtured ambitions of heading the ISBS and found Lord Willingdon amenable to his ideas. However, that was limited to hosting a BBC official to take charge of the ISBS. Reith’s idea of public service was drawn from the ‘Victorian ideal of public service and the emergent public culture of the inter-war years’, writes Zivin (1994: 104), quoting Scannel and Cardiff (1991). Lionel Fielden of the BBC was deputed as the First Controller of Broadcasting of the ISBS, in 1935. What follows is a glimpse into his perception and constructions of radio broadcasting in the subcontinent, as gleaned from his autobiographical work, ‘The Natural Bent’ (1960), and the ‘Report on the Progress of Broadcasting in India’ (1939) that he had authored upon the completion of his five-year stint with what had by then become the All India Radio. The Government of India Act of 1935, paving way for provincial government, placed broadcasting under the concurrent list. This indicated that the central government could not officially police provincial radio units, unless in an authoritarian fashion. Zivin (1994: 138) outlines the deliberation on allowing provinces the access to airwaves, and on qualifying the nature of the access, in fine detail. She goes on to talk about the fear in the colonial government, of the popularity of the Indian National Congress and the rising tide of nationalism. The Act of 1935, by allowing for provincial broadcasting, also translated into meaning that provinces that had overwhelmingly voted in favour of the nationalists would be able to broadcast their politics over radio. This, the colonial government, was highly uncomfortable with and was mulling over strategies to lock down any potential for mobilisation. Fielden, Zivin (1994) writes, was quite steeped into Reithian ideals when he took charge of the ISBS, but soon found

104 

P. RAGHUNATH

common cause with the nationalists in the subcontinent. He made friends with Gandhi, Nehru, and Sarojini Naidu, the communists and the industrialists, artists and cultural groups, she writes, and while they were sympathetic to his ideas of broadcasting their political ideals on the radio, they were very reluctant to utilise what they saw as an institution for Imperial propaganda. What may be called proxy-policy manifestations, like advisory committees that would hold up the government’s stance, were being considered—something that Zivin calls an indigenous Imperial feature. On the other hand, what she calls operative strategies were also an option, wherein implementing an excessively strong central broadcasting network could divest the provinces of air space and discourage local broadcasting. Zivin (1999) identifies Fielden to be subversive actor in the colonial policy apparatus, who emerged from the offstage (Goffman 1959), emerging as a democratising agent. Pinkerton (2008: 188) quotes Fielden’s (1939) narration of how the ISBS changed to All India Radio, in 1936. Fielden wrote: I cornered Lord Linlithgow after a Viceregal banquet, and said plaintively that I was in great difficulty and needed his advice. (He usually responded well to such an opening). I said I was sure that he agreed with me that the ISBS was a clumsy title. After a slight pause, he nodded his long head wisely. Yes, it was rather a mouthful. I said that it was perhaps a pity to use the word broadcasting at all, since all Indians had to say ‘broadcasting’—broad for them was an unpronounceable word. But I could not, I said, think of another title; could he help me? ‘Indian State’, I said was a term which, as he knew, hardly fitted into the 1935 Act. It should be something general. He rose beautifully to the bait, ‘All India’? I expressed my astonishment and admiration. The very thing. But surely not ‘Broadcasting’? After some thought he suggested ‘Radio’? Splendid, I said—and what beautiful initials’. The Viceroy concluded that he had invented it, and their was no more trouble. His pet name must be adopted. Thus All India Radio was born. (sic)

This description illustrates Certeau’s idea of tactical efforts that chip off at the fortified state’s strategic governance, aiding the process of democratisation. However, Zivin suggests that broadcasting in the subcontinent was left short-changed in comparison to its counterpart in Britain, due to the colonial government’s perceived imperilled security situation in the subcontinent, which a liberal radio apparatus would only accentuate. She writes, ‘The critical difference between the BBC and All India Radio was that the former had been turned over to a putatively independent trust

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

105

while the latter was in the tenacious grip of a declining imperial state’ (1994: 137). The 1937 elections, for the first time, allowed the subjects to vote for leaders of their own choice, and not government-appointed ones. Fielden wished to provide space for the election coverage on AIR, since the political activity was legitimate and permitted by the colonial government. The government, on the other hand, was very critical of the idea, sending him internal memos instead, expressing extremely displeasure with his subversive activities (Zivin 1999: 214). It was also in 1937 that an ‘Interim Report of a Committee on Broadcasting Services in the Colonies’ was published, alluding to the radio’s role in promoting ‘advanced administration’, catering to local and Imperial interests (Potter 2012: 82). Fielden was critical of the ‘nepotism and obsequiousness that he felt permeated Indian public life’ (1999: 208), that he saw as ‘very old traditions that British rule had done nothing but perpetuate; however, Fielden could not abide them in his studios. Insisting against all evidence to the contrary in India that broadcasting was an art, not a bureaucracy, he was determined to prohibit “the rise of clerks who knew nothing about Programmes”’ (ibid.). Even as he laid claim to liberal appeals of broadcasting, the Report of 1939 provides an insight into his perception of the sound and listening cultures of the subcontinent. The section on ‘Programmes’, Fielden describes the many political considerations that went into radio programming in the subcontinent and the intersections between radio programming and colonial educational and cultural policies. He writes: The difficulties of the programme-maker, always great, are perhaps greater in India than in any country of the world. Language, communalism, poverty, the absence of cheap home-made receivers; the condition of Indian music, the lack of notation and even of generally accepted standards in Indian music; the prejudice still existing in many quarters against all forms of entertainment, and the almost complete absence of any entertainment tradition; the comparatively narrow interests of the average, even literate, man; the state of political unrest all these and many more, are rocks in the path, of radio development in India. (1939: 18–19)

He even goes on to categorise the listeners under 11 broad categories (1939: 67–68), giving us an inkling of the manner in which audiences were codified into categories by the colonial government, for purposes of programming. Nijhawan (2016) writes about the cultural, literary, and

106 

P. RAGHUNATH

linguistic debates over Hindi, Urdu, and Hindustani broadcasts on the All India Radio. The author describes the various considerations that went into the formulation of the language policy for All India Radio. She speaks of the contestation with respect to the language debates of the time, especially language as spoken versus language as polished and constructed speech, suitable for radio. This would have repercussions in post-­ independence India, when the All India Radio and those running it would resort to ‘pure’ language for the medium. Asthana (2019) talks about the role of A.  S. Bukhari in drafting the language policy for the All India Radio, taking charge in 1939. This would see continuation and crystallisation post-independence in India, as the focus would be on formulating a language for the All India Radio. Lelyveld (1994) writes about the policies of administering music on All India Radio. He talks about Fielden saw music as ‘padding’ (1960: 14), since it did not inform or instruct. He saw Indian music as having limited expanse and as not having accepted standards. The AIR also employed two European musicologists, of which Fouldes was interested in bringing together the Indian and European music systems and was interested in exploiting the technicalities of instrumental music without the vocal, in tune with the sensibilities of Indian intonation. Lelyveld talks about how it was Fouldes who banned the harmonium from being aired on the AIR, ‘because its well-tempered scale did such violence to the microtonic intervals characteristic of Indian music’ (ibid.). Lelyveld also sheds light on the decentralisation that was planned for radio, in terms of stations as well as the initial distribution of radio sets. Even as these developments were taking place in the subcontinent, Ceylon was broadcasting its own experiences with Imperial radio. In 1931, the British policy for the governance of the island changed and the Donoughmore Constitution brought in territorial representation, as against the earlier policy of communal representation (Wilson 2003: 172). This enabled the island to become the first in the colonies to institutionalise universal adult suffrage. In 1933, a big receiver station was set up in Colombo to receive the BBC Empire Service and broadcasting from the subcontinent. The following year, experiments with short-wave broadcasting were carried out to reach out to the population in the Northern, Hilly, and Southern provinces. In 1936, a medium-wave transmitter was installed, which helped reach out to a larger population. Shortwave Central suggests that the short-wave and medium-wave transmitters worked in parallel and that the identification for Colombo Calling on the short wave

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

107

was described as bell music. Despite these developments, the short-wave service was shut by 1939, leaving only one radio station on air in Ceylon. These dynamics of radio broadcasting in South Asia would change with the coming of the Second World War, when radio became an important actor in defining the contours of public opinion-building and propaganda. Fielden’s tenure with the All India Radio also came to an end in 1940, and the war threw South Asia into frenetic activities in support of the Allied powers, of which Britain was a part. 

1938–1948: War and Freedom in the Air

In 1938, after airing out of temporary stations for two years, the All India Radio operated out of permanent stations—the first being set up in Lucknow and the next with the transition of the Madras Corporation’s Broadcasting Services into an AIR station. The year also saw the introduction of the AIR’s shortwave service. Further fortification of the importance of radio occurred in 1939, when the airwaves emerged as a battlespace for the Second World War, with its reverberations heard in South Asia. In September that year, Lord Linlithgow’s radio address announced colonial South Asia’s role on the side of the Allies, in the War. The War years saw radio gain increased prominence as a propaganda tool, by the Allies and the Axis powers. This timescape is characterised by a securitised colonial state apparatus laying claim to the airwaves as a means of advancing its geostrategic imperatives, in a manner more pronounced than in the initial days of radio broadcasting. The traditional approach to securitisation theory (Wæver 1995) postulates that the state becomes the referent object and key actor in carrying out the process of securitisation, turning the focus away from the human security of its peoples. Asthana (2019: 49) talks about how the audience unit was launched for the first time in 1940, since the British were concerned about the popularity of overseas broadcasts by the Soviets and Germans, in Hindustani. They were worried about propaganda and its reach among the masses in the subcontinent. The audience research unit, Asthana says, was modelled on the BBC’s audience unit under the leadership of Reith. The colonial government began the broadcast of the AIR external services, in languages like Arabic and Pushtu, in an effort to reach frontier regions and peoples. Writing about George Orwell’s tryst with war-time broadcasting, Kerr (2002: 474) notes the dynamics of policy and security that propelled broadcasting in a milieu of war-time propaganda and its geostrategic implications. The account illustrates British considerations of

108 

P. RAGHUNATH

the importance of the subcontinent in their war-time pursuits and their reflections in the radio broadcasting policy: The BBC, like the print media, came under the supervision of the Ministry of Information, housed in the University of London Senate House and later to serve as a model for the Ministry of Truth in Nineteen Eighty-Four. Scripts were vetted twice in advance, for policy and security, and a switch censor monitored all broadcasts, ready (at least in theory) to interrupt transmission if there was any deviation from the authorized script. The policy to which broadcasts had to conform, with regard to India, was that it was imperative for Indians to remain loyal to the King-Emperor in this time of crisis, and especially after the entry of Japan into the war with the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, which placed all Britain’s eastern possessions under threat.

Diya Gupta’s work, ‘The Raj in Radio Wars’ (2019), is very useful in helping understand the vying by the Allied and Axis powers, for Indian listenership and influencing of opinion in the colony. She dwells on the BBC Monitoring Service’s9 transcripts and narrates that two monitoring enterprises had been set up—the Far Eastern Bureau Monitoring Service in Delhi and another one directed by the GoI’s Department of Information and Broadcasting. The author draws our attention to the transmissions from Germany, which were influential among listeners who owned radio sets in British India. Similarly, Chandrika Kaul (2014) talks about how in 1943 the new studios of the All India Radio that were set up in Delhi ‘created the “largest centre of broadcasting activity in the East”’10 (2016: 125). Meanwhile in Nepal, radio was gaining popularity. Banerjee and Logan (2008) indicate that Kathmandu had about 500 radio sets in circulation, at the beginning of the war. However, the Rana rulers confiscated all the radio sets, since they did not want the people to listen in to adversarial war updates signalling the loss of the British against the Germans. This would, they indicate, have meant loss of power enjoyed by the Rana rulers. Nonetheless, as it eventually became clearer that the British would be part of the victorious side, the radio sets were returned. While this was the scenario in Nepal, which was not directly under British rule, Ceylon emerged a key strategic site and witness to Britain’s propaganda efforts in the subcontinent and the larger South East Asian region, against the 9

 This was initiated from the start of the Second World War.  Kaul (2014) cites an undated official memo, L/I/1/445.

10

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

109

Japanese threat. In 1943, Lord Mountbatten was appointed the Supreme Commander of South East Asia (SCSEA) and operated out of Delhi initially, before shifting the South East Asia Command (SEAC) to the geo-­ strategically well-dispositioned Ceylon where he held command. The SEAC, with its 100 kW short-wave transmitter, was beamed into Burma and surrounding areas, in response to Japan’s expansive efforts in the region (Hitchcock 2011). The Second World War came to an end in 1945, with the victory of the Allied powers. By this time, the AIR ‘was broadcasting in twenty-two languages to the Far East, the Middle-East and Europe’ (Page and Crawley 2001: 45). Page and Crawley (ibid.) also indicate that news and its importance during the war led to it becoming a more centralised function. This was evident in the setting up of a Director of News and External Services, which ensured that it spoke ‘in one voice in all…languages’ (ibid.). Even as the South Asian region emerged as a key site for British war efforts, nationalist movements for independence emerged alongside. In Ceylon, plantation workers and nationalists went on a series of strikes from 1939. The subcontinent saw the Quit India Movement starting and gaining ground in the backdrop of the war, in 1942. South Asia, over the next few years, witnessed an upsurge of nationalist sentiments and an intensification of the move towards decolonisation, especially in the post-war period. In 1945, a Cabinet committee on broadcasting was set up, which ‘came to the conclusion that broadcasting should be seen as a priority for India and for the colonies in the post-war period’ (Page and Crawley 2001: 45), setting the tone for the transition to a postcolonial world that was in order. In 1947, the Indian subcontinent was granted Independence from British colonial rule, partitioned into present-day India and unified East and West Pakistan. In 1948, Ceylon was granted Dominion status within the British Commonwealth. The SEAC was handed over to the Dominion and was renamed Radio Ceylon. The Rana kings of Nepal were overthrown in 1951, by those opposed to the monarchy’s ways, many of whom were in exile and had also participated in the Indian freedom struggle. This 1951 People’s Revolution would set in motion a series of efforts aimed at transitioning towards democracy over the next few decades, in Nepal.

110 

P. RAGHUNATH

Discussion The above narrative account of the utilisation of radio waves in the first half of the twentieth century showcases the co-construction of British colonial radio and its networks, in an era of clamour for resources, warfare, and colonial wrangles for domination and supremacy. Some of the larger themes that emerge from this account would recur throughout South Asia’s tryst with radio broadcasting, in its sundry forms, including community radio. It also provides insight into the strategic and contextual considerations that influenced and propelled policy for broadcasting, as evinced in official communication, but also in deliberative and subversive manoeuvres driven by varied individuals and groups. Braman (2009), in defining media policy, draws attention to the notion of legacy law as orienting the former according to ‘categories established by statutory and regulatory law, separately for each technology’ (Braman 2009: 68). She states that it provides ‘conceptual, rhetorical, and analytical frameworks for policy discourse’ (ibid.) that are useful to study continuities, while becoming ‘legacy’ law since the contextual realities undergo changes. This serves as a useful transitional lens to understand the continuities and changes that would play out in the postcolonies and their radios.

II. Decolonisation and Radio in South Asia: Conjunctures, Changes, and Continuities Adeney and Wyatt (2004), in their work on democratisation in South Asia, identify Decolonisation as a ‘critical juncture’, drawing on Collier and Collier (1991). They contend that though decolonisation was a critical juncture in that it was a departure from entrenched colonial rule, the structures that enabled the transition emerged in the late colonial period. In studying India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, the authors describe the interplay between structure and agency, by analysing political parties and ethnic identities as two variables in democratic transitions in these countries. They suggest that heterogeneity, in these countries, did not preclude democracy and that a shared national identity led to consolidated manoeuvres in these newly formed nation-states seeking to find place in a rapidly decolonising world order. Radio emerges as the site that voices the politics of decolonisation, development, and democratisation in the postcolonies of South Asia.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 



111

Decolonising Radio?: Colonial and Crypto-colonial Legacies of Communication Technologies

Chakravartty and Sarikakis (2006) write about the experiences of the newly decolonised states and their communications systems, wherein leaders sought to use the mass media for nation-building and integration. They write, ‘These national policy objectives were mediated through multilateral institutions and bilateral agreements that set the normative framework for the terms of domestic “development”’ (2006: 26–27). They further argue the ‘Third World’11 was integrated into the international system of development and modernisation, as defined by the West, during the Fordist era (2006: 30). The Bretton Woods institutions comprising bodies like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, formed in 1944 as a result of the Marshall Plan in the aftermath of the Second World War, played a role in offering expertise and funding, in order to enable the development of the ‘Third World’. The four-point focus of Truman’s inaugural speech of 1949 illustrated this commitment to ‘world economic recovery’ and ‘for making the benefits of…scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas’. This discourse of modernisation was congruently visible in the media and communication landscape in the postcolonies. Alhassan and Chakravartty (2011) cite Nicholas Dirks’ work on the codification of indigenous knowledge by the colonial state (2008), as also Mitchell (2002), in advancing the claim that technology emerges as the site that codifies continuities between the colonial and the postcolonial state. Martín-Barbero (1993) and Curran and Park (2000) write about the postcolonial state’s appropriation of communication technologies, for their mandate of development and modernisation, drawn from a Western teleological understanding of a linear development path that they would have to follow and uphold. This interplay between modernity and the postcolonial condition rendered the states in the ‘Third World’ negotiators between Western modernity and their own ‘particularities’. What follows is an exploration of the individual trajectories that radio broadcasting took in each of the countries under study, in consonance with the larger socio-economic and political landscapes in which South Asia’s encounter with Western modernity and the region’s own 11  The coinage, Thussu (2000) writes, was itself a product of the Cold War and was put forth by French economic historical Alfred Sauvy, in 1952, even as the world saw division between the East and the West Blocs.

112 

P. RAGHUNATH

postcoloniality occurred. These individual trajectories are laid out as narrative historiographies, interspersed with analytic annotations that allow for reflexive considerations of the politics of decolonisation as evinced in South Asia’s radio governance. India  947–1964: Partition, Planning, and Modernisation 1 The partition of British India into present-day India and unified Pakistan (inclusive of present-day Bangladesh) brought with it the division of AIR stations, as well. In 1947, the newly independent Indian state inherited six radio stations at Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, Madras, Lucknow, and Tiruchirapally, while Pakistan was bequeathed three stations at Peshawar, Dacca, and Lahore (Luthra 1986). Luthra (ibid.) writes that eventually, ‘the two countries had to bargain hard at the international level for the division of “frequencies” earlier allotted to undivided India’, in relaying the story of the partition of the AIR. The author also talks about the plans for expansion of the AIR, after partition, with Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as the Minister for Information and Broadcasting, and related difficulty in procuring transmitters from abroad. Jeffrey (2006: 211) writes about Patel being a staunch Gandhian, replete with the ‘puritanical ethic’ that went with his ideas around broadcasting. He also goes on to write about the setting up of special broadcasting units to address the refugee crisis that had precipitated as a result of the Partition. He also draws attention to the status of the radio stations in Jammu and Srinagar, set up in 1947 and 1948, respectively, and operated by the Jammu and Kashmir government. ‘This situation changed in 1954 when, as a further step towards the integration of Jammu and Kashmir in the Union of India, Communications were handed over to the Government of India’, he writes. In 1948, Nehru had advocated for an AIR that would become an autonomous corporation eventually, instead of following the BBC model, in the Constituent Assembly (Verghese 2010: 259). After 1950, India entered a planned economy, with broadcasting slowly finding space in the budgets (Luthra 1986). Sengupta (2001) writes about the Nehruvian model of development, which prioritised industrialisation and a planned economy, in order to traverse the role industrialisation played in the developed Western economies. ‘Those who wanted agriculture and rural development to be given the first priority in our

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

113

development policy recognised the importance of industrialisation. Similarly, those who, like Nehru, regarded industrialisation as the basis of our development policy would often quite reasonably argue for policies prioritising agricultural development’, he claims, outlining the ‘scientific spirit’ that was the underpinning of Nehru’s vision for development (Sengupta 2001: 13). Even as Indian leaders focussed on articulating a vision for the development of the country, also reflected in the communication and information policy, international and multilateral organisations of various kinds also entered the fray in the form of foreign technical assistance programmes. Manyozo (2012) talks about the various schools of thoughts in media, communication, and development and points to the Indian School of development and communication drawing on the funding offered by the Bretton Woods School when required. He cites the UNESCO’s Rural Radio Listeners’ Forums (Charcha Mandals) initiative, implemented in Poona, in the 1950s. He draws on the works of Rogers et al. (1977) and writes: ‘By 1959, the Indian government introduced the rural radio forum project on a national scale. These forums became a national programme incorporated in the country’s development plans, with an objective of establishing 15,000 radio forums by March, 1966’ (2012: 37). Meanwhile, from 1950 to 1952, R. R. Diwakar, who was a junior minister under Patel held the post of Minister of I&B, was ‘more committed to Gandhian ideals than Gandhi himself’ (Jeffrey 2006: 211). After him, the post was held by B. V. Keskar, who came to be known as an autocratic official, with a taste for high culture and did not prefer entertaining ideas that did not find agreement with his. B. G. Verghese, in his autobiography, ‘First Draft: Witness to the Making of Modern India’, writes about how the three-language formula was neither honestly nor imaginatively pursued, at least not on AIR. He described how Keskar’s preference for pure Hindi, rather than popular, pan-Indian Hindi, would only suggest that the government simply did not try (2010: 54). Jeffrey (ibid.) talks about how Keskar resisted the idea of a commission of inquiry into broadcasting, till the end of his tenure, in 1962.  964–1995: Quest for Space and Autonomy 1 Indira Gandhi, who succeeded him, appointed the Chanda Committee, in 1964, to inquire into the state of Indian broadcasting, not convinced with the Ministry’s functioning. He cites the Chanda Committee Report (1966: 51), which said, ‘successive Ministers usurped the policy-making

114 

P. RAGHUNATH

functions of the directorate-general and started interfering even in matters of programme planning and presentation’ (Jeffrey 2006: 212). Verghese (2010) writes about his role as Press Secretary to Indira Gandhi in 1966. He writes, ‘she…spoke about influencing information policy in a positive direction’, to which he asked for ‘full access to information…need to avoid crossing lines with the established information agencies in the government’ (2010: 82). He also narrates instances of Gandhi participating in roundtables with experts on varied subjects. He talks about instances of these experts conveying their anxiety over becoming neo-luddites and missing the ‘second industrial revolution’, which pertained to the introduction of automation and computers. Verghese recalls the suggestions made by Dr. Vikram Sarabhai, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission, during one of the meetings, that India was well equipped to develop exports in atomic energy, the international market for which would be on an upswing by 1975 (2010: 110). It was as a follow-up to this that the Scientific Advisory Committee to the Cabinet (SACC) was revived. Even as these developments took place on the national front, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) that was formed by the G-77 in 1964 demanded fairer economic distribution between the Global North and South, reflected in deliberations within UN bodies of trade and finance. Verghese’s book also has a chapter called ‘A Mandate for Change’, where he talks about his work on a prospective policy guide for Gandhi, just ahead of the important 1967 elections. In this document, he writes about how he advocated for a shift in the way the Indian National Congress functioned, calling for ‘the election of the leader directly by the parliamentary party, rather than through the usual Congress process of “consultation” and “consensus”’ (2010: 114). He also critiqued the form socialism had taken, in the country, and writes, ‘Past policy was not dogma that could defy the laws of growth and change. “Nehru reduced to (an ideological) Nehruism would become the mumbo jumbo of dogmatists” whereas “we have to own our responsibility and make our own opportunity”’ (2010: 115). In the same document, he also called for the appointment of a Lok Pal (national ombudsman), and ‘granting autonomy to the All India Radio with commercial broadcasting and receiver licensing to buttress its revenues’ (2010: 116). He narrates the incident of the then Cabinet Secretary gently letting him know that he should have consulted the various departmental heads before circulating policy notes and writing to the Prime Minister directly. ‘My policy notes and “Mandate for Change”

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

115

had probably attracted ire in some quarters. I agree that I should have been more consultative’, he writes, in a self-reflexive vein (2010: 121). The book also describes the birth of Vividh Bharati, the commercial broadcasting channel of the AIR. He narrates the episode of P. C. Chatterjee, who was the then station director of AIR, Calcutta (and would go on to be the DG, AIR), barring a Communist Party of India (CPI) labour minister in West Bengal from airing his Labour Day speech on May 1, 1967, ‘as he found certain passages objectionable’. In response, the minister chastised the Congress’ grip over the political and judicial systems, creating a stir. The AIR Code was revised as a result. This incident brought about renewed interest in the Chanda Committee’s recommendation for broadcast autonomy, he writes, adding that the Vividh Bharati was set up to counter the popularity of Radio Ceylon, amongst Indian listeners. Two 100-kilowatt short-wave transmitters were set up in Bombay and Madras, for this purpose, in 1957 (Page and Crawley 2001). Verghese also writes about television entering India experimentally with funding from the UNESCO, in 1959. ‘It appeared to open up new frontiers for audio-visual communication as an aid to development and national integration, overcoming literacy and connectivity barriers’, he adds (2010: 125). Finding support from Dr. Sarabhai, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) ‘elbowed out’ the conservative Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB), he writes, setting up the Krishi Darshan programme for farmers and ‘distributing community viewing sets through a terrestrial network, in a hundred villages around Delhi’ (ibid.). In 1968, Verghese wrote a note, ‘The Post of the Information Adviser’, to Gandhi, about reorganising the information wing of the Prime Minister’s Office. In the note, he writes: Information is an integral part of decision-making. However, in a democratic system, people are or should be partners in governance and enjoy a sense of participation and involvement. Information cannot be a closed preserve…The information limbs of the GOI should therefore be associated with the process of decision making and…fully aware of the background of intent/consequences of current decisions…GOI, however, has never had an information policy. Information is still considered something that should be given out in controlled doses after the event and its critical role in preparing the ground for decision making has been imperfectly understood and applied…The I&B Ministry is perhaps the least ‘informed’ in GOI. Secretary I&B’s very legitimate case to be included in the various committees of Secretaries ex-officio and to be posted with all policy papers has been repeatedly turned down. (2010: 138–139)

116 

P. RAGHUNATH

This letter allows for acquaintance with the South Block mindset, even as it illustrates the blocked dialectic of the interactions between the MIB and the Prime  Minister’s  Office (PMO), during the late 1960s. From Verghese’s earlier request for access to information, in ‘influencing information policy in a positive direction’, to tight-fisted control over information that is reminiscent of the colonial era, the Indian government, despite individual efforts to move beyond an ideological orthodoxy that it had become by then, continued to retain the preserve over access to information. Verghese was relieved of his services. He eventually went on to initiate the fortnightly column in The Sunday Magazine called ‘Our Village Chhatera’, producing reportage from Chhatera in Haryana, in 1969. This column, reflecting on various aspects of the rural village, went on till 1975, a year that would emerge significant for two reasons: the promulgation of the emergency in India and for a pioneering experiment in communication technologies, albeit of the modernisation paradigm of development. Meanwhile, a year before that, in 1974, the UN General Assembly tended to the demands of the NAM, calling for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) in a bid to restructure the international order implicating greater equity for the developing world in trade and debt-related areas. The Satellite Instructional Television Experiment (SITE) was launched by the Indian government’s Department of Atomic Energy, in collaboration with the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The NASA provided India with the Applications Technology Satellite-6 (ATS-6) over the Indian Ocean, in exchange for which, knowledge dissemination from the project would be made (Agrawal 1978). The programme, supported by UNESCO, entailed programming made over a year on various developmental concerns that the agenda was set for (Thussu 2000). It was jointly implemented by the AIR and the Space Applications Centre (SAC) (Verghese, 250). Chitnis and Karnik (1985: 269) write about the agendas and objectives of SITE: ‘The general objectives of SITE, as mentioned in the Indo-U.S.  Memorandum of Understanding, included the demonstration of the potential value of satellite technology in the rapid development of effective mass communications in developing countries, the acquisition of experience in the development and management of a satellite-based instructional TV system in rural areas, and the stimulation of national development in India. The specific instructional objectives were in the fields of family planning, agriculture, national integration, school education and teacher training’.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

117

Over 2400 villages from six developmentally backward states were divided into 400 clusters, and Direct Reception Systems (DRS) were brought in for community viewing. Chitnis and Karnik (ibid.) write, ‘The programmes were made in the four languages involved, and were produced in four studios set up specially for SITE. Villagers in each “cluster” received programmes made specially for them in their own language plus a 30 min “common programme” meant for all viewers and aimed at promoting national integration’. The authors present some key learnings from the experiment and offer ideas for the Indian National Satellite (INSAT-1A) that was launched in 1982, of which the SITE was a forerunner. SITE was followed by the Kheda and Jhabua projects, which focussed on furthering the use of satellite technology in development and education. The year following the completion of SITE, in 1977, the UNESCO set up a Commission under Sean MacBride to study communication problems. Verghese was invited as a member, and he writes: ‘The commission was to look at information flows, see how far these were dominated by the North, and secure more balanced communications. The developing countries of the Third World, recently decolonised, continued to feel dominated by information and cultural flows from the industrially developed nations of the world, while their voices could not be heard’ (2010: 258). This led to the presentation of the MacBride Commission report, ‘Many Voices, One World’, in 1980. The following decade would witness dramatic changes in the world order, ending with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and making way for the liberalisation of the Indian economy, in the wake of the last decade of the twentieth century. Even as these developments occurred at the international level, the emergency had stripped the fourth estate of any power, and the quest for any kind of broadcast autonomy remained a mirage. The Janata Party that was voted to power by the people, overthrowing the Congress government, set up a working group to understand how broadcast autonomy could be achieved. The many recommendations also included a National Broadcasting Trust named Akash Bharati, which would be a non-profit entity and have trustees for news and current affairs, education and extension, and entertainment and culture. Verghese quotes L. K. Advani, who was the then Information and Broadcasting Minister suggesting that they had promised autonomy, but the group had asked for independence (2010: 260). The report enabled the formulation of a modified Prasar Bharati Bill, which could not be passed in the Upper House of the Parliament, and thus came to grinding halt any quest for broadcast

118 

P. RAGHUNATH

autonomy, which would only resurface in 1990 again. The Congress government that came to power in 1980 decided to put on hold any calls for autonomy, instead preferring to commercialise media (Kumar 2003). Kumar (ibid.) suggests that an advisory committee was formed under G. Parthasarathi to look into the restructuring of media organisations in favour of professionalism. A News Policy for Broadcast Media was released in May 1982 in order to structure news coverage, especially pertaining to national development and integration. A few months later, a Working Group on Software for Doordarshan came out with a report called ‘An Indian Personality for Television’ (Pavarala and Malik 2007: 98), drawing attention to Delhi-centricity in the usage of national communication infrastructure. The authors (ibid.) contend that, ‘Neither the recommendations of the Verghese Committee nor those of the Joshi Committee to render radio and television independent and to discourage their misuse by the government were implemented’. Even as this interplay between control over information and communication and the ensuing quest for autonomy characterised India’s postcolonial condition, Sri Lanka’s tryst with broadcasting would take a trajectory consistent with the island-nation’s own experience of independence as a Dominion and then a Republic. Ceylon/Sri Lanka  948–1972: Dominion—Colonial Contract, Commercial Broadcasting, 1 Public Corporation The Soulbury Constitution of 1947 provided the basis for the transfer of power from the colonial government to the sovereign state of Ceylon, with the Reforms Commission allowing for ‘compromise on the distribution of seats between the Sinhala majority and the ethnic minorities, arising from the Ceylon Tamil demand for 50–50 representation in respect of seats for the Sinhalese and the combined minorities in the legislature’ (Wilson 2003: 173). In 1948, the newly independent Dominion of Ceylon inherited a 100-watt transmitter from the British, which the island-nation wanted to use for its own commercial broadcasting. Page and Crawley (2001: 48–49) describe the contestation between the British office and the Dominion’s government, with regard to the substantive ownership of the radio. ‘Britain had an interest in the continuing use of the transmitter to relay BBC broadcasts to the Far East and initially suggested that it

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

119

should remain in British hands and the BBC should run it’, they write. The Dominion, they write, was keen on using it for commercial purposes and would only ‘concede to consult Britain first and would give preference to clients from Britain and other Dominions’ (2001: 49). The authors provide a note, drawing from Livy Wijemanne’s autobiography, A Broadcaster Looks Back, which has an account of how Radio SEAC of the war-times was acquired by Radio Ceylon. They write, ‘Sir Oliver Goonetilleke, Ceylon’s Home Minister, apparently refused to pay rent for it, then demanded it be dismantled and finally shamed the British into giving it to Ceylon without payment’ (2001: 70). The first Minister for Posts and Telecommunications of postcolonial Ceylon, C. Sittampalam, launched a programme to distribute radio sets with the aim of providing popular access to the national broadcasting service. P.  W. S.  Perera (1962), writing about the history and growth of Radio Ceylon, says, ‘Another interesting feature in this rapid growth was the way in which radio gradually entered the village homes. The government too encouraged this by providing nearly 2000 radio sets exempt from the license fee to a number of schools, community centres, rural development societies, hospitals, deaf and blind schools, and similar institutions. Unfortunately, this scheme of distributing free sets among these institutions was stopped by the government on the advice of a report by the Commission on Broadcasting appointed in 1953, as the maintenance of these sets which were mostly of the wet battery type became a heavy burden on the Telegraph Department’. In 1949, the Dominion’s radio was given the call sign, ‘Radio Ceylon’, and a dedicated government department was set up for this purpose. Brady (2005) contends that despite all these developments, radio in Ceylon continued to labour under the shadow of its Dominion status. She quotes Crusz (1998) to suggest that Radio Ceylon continued contracting work to BBC-employed British expatriates, even after independence. The next few years saw the growth of Radio Ceylon, especially as a prominent commercial broadcaster in the larger South Asian region. As part of the Colombo Plan,12 Australian radio expert, Clifford Dodd was recruited to initiate the commercial broadcasting service. Page and Crawley (2001: 12  The Colombo Plan, akin to the Marshall Plan that enabled the reconstruction of warravaged Europe, was a multilateral aid effort in Asia, comprising donor countries like the United Kingdom, the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. It also brought on board leaders of some Asian countries that were part of the Commonwealth of Nations.

120 

P. RAGHUNATH

49–50) write about the work of the Radio Advertisers Society, which was an American organisation that operated out of Bombay. They provide insight into the manner in which Radio Ceylon’s commercial broadcasting was pan-region, narrating the making of programmes in varied Indian languages in the Bombay studios, for broadcast on Radio Ceylon. Citing Nandana Karunanayake’s work, Broadcasting in Sri Lanka (1990), they relate how the Society eventually provided Radio Ceylon with six to seven hours of programming per day, with advertising running into crores of rupees per annum. India’s Ameen and Hamid Sayani worked for the programming branch of the Society and became household names with their music programme, Binaca Geet Mala. The authors elaborate that Radio Ceylon had laid down the guidelines on advertising, and the contractors would negotiate with Indian advertisers and programme producers. Radio Ceylon stood to gain, with All India Radio’s Keskar’s antithetical stance on popular commercial music. Even as these developments on the broadcasting front occurred, the hue of the political scenario in the country would change with developments in 1948–1949, when the United National Party (UNP) government, with support from the All Ceylon Tamil Congress, passed legislations that disenfranchised the citizenship of Indian Tamils, setting in motion political moves that would come to occupy a prominent place in the country’s national politics. Krishna (1999) provides an analytic account of ‘postcolonial insecurities’, in delineating Jayawardena’s role in particular, in the construction of a Sinhala Buddhist identity for the island-nation, in its transformation from Ceylon to Sri Lanka. The shared understanding that the Sinhala Buddhists have been wronged in the four centuries of colonial rule preceding the island’s independence, and that the Tamils of the North and East have got unduly higher proportions of representation, was catalytic in propelling this consolidation of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism. The politics of ethnicity, language, and territory would go on to become important considerations for the broadcasting policy, as well, of the island-nation. The 1950s would only witness further consolidation of these ideas. In 1952, Radio Ceylon got its first Ceylonese director of Broadcasting, M. J. Perera. The following year, a Commission of Broadcasting was set up under the Chairmanship of N. E. Weerasooriya to provide recommendations on various aspects of radio broadcast services, as well as on the feasibility of television. Page and Crawley (2001: 50), drawing from Karunanayake’s (1990: 135–136), indicate that among the submissions to

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

121

the Commission the following: ‘the Sinhala Programme Organiser of Radio Ceylon said that the commercial service had done more damage to Sinhalese culture in two years than 400 years of colonialism; the Buddhist clergy complained about the decline in morals and the increased interest in gambling and racing; university professors claimed that Sinhala was being diluted with too many English words. The Commission was alarmed enough to recommend that commercial broadcasting should be closed down. But the government ignored the recommendation’, they write. The Commission provided recommendations two years hence. The various aspects that the Commission emphasised, among other things: need for an overseas service, initiating the Tamil broadcasting services, stopping the radio set distribution programme on account of non-­availability of liquid batteries, and so on. Almost a decade hence, the Hulugalle Commission would rue that a great opportunity was lost, in ‘the by-passing of the various Advisory Committees appointed as recommended by the Weerasooriya Commission “has contributed, in no small measure, to the lackadaisical state of Radio Ceylon”’.13 In 1956, a coalition of Sinhala-dominated parties won the elections, led by Bandaranaike of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). This development led to the recognition of Sinhala as the sole official language of the country, prompting rioting between the Tamils and the Sinhalese in the East of the island-nation. In 1966, the Hulugalle Commission was appointed to look into the functioning of Radio Ceylon. The Commission held the view that the Radio would perform better when removed from the usual administrative and financial that government bodies are subject to (ibid.). The Commission recommended that Radio Ceylon be made part of a Corporation under five eminent persons. In 1967, Radio Ceylon became a public corporation, as Ceylon Broadcasting Corporation. The then President Premadasa, in his address, outlined the structure and functioning of the Corporation. He suggested that the new body was a move from government-managed Radio Ceylon towards institutionalising a state-­ owned corporation. Placed under the Prime Minister (then Dudley Senanayake), the Corporation would have two wings, that of Information and the Broadcasting Corporation, he said. He added that this reflected the Ceylon government’s focus on both, Information and Broadcasting as separate units. ‘Radio should not only air the policies of the government 13  Quoted in http://www.sundaytimes.lk/080928/FunDay/fundaytimes_2.html; accessed on January 28, 2017.

122 

P. RAGHUNATH

in power, but also assess the views and opinions of the people and make the known to the government’, he stated (Jayasinhe, XX). This Presidential address at the inauguration of the Ceylon Broadcasting Corporation reveals the basic tenets and philosophy of broadcasting in the island-­ nation, as expressed by the then President. The above description illustrates the tugs and pulls of Ceylon’s experience with the demands of its colonial legacy as it played out on radio—the competing epistemes of fairness and entitlements (Krishna 1999) that came to characterise the politics of ethnicity and nationalism, coupled with the island-nation’s status as a Dominion—both of which would take on different trajectories in the 1970s.  972–1977: Republic, Civil Strife, Economic Restructuring 1 The Soulbury Constitution of 1947 had invested in the British Monarch, Executive powers for the island, with Her Majesty as the head of the state of the Dominion of Ceylon. This changed in 1972, when the island-nation became a Republic. Hettige (2010) writes about the transition from colonial domination to the repeated iterations for liberation that are part of postcolonial realities, through Ceylon’s dominion-hood and beyond: ‘As is well documented, the system of social stratification that evolved during the latter part of the British colonial rule was characterized by structural inequities, largely based on the distribution of land rights and access to education and employment. The domination of the colonial economy and society by a privileged, westernized propertied class became the most contentious issue in the immediate aftermath of political independence. Post-­ colonial economic and social policies increasingly sought to address the foregoing inequities’ (2010: 82). The 1970 elections voted into power the Sirimavo Bandaranaike government, which had as an election promise, the drafting of the country’s own constitution. Ceylon, thus, was reconstituted as the Republic of Sri Lanka, eliminating the Monarch’s executive powers and nationalising the landholdings that the Crown previously held. With this transition, the Ceylon Broadcasting Corporation was renamed the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC) and continues to function under the Ministry of Information and Media. The 1970s turned out to be a tumultuous one for the island-nation, with the aggravation of ethnic and class conflicts. Hettige (2010) writes about youth-led insurgencies of two kinds—the Janatha Vimukthi Perumuna (JVP) and the Liberation Tigers for Tamil Eelam (LTTE), outlining the larger contexts that led to their rise. In 1971, the JVP rebellion

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

123

in the Southern region was led by youth inspired by communist and Marxist-Leninist ideologues, who carried out insurrections and intensified their demands for the interests of the proletariat. The uprising triggered state responses in the ambit of media and communication, as well. Jayaratne and De Silva (2012: 4) contend that, ‘in the wake of the insurgency, the communication system of the country was severely disrupted. The government of the day, caught unawares, suddenly found the state radio to be a reliable ally in communicating directly with the public. It was alleged that even the insurgents used the radio without the knowledge of authorities to send coded messages to their cadres’. The authors suggest that these developments impacted the broadcast media policy of the island-nation, by acquainting the government with the electronic media’s vast potential for state propaganda, and in serving as an apology for disallowing the opening up of airwaves for communities, years later. As elucidated earlier in the chapter, articulations around imbalances in the flow of information and communication were beginning to gain ground internationally, around this time. In 1975, a regional conference on ‘Information Imbalance in Asia’, organised by the Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Centre, was held in Kandy. The conference discussions centred around the heavy dosage of information and entertainment flow from the developed countries to the developing world, while the flow from the latter to the former was heavily skewed. Ideas around access to funding and resources were also spoken about (Rao 1975: 69). These contentions would come to occupy centre-stage over the next few decades and play a decisive role in determining forms of media and the politics of policymaking for them. In 1977, the newly elected UNP government abandoned the country’s socialist orientation and opened up the economy for market-oriented reforms. This shift in economic policy would also open up avenues for the entry of diversified international actors, from aid funders for public service broadcasting setups to international development agencies, opening up the Sri Lankan radio sector as well, as narrated in the following chapter. The following year, in 1978, the Constitution of 1972 was replaced by a new one, as per the election manifesto of the UNP, which continues to be in operation and governs media law and policy in the country today. While Ceylon’s transition to Sri Lanka was witness to procedures of colonial transfer as it played out on airwaves, Bangladesh’s radio would voice the country’s quest for liberation, twice over.

124 

P. RAGHUNATH

East Pakistan/Bangladesh  947–1971: Language and Liberation 1 The Partition of 1947 willed Pakistan three radio stations, of which one was operational at Dacca, in East Pakistan. Zulfiqar Bokhari took charge of broadcasting in the newly independent country. He implemented two-­ fold measures—that of setting up a station in the new capital of Karachi and linking it to the three stations inherited by Pakistan, including the one in Dacca, and of setting up a centralised news department for nation-wide bulletins (Page and Crawley 2001: 46–47). Even as the country was reeling under the after-effects of the communal violence that accompanied the Partition, the central government located in West Pakistan made Urdu the national language, provoking a series of reactions in East Pakistan. This led to the launch of the Bengali Language Movement, in 1948, following the removal of Bangla from currencies and stamps. The same year, the singular station in Dhaka was renamed as the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation (from AIR, Dhaka), and later, Radio Pakistan, Dhaka (Islam, ??). The next decade saw little development in radio broadcasting in East Pakistan (ibid.), even as the agitation for the felt lack of due recognition for the Bangla identity and language only became more pronounced. East Pakistan’s radio, however, would emerge as a site that documented these voices of Bengali identity assertion and demand for more autonomy only over the next two decades, juxtaposed against the centralising tendencies of authorities in West Pakistan. The early years saw the rise of the Bangla-­ centric United Front in East Pakistan. In 1954, a state of Emergency was proclaimed, due to the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by the Governor General. The initiation of the One-Unit Policy that brought together four provinces in West Pakistan was in contradiction to the idea of provincial autonomy, on the basis of which the Provincial Assemblies that elected the Second Constituent Assembly were formulated. The Republic, formed in 1956, lasted only two years, during which time numerous political upheavals were witnessed. For instance, the coalition government formed by Prime Minister Suhrawardy (of East Pakistan) of the Awami League declared that East Pakistan had been granted 98% autonomy. However, with no substantive change emerging from this pronouncement, the party turned into factions, with one group supporting Suhrawardy’s support for the ruling government in West Pakistan and the leftist wing demanding complete autonomy for East Pakistan. With

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

125

surmounting political turmoil, the former was forced to resign and martial law was imposed by President Mirza, in 1958, and lasted four years. Evidently, the 1950s were witness to contestation and exacerbation of differences between the two parts of Pakistan, disallowing any growth of radio in East Pakistan. Islam (XX) writes about Ayub Khan’s intention in exercising centralised control, in 1958, and how radio was deployed to reflect the intent. Over the next two years, a new building came up in Shahbagh, Dhaka, to house the amplified radio station. He adds that a 10-kW station also came up in Kalyanpur. The 1960s was witness to the further strengthening of centralised radio broadcasting from East Pakistan. Islam lists out the many stations that opened up over the decade: ‘Earlier in 1959, a 10-kW transmitter was set up at Kalyanpur. In May 1963, a 100-kW transmitter was established. Apart from Dhaka, two 10-kW MW transmitters were set up at (the) port city of Chittagong and northern Rajshahi town. Subsequently full-fledged broadcasting houses were set up…and local programmes were aired apart from relaying the programmes from Dhaka. From 1961, a 2-kW transmitter in Sylhet was relaying programmes of Dhaka. In 1967, full-fledged stations were established at Sylhet and Rangpur with commissioning of 10-kW/MW transmitters. These stations aired their own programmes apart from relaying Dhaka’s programmes. In the southern Khulna division, a 10-kW/MW transmitter was set up in 1970’ (pp. 6–7). He also suggests that in addition to these efforts of expansion, a high-­ power short-wave transmitter was installed in Karachi, the news division from Dhaka was shifted to West Pakistan, and news was relayed to stations in East Pakistan. Even as these developments occurred in the expansion of radio as a means of extending centralised control, East Pakistan was witnessing the intensification of protests against the policies of West Pakistan. For instance, when the martial law was dropped in 1962 and there was widespread opposition to the Ayub Khan regime, the Awami League under Mujibur Rahman came up with a 6-point agenda for more autonomy and an enabling financial regime. However, this only escalated animosities, culminating in further deterioration of the political climate, accelerating the move towards secession. Despite having won the election in 1970, Mujibur Rahman could not form the government, giving way to protests calling for freedom from West Pakistan. Mujibur Rahman’s speech was first stopped from being broadcast by the military, but due to protests by personnel at radio station who refused to work, the speech was relayed the next morning. Islam

126 

P. RAGHUNATH

narrates the violence that ensued after the breakdown of talks between Yahya Khan and Mujibur Rahman, and the manner in which Mujibur Rahman announced the independence of what was to become Bangladesh via the wireless of the East Pakistan Rifles, which were paramilitary forces. This was broadcast from the Chittagong station, and some radio personnel formed the Swadhin Bangla Biplobi Betar Kendro. Though the station was eventually bombed and destroyed by the Pakistan Air Force, Islam narrates the manner in which the personnel had access to a one-kW transmitter, reached Ramgarh in Bandarban Hill district, and started airing programmes (p. 8). ‘In April 1971, some radio workers and intellectuals who crossed India started assembling in Kolkata, West Bengal, and initiated a discussion with the exile Bangladesh government to launch a radio station. Finally, the Swadhin Bangla Betar Kendro started its journey on 25 May, 1971, from a transmitter given by the Indian government’, he writes, calling the Liberation Radio, a ‘second front of Independence War of Bangladesh’ (pp. 9–10). Banerjee and Logan (2008) state that the radio ‘successfully enthused the freedom fighters, mustered the support of the common people and rallied the behind the cause of liberation through broadcasting inspirational and war-related programmes including music, anecdotes, news, information and commentaries as the war unfolded and reached its logical conclusion’ (2008: 107).  971–2000s: Dictatorship, Development, Disaster, Democracy 1 The birth of the new nation in December 1971 brought with it change of nomenclature, with the Swadhin Bangla Betar Kendro becoming Bangladesh Betar, an evocation of the Bangla identity that stood vindicated with the creation of the new state. The first four years saw the country moving towards a single-party presidential system (Haque 2002), with Mujibur Rahman becoming the President. Lewis (2011) writes about the trajectory taken by the newly liberated state, and the daunting tasks that the new government had to deal with, including the establishment of law and order, rehabilitation of freedom fighters, dealing with the economic health of the country, and the after-effects of the cyclone of 1970. He cites Van Schendel (2009: 178) to suggest that the new government began catering to a ‘politics of patronage’, also a characteristic of the socio-­ political life of the larger South Asian region in general. He also cites Kochanek (1993: 52) to suggest that ‘although the basic principles of a liberal democratic state existed in theory, the reality of the system was “highly personalised, centralised, and increasingly repressive”’ (Lewis

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

127

2011: 78). Lewis goes on to point out the plank of economic nationalism espoused by the Awami League government, one that was laid out in opposition to the new state’s earlier experience of centralised economic planning from West Pakistan. This combination of economic nationalism with political nationalism was also a response to an earlier Western form of development thinking, he writes, citing Kochanek (1993: 74): ‘This came as a reaction to the uneven pattern of growth that had resulted from the development model of the 1950s and 1960s, which had stressed the vigourous pursuit of macro-level economic growth as a solution to the poverty of the region. In the late 1960s, this development model came under attack by those who demanded greater economic equality and distributive justice’ (Lewis 2011: 78). The First Five-Year Plan saw the government making overtures towards a socialist pattern of development, with foreign investment restricted to joint ventures with public sector undertakings. Lewis (2011: 79) writes, ‘the FYP was adopted by Mujib without adequate consultation with other wings of the government or population, which meant that it has little in the way of wider government “ownership”…across the rest of bureaucracy’. He also points to the manner in which the World Bank was disapproving of the government’s economic policy. He cites Kochanek (1993) to suggest that this set is a precedent of low levels of accountability and responsibility, as part of the policy process, as nondominant groups did not find representation, and decisions were made in private. All these policy moves resulted in the near-collapse of the economy by 1973, which was only accentuated by the devastating famine that followed. The next year saw growing pressures from the international donor community, old business elites, and new Awami League supporters, all of which gave way to Mujib’s declaration of the state of emergency, and the initiation of an authoritarian one-party state. Page and Crawley (2001: 57) suggest that with this move, ‘radio and television became mouthpieces of his new authoritarianism’. The government changed in 1975, when a violent military coup occurred, killing Mujibur Rahman and some of his family members. The 1975 coup led to further chaos and some short-lived governments, before General Ziaur Rahman took over as the martial law administrator (MLA) in 1976. Bangladesh Betar was changed to Radio Bangladesh and would remain so till 1990. Genilo et al. (2013: 61) state that the state radio has never been a neutral space and has consistently been used as a tool for propaganda in favour of the government of the day. They cite Alam (2008), who suggests that

128 

P. RAGHUNATH

the practice began during Mujib’s rule and continued with General Zia’s tenure, during which time he would dictate the news aired on the radio station. The authors claim that, ‘it is widely accepted that the military governments of Zia (1977 to 1981) and Ershad (1983 to 1990) used their power to manipulate the media’ (2013: 62). The following years saw the entry of private capital, also supported by the World Bank, and international donor aid for poverty alleviation and development. Meanwhile, in 1977, General Zia amended the Constitution to replace secularism with Islam. The Presidential elections of 1978 saw him come back to power, reinstating his rule by institutionalising a new party, the Bangladesh National Party (BNP). Lewis writes about the economic policies pursued by General Zia, and how his aligning with the West and oil-rich middle Eastern countries marked a shift, with his modernising policies continuing to not find favour with private interests. ‘Zia’s efforts at liberalisation were thwarted by persistent high levels of restriction, regulation and uncertainty that continued to push local investors into nonproductive economic activities such as trade and construction’ (Lewis 2011: 84), he writes. Kochanek, he writes, describes his tenure as one that ushered in a second Bangladeshi political system built on a military bureaucratic complex, reminiscent of the Pakistan regime of the late 1950s and 1960s. Even as economic growth declined, numerous attempts at coups and mutinies were made, throughout his tenure, which ended brutally with his killing in 1981. After a year of unstable government, General Ershad staged another military coup ousting the government to form the second military regime in the country’s political history. The 1980s saw the Ershad government making policy manoeuvres enshrining structural adjustment, with his new Industrial Policy and its Revision. This was in line with agendas of the international financial agencies, underscoring liberalisation and deregulation. Further, he introduced the system of local self-government and the establishment of the upazila subdistrict, focussing on devolution of powers. Even as these developments were taking place on the political and policy fronts, Bangladesh was concomitantly registering itself as a ‘basket case’ for global development aid and funding, which can be traced to the beginning of the 1970s. Karim (2004) writes, ‘In Bangladesh, developmental NGOs have been among the most able service providers to the rural population. But NGOs are not mere service providers, they are also producers of social meanings and identities for actors associated with them. In rural society, NGOs have introduced modern consumption patterns and are purveyors of new ideas

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

129

and symbols’. The international development community emerges as a key policy actor, specifically in the case of Bangladesh, besides the rest of the region. Ahmed (2002), in his chapter, ‘Governance and IDC: Bangladesh Experience’, traces the involvement of the international development country in prescribing and guiding the country’s policy goals. In doing so, he establishes the linkages between colonialism, Bangladesh’s external dependence, globalisation, and policy prescriptions by the international development community. He writes, ‘To begin with, not unlike the organization of the “government”, there is a precise colonial legacy in the organization and development of the civil society in Bangladesh… Colonialism gave birth to a polarized political milieu in a countrywide scale…At a particular moment of history, this took the form of a struggle between the “colonial” and the “nationalist” forces, the organization of which led to the polarization of things in both “public” and “private” spheres of life, like, education, historiography, music’ (2002: 489). The second half of the 1980s saw natural disasters ravage the country and a dip in the economic growth. Even as these changes in the larger political and socio-economic environment were occurring, the National Broadcasting Authority (NBA) was formed, whose function was to, ‘to control, manage, operate, and develop the radio and television media of Bangladesh, and to implement the policy of the government with respect to their broadcasts. As per provision of the Ordinance, no plans and programs could be implemented by the NBA without prior clearance from the government. The said Authority, in the discharge of its functions, was bound by such general or special instructions as issued by the government from time to time’.14 The following years saw the rise of the BNP and Awami League as democratic alternatives to the military regime. People took to the streets, ushering in the gono andolan or people’s movement, which led to the comeback of the BNP in the 1991 elections. With democratic politics being reinscribed as a result of the people’s movement, Radio Bangladesh reverted to being called Bangladesh Betar. The 1990s saw the entry of satellite television, as also the expansion of radio. Banerjee and Logan (2008: 107–108) point to the Radio and Television Autonomy Commission that was formed in 1996. As per news reports (ibid.), one of the key aspects of the joint declaration of the three alliances after the people’s movement was to ensure autonomy and independence of the mass 14  http://archive.thedailystar.net/forum/2007/may/ensuring.htm; February 7, 2017.

accessed

on

130 

P. RAGHUNATH

media, including radio and television. However, this did not materialise in the first term held by Khaleda Zia of the BNP, but a Commission was set up in 1996. The report suggests that a Left Democratic Front leader had pushed for the removal of state control over public broadcasting, suggesting instead that ‘the authority of the parliamentary committee on the ministry of information be strengthened to conduct the affairs of Betar-BTV’ (ibid.). However, this resolution did not see the light of the day. In 1996, the Awami League constituted the Commission for Framing Rules and Regulations for the Autonomy of Bangladesh Television (Radio-TV Autonomy Commission), which made recommendations that a National Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) be set up, as an autonomous body and only answerable to the Ministry of Information. However, the Awami League eventually set up two separate bodies, with very little autonomy. Ever since, autonomy of the media and media democratisation have figured in the poll promises and manifestos of both parties. As described thus far in this section, the three countries of South Asia that experienced entrenched colonial rule dealt with varying degrees of democratisation, over nearly half a century of postcoloniality. Nepal’s tryst with independence emerges as a unique narrative, with complex structures of monarchical rule imbued with what can be identified as crypto-­ coloniality finding space on the airwaves. Nepal  946–1961: Airing Crypto-coloniality 1 Ensconced in its identity as an erstwhile Hindu monarchy, a historiography of Nepal often misses out on the relationship between the monarchy’s relations with British India, and the internal schisms between the monarchy and the oligarchy that the Rana Prime ministers’ rule over more than a century had become, then. This Nepalese state of the 1940s was not just a monarchy, but one characterised by what has come to be termed, cryptocolonialism. Cultural anthropologist Herzfeld (2002) uses the term to describe states that had historically not been colonised directly by colonial powers. They remained outside official colonial dominion when much of the Global South was colonised. However, these states historically experienced latent colonialism, evidenced through trade relations and treaties on security affairs. Herzfeld uses the idea of crypto-­colonialism as a heuristic device to typify what he calls the ‘third space’ of the twentieth century,

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

131

between the colonisers and the colonised, and identifies Nepal as a country that could be seen as having been a subject of crypto-­colonialism. Mikesell and Shreshta (1990) present a painstaking anthropological account of 200 years of historical trade relations between merchants in West-Central Nepal and the British. Treaties like the Sugauli Treaty15 have been referred to, by researchers studying the asymmetrical treaties that were imposed on Nepal, by India and the East India Company. Mary Des Chene’s work (1993)  on the history of the Gorkhas also illustrates the induction of the Gorkhas into the armies of the British. Through this cooperation, the British contained the possibility of revolts against them from within Nepal and also succeeded in crushing the rebellion of 1857 in India. Smith (1967) describes the tussle between the Shah monarchs and the Rana Prime Ministers. He outlines the manner in which the Himalayan Kingdom did not have a capable monarch ever since the death of Prithvi Narayan Shah, in the eighteenth century, and how members of the nobility were called upon to serve as prime ministers and other ministers. The Ranas massacred the other fueding noble families, to capture power, in 1846, and ruled till 1951. He also suggests that the British played a vital role in keeping the Ranas in power, who on their part disallowed any opposition to their autocratic rule. Panday (1989), in his work on administrative development in Nepal, foregrounds this notion of ‘semi-dependency’ of the bureaucracy, drawing on the country’s modern history. Through thick descriptive passages on the Nepal’s administrative culture, he referred to the continuing informal hold of the monarchy and the country’s social elite, in the bureaucracy at the time of the article’s publication. Haque (1997) draws on Panday (1989) to suggest that even countries that did not come under direct colonial rule in the South Asian region were impacted by the administrative reforms of their neighbours, evidenced by foreign technical assistance programmes and efforts towards modernising the bureaucracy in the 1950s and 1960s. Nelson (2011) furthers Herzfeld’s concept by suggesting that the study of Nepal be approached through an understanding of what he calls, ‘post-crypto-colonialism’. He alludes to Scott (2004) and 15  The Sugauli Teaty was signed between the King of Nepal and the East India Company over 1815–1816, following the Anglo-Nepalese War. It dealt with the transfer of territories from Nepal to the East India Company and laid the boundary-line between Nepal and India. It has hence been superseded on various occasions.

132 

P. RAGHUNATH

calls for understanding how crypto-colonies cannot resist or overthrow an unofficial coloniser, but endure some degree of colonial legacy and power that manifests itself in the endured structuring of its institutions. He underlines the need for ‘thinking of the colonial impact on Nepal not as a coercive barrier to sovereignty, but as a conditioning force that made certain practices and logics of the state and the national elite possible’ (p. 6). Banerjee and Logan (2008) state that Nepal’s radio history in the aftermath of the Second World War can be linked to the Rana Prime Minister Padma Shamsher’s national address on radio, in 1946. They suggest that while there were no transmitters in the country, perhaps it is the Nepali youth who served in battlefields abroad, who brought back wireless devices. Shamsher had announced that the people could possess personal radios. He also allowed Nepal Broadcasting, the first state broadcasting institution to operate from Bijuli Adda, in 1948. However, this did not last and Prime Minister Shamsher resigned from his post, after which the transmission also stopped. The broadcasting resumed after the last Rana Prime minister, Mohan Shamsher, took over, in 1948. This came to be known as Mohan Akashbani, and it utilised a hybrid telecommunication system comprising copper wires and radio waves (2008: 341). In 1946, the anti-Rana sentiments reached a tipping point and the following years witnessed a number of attempts by the Nepal monarchy and the Nepali Congress who operated out of India. The anti-Rana protesters captured Mohan Akashbani, in Bhojpur, and began broadcasting ‘revolutionary messages’. The authors suggest that this was the first broadcast from outside Kathmandu. They also add that the Nepali Congress and the revolutionaries also initiated Prajatantra Radio, in Biratnagar of the Terai region, in 1951. The Rana monarchy was overthrown the same year, establishing democracy in the country. Mohan Shamsher was exiled in India, and died in Bangalore, in 1967. The equipment from Biratnagar and Mohan Akashbani was used to initiate broadcasting from Singha Darbar, the administrative centre in Nepal’s capital of Kathmandu. In early 1951, King Tribhuvan returned to Kathmandu, and a cabinet comprising the King, the Ranas and non-Ranas, and the Nepali Congress was formed. The radio was named Nepal Radio, and later, Radio Nepal, in 1952, operating under the Department of Information and Broadcasting. However, from as early as later that year, numerous factions and feuds surfaced. The next eight years saw the government changing around ten times, bringing in instability and infighting. Analogous to these political developments, the next few years saw Radio Nepal’s broadcasting efforts expand, with

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

133

medium-wave broadcasting in 1953 and broadcasting beyond the Kathmandu Valley in 1956.  961–1991: Panchayat and Non-party Politics 1 Eventually, King Tribhuvan’s son, King Mahendra who took over after his father’s demise, in 1955, called upon a Committee and drafted a new constitution which was operationalised in 1959. Elections were held for the first time, and the Nepali Congress won with a majority. However, this government lasted only eighteen months. Smith (1967) states that the Kathmandu elite, who held powerful positions, were uncomfortable with the Nepali Congress and its leader, B.  P. Koirala, who hailed from Biratnagar and spent a lot of time in India. King Mahendra, for his part, believed in unifying and consolidating the Nepali identity. He dissolved the government formed by the Nepali Congress to set up a partyless Panchayat rule, for the next 30 years. Smith writes, ‘Asserting that the people were confused by the Western institutions of political parties and parliamentary government, Mahendra declared that Nepal must have a political system in keeping with Nepal’s culture and tradition. It had to be a Nepali system—not one copied from another nation’ (1967: 26–27). Towards this end, he set up a Council of Ministers and a committee to study various political systems to define what was suitable for Nepal. He ruled till 1962, as per the Constitution of 1959. In 1962, he drafted a new Constitution, institutionalising the Panchayat system, which, he believed, was the rule from the bottom upward, in four layers. The author suggests that King Mahendra felt that Western democracies and their Parliaments operated in a top-down fashion. He also felt that the political parties in Nepal, including the Nepali Congress, were mired in pursuing their own self-interests. In accordance with these ideas, the Panchayat system that he set up would espouse grassroots democracy with the Monarchy as the uniting force, banning all other forms of political organisations. He was faced with stiff opposition, and he reacted to it by jailing Koirala. Several other leaders took refuge in India and initiated their propaganda from there. The Nepalese broadcasting that was getting sedimented over a decade in the fledging democracy changed in 1961, with this development. Banerjee and Logan provide a description of the many international actors involved in aiding Nepal set up and expand its radio broadcasting. They write, ‘In 1962, the Australian government supported Radio Nepal by funding a five kilowatt shortwave transmitter and a fully fitted studio. The UK constructed a full-fledged broadcasting station with 100 kilowatt

134 

P. RAGHUNATH

shortwave and 10 kilowatt medium wave transmitters. The US helped by constructing a building with six studios. A modern studio was constructed at Singha Darbar under the joint effort of the UK, the US, and Nepal’ (2008: 341). Parajulee (2007: 56) suggests that in the Panchayat period, the government distributed radio sets and formed Community Listening Centres, wherein people would gather around and listen to Radio Nepal. The radio also broadcast distance learning programmes, which would be played out in rural schools. He also writes about how the possession of a radio set was considered a luxury and was not easy until the 1980s. He cites Onta (2005), who talks about the manner in which the King used the radio to propagate the Panchayat system, in the first five years. The King would broadcast speeches and air documents pertinent to the Panchayat system on the radio, which would then be translated into a book annually (2007: 59). In the late 1970s and early 1980s, movements against the autocratic rule emerged in the country. In 1979, the Nepal Bhasa Movement began when people felt that their own language had received a raw deal historically, which only got fortified during the Rana and Panchayat rules. The year also saw a series of student protests, forcing King Birendra, son of King Mahendra, to form a committee for a referendum on the form of government that would be introduced in the country—between a multiparty system and the Panchayat system. Kantha (2008) relates that for the first time since the 1950s, the media in the country ‘enjoyed unrestricted freedom following the announcement of the national referendum; this freedom largely continued even after the no-party system favoured by the King secured a narrow but controversial victory’ (2008: 64). Political parties began functioning in a cooperative fashion, despite no legal recognition. Eventually, two general elections were held, in 1981 and 1986, taking forward the process of democratic transition that started early that decade. This would culminate in the First Jan Andolan (People’s Movement) of 1990, which would initiate a new chapter in the country’s democratisation, also seen in the eventual opening up of the airwaves. Discussion The above country-wise historiographies of the trajectories taken by radio broadcasting in the postcolonies of South Asia (1) are illustrative of the internal workings of government departments and ministries, allowing to

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

135

go beyond perceiving the state as a monolith; (2) help understand the continuities and changes in the entry, re-entry, and renewed interactions with varied international actors, and their linkages with intra-state actors in these countries; and (3) inter-relations between the four countries that are part of the study, the interconnected politics and policy posturing, all of which draw on a common historical past. This allows room for conceptualising the postcolonial state itself as an assemblage comprising various actors with diversified constructions of radio broadcasting, a further advancement of Potter’s (2007) network heuristic of the colonial times. Scholarship on New Institutionalisms, comprising the Rational Choice, Historical, Sociological and Discursive Institutionalisms (Schmidt 2006), illuminates the interactions between the more static approaches (the former three) and the ideational approach (the fourth), locating the process of decolonisation in this interaction. Potetee and Ribot (2009: 6), in their work on decentralisation, domination, and democratisation in Senegal, use the concept of repertoires, defined by Charles Tilly (1978, 2006, 2008) as ‘sets of widely practiced claim-making performances as repertoires to highlight the limited range of observed performances in any given setting, the influence of prior exposure and practice (familiarity) on the set of typical performances, and on-­ going changes to the typical set of performances through innovation, creativity, and learning. Later, he associated repertoires with particular relationships in particular times and places’. Repertoires may be but are not solely strategies, in that they are defined by ‘similarity’ in claims-­ making and performativity and are embedded in a particular situation, unlike strategies which could take ‘infinitely different forms’ (2009: 7). The authors argue that decentralisation rarely produces democratisation, since some actors use repertoires of domination to usurp power as intermediaries in the process. This allows to understand relations of patrimonialism and clientalism that emerge as a key characteristic of governance, as evinced in the governance of radio in the modernising postcolonial state, in the four decades since the initiation of decolonisation. Ribot (1998) also conceptualises repertoires of resistance, defined as a set of small-scale performances and tools deployed to resist those who retain control over resources, including but not limited to the state. This concept of repertoires is useful in delineating the continual dramaturgy of contestation between the pursuit of domination over airwaves and the erosive power of resistance to it, especially as it would play out in the governance of radio, when the countries under study took to liberalisation.

136 

P. RAGHUNATH

Conclusion Blaney and Inayatullah (2002b) argue that the process of modernisation is one that produces binaries—of the nation-state that contains ‘internalities’ like community and the international ‘system’ characterised by anarchy. They draw on Todorov (1984) to cite the job of the comparativist as having to encounter the ‘ethnological moment’, one that contains the double action of assimilation and retaining difference, all at once. The authors then move towards an understanding of what they call, neo-­modernisation, which is the newer negotiation with modernity in the wake of globalisation. They call for an institutional study of international studies ‘based on the creation of conversations among cultures; theoretically, we call for a practice that, while taking seriously both global structures and the meanings/intentions of actors, also focuses on the actual history of cultural contact’ (2002b: 130). Dingli (2015) draws on diverse scholarship at the intersections of feminist theory, subaltern studies, studies on modernity, and postcolonial theory to elucidate the idea of ‘silence’ in the theorising of the international. In doing so, the author cites Galtung (1969, 1990) to elaborate on three kinds of violence: Direct, comprising the physical and the psychological aspects; Structural, which manifests itself in unequal opportunities; and, Cultural or Symbolic, which legitimate corporeal violence by finding legitimacy for it in culture. The theorising of silence, the author claims, denies attention to the aesthetic dimension of experience. It is in this dimension that Orality locates itself, negotiating processes of decolonisation and, in turn, democratisation. As laid out in the previous chapter, the 1980s were witness to new developments in the South Asian region, with the formation of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), even as the world order that was entrenched in decades of Cold War between the American and the Soviet blocs was dismantled by the end of the decade. The emergent new world order, characterised by globalisation, saw the national economies of the countries under study implementing policies favouring neoliberalism. This would facilitate interaction with a unipolar world order, with a growing tendency towards regional groupings. Guillame (2013b) writes about how the international continues to be conceived of in a decontextualised fashion, laying claim to universalising facts and events. He makes a call for a focus on ‘multiple situatedness’, in allowing theoretical efforts in studying the international, to take cognisance of the multiplicities of histories that are connected (Subrahmanyam 1997).

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

137

However, in doing so, it becomes important to preclude focusing on provincialising (Chakrabarty 2000), as if the history being studied exists in isolation and in a fixed manner. Loomba (2014) critiques Subrahmanyam’s idea of a global modernity shaped by numerous interactions facilitated by trade and culture. She writes, ‘work on “connected histories” does not always pay attention to the fact that this single global modernity was forged, or at least drastically reshaped, alongside colonialism’ (2014: 145). She then draws our attention to the equation between capitalism and colonialism. This unremitting negotiation of the multiplicity of histories, with complex structures of power as they emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s, helps synthesise a theory of the international from the ground up. In studying the practice of such theory-building from the bottom-up, a critical study of communication and media policy assumes centre-stage. The next chapter draws attention to the further globalisation of media and the policies governing them, taking off from early technology-associated internationalisation as Sosale (2014) suggests, over the larger part of the twentieth century, as has been illustrated in this chapter. As evident in this chapter, De Certeau’s ideas on historicity, writing historiography, place-­ space, and orality inform a practice-oriented approach to historicising the international. Elaborating on this idea, the following chapter presents a contemporary history of policies and their practice for community radio (CR) in the four countries of South Asia under study, in an effort to write the Voice of the Global from Below.

Bibliography Adeney, K., & Wyatt, A. (2004). Democracy in South Asia: Getting beyond the Structure–Agency Dichotomy. Political Studies, 52(1), 1–18. Agrawal, B. (1978). Television Comes to Village: An Evaluation of SITE. Ahmedabad: Space Applications Centre. Ahmed, I. (2002). Governance and IDC: Bangladesh Experience. In H. A. Hye (Ed.), Governance: South Asian Perspectives. New Delhi: Manohar. Alam, R. (2008). Military-Media Relations in Bangladesh: 1975–1990. Washington, DC: World Bank. Alhassan, A. & Chakravartty, P. (2011). Postcolonial Media Policy Under the Long Shadow of Empire. In R.  Mansell & M.  Raboy (Eds.), Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Asthana, S. (2019). India’s State-run Media: Boradcasting, Power, and Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

138 

P. RAGHUNATH

Avery, T. (2006). Radio Modernism: Literature, Ethics, and the BBC, 1922–1938. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing House. Bandyopadhyay, S. (2015). From Plassey to Partition and After: A History of Modern India. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Banerjee, I., & Logan, S. (2008). Asian Communication Handbook 2008. Asian Media Information and Communication Centre, and Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information. Nanyang Technological University. Berger, S. (1996). The Rise and Fall of “Critical” Historiography? Some Reflections on the Historiographical Agenda of the Left in Britain, France and Germany at the End of the Twentieth Century. European Review of History: Revue Européenne D’histoire, 3(2), 213–232. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brady, L. (2005). Colonials, Bourgeoisies and Media Dynasties: A Case Study of Sri Lankan Media. eJournalist, 5(2), 2. Brayne, F. L. (1929). The Remaking of Village India. Oxford University Press. Brewer, C. (2014). Historicizing in Critical Policy Analysis: The Production of Cultural Histories and Microhistories. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(3), 273–288. Briggs, A. (1961). The History of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom, Vol. 1: The Birth of Broadcasting. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Briggs, A. (1985). The BBC: The First Fifty Years. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chakravartty, P., & Sarikakis, K. (2006). Media Policy and Globalization. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Chanda Committee Report. (1966). Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Government of India. Chitnis, E. V., & Karnik, K. S. (1985). The Message and the Experience of the SITE Project. Acta Astronautica, 12(4), 269–275. Cohen, D. R., Coyle, M., & Lewty, J. (2009). Broadcasting Modernism. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Collier, R. B., & Collier, D. (1991). Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Crusz, N. (1998). Livy’s Golden Years on Radio. Island. Retrieved from http:// www.rootsweb.com/~lkawgw/livy.html Curran, J., & Park, M.-J. (Eds.). (2000). De-Westernizing Media Studies (Communication and Society). London: Routledge. de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. (S. Rendall, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

139

de Certeau, M. (1988). The Writing of History. (T. Conley, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press. Des Chene, M. (1993). Soldiers, Sovereignty and Silences: Gorkhas as Diplomatic Currency. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 13(1, 2), 67–80. Dingli, S. (2015). We Need to Talk about Silence: Re-examining Silence in International Relations Theory. European Journal of International Relations, 21(4), 721–742. Dirks, N. (2008). The Scandal of Empire: India and the Creation of Imperial Britain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fielden, L. (1939). Report on the Progress of Broadcasting in India. The Government Of India Press. Fielden, L. (1960). The Natural Bent. London Andre Deutsch. Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, Peace, and Peace Research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167–191. Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural Violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27(3), 291–305. Genilo, J., Bhowmick, B., & Shoesmith, B. (2013). Radio in Bangladesh: Growth, Decline and Transformation. In B. Shoesmith & J. Genilo (Eds.), Bangladesh’s Changing Mediascape: From State Control to Market Forces. Chicago: Intellect. Ginzburg, C. (1980). The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Doubleday. Gupta, D. (2019). The Raj in Radio Wars. Media History, 25(4), 414–429. Gupta, P. S. (2002). Power, Politics and the People: Studies in British Imperialism and Indian Nationalism. London: Anthem Press. Hale, J. (1975). Radio Power: Propaganda and International Broadcasting. London: Paul Elek. Haque, S. (1997). Incongruity between Bureaucracy and Society in Developing Countries: A Critique. Peace and Change, 22(4), 432–462. Haque, S. (2002). The Changing Balance of Power between the Government and NGOs in Bangladesh. International Political Science Review, 23(4), 411–435. Herzfeld, M. (2002). The Absence Presence: Discourses of Crypto-Colonialism. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(4), 899–926. Hettige, S. (2010). Youth and Political Engagement in Sri Lanka. In D. Gellner (Ed.), Varieties of Activist Experience: Civil Society in South Asia. Governance, Conflict, and Civic Action: Volume 3. London: Sage Publications. Hirsch, E., & Stewart, C. (2005). Introduction: Ethnographies of Historicity. History and Anthropology, 16(3), 261–274. Hitchcock, E. (2011). Making Waves: Admiral Mountbatten’s Radio SEAC 1945–1949. Helion & Company. Ingold, T. (1996). Key Debates in Anthropology. London: Routledge.

140 

P. RAGHUNATH

Jayaratne, T., & De Silva, S. (2012). Media Policy and Law in Sri Lanka—Part II: The Political Economy of the Electronic Media in Sri Lanka. Law and Society Trust, 22, 293–294. Jeffrey, R. (2006). The Mahatma Didn’t like the Movies and Why It Matters: Indian Broadcasting Policy, 1920s–1990s. Global Media and Communication, 2(2), 204–224. Jordheim, H. (2012). Against Periodization: Koselleck’s Theory of Multiple Temporalities. History and Theory, 51(2), 151–171. Kantha, P. (2008). Nepal’s Protracted Democratization in Terms of Modes of Transition. Himalaya, 28(1–2), 59–70. Karim, L. (2004). Democratizing Bangladesh: State, NGOs, and Militant Islam. Cultural Dynamics, 16(2/3), 291–318. Karunanayake, N. (1990). Broadcasting in Sri Lanka: Potential and Performance. Centre for Media and Policy Studies. Kerr, D. (2002). Orwell’s BBC Broadcasts: Colonial Discourse and the Rhetoric of Propaganda. Textual Practice, 16(3), 473–490. Kaul, C. (2014). Communications, Media and the Imperial Experience. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Kaul, C. (2016). News of the Imperial World: Popular Print Culture, the News of the World and India in the late Nineteenth Century. In L. Brake, C. Kaul, & M. W. Turner (Eds.), The News of the World and the British Press, 1843–2011. Palgrave Studies in the History of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Kochanek, S. (1993). Patron-Client Politics and Business in Bangladesh. New Delhi: Sage. Krishna, S. (1999). Postcolonial Insecurities: India, Sri Lanka, and the Question of Nationhood. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Kumar, K. (2003). Mixed Signals: Radio Broadcasting Policy in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(22), 2173–2182. Lather, P. (2006). Foucauldian Scientificity: Rethinking the Nexus of Qualitative Research and Educational Policy Analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education., 19, 783–791. Lelyveld, D. (1994). Upon the Subdominant: Administering Music on All-India Radio. Social Text, (39), 111–127. Lewis, D. (2011). Bangladesh: Politics, Economy and Civil Society. New  York: Cambridge University Press. Loomba, A. (2014). Early Modern or Early Colonial? Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies, 14(1), 143–148. Luther, S. (1988). The United States and the Direct Broadcast Satellite: The Politics of International Broadcasting in Space. New York: Oxford University Press. Luthra, H.  R. (1986). Indian Broadcasting. Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Manyozo, L. (2012). Media, Communication and Development: Three Approaches. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

141

Martín-Barbero, J. (1993). Communication, Culture and Hegemony: From Media to Mediation. London: Sage Publications. McChesney, R. (1993). Telecommunications, Mass Media, and Democracy: The Battle for the Control of U.S.  Broadcasting, 1928–1935. New  York: Oxford University Press. Mikesell, S., & Shreshta, J. (1990). Mercantilism and Domestic Industry in West-­ Central Nepal: Significance for Anthropological Study of the Community. Occasional Papers in Sociology and Anthropology, 2, 77–89. Mitchell, T. (2002). Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-Politics, Modernity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Nelson, A. (2011). Towards a Post-Crypto-Colonialism: Notes on the Anthropology of Nepal’s Non-Colonial Condition. American Anthropological Association meeting, Montréal, QC. Nijhawan, S. (2016). Hindi, Urdu or Hinustani? Debates through Radio Broadcasting in Late Colonial India. South Asia Research, 36(1), 80–97. Onta, P. (2005). Radio Journalism: News and Talk Programs in FM. Kathmandu: Martin Chautari. Co-edited volume (in Nepali). Page, D., & Crawley, W. (2001). Satellites over South Asia: Broadcasting, Culture and the Public Interest. London: Sage. Panday, D. R. (1989). Administrative Development in a Semi-dependency: The Experience of Nepal. Public Administration and Development, 9(3), 315–329. Parajulee, S. (2007). Seven Decades of Radio Listening in Nepal. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 4(2), 52–67. Pavarala, V., & Malik, K.  K. (2007). Other Voices: The Struggle for Community Radio in India. Sage Publications. Perera, P.  W. S. (1962). Radio Ceylon. International Communication Gazette., 8(3), 255–264. Pinkerton, A. (2008). Radio and the Raj: Broadcasting in British India (1920–1940). Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. Series 3, 18(2), 167–191. Potetee, A., & Ribot, J. (2009). Repertoires of Domination in Decentralization: Cases from Botswana and Senegal. Paper prepared for the Working Group on the Politics on Authority, Land, and Natural Resources at the Workshop on the Workshop 4, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 2–7 June 2009. Potter, S. (2007). Webs, Networks, and Systems: Globalization and the Mass Media in the Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century British Empire. Journal of British Studies, 46(3), 621–646. Potter, S. (2012). Broadcasting Empire: The BBC and the British World, 1922–1970. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rancière, J. (1998). Disagreement: Politics and philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rao, Y. V. L. (1975). Information Imbalance in Asia. Media Asia, 2(2), 78–81. Reith, J. (1949). Into the Wind. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

142 

P. RAGHUNATH

Ribot, J. (1998). Theorizing Access: Forest Profits along Senegal’s Charcoal Commodity Chain. Development and Change, 29(2), 307–341. Rogers, E., Braun, J., & Vermilion, M. (1977). Radio Forums: A Strategy for Rural Development. In P.  L. Spain, D.  Jamison, & E.  G. McAnany (Eds.) Radio for Education and Development: Case Studies (pp.  361–381). World Bank Staff Working Paper 266. Washington, DC: World Bank. Scannel, P., & Cardiff, D. (1991). A Social History of British Broadcasting: 1922–1939 – Serving the Nation. Basil Blackwell. Schmidt, V. (2006). Give Peace a Chance: Reconciling Four (Not Three) “New Institutionalisms”. Paper prepared for presentation for the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, August 31– September 3, 2006. Scott, J. (2004). Conscripts of Modernity: The Tragedy of Colonial Enlightenment. Durham: Duke University Press. Sengupta, A. (2001). Reforms, Equity, and the IMF: An Economist’s World. New Delhi: Har-Anand Publications. Smith, T. (1967). The Ideology of Nepal’s Panchayati Raj. Master’s thesis. The Arizona State University. Sosale, S. (2014). Mapping and Modernizing the Indian Ocean Rim: Communication Technologies under Colonial Britain. Global Media and Communication, 10(2), 155–176. Subrahmanyam, S. (1997). Connected Histories: Notes Towards a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia. Modern Asian Studies, 31(3), Special Issue: The Eurasian Context of the Early Modern History of Mainland South East Asia, 1400–1800, 735–762. Thangamani, P. (2000). History of Broadcasting in India: With Special Reference to Tamil Nadu 1924–1954. Chennai: Ponnaiah Pathippagam. Thussu, D. (2000). International Communication: Continuity and Change. London: Hodder Arnold. Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. New  York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. Tilly, C. (2006). Regimes and Repertoires. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Tilly, C. (2008). Contentious Performances. New York: Cambridge University Press. Todorov, T. (1984). The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other. New York: Harper and Row. Van Schendel, W. (2009). A History of Bangladesh. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verghese, B. G. (2010). First Draft: Witness to the Making of Modern India. New Delhi: Tranquebar. Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and Desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz (Ed.), On Security (pp. 46–86). New York: Columbia University Press.

3  THE POSTCOLONY AND ITS RADIO 

143

Wilson, A.  J. (2003). Sri Lanka: Ethnic Strife and the Politics of Space. In J.  Coakley (Ed.), The Territorial Management of Ethnic Conflict. London: Frank Cass Publishers. Zivin, J. (1994). The Projection of India: Imperial Propaganda, the British State and Nationalist India, 1930–1947. PhD thesis. Duke University. Zivin, J. (1998). The Imagined Reign of the Iron Lecturer. Modern Asian Studies, 32(3), 717–738. Zivin, J. (1999). ‘Bent’: A Colonial Subversive and Indian Broadcasting. Past and Present, 162(1), 195–220.

CHAPTER 4

A Glocal Public Sphere: Opening up of Radio to Communities in South Asia

Two countries that form a part of this research endeavour present unique cases of community broadcasting, lending their particularities and colouring the overall community broadcasting experience of South Asia as well. The Sri Lankan experience of community broadcasting is a unique one, in that while it is a pioneering one in the region, the broadcasting was done under the aegis of the State. The lack of provision for community radio as a separate form of broadcasting is conspicuous in the case of Sri Lanka, since it was done under the umbrella of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC). Some observers and commentators have sought to call the experience community-based broadcasting, as it was not explicitly community-led broadcasting, it is argued. In the case of Nepal, the country is a pioneer in its own right, in being the home of independent broadcasting sans the authorisation of the State. In contrast to the Sri Lankan case, community broadcasting in Nepal emerged in a media landscape that opened itself to private players, sans a policy provision for ‘community’ broadcasting. In this case, the interpretation of a clause that allowed private broadcasting was key to the promulgation of community radio in the country. The island- and the Himalayan nations present unique cases of community broadcasting, since they were both initiated, with similar yet divergent experiences, sans a policy specific to community radio.

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_4

145

146 

P. RAGHUNATH

Similarly, India and Bangladesh emerge as the two countries with histories of struggles and strategies to bring about policies specific to community radio. The Indian story, replete with divergent viewpoints as will be showcased in the next chapter, presents the story of how various mechanisms and methods were used to make a push for a policy specific to community radio, in two such gradual instances. The strategic choices in terms of utilising policy windows, committing to advocacy efforts, and generating a discourse that would be favourably viewed by the dispensation of the day make for an interesting study. Bangladesh, the latest country in the region to promulgate a policy for community radio, also showcases stories of reluctance, constrained by development priorities and fears of new actors and technologies. The country’s policy experience, however, is one that is markedly different in that the implementation of the policy has occurred in a phased, well-­ planned manner. Laid out as a chronology in time, this chapter presents the early interactions in the community radio space, starting with the introduction of the medium to South Asia, in Sri Lanka of the late 1970s. The chapter showcases the entry of private players in the Nepalese media landscape after Jan Andolan I. It also presents the legal setup in Sri Lanka, and the resonant cultures of broadcasting in the island-nation, before moving on to showcase the Indian Supreme Court’s judgement of 1995, which led to activism for community radio in the country. The activism and run-up to the granting of permissions and licensing of radio to educational institutions is also presented. The chapter goes on to narrate Bangladesh’s early tryst with the idea of community radio, sated with the transfer of policy ideas and learnings, as well. As a collective set of experiences in South Asia, the transnational transfer of knowledge, technology, and policy ideas emerge as key characteristics of the creation and propelling of communicative spaces that community radios are, in the region. The entry of community radio in South Asia through international actors such as multilateral donor agencies and international organisations, their interface with the local realities and subjectivities, the interaction of modern technologies and communitarian forms of life, the formation of transnational epistemic communities for advocacy, and the transfer of policy ideas across countries come together to colour what have been called transnational public spheres at the cusp of

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

147

glocalisation. This chapter1 showcases such situated experiences in South Asia and lays the ground to understand further proliferation and/or subjugation of community radio in the region (Table 4.1).

Modernisation and Community Radio in South Asia As narrated in the previous chapter, the newly elected UNP government of 1977 opened up the economy to market-oriented reforms, becoming one of the first countries in the region to do so. Among the many policies that the government of the day pursued were also policies pertaining to agricultural growth and generation of hydropower. The Accelerated Mahaweli Development Scheme2 was one such large-scale programme implemented by the government, an upgradation of the Mahaweli Development Project already underway in the country since the mid-­1960s. The opening up of the economy allowed for the slow opening up of media in the island-nation, as well. The shift in economic policy opened up avenues for the entry of diversified international actors, from aid funders for public service broadcasting setups to international development agencies, opening up the Sri Lankan radio sector as well. The following year, in 1978, the Constitution of 1972 was replaced by a new one, as per the election manifesto of the UNP, which continues to be in operation and governs media law and policy in the country today. It was in 1984 that the state monopoly in radio was broken, followed by the opening up of television in 1992 (Pinto-Jayawardena and Gunetilleke 2012). The late 1970s were also times when transfer of knowledge and know-­ how took place between the developed and developing worlds. It is in this context that one can examine the opening up of the Sri Lankan economy and the interventions that came in from abroad, during this time.  Parts of this chapter were presented at the 3rd International Public Policy Association’s (IPPA) annual conference, at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore. 2  The Jayawardena government promoted the Accelerated Mahaweli Development Scheme in full-swing, upon coming to power in 1977, in a bid to address aspects of dry zone cultivation, controlling floods, irrigation, hydropower generation, and so on. The Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka was established by an Act of Parliament, in 1979. The Project had displaced about 200,000 villagers in the settlement area, changing their livelihood and landholding patterns forever. They were shifted to the Dry Zone, and a sense of community was missing. 1

Some key milestones 1977—Opening up of Sri Lankan economy 1978—Adoption of new Constitution in Sri Lanka 1979—Setting up of Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation’s first regional station at Rajarata 1979—Danish International Development Agency and UNESCO’s Joint Mission 1978–1979—Groundwork for the Mahaweli Community Radio in Sri Lanka 1981–1983—First phase of the Mahaweli Community Radio in Sri Lanka 1984–1986—Second phase of the Mahaweli Community Radio in Sri Lanka 1987–1989—Third phase of the Mahaweli Community Radio in Sri Lanka 1986—Kothmale Community Radio in Sri Lanka was started 1990—Jan Andolan I in Nepal 1992—High-Level Task Force on Media Policy in Nepal 1993—National Broadcasting Act in Nepal 1995—National Broadcasting Regulation in Nepal 1995—Supreme Court judgement declaring airwaves as public property in India 1996—Series of consultations held by Voices, Bangalore, leading to the Bangalore Declaration in India 1997—License for Radio Sagarmatha given in Nepal 1997—Introduction of the Broadcast Bill in India 1999—Early meeting in Dhaka, Bangladesh, for discussions on CR 2000—First auction of FM frequencies in India 2000—Pastapur Declaration in India 2000—Conference on ‘Globalisation, Social Movements, Human Rights and the Law’, in India 2001—Consultation organised by IGNOU to discuss Gyan Vani, in India 2002—Policy on Information and Communication Technology, implicating alternative media, in Bangladesh 2002—Union Cabinet allowing ‘well-established educational institutions, universities and residential schools’ to operate radios, in India

Table 4.1  Key milestones in the history of community radio in South Asia

148  P. RAGHUNATH

2003—Amit Mitra committee on radio broadcast policy and its report, in India 2003—Uva CR was set up, in Sri Lanka 2004—Gemi Diriya Project was started, under which work for the Saru Praja FM was initiated, in Sri Lanka 2004—Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) was made the regulatory body for broadcast media, in India 2004—Establishment of the first radio station under the policy at Anna University, in India 2004—Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) Consultation Paper, in India 2005—Save Independent Radio Movement, in Nepal 2006—CR Policy Guidelines of 2006, in India 2006—Jan Andolan II, in Nepal 2006—Comprehensive Peace Agreement, in Nepal 2007—Interim Constitution into force, in Nepal Between 2002 and 2007—Inter-ministerial Consultations 2007—Caretaker Government come into the picture, in Bangladesh 2007—High Authority Meeting held, chaired by the Information Secretary and organised by the Ministry of Information, in Bangladesh 2007—Ministerial Committee of eight members convened by the Director General of Bangladesh Betar, in Bangladesh 2007—Ministerial Committee officially presents policy and concept note to the Ministry of Information, in Bangladesh 2008—Community Radio in Awami League’s Manifesto 2008—Community Radio Installation, Broadcast and Operation Policy, in Bangladesh 2015—Constitution adopted, replacing the Interim Constitution, in Nepal 2015—Third Phase of FM frequencies auctioned, in India Between 2008 and 2017—17 Community Radio Stations set up, in Bangladesh 2017—Revised CR Policy for the country put out, in India 2017—Community Radio Installation, Broadcast and Operation Policy (2017), in Bangladesh 2018—New revision of the CR Policy for India announced Legalities in Sri Lanka Sri Lanka Broadcasting Act of 1966 Constitution of 1978—Articles 10, 14(1)(a), 15(2), 15(7) 1987—13th Amendment to the constitution, allowing for the establishment of a Provincial Council for each Province 1988—Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (Amendment) Act 2008—Colombo Declaration on Media Freedom and Social Responsibility 2012—Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka’s Frequency Plan

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

149

150 

P. RAGHUNATH

Articulations around imbalances in the flow of information and communication were beginning to gain ground internationally, around this time. In 1975, a regional conference on ‘Information Imbalance in Asia’, organised by the Asian Mass Communication Research and Information Centre, was held in Kandy. The conference discussions centred around the heavy dosage of information and entertainment flow from the developed countries to the developing world, while the flow from the latter to the former was less prevalent. Ideas around access to funding and resources were also spoken about (Rao 1975: 69). These contentions would come to occupy centre-stage over the next few decades and play a decisive role in determining forms of media and the politics of policymaking for them. What follows is an account of the setting up of community broadcasting in Sri Lanka, the many kinds of actors involved in initiating this form of broadcasting for the first time in South Asia and the larger national and international milieu that provided the impetus for such developments. The Story of How It Began: Transnational Interventions in Sri Lanka During my field-visit to Sri Lanka in February 2014, I was able to meet the Danish broadcaster who had mooted the idea of community broadcasting in the country, also a first for the South Asian region. In 1978, Knud Ebbesen, who worked with Radio Denmark, visited the island, living for two months each, in Wellawatta, Kandy, and Colombo. ‘Do you want the official version or the unofficial story?’, he asked, and went on to provide both versions, only indicating the seamlessness that often characterises an individual actor’s practice of policy. I was here in Sri Lanka for personal reasons. To finance my stay here, I was looking at how radio could be used in development. Back home, I was with the Public Access department of Radio Denmark, and worked on the Baandvaerkstedet (the Tape Workshop), wherein I would invite people to the station, enabling the Danish broadcaster to transform itself from a monopoly to providing open access to the public. Our first experiment with CR was in late 1977, covering 40,000 people. My first visit to Sri Lanka allowed me to interact with officials at the SLBC. I met the then Director General Thevis Guruge as well as scholars like Dr. Sarat Amunugama, who was an advocate of two-way participatory communication. About a year later, Sarat asked me to come up with a proposal for the people in the Mahaweli areas, where 125,000 families had been rehabilitated due to the

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

151

large-scale irrigation project. He felt something like the initiative back home would be helpful to the people there. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Ebbesen, upon his return to Denmark, put together a proposal and mailed it to Dr. Amunugama, UNESCO, and the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA). It was a year later, in August 1979, that the UNESCO and DANIDA came together in a joint mission. Ebbesen elaborated on the intent behind the setting up of this project: Right from the formulation of the project, we involved the community. We went to the Mahaweli area and spoke to the settlers. We understood that there were only two possibilities: waiting for government officials to take notice, or motivate them to take responsibility for their own future. This, we thought, was the only way to create development…empower people to take charge of their own communication and development. We thought radio would be a great motivator for this purpose, if used the right way. The basic principle of radio is that, one has to believe the person talking to us on radio. If it is a fellow community member, it is possible easily because the context is similar. The medium of radio is built on this principle. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Following this decision, three places were selected for the initiation of the Mahaweli Community Radio (MCR) project, at Mahaweli H, Anuradhapura, and Dambulla. Started for a two-year period in January 1981, till 1983, the collaboration between UNESCO and SLBC was such that UNESCO (with funding from DANIDA)3 would provide for a project expert, equipment, and training to the tune of USD 314,000 for the first two years. The SLBC, it was decided, would provide salaries for other emoluments, housing, and running costs. The MCR project was then extended to the second and third phases, from 1984 to 1986 and from 1987 to 1989, respectively. The total expenditure for the three-phase project was about USD 900,000, without the overhead costs. The transfer of conceptual know-how from the Danish broadcasting experience can be gleaned from the publicly stated aim,4 which is, ‘to 3  A UNESCO-SLBC Restricted Report prepared exclusively for the Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka, published in July 1984, provides the historical details of the project. 4  A Report titled, ‘Community Radio and Rural Development: Four Essays’ published as part of The MCR Workbook, in 1985, talks about The Tape Workshop and how the concept of participatory radio was transferred to Sri Lanka.

152 

P. RAGHUNATH

transplant the ideas of access and participation in to the context of Third World farmers, within the framework of a major settlement scheme’ (Aabenhus and Jayaweera 1985: 27). The focus of this form of radio broadcasting was to move away from the dominant paradigm of development communication, which was prevalent until the opening up of the economy. Elaborating on UNESCO’s involvement, Ebbesen suggested that after the first couple of years of MCR’s initiation, UNESCO was helpful in bringing international recognition: It was difficult for the SLBC to garner that recognition themselves. In fact, I also remember that the then Deputy Director General of the SLBC, EST Fernando and I attended the first AMARC Conference, in August, 1983, held at Montreal. We presented the MCR experience, and Fernando was able to see the initiative in a new light, since. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Wijayananda Jayaweera, who was then associated with the Rajarata Sewa, and eventually became the Director, International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC) at UNESCO, spoke about UNESCO’s involvement with community broadcasting internationally, and with Sri Lanka, in particular: UNESCO’s involvement in CR began in Kenya; it was called Homa Bay CR. It was shut down in six months by the government there. UNESCO has always wanted to have a good rapport with any country’s government in question. For the Mahaweli CR, they needed the government’s involvement; the Communication Wing’s cooperation was needed. This was also the time when the debate around the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) was on, and UNESCO was in favour of the Global South. But the whole debate was misplaced, since nobody spoke of the imbalance within countries of the South itself. Nobody addressed the issue of media monopolies in countries of South. UNESCO’s main focus was on working with governments. This was changed in 1982 when the General Conference took place. The GC passed a Resolution that while there is an imbalance, UNESCO should promote freedom of expression within and between the nations. The ‘within’ is important too. After 1982, UNESCO started supporting free press and freedom of expression. In 1983, there was a big World Conference on Cultural Policies, held in Mexico. All these international declarations and conventions had a bearing on the Asian media landscape…the need was felt to make it free, independent and plural.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

153

One should see the Mahaweli CR in this NWICO atmosphere. So, there was definitely the push for development-oriented radio services. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Modernisation and Community: Dialectics and Dynamics The Mahaweli Community Radio project was a first-of-its-kind in the region, to make inroads into the structured functioning of the State broadcaster. The Introduction to the MCR Workbook (Aabenhus and Jayaweera 1985) presents this approach to ‘rural and development radio’, going beyond the Extension approach, as follows: ‘send broadcasters to the field, let them listen and learn what real needs of the villagers are, and take this as a point of departure’. Among the many considerations that went into formulating the MCR Approach were the ideas that the villagers looked at the State radio as ‘Mahaththaya-radio’ or radio broadcasting by ‘official/sir/someone above you’; the language was not easily understood at the local level; the radio should cater to their everyday needs and problems; and should have their own community members explaining and narrating things instead of high-level officials. Drawing from such an understanding of community participation in radio programming, employees of the SLBC were sent to work with villagers in the Mahaweli region. Sunil Wijesinghe,5 an SLBC employee, spoke about the initial days of working with MCR: There were three regional stations in Sri Lanka at that time: Ruhunu service in the South, Kanduratta service in Kandy, and the Rajarata Sevaya in North-­ Central Province. We used the Rajarata Sevaya for Mahaweli CR, because we did not have a straight transmitter for Mahaweli. Even Kothmale has parts of the Mahaweli settlement within its ambit. For this region, we used the Kandy service. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Wijesinghe then went on to provide a comprehensive picture of the programme production cycle, allowing for an understanding of the various state actors involved, and the manner in which the MCR emerged as a space for interaction between the villagers constituting the Mahaweli community on ground, and these official state actors: 5  Wijesinghe was to become the Station Manager of the Kothmale Community Radio (KCR), a hybrid CR-multimedia initiative that became popular in the 1990s, the fourth in line since CR was introduced in the island-nation.

154 

P. RAGHUNATH

In 1981, we had two teams comprising three producers each, one operational assistant, two technicians, one cook, two labourers, and maybe a driver. We used to spend one week in Anuradhapuram, which was in the Mahaweli H area. We wore sarongs, like the farmers there used to wear. We wanted to be like the farmers. We used to do research for two days, on their lives, what the issues were, their skills, etc. Then on the third day, we would start recording. We would just go to people and start talking, we used to gather facts. After four days, the recordings would finish. We would come to office in Peradeniya, and for one week, we would listen to the recording. Sometimes, we would spend 10–12 hours over each recording. Each producer would then make half an hour programmes. The SLBC gave us a new office; they also gave salary and subsistence, including the fuel. The UNESCO gave us 8 vehicles, the recording equipment, generators, tents, etc. We then went back after one week. We would ask them to organise a cultural show, which would either be at the community development centre or at the temple. Everyone came to perform whatever they wished to. It would start at 7 pm, when people came back from work. I remember, we would go to the Mahaweli area officers for grievance redressal. We would also invite them to the Mahaweli CR, facilitating interactions on various issues. In the second week, we would do the editing and producing. On the fourth day evening, we have to move from the village and go to Kandy. After 12 days we would invite villagers to come and listen to the programme, to check if anything was wrong and if any errors needed to be fixed. Then, we would edit or reproduce accordingly. At 7 pm, next week, we would air the programme on the SLBC’s Rajarata Sevaya. For all these activities, we had teams simultaneously working for Rajarata and Kandy. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The above narrative helps understand the manner in which those involved with the community radio ran the station in the true spirit of a CR. Despite being employees of the state broadcaster, they were immersed in the socio-cultural life of the community, living and working in tandem with them. Similarly, it also showcases the manner in which the state provided for the CR in partnership with UNESCO. The employees, despite such benevolence from the state, continued to function not as propagandists of the state, but as true ‘community’ broadcasters. The Report, ‘Mahaweli Community Radio: A tool for self-reliant rural development’ (1984), talks about the Folk Music library being an additional gain from the project: ‘This is based on recordings made during the cultural show (or Village Stage as it will be called in the future), which takes place on full evening during the producers’ two-week stay in a village. All contributions

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

155

of village participants are recorded’ (1984: 0–3). Wijesinghe elaborated further on the many ways in which the cultures of those rehabilitated and displaced by the Mahaweli Project found space on the MCR, drawing from his interactions with the communities on ground: We would come up with creative ideas for self-employment. Once it so happened, that there was a pond that was very unclean. We got all the villagers together and arranged a community cleaning of the pond. Then we made an aquarium out of it, and got the Mahaweli officers to bring in some fishes. This is a small example, but that is the way a broadcaster should function and do his job. It is not only about information and entertainment. Only then will the community be with the radio and own it in the true sense, and that is what CR is all about. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

I was able to have informal conversations with a few individuals involved with the running of the MCR, about the interactions between the stations and the SLBC officials. One such interviewee spoke about an experience revealing their dynamics with local political groups and how that impacted the functioning of the community broadcasting on SLBC: This happened in Wattegama village, in Kandy, in 1983. When we had gone there for programming, and stayed at the temple. One gentleman came forth and enquired about why we had not met him first. He turned out to be the village headman, the Gramodaya Mandala Sabhapati, which is a political appointment. We requested him to meet at the temple, since it is a common place, and there would be no political divide there. He refused, and we too didn’t go to meet him. We had to go to the village for our programme production, and I was summoned by the Chairman of SLBC. He conveyed to us that the Minister in charge of Security had instructed not to send us to the village. We told him that if we did not, the villagers would destroy the politician’s house because they love us so much. After some negotiation, we were directed to the Wattegama police station, where we were informed that we would not be provided any security, and that if anything untoward were to happen, we would be arrested. We went back and discussed it as a team of 12, and decided to go ahead. We went really late in the evening, as opposed to our usual morning trip. The priest went as far as saying that if we delayed it by another one hour, they would destroy the local politician’s house. Then, the authorities had to give in. Finally, we even invited the Chairman on the stage and welcomed him! You know, everyone knows that we did what the people really needed, not what we wanted. However, the

156 

P. RAGHUNATH

SLBC wanted to control broadcasting and reduce the expenditure. I kept telling the authorities that this is a good way to counter private radio channels. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

In 1986, a CR was set up at Girundurukotte, in the Mahaweli System C Area, with a separate frequency of 96 FM. It would initially broadcast from 5  pm to 8  pm, and this was gradually increased. The Mahaweli Authority provided the accommodation for a team that was stationed there, comprising three producers and one driver, who worked with village volunteers and youth in making programmes. Similarly, in 1987, the Mahaupallama CR in the Mahaweli H area was set up, in spite of the Rajarate Sevaya broadcasting in the area. In 1991, the Uva CR was set up, and the Pulithisivare CR was set up in the North-Central province. In all, four or five CRs were started, all of them under the aegis of the SLBC. However, the transmitters were with the team, and they did not have to link to the SLBC. Even as these initiatives were taking place in the sphere of community broadcasting on SLBC, other developments were beginning to take place in the private broadcasting and multimedia spaces, concomitant with larger political and economic shifts in the country. The 1980s were the years that saw the beginning of the Sri Lankan Civil War, fought between the Liberation Tiger for the Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Sri Lankan state, beginning in 1983. The latter part of the decade witnessed the second Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna insurrection, also a reaction against the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord, between 1987 and 1989. The former would go on to last about 25 years, and the latter, though unsuccessful and quelled, conditioned the larger media environment. The Sri Lankan state’s reluctance in allowing for independent radio broadcasting, outside of the ambit of the SLBC may be seen in light of this securitised state. However, the further opening up of the economy, in the second half of the 1980s, led to the entry of private players in the radio broadcasting space, in the early 1990s. Even as these shifts were taking place in the political and economic spheres within the country, international actors like the UNESCO were involved in a fourth community broadcasting initiative, this time as a hybrid multimedia initiative, with the introduction of the internet. The Kothmale Community Radio (KCR) initiative was the first under the MCR set of CR stations. Eventually, Internet was introduced, and the Kothmale Multimedia Project was born. Wijesinghe spoke about the troubles with finances that the community broadcasting setups eventually ran into:

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

157

Kothmale started in 1986. We were the first ones at Girundurukotte, and UNESCO funded the project. However, the radio broadcasting closed in 1987, and they did not spend for CR anymore. Handing over CR was the problem, the budget was reduced from $250 to $ 35 per hour. The CR producers did not think of it as SLBC, we looked at it as real CR, and created our own model. We had a lot of problems in Kothmale; we had no vehicle then and had to climb 6–7 kilometres to broadcast because the transmission station was there. The recoding used to go on three times a week, then. After the 1990s, lots of private stations started coming up, and people tuned in to them for entertainment. From 1987, UNESCO stopped funding us. But Jayaweera said that he could support, but insisted that we work on the internet. That’s how, in 1999, the Kothmale Internet project and also monthly printed magazine were initiated. The superiors in SLBC did not know anything about CR.  Eventually, our Internet radio ran well. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Independent Radio on Air in South Asia While this was the situation in the late 1980s in Sri Lanka, Nepal was undergoing shifts in its polity as well. A State characterised by crypto-­ coloniality, as explicated in Chap. 3, combined with the Panchayat system that invoked ideas of a Hindu kingdom backed by Monarchy, was challenged by the Jan Andolan I in 1990. This Peoples’ Movement itself was a culmination of events like a referendum in 1980 and civil disobedience for reform towards restoration of a multi-party system in 1985. In November 1990, a new Constitution underscoring a multi-party democracy alongside a Hindu kingdom upholding a special place for the monarchy was adopted. An important development in the larger South Asian region in the previous decade was the setting up of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), with its permanent secretariat in Nepal. This was coupled with the new-found status for second generation of intergovernmental organisations and aid agencies (Nelson 2011) in a post-USSR world order, only accentuating their presence in the region. The setting up of the Nepal Press Institute (NPI) under the leadership of veteran journalist, Bharat Dutta Koirala, saw close interaction of the media sector with regional players and intergovernmental bodies in the new democracy of Nepal. For instance, in 1991, a first-of-its-kind regional consultation organised by NPI and the Asian Media Information Centre (AMIC) on press systems in SAARC was held in Kathmandu and was attended by policymakers, media practitioners, and academicians. Another

158 

P. RAGHUNATH

important convention was the second annual meeting of the Asian Press Institutes, in 1991, which was attended by the then Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala (of the Nepali Congress, the first party to form the government in post-1990 Nepal), UNESCO representative to Nepal Carlos Amaldo, and Bharat Dutta Koirala. Besides other recommendations emerging out of the meeting, a key development that is of importance to the history of community radio and its policies in South Asia emerged on the sidelines of the meeting. Adhikari (2004), in his work profiling the public life of Bharat Dutta Koirala, narrates this push for opening up of airwaves to the public in Nepal: During a tea-party hosted by the premier, where Koirala was present, UNESCO’s communication representative Carlos A.  Amaldo raised the topic of opening up airwaves for private radio. The PM was concerned that private radio stations in a country surrounded by big nations could hurt the sentiments of the neighbors. Amaldo explained that they were talking about small, local radio stations. The PM turned to Koirala and asked, “Don’t you think it is a good idea? Small radio stations, for local communities?” Koirala confirmed they were talking about small community stations. In that case, the PM said, there was no problem; it could be done. But Koirala knew his words had to be conveyed to his functionaries if they were to be translated into action. Right there, he called for Jay Prakash Prasad Gupta, who was then the PM’s Communication Advisor. He relayed to Gupta the PM’s verdict: “The PM has told me that there is no problem, now you have to begin the process of issuing licenses.” (p. 329)

This interaction, from 1991, and granting of ‘verbal assurance’ (Adhikari 2004), was preceded by the meeting of minds between Bharat Dutta Koirala and Carlos Amaldo, both of whom felt the need for something like community radio in a mountainous country like Nepal where access of the rural population to national media was poor. The above incident gains importance for this study since it sets the tone for some key aspects of policymaking for community radio. The informal venue of the tea party hosted after the regional convention ended emerges, over the next two decades, as a prime feature of community radio policymaking in Nepal and the region broadly. These informal venues emerge as deliberative spaces, providing for dialogue amongst diverse policy actors. This brings to the fore another characteristic theme of policymaking for community radio in Nepal, that of collaboration and coordination between

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

159

diverse policy actors, like intergovernmental organisations, aid agencies, and proponents advocating for community radio. These actors collaborate in various fora and through diverse mechanisms, creating pressure points and pushing for shifts in policies governing community radio in Nepal, as will be illustrated further ahead in the chapter. The ‘Singha Darbar’ Mindset Following the interaction between Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala and Bharat Dutta Koirala, and in the larger context of the constitutional recognition of a pluralistic society, the government convened under the then Communications Minister Narahari Acharya, a High-Level Task Force on Media Policy, in 1992. The media policy prevalent until then had been drafted in 1971 and had further institutionalised tight control of the state over the media. As is the formal practice for policymaking, the High-­ Level Task Force comprised individuals from diverse areas of operation, including journalists, academicians, civil society members, and the like. Rajendra Dahal, a friend of Bharat Dutta Koirala and also a representative of the Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ), was part of the Task Force. Adhikari (2004) indicates that Koirala had put together a set of case studies of the private media policy scenario in seven countries, handing it over to Dahal to make a case for the opening up of the airwaves to private players. In his interview with me, Dahal narrated how the terminology allowing private players made its way into the draft media policy: At that time, FM technology was new technology and we had a new democracy. Koirala and I thought it was a good opportunity. He was very well-­ travelled and mentioned the experiments in Philippines, and asked me to press for including the phrase ‘private FM’ in the draft policy. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Following this, the National Communications Policy of 1992 came into being. An advocacy coalition for community radio, more about which is discussed later in the chapter, was formed and an application for a community radio for NEFEJ was filed. However, despite the Left-of-Centre Nepali Congress government’s lip-service and verbal assurances towards opening of the airwaves, bottlenecks emerged from those in power, both in the political and in the administrative spheres. Adhikari (2004) also goes on to narrate that the advocates for freeing up the airwaves had to

160 

P. RAGHUNATH

eventually contend with disappointment when Communications Advisor Gupta blocked the issuing of license for the proposed community radio when he became the Minister (p. 330). This, again, is only symptomatic of how the last-mile key decision-making with respect to media policies rested with the government that was partly motivated by its own ideology and partly driven by established norms or ‘doxa’ (Bourdieu 1977) that are evidenced in the administrative culture and mindset then prevalent. Dahal, in his interview, elaborated on this: The problem was the bureaucracy and the political parties, and their mindset. For radio and other media also, the traditional mind set was so strong that they were not ready to accept the private sector. It took months and months to convince them, especially the representatives of the government agencies, bureaucrats…to convince them saying, “you should not worry about the radio…they will do no harm to your society or national interest or anything.” It was most difficult to convince them because they were very sensitive and the mindset was very Cold War era mindset…One thing was clear, we had to convince them that it was not anti-national and you should not worry…every citizen, every people all are responsible and everyone will play responsibly. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A prominent media house owner called the government’s stance a ‘luddite position’, since it constantly brought up the idea of national security, citing the Rwandan experience with radio. Reflecting on the fear that held the bureaucracy hostage in the early years, he said: Many of us felt that with an open society should come an open media system. Government control over airwaves had, until then, only given us binaries of pure entertainment and pure propaganda. It was all about government information, development information and propaganda. The participatory nature of radio was something they could not think about. As a government, you cannot not use technology that can advance knowledge, information, participation and entertainment. Rather than doing that, the average bureaucrat, supported by the politician, would not open the space at all. (Personal Interview, 2013)

In accordance with the larger constitutional framework that enshrined democracy, Bharat Dutta Koirala’s efforts, through the National Press Institute, were towards development journalism and a public information system reform. Towards this end, he organised workshops with

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

161

bureaucrats, since he believed that the ‘government bureaucracy was a major hurdle in the development of media’. Adhikari also suggests that Koirala understood that the average civil servants ‘believed denying information was their power, which they did not want to give up’ (2004: 334–335). At a workshop for bureaucrats that was aimed at ‘activating the government spokesperson’, after presentation of case studies of how the public information dissemination system worked across the world, a few spokespersons approached Koirala and suggested that despite whatever they had learnt, he should not expect to see any change in their functioning. Adhikari writes, ‘Their argument was that since the elected leaders and heads of administration held on to their tradition, any efforts they would make towards a change would jeopardize their positions’ (p. 335). They suggested to him that a written, official document was the only way they could delineate their responsibilities. Members of the bureaucracy and political parties themselves indulged in a self-reflective assessment of how deliberations on media policy had transpired earlier on. The current Vice-Secretary, Frequency, in the Ministry of Information and Communication (MoIC), who has been part of the bureaucratic setup in the early 1990s and was involved in the licensing process, spoke about the perception that the bureaucracy had, of demands for opening of the airwaves. He not only spoke about the mindset in Singha Darbar then, but also how he personally perceived the first applicant for a non-government radio license: The first policy document opened the door and now we are here…but the mindset of all the top bureaucrats and all politicians, even at that time was very narrow. I was part of the licensing authority even then. Many of us felt that no private sector should be allowed for the broadcasting because once they have the radio transmitter they would transmit things according to their priorities. There was panic at that time. From the very beginning, I was trying my best to issue a license for the private sector…because they were somehow very reliable parties, these environmental journalists…and first demand was from them. That was my individual take on giving them license then. But this was not possible. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

On the legislative front, the National Broadcasting Act of 1993 was enacted further legalising private FM in the country. The Nepali Congress government collapsed in 1994 due to internal factionalism, paving way for a government formed by the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist

162 

P. RAGHUNATH

Leninist (CPN-UML). The advocates for community radio had to re-start their advocacy efforts with representatives of this government. Contradictory narratives on what transpired on the opening of airwaves for community radio emerged from interviews with advocates and those in government then. Some early advocates of the freeing up of airwaves suggested that the CPN-UML was no better than the Nepali Congress. ‘This was a Communist government, and they did not entertain the idea of opening up airwaves to private players’, said a prominent media practitioner. Adhikari (2004: 356) suggests that Koirala had approached Pradeep Nepal, the then Communications Minister, with the hope that a progressive Left government would be more open to his proposal. While Nepal did make a quick promise, taken in by the stature of Koirala, he was largely reluctant about opening the doors to private players. This, Adhikari says, was ‘a familiar pattern of reasoning within Singha Darbar’. Pradeep Nepal, in his interview with me, spoke about how he perceived the request. In my view, I was trying to be a good Minister, since my predecessor had rejected the license. I was aware that this was the first Communist government in South Asia. So, we had the responsibility to be more pro-people and approachable. I understood that community radio means local radio, for the people. I was open to all these people who were talking about community radio at that time. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Advocates and activists for community radio spoke further about the mindset of the Ministry, reflected through its actions towards these demands. Setting the tone for the implementation of the National Broadcasting Act of 1993, the government promulgated the National Broadcasting Regulation, in 1995. This Regulation allowed the government the right to bring in special clauses and conditions in the granting of licenses to private broadcasters, as permitted by the Act of 1993. ‘According to clause 8(j), “The Ministry has the authority to add other conditions”, the regulation was draconian (for the case of community media) as it even allowed to issue, undefined, “extra” conditions that broadcasters were required to abide by’ (Dahal and Aram 2011). The Communist government was short-lived after a show of ‘no confidence’ in the legislature, and a Nepali Congress-led coalition came into power this time, from 1995 to

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

163

1997. In 1995, the Ministry set up Kathmandu FM,6 the government’s own FM channel. The channel was housed in the premises of Singha Darbar, further fortifying perceptions of how the state wanted to secure the first FM license, before handing it over to private players as laid down in the Act of 1993. Raghu Mainali of NEFEJ, a prominent activist for community radio in Nepal, spoke about how the government initiated the selling of airtime on Kathmandu FM to private players. The government, in its defence said that it drew the legitimacy for this from the 1992 Broadcasting Policy, saying it was an interpretation of its provisions. It was only after securing the first license did the state reconsider the application for community radio made by NEFEJ on behalf of the advocacy coalition. In 1997, the license application of NEFEJ was approved and thus came into being, Radio Sagarmatha, which emerged as the first independent radio station in South Asia. The government, however, drawing on the National Broadcasting Regulations of 1995 made sure to issue a list of 17 clauses with the license, in order to exercise restrained broadcasting. One of the first broadcasters with Radio Sagarmatha spoke about the conditions that came with the license: There was a provision for a committee in which one government representative would be part of it. It was called Program Decision Committee, and we would first show all programmes and modalities to that committee. If that committee passed the programme, we could broadcast that. This was a provision. If I look back now, I remember that it was very difficult to run a radio station without broadcasting news, without asking for advertisement … there was no revenue and government also could not provide any subsidies. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Recollecting his experience of working with Radio Sagarmatha further, he said: We had to keep one thing in mind…the government was doing this as a trial. They wanted to see Radio Sagarmatha as a pilot radio. If Radio Sagarmatha would be successful, then other radio stations would get license. But if this effort failed, it would mean that the others would have a hard 6  ‘In consonance with the policy of forging ahead in tune with the changing broadcasting scenario, Radio Nepal launched the first FM Channel in Nepal on The 30th Kartik 2052 B.S.(16th Nov. 1995)’.—Sourced on April 21, 2016, from http://radionepal.gov. np/?page_id=132.

164 

P. RAGHUNATH

time getting a license. That was the bottom-line of the government’s outlook towards us and they monitored us quite closely. The problem for the government was that the law of 1992 was a liberal one. And the problem for us was that the bye-laws and clauses brought in by the government restricted the liberal nature of the law. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

These experiences with Kathmandu FM and Radio Sagarmatha are indicative of the interpretive nature of the entire ambit of the policy process. In this case, the interpretation was done by effecting subordinate legislation for argumentation that is supportive of the State’s interests. In summary, this State of the early 1990s had techno-bureaucratic doxa (Ojha 2006) inscribed as administrative culture as a result of the amalgamation of the political climate. Further, it drew on legacy law (Braman 2004) of a media policy from 1972 that disallowed any non-state entity from broadcasting and traditional perceptions and bureaucratic practices that get codified as norms.

Understanding Cultures of Governance The legal and regulatory framework and cultures of legality for broadcasting in Sri Lanka serve as a lens to understand international decrees (both legally binding and non-binding), national laws and acts, the normative aspects of legal systems, and the shaping of people-centric processes. This section attempts to bring together an understanding of these legal aspects, as they have played out in the practice of law and policy governing the practice of community broadcasting in Sri Lanka. Acts and Laws: Continuities and Changes As indicated earlier, the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Act of 1966 transformed Radio Ceylon into the government corporation of SLBC. While it is under the ambit of this Corporation that community broadcasting was operational, numerous instances of negotiations on the legal front to regulate broadcasting as a whole, inclusive of its normative aspects, can be found since the late 1980s. These developments may be seen in congruence with the opening up of broadcasting to private players, in the form of deregulation. The Constitution of 1978 enshrines freedoms pertinent to the media, in various Articles. Article 10 deals with the freedom of thought,

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

165

conscience, and religion (Banerjee and Logan 2008: 449). Similarly, Article 14(1)(a) declared that every citizen of Sri Lanka is entitled to ‘the freedom of speech and expression including publication’. Restrictions on the freedoms guaranteed by Article 14(1)(a) comes in the form of Articles 15(2) and Article 15(7), both of which implicate national security, racial and religious harmony, contempt of court, defamation, protection of public order, and so on. Pinto-Jayawardena and Gunetilleke (2012: 13) also point to the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of 1978, which allows the imposition of total ban on the advocacy of secession from the Sri Lankan state. The authors then point to legislative provisions, like Section 120 of the Penal Code, which pertains to Sedition, the Public Performance Ordinance of 1912, the Official Secrets Act of 1955, the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1981, and the Emergency Regulations under the Public Security Ordinance of 1947 (ibid.). The authors move on to posit that while Constitutional and legal guarantees persist, their interpretation and operationalisation by the Sri Lankan state has been in an illiberal fashion (2012: 14). They contend that: media reform does not merely concern the amendment of legal provisions. Instead, reform measures raise fundamental questions about the media culture in Sri Lanka. Thus reform must involve an integrated and holistic process of reforming not only the legal framework, but also the institutional and educational frameworks pertaining to the media together with subversive state practices. (2012: 14)

In this light, one could examine developments on the political and legal front over two decades, starting from the late 1980s. For instance, in 1987, the 13th amendment to the Constitution brought about the provisions for the establishment of a Provincial Council for each Province, as an endeavour towards devolving power from the Centre. However, broadcasting was seldom subject to such power-sharing, with the Uva Community Radio that is elaborated upon further ahead in the chapter, being an exception. Broadcasting in Sri Lanka saw deregulation in 1992, with private players entering the media landscape. The Maharaja Television Network (MTV), in collaboration with the Singapore Telecommunications Limited (SingTel), was launched that year and initiated broadcast in December 1992 (Page and Crawley 2001). A few years hence, Sirasa TV and Shakti

166 

P. RAGHUNATH

TV were launched, making further strides towards the opening up of private broadcasting. The country saw a change of government around this time, with the UNP government defeated by the People’s Alliance led by Chandrika Kumaratunga. In October 1994, the then Minister of Information in the newly elected People’s Alliance government had presented a cabinet paper proposing the reform of existing regulations governing the media sector, in favour of freedom of expression and the right to information. A ‘Committee to Advise on the reform of laws Affecting Media Freedom and Freedom of Expression’ was formed and was headed by senior lawyer R. K. W. Goonesekere in 1996. The Committee Report, in line with its mandate of identifying areas for media reform, outlined some key ideas for change. These included, amongst other things, taking cognisance of Articles 18 and 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and of freedom of information and find reflection in the Sri Lankan Constitution. Broadly, the Committee recommended that the provisions of the Constitution governing freedom of expression and information be amended in alignment with international decrees and covenants. Besides reflecting on laws dealing with defamation, secrecy, and the like, the Committee also put forth the proposal for an independent broadcasting authority to regulate licensing and the setting up of an independent media council to serve as an Ombudsman. A programme broadcast as part of the National Education Service (NES) turned out to eventually provide for a landmark case on the right to hold opinions. Samarasooriya, Director (Training and Foreign Relations), SLBC, spoke about a participatory programme called the ‘Kamkaru Prajawa’ (the labour community), which was on air, one morning in 1995. A caller named Wimal Fernando had brought up an issue that was pertinent then. The Fernando versus SLBC and Others case describes this as follows: The programme included a telephone interview with the Hon. Minister C. V. Gooneratne. In the programme several workers of Kundanmals Ltd., were interviewed in connection with a strike and the promises given by the authorities to the workers. The Hon. Minister of Industries (Mr. C. V. Gooneratne) said that this did not come within his purview but only the Hon. Minister of Labour. Then the workers stated that the Hon. Minister of Labour had stated that he was not responsible and it was the

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

167

Minister of Industries who was responsible. Workers said that before the General Election 1994, the Hon. Minister Gooneratne came to the work place and promised to solve all the problems but now he had forgotten everything. There was indication that the Hon. Minister of Labour was also to be interviewed but suddenly the programme was stopped and there was an announcement that songs would be broadcast thereafter. There was not a single NFEP broadcast after this and the NFEP virtually came to an end.7

The Courts ruled, in this case, that the right to hold opinions was a corollary of the freedom of thought, under the purview of Article 10 of the Constitution, without the need to lay claim to Article 14(1)(a), which posits the right to freedom of speech. Samarasooriya reflected on the manner in which the SLBC took this forward, allowing for an understanding of legal interjection, administrative intervention, and their larger implications for broadcasting: The Supreme Court decided that two particular fundamental rights were violated, the right to information, and right to freedom of expression. The listener was paid compensation, but sadly enough, the NES was not reinstated. So from that particular point, the focus of broadcasting went back by fifty years. But in the long run, ironically, this very same format has now become indispensable with all the radio and TV channels. You see that was the point when all the interactive programs were simply stopped. Then what the corporation did was, they came up with a pseudo education service with a fancy name, simply to maintain the argument, that the education service was not stopped, and that we still have the same programme. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The above narration is perhaps reflective of the appropriation of particular organic ideas and their transformation, which are often rendered far removed from the original intent behind them. Similarly, in 1997, the Broadcasting Authority Bill was pronounced unconstitutional, since it upheld the setting up of a regulatory body with powers to suppress freedom of thought and speech, especially in matters of license allocation. While the above provide a glimpse of the various acts and legal provisions that have, at varied junctures, structured broadcasting in the island-nation, 7  Retrieved from the Human Rights Library, archived by the University of Minnesota, http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/srilanka/caselaw/Speech/Fernando_v_SLBC.htm; accessed on April 30, 2017.

168 

P. RAGHUNATH

an account of the ground-level politics and practice of broadcasting helps piece together an understanding of the cultures of broadcasting in the island-nation, as far as it is relevant for community broadcasting. Broadcasting Cultures: Politics and Practice Even as the Sri Lankan state, the legal apparatus, and the SLBC shaped overarching policies, the politics seen in the practice of broadcasting provide a lens to comprehend everyday negotiations on ground. Sunil Wijesinghe, in his interview, spoke about the SLBC staff’s interactions with officials and higher-ups, as also politics internal to the Corporation. For instance, Sunil Wijesinghe spoke about his involvement in running the Kothmale CR in some detail, providing for an understanding of interactions on ground, and their eventual uptake at the SLBC. Between 1986 and 1999, the SLBC supported us, they paid our salaries, and every month, we would have meeting with directors. Eventually, CR became a white elephant, and the Director conveyed this to us. But we were very involved with our community. So, we made a case for CR and showed them that the listeners are with us. We got permission to increase broadcasting and to get advertisements. We spoke to businessmen, and told them that the CR is going to shut down. Then, we earned money; in one month, we got more than 35,000 LKR. Then, it became 150,000 per month; and even spoke to the DG about paying volunteers. This was a relief on SLBC. Announcers are paid Rs. 24 per minute in Colombo. So, Kothmale was FM in the morning and CR in the evening. In all this, we must understand that there’s a difference between hearers and listeners. Hearers passively hear, and listeners participate. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Having elucidated this close association with the larger community for KCR, Wijesinghe spoke about his own politics: After I left, one director was interested to come and take over. Many got themselves transferred from Colombo to Kothmale, they tried to become directors. They were all from the current government’s party (sic). After I left, each of them tried to become the director. There was also a lot of politics in the SLBC union. Finally, the station was shut down. In 1994, the UNP government lost. The SLBC directors knew I was a party worker and the director was okay with it. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

169

The above narratives allow for an understanding of not just party politics, but aspects of the everyday manifestations of the business of localised media. By linking them to the political economy of media practices, like larger policy questions of licensing and spectrum allocation, one arrives at a holistic understanding of the varied facets of the governance of community broadcasting. For instance, the issuing of the first license for private broadcasting was done in a non-transparent manner, as related by some interviewees. Prof. Rohan Samarajiva, Founding Chair of LirneAsia, provided a snapshot of the licensing process in Sri Lanka, suggesting that the norms for licensing set out since the initial days of the opening up of the media in the country could be said to be characterised by patrimonialism and clientelism. Mitra (2011) and Kochanek (2000) describe patron-­client relations as a defining feature of the cultures of governance in South Asia, wherein certain groups are allowed the access and leeway to resources of varied kinds by virtue of connections and influential patrons. Prof. Samarajiva suggested that this could be seen in the patterns of politico-­ business interactions and nexus that dominates the political economy of the broadcasting industry. For instance, even the first private television license was handed to the brother of a minister, just when the economy had opened up, when the government did not have a television station of its own. After he fell out with a partner, the television became a government television channel. Even the negotiations over broadcasting laws are put out in the public, but with little room for negotiations, leaving room for cosmetic discussions. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Samanmalee Swarnalatha of the Saru Praja FM also indicated that frequency allocation was done based on political considerations, most of the times, favouring certain private players. For instance, Sirasa FM was the first to be allowed to broadcast news, which was not allowed prior to that.

Airwaves as Public Property The early 1990s saw a marked shift in India’s economic policy, with the opening up of trade barriers in favour of liberalisation. With commercial media already established in the region in Sri Lanka, and more certainly in other parts of the world, the shift was slowly beginning to occur in the

170 

P. RAGHUNATH

Indian media landscape. The Memorandum on Economic Policies8 stated, ‘The thrust will be to increase the efficiency and international competitiveness of industrial production, to utilize foreign investment and technology to a much greater degree than that in the past, to improve the performance and rationalise the scope of public sector and to reform and modernise the financial sector so that it can more efficiently serve the needs of the economy’. Price and Verhulst’s (2000) edited volume on Broadcasting Reform in India presents an understanding, from varied angles, of the country’s tryst with media policy and law, reform, and liberalisation. Sevanti Ninan’s chapter on the history of broadcasting reform in India presents a veritable guide for the media policy scholar. Even though the Congress Party’s manifesto for the elections in 1991 declared that it would free electronic media if it came to power, it was never accomplished, Ninan writes. Globally, the aftermath of the Gulf War saw the rise of private media emerge onto the scene. In India, cable television started beaming out of homes. In 1991, Star Television also started beaming into India. Ninan notes that the government took note of the advent of private interests in electronic media, when it commissioned a committee to look into competition in electronic media, towards the end of 1991. In 1992, Zee TV started broadcasting in the country. The year also saw international news coverage of the demolition of the Babri Masjid, due to the presence of international news television in the country. In 1994, the Government came up with an ordinance to regulate cable television. A year later, a law for cable was also introduced, but never implemented, Ninan writes. In 1995, a dispute occurred between the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) over granting exclusive telecast rights to a private entity and not Doordarshan. The basic tenet that was put under the lens of the judiciary was whether or not, in light of a liberalised economy, the state broadcaster or government-related agencies such as Doordarshan could wield a monopoly over terrestrial signals that would be harnessed for television broadcasting. The Supreme Court had, at its disposal, what emerged to be a landmark in terms of defining the contours of the public sphere in India and who could lay claim to the airwaves and, in turn, shape it. The judgement saw the Supreme Court pronouncing airwaves as public property, thereby eschewing any claims of monopoly over the airwaves. Those with nascent ideas 8

 Government of India, ‘Memorandum on New Economic Policies’ (1991).

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

171

on citizen access to media defined this judgement as a constitutive moment (Starr 2004), in making a call for community-driven broadcasting in the country, since it allowed for access to the public sphere. The judgement was the beginning of activism for community radio (CR) in India, pronouncing a marked shift from the established top-down and community-based approach to deploying technology for development and broadcasting to community-led broadcasting which became the bulwark of the activism for CR in the country. It brought together disparate groups who were interested in citizen rights and the media, emerging as the site that saw collaborations and contestations over issues of access and freedom of expression. Picking the Cue: Post-Judgement Activism in India The post-judgement phase saw the initiation of activism from different kinds of groupings and actors, all of whom would eventually form the nascent epistemic community for CR in India. These actors were not solely localised ones, but also featured international actors who liaised with domestic activists to articulate issues and agendas.  ransnational Actors Meet Advocacy Coalition for CR: Towards T Transnational Epistemic Communities Voices, a Bangalore-based media NGO played a key role in the early days, holding a series of consultations around ideas of citizen access and usage of media, in September 1996. Among other media that were the focus of discussion, radio also featured as an area of interest. In her interview with me, the then head of Voices spoke about the imperativeness of the consultations, in allowing the transfer of ideas and experiences from other countries: Representatives from the state-run All India Radio, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and experts from Philippines and Latin America were part of these discussions, among others. Experiences from Latin America, where CR was used by citizen groups against repressive regimes were narrated. It opened up a whole new horizon for us and helped us consolidate our initial ideas. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

She thus recalled, indicating the nascent coalescing of transnational policy experiences. Among the other prominent personalities was late

172 

P. RAGHUNATH

Prof. K. E. Eapen, a mentor to Voices, extending his support and activism for CR.  Other actors who came into the fold included the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) and multilateral organisations like UNESCO. In 1996, a diverse groups of activists met at the ‘Consultation on Community Radio and Media Policy’ to advocate for community radio in the country. The group comprised representatives from Voices, the MIB, a representative from UNESCO, media activists, various NGOs, radio practitioners, and academics, among others. It was this consultation that led to a declaration that came to be known as the Bangalore Declaration, following which a task force on CR was formed. The declaration highlighted the need to go beyond the confines of the 1885 Telegraph Act which continued to rule broadcasting in the country. It stated, ‘Centralized, one-way broadcasting…has a limited scope to serve the goals of development, especially in the context of pluralism and diversity which is a singular characteristic of Indian society’, also establishing the need for a three-tier broadcast system in the country. ‘The Bangalore Declaration was thereafter actively used and cited in advocacy efforts with different decision-makers’, the head of Voices shared. Cutting to the larger political context with relevance to media policy in the country, the I. K. Gujral government was in power in 1997 and introduced the Broadcast Bill, which was to also enable the setting up of an independent broadcast authority. Voices, in association with the National Law School University of India, Bangalore, presented a recommendation to the MIB, pressing for the inclusion of community broadcasting in the bill: [A]ny broadcasting policy must carry with it the onus to safeguard the citizen’s right be informed, transmit varied programmes to awaken, inform, enlighten, educate, enrich and entertain all sections of the people and serve the rural and urban illiterate and underprivileged populations, keeping in mind the special needs and interests of the young women, social and cultural minorities, the tribal populations and those residing in the backward areas. The Broadcasting Bill, 1997 must be analysed in this light to see if it fulfils these national objectives. (Bangalore Declaration, 1997)

The former head of Voices also highlighted the presentations made to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communication as another

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

173

key effort. She spoke about the reluctance and fears of the government, and said: They were all hesitant and skeptical about how it would be used. They invoked the example of Rwanda, and were worried that terrorist and separatist groups would use CR for their motives. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

What started off as a nascent transnational advocacy grouping could be said to have emerged as an epistemic community for CR in India, espousing epistemes, norms, and values that invoked the idea of pluralism, the need to go beyond a media policy emanating from a colonial remnant, and the need for space in the emerging media system for groups historically marginalised on various accounts. It is important to note that a unifying feature from early entry of radio in colonial India and the marked shift of the 1990s is the manner in which the entry of private players served as a corollary for the espousing of radio for development. The economic reforms allowed for influx of capital into the media sector from foreign investment and Indian business houses, leading to the consolidation of few large commercial media houses that exert control over the media landscape of the country. At the time of researching for this chapter, the country’s government sought feedback from stakeholders on a possible 100% foreign direct investment in the new media. In one of the early and key works on community radio in India, Pavarala and Malik (2007: 37) talk of the ‘paradox of multiplication of communication outlets and at the same time the diminishing plurality of information’, in the context of media globalisation. The Supreme Court judgement, however, provided for consolidation of notions of public interest in the same space. Public interest has often served as a check-and-­ balance measure, acting as a normative cornerstone for media policymakers in judging media systems (Napoli 2001). The tension between market forces and justifying policies on grounds of public interest in a neoliberal economy, Napoli says, characterises media policymaking in many countries today. The first auction of FM frequencies took place in May 2000, with 108 licenses given in 40 cities of India. This marked a shift in the kind of actors operating in the radio broadcasting sector in India and served as a fillip to activists demanding the opening up of the airwaves to the people. Following this development, in July that year, the epistemic community

174 

P. RAGHUNATH

comprising CR activists, NGOs, representatives from AIR and UNESCO convened at Hyderabad, at a conference jointly organised by Voices and the Sarojini Naidu School of Arts and Communication. The first two days of the conference saw participants exploring and understanding international experiences with CR. On the third day of the conference, the participants visited Pastapur village of Medak district of Andhra Pradesh. The consultation, funded by UNESCO, took stock of developments since the pronouncement of the 1995 judgement. The consultation saw the demonstration of affordable, low-cost technologies and an understanding of how they could be brought in towards making a call for CR. The group passed the Pastapur Declaration, asking the Indian government to allocate frequencies specifically for community broadcasting in the country. In December that year, a Media and Human Rights workshop was organised by Drishti Media Collective and the Magic Lantern Foundation, as part of a conference on ‘Globalisation, Social Movements, Human Rights, and the Law’, in Panchgani, Maharashtra, allowing for further deliberation on community radio. Discussions around the policy frameworks of various countries and the idea of ‘community’ were discussed, among other things. Discussions centred around national elections and utilising the mood to negotiate with the government. Similarly, the idea of liaising with the local government was also critically evaluated, alluding to the notion of truly independent community radio. The group concluded that multi-pronged advocacy was needed. Representatives were to meet the then Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Sushma Swaraj, seeking the following: (a) Free time of up to one hour on the local radio stations of AIR for broadcasting by communities belonging to marginalised linguistic groups (or dialects), such as the Kutchi or the Garhwali; (b) Five independent, low-power FM (about 30 km radius) community radio stations, on an experimental basis, to be owned and managed by women’s groups in rural areas; and (c) Limited free time on local radio stations for the visually impaired.

‘The Basket Case for Development’ Lewis (2011) suggests that in the aftermath of the Liberation War of 1971, Bangladesh’s reconstruction was most important and in focus. It is at this juncture that non-governmental organisations (NGOs) started gaining importance in the country. Lewis writes:

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

175

Relief and development NGOs were, therefore, established by various sections of the middle classes—by sincere members of the reformist elite, former student radicals alienated or restricted by formal politics and members of the new emerging middle class seeking to build socially useful careers in social work or in the professionalising worlds of development aid. (2011: 114)

The country also became a very prominent recipient of international development aid, working in areas ranging from disaster relief operations to microcredit in rural Bangladesh. Lewis (2011: 109, 117) cites the Department for International Development (DFID) (2000) as indicating that by the turn of the millennium, close to 22,000 NGOs had come up in Bangladesh. The report suggests that NGOs were receiving close to 17% of the funding given to Bangladesh by international aid organisations. Lewis (ibid.) also states that about ten large Bangladeshi NGOs were consuming about 85% of the aid coming into the sector, in the country. NGOs, today, constitute a key segment of Bangladesh’s governance structure as well, often acting almost parallel to the State (Lewis 2011: 121). They are well funded by foreign aid, participate actively in the transfer of knowledge and know-how, are recipients of technical assistance, and are often seen working towards propelling action and change, as well as with communities, mobilising them for diverse programmes. The sphere of community radio is no exception, with non-governmental actors being the mainstay of the advocacy for CR in the country. It is imperative, at this juncture, to present a historicised understanding of the advocacy for community radio and its policy, in Bangladesh. Advocating for Community Radio: The Early Days I met numerous individuals who, in their individual capacities and as representatives of organisations, had played key roles in the history of advocating for community radio in Bangladesh. There emerged some competing claims and multiple narratives, in terms of the chronology, in the process of unravelling the early days of advocacy for CR. I spoke to Kamrul Hasan Monju of the Mass-Line Media Centre (MMC), an organisation that was an early advocate at the forefront of talking about community radio in Bangladesh. Kamrul Hasan Monju, the Executive Director, Mass-Line Media Centre spoke about the initial efforts that went into

176 

P. RAGHUNATH

lobbying for CR, the knowledge transfer from Nepal, and banding together with media houses in advocating for CR: We tried several times and lobbied with the government, but the government was very reluctant to give license to community radio, in the initial days. It is because there was no community radio policy in Bangladesh for licensing. It was at that time I got a linkage with the AMARC. There was seminar in Nepal in the early 2000s and I attended it. There, I presented the real scenario of Bangladesh and the problems of having community radio in our country. Participating in that seminar…especially listening to them quote the example of Nepal, how they advocated with the government…that helped me a lot. When I came back, I discussed with BNNRC and other organisations who were interested in community radio. However, at the primary stage, from the government side, we got a negative signal. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Monju spoke about efforts directed towards publicising community radio. He suggested that they did not give up despite lack of government interests. They were continuously communicating with newspaper offices, held discussions with them, organised a seminar, symposium, and roundtable on community radio, and got positive responses from the roundtable meeting. People were very enthusiastic to have community radio in Bangladesh, he stated. They then campaigned and spread the message all over the country. From their side, they organised several seminars at the local level on community radio. In the coastal districts, they organised different types of seminars and spoke about the access of the grassroot people in the community radio, he said. They also invited different professionals at the grassroot level who came forward and also raised their interest to have community radio at the local level. Monju also spoke about the entry of the Bangladesh Network of NGOs in Radio and Communication (BNNRC), which eventually became a key organisation for CR in the country, and arguably, the region. Monju spoke about how the BNNRC was into ham radio, before coming to the community radio. When the organisation found that Monju had presented a paper on the community radio in a seminar, they also participated in it. After the seminar, Bazlur Rahman approached Monju and said that they were also interested in community radio and that they should move forward jointly. Bazlur Rahman also developed a strategy on how to have community radio in Bangladesh. Then, they organised a larger seminar with the policymakers in the government, also bringing on board civil

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

177

society members, lawyers, and other professionals in those seminars. A historicised understanding of institutions operational in the policy space allows for an understanding of their entry-points, their initial motivations, and manoeuvres. The narrative below also positions strongly, as with other countries in the region, personality-based politics and policymaking as a key characteristic feature: The Ministry was reluctant and said that they have a broad-based policy on media, but they don’t have special policy for the community radio. We then decided to knock on various doors. Our idea was transmitted to the Director of Radio Bangladesh. Fortunately he was a good friend of mine, we studied together and we had a good discussion. He raised this issue to with the Ministry of Information that it is very important to have the community radio in Bangladesh to cover grassroot-level issues and eradicate poverty, in all of which community radio can play a better role. That’s because the central-level radio stations cannot reach the grassroot level and cannot highlight their lifestyles and livelihood. BNNRC sat along with us and the Secretary of the Minister of Information was there, the Director of Radio Bangladesh was there…we presented everything related to CR and how it plays a key role in human rights. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

This narrative was corroborated by Ahmed Swapan Mahmud, the Executive Director and Founder, Voice, who had been involved with advocacy for CR in its nascent stages in the country. Mahmud spoke about the 1990s, when media consolidation and corporatisation was becoming a reality in the country. He spoke about how those were times of media accumulation and consolidation. Very few people controlled everything. So at that time, they were thinking about how to fight and how to be engaged in a form that would involve the community, he said. They wanted it to be in a form that would serve as the alternative medium for expression and information: As far as I remember, there was a meeting in Dhaka, in 1999. Here, I presented a framework on community radio, along with an organisation called the Centre for Development Communication (CDC), which was run by Muhammed Jahangir, the brother of Muhammed Yunus.9 They organised this meeting, and later some media organisations like the Mass-Line Media 9  Muhammed Yunus was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006, for founding the Grameen Bank.

178 

P. RAGHUNATH

Centre whom we met there…we came together and discussed things and then we started sort off the advocacy. In 2002, there was a policy on ICT, and we wanted to include something in the ICT policy. The policymakers included community radio as an alternative media in the policy. That was one level of advocacy and action that we did. During that period, the WSIS process was on, and I was then the member of the committee of the Bangladesh Chapter, which was headed by a Minister and the Chairman of the BTRC. This meant that I was supposed to contribute to the groundwork and policy work to be presented in the WSIS process. This is when we advocated and prepared numerous documents, which included community radio. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

He said that this was the gradual progression. Further, everyone came together to organise seminars and training sessions. MMC got funds from donors and they did some work, he said. So through this, they went to meet policymakers, and also wrote papers and articles in the newspapers. Through these initiatives, the efforts gained momentum and major players including the ministers, some secretaries, and BTRC chairman and officials got to understand community radio, he stated. He shared that he also visited community radio stations in Australia and got featured in the media, as well. Mahmud related the above narrative of his early involvement with CR in the country, besides indicating the many other individuals and groups, inspirations, and learning that had an influence on the sector in Bangladesh. AHM Bazlur Rahman, the CEO of the Bangladesh Network for NGOs in Radio and Communication (BNNRC) and another of the early advocates and activists for community radio, spoke about the early days and shifts in NGO agendas that had set base in Bangladesh after the Liberation War: After the war of 1971, NGOs came into this country to assist with development and reconstruction. Till about 1985 to 1990, the agenda was relief, reconstruction, and rehabilitation. From the 1990s, there was a shift in NGO agenda. A rights-based approach began to take centre-stage. It was the phase of empowerment. During the previous phase, the media sector was not convinced about the NGO activity. After 1985, with the shift in NGO agenda, development journalism began to take root. Media think-­ tanks from outside began to set up base in our country. It is after this that NGO activity was accepted by the media community. The international NGOs have done a tremendous job in Bangladesh. Earlier, they were very involved with the operation. Later, they started facilitating development

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

179

work through NGOs. For instance, they have helped our government implement the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). (Personal Interview, March 2014)

It was in 1998 that BNNRC felt the need to associate with community media. There was no knowledge creation or preservation happening, it was felt. Most of the knowledge dissemination was done by NGOs who used Information-Education-Communication (IEC) material or inter-­ personal communication. The districts outside of Dhaka had no access to media. It was felt that people needed media of their own, to preserve, develop, and utilise knowledge. This was also the time when there was inertia within the government and civil society about this area. BNNRC started working on this, by deploying the approach of educating government officials. For the next ten years, until the pronouncement of the CR policy in the country, the process of educating the government, journalists, mainstream media, and NGO activists was undertaken. Ten organisations came together for this, with most of them being located in the rural areas. Radio listeners clubs were organised, in collaboration with Voice of America, the BBC, and Deutsche-Welle. Bazlur Rahman spoke about his personal journey in working with CR in Bangladesh and, arguably, the larger South Asian region: In 1998, I attended a course organised by the Participatory Research Institute of Asia (PRIA), in New Delhi. I was with ActionAid. There were eight modules in the course, and the eighth module was on community media. This is where I was introduced to the concept and learnt about it. We were made to develop a plan on how to promote it. I also connected with Sucharita Eashwar, Director, Voices, India, during this time. Voices used to publish a magazine at that time, which was focused on communication rights in South Asia. Unfortunately, she left Voices later, and the magazine also stopped. I was very influenced by Voices and their role in the Bangalore Declaration. They had also published a book on CR then. I had learnt a lot, and developed a plan. I began lobbying, with ActionAid. They had their own strategy and did not feel that the government would open up. I left the organisation in 2000, to set up BNNRC. This is when the process of educating the government started. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The nascent coming together of the epistemic community for CR is witnessed in Bangladesh, with the transfer of policy ideas (Dolowitz and

180 

P. RAGHUNATH

Marsh 1996; Evans 2009) from India’s emerging epistemic community,10 international development organisations, as well as regional experiences and learnings. In three years, by 2000, the epistemic community can be said to have come together in some form in Bangladesh, especially with the forming of the BNNRC.

Negotiating Airwaves While civil society advocates were actively campaigning and advocating for CR through legal routes and by creating awareness on a plural media landscape, on-ground efforts were being made by grassroot bodies. These efforts, as discussed above, fed into discussions at consultative meetings. While the local radio stations of AIR were making programmes in some local languages and re-broadcasting national programmes, there was hardly any space for broadcasts by communities (Pavarala 2003). Continuing its advocacy efforts post consultations, Voices negotiated for time for community broadcasting on local AIR stations, besides calling for opening up of licenses to NGOs (Page and Crawley 2001). In 1997, AIR agreed to allocate airtime for community broadcasting on its local stations. It was in 1999, after two years, that the Chitradurga station of AIR permitted 30-minute programmes on the second Thursday of every month. This was discontinued after four months, by the AIR (Page and Crawley 2001). In the same year, 30-minute programmes made by the Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan (KMVS), with financial support of the UNDP and the technical support of Drishti Media Collective of Ahmedabad, were allowed to air on AIR Bhuj, on Thursdays. They had also initiated narrowcasting as a means of reaching the community. In 1998, Deccan Development Society of Medak district, Andhra Pradesh, set up Sangham Radio, run entirely by rural dalit women. With no scope for broadcasting, they pursued narrowcasting in nearby villages, on a regular basis. In 2000, UNESCO agreed to provide support to Voices through an IPDC grant, for which the latter tied up with an established NGO called the Mysore Resettlement and Development Agency (MYRADA). MYRADA had been working at Budhikote village of Kolar district with 10  AHM Bazlur Rahman, CEO, BNNRC, attended the Pastapur Declaration at Medak district, Telangana, India, in 2000. The Declaration has been written about at length in the previous chapter on India.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

181

women self-help groups. Namma Dhwani (Our Voice) was thus established in Budhikote, in September 2001, with UNESCO providing technical capacity-building and equipment. Since the license for broadcasting was not permitted then, those running Namma Dhwani chose to cablecast the programmes, in 2003. UNESCO’s profile of Namma Dhwani suggests that eventually, computers and multimedia facilities were set up in the centre, in 2002. I spoke to a former Programme Officer with the National Foundation for India (NFI), which funded the Alternative for India Development (AID) in producing the 30-minute community radio programme called Chala Ho Gaon Mein, on the local All India Radio in Daltonganj, Jharkhand, in 2001. Mandira Kalra Kalaan spoke about the earlier experiments with using localised broadcasting as a means of leveraging the potential in community: Back then, NGOs were not using the media like they are today. We were working with the idea of journalists on the ground, and wanted to build their capacities towards development journalism. Community Radio fit in well with this vision, since it allowed for grassroots reporting. For instance, corruption at the local level was never talked about, and we were interested in enabling local journalists to take on such issues. We applied for a permit to air Chala Ho Gaon Mein, in 2001. The NGO had reservations, and were worried that they would not have the content required to run a full-fledged station. We were narrowcasting on AIR, and were airing very localised content. The languages were focused on were the local languages and Hindi. We at the National Foundation for india were putting communication around CR on a national platform. Chala Ho Gaon Mein was an example of how we were pushing the agenda with NGOs, as well as at the national level. Since the NGOs were quite scared, we made a move to make technical training easier. We also helped network with international donor agencies like the America India Foundation, and the UNESCO. Ajay Mehta, who was the Executive Director of the NFI then, took part in a lot of advocacy that had happened, and we were firm on the rights perspective to communication. We were aware that this perspective was not as strong in the advocacy for radio. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

Kalaan went on to highlight the role CR has played, as a young medium, in development. She spoke about how CR had emerged useful in information-­related development (Pavarala 2003).

182 

P. RAGHUNATH

These were the earlier experiments with community-led broadcasting. In 2002, the Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (SERP) was funded by the World Bank, to set up a 1-watt Mana Radio (Our Radio) in Orvakal village of Kurnool district, Andhra Pradesh (Joseph 2002). The local women self-help groups began using the radio to communicate and express themselves. The community radio movement essentially started as a civil society coalition comprising free speech activists, NGOs, academics, international organisations, journalists, and radio enthusiasts. While the crux of their demands was the opening up of airwaves for communities, especially those in media-dark regions at the grassroots, the initial years were dominated by the elite. Ashish Sen, CR activist and formerly, President, AMARC Asia-Pacific, spoke about how the Bangalore Declaration signed in 1996 was driven by the civil society: We did not have grassroot involvement at that stage and were only reactants to the SC judgement. That was a handicap of the Bangalore Declaration. However, by the time the Pastapur Declaration was passed in 2000, we had a few examples of some grassroot engagement. Initiatives like the Namma Dhwani, Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan’s radio, Deccan Development Society’s radio had all started narrowcasting to their respective communities. This acted as tangible pressure, since we had grassroot examples to show. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The above description showcases the using of participatory prototypes to nudge the government towards taking note of the envisaged potential of community radio was a strategy deployed by the group. Importantly, the playing out of the grassroot initiatives changed the contours of the activist grouping. The other push that influenced the demand for opening up of airwaves came from IGNOU’s Gyan Vani initiative. It operated with content guidelines that spoke of 40% of the broadcast content focusing on the community.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

183

Ushering in South Asia’s First Community Radio Policy Competing Epistemes In August 2001, the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) organised a consultation to discuss Gyan Vani (educational radio). Dr. R. Sreedher, the then Director of the Electronic Media Production Centre (EMPC) of IGNOU, spoke about how educational radio came to be part of the discourse on CR: When private players were given FM licenses, the Prime Minister wanted to provide some leeway to the social sector as well. However, the Home Ministry was against this move, owing to the security situation created due to the war with Pakistan a couple of years ago then and the subsequent attack on the Indian Parliament. The PM, hence, was in favour of allocating one frequency to educational institutions and was ready to provide for 40 FMs under the Ministry of Human Resource Development, in-charge of educational institutions. The Ministry is legally not permitted to run radio stations, and hence, IGNOU was made the nodal agency. (Personal Interview, January 2014)

The consultation was organised to define Gyan Vani, wherein it was decided that content on Gyan Vani would be such that 60% would focus on educational content and 40% would focus on community content. Dr. Sreedher stated: Gyan vani was also an important step in moving towards community radio in India, since it helped allay government fears about letting go of their control on radio broadcasting to the social sector. (Personal Interview, January 2014)

There emerged two very different focal points of the discourse on community radio, one of community broadcasting as a necessity for the grassroots in a media landscape dominated by one-way communication from commercial and government radio and the other that spoke of educational and campus radio. It sets the tone for debates amongst activists and advocates in the years ahead, on the conflating of defining features of campus and community radios under a single umbrella. On December 18, 2002, a Union Cabinet meeting was held in New Delhi, which approved the

184 

P. RAGHUNATH

proposal of the then Minister, Information and Broadcasting, to permit well-established educational institutions, universities, and residential schools to run community radio stations. The following month, the MIB announced the guidelines and criteria for licensing of such radio. A debate ensued over The Hoot, over the following months, to interrogate the idea of ‘community’ radio and to evaluate the government’s policy move. Advocates of CR criticised the government’s reluctance in trusting ‘real communities’ with licenses and taking a safe detour by allowing only educational institutions to run CRs. Others contended that while the policy was restrictive, it was a big step forward and continued advocacy would push the government to soften its stance. While many felt that the government had allowed ‘educational’ radio in the garb of CR, some others felt that the radios set up in accordance with the policy could act as community radios, serving the community in and around campuses. Stemming from these concerns, efforts towards legalising ‘community’ radio continued. An interesting development was the intertwining of cable and community radio. In March 2003, Namma Dhwani was made available via cable television in listeners’ homes, with the cooperation of the local cable operator. Similar ideas were being discussed in Mumbai. Meanwhile, Mana Radio at Orvakal was shut down by the government in early 2003, citing non-adherence to licensing procedures. In an article published in the Washington Post, the then Secretary, MIB, was quoted as saying, ‘We have to tread very cautiously when it comes to community radio. As of today we don’t think that villagers are equipped to run radio stations. People are unprepared, and it could become a platform to air provocative, political content that doesn’t serve any purpose except to divide people. It is fraught with danger’.11 This discourse of national security and the citing of risk is a recurrent trope, reminiscent of the colonial government’s distrust of Indian groups taking to broadcasting. This rhetoric invoked by the state is often contested on grounds of upholding human security of communities. Around this time, developments related to Phase 2 of private FM licensing were beginning to take place at the national level. In July 2003, the Amit Mitra committee on radio broadcast policy was set up, the report of which was released in November that year. Among other things, the report 11  http://por tal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13055&URL_DO=DO_ TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html; accessed on May 21, 2014. http://indiatogether. org/trairadio-media; accessed on May 21, 2014.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

185

recommended permitting the broadcast of news and current affairs on private FMs including ‘non-commercial radio’ (this continues to be a bone of contention even today, with the policy banning news on private FMs and CR). In a big development for the broadcast sector as a whole, the Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) was made the regulatory body for broadcast media in the country, in early 2004. Following this, the Amit Mitra committee recommendations were presented to TRAI. The regulator released a consultation paper for Phase 2 of private FM licensing and also held an open house a month later. Activists and advocates of CR used the opportunity to make their presence felt and get their voices heard. ‘Civil society is seldom given a chance to influence public policy in India. For those who have observed the inaccessibility to public airwaves with growing concern, this is an opportunity to speak up and be heard. Both individually and collectively, we must write to TRAI and address the issues that they have raised…Those attending can assert their views on non-commercial radio both for the communities they represent and, more importantly, for the communities that have no voice to be heard in big cities’, wrote Sajan Venniyoor, CR activist, then with Doordarshan. They attended the open house and put forth the demand that CR be discussed.12 In the following months, TRAI released a consultation paper on CR. The paper took stock of the 2002 policy, the establishment of the first radio station under the policy at Anna University in early 2004, and the various community radio initiatives that weren’t allowed to broadcast yet. ‘…a need to expand the scope of Community Radio beyond educational institutions and as a medium for meeting the needs of local communities has been recognized. With this perspective the Authority recommends that any legal entity should be eligible for grant of a Community Radio License’,13 the paper recommended. It also went as far to say, ‘An individual should also be eligible for grant of a Community Radio License’. An open house on CR was held in October that year, marked by debates on whether advertising should be allowed for non-commercial radio. However, there was consensus that news and current affairs should be allowed to be aired on CR. 12  http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2004/08/26/stories/2004082602160600. htm; accessed on May 21, 2014. 13  http://www.trai.gov.in/trai/upload/recommendations/14/recom9dec.pdf; accessed on May 21, 2014.

186 

P. RAGHUNATH

While the legalities were playing out at the policy level, international organisations and civil society advocates continued to engage government officials and authorities in consultations and conferences as important spaces for advocacy. In May 2004, the UNESCO and UNDP supported the MIB in organising a workshop on ‘Designing an enabling framework for community radio’. The civil society consisting of academics14 and activists presented a ‘Consensus Document on Community Radio in India’. The press release by UNDP quotes U. S. Bhatia, the then Joint Secretary, MIB, as saying, ‘What we have now is good but we need to proceed to a new model that allows communities themselves to own and run their radio stations’. A handbook, ‘Step-by-Step’, supported by UNDP and Voices was also released at the workshop. In 2005, a petition ‘Urging The Inclusion Of The Right Of The Communities Within The Community Radio Policy’15 was signed by civil society groups, urging the need to go beyond what they felt was campus radio, as allowed by the government of India until then. Calling the government’s policy ‘discriminatory towards communities’, the petition urged support for the opening up of airwaves to communities. Such advocacy measures on the civil society front, with support from international organisations, saw the government of India opening up the CR policy in 2006 to include non-governmental and community-based organisations.

Narratives of Policy Transfer and Epistemic Cooperation It can also be gleaned that the epistemic community for CR in Bangladesh pushed the policy envelope through the process of education, transferring knowledge and know-how. This, they did, in a three-fold manner: by distributing booklets and literature, by organising meetings and seminars, and by conducting orientation. Bazlur Rahman, in his conversation with me, suggested that accessing policymakers was not a problem and that the problem lies in convincing them of the utility and imperativeness of something like community media, in the media landscape of Bangladesh. He stated that the policymakers at the time were only listening to him but not acting on preferred policy moves. 14  The Department of Communication, University of Hyderabad, participated in preparing the initial draft of this document. 15  http://www.petitiononline.com/comradio/petition.html; accessed on May 21, 2014.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

187

Accessing the policymakers was not difficult at that point. I was a rural journalist, and knew how to enter the circle and lobby. This was an advantage. In 1998, the Ershad regime existed. In 2001, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party came to power. With change in government, there was no change in our strategy. Our effort in the process of education was constant, and there was also no difference in the party reaction. The policy of 2008 is the result of the process of educating policymakers. We found our allies in two or three advisors. Most importantly, Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, the Chief Advisor to the Caretaker government of 2007, was one such person. He insisted upon CR to the government, and took on the role of developing it. Others followed his advice. The Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party were both positively dispositioned to CR. The Awami League mentioned CR in their Manifesto, and the influential members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party said that if elected to power, they would liberate the airwaves. One Mr. Leleen, the presidium Member of the Awami League, and Ambassador Jameel were both supportive of the CR movement in the country, and knew the activists for CR for a decade. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

I also spoke to Abdul Muyeed Chowdhury, former Secretary, and Advisor to the Caretaker Government of 2001, for an understanding of his tryst with the advocacy for CR: I was the Executive Director of the BRAC. MMC and BNNRC came to me, and explained to me what CR was. I started attending more advocacy events organised by them, like seminars etc. Their capacity to reach the government was less than mine. I took it up with the Ministry of Information very seriously. The then Secretary had worked with me as a junior colleague. I had met him at a social gathering, visited him subsequently in the office, and convinced him to organise a meeting. He convened a meeting, and at the meeting, special material was given by the BNNRC. However, we realised that the biggest obstacle could be the Bangladesh Betar. Therefore, we suggested that the Director General of the Bangladesh Betar should become the Chair of the Committee. We were pleasantly surprised after the first meeting, because the DG was convinced that this was a good initiative. He, now, became the protagonist. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

This insight provided by Chowdhury is fascinating, since it allows to comprehend the strategic means of dealing with opposition and of creating policy opportunities. It also allows to tease out the idea of policy performances, especially with the use of the word, ‘protagonist’, which would

188 

P. RAGHUNATH

be elaborated upon further ahead in the chapter. Chowdhury, then, related the story of how the envelope was further pushed. He spoke about how Bazlur Rahman went on to make a report following the meeting, the draft of which was read, edited, and wired to the NGO and government heads. They sent back the draft with inputs on clauses and ideas that may be problematic. Then, it was formally placed in front of a Committee, which approved it, and it was sent to the government. Chowdhury stated: The Secretary at the time was going to retire. I requested him to push for this, since it is very important, and it would be a good end to his tenure. We got him to initiate the process of inter-ministry consultations. We explained that the government would not be required to spend money. It could, instead, earn money through license fees. This process was not completed till the Caretaker Government came into office in 2007. The then Chief Advisor, Fakhruddin Ahmed, took interest and moved it quickly. I can say that we were lucky the Caretaker Government was in power, since it would have taken a long time for it to become a law otherwise. In this case, it was fast-tracked. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Thus, Bangladesh is also the first country in the region to see the cause of CR enter the manifesto of a mainstream political party. Conclusion The above accounts help understand the key actors involved in the early days of CR in South Asia. The transfer of policy ideas, the involvement of international organisations, and collaborations at the national level have been outlined. Further, by elaborating on the national political contexts and the key roles they play in the formal, as also the informal modes of pushing policy, the above accounts set the stage to understand the interplay between larger contexts and the CR policy in the region. Narratives containing nuggets of policy histories, situated rationalities, and claims-­ making have been presented in the chapter, also alluding to early experiences that showcase the principles, policies, performances, and practices related to early conversations and ventures in community radio in South Asia.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

189

Discussion: A Glocal Public Sphere in South Asia At this juncture, it is imperative to look at the interface between communities, the Westphalian nation-state, and transnationalism, as evidenced in the above narratives and early experiences of community radio in the region. The idea of a glocal public sphere on community radio needs to be probed, to understand the dialectics of transnational interventions and local practices of broadcasting and community-oriented organisation of activities in the region, only coloured by the national contexts. Crack (2008) talks about the need to overhaul Habermasian theory of the public sphere from being foundationalist and statist (her argument), to make it more reflexive and critical, as well as transnational (and I would argue, glocal). In doing so, she reconstructs the theory of the public sphere, critiquing the conception of a singular public sphere to talk about gender and other marginalities that do not find adequate mention in the traditional conception of the Habermasian public sphere. She draws on Fraser (1990) to talk about counter public spheres and brings in the idea of multiple public spheres, normativity, and shared publicity, before presenting her thesis of the transnational public sphere. She also draws on Bohman (1998), who talks about going beyond a Eurocentric conception of the public sphere, addressing diverse historical conditions. She, then, advances her thesis: A transnational public sphere can be understood as a site of deliberation in which non-state actors reach understandings about issues of common concern according to the norms of publicity. (p. 65)

Volkmer (2014), in her work on the global public sphere, talks about the blending of the local with the global, in an ‘interdependent’ era of public communication. Dahlgren (2015), reviewing her book, talks about how the ‘global public sphere operates across supra- and sub-national societal contexts’. However, while Volkmer talks about globalisation that is not dominated by the West and reflects on the disjuncture from the movement of people and their utilisation of media in non-national contexts, the work does not take into account the reiteration of state capacities that has happened in the last half a decade, also in South Asia. Ideas of globalisation, the public sphere, global civil society, and the like fall short of understanding and presenting the interaction of the micro, with the global, mediated by the state. The complex interactions that they

190 

P. RAGHUNATH

lead to amongst diverse actors make it difficult to steer clear of the messiness of everyday politics and interactions in spaces where they occur. It is this gap that this book seeks to fill, bringing to light linkages between micro grassroot politics and expressions, with the macro and supranational actors and arenas of interface and interactions, as evidenced in South Asia. It links norms and values to the abstract and real regional conceptualisations of space, as defined for this research endeavour, in Chap. 2. This chapter has showcased the initialising of community radio in South Asia starting with Sri Lanka. Actors like international donor agencies, multilateral bodies, international non-governmental organisations, grassroot activists, transnational civil society, policy communities, and the like participated in activities that qualifies as deliberation, in relation to each other, indulging in advancing the common cause of community radio in the region. With its airing, community radio at once becomes a localised site of glocal politics and policies. Its givenness is not of a homogenous nature; it is conceptualised and formulated by glocal activities, rendering it as a glocal site of deliberation. One witnesses the formulation of a public sphere in South Asia, marked by policy activities—dialogic and deliberative—drawing on not only Western rationalities, but also localised forms of understanding and meaning-making that are peculiar and particular to the many voices in the region. To emphasise further, a South Asian public sphere that is open-ended—drawing on global and local realities and rationalities—without eluding diverse voices is seen, as this chapter showcases. Drawing on this thread, the next chapter will focus on weaving together narratives of various actors, the norms and rationalities they advance, and the socio-political characteristics of their activities in the region, only colouring the South Asian public sphere that one finds being continually advanced, further more with their interactions.

Bibliography Aabenhus, O., & Jayaweera, W. (1985). The MCR Workbook: A Summary of Experiences in Community Radio for Rural Development. Colombo: Mahaweli Community Radio. Adhikari, D. (2004). A Nepali Quest for Journalistic Professionalism: The Public Life of Bharat Dutta Koirala. Columbia: University of Missouri. Banerjee, I., & Logan, S. (2008). Asian Communication Handbook 2008. Asian Media Information and Communication Centre, and Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information. Nanyang Technological University.

4  A GLOCAL PUBLIC SPHERE: OPENING UP OF RADIO TO COMMUNITIES… 

191

Bohman, J. (1998). Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(4), 400–425. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Braman, S. (2004). Where has Media Policy Gone? Defining the Field in the Twenty-First Century. Communication Law and Policy, 9(2), 153–182. Crack, A.  M. (2008). Contending Theories of Transnational Public Spheres: Propositions for an Alternative Analytical Framework. In Global Communication and Transnational Public Spheres (Palgrave Macmillan Series in International Political Communication). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Dahal, S., & Aram, A. (2011). Crafting a Community Radio ‘Friendly’ Broadcast Policy in Nepal. Observatorio (OBS*) Journal, 5(4), 45. Dahlgren, P. (2015). (Book Review) The Global Public Sphere: Public Communication in the Age of Reflective Interdependence. Information, Communication and Society, 18(12), 1423–1425. Dolowitz, D. P., & Marsh, D. (1996). Who Learns What from Whom? A Review of the Policy Transfer Literature. Political Studies, 44(2), 343–357. Evans, M. (2009). Policy Transfer in Critical Perspective. Policy Studies, 3, 243–268. Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56–80. Joseph, A. (2002). Working, Watching and Waiting. Women and Issues of Access, Employment and Decision-Making in the Media in India. United Nations. Kochanek, S. (2000). Governance, Patronage Politics, and Democratic Transition in Bangladesh. Asian Survey, 40(3), 530–550. Lewis, D. (2011). Bangladesh: Politics, Economy and Civil Society. New  York: Cambridge University Press. Mitra, S. K. (2011). Politics in India: Structure, Process, Policy. London: Routledge. Napoli, P. (2001). Foundations of Communications Policy: Principles and Process in the Regulation of Electronic Media. New York: Hampton Press. Nelson, A. (2011). Towards a Post-Crypto-Colonialism: Notes on the Anthropology of Nepal’s Non-Colonial Condition. American Anthropological Association meeting, Montréal, QC. Ojha, H. (2006). Techno-Bureaucratic Doxa and the Challenges of Deliberative Governance: The Case of Community Forestry Policy and Practice in Nepal. Policy and Society, 25(2), 131–175. Page, D., & Crawley, W. (2001). Satellites over South Asia: Broadcasting, Culture and the Public Interest. London: Sage. Pavarala, V. (2003). Building Solidarities: A case of Community Radio in Jharkhand. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(22), 2188–2197. Pavarala, V., & Malik, K.  K. (2007). Other Voices: The Struggle for Community Radio in India. Sage Publications.

192 

P. RAGHUNATH

Pinto-Jayawardena, K., & Gunetilleke, G. (2012). Legal, Industry and Educational Reforms Pertaining to the Print Media. In Law and Society Trust. Price, M., & Verhulst, S. (2000). Broadcasting Reform in India: Media Law from a Global Perspective. Oxford University Press. Rao, Y. V. L. (1975). Information Imbalance in Asia. Media Asia, 2(2), 78–81. Starr, P. (2004). The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications. New York: Basic. UNESCO. (1984). Mahaweli Community Radio: A Tool for Self-Reliant Rural Development. UNESCO. Volkmer, I. (2014). The Global Public Sphere: Public Communication in the Age of Reflective Interdependence. Cambridge: Polity Press.

CHAPTER 5

Plural Policy Actors and Narratives of Practice

Despite the internal differences and uniqueness that each of the countries bring to the table, common crypto-colonial/colonial pasts as discussed in Chap. 3, and similar early trysts with the mandates of international development intervention and practice of community radio (CR) in the initial days allow for a collaborative project in writing about community radio policies in South Asia, as showcased in Chap. 4. This chapter presents the range of policy actors of varied typologies and kinds, in the policy space for CR in South Asia, complete with their individual interests, values, and norms that they espoused, their own rationalities and efforts at claims-­ making, the rhetoric and the many manifestations their efforts took, and the communicative acts deployed in the pursuit of their rationalities. As such, the focus of this chapter is on the plural articulations by diversified policy actors related to community radio in South Asia, presented as policy narratives.

Unravelling Actor Stances This chapter makes the effort towards critically appreciating the range of policy actors involved in the CR space in South Asia, across scales of the global to the local, and different typologies. It showcases their key stances and articulations, at a number of venues and policy junctures, helping understand their intentions and interests, locus standi with respect to CR, and norms that they apprehended or discarded. Risse et al. (1999), in their © The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_5

193

194 

P. RAGHUNATH

work on human rights norms and state behaviour, speak about the identity of actors. Drawing from this understanding, one can see how ideas, norms, and adherence to certain epistemic values associated with CR come to colour the identity of policy actors for CR. This chapter introduces and presents the stances of diverse policy actors, ranging from community radio themselves to international donor agencies, multilateral bodies to various Ministries and wings of the governments of the states under study. The identity of these various policy actors renders the policy process multi-pronged and multi-faceted. Papanastasiou (2017) critically interrogates the idea of ‘scale’ in the policy process, arguing from a human geography grounding, to examine its politics and practice. She argues against a ‘flat ontology’, which involves ‘studying humans and objects in their interactions across a multiplicity of social sites’ (Marston et al. 2005: 427). While scholars have argued for the study of social sites, which this research work also commits itself to, the author argues that a post-structuralist analysis would uncover the politics of being situated at each scale and calls for further uncovering of scale as a meaning-­making device. She draws on Moore (2008) to showcase how scale has often been conceived of as a ‘category of analysis’, as against a ‘category of practice’. She draws on the work of Brubaker and Cooper (2000), who speak of ‘categories of practice’ as ‘categories of everyday experience, developed and deployed by ordinary social actors…to make sense of themselves, and of their activities’ (2000: 4). They suggest that by reifying a scale, one contributes to an ontological positioning of the scale, as against an epistemological one that is explanatory. This understanding is useful to this research endeavour, since this chapter showcases the manner in which various policy actors across scales interact and construct their worldviews, which intersect with each other, rendering the policy process complex.

Community Broadcasters in Sri Lanka As laid out in the previous chapter, the late 1970s and early 1980s were witness to the opening up of government radio run by the SLBC, to communities. Efforts towards decentralisation were first seen in the setting up of the SLBC’s Regional Service, with three regional stations opening up at Rajarata in Anuradhapura, Ruhunu in Matara, and Kandurata in Kandy, in

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

195

1979, 1980, and 1983, respectively. This shift from public broadcasting to efforts that were rooted in community broadcasting under the aegis of the SLBC, precluding the possibility of making separate policies for this form of broadcasting, is important to understand. Community radios themselves emerge as key actors in the policyscape governing them. While universally congruent definitions and approaches to community radio exist, it is imperative to allow a grounded definition and idea of the medium to emerge. The Practice of Community Broadcasting: Epistemic Forms and Manifestations Drawing from the understanding of community broadcasting as practised, despite operating under the SLBC, the policy ethnography in the island-­ nation also allowed for an understanding of the various epistemic forms and manifestations that community broadcasting took. This becomes important for an ethnography of policy, since it helps understand the conduct of broadcasting and its policies on ground, in its many manifestations of practice, replete with negotiations with the state broadcaster. This is consistent with the idea of Practices, as put forth by Wagenaar (2011). Practice, in its interpretive form, is hermeneutic, discursive, and dialogic and emerges critical and contributing to the deepening of democracy. This practice can be seen in the form of the participatory prototypes as elucidated in the previous chapter pertaining to India’s experiences, as also in the plural articulations of policy actors.  articipation and ‘Community-Based’ Broadcasting P Sri Lanka is seen as the pioneer in participatory and what is now being called ‘community-based’ broadcasting in the South Asian region. As laid out above, the opening up of the economy and the entry of transnational actors, processes of modernisation, and the everyday efforts on ground allow for an understanding of this manifestation of community broadcasting. Uphoff (1985) defines four ways of participation observed in participatory communication for development: participation in implementation, participation in evaluation, participation in benefit, and participation in decision-making. The interviewees narrated their own understanding of this form of making media.

196 

P. RAGHUNATH

Sunil Wijesinghe gave a glimpse of how the CR emerged as participatory media, with the programming based on interaction with local cultures and bringing in the community: The broadcasting radius of the station was 25 kilometres. Sometimes, even down South they could hear us. The focus of programming was on health, education, entertainment, dramas. We had a news programme called kadamandiya, which means ‘bazaar’ or market. This was the mode of providing news, wherein we would gather information from the village. There was was a kade akka (meaning shop-girl), who would discuss news in that bazaar environment. We would also have the village headman or ranbanda, who would talk to her and they would discuss daily happenings. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

I was able to contact the former Secretary of a Listeners’ Club, who also described annual events organised by the radio listeners’ club, which he saw as an example of participation. We would exchange views, enjoy thoroughly, be live on air throughout the day. We would have an open house and have discussions on air and in the stations; it was open to everyone. We had this interesting concept of an open-ended programme, wherein people would meet us on the road, and talk to us. One programme would lead to another. In our country, everything is so Colombo-centric. These examples are shining ones of actual community participation. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Wijayananda Jayaweera of UNESCO, meanwhile, suggested that community radio broadcasting in Sri Lanka be seen as community-based broadcasting, since the ownership has always rested with the SLBC. Thus, participation and community-centricity of varied proportions emerge as an important defining episteme of community broadcasting in Sri Lanka and, indeed, the South Asian region.  ducation: New Education Service and Campus Radio E Even as participatory development, in the context of the Mahaweli resettlement plan, was an entry-point to understanding the community-based broadcasting in the country, another version of community broadcasting was articulated by an official of the SLBC. Thilina Samarasooriya, Director (Training and Foreign Relations), SLBC, spoke about the New Education Service, elaborating on the episteme of non-formal education as a way to

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

197

understand the efforts undertaken by the broadcaster. He demarcated this form of broadcasting service from the Traditional Education Service, was founded to care for the educational needs of school children in the whole country. He suggested that in some stages, separate frequencies had been allocated to this particular radio channel, and was focused on curriculum, was exam-oriented, and looked at formal education. He then went on to speak about the New Education Service: The New Education Service was a bold experiment where we designed a project to bring the principles and concepts of community radio into the mainstream radio here in Sri Lanka. The team of educational broadcasters, under Thilak Jayaratne decided that the educational service as such should cover much more, especially in the non-formal and informal domains in education. So we adopted the concepts of community radio, for this mainstream radio project, where we identified separate and discrete chunks, target listener groups and decided to allocate different airtime slots. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The NES/NFEP initiated the identification of diverse communities, treating each of them as different ones, having their own specific set of unmet needs, issues, and problems to deal with. Samarasooriya elaborated: It was this way with the blue collar workers, the commuters, the white collar workers, etc. We treated each and every category as separate distinct communities and from our side, we also wanted to change how the broadcasters themselves approached the production and presented it. Now, traditionally, in the mainstream radio in Sri Lanka, things used to be quite individualistic. Typically if I am the producer, I am responsible for selecting my programme areas. But with this experiment, we decided to have production administration teams. So we relied to a large extent on team-work, and each and every time-slot was assigned for different target listener groups. There was a station team put in in-charge for those particular time-slots. What was radically different from other programmes in mainstream radio, from all the other channels was that the production and presentation teams, the station teams went out and actually met these communities and formed connections with them. They went and engaged with them, found out what their likes and dislikes are, what their particular issues and problems are, what their needs are, and then designed the programming accordingly with the representation and participation from the communities themselves. So from each and every target listener group, people were encouraged to come up with programme ideas and with as much content programme material as possible,

198 

P. RAGHUNATH

bring their problems and issues and work together with the station team to produce and even present live, their own programs. That was the crux, the essence of our methodology. In mainstream radio, there was none of that. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

This showcases the construction of the radio’s ‘community’, in this instance, the labour class. It also highlights the understanding of divergence between mainstream radio and community-based radio that the interviewee talks about. Samarasooriya also spoke of the constant tussle between toeing the SLBC’s line and their efforts to work with communities on ground, the legal aspects and particularities of which are elaborated in the next section. The New Education Service was an interesting manner in which the idea of community radio was operationalised. Similarly, when advances in technology were added to the mix, innovative ways of making community broadcasting emerged, as detailed ahead.  ew Technology: Experimentation and Innovation N In 1986, the Kothmale Community Radio (KCR) project was started. This was the fourth such initiative of broadcasting, interspersed with the entry of the new technology of the Internet. Located at Mawathula, in the Kothmale Valley, not far away from Kandy, the station covered the towns of Gampola and Nawalapitiya, and about 50 villages in the vicinity. Pringle and David (2002: 100) suggest that, ‘the station raises funds through advertising, as much as 75 percent of its budget, and makes independent decisions about programming. Management and staffing are local’. They cite Notley (2000), who writes: The morning programs generally announce the daily exchange rates and the daily wholesale agriculture prices from the Central bank of Sri Lanka. The weather report is also read from the Internet. The afternoon broadcasts will often incorporate Sri Lankan and world news from Reuters and other web sites. (2002: 102)

In his interview with me, Eric Fernando, the Former Director General of Broadcasting, SLBC, spoke about how the station emerged as an important access point in the community: The government provided a dedicated data-line to the Kothmale initiative, in times when there was not much broadband penetration. There was one

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

199

computer to access the internet that was largely accessible in the English language. So we came up with radio browsing programmes. The people were very enthusiastic about the station. In the region where it was located, there were cottage industries on jaggery and other products. We would browse and give the community information in their own language. Eventually, we spoke to UNESCO and got a few more computers, and placed them outside the station to make them more accessible. The ownership of the community was most palpable amongst children, who took to the new technology easily. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Slater et al. (2002) describe instances of ‘convergence’, not as passive acceptance of technology, but as the usage of technology by the community, rendering the invisible visible. The authors cite instances of how the KCR Internet initiative was used very well by the students in the community, in accessing educational material, examination results, and in skill-­ based training. Fernando also spoke about the idea of ownership in the community and how the SLBC saw it: For the success of an initiative like this, it is very important that the community believes that this is their own. We were so close to the community, so much so that if a cow got lost, we would use our Kothmale initiative to find it! In fact, one kid even went to the US on a scholarship, because he could access information here. This kind of an initiative would not have been possible without a non-interfering SLBC. The minister, then, was an educated man, and understood the importance of initiatives such as this. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

New technology, hybridisation, and innovation and convergence were epistemes articulated with the setting up of the KCR Internet initiative. The above quote also showcases the manner in which State action and stances are shaped by the people who are at the helm of affairs, in this case the Minister. It is reflective of the manner in which the culture of governance gets shaped in a country.

Diversified Policy Actors Beyond the Nepalese State The previous chapter showcased the early days of the initiation of conversations about community radio in Nepal, and the run up to the licensing of Radio Sagarmatha. The circumspect but certain shift towards issuing

200 

P. RAGHUNATH

the first license for Radio Sagarmatha in the first half of the 1990s was effected largely due to the efforts of diverse non-governmental actors. This process of the Nepalese State’s initiation and socialisation (Risse et al. 1999) into the interests emanating from these diverse policy actors warrants deeper understanding. This section delves into these varied actors, processes, and practices of policymaking for Nepalese CR, with a contextual understanding of the many shifts in the political, socio-economic, and cultural landscape of the country. The late 1980s and early 1990s saw the world order moving towards growth of regional groupings, such as the Association for South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the third generation of democratisation and human rights, and shifts in the approach of ‘development’ towards more inclusive, and participatory processes with people, instead of with governments alone. This, coupled with Nepal’s status as a new multi-party democracy, led to collaborations between Intergovernmental organisations (IGOs) and International non-governmental organisations (INGOs), on the one hand (henceforth International Organisations [IOs] when used to denote them collectively), and proponents for deepening democracy, such as the Nepalese pesagut samuha (loosely translated to professional/occupational groups) to start off with (Shah 2008), on the other. To understand the larger context, the IOs have had a huge role to play in Nepal since the 1950s, aiding large-scale development projects and helping modernise the state (Bhattarai 2007). Towards the 1980s, foreign aid was largely infused in the form of multilateral assistance programmes, with focus on technology transfer and skill development (Khagram et al. 2002) and structuring of national policies in consultation with donors. What follows is an understanding of the early years of activism for community radio in Nepal from the early 1990s. Collective Action for CR Adhikari (2004) writes extensively about the linkages that Bharat Dutta Koirala had, with multilateral agencies like UNESCO, UNDP, and UNICEF and other international organisations like Panos Institute, Asian Media Information Centre, and Asia Foundation. He had established a good working relationship through the Nepal Press Institute, with Wijayananda Jayaweera of UNESCO, besides Kunda Dixit of Inter Press Service. Once the National Broadcasting Policy of 1992 and subsequently

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

201

the National Broadcasting Act of 1993 were passed, Koirala and a few other individuals and organisations that he had already worked with on behalf of NPI came together to form a coalition for advocating for community radio. The advocacy coalition comprised the Nepal Press Institute, Nepal Environmental Journalists Forum (NEFEJ), Worldview International, Himal Association, and other supporting actors. NEFEJ, then, was headed by Hem Bahadur Bista, Koirala’s colleague on another project, and the Himal Association was run by Kanak Mani Dixit, whose brother Kunda Dixit had worked closely with Koirala. The supporting actors included individuals who were technology experts and believed in exploiting the new technology of FM radio to break free from the clutches of state broadcasting. Evidently, the coalition for the advocacy for CR was based on prior networks established among those who could be seen as the professional elite in Kathmandu, to start off with. They possessed knowledge on the technological and socio-political dimensions of what they envisaged as community radio. In addition, they possessed the right connections with transnational actors, including intergovernmental organisations, international professional bodies, and donor agencies. The Social Welfare Act of 1992 passed by the Government of Nepal allowed international donor agencies to bring in funding, only by working with local NGOs and charitable bodies. This allowed these transnational actors to work with not-for-profit organisations that were part of the advocacy coalition for CR.  The binding and shared normative idea of opening up the airwaves for participatory radio, towards creation of a more plural mediascape in the country, enabled this small community of Nepalese CR advocates supported by transnational actors. Drawing from this understanding, this community could be called the ‘epistemic community’ (Haas 1992) for CR in Nepal. The epistemic community for CR in Nepal derived its legitimacy from pursuing the ideal of deliberative democracy (Benhabib 1996; Bohman 1996; Gutmann and Thompson 1996) in the new democracy of Nepal. Deliberative Democracy, more often than not, is work in progress in a democracy, wherein efforts are channelised towards deepening democracy from solely electoral participation of citizens to a more communicative democracy by creating scope and space for deliberation and argumentation (Habermas 1984, 1996/1992; Sen 2005). What follows is an exploration of the methods and discourses using which the epistemic community pushed for policy shifts for CR in Nepal.

202 

P. RAGHUNATH

Pushing for a Broadcast Policy Shift for CR The National Broadcasting Policy of 1992 was the first policy document to mention ‘private players’. This, however, was just the beginning of a struggle of nearly half a decade, before the first license was issued. Raghu Mainali, who has been part of NEFEJ since the organisation was part of the advocacy coalition, spoke about the early days. ‘Even though we had a Policy, the bureaucracy could not move ahead since there was no law. This would mean that we had to push for an Act. So we started lobbying for an Act and Regulations’, he began narrating, highlighting the legal framework that forms part of the CR policy space. According to a UNESCO document on communications policies of 1980, ‘Communication policies are sets of principles and norms established to guide the behaviour of communication systems’ (Mwaura 1980). These policies serve as guideposts for legislative processes that lead to the formulation of an Act. ‘Based on policies which are directive principles, Acts are made by the Parliament. Then, we may have delegated authorities who use the Act to formulate regulations which serve as subordinate legislations to implement the Act’, explained the Under-Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of Nepal. The advocacy coalition then organised a South Asia seminar towards the end of 1992, inviting other broadcasters from South Asia, to discuss the possibilities of FM broadcasting. ‘We also invited the Communications Minister Narahari Acharya for the seminar. There, the advocacy coalition involved ourselves in drafting an Act unofficially. I must tell you that the Minister seemed positive’, Mainali recollected. The following year, the National Broadcasting Act of 1993 was passed. The advocacy coalition then came up with an Advocacy Strategy Plan, in 1993. The Plan identified various stakeholders and drew up a list of activities to be pursued through them: (a) the diplomatic sector, including INGOs, Embassies, and UN bodies; (b) the larger media sector; (c) the heads of the publicity departments of all political parties, to bring in their intervention; and (d) bureaucrats and ministers. Transnational Actors and Diplomacy UNESCO, in its capacity as an intergovernmental organisation with a mandate of promoting media development and pluralism,1 found 1  UNESCO’s attention to media environments within countries began in the context of the Belgrade Conference, the MacBride Commission report, and the establishment of the International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC), in 1980.

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

203

common cause with the shift towards democracy in Nepal, in 1990. UNESCO brought with it its experience in supporting community radio in other countries, like Sri Lanka and Philippines. Mainali elaborated on this: We requested UNESCO to help us out. They sent a mission to conduct a feasibility study. Back in 1993, there was a UNESCO Commission as part of the Education Ministry. They conducted a study in a month and submitted it to the Education and Communications Ministries. The UNESCO had a tricky clause in the way they would operate then; if the organisation proposes something and the government in question does not object in the next six months, it is understood as having been accepted. In this case, our bureaucracy chose to retain silence and that allowed the UNESCO to interpret the feasibility report has having been accepted by the Ministry. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

In addition to this, the advocacy coalition also convinced the then Nepalese Ambassador to France, Keshav Raj, to pursue an IPDC project at the UNESCO Headquarters in Paris. This was finally approved by Wijayananda Jayaweera, who had already been involved with the Sri Lankan experiment with community radio, and allowed NEFEJ to pursue the Radio Sagarmatha project. One of the recipients of a fellowship instituted as part of the project spoke about the initial days of engaging with participatory radio. Raghu Mainali explained further: I was working with a newspaper then and had heard that NEFEJ and some other organisations together were conducting training for radio broadcasting and anchoring. I got selected and took part in the 15-day training, where we were taught to record and produce field-reports. Then, I received a fellowship from them that enabled me to go to the Western part of Nepal, in the hills and plains area, to produce radio features and programmes on the local people. In about one month or so, I visited nearly 5–6 districts of Nepal. The Radio Sagarmatha project was a preparation towards building practical knowledge in the process of advocacy for a CR license. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

He added that he continued to be part of the movement from then and later went on to work with Radio Sagarmatha when it eventually procured a license. Meanwhile, Jayaweera of UNESCO-IPDC continued to work with the Nepalese government. Recollecting this involvement, Mainali further said:

204 

P. RAGHUNATH

He visited Kathmandu and we organised a meeting with the Communications Minister and Secretary of Communication. Radio Nepal also submitted one proposal to UNESCO. In the meeting, he explicitly mentioned that since the Act existed, a license should be given to Radio Sagarmatha. Then, he would approve the government’s Radio Nepal project. However, this got no response from the government, and in turn, they lost the project. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

One of the advocacy coalition partners said: UNESCO is an organisation without much money, especially then, since the US pulled out of support in the previous decade. Their financial help in funding the Radio Sagarmatha project and rallying behind the cause for community radio by trying to bargain with the government was catalytic in advancing our interests. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Taking the diplomatic route a step further in 1994, the advocacy coalition requested UNESCO to send the equipment for broadcasting. They then sought UNDP’s help in procuring the diplomatic parcel and finally accessed radio equipment. This allowed them to move on to the next step in their advocacy strategising. Demystifying Technology and Building Larger Solidarities As the equipment was already with the advocacy coalition, they were keen to start broadcasting. However, while the Act of 1993 existed, the Ministry rejected their application, as there were no Regulations following from the Act. The advocacy coalition was helped by the Nepal Bar Association, in figuring out the nitty-gritties of the legal framework and in reapplying for the license. The government did not respond to the application. In this scenario, the Association advised the coalition to file another application intimating the authorities about the testing of the radio equipment. The application sought permission and also a temporary frequency. Since they did not receive any response, they decided to go ahead with broadcasting on 102 FM. By bringing in legal expertise, the coalition was able to communicate with the engineers at Radio Nepal and Nepal Television of legal consequences of not allowing them to broadcast under the aegis of the Act. ‘We had only one equipment (sic) in the country to test the field strength of the signal, which was with Nepal Television and not even with

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

205

Radio Nepal. In fact, we even asked for a Nepal Television engineer to help us out’, said the technical coordinator at NEFEJ, who collaborated with the engineer to test the equipment on his rooftop. The engineer was asked to provide an explanation as to why 100 FM, which was meant to be used by the police, was used for the test broadcast. The Nepal Bar Association assured the coalition of support in the preparation of litigation, if needed. Meanwhile, the government had sent the coalition a show-cause notice asking for explanation on why they should not be arrested. The next day, mainstream newspaper outlets Rising Nepal and Gorkhapatra, government newspapers and other broadsheets carried the news. The BBC Nepali service broadcast news favouring the coalition and criticising the government. In addition to this, the American Ambassador was also kept in the loop on the coalition’s activities. The technical coordinator who was part of the coalition said: We were clear. The government’s duty is to regularise in accordance with the law. They had no legal grounds to take action against us. In fact, when I had met with another engineer in the MoIC, he said airplanes could crash because of frequency disturbances! Our activities could disturb air traffic! We had to gently point them to the presence of FM radio in the US and other countries. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

The current Vice-Secretary, Frequency, MoIC, spoke about how they felt the pressure building from all sides building, in support of the advocacy coalition: We were under a lot of pressure. Our problem, besides a lot of apprehension, was that the Ministers and Secretaries changed very often around that time. Since 1990, nearly 4 Ministers had changed by then. It was difficult for us to operate. Moreover, we had no idea about FM technology and were very hesitant. But it was time to take a decision. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

This is similar to what Risse et al. (1999) advance, in their account of the three phases across which the socialisation of the state into certain ideas forwarded by advocacy groups occurs. Bargaining and adaptation happen towards the early stages of the socialisation process, they write, when the state is allowed to choose its priorities based on its instrumental

206 

P. RAGHUNATH

rationality, while pushing for the advocacy group’s policy goals. The three stages are as follows: . process of adaptation and strategic bargaining; 1 2. processes of moral consciousness-raising, ‘shaming’, argumentation, dialogue, and persuasion; 3. processes of institutionalisation and habitualisation (1999: 5). The epistemic community for CR in Nepal had expanded its base to include groups of experts on diverse areas ranging from technology to law to communication, bound by the same goals and perspectives. The community had moved from bargaining to raising consciousness evidenced by procuring the support of an engineer from the state, indulging in processes of deliberation through newspaper editorials and in persuasive techniques (Risse et  al. 1999). The final step was towards habituation and institutionalisation of their ideas and policy goals. Over the Edge: The Final Push From the time this test transmission was done over four days in 1995, the government was forced to take cognisance of the demand. The Vice-­ Secretary, Frequency, MoIC, at the time of fieldwork, stated: Nepal did not have a channel frequency plan. We only had the band and no expert on FM technology was available in the country. Some academicians had studied the technology but had no experience with FM transmitters. We had to go to ITU for technical support on spectrum planning and for a study on FM licensing. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

While this was happening at the Ministry, Hem Bahadur Bista of NEFEJ had moved to Nepal Television as its Chair and Aditya Man Shrestha, Koirala’s close aide, worked at the Ministry as an unpaid ‘understudy’ advisor to the Minister (Adhikari 2004). Besides, Raghu Mainali’s cousin had become a Minister. As the last strategic push, when the local government elections were drawing closer, the coalition announced that they would start broadcasting in a week if the license was not given. The epistemic community for CR in Nepal had pushed, through personal networks, solidarities established and pressure built over time, to the

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

207

institutionalisation of their interests. The first license for independent radio in South Asia was given on May 18, 1997. However, over a few years, the dynamics and nature of what constituted the epistemic community would change, in the backdrop of civil war and Jan Andolan II. Call for Democracy and the Nepalese Civil War Radio Sagarmatha, despite the limitations posed by the 17 clauses that came with the license, became popular in the Kathmandu Valley as a station that sounded very different to ears accustomed to programming on the top-down government radio. Programmes like Hamro Khaldo or ‘Our Valley’ explored various aspects of life in Kathmandu Valley that went uncovered in the mainstream media. A radio broadcaster who has been with Radio Sagarmatha since the early days spoke about the kind of programming she would do: We had programmes on issues and thematic areas that no one had paid attention to before. We covered children, women, economic issues, agriculture and livelihood, environment … we would go to the community and bring vox-pops and make radio magazines. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

She added that the 100-watt transmitter would cover the entire Valley. A member of the Radio Sagarmatha project funded by UNESCO continued working with the radio after the license was procured. She stated: We had some innovative programmes and formats that came to be identified with community radio. For instance, since news was not allowed as per the clauses imposed, we would do a programme called Haal-Chaal, which is a very colloquial way of talking about daily occurrences on radio. Unlike the government radio, we started talking about policies, budgets, politics and issues from the perspectives of the community. And it was possible in that time … with strikes happening everywhere. We brought so many political leaders, parliamentarians, secretaries, ex-secretaries, ex-ministers, and so many personalities … we talked about the policies, about development. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

This, again, alludes to the interpretive nature of policy documents that leave room for multiple interpretations, wherein conditional clauses could

208 

P. RAGHUNATH

be interpreted in a particular way to aid programming on Radio Sagarmatha. A year after Radio Sagarmatha was established, the government started giving out licenses to both, community and commercial FMs. A key aspect of the broadcasting policy governing Nepalese community radio is that it does not make a demarcation between community and private radios. The phrase ‘private radio’ was seen as denoting ‘nongovernment radio’. The onus, then, is on the license applicant to suggest if the organisation had a not-for-profit motive or not. Interpretations of this aspect of the broadcasting policy and its repercussion in the post-2006 transitional Nepal would be elucidated further ahead in the chapter. The Nepalese government also passed the Local Self-­Governance Act in 1999, as a move towards decentralisation and deepening of democracy. Decentralisation served as a means to promote the idea of decentralised, localised radio. In 2000, Radio Lumbini became the first cooperativeowned radio in South Asia, and Radio Madhanpokhara in Palpa became the first village-based community radio station, as part of the Village Development Committee (VDC). Shifts in the Epistemic Community for CR Even as the number of community radios began to grow, the advocacy coalition for CR had a fall-out. NEFEJ continued to hold the license for Radio Sagarmatha, and the other organisations sought to opt out of working together closely. One of the early producers with the radio suggested: Though NEFEJ was the legal owner of the license, the other three organisations who were part of the advocacy coalition were equally involved. In fact, Koirala of NPI was the first Chairman of Radio Sagarmatha. Then this all changed in 2000. Trouble was brewing since two years then, and they decided to go their own way allowing NEFEJ to retain the license. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

This event was followed by the setting up of the Community Radio Support Centre (CRSC) under NEFEJ in the same year, to enable the setting up and functioning of community radio stations in the country. The following year, within NEFEJ, the Association for Community Radio Broadcasters was constituted. Raghu Mainali said:

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

209

We felt the need to have an umbrella organisation for CRs in Nepal. At that time, the country had only 5 CRs. In order to register as an association as per Nepal’s rules, we needed 7 members. Since there was no demarcation between commercial and community radios in the Broadcasting Act, we utilised the loophole and brought on board two commercial stations who allowed us to utilise their license details. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

In addition to this, the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) decided to set up office in Nepal, in 2003, with the aim of working with the emerging CR space in the country and the larger region. However, in a few years, not just members of the advocacy coalition, but a larger mass movement in opposition to the royal takeover of the country, would forge solidarities yet again. Saving Independent Radio from Being Silenced Even as these developments were taking place on the community radio front, the Nepalese country-side was witnessing widespread violence. Despite the Jan Andolan I, the country had to contend with instability on the political front, as factionalism and intra-party feuds continued to gain traction (Shah 2008). While the Constitution of 1990 enshrined a multi-­ party system, Nepal continued to simultaneously function as a Hindu monarchy. In 1996, the Community Party of Nepal-Maoist called for a war against the ‘bourgeois’ class entrenched in feudalism, capitalism, and Indian imperialism (Dahal 2010), beginning what would turn into a decade-long civil war. Instances of violence continued, leading to the Government forming a paramilitary Armed Police Force, in 2001. The same year, the massacre of King Birendra and other members of the royal family took place. Eventually, Gyanendra was crowned King. The next year, due to reigning emergency, upon the advice of Prime Minister Deuba, the King ordered the dissolution of the Parliament. Instead of calling for elections, he assumed executive power. Over the next couple of years, violence escalated with the Maoists giving ultimatums to the King and efforts towards peace failing. A seven-­ party alliance with support from the Maoists sought to bring the country back on the rails of democracy. In February 2005, a royal coup was orchestrated by King Gyanendra, in a bid to takeover the country. Heavy censorship was imposed, with Internet services being cut off and the media not being allowed to function freely. Massive protests erupted across the

210 

P. RAGHUNATH

country. Durga Karki, a broadcaster with Radio Sagarmatha was arrested with her colleagues, during the time: The Army barged into our station and shut our broadcast, taking away the transmitter and equipment, and arrested us. The BBC Nepali Service had interviewed Maoist supremo Prachanda then. The Army thought we were relaying the news and raided our station. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Instances of censorship and arrests became frequent. By 2005, Nepal had around 20 CRs and 36 private FMs. The Save Independent Radio Movement (SIRM) emerged out of these prevailing conditions of censorship in 2005. The Save Independent Radio Movement was one that was marked by two key aspects. Firstly, the protests were part of the larger movement against the emergency and monarchy. The linkages with the mainstream media established earlier were furthered during the course of the movement, with a singular goal. Next, the protests were marked by culture-­ specific symbolic gestures to protest the King’s autocratic rule. Melucci (1996) draws attention to cultural symbolism in new social movements, specifically. The strategy behind the protest was two-pronged, comprising on-air protests and street protests: The government had banned all programmes on radio, except music. So during news time, we would talk about our programme activities, a week in advance. We also used symbolic gestures, like the blowing of the conch on air during news-time. In Nepal, a conch is blown when someone passes away. This was to symbolise the death of news. In addition to on-air protests, we organized street protests. Initially, as CR broadcasters, we didn’t have a huge mass following with us. So we designed certain programmes that could capture the attention of the public. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

These events, again, were rooted in culturally symbolic gestures. For instance, according to a popular Nepali proverb, handing a coconut in a monkey’s hand is symbolic of the idea that monkeys would not know the value of the coconut, not knowing what to do with it. The protesters went to the Swayambhu temple area near Kathmandu, which is infested with monkeys. Mainali elaborated on the symbolic efforts to grab attention:

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

211

We went there and passed on coconuts to monkeys, symbolising that government is a monkey and radio is a coconut. Next day, broadsheet papers covered the news on the front page with 3 column photos. Our King always concluded his addresses with, ‘Lord Pashupathinath bless us’. So we went to the Pashupathinath temple in Kathmandu, and had a prayer tray with a radio set. We prayed to Lord Pashupathinath for a wise government in Nepal. The next day, the media covered that news too. We went to the postal office with our Constitution and a very old radio set that didn’t work. We put them in a box and we posted it to the Council of Ministers in the Prime Minister’s office. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Once the attention of the masses was garnered, the next stage was to procure solidarity, bringing on board university teachers’ associations, Nepal bar association, doctors’ association, and nursing association, and similar such bodies of collective action came together to produce press releases for solidarity: The mainstream media has been supportive of our efforts. So we collaborated with the broadsheet media and came up with an Editorial Solidarity Week. All of them produced one editorial within that week favouring us. We called musicians, vocalists to organise a concert to express their solidarity with the SIRM. We called the poets to recite solidarity poems and theatre artistes to organise plays. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

From then on, it became a joint ‘civil society movement’, with the Federation of Nepali Journalists coming on board, as well. A massive rally was organised, in November, 2005: It was a huge event. We had a 6 x 8 feet radio with a red label across it, to symbolise gagged radio, erected on a truck and conducted a huge rally from Tripureshwor to Baneshwor areas around Kathmandu. That was the biggest one within that period. The same truck doubled up as our public address system. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

In addition to such collective action efforts built on culturally symbolic, evocative gestures, other measures such as filing for litigation in the Supreme Court, to challenge the ordinance on banning news on radio, were undertaken. Since news was not allowed to be read on air, broadcasters took to singing the news. When the King was on a visit to Doha, they broadcast news of the King’s visit, because it was difficult for the

212 

P. RAGHUNATH

bureaucrats to stop the King’s news. From then on, news broadcast was a continuous feature through the protests. The Save Independent Radio Movement is often cited as a landmark instance of media activism, in consonance with larger socio-political struggles that eventually led to the end of almost three centuries of monarchy in Nepal, paving way for the move towards democratisation.

State, International Development, Market in Sri Lanka While the entry of community broadcasting in Sri Lanka was mooted by international development agencies, in conjunction with the state, the early 2000s saw a renewed shift in the functioning of such agencies and their work. The ushering in of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) shaped work done by UN agencies in a big way. In the context of community broadcasting, this renewed focus can be seen in the initiation of the Uva Community Radio (UCR) and the Saru Praja Radio projects. The two projects were initiated and operationalised very differently, but help understand the workings of international development funding, the Sri Lankan state including local governments, and communities and citizens involved with community broadcasting. Uva Community Radio (UCR) Initiation The Uva Community Radio (UCR) was set up in 2003, as part of the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Uva Area-Based Growth and Equity Programme (ABGEP) that was initiated in the hilly province in 1998.2 The UCR part of the ABGEP was given to the UNESCO, with an MoU signed between the SLBC (which held the license) and the Uva Provincial Council (UPC). According to Jayaratne et al. (2007), the SLBC appointed the station manager, technical officer, and provide engineering assistance, while the Council would bear the running costs of the station. The authors suggest that the ‘SLBC was also 2  The UNDP Report of the Evaluation Mission (2000) suggests: ‘ABGEP is aimed at reducing poverty by enhancing broad-based economic growth with equity at a decentralized level. This implies creating strong linkages all the way from community based development to regional and national policy making’ (2000: 2).

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

213

obliged to assume editorial responsibilities and the SLBC-nominated station manager was expected to safeguard these interests’ (2007: 35). The circumference of the broadcast coverage was two districts, namely, Badulla and Monaragala districts. However, the authors suggest that due to the distance and costs of transportation and time involved, those outside Badulla could not participate in the programming as much. Dr. Pradeep Weeresinghe, Head, Department of Mass Media, University of Colombo, spoke about the project and UCR, from his experience of working with the project: The UNDP identified that even when they had invested plenty of resources and time, their development projects had not been very successful. They identified that lack of people’s participation in projects, for example, identifying, planning, implementation, and evaluation of the projects, was a big reason for this. There were not many beneficiaries of the project, due to lack of participation. Then, I wrote that proposal because I had a good relationship with the Chief Minister and Governor at that time. This was when I was working for the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation. From UNESCO’s side, we had Thilak as the consultant. I suggested that we have an independent monitoring body for these projects like auditors or watchdogs. He asked me to write a proposal, and I proposed that we start this independent community radio station in Uva. The concept is based on the real concept of CR, that’s owned, managed, and where programming is done by the community. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Institutional Framework The above account is indicative of the pitfalls of a top-down approach to development and the need for a more participatory one instead. In addition, it also provides insight into the internal functioning of the practice of policy, showcasing personality-driven interventions based on personal connections. Dr. Weeresinghe also provided information on the formation of knowledge-focused groupings at various levels of the community, in the Province: By 2003, we established groups comprising at least 10,000 people, and called it the Knowledge Society. For every three villages, we had one Knowledge Society. Further, we formed Knowledge Society federations at the district-level for both districts. This multi-leveled set-up provided the institutional base for the functioning of UCR. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

214 

P. RAGHUNATH

Jayaratne et al. (2007) suggest that about 200 such Knowledge Societies were established, comprising general membership as also officials elected for two-year terms. The structure of the UCR Management Council, as proposed by the KS Federation, comprised nine members from the KS, one member from the Provincial Council, three members who were officials from the Provincial Council, and two UCR staff. However, the authors state that this proposal was vehemently opposed by the SLBC and the Uva Provincial Council authorities, since majority of the 15-member Management Committee would comprise KS members. ‘Indeed, the political authorities even went so far as to object to the word “Knowledge” in the phrase, Knowledge Society’, the authors claim (2007: 37). In order to instil editorial independence, UNESCO was brought in and the organisation conducted workshops in participatory content-making and in local accountability, they add. However, the SLBC retained editorial responsibility, they contend, also suggesting the prevalence of political tensions between the Provincial government and the national government, which were run by two different political parties. Such schisms, political interference, lack of editorial autonomy, and impinging structural attributes emerge as evidences of contestation inherent to the interactions between international organisations, the central and provincial forms of the state, and the institutional formations in the community. This is only enunciated further by the authors, when they indicate that a multi-stakeholder meeting3 was organised by UNESCO in 2002, where broadcasters’ guidelines were set forth. They indicate that these guidelines were violated in 2004, since the tussle for editorial control between the SLBC and UCR became apparent. They write: UNESCO recommended the establishment of an interim Governing Board comprising 13 members for UCR until a legal and administrative framework ensuring its status as a community radio could be established. As a transitional measure, the Provincial Council could appoint six members, the Provincial Administration three, and NGO and community organisations— including the KS—four, through a broad consultation. This suggestion was not taken seriously by either UPC or SLBC. (2007: 38)

3  These stakeholders included the SLBC, the UPC, and members of the Knowledge Societies, besides UNESCO.

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

215

Mapping Political Shifts The early 2000s were marked by political upheaval, with the United National Front (UNF) coalition, led by the United National Party (UNP), coming to power after a hung Parliament. Two years later, the parliament was dissolved by the President, before which he took over three Ministries, including the Ministry of Media and Information, which was then used predominantly for electioneering (Jayaratne et al. 2007: 39). The UCR was caught in the tussle between government interference and propaganda, and the community’s reaction against it, in programming and broadcasting. Jayaratne et al. (2007: 39–40) provide an account of how the manager appointed to UCR was a political appointee and made sweeping changes to the programme schedules that were in actuality developed by the community. Propaganda, they suggest, was introduced in a big way, much to the chagrin of the community. In reaction to this, the community members reacted strongly, forming an organisation called the Association to Protect UCR. In 2005, representations were made to the Secretary of the Ministry of Media and information, the Director General of the President’s Media Unit, and the Chairman of SLBC, asking for independence in broadcasting as earlier. After numerous conversations and tussles, the Station Manager Weeresinghe was recalled to Colombo and a new person named Harishchandra was sent in his place to continue the work. However, the UCR broadcasters continued to allege that political propaganda was rampant. This incident is indicative of the constant tussle over editorial control and independence in this community broadcasting initiative, especially due to the prevalence of state ownership of a ‘community’ radio initiative. Saru Praja Radio Initiation The Gemi Diriya Project was set up in 2004 and funded by the World Bank. The World Bank web archive of documents4 pertaining to the project presents details of the grant, the components, and approach. The project overview suggests that it had five components: 4  The project-related documents can be found here: http://projects.worldbank.org/ P074872/community-development-livelihood-improvement-gemi-diriyaproject?lang=en&tab=overview; accessed on August 1, 2017.

216 

P. RAGHUNATH

The project comprises the following five components: Component 1, Village Development, strengthens village organisations (VOs) and funds priority sub- projects. Component 2, Institutional Strengthening, builds the capacity of local and national agencies and supports organisations to respond to community demands. Component 3, Innovation Seed Fund, pilots innovative ideas that need experimentation, learning and incubation. ­ Component 4, Project Management, facilitates overall coordination, implementation, and management of the project. Component 5, Village SelfHelp Learning Initiative Pilot, completes implementation of the ongoing pilot in Polonnaruwa district. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Samanmalee Swarnalatha, Coordinator of the Saru Praja CR that was operationalised as part of the Gemi Diriya project, spoke about the initial days of setting it up, including identifying the community and training them in CR broadcasting: The World Bank conducted research on the failure of CR in Sri Lanka, on the basis of which, the Saru pilot was started. People like Thilak Jayaratne served as World Bank consultants in June, 2005, and trained people in the Pollanaruwa district, which is in the North-Central province and is more oriented towards agriculture and farming. Community members were selected from 27 villages and trained on the principles of CR, the importance of CR, and programming specific to the medium. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The Saru Praja CR was initially not supported by the Gemi Diriya Action Plan, but eventually got the World Bank approval for funding. The project comprised two steps: first, the empowerment of communities and test transmission and then, the application for the license. While the test transmission was completed successfully by 2009, it is at the second step that the CR project faced hassles. The team applied for licenses, but were told by the Telecom Regulatory Commission (TRC) that no frequencies were available. Taking recourse to an alternative path, the TRC decided to sign a Memorandum of understanding (MoU) with SLBC for temporary frequency allocation. The SLBC agreed to allocate 100.7 FM, on the payment of one lakh LKR per month. The first agreement was to last a year. The World Bank provided five million, to purchase the transmitter and equipment, and ten million LKR for the final project.

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

217

Understanding the Politics of Broadcasting The Saru Praja community broadcasting project eventually got mired in controversies, with personal interests entering the fray. The new Project Director said he wanted to stop the pilot project and wanted the money back. The community did not agree to deposit the money amounting to about $9.6 million to the Pulathisi Federation, which was a public company situated in Pollannaruwa5. The community members had to pay the SLBC the money instead. The Project Director, who had a political background, sent the SLBC a letter asking that the project not be supported, since it is dangerous to hand over the radio to the community. The SLBC Chairman, Swarnalatha narrated, took the deposit made by the community, purchased the transmitter, and linked it, but did not install it, thereby violating the agreement that the SLBC had signed with the company. Swarnalatha further stated that the community had asked several times that the SLBC install the equipment, but without a favourable response. ‘The community wants the CR in any case, and will file a case to get the money back and start their own project’, Swarnalatha indicated, at the time of the interview with me. Donor Dimensions Commenting on international donor funding, Swarnalatha spoke about their different modes of functioning. She suggested that the World Bank does not usually lobby with the government for allocation of licenses. ‘Beyond giving money, they do not really come into the picture with anything else. They could not give up on us because of our hard work’, she reflected. She also spoke about their interactions with AMARC Africa, who visited and trained them as an extension of their work with the World Bank. ‘The representatives met the TRC and the Media Ministry, and were told that there was no relevant frequency’, she narrated. Charitha Herath, Former Secretary of the Ministry of Mass Media and Information, spoke about the shifts in the market and his perception of donor funding for localised media initiatives: At that time it was a new concept. But now, things have changed because today, the market economy is bigger than we expect. The market provides 5  The Gemi Diriya Foundation, under the ministry governing ecological development, had signed an agreement with Pulathirisi.

218 

P. RAGHUNATH

space for people to breathe. So everything is now confirmed and considered through and by that principles of market economy. If you are not profitable, you are out. If you don’t have capital, then you don’t have a channel. For initiatives like these, donor capital was the basis. But it does not allow longer term survival and is not continuous. Once donor funding dies out, things are shut. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The experiences of the Uva CR and Saru Praja Radio allow for an understanding of the interaction between international development initiatives replete with donor aid, the State, and the communities themselves. They expose a multi-layered community structure, wherein local political elite wield power, thereby subverting any genuine community broadcasting initiative. However, they also reveal the ability of communities to audit the conduct of such elite and push forward in favour of larger democratic principles and a shared sense of community.

Indian Civil Society and the Community Radio Policy The concept of civil society has been defined in a number of ways, starting from the idea of a third space between the state and the market, an associational grouping in the Tocquevillean sense, and now, increasingly, as a networked space (Costoya 2007) and characterised by rhizomatic social movements (Funke 2014). Chandhoke (2003) talks about the possibilities of uncivility by civil society, and the need for deliberate intervention, in reclaiming the space time and again. Gudavarthy (2013) provides a compelling account of the politics of what he calls post-civil society, in India. He calls for a focus on interstitial transformation, on the points of convergence of various movements and extension of solidarities, as also the dialectics of struggles. The plurality of definitions only reiterates the amorphous nature of civil society in an increasingly networked world. This is also seen in the space for the activism for CR, in the associational-­ networked character of the space. Wijayananda Jayaweera, then Director, IPDC, UNESCO, spoke about the crucial role of civil society in pushing for community radio in India: The civil society in India dates back to the freedom struggle. In contrast to Sri Lanka, where community broadcasting in South Asia started, India has a much more open political process and the civil society is a representative one. They were instrumental in pushing the envelope constantly, and

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

219

worked with us in organising parallel consultations and meetings. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Moving beyond either ends of the continuum of liberal and republican democracy, India and the larger South Asian region offer compelling considerations owing to their plural social fabric, for communitarian, associational, and networked forms of connectivity, which often serve as a second layer of deliberative democracy (Achterberg 2001). This section presents a sampling and overview of some key actors in the Indian CR policyscape to suggest its networked nature and embedded rationalities. From what started off as a loose group of freedom of expression activists who were reactants to the Indian SC judgement with a place in the larger civil society, the group evolved into a more networked space, with the setting up of associational bodies, while retaining larger connectivity. A former Vice-President, AMARC Asia-Pacific had been involved with CR in India since 2004. He pointed out that before the 2006 policy was announced, the group of activists and advocates was a non-registered, loose grouping of individuals. However, the policy formalised a CR sector, bringing in the need for a registered formal body that could continue doing what the earlier network was doing, and more. The group has since been involved in negotiating with other actors involved in the policy process. Similarly, the group also continues to strategically engage, on and off, with the larger civil society on common causes. For instance, the Community Radio Forum has tried to engage with the Right to Information (RTI) movement in the country, participating in the National Convention for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI) in 2013 and also promoting on-air space as a site for engaging with RTI.  Since the announcement of the 2006 CR policy, the group has further organised itself as the focal point for negotiations and deliberations, consolidating certain ideas and values in the communicative spaces that they create. A key aspect of the Indian tryst with community radio has been the emergence of the academia as a key policy actor as well. With the Indian government opening up access to airwaves to NGOs and educational institutions, India became the first country in South Asia to have a policy specific to community radio. The ‘CR Policy Guidelines of 2006’, provide guidelines and stipulations for community radios in the country, including the technical parameters for setting up stations and transmitters, content guidelines, and advertising and fiscal guidelines.

220 

P. RAGHUNATH

Associational-Networked Deliberation and the Indian Community Radio Policy After the promulgation of the policy of 2006, the need for a body that represents the CRs was felt. The activists and the NGOs who had applied for licenses came together to form the Community Radio Forum (CRF) in January 2007, in a public meeting convened by One World South Asia, in New Delhi. This was followed by a two-day CR Awareness Workshop, after which the formation of the CRF was announced. The CRF brought in a more organised structure in 2010, at the first annual general body meeting in 2010  in Bangalore. This was held on the sidelines of the AMARC Asia-Pacific Regional Conference. The meeting saw elections being held and office-bearers being chosen. An office-bearer with CRF spoke about the vision they had in mind when CRF was formed: CRF started as a getting together of activists from different areas, working in the community media sector. There was a decision in a public meeting held in Delhi to establish something called the Community Radio Forum of India. It took a while for it to concretise; it was only finally registered as a organisation in February of 2008, and probably announced a month after that at the AMARC meeting in Bangalore. Initially it was seen as THE voice of community radio in terms of presenting an unified platform for discussion of community media and policy to interact with government for and lobbying with the government for changes in policy and so on and so forth. But as matters stood, the idea was also to create a cadre of community radio stations or community media grassroots activists who drastically take charge of that process on ground. But that became exceedingly difficult mainly because the initial wave of people who actually became officer bearers at CRF were in fact drawn from the activists who were lobbying for the policy and had some experience working with the government and perhaps had a larger view of the sector and its processes, of course. It has been difficult for those individuals to actually let go of this because I think we have been, as a group we have been spectacularly incapable of creating or sufficiently trained grassroots activism which could take over the responsibility of the representation of this sector. It has struggled with the creation of other processes around it, for example the community radio support fund because the original idea was to have an autonomous structure for that fund in which representative bodies adequately represented. However, since this support fund became a government scheme, it has been hard to envision of process like that into which any kind of civil society organisation or forum could be. (Personal Interview, January 2014)

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

221

Another office-bearer spoke about the government perception of CRF and interaction with the organisation, and vice versa: I think the government still comes to us for policy papers. But I think somewhere the CRF is now marginalised in terms of this day-to-day interaction with the government, because when they actually want to roll out s­ omething, then they are doing it on their own. It’s like all the inputs, as if they never happen. So I feel somewhere that marginalisation has happened. I don’t think it is our brief to be running awareness workshops. I think CRF should just be a kind of a capacity-building, activist kind of body, fight PILs, fight for opening up the space, do capacity-building workshops but general work. Unfortunately to do PILs and to do lobbying we need money, to figure out where that will come from, we need to get our act together. I think we see the government now right now as an entity that is just making announcements. There is an announcement of a CR support scheme, but there’s little meaning to it. If you don’t allocate frequency, if you don’t have a single window clearance system, you don’t harass people for renewal of GOPA, if you are going to have policies in place which weren’t in place with due consultation, if you are not even going to take cognisance of the recommendations … you know, all those things, then it is all just noise and I think the idea of creating that noise is to also so that everybody focuses on the noise and doesn’t listen to all this which is happening. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

A few years later, a group of practicing CR stations decided to form a separate association of stations, called the Community Radio Association (CRA). The CRA was registered in 2012 and works towards representing the experiences and perspectives of operational stations at the policy level. An office-bearer of the CRA spoke about the organisation’s beginnings: The idea of CRA came up during the first CR Sammelan, which was in 2011. I think that time we were just about 120 odd stations and once people came in for the conference, there was lot of expectations and they would get a chance to speak or whatever. I got a sense that people felt that there needed to be a platform for operating stations because at that point of time, people felt that all the issues that everybody was talking about pertain to the community radio but none of those who have talked about it were operators. Either they were supporters or they were advocates, but they were not operators. So it was a very nice kind of thing, very romaticised approach but the realities were very different on the ground and there were certain problems of operating stations which were not being addressed and I assume that

222 

P. RAGHUNATH

the same things even till today, but other voices are also being heard. So I think, I believe that was the reason why CRA came in because 120–130 isn’t a small number and I believe that 58 or 60 people signed a petition. I felt that we are the people who were doing all the hard work, we are the people who are putting up stations despite all odds, despite ambiguity on number of issues, we are the ones who are trying to follow a certain mandate which was despite that policy guidelines in which none of the operating stations had a role to play because that was done in 2002. So that was the basis. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

The organisation now has zonal chapters, to look into the localised requirements of stations across various regions in the country, and to voice them all at the national platform. Another office-bearer of the CRA spoke about the organisation’s internal structure: Our organisation had come up after the 2012 Sammelan. We have a decentralised structure, with a national body, zonal-level organisation, and state-­ level organisation. In Karnataka, for instance, we had lobbied with the government for advertisements, and that has been need-based. In Maharashtra, the stations are currently working on procuring collective advertisements. At the national level, Delhi-based people in the organisation are more active. I would say our skillsets are divided, and we had formed committees in a General Body Meeting, based on skills. The primary issues we have dealt with include, non-representation of CRs in the policy space, and collective bargaining for advertisements. We are also concerned about the DAVP empanelment of stations. These are some of the issues, also on the policy front that we have been engaging with. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

The views and approaches of the two organisations differ on various issues. The spectrum fee case of 2012 is a case in point. The Ministry of Communication and IT (MoCIT), which handles the spectrum allocation, decided to increase the annual spectrum fee to be paid by CR stations, from Rs. 19,100 to Rs. 95,000. While the two bodies held the same view that the increase was disruptive to the idea of CR and would impact stations adversely, they chose different approaches towards negotiating and advocating for a rollback. The CRF abstained from a consultation organised by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB). ‘CRF has always been a body of activists and we could not attend the meeting and get co-opted by the government. We had to abstain and register our

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

223

protest. We believe that there is a difference between cooperation and co-­ option’, said a member of CRF. The CRF approach was multi-pronged, with the understanding that dissent is also a means of participation and shapes outcomes. This involved boycotting any activities and policy processes with the government, publishing of articles in the media and reaching out to high-level contacts like the members of the National Advisory Council (NAC). The CRA, on the other hand, attended the meeting and lobbied with the MIB. ‘We wrote a letter to and met the then MoCIT Minister Kapil Sibal, strongly urging that he consider a rollback’, said the then Treasurer of CRA. The two bodies operated as niche players at the time of writing this chapter. The CRF was looked upon as the body that brings in a long-term vision for the sector. ‘CRF is more of a think tank. We at the MIB can always look to them for policy inputs and see them as thought leaders with an ideal vision for the sector’, said the then Joint Secretary of the MIB.  CRA, as the body of practitioners, is concerned with issues like advertisement rates for government advertising, creation of a CR support fund,6 and the like. ‘We definitely need to engage with operational stations, and what better way than approaching their association. CRA brings to us the on-ground struggles and successes, and that helps us understand how the policy is being operationalised on ground’, she said. Both organisations participate in formal consultations with the MIB and also engage with the Ministry at academic conferences and seminars, regional fora, and the like. The bodies are present in Screening Committee meetings held at the MIB to approve applications for the award of CR licenses. Beyond the close-knit policy community, the larger civil society comprising journalists, academia, free speech, and right to information activists, climate change warriors have also been engaging with community radio in India. Since I conducted my fieldwork, a new body called the Federation of Community Radio Stations has come up in the country.7 The emergence of groupings with divergent characteristic features only helps enunciate the many epistemic entry-points associated with the community radio space in India. 6  The vision for a CR Support Fund has seen contestation, with the CRF proposing an independent body in line with international experiences, and presenting a document on the same. However, subsequently, a CR Support Scheme was institutionalised under the aegis of the MIB. 7  I could not interview any office-bearers. More information about the FCRS could be found here: http://www.fcrs.in.

224 

P. RAGHUNATH

International Development, Action, and Advocacy for CR This section looks at the various international, multilateral, and transnational organisations operational in the CR space, to the extent that they are functional or influence the functioning of CR, in India. The World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) is an international body that is devoted to the cause of CR.  Active in the Asia-Pacific region since 2003, has been a part of every policy shift that is seen  in the region. AMARC prioritises its activities according to the Regional Action Plan for South Asia that is made every four years. Advocacy is at the crux of AMARC’s work, and the organisation consistently works with national government and national CR bodies. The General Secretary of AMARC Asia-Pacific spoke of the methods his organisation adopts in working with governments: Consultations are an important part of our work, with governments as well as associations. We work with national associations to draft policies, and advocate with governments. To tell you about the Regional Action Plan, the Action Plan was divided into some broad categories, the foremost being legislation and policy reform. The struggle for a policy is quite real, since policies create environments that are truly community radio friendly, or ban them entirely. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

The role of UNESCO in CR has been enunciated all along, especially in the post-MacBride Commission era, other UN bodies like UNDP have also been active in the CR space, as illustrated above. The organisations have been involved in continued activism, providing support by encouraging discussion at various points. A CR activist suggested that UNESCO had been a continuous source of support and that UNDP had brokered several meetings and provided financial support through 2003, 2004, and 2005, where number of the organisations working in this space actually represented and debated how this first policy could be further revised in order to come up with that even more liberal gradient further in the direction of community-led media, in the way they all had imagined. What follows is an explication of various other multilateral and international organisations who entered the fray once the 2006 policy was announced. A later entrant into the CR space is UNICEF, which has been involved with community radio in India since 2008. UNICEF has been involved

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

225

with funding local NGOs to run CRs and has also simultaneously been part of the policy process. The organisation’s country programme for five years, from 2008 to 2012, was aligned with the Indian government’s own plan. UNICEF works in 17 districts in India, and for the purpose of CR, 7 districts were identified and local NGOs were brought on board. The Communication for Development specialist at UNICEF New Delhi spoke about how UNICEF has been working with CR: Our understanding of policy influence comes from evidence-based policy analysis. For this, we thought we needed to work with NGOs and help them set up CRs. Our work started off with tabling their cause at the MIB and seeking out meetings with the Joint Secretary of Broadcasting. Once our partner NGOs got their licenses, we focused on building their capacities. We have been involved in the entire gamut of activities related to setting up a CR station, including working on training modules for technology, marketing, programming and the like. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

Now, UNICEF has phased out support to NGOs directly and is focusing on understanding the knowledge generated as part of the engagement. The specialist said: Our next focus is on three areas, ethics in broadcasting, sustainability of CRs, and peer-learning. We plan to focus on working with CR advocates and associations like the CRF and CRA towards this end. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

Further, UNICEF has been advocating with the government on issues related to the CR policy guidelines, focusing on single-window clearance, creating an environment for innovation in CR in order to address the issues of sustainability and also on allowing the broadcast of news. Towards this end, UNICEF engages directly with the government in one-on-one meetings with the Joint Secretary, MIB, and presents evidence from its own partnership with NGOs and their CRs. Indirectly, UNICEF works with civil society groups, activists, and advocates on particular issues related to the policy. The specialist spoke about the organisation’s interactions in the CR space: Our engagement with community radio through the CRA has helped us understand where the shoe pinches. Similarly, organisations like CEMCA, Ideosync Media Combine, Drishti have the potential for innovation, and we

226 

P. RAGHUNATH

see ourselves working with them. Knowledge generation, documentation and analysis are procured by partnering with academic institutions. We have contacts in the media for our other activities, but haven’t leveraged them for the purpose of our engagement with CR. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

She went on to add that while UNICEF’s primary focus is on children, CR emerges as a space to engage with issues related to children, adolescents, and women empowerment. Contributing to 4% of the government’s budget for social issues, UNICEF is an important international actor in the CR scene in India. She added: We have participated in about four policy reviews with the MIB, besides being on the Screening Committee for the grant of CR licenses. We at UNICEF see the MIB as doing a good job, especially in conducting inter-­ ministerial advocacy with other ministries involved in the CR process. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

Broadcasting policies often intersect with other laws and policies in practices, in the cultural and technological domains. The Specialist from UNICEF also spoke about UNICEF’s ideas regarding these intersecting policies, especially copyright and spectrum allocation: Copyright is a huge issue and I don’t think that the community radios stations quite understand the impingement that they are making on copyrights by re-broadcasting, doing singing … I don’t know, they are doing their own thing and that’s why I think ethics becomes important. You can’t monitor and police everything, somewhere you have to leave it to the station and station’s judgement of right and wrong. So while ethical guidelines and all of that may be written up, in spirit what do they understand by copyrights act, what do they understand by impinging on copyrights, specially the songs from before 1960s … they have re- recorded … so they really have to take this you know in the spirit of the way that it is intended, clearly. When it comes to spectrum allocation, currently they have dedicated frequencies but they need to dedicate more than that … I think I&B is lobbying for it. I believe that with digitisation, spectrum will not be a that much of an issue because then various kinds of frequencies can be used within the same time. Someone in the Ministry needs to and I think this is an inter-ministry issue also with MoCIT.  There is no frequency available. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

227

UNICEF’s Communication for Development Specialist, thus, shared her views on various aspects of the CR sector and processes in place. In addition to multilateral organisations, other international and regional organisations operate in the CR space. One among them is One World South Asia, which works extensively in support and guidance in CR application. One World South Asia, started its work in India in 1999, was first involved in capacity-building of projects. A representative of the organisation said: The CR movement was gaining momentum in India, and we saw opportunity. The 2002 policy was under discussion, and we had helped conduct the TRAI consultation with stakeholders, leading to a recommendation for policy. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

The organisation, then, got involved in capacity-building for stations like Hamara Radio in Solan. In 2005, they started their own radio programme for the development of community radio, Ek Duniya Anek Awaaz (EDAA), before going on to set up their studio in Delhi. ‘We were a funder-driven organisation then, with support from DFID and Hivos. Now, we are on our own. We use radio for advocacy on issues’, he said. On the policy front, the organisation adopts the role of a facilitator and ‘does not push agendas’. For instance, the Community Radio Forum was initially housed in their office. Similarly, in 2013, through a Call for Proposals, the Community Radio Facilitation Centre was set up to assist interested applicants in applying for CR licenses. Drawing from the organisation’s experience in running the centre, the representative said: We interact with different line ministries in facilitating an applicant’s license. The Wireless Planning and Coordination (WPC) wing of the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MoCIT) are perhaps the biggest bottlenecks. These are systemic problems, as acknowledged by the MIB, as well. There is no convergence of work, as they work in silos. The problem is, at the MoCIT, CR is not a priority area since they deal with bigger players in the spectrum allocation business. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

He added that the facilitation centre also works towards expediting application processes at Inter-Ministerial Coordination Committee meetings.

228 

P. RAGHUNATH

Another organisation that has been involved in the CR space in India is Panos South Asia, the organisation whose India office operates out of New Delhi. I spoke to a representative of the organisation to understand the various activities undertaken by the organisation in the CR space in the country. Panos South Asia has been involved in experiments in Kashmir to showcase that one can have community radio in a place like Kashmir, the representative said. She went on to elaborate the organisation’s efforts in the CR space: We have worked in a two-pronged manner—by working on ground, and working at the policy level. At the policy level, we have worked as part of the CRF. Before working on CR in India, we worked in Nepal. In Nepal, we were there from the initiation, and saw the power of public debate and in making media accessible to people, especially of the marginalised. Radio is one of the most accessible mediums. There is power in getting the governing structure to listen to people. Before the CRF was formed, we used to have meetings to discuss how we could get things moving. We had a project with UNESCO, and Equal Access had also come in. They wanted to help us with the programming. It was in 1998, that Panos set up office, and we soon had a full-fledged office in 2000. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

The representative also spoke about her view of the policy for CR, highlighting some key issues. She said that a whole lot of tightening up was needed, especially in terms of how people get their licenses, the amount of money involved, and where money comes from. However, the policy should not be a restricted one. It must take cognisance of various things, including vested interests and deal with it in a progressive and sustainable manner. We need buy-in from the community, to run a CR station. This is not happening. At Panos, we have been going through a crisis, and operations have shrunk. In the policy space, we observe that all kinds of people representing all kinds of interests have entered the fray. The government is still vary of radio … they want to protect the airwaves from people. The policy is still frozen in that mindset, and therefore, what we have as a result are just ad-­ hoc decisions. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

The representative also said that it was important to go beyond seeing the government as a monolith to understand individual players on ground. The bureaucrats, she felt, looked at things very differently and she

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

229

attributed gaps in understanding to a lack of understanding of various issues of the media, and what the media really is. One of the key take-aways from interactions with the epistemic community and civil society for CR, and the international development community, is the developmentalist orientation that characterises the CR space in a big way. Experts point to the fears of opening up the airwaves to the people as the reason for having chosen the developmentalist route. This was only furthered by the interests of international development organisations. An understanding of the State apparatus is warranted at this juncture to understand the cultures of governance, replete with the paradigm of securitisation.

The Indian Government and Its Multiple Anchors Since the two policy pronouncements of 2002 and 2006, the Government of India has been a key policy actor and the main implementer of policy in the CR space. The government, replete with the many Ministries involved in the functioning and executing of the CR policy, emerged as integral to the practice of policy, especially with the numerous exercises in place to engage stakeholders and formulate newer policy options. In order to understand the process of policymaking for broadcast media in general, and CR in particular, I spoke to the then Joint Secretary, Broadcasting, who provided an understanding of the interface between various departments and wings of the government. She spoke about how the Broadcasting Wing at the Ministry deals with the broadcasting policy, which includes the DTH policy, the Uplinking and Downlinking guidelines (which was amended in 2011), the DTH policy of 2001, and the community radio policy. In the broadcasting sector, they also have the cable television network regulation act of 1995. In terms of how policymaking happens, broadcasting has been defined as a telecommunication activity under section 4 of the Telegraph Act. This means that TRAI which is the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India is the MIB’s regulator also, apart from being the regulator for Department of Telecom and the Ministry of IT and Communication. The policies are always being made in the broadcasting sector in consultation with TRAI, she indicated. The ministry initially makes a reference to TRAI, then TRAI follows a very elaborate process of consultation with stakeholders. The first thing that TRAI does is it prepares a consultation paper and puts in on its website and invites comments from stakeholders within a particular timeframe.

230 

P. RAGHUNATH

After the timeframe is over and the comments are received, they actually hold something called an Open House meeting. Usually they have about four or five regional Open House meetings which provides an opportunity to anyone who is interested in giving comments on a particular issue, she indicated. Within TRAI they have a legal department, which is consulted after which the regulator comes out with a recommendation. Then, the TRAI recommendations are sent to the MIB and it is for the MIB to take call on the recommendations. As per the TRAI Act, if the recommendations are not acceptable then the Ministry makes a back reference to TRAI, in certain areas. Otherwise, they are free to either accept the recommendations or reject the recommendations of TRAI. She suggested that the MIB had also constituted something called as Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC), where the TRAI recommendations are taken. The IMC has representatives from other ministries, including the Ministry of Law. The discussions take place and then the Ministry accepts the recommendations or rejects it and comes out with a policy. After ten years, the policy then gets automatically revised. If there is a need to revise it or amend it earlier, then the Ministry has to make a reference to TRAI. With regard to the other wings in the Ministry, they do not have to consult TRAI because they are governed by something called the Cinematograph Act, she indicated. The Policy & Administration Wing deals mostly with administration and other media units, including the Press Council of India Act. This was the Ministry in a nutshell, she clarified. I also asked the Joint Secretary for her understanding of the functioning of international organisations in the community radio space, to which she replied that the interaction was a collaborative one: We do not have any binding kind of an approach because we have not signed any kind of document or a memorandum of understanding or anything. But it is a very collaborative approach and I think we have in the past, shared our annual plans with each other. The ministry took an initiative to invite all the international agencies that grant money to ask them to share their inputs and we shared our inputs with them as well as our annual plan … so that we don’t replicate, we don’t duplicate what the other person is doing, we also fill in the blanks, we see where the money is not available so that we could pitch in, which ever agency wants to and we have a more collaborative and synergising impact. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

231

Having outlined her interaction with international agencies as stakeholders, she also opined on the existence of at least two groupings in the CR space, the Community Radio Forum and the Community Radio Association. She felt that it was not an issue if there were more than one groupings, since the focus was on the empowerment of community radios and the sector as a whole. She felt that there could be many more groups coming up in the future, but if the intent was right, there was no problem in accommodating as many groups. She then went on to outline the Ministry’s vision for the sector. She said that the Ministry wanted community radios to come up in every nook and corner of the country and do good work. The focus, she said, was on credible and genuine grassroots organisations to take up community radios in interior areas, have a deep engagement with community, bring their voices to the fore, so that they can participate truly in the entire democratic process. She stated that there were requests and demands that news be allowed on the community radio because communities have a right to news and said that she thought it was a fair and valid demand. This aspect was to be taken care of in the new policy document that they had just drafted,8 she stated. Unsure of the kind of approval process such a clause would have to go through, she said that the stakeholder group was unanimous that inclusion of news can no longer be kept aside and it has become a matter of right. She suggested that the Ministry had also started the process of peer-learning or peer-review, saying that she preferred to call it peer-learning, since it has a wider and inclusive connotation. Further, she said that advertisements for the Community Radio Support Scheme (CRSS) seeking applications from people was out and that a document on innovation grants was in the offing. In addition, the Ministry had lined up awareness workshop for the next three years then and was also focused on organising regional workshops to bring people closer, to provide them a regional platform, to talk to them in their own language: We are also looking forward to more engaging content sharing platforms, and want to support some of the existing content sharing platforms to have more content This capacity-building, training of community radio stations especially in the area of technical capacity, content capacity, how to edit it, how to make fresh content is something that we are looking forward to. More sustainability options for community radios is something which is very 8

 This document has not been put out in the public domain.

232 

P. RAGHUNATH

important. We are looking at all those options whether it is DAVP empanelment or it is programmes by ways of ministry departments. We have initiated some dialogue and discussions with the national disaster management and people disaster management in community radio stations and we look forward to a long term capacity building plan in this regard with them as well as the other agencies, so that the capacity building can happen in the future … disaster management because this is where community radios can play very important role. These are some of the areas that we are working on. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

As already outlined earlier, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting interacts regularly with other Ministries in the administering and clearing of applications for the running of CR stations. The Joint Secretary, MIB, spoke about her Ministry’s interactions with the other Ministries, especially the Wireless Planning and Coordination wing of the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MoCIT): They are critical for the sector because if WPC or Telecomm does not give frequencies or the SACFA clearance or the WOLs, then the sector cannot function. I would say they are the most critical players in the sector. We may bring hundreds and crores of rupees but if they don’t allocate frequencies, then it does not work. Our advise to them has been to establish a single window clearance set up, so that a person does not have to go like ping pong ball between them and us for GOPA, for WOL, for frequency allocation, for SACFA, etc. So we want to put an end to it … I think that establishing a single window clearance mechanism where you once apply and then everything is taken care of … I think that will be the D-day, when we find that the entire process is really synchronised and less complicated for people to make use of this wonderful medium. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

In order to piece together the other side of the story, I spoke to the Deputy Wireless Advisor, Wireless Planning and Coordination wing of the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MoCIT), who spoke about the functioning and perception of the wing, of CR. He spoke about how, internationally, low-power FM is clubbed at one end of the band, usually at the bottom of the band, at 88–90 MHz. In India, there are other commitments, so the band starts at 90 MHz. Three frequencies have been earmarked for CR, which are 90.4  MHz, 90.8  MHz, and 91.2 MHz. He elaborated on the interface with the MIB, and the allocation of spectrum to CRs:

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

233

MIB is the nodal ministry, and they take views from several ministries while making policy. One has to understand that frequency is extremely valuable, and that distribution should be just and fair. While FM radio has commercial value, CR is for social good. In the allocation of spectrum, geography is very important: in the urban areas, spacing can be reduced, while in the rural areas, spacing has to be more. The MIB forwards applications for comments, and most of the times, it is about whether a frequency is available or not. The application comes back after the Letter of intent (LOI). Before that, it is only indicative. The standard procedure is that, the LOI from us is different from that of the MIB’s. Some of the issues we face have to do with the agents and third parties interveing on behalf of applicants. We are not comfortable talking to agents. A lot of times, even after two years, the applicants don’t know the status of their applications because of this. We do not entertain backdoor entries. The government has a liberal attitude, they do not cancel licenses even after six months of non-use. The IMC meets every quarter, to look into pending cases, issues, and objections. I feel that the single-window is a fanciful concept, and that is my personal view. After the 2G scam, we had a committee formed here to look into certain areas of operation … and until the decision of the government, on auctions is obtained, we cannot assign frequencies. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

The last part of the comment was especially important in light of the 2G scam that had broken out a couple of years before the interview was taken and, hence, had repercussions on the spectrum allocation for CRs as well. The interviews with officials also reveal the dynamics of inter-­ministry relations and affairs, protocols and processes that need to be followed, allowing for an understanding of the structures of governance in place, and how that in turn dictates the cultures of governance in the country. I also spoke to the Deputy Director, MIB, in charge of community radio and handling the CR Cell at the Ministry. The CR Cell was an extension of the Broadcasting Administration Programmes (BAP), after the finalisation of the 2002 policy. The main role of the Cell has been to help with the permission process and to help spread awareness across the country, in collaboration with civil society, on CR. The Cell deals with three ministries in its activities—the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Defence, and the Wireless Planning and Coordination wing of the MoCIT. It also deals with the Ministry of Human Resource Development and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. To expedite the process, monthly coordination meetings were started three years back then and are held on the 10th of every month. At the time of interview, in late 2015, the 53rd such

234 

P. RAGHUNATH

meeting had concluded. The Deputy Director also spoke of the Screening Committee meetings being held every month, chaired by the Joint Secretary (Broadcasting), stakeholders, and special invitees. He spoke of a 2013 policy revision exercise, for which consultations were held with stakeholders as well as CRs. However, it could not be implemented. The contention over the broadcasting of news has often led to the entire process getting delayed, he opined. He said that the then Secretary was not open to allowing news and that the All India Radio news was allowed in turn. The government is aware that there is a demand for news on CRs. However, this could pose a problem in term of monitoring. Our question is, “who will listen from the government?”. The petition is in the Supreme Court on this. This one thing cannot negate what the government has done for the CR sector. The government itself has taken so many proactive steps, like peer review. The ministry does not earn from CR. It spends on it, in fact. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

The Deputy Director also spoke about how a lot depended on individual officers, when it came to shaping the CR space. Bureaucratic processes entail that they keep getting transferred, and hence, it takes time to sensitise them. The problems are also structural, he felt. The above account helps understand the processes in place for the approval and processing of applications for CR by organisations. I also spoke to the then Secretary of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), who outlined his understanding of CR in India: I believe that CR is a localised medium, and therefore, the cost of operations should be recovered through local means of advertising. In areas like the hilly regions, CRs provide space for local artistes and speakers. I do not see commercial and community radios as competing media, solely because of the fact that the intent behind each of them is different. Similarly, policy intentions are different from what happens on ground. We cannot shoot the messenger, especially in disturbed areas. Some sort of a monitoring mechanism should be put in place, since it is these areas in which CRs can serve a very local interest. I have very little doubt about the utility of CR in India, especially with our diverse cultures. (Personal Interview, September 2015)

In general, it seemed like individual officials from the ministries and regulatory authorities were sensitive to and had acquired an

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

235

understanding of CR as a site that registers the country’s plurality, in terms of culture, language, class, and other forms of diversity. However, the state apparatus, as a larger entity, often obfuscates individual stances and has a mind of its own, as will be explored further ahead in the book.

Understanding Domestic and International Realities in Bangladesh What follows is an explication of the move towards the second CR policy in the region, after India. This section explores the domestic as well as international realities with respect to the CR policy process in Bangladesh. The political instabilities and shifts in government are key to understanding ideas around political will and the strategic overtures made by the advocacy groups described in the previous chapter to push for policy. Similarly, as has already been described, Bangladesh being the focus of international developmental aid in general also invited the participation, push, and support for CR from the diplomatic and international aid sector in the country. Written as narratives from various policy vantage points, this section helps piece together the policy story for CR till the proclamation of the policy in 2008. Policy Narratives: Policy Windows and Strategies I spoke to a researcher and former official with Bangladesh Betar, who currently works in diplomacy and international development. Faroha Suhrawardy shared his perspective from direct involvement with radio and CR, from the initial days. One can say that there were two sets of people struggling for community radio—one in the government and one non-government. There is a small unit in Bangladesh Betar called transcription service, which is the sound archive. They had a very big audio archive at that time and they were producing quality programs to feed all the radio stations. It was around 2000, that one of the directors of the station, Monzur Islam wrote in the newspaper about some innovations. He chose very young innovative government officials to do new things. There was so much talent, so much innovation … he tried to start community broadcasting. This was under the government. He didn’t succeed. Bangladesh Betar had a very good partnership with the UNICEF Bangladesh. So UNICEF Bangladesh came with its idea that we

236 

P. RAGHUNATH

can do community broadcasting, with UNICEF’s own agenda, like women, children, maternal health. They would take some Bangladesh Betar artistes and go to a remote place, like a small village and showcase some cultural experiences, and mix with the local artistes … they would produce programmes with a local problem, local issue and then they broadcast that on Bangladesh Betar. I was with Betar at the time. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Akin to the experiments with community-based or community-centric broadcasting in the other countries, especially Sri Lanka, Bangladesh too started pushing the envelope with participation on the public service broadcaster. The involvement of international development agencies is also visible right from the initial days. Elaborating more on this, Suhrawardy spoke about how the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) came with a new focus and had a project running at that time, the Empowerment of the Coastal Fishing Communities (ECFC). The project was prevalent in 117 villages, in the Cox’s Bazaar coastal region. This was an important project with lots of components, including education. They gave that proposal to an officer, to have a slot for community broadcasting and under that project, they set up a unit called the CCRU, Coastal Community Radio Unit, where Suhrawardy worked as a fisher-folk radio programme officer. He narrated about aspects from working in the field, which are quite different form experiences in a studio: The coastal people would come into the radio station every month, sit together to do their plan … it was a bi-weekly, twenty minutes programme. They would perform in their own language and that become the most popular programme in the country. While I don’t want to call it community radio because it was on public radio, such community-centric programming changed a lot of minds … and in 2007, the Ministry of Information found that the listenership of Bangladesh Betar was going down very fast. It was at the bottom and that was not a good sign, so Bangladesh Betar should concentrate on community needs was the conclusion. Bangladesh Betar did a lot of research and discussion … then they sent their opinion to the Ministry … the Ministry sent another letter to the radio authority saying we need community radio, a different kind of radio. They asked that a draft policy be designed. The Bangladesh Betar Director General was the head and two other guys from civil society, one from MMC and one from BNNRC came and joined the team to draft the policy. I too was there. We drafted the policy and sent it back to the Ministry, and within few days that

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

237

policy finalised and adopted. It was like magic, because policy formation is not that easy in this country and especially in the broadcasting sector. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

This is when he tried to find out how it was possible and discovered that there was a decade-long history wherein the civil society organisations had been struggling to introduce community radio and the political regime in power at the time was in favour. Suhrawardy’s recollection of the history of policymaking for CR and the advocacy campaign helped understand the government broadcaster angle to the policy story of CR in Bangladesh. A key aspect flagged off by many interviewees was the political dispensation that was prevalent during the time the policy was passed. The Caretaker Government of 2007 showcased the political will, which is an extremely important aspect of broadcast media policymaking. The military-­backed government was in power for two years and, within those two years, they took 119 policy decisions, of which the policy on CR was one. In the Manifesto: Support for CR and the Policy of 2008 The new government of 2008, which took over from the Caretaker government, followed up on the mention in the Manifesto. I spoke to one of the political leaders belonging to the Awami League, which formed the government in 2008, to gain an understanding of how the Party viewed CR and why they had managed to include it in their Manifesto. Nooh-Ul-­ Alam Lenin of the Awami League reflected on the Party’s tryst with the idea of community radio and their experience of adding it to their manifesto. Though his account showcases points of departure from the narrative of advocacy as provided by the NGOs and BNNRC, it becomes imperative since it was the first such instance of a political party getting involved with CR in such a direct manner. Our party is one that is deeply connected with the people. We introduced the Right to Information in this country. We understand and recognise the importance of communication in today’s times, in this era of free information. People get information from print and electronic media, and their mobile phones. The role played by CR has been good, especially in Latin American countries. If this is the case in Latin America, why not in our rural areas where the people are eager to find out more about the policies of the

238 

P. RAGHUNATH

government, and about market prices? As a Party, out focus has been on peoples’ rights. There are many NGOs that talk of CR, but we are a Party as deeply connected with the people and we know what is the best medium for the people, and what their aspirations are. We do not entirely depend on advocacy of others. We have introduced it in our election manifesto, of which I was a big part, even before people came to us. It is only in 2014 that some NGOs came to us. We told them that we introduced it in our manifesto of 2008. It is our own initiative. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

While the narrative provided a divergent version, Lenin provided interesting insight into the process of policymaking in Bangladesh. He spoke about the route taken by an item on a party manifesto to becoming a law: Our Planning Commission usually has short, mid, and long term policies, for the period 2001–2021. One of the goals was expansion of connectivity and the media, including the national radio, and the private FM. There were numerous licenses given to the private FM, but none to community radio. We introduced community radio in our time, besides giving private radio and television channel licenses. That was the policy. Our Planning Commission put it in front of the information Ministry, that there needs to be a policy for implementing CR, and asked for the criteria and other policy matters for licensing. We have a Parliamentary Standing Committee in all the concerned ministries. The Committee has members from not just the Awami League, but all parties. The Committee monitors the implementation of the policy, and if necessary also take the initiative of the policymaker in terms of the implementation. The Committee also interfaces with the civil society and have meetings with them, including journalists and teachers unions, media personalities, etc. Through the Parliamanetary Standing Committee, it goes to the Parliament, and the Parliament passes the Law through the Law Ministry. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

After explaining the process of law-making in the country for CR, the politician also spoke about how CR continued to feature in the Party manifesto for the next elections held in 2014. He suggested that the process had only been initiated in 2008 and was not complete. He said that the number of CRs were small and that taking CR to different areas in the country was a continuous process. Ideas of sustainability can be garnered from this understanding of the CR policy, not just as a policy document, but as the practice of CR, a continuous one at that. Lenin also conveyed the idea that Awami League, as a pro-Liberation Party, was in favour of

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

239

freedom of expression and information and, therefore, of CR. This divergent narrative provides insight into the socially constructed nature of policymaking, wherein competing constructions of reality inform the many diverse narratives of policy. While Lenin spoke on his Party’s behalf, I also met Shafik Rahman, a famed media personality who has experienced a tumultuous public life and has often been placed under official and unofficial house arrests. I met him on one such occasion, when he could not leave his home. Shafik Rahman provided another narrative of media freedom in the country, and the Party’s image: You see, in Bangladesh, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party is branded as a pro-religious party, Similarly, the Awami League is branded as an anti-media party because they had banned newspapers, nationalising them and passing draconian laws in the past. Now, they seem to be taking a stand that is pro-­ media stance, barring the shutting down of pro-religious channels, saying that they would liberalise things. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The above quote provides a glimpse into the contestation of ideas in Bangladesh’s political landscape and larger politics that dominates the nation. CR, as a broadcasting space, is shaped as much by the larger political tidings of the country. Even as the narration above provides an inkling of the policymaking process in Bangladesh, Monju provided the civil society’s side of participation in such a process as well, talking about seminars that were held to educate the Ministry officials: In the seminar held in Nepal, I spoke to the Joint Secretary of Ministry of Information. He was very glad to have been with us at Nepal and we jointly participated there. We listened to the speakers of Nepal and India. He was motivated now and he committed from his side saying that he would do as much as he could to have a community radio policy in Bangladesh. Unfortunately, in some time, he had to retire from the government. Then we had to start our advocacy newly through the Communication Minister and former senior government officials to get us to have a dialogue with the Minister of Information. The senior government official Mr. Muheem, he was the Secretary of the Ministry of Information … he also helped us and participated with us in that seminar. He was a very respectable person, his voice in real terms helped to have the policy for community radio. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

240 

P. RAGHUNATH

Monju of MMC also spoke about an instance when the epistemic community was directly called upon to help draft the policy for the Ministry: At one point I got a telephone call from the Director of Bangladesh Betar Mr. Mahbub, who said that they had to submit a policy by the next day to the Ministry of Information. He asked if it was possible for us (MMC and BNNRC) to prepare a draft policy. In that one day, we worked together with three to five policies and prepared a draft policy that very night. The next morning, we gave it to him and he found it very nice and presented it to the Ministry of Information. The Ministry formed a Committee within, and the Committee revised the policy and provided further inputs. Then it was finally approved by the Ministry of Information, and was sent to the Law Commission for them to have a look. The Law Commission gave the green signal, and then the minister said that this law was sufficient … that this policy would be sufficient to provide licenses to the community radio sector. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The above account illustrates the deliberative nature of the policymaking process for CR in Bangladesh. The epistemic community for CR in the country could be said to have been involved in two ways: (a) As an educator, in transferring policy ideas and epistemes related to the idea of community radio, thereby diffusing knowledge, and (b) As policymakers, going further ahead with the role of a policy educator, to help in the policy documents aspect of the policy process in the country, thereby alluding to the deliberative and interdependent nature of the process. It further attests the personality-centric9 characteristic of the policy process in the country, as also in the larger region, with a degree of informality showing up in the interactions between government officials in charge of the policy, and policy advocates, only enabled by levels of familiarity with each other. The educating aspect of the process helps analyse the epistemes, constructs, or ideas with respect to CR that were transferred as part of the process.

9  One can say that policymaking is personality-centric when the policy actors in question use their personal charm, persuasive ability, connections, and networks to push for policy shifts, by being privy to information or by using their social connections to further policy agendas and motives.

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

241

International Development: Aid Funding, Agendas, and Action As has been discussed above, aid funding plays an important part in defining the media landscape of Bangladesh. I spoke to individuals working in the international development sector in the country, to try and understand the involvement of donors and their interactions with Bangladeshi NGOs and organisations working with CR in the country. Shameem Ara Sheuli is one such individual working in the international aid sector and was associated with USAID in the past, in the capacity of a Programme Officer, Media, when the CR movement was on in the country. She spoke about the involvement of USAID in the advocacy for CR in the country: We organised workshops at the divisional level and invited media professionals, civil society members, as also high level government officials, members of the Parliament, as also academicians who are in the communication sector. I remember that there were some recommendations, like community radio should not broadcast any kind of advertisement, and they should not be operated by any development organisation, because there are chances that it will give its own purpose, there should not be any interference of the government or local political leadership, etc. It became the topic of discussion in the media and in the civil society. We were trying to bring some effective suggestions those can help government to finalise the track, so these kinds of recommendations came to the government … we organised a national level workshop, where we invited the Secretary of the Ministry of Information and the Director of BTRC and other government officials who actually play a role in formulation of the policy. They actually presented our recommendations to those who came from the root level. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The socialisation of the government, by international organisations and development agencies, towards adopting a favourable view of CR was initiated in the late 1990s, alongside the efforts of the activists and advocates of CR as narrated above. Anwarya Begum, the then Joint Secretary with the Ministry of Information, spoke about how important INGOs were in a country like Bangladesh: Most of the INGOs and NGOs work within the ambit of the rules and regulations laid down by the government. They are important in a country like Bangladesh since they work in remote areas where the government might not be able to reach. We have 64 districts and 500 sub-districts. And in every sub-district there is one executive officer. I was an executive officer in the

242 

P. RAGHUNATH

government local office in the past. We tried our best to develop their social status, but INGOs are also working for the betterment of our village people. They work with our government as well as our local NGOs who have more reach among the grassroot people. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Following all these concerted efforts, with transnational advocacy and alliances with local NGOs, and national and regional advocacy groups, the Government of Bangladesh adopted the ‘Community Radio Installation, Broadcast and Operation Policy’ on March 8, 2008. The policy of 2008 contains technical stipulations for CR, in terms of the radius of operation, the power of the transmitter, and so on, in details. The document is also revelatory of the hold of the idea of ‘development’ on the country’s imagination of broadcasting, since it allows for ‘development news’ and ‘development advertising’, terminology that do not appear in any other country’s CR policy document. It attests to and harks back to the positioning of Bangladesh in the international development scenario, as well as the manner in which development serves as the chosen rhetoric to alleviate government fears over the opening up of the airwaves, as is also the case in India.

Sustaining the CR Policy After the adoption of the 2008 policy, the government of Bangladesh set up three committees, to oversee the implementation of the policy—the National Regulatory Committee comprising eight members, the Technical Sub-Committee comprising seven members, and the Central Monitoring Committee comprising eight members. In the first phase, 13 organisations were granted CR licenses, while one CR license was given to a government wing. The policy suggests that the Upazila or district officials shall have Advisory Committees to oversee and advise CRs. With the CR policy in place, the next challenge was to ensure strategic application for licenses and the spread of CR in the country. Continued Performance as Sustainable Practice The sustainability of the practice of policy can be looked at, by understanding the following aspects: (a) the planned and phased manner in which the practice of CR has been accomplished, (b) the sustained efforts in advocating for CR even after the pronouncement of the policy of 2008,

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

243

and (c) the focus on disaster and natural calamities and vulnerabilities of coastal regions (as articulations of sustainability), as an integral part of the CR sector in the country. Lejano and Park (2016), in writing about the textuality of the policy document, argue for policy going beyond the text. Citing Park (2013), the authors suggest that textualism leads to shallow than deep implementation of a policy, with the former accounting for a superficial conformity to the policy document and the latter allowing for creative practice that strives to meet the intent behind the policy (2016: 281). This section seeks to put under the lens such an understanding of practice as sustainability in that it is continuous, evolving, open, and internally connected, seeks to understand the diverse perceptions and views of the CR policy, the negotiations with the object of policy, as well as the strategies adopted in the process. After the policy pronouncement of 2008, a CR helpdesk was set up by the government and BNNRC, which received 200 applications. The Technical Sub-Committee finalised 116 applications, which were sent to the Home Ministry for clearance by the Ministry of Information. Forty applicants were given the clearance, and in the end, 16 were allowed the license. The government called for applications the second time around, when 125 applications were received, out of which the Technical Sub-­ Committee shortlisted 102. In the end, 16 of them were again approved. The focus in Bangladesh has been on spreading the coverage of CR outside the city of Dhaka and beyond the urban landscape. The BNNRC, which is a member of the Drafting committee, had also conveyed to the government that their mandate was to work outside of Dhaka. They regard centralised content generation as a complete no-no and a non-­ negotiable. AHM Bazlur Rahman of the BNNRC suggested that community radio reflects local content and that centralised content had the possibilities of succumbing to dominant agendas. In the former, the context is local as well. He also went on to elaborate the role of BNNRC after 2008: After the policy of 2008, we began promoting the policy all across the country, and organised a helpdesk. We started conducting seminars to carry out hand-holding of stakeholders and possible applicants. The policy is not a one-time work. It is an ongoing endeavour. The sector, ever since, has been growing. There are no roadblocks in CR.  Now, we are campaigning for community television and community film. Since 2008, the government has been trying to facilitate the process. They conduct the World Radio Day

244 

P. RAGHUNATH

every year, in collaboration with the public service broadcaster, and community radio. These two kinds of radios work very closely, and there is no competition. Our task is three pronged: capacity-building, research and development, and technical cooperation. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The Caretaker Government had stayed on in power much beyond the 120-day period allotted for it, thereby passing policy legislation without legal and legislative authority or power. Early 2009 brought a change in government in Bangladesh, with the Awami League assuming charge and taking over from the Caretaker Government. As has been outlined early, the Awami League had in their manifesto an item on permitting community radio in the country. I spoke to the government official who joined the Ministry of Information as the Joint Secretary (Broadcasting), in March 2009, when the government was beginning to formalise the process of application and shortlisting of applicants for the CR license. The official spoke about his tryst with CR and licensing, as well as his exposure to regional experiences: A team from our Ministry visited Bangalore for a workshop. We were exposed to the demand for CR licenses at home in Bangladesh, and outside. The CR movement is a demand of time and technology. We started giving out licenses to NGOs initially, since they work for the development of the community, and we preferred rural and underdeveloped areas. In the Barguna district, for example, there was a cyclone that afflicted the region. CR played a great role for the fishermen in the affected area, and was appreciated by everyone. We conduct a tough scrutiny when it comes to deciding whom to give the license and whom not to … that, in a nutshell, is the challenge of policymaking in CR, more than anything else. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The politics of licensing emerged as a recurrent theme, during the transcription and analyses of interviews with government officials. For instance, the contestation between choosing AM or FM bands and the looming future of radio in a digitised form emerged as conversation pointers. I also spoke to three other government officials at the office of the Bangladesh Betar, the public service broadcaster, to try and understand patterns of frequency allocation for radio, broadly. They suggested that today, few people own radio sets and that most of them used mobile phones, and prefer one device to two. The main reason for setting up CR is for localised broadcasting, they opined. On FM radio, the sound is crystal clear,

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

245

and the AM band provides large coverage at very low frequency. The problem, however, they said, was that one has to have a big antenna for reception, which is power consuming, and the sound output was not as good as FM. They then brought the focus on to another issue to think about today—digitisation. The officials suggested that it would take time for developing countries. While digitisation itself was not a problem, the availability and expense of FM handsets certainly is, they said. Digital receivers are costly, and those who tune in to CR as typically the marginalised, who would not be able to afford them. They also stated that CR would not go in for digitisation in the next few years and that it may happen with private FM in the commercial areas. The politics in the process of licensing emerges in the divergent capacities of listeners to access the airwaves, the push by the corporate media owners towards digitisation, as well as their ability to lay claim to spectrum owing to their powerful positions. Lt. Col. Sajjad of the Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) stated that in the National Frequency Allocation Plan, Region 3 was from 87.5 to 108 MHz. Three frequencies of 99.0, 99.2, and 98.8 MHz were earmarked for CR. CRs were allowed to set up a 100-watt transmitter, to reach a radius of 17 kilometres. The frequencies were reused every few kilometres. The Allocation of Spectrum and Licensing is done when the MoI receives applications and evaluates them. The shortlisted parties apply to the BTRC for spectrum and NOC equipment, after procuring the license, he suggested. He added that there was a set procedure for assigning spectrum, whereby the National Committee for Spectrum Allocation sits for meetings every two to three months and makes recommendations to the BTRC.  The BTRC has the powers to accept the recommendation or reject it. BTRC is not involved in the process of procuring a security clearance. However, it is involved in the import of equipment, wherein the officials visit the CR station for inspection, and if everything is satisfactory, the license is provided. Therefore, a CR station gets two licenses—from the MoI as well as a license for operating radio equipment. The conversation with the Lt. Col. Sajjad revealed the ways in which the inter-ministerial and intra-institutional functioning of CR was done. I then spoke about the role of the various wings of the Bangladesh Betar, and the officials associated with the public broadcaster, in the policymaking for broadcasting, in general, and CR, in particular. Among the many themes that emerged was the idea that as the ‘senior’ broadcaster,

246 

P. RAGHUNATH

certain rules needed to be appended to the functioning of CRs, since they were just taking off and needed prescriptive guidance and that they would, perhaps, broadcast ‘unnecessary things’ on air. The Bangladesh Betar monitored the programming on CR, with the local committee being instituted for each station, headed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner. The monitoring report is sent every month to the Director General, Bangladesh Betar, who is the head of the Monitoring Committee. Off the record, one of the officials also suggested that while it may seem that the Ministry had made the policy, in reality, it was they who made it completely, especially the technical clauses. This was corroborated by the Director General, Bangladesh Betar, who was also interviewed separately: As ex-officio Convener of the committee that looked into policy, I can say that we had threadbare discussions with members from the private sector, the BNNRC, some NGOs, and Ministry officials. We also looked at the experiences of our neighbouring countries. We finalised the policy over six to seven sessions. Three of us from here conducted the study, and then sat down with other members and stakeholders, including aspirant initiators and NGOs. We then went to the Ministry of Information for government approval. We received dozens of applications, about 180 of them. The response was very encouraging. The Scrutiny Committee, comprising the Secretary who heads it, and three of us from here, felt that 124 of them were eligible. The representative from the Ministry of Home Affairs was very critical of the process. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

He also recounted the advocacy efforts that he was privy to, from the early days of CR, suggesting that Monju of the MMC was corresponding with him since the early days, when he was the Director General, Film. He took him to the Joint Secretary, Broadcasting, in 1997. When he became the Director General of Bangladesh Betar, the advocacy group came to him again, saying that he was in the right position to help them. This account only reinforces the personality-centricity of policymaking, as well as the strategic potential in acquiring a keen understanding of the administrative system, itself a product of the colonial governance architecture and postcolonial national imaginations, in the country and the larger region. International Organisations After 2008: Strategy and Sustenance The post-policy scenario in Bangladesh has seen increased donor intervention in the CR space, with numerous international organisations working

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

247

with BNNRC, as the umbrella body of NGOs in radio and communication, the various NGOs that had applied and procured licenses to run CRs, as well as the government. With the policy stipulating that development news and advertising was permitted, donor funding is a legal, desirable, and integral aspect of the CR space in Bangladesh. This section looks at how international donor and development aid agencies operate in this space. Amin Al Rasheed, who has been associated with private FM and CRs in the country, spoke about the involvement of organisations like the Japan International Cooperation Association (JICA), the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA), the UNESCO, and the UNICEF, in propelling CR in Bangladesh. UNICEF, in particular, was involved since the pre-policy days. They made a draft policy for CR, called the ‘National Strategy for the Implementation of Community Radio Installation, Broadcast and Operations Policy in Bangladesh’, to advocate with the Government of Bangladesh. The draft highlights the strategy adopted in a planned manner, to involve the Government of Bangladesh, in the granting of licenses to organisations interested in setting up CR. Among the many things alluded to, ideas of democracy as inscribed in the Vision 2021 for Bangladesh, of access as purported in the manifesto for Digital Bangladesh and the Right to Information Act of 2009, the National Strategy for Accelerated Poverty Reduction II 2009 (NSAPRII), and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were made in the document. By strategically mapping CR to existing policies and aspirations in the country, and the vision for its future, the UNICEF strategy document is eminently helpful in understanding the many considerations as well as policy ideas that went into advocating for a CR policy in the country. Among other things, the document talks about key challenges facing the CR space in the country, which it outlines as: Creating an enabling environment for community radios, facilitating their social, financial and institutional sustainability; ensuring community representation and independence of CRs, articulating collaboration among stakeholders, etc.

The strategy document was released in 2012, in the English and Bangla languages. The BNNRC and MMC alike were very supportive of the strategy document and felt that it provided a vision for the next decade for CR in the country.

248 

P. RAGHUNATH

Similarly, I spoke to a long-time associate in the CR space, who at the time of the interview worked with Transparency International-Bangladesh. Prior to that, he had years of experience working with MMC and in the CR space, especially before the policy was announced. He shared his experiences of working in the space and spoke about how international organisations functioned in the country. International organisations play a very significant and vital role. Our policymakers cannot take into cognisance various ideas when we tell them. When it is directed through an international organisation, experts and outsiders, they do listen. I do remember Mr. Jayaweera of UNESCO being highly impressed when I presented a country strategy paper on behalf of the Bangladesh team at the 8th annual AMARC conference in Kathmandu. He even told me to take legal permission from the government, and said that he would provide technical and financial support. Unfortunately, I could not follow through. In my opinion, the finances are a problem that CRs face, as also the broadcasting area. Building the technical capacities of CRs is very needed. I have visited some CRs out of personal interest, and I feel that we need to do a lot more to see functional, effective CRs in the country. I have seen a lot of potential. I visited Radio Pollikontho, where they work with the tea-garden people, and radio Lokobetar, where they work with fisherfolk in the coastal area. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The representative had also been involved in a Media South Asia project organised by researchers from the UK and spoke passionately about community journalism. Similarly, I also spoke to Afshan Chowdhury, well-­ known observer of the media scene in Bangladesh, and the larger region. He is also associated with BRAC, one of the important advocates that help push the cause of CR.  He held the view that CRs in the country were donor-driven. He opined that the government in Bangladesh was weak and that donor agendas and policies held sway over their functioning. He also felt that the donor push behind CR was not necessarily a negative thing. In Bangladesh, the government is not proactive. The trigger never comes from within. External bodies have always driven policies. The government’s policy is influenced by the World Bank. Except for remittances, garment factories, and agriculture, donors figure everywhere. It is different in the case of communication. The Ministry of Information sees information as a subversive subject, and wants to control it. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

249

I also spoke to a representative of UNESCO Bangladesh, who provided insight into the interaction that the organisation had, with the CR space in Bangladesh. UNESCO Bangladesh has been involved in awareness creation, installation support, programming, and policy advocacy, in the CR sector. Nyma Nargis, Programme Officer, Information and Communication Unit, spoke about UNESCO’s role in CR, the organisation’s interaction with the government of Bangladesh, and her perspective on CR in the country: I joined UNESCO Bangladesh in 2011.10 Since then, we have been involved in a number of things with respect to CR. For instance, we helped in the installation of 2 CRs—Radio Padma, run by the Centre for Communication Development (CCD), and Radio Lokobetar, run by the Mass-Line Media Centre (MMC). The Communication Unit of UNESCO, Dhaka was set up only in 2008, and therefore, our involvement is a post-policy one, and has been parallel to the growth of CR in the country. BNNRC has been our partner from the very beginning. In my opinion, the Ministry of Information is very positive about CR, and they want to promote it. However, our budgets and scope is very limited. I feel the local NGOs do not have much knowledge about CR. Our role in working with the government has been such that, we directly communicate with the Ministry of Information, and invite them to the policy dialogue sessions that we organise. That’s how they know the reality on the field. I believe, the shortcoming is that we do not have a dedicated person in the Ministry to understand and deal with CR. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Nargis also elaborated on the activities in CR: year one was dedicated to set up two stations, year two was focused on programming, year three on back up transmission, and year four on capacity-building. At the time of this conversation, it was the fourth year of involvement, and Nargis suggested that the UNESCO had spoken to BNNRC about the plan for capacity-building. On the licensing process, she opined that the process had been easy. However, she was critical of the manner in which NGOs jumped on to the bandwagon if there was money or funds available, but possessed little knowledge of CR.  Nargis also reflected on UNESCO’s involvement in the making of broadcasting law and policy: 10  It may be noted here that this understanding of UNESCO’s role comes from the interviewee’s experience of working with the organisation. It does not imply that UNESCO was not involved prior to her joining the organisation. In the early 2000s, UNESCO had facilitated the participation of Bangladesh stakeholders in regional meetings on CR.

250 

P. RAGHUNATH

Last year, we organised a series of focus group discussions and roundtables. The broadcast law is similar to other laws … it is extracted from other laws, and is a compilation. However, participation is added here. The Institute of Communication Studies was also present. Senior journalists recommended that the Institute and UNESCO draft a different law. However, there has been a huge confused about different clauses. It is difficult to make a broadcast law that specifically contains CR, and does not let it feature under the umbrella of radio. It is a vague term, and needs revision. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Nargis also spoke about UNESCO’s focus on Freedom of Expression and how CR fits well within the purview of UNESCO’s aims and operations, in the country, and globally. Besides the above agencies, the UNDP, JICA, the European Union, the Free Press Unlimited, CEMCA, the UNESCO Chair on Community Media, and other aid agencies working in the media development space have been operational in supporting the CR sector in advocacy as well as in funding issue-based programming and capacity-building in the country. The views aired by representatives, as well as observers of international development, only corroborated the substantial role played by international development and donor aid agencies, in a country like Bangladesh. The CR sector is a prism that showcases this rather well.

Conclusion: A Reflexive Note on Policy Actors Policy actors are an integral part of the Deliberative Policy Ecology and emerged as a major component of the Mapping exercise undertaken for this research endeavour. The range of such actors, starting from international donor agencies and multilateral organisations to governments, local grassroot epistemic community and movement for community radio to the community radio stations themselves, allowed me to delve into the many constructions that they had on a list of questions that were put to them. For this work, I have tried to understand how a scale is organised in the actors’ imaginations of themselves and of each other, and the world. Is it hierarchal, dialogic, or simply multi-situated? Which scale is closer or distant? And finally, what level of importance is attributed to a specific scale? These are some of the questions that were kept in mind in the writing of

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

251

the various actors’ dispositions and perspectives on aspects of the policy and the policymaking process, including constructions of the other actors. For instance, did ‘local’ actors see themselves as just that—local, or did their interactions with international aid agencies, or the government allow them to perceive themselves as global/glocal, or national, respectively? Questions like these propel the construction of the self of each actor in the everyday. The socio-political facets. and indeed, the economics underlying the sites and the interaction of policy actors across sites, only contribute to the messiness that such interactions in the everyday are. Critical theories of development are useful at this juncture, in questioning the everyday practices of civil society actors in South Asia. As this chapter has detailed, civil society in the region is not unproblematic, with donor funding and aid distribution raising questions about the independence and interdependence of civil society groups in the region, as well as the intent and means of initiating community radio setups in the region. How does one approach international donor aid in repressive states versus transitional societies? Similarly, capturing organic demand for community radio in countries like India and Bangladesh, where hitherto existent activist groups took the form of semi-/professional organisations liaisoning and interfacing with international and multilateral aid donors, becomes difficult and needs to be problematised. This chapter sought to engage with these ideas, presenting narratives and thick description of such an engagement with civil society actors who have assumed glocal colours.

Bibliography Achterberg, W. (2001). Association and deliberation in risk society: Two faces of ecological democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 4(1), 85–104. Area-Based Growth With Equity Programme (ABGEP). (2000). (Project SRL/971101). Colombo: UNDP. Adhikari, D. (2004). A Nepali Quest for Journalistic Professionalism: The Public Life of Bharat Dutta Koirala. Columbia: University of Missouri. Benhabib, S. (1996). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bhattarai, H.  P. (2007). Nepal. In D.  Mendis (Ed.), Electoral Processes and Governance in South Asia. London: Sage Publications. Bohman, J. (1996). Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

252 

P. RAGHUNATH

Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond Identity. Theory and Society, 29(1), 1–47. Chandhoke, N. (2003). The Conceits of Civil Society. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Costoya, Manuel. (2007). Toward a Typology of Civil Society Actors: The Case of the Movement to Change International Trade Rules and Barriers. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Civil Society and Social Movements Programme, Paper No. 30. Dahal, D.  R. (2010). Post-conflict Peace Building in Nepal: Challenges and Opportunities. Paper presented at a training organized by Nepal Administrative Staff College for Joint Secretaries of Various Ministries on June 20, 2010. Funke, P. (2014). Building Rhizomatic Social Movements? Movement-Building Relays during the Current Epoch of Contention. Studies in Social Justice, 8(1), 27–44. Gudavarthy, A. (2013). Politics of Post-Civil Society: Contemporary History of Political Movements in India. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Haas, P. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization, 46(1) Knowledge, Power, and International Policy Coordination. 1–35. Habermas, J. (1996/1992). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. (W.  Rehg, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 1). London: Heinemann. Jayaratne, et al. (2007). Legal Challenges and Practical Constraints: A Comprehensive Study of ‘Community Radio’ in Sri Lanka, Colombo: Law and Society Trust. Khagram, S., Riker, J., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (2002). Restructuring World Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks, and Norms. University of Minnesota Press. Lejano, R., & Park, S. J. (2016). The Autopoietic Text. In F. Fischer et al. (Eds.), Handbook of Critical Policy Studies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Marston, et  al. (2005). Human Geography without Scale. British Geographical Society, 416–432. Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age. Cambridge University Press. Moore, A. (2008). Rethinking Scale as a Geographical Category. From Analysis to Practice. Progress in Human Geography, 32(2), 203–225. Mwaura, P. (1980). Communication Policies in Kenya. UNESCO. Notley, T. (2000). Unpublished Report on the Kothmale Project.

5  PLURAL POLICY ACTORS AND NARRATIVES OF PRACTICE 

253

Papanastasiou, N. (2017). How Does Scale Mean? A Critical Approach to Scale in the Study of Policy. Critical Policy Studies, 11(1), 39–56. Park, S. J. (2013). Opening the Black Box of ICT4D: Advancing Our Understanding of ICT4D Partnerships. Doctoral Dissertation: University of California Irvine. Pringle, I., & David, M. J. R. (2002). Rural Community ICT Applications: The Kothmale Model. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing, 8, 1–14. Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (1999). The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge University Press. Sen, A. (2005). The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity. Allen Lane. Shah, S. (2008). Civil Society in Uncivil Places: Soft State and Regime Change in Nepal. Washington, DC: East-West Center. Slater, D., Tacchi, J., & Lewis, P.  A. (2002). Ethnographic Monitoring and Evaluation of Community Multimedia Centres: A Study of Kothmale Community Radio Internet Project, Sri Lanka. DFID and UNESCO. Uphoff, N. (1985). Fitting Projects to People. In M. M. Cernea (Ed.), Putting People First: Sociological Variables in Rural Development (pp.  369–378). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Wagenaar, H. (2011). Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. Planning Theory and Practice, 12(4), 643–647.

CHAPTER 6

Liminality, Sustainability, and the State

The concept of liminality serves as a useful analytic device in understanding the trajectory taken by community radio in transitional Nepal and Sri Lanka, which were both characterised by the absence of a legal mechanism to provide the legal basis for defining community radio and various aspects of its operation in the country. First used by social anthropologist Arnold van Gennep (1909) to refer to rites of passage in his study of cultural rites and rituals, the concept of liminality has since been used across disciplines. Victor Turner (1967) developed the concept further, in his inquiry into social processes, moving away from the structuralist undertones of the notion of ‘passage’ to a more humanist experience of the state of liminality. He drew on the idea of passage, expanding it to that of a stage. He defined liminality as the ‘betwixt and between space’, between structured settings, underlying how societies undergo the dialectics of these transformative phases towards further consolidation leading to a new phase. Horvath et  al. (2015: 2), in their edited volume, define liminality as an analytic concept. They suggest: Originally referring to the ubiquitous rites of passage as a category of cultural experience, liminality captures in-between situations and conditions characterised by the dislocation of established structures, the reversal of hierarchies, and uncertainty about the continuity of tradition and future outcome.

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_6

255

256 

P. RAGHUNATH

Thomassen (2012) identifies three distinct kinds of subject-hoods of liminality, including at the individual level, as social groups, and the state or society being the three level of analysis. The liminal state, drawing from Turner, should not be seen as a static structural phase of transience, but as one that is shaped by actors embedded in liminality in accordance with their own constructions of the phase. These actors construct the liminal phase that they are part of, in accordance to their own social embeddedness and perceptions of their realities. Extrapolating this to the arena of the policy process, this would mean that actors involved in constructing their own experiences of policy would advance their interests in the larger context of policy liminality.

Conflict, Liminality, Space: Civil War and Broadcasting in Sri Lanka The ethnic strife on the island-nation is a determining feature of Sri Lanka’s political landscape, also impacting trade and commerce, societal harmony, and multi-stakeholder progress. This section looks at localised radio broadcasting against this backdrop and the extent to which it emerges as the site that registers liminal voices. The conversations with the interviewees allowed for an understanding of the efforts made towards dialogue and peace-building, impediments to their actualisation, and the legalities of such praxis. Ebbesen, the pioneering Danish broadcaster, spoke of efforts made by diplomatic missions towards peace-building between the two parties to the civil war. In 2002, the newly elected Wickramasinghe government was part of the peace talks with the Tamil Tigers, a first after almost 19 years of relentless war. The process, brokered by the Norwegian government, saw the idea of the Voice of Tigers (VoT) being mooted. This radio was to be a public service broadcaster, to facilitate the peace process, in Kilinochchi. As part of the effort, two stations would be established, the other being a station broadcasting in Sinhalese. Ebbesen noted that UNESCO had signed a document, and the Norwegian authorities offered the Tigers all the technical equipment, with no conditional clauses from UNESCO. This was in congruence with the organisation’s focus on independent journalism and principles of public service broadcasting. However,

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

257

this station was bombed in 2007, during the military operation against the LTTE that put an end to the civil war. The post-civil war media scenario in the island-nation was described as characterised by self-censorship and intolerance for freedom of expression, by many interviewees. The Rajapaksa government’s focus was on reconstruction and rebuilding of a war-ravaged country and was one that was suspicious of donor funding, even as it was criticised in the international media for alleged war crimes. Dr. Pradeep Weeresinghe reflected on the reconstruction process in the North and East of the island-nation, and some demand felt for community radio and associated fears: I know that some kind of radio station in the East (they call it community radio) exists…there are some people from Kothmale also in the East, but I do not think it is legal. They are illegal, I mean they are using locally made transmitters and even transmit like FM radio station. They do not adhere to the proper concept of community radio. In the North, the Jaffna University has a journalism program now. They are also interested in community radio; there is a discussion about this. But I’m sure, the government is afraid that it might be more than a campus radio station. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

MC Rasmin of the Sri Lanka Development Journalists Forum (SDJF) elaborated on early efforts made towards institutionalising community broadcasting in Sri Lanka, and the gaps in civil society activism, as he sees it: I wouldn’t say community broadcasting has ever been neglected after the 1990s. Perhaps, before the 1990s, a cabinet paper was rejected by members, Mangala Samaraweera, wrote to parliament, and asked for recognition of community radios. So there was some attempt, but the government was definitely reluctant. On the other hand, my point is, there wasn’t any civil society activism. In order to convince the government and get them to realise the overall philosophy of community broadcasting, how do we expect government to simply start a community radio movement. The civil war situation was definitely on the other side, the government has just helped a radio station with transmitters, and it was a World Bank-funded project. The radio station in the East, Pirai, was started as a community radio and the one in Jaffna also started as community radio. So, there is will within the government. But it is not really within the technical framework of “community radio”. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

258 

P. RAGHUNATH

While the above reflection allows for an understanding of administrative will and its juxtaposition against the recognition of community radio as a separate type of broadcasting, Rasmin also spoke about ‘dialogue’, as an idea that ties together administrative will, and efforts made by civil society: It may be noted that there was no mechanism that was in place in order for government to start a dialogue to develop a format which is more applicable for civil society, which is more for a civil society friendly radio station. Of course, there are instances where the government had shown reluctance to allocate frequency, to upgrade regional radio stations and to support community radio stations. For example, now you would have seen that Kothmale is almost paralysed. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure some momentum on this front. Moreover, one of the major weaknesses of government is government really failed in terms of mobilising a knowledge base around community radio, which was initiated in Sri Lanka first, in the entire region. We have had people like MJR David, Sunil Wijesinghe, who are very knowledgeable and skilled. But we have failed to capitalise on our knowledge base; the government has failed on that account. They have not been able to understand the full potential of CR; we have not educated them. Further, due to the war and conflict factor, allocating frequency was not that easy for the government, from their perspective. It is seen as a threat. I strongly believe that if there is a proper dialogue, we really could. But there is room for government to twist existing regional radio stations into community radio stations. No one can blame the government without engaging the government, or without going for the dialogue with them. We need an active civil society and this is the gap we aim to fill, at SDJF, by creating some sort of dialogue with the stakeholders and the government, just to get them to understand and utilize existing platforms. We have been able to do that in five places this far. (Personal Interview, February 2014)

Rasmin elaborated on these efforts in mobilising people on ground, especially in areas affected by the civil war. For instance, he described a training programme completed with 20 young people in Jaffna, in community radio programming, drama, and talk shows. Similarly, in Trincomalee, he said, youth and civil society members requested for training to engage with the available local radio to make radio programmes on their region. He suggested that the enthusiasm was certainly there, but the activism was limited to their region and radio station, which he saw as a potential weakness.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

259

Evidently, civil war and conflict have been key aspects in defining the trajectory taken by media, including community-based efforts, in the island-nation.

Community Radio and Politics of Transition in Nepal: Foreign Aid, Politicisation, and Legitimacy Crisis The Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006, between the United Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist and the Government of Nepal, put an end to the decade-long civil war that ravaged the country and changed its political system, putting an end to the Monarchy, in toto. While the conflict had ended, it was only the beginning of a long transition towards resolution and moving towards framing a new Constitution enshrining democracy. The UN Mission in Nepal was set up to monitor this process, indicative of an already established practice then, of the involvement of the international community in Nepal’s transition to democracy and pluralism. The following year, a Constituent Assembly, bringing together all the political forces, especially the Maoists, was formed with the objective of framing Nepal’s new Constitution, enshrining secularism and multi-party democracy. The years following 2006 saw the country mired in efforts towards formulating a Constitution, which provides the sovereign legitimacy to institutions and policies governing all aspects of the conduct of public affairs in Nepal. Nepal’s transition, drawing from this level of analysis, could be seen as a liminal1 phase in the country’s history. Temporally, for the purpose of this study, the period after Jan Andolan II until 2015, is understood as the liminal state, though it could be argued that the slow shift from absolute monarchy to a secular republic could itself be seen as a long period of transition. Spatially, the territorial state of Nepal is in itself often seen as a liminal ‘buffer’, situated between the two Asian giants of India and China. To establish this further, Nepal’s liminal state has been one characterised not just by the collapse of institutional settings, but also transformation of the very foundation of the state starting from the collapse of Hindu monarchy to the instating of secular democracy. In addition, as is peculiar to the liminal phase, the transition was also characterised by upheavals in 1  The concept of liminality has been used by Bhabha (1994) in a postcolonial study of the cultural hybridity of a ‘nation’.

260 

P. RAGHUNATH

established social norms. This could be seen in social uprisings in the Nepalese countryside, evidenced in the joining of forces between Maoists and the ethnic communities of the plains (like the Madhesis) and the latter’s role in the process of Constitution-making in new Nepal. Nepalese community radio, set against the backdrop of this transition, is a site where the experience of liminality plays out. This liminal phase is characterised by: (1) Nepal’s transition emerged as the site for international development and donor agencies to accelerate and further their activities in promoting democracy in Nepal, by funding activities perceived as democratising ones, including spread of and programming on community radio; (2) the transition itself was an eventuality of a battle between political forces holding differing ideologies and aspirations for the country, leading to democratisation and politicisation emerging as key contextual factors of the community radio landscape; and (3) the absence of a constitution and bodies deriving their legitimacy from the constitution translated into lack of opportunities in pushing for legislation and policy that take into cognisance the characteristic features of community radio. All of these aspects render the policy process for CR itself liminal, due to lack of opportunities for legislative recourse, in addition to transforming community radios as sites of liminality. What follows is an exploration of facets of this liminal policy process for CR in transitional Nepal and its ramifications for the CR policy environment in the country. Understanding the Proliferation of CR in Post-2006 Nepal The Nepalese community radio landscape witnessed a rapid growth, in the aftermath of Jan Andolan II and the inclusion of Maoists, who were repeatedly termed ‘democratising forces’ by interviewees, in the government. From 36 community radio stations, the number went up to 160 stations within one year of Jan Andolan II in 2006. Nepal had more than 270 of them, at the time of writing this chapter. Details on ownership of CRs on the ACORAB’s website2 suggest that majority of these stations are owned by NGOs, followed by a small number of cooperative-owned CRs and a few of them by local government bodies. These community radio

2  Sourced on May 2, 2014. More than 200 CRs are members of ACORAB, hence it could be said that the pie-chart on the website that showcases ownership is representative of the CR landscape.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

261

stations emerged and have been thriving in the context of Nepal’s transition to democracy. S hifts in Donor Funding for CR The involvement of transnational actors as part of the epistemic community for CR has been elaborated in the earlier sections. The last few years of the protracted civil war and the subsequent transition have seen donor agencies playing a big role in various aspects of Nepalese governance. The third wave of democratisation and multilateral aid funding has seen the shift from aid for structural adjustments to talking about aid architecture and aid effectiveness that have been institutionalised over the last decade.3 Towards this end, donor agencies have moved beyond solely funding projects to building new strategic partnerships with networks and institutions, in the attempt towards ‘harmonisation’ and ‘alignment’ while implicating ‘good ownership’ of the aid process on such institutions (Meyer and Schulz, 2008). Towards this end, the discourses around ‘deepening democracies’ intertwined with ‘good governance’ as catch-phrases have emerged (INTRAC, 2012). While international donor agencies made their presence felt during the civil war, the proliferation of CR after 2006 allowed their presence to be registered further in the ambit that concerns this study. Interviews with recipients of donor funding and participants in the epistemic community for CR in Nepal seemed to suggest that transnational organisations were involved in setting up of physical infrastructure earlier on, by providing financial help for the setting up of stations, technical equipment, and even technical training. A representative of Panos South Asia in Nepal spoke about the organisation’s interest in CR. Adding that the organisation was not involved in pushing for policy shifts for CR, he said: From 2001 to 2008, Panos was heavily involved in facilitating the operation of Communication Corner. We not only provided financial assistance, but also provided technical support and conducted training workshops. We had funding from DFID and the Open Society Foundation, to support our 3  High-Level Forums on Aid Effectiveness over the last decade have institutionalised these practices, in their quest to ensure alignment of donor aid to key requisites on ground. The inefficacy of donor funding emerged as a concern after practices of the 1990s were seen as inefficient in the light of lack of institutional mechanisms to keep the ‘projects’ going. The push at these Forums has been on not solely networking with the civil society of the aid recipient countries, but to work with institutions in order to call for accountability.

262 

P. RAGHUNATH

efforts. In addition to this, we also supported a community radio station focussed on environmental issues. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

This kind of multilateral involvement seemed to have changed during the transitional period, which allowed for their involvement in programming on CRs as well. During the course of Nepal’s transition, prominent international aid agencies with a mandate on deepening democracies, like the USAID, DANIDA, UNDP, DFID, among others, were working in the CR space in Nepal. This, they pursued, by working with actors who were part of the epistemic community for community radio policy. The transformation of these actors, from solely epistemic players to membership-­ driven networking organisations also focused on content syndication, is a key feature of the policy space for CR in transitional Nepal. This is in line with the larger international donor funding strategy focused on accountability and ‘good ownership’. This morphing has implications for CR-related policy, as will be elaborated further ahead. Clearly, content syndication could be seen as a result of the influx of donor funding. The founder of Communication Corner that runs Ujyalo Network4 spoke about a Peace Fund for programming. He spoke about the funding for peace programming in the country’s transitional phase: As you would know, international bodies cannot work directly with communities in Nepal. They have to work with local NGOs as per the law. BBC Media Action is the global partner of UNDP in promoting particular kinds of programming. Since the funding is UK-based, DFID chose to work with UNDP, routing funds to BBC Media Action here in Nepal. However, they could not set shop here and were opposed by ACORAB. As a way out, they have started working with ACORAB and have set up the Community Information Network (CIN). (Personal Interview, September 2013)

ACORAB, since 2002, had undergone a shift in terms of its operations. Change in the leadership of ACORAB came with difference in styles of operation. The organisation procured an office space and moved out of NEFEJ, where it was started as a fledgling group of CRs. With the inflow of donor aid, ACORAB has been able to network not just with community radio stations, but also with donor agencies. The organisation’s further institutionalisation as a national professional association, from an 4  The Ujyalo Network is one of the largest radio networks in Nepal and caters to millions of listeners. It is the radio broadcasting arm of the Communications Corner.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

263

NGO, enabled this process further. An office-bearer of ACORAB spoke about his perspectives on the CIN: We believe it is a very useful thing to have a network like CIN. It is a national satellite network and is beneficial to all our members, who can take programming made here and broadcast it on their stations. For example, we had programmes on human rights and workers in the informal service sector. Similarly, we had programming on education and peace, also about cleanliness and sanitation. We cover diverse areas. What is good about CIN is that it is not only about sending programmes from Kathmandu to our member stations. We also get programmes from them and they share it among themselves. We facilitate networking of stations, that way. It is a unique thing in the Nepalese CR sector. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Another office-bearer of ACORAB laid down firmly, the organisation’s independence: We are very independent in our editorial policy. At any time, we have not accepted funds if someone tries to influence our editorial policy. This is a very declared thing. So while we work with funders like BBC Media Action, we also work with news services like BBC Nepali service. There is diversity and no one organisation can dictate our editorial policy. We have own guidelines, own editorial policy and do not compromise. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

He also spoke about the support rendered by the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) and UNDP to the organisation. DANIDA and ACORAB work as what they call, ‘strategic partners’. ‘We work with DANIDA quite closely, but do not see them as donor agencies. They are our strategic partners’, he stated. The latest Country Policy Paper on Nepal, by the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, outlines DANIDA’s interests in the country. The report suggests that the focus is on human rights and inclusive governance and poverty reduction. Towards this end, DANIDA works through what are called Business Partnerships, collaborating with Nepalese civil society groups, NGOs, and businesses. In addition to this, DANIDA also funds UNDP (Ljungman and Thapa 2013), which works with ACORAB on good governance and social accountability-related projects. A representative of DANIDA said:

264 

P. RAGHUNATH

Earlier, we were part of the CR sector as project-funders. That was for a couple of years. Now, we work through strategic partnerships that are initially for five years. We work with ACORAB now since they have a good membership base and we can reach many CRs easily. But prior to working with them, we worked on understanding their capacities, reach and strength. Their own organisational vision is also important and there should be some alignment with ours. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

The syndication of content from Kathmandu-based studios was met with criticism from some others. A key advocate for CR in the country stated the following, highlighting the policy liminality that is a result of the absence of institutional legitimacy in transitional Nepal: There are so many Kathmandu-based content syndicates now, distorting the sector. Earlier, some organisations would focus only on advocacy for CR policy. Eventually, donor funding seems to have lured them into content syndication and perhaps, their focus is now on programming. I cannot fully fault them because that is the situation in Nepal. We have no constitution, so we cannot ask for policy. They may feel it is better to capitalise on donor funding now. But it is important to ask how that impacts CR stations. Do they remain locally-rooted after broadcasting Kathmandu-based content? (Personal Interview, September 2013)

An office-bearer at ACORAB suggested that their focus on policy has not been done away with and stated: In fact, after we were recognised as a professional association, we are part of every policy advocacy meeting. We keep pushing for a specific policy for CR. But the country does not have a constitution even. How is it possible to continue advocacy work without no possible end in sight? (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A former producer at Radio Sagarmatha, currently working at an international media house sees this phenomenon of international donor aid as neo-colonialism: One needs to be sceptical of the role of international players in any poor country, especially one ravaged by civil war. I would say that international aid to Nepal, for the last fifty years, should have made a lot of difference in this small country. The truth is, only the elite get richer. This model of development does not work. I would not hesitate to call it tokenism. All the

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

265

money coming in is time-bound. Only those with connections will be able to capitalise on this. While we have many CRs doing well because of syndicated content or funding for peace programming, there are others who are shutting shop. Other still, are driven to other means of income generation. The donor agencies also collect reports from the networks and take their word for it. They do not check with the local CR station in a remote region that takes three days to reach. This is the ground reality. The agendas are set in London and Washington, without an understanding of what ails the CRs on ground. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

While constructions of donor funding for CR in Nepal’s transitional phase emerged from advocates and actors in the policy space, community radios operational on ground have their own experiential understanding to offer. ECR FM, set up in 2004 and run by an NGO called Youth Awareness Environmental Forum (YAEF), is an example of a CR struggling to make ends meet. Asthaman Krishi Mahajan, the chairperson of the station, spoke about the funding woes they faced: Our station has been struggling for some time now. Our monthly expenditure comes to Nepali Rupees One Lakh. Our major problem is electricity. The outages last 2 to 3 days. In fact, we have had to sell our land to keep the station running. It operates from my house. Had we rented out space, we would have to shut shop”, he shared. “Stations like ours follow certain rules. We will not play Hindi songs just to earn extra money. We focus on including public awareness programmes in our daily run-list, and also have one hour of ethnic language programming. We approached all kinds of donors to keep ourselves afloat. But they are more interested in diverting funds through networks, because that is easier for them to monitor…they can reach out to many stations in one shot. Even to be able to procure funds, it looks like we need lot of connections. This is our story, and many know about it. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A prominent advocate of CR added that ten CRs have shut down in about four years, for lack of funding and rise in expenditure, suggesting that networking organisations should advocate for their cause rather than focussing on content production. Suman Basnet of AMARC Asia-Pacific raised concerns about the sustainability of CR, with the influx of donor-­ funded programming:

266 

P. RAGHUNATH

Broadly speaking, I think the role of donor agencies has to be applauded. They have been very supportive of broadcasting. The UN agencies, multilateral donors, bilateral donors, they have mostly been supportive of community radio stations…they truly believe that community radio gives voice to the voiceless, that it’s a good investment for local development, for ensuring the rights of people at local level, to ensure good governance and human rights and all that. At the same time, I think, sometimes, access to funds, excess of funds also works against sustainability. There have been several examples where community radios or radios established at local level are more beholden to the donors, which then takes their focus away from increasing local community participation. But I really don’t see that as if the fault of the donors only. I think it is the community radio sector that needs to have a very clear vision and understanding and a strategy of dealing with foreign aid. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

In addition to the funding of CRs and CR networking bodies in the course of promoting democracy, international donor funding is also seen in the ambit of diplomacy. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) was part of a project on defining a plural media landscape with the government of Nepal, at the time of fieldwork conducted for this project. With a focus on developing a Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) in Nepal, moving away from state broadcasting, the JICA was working towards a broadcasting policy, which would also govern community radio in Nepal. Many of the policy actors in the CR space had their own perceptions of the JICA-led policy process. A prominent policy advocate suggested: It is an issue of policy ownership. JICA is more of a foreign development agency. How can we allow them to formulate our own policies for us, and on something as crucial as the media? In times like this, we need to focus on building our own institutions. In fact, the government has not been able to own the policy put forth since JICA is working with an NGO in this regard. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

An official with Nepal Television presented how the government saw JICA’s involvement: It is all about diplomacy and maintaining relations. Japan has been a big partner with Nepal in many things. They are interested in pushing for sale of their equipment, and in digitising of Nepal Television. At this point, we have no constitutional authority to make policies and laws. I think, the government wants to pursue this process of stakeholder consulting on policy,

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

267

especially in the case of JICA’s PSB policy. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

However, a bureaucrat of the MoIC was critical of donor aid for the CR sector, seeing them as overtaking the government’s role in the transitional period: There are many organisations providing funding for CR.  But I feel they dictate the code of conduct, while bringing in funds to empower local people. The government does not make the code of conduct. It is made by the donors. We would like to regulate and monitor this growth of the CR sector, but the transition does not allow us any powers to do this. They see us as a controller of the sector. We are waiting for the new Constitution to put demarcations in place for all the stakeholders of CR. This is not applicable to content on CR. I think the content should be monitored by the community or the market. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A producer at Radio Sagarmatha supported this view: Since we have been there from the beginning and set the standards for how a CR should function, it is painful to see how the sector has transformed. Today, if you tune in, you will not be able to differentiate between commercial and community radio stations. The content is more or less similar. We need some monitoring from the government, to see how stations are being run and which ones are doing the work of a real CR. The audio-visual section of the Ministry only renews licenses and does not monitor properly. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A Press Council representative outlined that the regulation mechanism is driven by sub-committees looking into code of ethics, research, and legal teams. The MoIC sends complaints to the Press Council to take action: While that is the practice, we do not take proactive steps. It is only during the elections that we monitor electronic media by recording FM programmes and taking television screen grabs. We have no laws, no Acts, no technology or manpower to broaden our ambit beyond that. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

The MoIC bureaucrat added, saying:

268 

P. RAGHUNATH

In fact, in some policy consultations we have had in the JICA policy process, we see that some advocacy groups do not even provide us policy drafts or analysis. They do not contest ideas actively. Donor interests divert them towards taking up projects instead of focussing on policy. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

The shifts in the functioning of donor agencies and IOs also bring in a marked shift in the epistemic community for CR. The earlier episteme of development was replaced by the focus on good governance, human rights, and peace-building. Interestingly, with a ‘stateless’ liminal condition at hand then, the epistemic community’s actions could be said to have been internalised by adopting mechanisms like programmatic focus, capacity-building, and technical support, where these newer paradigms of knowledge or epistemes are transmitted. The shift is further evidenced in the donor agencies’ focus on ‘deepening democracy’ in Nepal, in a bid to further the Constitution-building process and move towards formal democratisation.  onstructions of Democratisation and Politicisation: Interlinkages C and Ramifications for Nepalese CR The proliferation of community radio in the transitional phase is attributed to the policy of the new government that took charge in 2006. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 led to the inclusion of the Maoists in the government. As part of this, the new government introduced a Special Act to legalise all the outfits of the Maoists, including the ‘mainstreaming’ of those stations run by Maoists that had operated underground. One of the office-bearers of the ACORAB elaborated on this further: The new government was formed on the basis of negotiation. They had the interests of all ideologies and groups of people in mind. Moreover, the media played a strong role in opposing the monarchy and this allowed the government to look at them favourably. That’s why licensing was eased completely. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Another official from the Ministry drew attention to the shift in the practice of policy, saying, ‘We were given directives from the then Minister to issue licenses within three days. The earlier clauses and conditions that were imposed on station were all done away with. This was a big shift and

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

269

that’s the reason so many stations have come up’. Community radio stations, while relaying programmes aimed at inclusive participation and deepening democracy funded by donors, are also seen as sites that serve as deliberative spaces for the deepening of democracy themselves. An off-shoot of these contextual factors has been the proliferation of community radio, intertwined with politicisation (Pringle and Subba 2007). Bhandari (2014) cites Choudhry (2010) in outlining the linkages between ethno-cultural diversity and political fragmentation in society. In Nepal’s case, the move towards democratisation was also about a move towards bringing into the political fold, groups previously left out of mainstream politics, especially in light of the monarchy and elite governance. The conflict in itself was not just one waged by Maoists against a ‘bourgeois’ political order, but also one that saw ethno-cultural groups making their presence felt. The liminal state brought to the fore of mainstream politics these diverse groups. The repercussions of this facet of transition were to be seen in the CR space. To be clear, politicisation does not refer to heightened political consciousness, but goes beyond that, to implicate party politics. An article published in 2012 in Navayug, a Nepali magazine, spoke of division of the CR stations in the country, amongst political parties. Of the 250 community radios that existed then, the article credits 80 of them to the CPN-UML, 60 of them to the Nepali Congress, 35 CRs to the UCPNMaoists, 30 of them to the Madhesi parties, and 10 of them to the janajathi and dalit groups, the article said. Interviews with policy actors in the CR space revealed their constructions of the intertwining of democratisation and democratisation, in the CR space. An observer of the CR space talked about the politicisation of every aspect of public life in Nepal: Today, the Nepalese civil society is highly politicised. From NGOs to local groups, everyone is affiliated to political parties. Large media houses are openly supportive of political parties. In fact, every political party has its own press union! In this transitional phase, nobody is non- party political, it seems. One cannot expect only CRs to remain that way. At the local level, they are part of these local governance structures that are very divided. If one party member comes up with a CR, a rival party member in the same area does the same. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

An office-bearer of ACORAB spoke about this phenomenon at the local municipal level, saying:

270 

P. RAGHUNATH

The political interest in the community is high. For example, I am from the eastern part of the country and I have my own community, and I belong to one of the municipal corporations in the area. And, within that municipal corporation we have had some interest …some of the people felt the need for establishment of a community radio. The rival political party in that area thought that it was our mouthpiece, so they began another radio, and now there are two radios in my hometown. Though I belong to the first community, I had no political interest at that time. I was only interested in a community radio in the area and I helped the community. But, as it is predominantly run by people of some local political affiliation, people assume it is a party radio. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Pradeep Nepal, the former Communications Minister from CPN-UML spoke about how, in the reconciliation process, Maoist radios had become legalised. This happened, since a person from the Maoist party became the Minister, and legislation was brought in to enable the surrender of previously illegal transmitters to some NGOs and not-for-profit groups. After that, every party could rather openly set up their own radios. He acknowledged how political parties fight association-level elections on party lines: The Presidents of Broadcasters Association of Nepal (BAN) and ACORAB are from our party. I know that these organisations keep advocating with the government for a policy. They keep telling us that the government does not care for small radio, and that they only care about big private FM stations. But we have to put it in the Parliament. Our track record in Nepal is very poor. We have unstable governments and if we have one party governing for five years, we can make progress with policies. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

An office-bearer of AMARC Asia-Pacific elaborated on this further, suggesting that it was impossible to keep party-based politics out of anything. It was everywhere, he said: We are not talking about politics. If you talk about politicisation, then it is about party-based politics. Even within parties, there are groups. Our society is deeply, deeply divided along those lines. Every profession, from university teachers to lawyers to doctors, every profession is divided along party lines, which is fine. However, it really starts to hurt when their sincerity, their honesty, their loyalty to their chosen profession is being governed by those affiliations of the parties. That’s where it starts hurting and I think it would be the same for community radio stations. It’s fine to be affiliated. I

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

271

vote for someone, I may be active member of that particular political party or may be close to certain leader and all that, but if I don’t bring that in my work, which has its own principles and ethics with a working code of conduct, it remains unproblematic. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

He said that the danger was in bringing all those things inside the radio station, which defeats the entire idea of community radio broadcasting being a free independent space for communities to interact through communication and information. In the last two elections at ACORAB, the seats have been divided among political parties in the Board. Similarly, when you see that certain community radio stations are run by people who are very active in party politics and are simultaneously very active in community radio stations, making programmes and decisions, then people naturally doubt your credibility. This is suicidal for community radio. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Another activist voiced similar concerns suggesting that the power-­ sharing within ACORAB was done on party lines. DANIDA’s representative provided the donor’s perspective on how politicisation was seen especially in the context of the push for deepening democracy: We want them (ACORAB) to be as democratic as possible. But we leave to them, we do not interfere. In fact, I did not attend their General Body Meeting, even though we are invited. When we do go, we go as observers, we cannot have any influence because we are still outsiders to their organisation. So we don’t have to say much about their internal matters as such but we keep on insisting that they adopt a democratic procedure…that there are more women, that they are more inclusive, that they produce their programmes, that they are sensitive to gender issues. They have an institutional good governance policy with our support and an anti-corruption clause and procedure in place. We keep pushing them and telling them that they, as a civil society organisation, should stand out. However, we cannot impose anything on them, because it is their organisation, it is their vision and it is their issue. If any problem comes from outside, like a third party telling you about corrupt practices, then we seek to enable a dialogue with them and tell them to correct their way of earning. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Another office-bearer of ACORAB spoke about the consolidation in the growth spurt of CRs in Nepal:

272 

P. RAGHUNATH

Just after the transition, there was a big spurt in the number of CRs, since there was sudden freedom and political parties came to the fore. But the Ministry is now slowing down licensing because at least in Kathmandu, the airwaves are choked. I think, now is the time for quality CR. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

An early CR activist and technical expert, however, suggested that it is due to party politics that CR exists in Nepal: If you trace the story of CR in Nepal, it has happened because of political shifts and connected key personalities in the movement have had. That has provided impetus, and I would not look at party politics in a negative way entirely. Instead, the sector should focus on self-regulation, for which Raghu Mainali has drawn up tools. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A prominent media practitioner called the manoeuvres of the CR sector as second-generation problems faced by the sector. ‘Issues of ownership, centralised content and political interference are all second generation problems of a sector that is now well- established and has seen a spurt, given the context of the transition’, he said. Many others are quick to point to these issues as instances of democracy deficit in the process of democratisation. A researcher from Martin Chautari, a research organisation, pointed out: After the transition, getting the license has been so easy. It is like getting an inheritance. The fact that we do not have any laws to ensure that consolidation does not happen. Some groups are able to procure multiple licenses in different parts of the country and are monopolising the airwaves. Once they get it, there is no taking back or re-allocation. If there was a CR-specific law, it could be looked into. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

Similarly, others spoke about the saturation of the market in Kathmandu. An observer of the sector said: Most of the people applying for licenses want to do that in Kathmandu, except for those who genuinely want to work with communities in other parts. The situation is getting out of hands, because if you tune in to a ­particular frequency, you can hear disturbances and overlapping of other channels. There is absolutely no airspace left. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

273

A bureaucrat with the MoIC recalled the licensing policy suggested by an ITU expert who was brought in to conduct a study of the potential for FM radio in the early 1990s, for the government. Recalling the policy provisions that could not disallow applicants from the Valley, he narrated: He had suggested that Kathmandu valley-based FMs had the potential to focus on the advertisement market. He said that the Kathmandu valley will support three stations for next 10 years and two commercial stations for the next 3 years, in his document. He had submitted that recommendation to the government and we owned the report, but we didn’t make a decision accordingly. We adopted the channel plan but the policy part we couldn’t, because at that time when we had a report with us, we almost had 17 applications from Kathmandu valley itself. In our act and regulations, there was a provision that if you are going to start commercial stations you have to make a feasibility study by yourself. If the project is feasible, the government would issue the license. It entirely depends upon the applicant’s perception of seeing the market as feasible or commercially viable or not. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

The head of Ujyalo Network suggested that it is the mix of politicisation and funding that keeps CRs going: The transition, with its focus on democratisation of Nepal has brought in a lot of funding. Political parties are interested in gaining ground in all spheres of public life, including CR. Many organisations make use of this transitional phase, since there is no one to lay down rules. In fact, the biggest problem is the lack of a policy for CR. When there is no demarcation between community and commercial radio, both groups are making the most of the transition and the messiness it offers. Everyone is gaining out of the ambiguity in policy. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

As pointed out by a representative of Panos South Asia, the media have witnessed a boom, instead of media reform, in the face of the country’s transition. As laid out previously, the lack of an institutional setting for promulgating a separate policy recognising CR is one of the key features of the policy space for CR in Nepal, and, the transition only accentuated this problem of the lack of a legislative recourse. A representative of the Federation of Nepali Journalists spoke about their synergetic efforts with ACORAB, in advocating for separate policies for commercial and community radio stations, and suggested that they were waiting for the

274 

P. RAGHUNATH

country to frame the Constitution. The representative from AMARC Asia-Pacific was critical of the hybrid character that radio broadcasting had come to assume in the country: I think we can go to the donors on one hand, and on the other hand, we can also go to the open market and that’s what the commercial radios are really angry about…they tell us that we are as community as you are because we are as concerned for the community’s interests as you are, but how come we don’t have access to donors funds. But it’s when policies are drawn that there will be lines drawn between community broadcasting and commercial broadcasting. We’ll have a very specific interest to be pursued and sometimes, there could be a clash of interest, like the clamour for tier-specific licensing, which isn’t there at the moment. But if a specific policy of a three-­ tier legislation with legislative recognition of community broadcasting exists, all of this would fall into place like it has in countries with three-tier media has legal recognition. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

A representative of Equal Access, however, suggested that while everyone was looking for a CR policy, the focus should perhaps be on defining CR through quality content: I’m not sure if a policy would be the answer to the hybridity that commercial and community radio stations have become because of this transition. Perhaps yes, but may be not. Perhaps, the organisations running CRs should be more vigilant, should shape them as true CRs through content instead of waiting for a policy, which might not happen till we have a Constitution. (Personal Interview, September 2013)

The State and Community Radio: A Look at India Even as the civil wars, in the case of Nepal and Sri Lanka, justified the role of the State in the two countries, the Indian and Bangladeshi cases offer divergent experiences. Escobar (2015) draws attention to the dramaturgy of policy, as an increasingly important aspect of present-day politics and as a key component of argumentative policy analysis (Fischer and Forester 1993). He draws on Williams (2012) to suggest that ‘scripting illuminates the backstage political work that sustains the springing “theatres of collaboration” of contemporary governance’ (2012: 18). This allows for an understanding of the theatre of politics surrounding Indian radio

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

275

broadcasting, from the offstage, and the dramaturgy evidenced from Verghese’s accounts of scripting Indira Gandhi’s radio broadcasts in chaste Hindi. The Joint Secretary with the MIB spoke about the efforts of the Ministry in working with the other government departments and ministries, towards making the process of application for CR licenses easier and more streamlined. Further, she also spoke about her Ministry’s efforts in allaying government fears of ‘disturbed’ areas and the need to open up licensing in such areas. She spoke about how the MIB’s advocacy with Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had seen many curves. They have a Coordination Committee in the Ministry that was constituted about three and a half years ago then, with the purpose of getting the MHA, the Ministry of Defence and the Human Resources Development Ministry, Agriculture Ministry, and WPC on the same platform. The MIB sits with them to try and see how and why clearance of applications could happen. During such a process, the MIB explains to each of these of ministries, the significance of setting up more and more community radio stations in these areas, she said. The coordination committee meetings are also a very good platform to allay the fears of ministries that community radio stations can be misused or can be misutilised in these areas, she added: We explain to them that against the extremism, there has to be a mechanism, by the people, for the people to air their issues and to reach out to them. If you keep on denying the people in these areas, an instrument which they own to write their own grievances, then you are actually not furthering the cause of development in these areas. You will be pushing them further into isolation, desperation because people won’t have voices. That’s the first concern, so we are clarifying that in many meetings informally. Then we also talk about the safety, security of these installations. They could be attacked by these people and could be lost. So we always tell them that they can suggest them a place where they feel it is more safe. But one can’t deny that because of the safety reasons. So perhaps we could more talk to the organisation, see to it where they can locate the community radio station somewhere inside villages where it is more safe and where the government could provide some protection also because that could also be a solution to this particular problem. Some of the fears which is really unfounded, we have been able to clear and we are being continuously able to pursue them…thanks to their effort also, you know they have kind of broken those communication barriers and have come out in a very big way to support stations in these

276 

P. RAGHUNATH

disturbed areas, specially in Chattisgarh and Jharkhand and some parts of Odisha. (Personal Interview, April 2014)

The fear of opening up the airwaves in areas that are considered disturbed or marked by internal conflict has often led to the invocation of ‘national security’ as the pretext for the implementation of a securitised policy in the region. This contestation between the State and individuals and groups on ground calls for an understanding of securitisation as a state-led process and its subversion or contestation by these groups. This is further explored in the next section. State, Ideology, and the Dramaturgy of Contestation A former Vice-President, AMARC Asia-Pacific spoke of the siphoning off of frequencies meant for community radios to commercial radio stations, at the South Asia seminar held in New Delhi. ‘Initially, in 2006, six frequencies were set aside for community radio in a given license area. However, as of 2013, this has now been reduced to three frequencies, with the rest being channelised for commercial broadcasters’, he said. In addition to this, shifts in the policy for community radio have been more or less linked to the phased manner of frequencies auctions for private FM.  The frequencies allocated for community radio are often on either ends of the spectrum set aside for radio broadcasting in the country. This is viewed as an indication of the side-lining of community radio, and the need to ‘move from the margins to the middle’ was expressed by many at the seminar. At the time of writing this chapter, the country had about 251 community radio stations. On the other hand, informal conversations also brought forth the notion that it would be difficult for the government to justify any further moves favouring spectrum allocation for community radio since the annual spectrum fees collected from CR stations was a token amount in comparison to the high costs that private broadcasters pay in the auctioning of spectrum. This is symptomatic of the sway private broadcasters hold, in a neoliberal state, where policy moves are rendered unjustifiable due to the state’s construction of the utilities of the commons such as spectrum. In the Indian case, this dimension of the state assumed greater fortification after the elections of 2014.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

277

Another important aspect of the radio experience in India is that independently produced news is not permitted to be broadcast via the medium. This clause was challenged in May 2013, with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) being filed in the Supreme Court of India by the NGO Common Cause, to challenge the disallowing of news on private and community radio. A joint petition with industry players, the petition was argued for by famed lawyer Prashant Bhushan, and cited the TRAI recommendations of 2004, which spoke of allowing news on Community radio as well. Eventually, there was a notification that allowed private FM and community radio channels to re-broadcast All India Radio (AIR) news. The 2014 and the 2019 elections were historic in India, with the right-­ wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) winning with an unprecedented majority riding high on promises of non-corruption and development. The political theatre leading to the elections also saw an anti-corruption movement that captured the widespread sentiments of a burgeoning Indian middle class (Jodhka and Prakash 2016) and a political party emerging out of the fray. Since then, the Indian state has seen the fortification of its ideological apparatus, evidenced in the strengthening of the BJP’s ties with its vociferous religious right-wing nationalist base. A representative of One World South Asia spoke about shifts in licensing since the new party came to power, with organisations with an ideological affinity to the government in power being granted licenses. ‘In fact, a member of the ruling party also wanted to procure a license and contacted us’, he stated, indicating the construction of CRs as a space for mass mobilisation on an ideological basis. This supplements the Indian Prime Minister’s Mann Ki Baat (Speech from the Heart), an engagement with the country’s citizenry through the public broadcaster All India Radio. Batch One of the Third Phase of FM licensing held in 2015 saw big media players like HT Media and EDIL winning the auctions for most of the spectrum up for bidding in major cities. Over the last few years, officials representing the Ministry have made statements that envisage an increase in the number of community radio stations, with a 100 new stations looking to come up by the end of 2019, as per news reports5 at the time of writing this chapter.

5  https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/more-community-radio-stationsget-nod/article28751504.ece.

278 

P. RAGHUNATH

Sustainability as a Trope in India Even as these developments were taking place, the community radio space registered a few historic success stories, in terms of catering to climate change and the idea of sustainability. The first emergency license for community radio was approved by the government for disaster relief, during the Chennai floods of 2016, in Cuddalore. The license was held by NGO Saranalayam, which submitted a petition in this regard to M. K. Patnaik, official of the WPC wing of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Prior to this, 2013 saw the Uttarakhand floods ravage the mountainous state. This led to the formation of the CR Consortium for Environment Protection (CRCEP), in the months following the disaster, as a means to create a knowledge and experience base on disasters and climate change and the usage of community radio during such times. Six community radio stations were brought together under the CRCEP, initiated by Ideosync Media Combine, as a way to forge solidarity and knowledge-sharing. In the Kerala floods of 2018, at least ten radio stations served as critical sites of information and communication, providing emergency coverage and aid. From information on the opening of dams to rescue operations and food distribution to crucial everyday issues, the radio stations emerged as purveyors of news for the flood afflicted. The stations worked with multilateral bodies and donor aid agencies, to provide relief, even as they battled the natural disaster themselves. The resurrection of community radio stations themselves battered by climactic conditions and disaster emerged as a key aspect of disaster management in these areas. Clearly, sustainability and climate change have emerged as an important trope in the functioning of CR in India, receiving a fillip with the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) joining panels at the CR Sammelan (CR Congregation) that meets every year.

The Bangladeshi Idea of Community Radio: Epistemes and Forms The Bangladeshi idea of community radio could be garnered from the interviews with various policy actors, with them reflecting on defining and delineating what CR was and what kind of a space it occupied in the mediascape of Bangladesh. This section looks at two aspects: the defining

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

279

of CR and the experiences of CR, an understanding of which was accrued through field-visits to a few CR stations in the country. As has been explicated in Chap. 1 of this book, community radio has been theoretically defined using varied entry-points. It becomes an interesting exercise to understand the attributes and perceptions of CR that were alluded to, on ground, in the articulation and advocacy for CR in Bangladesh. The interviews revealed the many ways in which community radio was actively defined by the various stakeholders of policy for CR, providing an in vivo understanding of the many attributes associated with the medium. Drawn from international definitions of CR, to regional collaborative definitions, and most definitely the national contexts, CR in Bangladesh has been defined to tease out definitions of ‘community’ to provide a contextual understanding of communication over radio. For instance, one of the common ways of identifying community radio was that it was linked with development, as opposed to private stations that were focused on entertainment. This development, often is linked to the ‘local’, in terms of defining its spatiality. Amin Al Rasheed, a radio practitioner, who works in the private as well as community radio sectors, spoke about this: Community radio can play a very good role in local development issues, like health, sanitation, environment, education, and even local corruption, local level government corruption. I think, community radio…the main purpose should be focused on development issues. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Some other actors chose to link to the democratisation of information and freedom of expression. One policy actor suggested a demarcation between the information elite and non-elite and chose to attest to the rights-based approach as instrumental in bridging the divide: There is a social divide, we want to minimise the divide. So there is a higher social class, the information class. The rights perspective says that everyone has the right. Those who earn less and cannot afford a laptop can express themselves through community radio. So that is one significant point that if you want to reduce the divide in the society and community, then community radio can help a lot. And that is through a rights approach. The other thing is that community radio deals with the community issues, with the local issues and it has a certain radius where it functions…it is supposed to focus on content prepared by the community based on the local crisis and local issues. So it becomes naturally necessary for community members to

280 

P. RAGHUNATH

get to know the information from each other or pass the information through each other at no cost or with very low cost. The other thing is that in the decision making process the poor people cannot take part…community radio is one way through which they can take part. It runs through a rights and justice framework. CR must not compete with the mainstream media, if it does, then it is a disaster. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The invocation of a rights-based approach in the above quote is indicative of the divergent epistemes being laid claim to, in the context of community radio in the country. While development is a very important trope, especially in the case of Bangladesh, we also find early articulations of rights- and justice-centric ideas associated with community radio. Some activists did visualise the space as not merely for developing the marginalised through two-way programming and participation, but also as a means for communities to reclaim their rights and demand justice. Arshad Siddiqui of the MMC spoke about ownership of media, including that of CR: In my point of view, the ownership should be held by the community. How it could be happened, I’m just trying to find out the way. How could community own the community radio? NGO-owned radios are simply mouthing NGO agendas. But if it is community-owned, the community will help to sustain this kind of venture. Otherwise, NGOs are always dependent on the funds, and if the funds will close, then the community radio will die. And that’s why I’m always telling this, establishing community ownership is important for the sustainability of the community radio. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Similarly, from the international development space, one policy actor chose to talk about the dynamics between the government and CR: They provide information about agriculture, about education, and it will reach those people where government also wants to reach. It will actually support the government, so government should not fear community radio. Instead, they should actually support them. The community wants to run it independently, for which they should be financially self-sufficient. But it will not be possible if the government does not support. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

281

Nargis of UNESCO, in her recollection of the support provided to CRs, spoke about programming on CR: Initially, the level of awareness was low. We supported organisations in creating awareness on CR. Since 2012, we have also been involved in programming. Through the CCD, we implemented two projects in 2012 and 2013, on promoting education and mainstreaming gender. I think CRs still do not have the right knowledge to produce programmes (emphasis mine). The programmes are mostly entertainment, which is good. But I want them to produce meaningful programmes, on gender, human rights, child rights, etc. for CR. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Interestingly, Suhrawardy spoke about the government ownership of a CR station, Krishi Radio, which is a farm radio, where he worked as the technical advisor. He spoke about his initial days with Krishi Radio, when he started work from the scratch—finding land, managing people, preparing the volunteers, then start broadcasting. The equipment was brought from India, from WEBEL Media Electronics. After they installed the transmitters, they started doing the test transmission. He narrated his experience: I went out with a car to remote place where there is a radio coverage…it was a winter night. I found a group of people who were enjoying fire. So I went to them, I asked them that, do you know there is a community radio started today here, and they said no, and they asked that what is community radio? So I asked them, what is your name? They said their names and what they are doing, etc. Taking information from them, I called the radio station and asked them to announce their name, their identity and dedicated a very good local song for them and then I switched on the radio…they listened their names, their identity and the song subsequently played and they were amazed. They started cheering that now there is a radio station which is beginning to care about them, which is for them…so I think it is a big change, if you consider the rural people, who may not have access to the anything…but now they have access to anything and the local people, they are so happy. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

The above explication allows for an understanding of community radio or community-based radio, in this case (since it is owned by the government), as located amongst the people and reflective of the community. By taking on issues of the people and making it its own, the radio obtains the

282 

P. RAGHUNATH

hue of the people that form its community. Ranging from democracy, to a rights-based approach, and development to opening up of media in media-­ dark spaces, this section helped provide a glimpse into the many meanings and even aspirations attributed to a medium like CR. It is interesting to then look at the actual functioning of CR on ground, as will be detailed further ahead. Community Radios on Ground in Bangladesh The participation of policy actors as described through a large part of the previous chapter relies heavily on the idea of ‘strategising’ stakeholders to policy, who made use of policy windows in advocating and pushing for a CR policy in the country. The on-ground experiences of CR, also as stakeholders of policy, need a distinctly different rubric to label their participation in the policy space. De Certeau (1984), in talking about everyday practice, identifies ‘tactics’ as a rubric to define the everyday adaptiveness but also perhaps subversion and defining, by those who do not feature in powerful spaces. The everyday defining of CR is demarcated by the practice of running the stations according to the realities of lived conditions and experiences, often away from capital cities and urban spaces that see most of the focus of media policy work. I visited CR stations and spoke to people working at CR stations, as well as NGOs who held the licenses to run these stations. Radio Bikrampur was one such station, located in Munshigunj, which is a few hours away from Dhaka. The station had three staff members, comprising the station manager, the head of programming, and one member who was the supporting staff. About 14 regular indoor volunteers worked with the station, as also some more outdoor, irregular volunteers. The station started in May 2012 and defines as its community farmers, fishermen, harijans, students, rickshaw-pullers, shopkeepers, and others living in the listenership area. The broadcast radius is about 17 kilometres, and the transmitter is a 100-watt transmitter. The station is run by EC Bangladesh. The CR conducts two to three sessions with the community every year and has about 100 listener clubs of different community groups, most of whom are students. An interesting aspect of Radio Bikrampur’s functioning was that it catered to the bedhe community, who dwelled on boats in the backwaters of the local rivers. The community was an untouchable community, besides being poor as well as mobile. They relied on radio for information and entertainment. I was able to visit the bedhe naaris (bedhe women) to

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

283

get a feel of their living conditions in a bid to gain an understanding of the community the station catered to, but could not converse with them. One of the regular volunteers spoke to me on the experience of working with the CR station, recounting the experience of applying for a license and procuring it. He said that it took them almost a year to get the license. The advisory committee as prescribed by the national policy had three members. The volunteer also spoke about how the policy dissuades any political broadcasting. He suggested that local leaders from both major parties were cordial with the station. Despite such dissuading, the station broadcast the elections held in three upazilas, as also live coverage when there was a bomb blast in the area. He also focussed on some issues that were characteristically local in nature, as also interactions with the government: Munshigunj is surrounded by many rivers. A big problem in the area is that of drugs. The government wants us to run programmes against drugs. They also want us to run programmes on the issue of early marriage, which is rampant here. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Besides the government, the station also received funding for an anti-­ tobacco campaign. The BNNRC also worked with them on content, funded by the European Union and Free Press Unlimited. He suggested that while ideas and issues were given by the donors and the government, the scriptwriting was done by the station. The donors would then monitor and correct any errors. He also spoke about how the station subverted the rule of not airing political news, by talking about elections or political issues in a conversational or dramatised manner. A common concern that the NGO head and the volunteer spoke about was finance. They both felt that the government’s policy of not allowing for advertisement (barring development advertising that brings funding from donor agencies) was discouraging, since it meant that they could not make good programmes. The community that the station catered to comprised people who did not have steady incomes, and finding financial support and collective funding among them was difficult. The NGO representative said: In our community, people working as volunteers are very interested. However, after sometime, they have become experienced and are not interested in volunteerism for long time. They become radio professionals with

284 

P. RAGHUNATH

private stations after that. This is like a learning ground. (Personal Interview, March 2014)

I also spoke to Syed Tarikul Islam of the Alliance for Cooperation and Legal Aid Bangladesh (ACLAB), which runs Radio Naf, in Teknaf, Cox’s Bazaar. Radio Naf is located at the Bangladesh-Myanmar border, and one can say that it deals with a community that is somewhat fluid and mobile, owing to the porosity of the border. The CR works with the Rakhine and Chakma populations, who are ethnic groups from Myanmar and Bangladesh, respectively, besides dalits. The NGO has been working in Teknaf, Cox’s Bazaar, since 2004, on various aspects including issues like disaster and water sanitation, on programmes supported by Bangladesh’s Ministry of Health, and the German Embassy. Islam spoke about the NGO’s work: From our experience and observations, we find the people of the coastal areas are very vulnerable. Since we have already been working here, we have good relations with people and coordination with the government people, local people, local government people and also have a great network in the NGO-CBO circuit. So after getting the permission from the government, we conducted a survey on the needs in the locality in order to develop the programmes and the decision-making process. Next, we arranged necessary instruments, contacted relevant vendors and completed necessary government frequency allocations, permissions and government procedures. Then, we coordinated with the government and local government as well. After that, we started broadcasting in April, 2012. Drawing from our baseline survey, we made some programmes on health, land disputes and trafficking, especially since we deal with the Myanmar-Bangladesh border. We are also focused on local language, we have news in  local languages.6 (Personal Interview, March 2014)

Islam also narrated how volunteers were recruited from the community, besides numerous quality editors. The station has five staff members including the station manager. Fifty percent of the volunteers are women, he said. The station has received support from the BNNRC for capacity-­ building purposes, from the government, from UNICEF, and Free Press Unlimited. The station had recently constituted an advisory committee, headed by the executive officer of the Alliance for Cooperation and Legal 6

 Development news is permitted to be aired on community radio in Bangladesh.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

285

Aid Bangladesh (ACLAB), and comprising 15 members from arenas and departments like social welfare, disaster, education, irritation, and local governments. The station also has a community radio management committee, comprising seven members—three members from the organisation, four members in  local levels district offices, civil society people, teachers, local government, journalists, and the like. Islam is also the Convenor of a group of CR heads and initiators who were beginning to talk about starting an association of community radio stations in Bangladesh, at the time of conducting this research. Islam suggested that the association was needed in order to create a bond amongst community radio stations in the country. Additionally, the association was needed to collect resources and to provide for strong advocacy for the development of CR with governments and other bodies. Ultimately, the association hopes to raise a common voice on issues that are common to all the stations, which he felt was beyond the ambit of an organisation like the BNNRC. For instance, some groups attacked the station manager of Radio Naltha, located in Shatkera, a disaster-prone area. Islam hoped that the association would raise the voice against such incidents, besides advocating for advertising revenue. The above narrative emphasises not just the organisational dynamics of running a CR, but also the everyday experiences of running CRs in Bangladesh, replete with tactics that emerge in the form of advocacy, efforts at creating new organisations and the dynamics of their interactions with other stakeholders.

Conclusion This chapter probed and presented phases of liminality and associated conditions of the practice of policy, especially as seen in the civil wars of Nepal and Sri Lanka. The phases of civil war and post-conflict reconstruction have meant that the countries have experienced and witnessed varying degrees of the strengthening of the State and civil society. Communitas?: Sri Lanka Recent efforts have been in line since the elections of 2015, with a change in government. The next government headed by Sirisena made strides in freeing up spaces in the media for free expression. The thrust on digitalisation and carrying along all forms of media in the process has seen efforts

286 

P. RAGHUNATH

in the form of linking media policy to the idea of innovation. For instance, a recently held policy meeting identified innovation in technology and its linkage with media policy, as an important aspect of the Sustainable Development Goals, in operation since 2015. This is reminiscent of similar articulations around innovation, as seen in the Kothmale Internet Project described earlier on in the chapter. The report on Rebuilding Public Trust (2016) takes cognisance of the media scenario in Sri Lanka, as well as the larger legal and policy environments in which the media operates. Among other things, the report recommends that the state recognise community media, in order to promote diversity and plurality within the country’s media system. It asks that the state put in place licensing mechanisms for community media, overseen by an independent regulatory body, among other things. Similarly, a renewed focus on democratic reforms in the media is being articulated by organisations like Verite Research, besides efforts at establishing an Independent Council for News Media Standards, focused on setting norms for independent and free media, to ensure their accountability, and to foster transparency. There have also been efforts in the recent years on reviving community radio in the island-nation. The way forward for community-centric broadcasting in its myriad forms in the island-nation, ravaged by decades of civil war and a post-war reconstruction process, remains in committing to exploring avenues for communitas, in free media of varied hues. 2015 Defines Temporality: Nepal The year 2015 saw the Himalayan country being ravaged by an earthquake, during which time CRs became sites of disaster redressal, even in the midst of the stations themselves being struck by the disaster.7 The year also emerged as a constitutive moment (Starr 2004) for the country, with the new Constitution coming into force even in the midst of contentions from various groups, almost a decade of efforts towards implementing the Interim Constitution. Further, the year also saw the promulgation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) internationally, bringing with it newer goals aimed at the Agenda 2030. The temporal aspect gains important in any study of media policymaking, owing to the contingent nature 7  The Hoot covered the status of CR broadcasting in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, with a  report written by me: http://www.thehoot.org/media-watch/communitymedia/cr-stations-in-nepal-struggle-to-restore-broadcasting-8308.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

287

of the policy endeavour and by extension, its study. The policy for community radio in Nepal is still not in the format of an instrumental policy document, something that continues to engage the various stakeholders in negotiating for such an official pronouncement to this day. The present research, while taking cognisance of the shifts brought about by these changes in Nepal’s media landscape and newer efforts to draft the country’s media policy in 2016, exits the stage at this juncture. Pushing the Policy Envelope Yet Again?—A Reflexive Take on India I was involved, in my capacity as a research assistant with the UNESCO Chair on Community Media, in the drafting of a policy paper, in late 2016, to serve as an interim policy proposition towards negotiating policy with the Government of India. Subsequently, in early 2017, I was part of the Policy Working Group, for the National Consultation on Community Radio Policy in India. This engagement with policy had, among other things, clauses that took cognisance of the new Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) policy put in place by the Government of India and the country’s telecommunication policy in line with the idea of Digital India. I leave the stage at this juncture, at the time of writing this chapter. There may be newer engagements that community radio has with the issues of climate change, with sustainability becoming a recurrent trope. New Policy Iterations and Way Forward: Bangladesh During the conduct of fieldwork, there were numerous talks of a new policy being discussed and advocated for, in Bangladesh. Consequently, at the time of writing this book, Bangladesh saw the new ‘Community Radio: Installation, Broadcast and Operation Policy 2017’ being formulated and implemented in the country. The time period also saw an increase in the number of operational CR stations to 17 stations. BNNRC, as an organisation also began working more in the digital sphere, in line with the vision of Digital Bangladesh. These new policy iterations and hybridisation of community radio in the country only purports a renewed focus on CR in Bangladesh.

288 

P. RAGHUNATH

One unifying trend is seen in these four countries from South Asia, besides their colonial and crypto-colonial pasts in that of the growing fortification of the nation-state. Even as climate change and the focus on sustainable development became international UN-designated targets for nation-states to achieve, neoliberal policies of the last three decades have only left a stronger and muscular State, despite the promise of ‘openness’. The next concluding chapter of this book will present ideas on community radio in times of late capitalism, drawing on experiences from South Asia.

Discussion Mankekar (1999: 49) talks about ‘conjunctural ethnography’ as ethnography conducted in situations filled with contingencies, disjuncture, and disruptions. Bridging the gap between anthropology and media studies, she suggests that conjunctural ethnography has profound implications for media studies, especially since it requires unorthodox methodological interventions owing to the scales and lenses through which the media is at once defining and defined. It is my contention that such an ethnography is best suited to the study of the liminal, which brings with it various attributes of transitions, including lack of governance mechanisms and policies in place, haphazard coordination on public engagement, low economic conditions, lack of a prominent vision, and the like. It is also better understood in conjunction with the theoretical premises put forth by Critical Security Studies, which allow for a focus on human security in conflict and liminal situations, permitting a shift from the State to the human as the referent object and from the realm of normal politics to that of emergency politics. In taking the affairs of the everyday to the realm of emergency politics through processes of securitisation, the policy situation at hand becomes a space that registers aberrations at the intersections of language, race, religion, caste, gender, and other identity-related and communitarian forms of repression and contingencies. This chapter drew on these insights to study the liminal as contingent and the sustainable as communitas. The chapter looked at the politics of international donor aid, the liminal contextual attributes and offerings of such a state to policymaking for community radio, and the emergence of sustainability as a trope for the study of community radio in South Asia.

6  LIMINALITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND THE STATE 

289

Bibliography Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhandari, S. (2014). Self-Determination & Constitution Making in Nepal: Constituent Assembly, Inclusion, and Ethnic Federalism. Singapore: Springer. Choudhry, S. (2010). Bridging Comparative Politics and Comparative Constitutional Law: Constitutional Design in Divided Societies. (Eds.) Constitutional Design for Divided Societies: Integration or Accommodation? Oxford University Press, pp. 4–5 de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. (S. Rendall, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press. Escobar, O. (2015). Scripting Deliberative Policy-Making: Dramaturgic Policy Analysis and Engagement Know-How. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 17(3), 269–285. Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (Eds.). (1993). The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. Durham & London: Duke University Press. Horvath, A., Thomassen, B., & Wydra, H. (2015). Breaking Boundaries: Varieties of Liminality. Berghahn Books. INTRAC. (2012). Deepening Democracy: A Strategy for Improving the Integrity of Elections Worldwide. Kofi Annan Foundation. Jodhka, S., & Prakash, A. (2016). The Indian Middle Class. Oxford University Press. Ljungman, C., & Thapa, M. (2013). Evaluation of Danish Support to Civil Society. Annex G: Nepal Country Study. DANIDA. http://um.dk/en/~/media/ UM/Danishsite/Documents/Danida/Resultater/Eval/201301AnnexG.pdf. Mankekar, P. (1999). Screening Culture, Viewing Politics: An Ethnography of Television, Womanhood, and Nation in Postcolonial India. Duke University Press. Meyer, S., & Schulz, N.-S. (2008). Ownership with Adjectives—Donor Harmonisation: Between Effectiveness and Democratisation. Synthesis Report. Fride Working Paper. Pringle, I., & Subba, B. (2007). Ten Years On: The State of Community Radio in Nepal. Paris: UNESCO. Rebuilding Public Trust: An Assessment of the Media Industry and Profession in Sri Lanka. (2016). Report of International Media Support and Secretariat for Media Reforms. Starr, P. (2004). The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications. New York: Basic. Thomassen, B. (2012). Revisiting liminality: the danger of empty spaces. In Liminal Landscapes: Remapping the Field (pp. 21–35). London: Routledge. Turner, V. (1967). The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Cornell University Press. Van Gennep, A. (1909). Les rites de Passage (in French). Paris: Émile Nourry. Williams, P. (2012). Collaboration in Public Policy and Practice: Perspectives on Boundary Spanners. Bristol: The Policy Press.

CHAPTER 7

A Critical Comparative Ecology: Connectedness, Contestation, Comparativity

The process and practice of policy for community radio (CR) is an endeavour in negotiating diverse constructions of norms and values, ideas and ideals associated with the medium, amongst numerous policy actors who are in the fray, across the global-local spectrum. Any study that attempts to map such interests and intersecting claims over such processes and practices is rendered justified when it provides in-depth analyses of all the aspects that help build various micro-histories and narratives to a mega narrative, to ruminate with a regional focus. This chapter provides a concluding analysis for this book on the policies and policymaking for CR in the four countries under study, namely, Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh. This book began with an introduction to critical media policy studies, locating this researcher’s approach in tandem with the definition put forth by the International Association of Media and Community Research (IAMCR) Global Media Policy Working Group, on Global Media Policy. The introductory chapter then went on to present an overview of community media and community radio policies and environments across the globe. Region becomes an important aspect of this study, with South Asia in its characteristic politico-economic, socio-­ legal, and cultural attributes, serving as the backdrop. The second chapter then presented the theoretical anchor for this research, the Deliberative Policy Ecology approach, drawing on various theoretical efforts to the study of policy and synthesising them to draw on the ideals of deliberative democracy to study and articulate policymaking © The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6_7

291

292 

P. RAGHUNATH

for media. This research endeavour is a critical policy ethnography, rooted in emancipatory politics. This critical study to community radio policies in South Asia helped understand the divergent rationalities and rhetoric, norms and values that diverse policy actors laid claim to, even as they involved themselves in the policymaking process for CR. This book then presented a historiography of radio governance in South Asia, before moving on to talk about the trajectories taken by community radio in the four countries under study, weaving together the trysts that each of them have had with policymaking for it within the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural contexts. While each of the countries present divergent policy situations, a common colonial and/or crypto-colonial past and shared administrative cultures serve as common connections. Similarly, the region’s interface with international media policy actors, like international development agencies invested in media development agendas, donor aid agencies involved in funding media as an allied practice to socio-economic rehabilitation and reconstruction activities, regulatory actors that set technical standards for radio spectrum, and diplomatic agencies involved in building multilateral relations, serves as larger global connections. The particularities of each country’s political, constitutional and legal, and economic systems serve as arenas of divergence and differentiation, defining the shape taken by community radio policy and the medium of community radio itself in the countries under study. The nature of civil wars and conflicts, natural disasters, and ecological imbalances bring to the picture their own particular hues, in terms of their timelines, damages, and costs to human activity. Along similar lines, the legislative processes in each of the countries, besides the intensity and sentiments associated with the community radio movements, themselves add to the diversity of experiences with CR policies in the region. A comparative study of policymaking of CR in South Asia entails that these commonalities and differences be analysed, thematised, and highlighted in order to understand points of conjunction and disjunction. However, multicausality and incomparable contexts across divergent policy setups, for instance, obscure strict comparisons, as is the case with this research. Therefore, this concluding analysis presents larger themes under which the policymaking for community radio in the four countries is brought under the lens. By drawing on the interplay between the ideas of connectedness (Subrahmanyam 1997; Bhambra 2014), contestation (Dryzek 2010), competition (Bourdieu 1993), and comparativity (Larsen 2015), this chapter goes on to present key aspects of the attributes,

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

293

cultures, and processes of governance and policymaking for democratising access to airwaves, with special reference to community radio in South Asia.

Comparing and Synthesising Theory and Praxis: Critical Theory and Community Radio Policies in South Asia Legitimation and Language Jurgen Habermas’ (English) work of 1975, Legitimation Crisis serves as a useful background to understanding the loss of legitimacy faced by institutions that relied on values and norms of the pre-capitalist society, due to rapid shifts brought about by capitalism. Habermas suggests that the resulting crises would be rehabilitated into the social setups and cultural spheres. This occurs due to state action when it comes to dealing with the economic shifts that are brought about as a result. The lack of internally cohesive norms and values propel this crisis of legitimacy, as societies stare at shifts brought about by capitalism, and neoliberal policies in South Asia, over the last 30 years, especially. It is my contention that legitimation crises serve as constitutive moments (Starr 2004) for the media, often marking shifts in the politico-economic, technological, and socio-legal realms. The need for the policy actors and institutions operating in these larger settings to face the test of legitimacy finds articulation and representation in the media. The media become the site for such deliberation, reflecting upheavals in particular contexts. The colonial administrative establishments serve as a common thread linking the experiences of all the four countries that form a part of this study. Nepal’s tryst with what is increasingly being called ‘crypto-­colonialism’ (Herzfeld 2002) was enunciated. This experience can also be seen as a crisis of legitimacy, as marked by various political events of Nepal in the latter half of the twentieth century, spilling over into the first decade of the twenty-first century. The experience of the other three countries with direct colonial rule and their articulations and representations on the airwaves, together, allow us to talk of a larger South Asian public sphere. This conceptualisation of the public sphere is characterised by reflexive interdependence, characterised by micro- and macro-networks (Volkmer 2014). Braman’s concept of legacy law (2004) serves as an important transitional tool to conjointly address the colonial and postcolonial experiences

294 

P. RAGHUNATH

of policies governing the airwaves. The fact that these countries have legal and policy frameworks of the colonial era to continue to govern their broadcasting systems shows how postcolonial policies tend to be outcomes of negotiations with this administrative legacy. Dirks’ (2008) work helps look at the emergence of technology as the site that codifies continuities between the colonial and postcolonial states. Similarly, the larger South Asian region has experienced the processes of modernisation and subsequent liberalisation along similar timeframes, with the second half of the twentieth century marked by somewhat similar experiences of tussles between industrialisation, on the one hand, and the need to preserve cultural heterogeneity and a civilisational ethos, on the other. It also saw the rise and fall of economies, fortification of older elites, and creation of newer political bodies, as these young nations grew to embrace the challenges of post-independence reconstruction, rehabilitation, and repatriation of people and resources. These experiences have been mediated by their interactions with the world economy, international and multilateral development actors, as well as diplomatic relations with countries. These can be seen in the form of technical assistance programmes, development aid, and donor funding driven by agendas of international and multilateral aid agencies, as evidenced in the community-based radio space (including Sri Lanka, where community radio was broadcast under the aegis of the state corporation). The upheavals brought about by civil wars, with the larger factors and displacements that go with them, impacted the functioning of the state, in Sri Lanka and Nepal. The policymaking apparatus and process for community radio showcase this loss of legitimacy by the state and the divergent ways in which the state wielded power, benevolence, control, and diplomacy, in both countries. On the one hand, the Sri Lankan state’s efforts at deriving legitimacy, in the face of conflict and civil war, are seen in the state control over broadcasting as it played out in practice. The Sri Lankan state displayed tight-fisted control at times, and turning into a benign provider of resources at other times, ensuring legal control over broadcasting in both kinds of circumstances. In terms of the spatiality, the location of these community-based broadcasting initiatives have been associated with the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Mahaweli dam project, furthering the development mandate of the state, above everything else. The narration by Knud Ebbesen, the Danish consultant explicates the manner in which the Sri Lankan state was difficult to negotiate with, and the frustrations faced by the international development

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

295

consultant, at various points. This attribute of the Sri Lankan state was also seen in the case of the New Education Service, in the narration by Thilina Samarasooriya, of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC), when a radio programme on air was abruptly shut due to undesired questions from the community on a phone-in programme. The Nepalese state strove to derive legitimacy, mired in crises in the face of the two Jan Andolans (Peoples’ Movements). The emergence of non-state community radio for the first time in the South Asian region, in Nepal, can be attributed to this lack of a functioning state mechanism, with local governance systems, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and other kinds of community development bodies working to retain and structure some kind of cohesion in the midst of upheavals. It is safe to suggest that community radio in Nepal emerged as a site of expression of such societal upheavals along class and ethnic lines, besides the introduction of new technology. This can be seen across a number of developments that the country saw, ranging from the rapid spread of independent radio outlets, the movement for free expression and independent radio, fortification of the monarchy until 2005, and to the influx of donor aid into the Nepalese media landscape. Evidently, civil war is closely linked to a crisis in the legitimacy of functioning institutional administrative systems in the two countries. The liminal states that the two countries found themselves in, in the absence of fully legitimate governments, have had a bearing on the forms and manifestations that community radio took in these countries. Besides the civil war and associated liminality as an analytic category, development emerges as a major trope that coalesces the shared clamour for legitimacy (for community radio, in this case), necessitating recourse to the developmental agenda of non-state actors in India and Bangladesh. In India, development emerges as the discourse by which attempt is made to justify community radio to the state. In other words, recourse to the rubric of development allowed advocates and propellers of community radio to engage the state and alleviate any suspicion or uneasiness on the latter’s behalf, in pushing for a community radio policy. The unitary-cum-­ federal structure of India allows for argumentation over access to resources of various kinds and ideals of distributive justice. Some would even go as far as applying the analytic category of liminality to the experiences of those in the ‘disturbed’ areas in the country, where negotiating access to natural resources like spectrum is a protracted effort. It is in this light that the trope of development finds utility. The chapters presented some governmental perspective on this aspect, with intra-governmental/

296 

P. RAGHUNATH

inter-­ministerial communication emerging as a key focal point of the process of policymaking for community radio. Bangladesh, with its entrenched history of having been the basket case for development aid, also draws on development as a legitimating device, by the state, the NGO and community-based organisations (CBO) sector, as well as the international aid community. As Chap. 6 indicated, the entrenched structures around poverty and underdevelopment find articulation in the community radio space, with the idea of development being mobilised to make space for community radio in the country’s media landscape. The policy document for community radio makes no bones of this focus on development, with development news and development advertising emerging as buzzwords around the issues of news and financial sustainability, over which neighbouring India continues to struggle. The trope of development finds prominence and emerges as a prominent discourse marker, as seen in the interviews with advocacy groups, representatives of international and multilateral organisations, as well as the government. The shared sense of responsibility towards the cause seemed quite apparent. Another key aspect of the context has been the analytic category of disaster and rehabilitation. This is closely linked to the larger issue of climate change, ecological sustainability, and rehabilitation. Starting with the Mahaweli project in Sri Lanka, which is a state-led project of dam-­building, to the recurrent natural flooding and climactic triggers experienced by Bangladesh, to the massive earthquake experienced by Nepal, community radios are seen as emerging or engaging with these ecology-related experiences in South Asia. Habermas’ idea of language as shared linguistic meaning emerges as a useful way to bind the contextual offerings of the lifeworld and to situate the policy process for CR as one of communicating, negotiating, and mediating with it, through (a) the policy document and (b) the practice. The next section seeks to place this process of shared linguistic meaning-­ generation and -making as a site for comparison with respect to the policymaking for community radio in South Asia. Language and Liberation Language emerges as the space that links the material practice of policy to the contexts in which they are made, remade, iterated, and reiterated, as a continuous activity. Bakhtin’s idea of dialogism (1981), situated as it is

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

297

between constructivism and structuralism, foregrounds the importance of context. Researchers of Bakhtin’s work (Holquist 1990) argue that his idea of dialogism is not a closed one and that it is open-ended to connect to divergent contextual attributes. Similarly, Volosinov (1986) speaks of language as inevitably and inextricably linked to the social context. This research project’s grounding in critical media policy allowed it to engage with the making of policy as a deliberative activity, containing the dialogic with multiple constituent narratives, and going beyond its systemic undertones. Rooted in Habermas’ ideas elucidated in The Theory of Communicative Action – I and II (1984, 1987), intersubjectivity emerges as a cornerstone of this researcher’s approach to language. In appreciating but going beyond systemic attributes, understanding and locating mobility enables a critical media policy researcher to indulge in some kind of a ‘policy tracing’, replete with the contextual attributes, to study policy over time. The chapters presented detailed narratives and analytic observations on mechanisms, manoeuvres, and methods involved in the formulation and practice of policies for community radio in the four countries under study. Chapters 4, 5, and 6 presented varying experiences of advocating for community radio, towards change and liberation, mobility, and communitas over time. This, the advocates for community did, through the process of socialising the state. This sub-section presents the epistemic entry-points, as language, in relation to the process of policymaking for change. These epistemic entry-points were drawn upon to support the stances of these activists and advocates for community radio, in their efforts towards working within the parameters of the Westphalian nation-state, even as they engaged with international actors in this process. As discussed previously, these stances helped provide legitimacy to their policy advocacy. Regional Spatiality The Region, with all its attributes, emerges as an important policy actor in itself, in this ethnography. Regional spatiality emerges primary to articulations around various aspects of the practice of policy. The capital cities of each of the countries emerge as key sites of the policymaking process for community radio, since they house the government machinery, and a lot of times, the country offices of international and multilateral organisations. However, policymaking for community radio clearly goes beyond these capital cities, as explicated in the country chapters. Academic spaces, advocacy groups, and activists, besides community radios, themselves

298 

P. RAGHUNATH

emerge as key policy actors for community radio, and sites that are involved in the functioning of the larger policy ecosystem. In addition, one can find the region emerging as a decisive backdrop in terms of the physical features. For instance, the mountainous terrain of the Himalayas contributes to particular kinds of experiences of community radios in Nepal. The mountainous terrain becomes a character in the ethnography for Nepal, since it determines the experiences of radio broadcasting in the Kathmandu Valley versus far-off Lumbini, for instance. Similarly, the island-nation of Sri Lanka and the spatial distribution of the civil war, for example, emerge as key factors in the governance system in the country. India’s peninsular South and land-locked North create connecting linkages with the seas on the one side, and the mountains on the other, emerges as imperative in deciding the experiences of the forests of Jharkhand, and the dry rocky lands of rural places in the Deccan Plateau. Similarly, Bangladesh’s coastline is a character in deciding the country’s trysts with flooding, and the larger issues of sustainable development, the spread of stations across coastal areas, and the interest of international donors like Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), in the Hatiya Island, as one that is off the coast of Bangladesh and prone to massive flooding, for instance. The urbanism of capital cities as spaces of ‘high policy’ is contrasted and connected to the localised experiences of the spread of policy actors across these geographic spaces with regional realities. Evidently, the idea of ‘region’ emerges as an important analytic device, in this study on community radio policy in South Asia. Education Education emerges as an interesting discourse, in a space focused on community radio policies and the process of socialisation of the state, since it inverts the idea that the state is the repository of scientific knowledge and is the legitimate administrator of such knowledge. By invoking education as a key part of the policy process for community radio, the advocates and activists indulged in sharing their knowledge. As seen in these countries, this was done to alleviate fears of letting go of control over the airwaves that were traditionally in the hands of the state and broadcasts that could pose dangers to the national security of these states. It emerged as an important discourse as well as practice, in the advocacy for community radio. Sri Lanka’s experience with the New Education Service of the SLBC showcases the presence of education as an episteme. The radio programming focused on non-formal education, catering to diverse communities.

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

299

It was based on extensive fieldwork on ground, where the personnel from the radio went to meet the public to capture their views and day-to-day functioning. The New Education Service (NES) produced programmes that were genuinely in line with the idea of community broadcasting, under the aegis of the SLBC. In the case of India, the first policy of 2002 was focused on allowing educational institutions access to the airwaves. It was the first step towards disarming the sceptical Indian state and in allowing the public access to the airwaves. The utility of Gyanvani as educational radio and of education as an episteme was presented in the chapter. As discussed, educational institutions were seen as less harmful and fulfilled the government’s goal of letting the social sector gain access to the airwaves. In the case of Bangladesh, education as an episteme emerges in the civil society and advocacy group’s efforts in educating the government policymakers. Chapter 6 discussed at length, the various ways in which the advocates for community radio in the country acted as educators, transferring understanding and knowledge, and creating a favourable outlook towards community radio, among government authorities. Seminars, workshops, and conferences became avenues where ministers and government officials were invited, and such opportunities were used to convey ideas and knowledge on community radio. Education as a linguistic device emerges as a means of socialising the state, on community radio in South Asia.  reedom of Expression and Right to Communicate F The discourse around ‘freedom of expression’ and the ‘right to communicate’ emerge as norms that find articulation in the advocacy for community radio in the region. They emerge as rallying points around which the case for community radio is made. For instance, Nepal’s Save Independent Radio Movement (SIRM) is a prime example of a movement that emerged out of conditions of censorship. Freedom of expression as a normative claim of the media emerged as a cornerstone of the movement, especially in its linkages with the mainstream media. Instances of control and censorship by the monarchy led to this recognition of these values as important to a vibrant democracy. Similarly, in India and Bangladesh, the collaborations that community radio had had with the Right to Information movements in the countries are exemplary of these linkages.1 The movements 1  While there have been efforts from the community radio sector to link with the Right to Information (RTI) movement, the uptake from the latter has been minimal.

300 

P. RAGHUNATH

aimed at increased transparency and accountability to the public, allowing for community radios to emerge as sites that uphold the participatory aspect of democracies, contributing to deliberation and public audits. Chapters 5 and 6 presented these aspects, also highlighting the interviewees’ articulations of community radios being rooted in a rights-­ based approach2 to empowerment and strengthening of communities. The interviewees, especially representatives of funding agencies, spoke of the rights-based approach as key to the projects on community radio that they were funding.  evelopment, Sustainability, Human Security D Development emerges as an important trope in the study of community radio policies in South Asia. It often becomes the claim made by advocates, and the international development community, in favour of community radio. It also is an important value that the state views positively, thereby allowing the advocates to legitimately use it in the advocacy and lobbying efforts. The state finds the legitimacy it needs to permit something like community radio, since it fits in well within the purview of its agenda. For the advocates of community radio, top-down state-led development is juxtaposed against the more participatory form of development. Similarly, sustainability emerges as an important trope, in the form of norms and values associated with sustainable development, as well as, more recently, the 17 goals listed out as the UN System’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainability as a facet of the processes and practice of policymaking for community radio begins to emerge in Bangladesh, but one can argue that it really becomes an important concern for the other countries under study as well. For instance, the proposition of funding by governments for community radio is an important aspect of keeping them alive and functioning. Similarly, the process of ensuring that there is social sustainability in the form of acceptance, and engagement by the members of the communities that these radios cater to, becomes another important concern. Overarching national policies can include some aspects of sustainability at the larger level, but station-made policies for their own functioning become important as well. The 2  This is not to suggest that the rights-based discourse has found favour with the state. In India, for instance, the discourse has been eschewed in favour of the ‘development’ discourse, owing to state scepticism in the face of security threats and a legacy of resorting to the development agenda in the country.

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

301

Sustainable Development Goals serve as larger connections that policy actors engage with, in a post-2015 world, in their bid for international development funding, as well as relevance. Human Security is yet another aspect, juxtaposed against the state’s focus on national security. Human security (UNDP 1994) emerges as an important trope in safeguarding the spaces for which community radios serve as custodians. Often times, the agenda on national security is seen to impede the larger agenda of human progress and liberation. State scepticism of new technology is a recurrent theme in the South Asian states under study, owing to factors like retaining its own role and legitimacy, control, and power. Human security stresses on non-traditional aspects of security and places a premium on dealing with human vulnerabilities, focusing on the ‘people’ that make up a nation, instead. Recognition and Policy: The Status of Community Radio Recognition emerges as an important theme in the study of community radio and its policies in South Asia. The advocacy and activism for the medium is marked by the struggle for recognition (Honneth 1992). Honneth, as a critical theorist, places recognition as the central connect between social conflicts, as the moral basis for interaction between humans, in his work that focuses on the normative aspects of social theory. This struggle for recognition, extrapolating the Hegelian idea of recognition being the precondition for self-consciousness on to the stage that community radio symbolises, is one marked by the lack of identification of (a) the people that community radio as a medium is most associated with and (b) the medium itself in the larger media system. This study was conceptualised to understand the rationalities that diverse policy actors drew upon or laid recourse to, in making a case for community radio. They drew on a number of reasons, ranging from the need for giving a voice to the voiceless, to address the issue of voice parity, to demystify technology, to democratise the media systems within and between countries, and to facilitate the transfer of technology and know-­ how, as well as financial resources. Similarly, the ‘marketplace for policy ideas’, if you will, saw competing rationalities, inherent with a critique of existing structures and ideas, as well as of competing claims. Further, there existed the tendency to make claims and to ‘justification’. In other words, if certain policy actors understand that certain norms or actions discharged by an institutional authority or the state are not in conjunction with their

302 

P. RAGHUNATH

own world views of justice, they can suggest that such actions or norms are not justified to them. Rainer Forst (2011) contends that the right to justification serves as a common moral ground for human rights. This sub-­ section deals with these jostling rationalities, critiques, and justifications, to deliberate on the cultures of governance in South Asia. The experiences of the four countries, as explored in this book, showcase the manner in which activists and advocates work towards acquiring recognition of the space that CR privileges, first as part of the larger mediascape and then in the instrumental aspect of the policy. The four country chapters laid out explicitly an explication of the mechanisms, manoeuvres, and methods that were practiced in the process of pushing for community radio in these countries. Cultural Symbolism New social movements are characterised by cultural symbolism that form an integral aspect of the communication that is part of these movements (Melucci 1996). Symbolism rooted in local cultural expressions becomes an inherent part of these protest movements, owing to their indigenous forms of communicating the message to capture public attention. This emerged as an interesting way of pushing for policies for CR in each of the countries, drawing from distinctly ‘South Asian’ ways of lodging dissent and pushing the policy envelope. For instance, the chapters contained examples from Sri Lanka, on episodes of community involvement in the Mahaweli and Kothmale initiatives. Narratives of using CR to clear up the local pond or engaging with the community were presented. These are distinct slices from the cultural life of the island-nation that get registered as symbolic of making community radio. Similarly, Nepal’s experience with the practice of community radio policy comprises examples from the Save Independent Radio Movement (SIRM), where the community radio activists initiated culturally indigenous ways of protest. For instance, placing the radio in the hands of the monkey at the Pashupathinath Temple, or on the plate taken to the god for worship, was symbolic of the ways in which the protests were rooted in the everyday cultural ethos of the Nepalese. This was also seen in Bangladesh, when activists taped their mouths to protest against silencing of the media.

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

303

Transnational Diplomacy A crucial aspect of policymaking for CR in each of these countries is the element of transnational diplomacy, with international donors and multilateral agencies and actors playing key roles in the transfer of technology, capital, and know-how. Transnational diplomacy emerges as an important aspect in the planning and execution of efforts in promoting freedom of movement, and expression, by domestic actors. International donor agencies, in line with their larger agendas for international development, work with these domestic actors, sometimes bypassing the state and at other times working with the state machinery as well. The Sri Lankan case of Danish International Development Agency’s (DANIDA) involvement with the transfer of know-how on Danish radio programming, as well as financial resources, is an example of an international development agency working with the state authority, without bypassing it. Similarly, instances of the funding of community radio ventures and programmes by the World Bank, in Sri Lanka and India, are examples of transfer of funding. The policy histories of community radio in each of the countries under study facilitate diversified, yet broadly common ways of interaction with international development donors, since many of them work with a regional focus. The case of Nepal’s community radio scene showcases well the involvement with the international donor agencies and multilateral organisations. For instance, the involvement of UNESCO and UNDP in helping with the procurement of the radio equipment through the route of diplomatic channels makes for a very interesting story! Similarly, the involvement of UNESCO in all the countries, especially in the transfer of epistemic know-­ how as well as finances, showcases their outreach with respect to community radio in the developing world. Bangladesh’s development sector has examples of donors like Department for International Development (DFID), JICA, and the like, being involved in development programmes of various kinds and of liaising with community radio as part of these programmes. In all, the coming together of international donors interested in media development, the civil society, and the state in some cases allows to study their interlinkages with community radio policies in South Asia in an inclusive manner. Personality-Centrism As flagged off suitably in the relevant sections of the country chapters, personality-centric policymaking emerges as a distinct characteristic of the

304 

P. RAGHUNATH

cultures of governance in South Asia. Personality-driven policy manoeuvres also, partially, cater to this characteristic feature of governance, with family/clan relations serving as connections that policy actors make use of. This was seen in evidence in Nepal and Bangladesh, wherein personal connections and social relations helped push for the agenda of community radio. The presence of a relative in the ministry, or a known and favourable Minister that one is connected to, emerged opportune to the community-­ related policy agenda at hand. In other words, the personal charm, networks, and connections that few members of the advocacy coalitions could boast of emerged as helpful to the agenda for community radio policies, allowing access to powerful members of the political and social classes. Consolidation of Power In at least two of the countries, there exist sparring oppositional groups within the CR policy advocacy groups, who have now emerged as associational/networked bodies of different kinds. The consolidation of power and articulations around them emerges as an important one, especially in the wake of calls for multi-stakeholderism. Does a diversified community radio space with multiple groups and associations constitute a democratised advocacy space, or does it signify the consolidation of interests along various lines, like intent, or mechanism of lobbying, or issues of interest, and so on? One of the bureaucrats from India seemed to suggest that the more the number of groups, the more would be the articulation in favour of community radio, with many talking about it. Communitas? As articulated above, liminality emerges as a recurring theme and a powerful phase in the countries under study, having ramifications for them in varied ways. However, by tracing policy over time, as mentioned earlier on in the chapter, one is allowed the luxury of mapping the transitional phase, seeing it through. In other words, one is able to study the end of the transitional phase and the consolidation of various efforts at returning to the normal, aspiring for peace and cooperation, through nation-building. Communitas, as the end of the liminal and the start of the consolidation of the civil and the permanent, emerges as a theme in the countries in South Asia. This can be seen especially at the end of the civil wars in Nepal and Sri Lanka and the processes of constitution-making and nation-­ building, respectively. This is also seen in the case of India, especially in the ‘disturbed’ areas, as also in Bangladesh and Nepal, in the aftermath of

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

305

post-disaster reconstruction. Post-conflict rebuilding and post-disaster reconstruction are markedly important in these countries, since they allow for renegotiating norms and common values. There is an aspirational element to this theme, since it is normative in nature. Community radio policies made in such situations strive for a renewed focus on inclusive media-making. Further, the coming of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the renewed focus on looking at ‘voice parity’ can all lead to the harmonisation of policies (and policy processes) for community radio, by invoking multi-stakeholderism as a cornerstone, besides public interest.

Doing Media Policy Studies: The Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach The Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach to the study of media policy, as envisaged and laid out in this book, is one that is rooted in emancipatory politics and a bottom-up approach to policymaking. This concluding section focuses on how one can conduct media policy research in accordance with the tenets of this approach, in order to make sense of complex policy worlds that are a resultant of the intermeshing of the global and the local in terms of scale, the exogenous and the endogenous in terms of an ethnographic lens, and diverse kinds of rationalities. What follows is an attempt to provide a snapshot of the Approach adopted in the book, laying out some key principles drawn from this research endeavour and its theoretical premise that emerged from theory-making from the ground-up. • The Approach is rooted in an emic approach to the study of media policymaking. The stress on the formulation and construction of policies makes it possible to draw on ethnography as a mode of inquiry to study media policies. By utilising the efficacy of a critical policy ethnography, the texture of the policy space complete with its messiness and diverse narratives is fleshed out. A qualitative study greatly enhances the possibilities of engagement in the case of such a study of media policymaking to understand multiple perspectives. It helps go beyond an instrumental approach of a cause-and-effect model of policy analysis to embrace individual and group interactions in a policy space.

306 

P. RAGHUNATH

• The Approach is rooted in the Decolonial, aligning with human agency that questions and raises concerns over problematic assumptions and practices of supremacy and colonialism on the basis of race, religion, class, caste, and gender. It interrogates structures of power, to underscore support for the emancipation of the marginalised, and those that have been historically and contingencially oppressed. Decolonial thought is helpful in working through realities of structural violence to enable bringing to the fore voices that have been silenced or quelled. • The Approach is premised on enabling the development of Liminality as a contextual attribute, to study policies and policymaking in transitional societies reeling under multiple forms of contingencies, most prominently, the lack of democracy. The liminal becomes an important site to contextualise policymaking, since it often calls for heightened efforts on defraying conditions characterised by emergency politics and preparedness. This was seen in the funding mechanisms in place in conflict and post-conflict situations in South Asia, as elucidated in this research endeavour. Dealing with the liminal as a particular case of policy is a characteristic feature of the Approach, since it allows the researcher to be context-sensitive in terms of understanding and elucidating identities, politics, and practices in such conditions. • The Approach is directly concerned with Criticality, drawing on the many variants of studies rooted in critical theorising. For instance, critical development studies emerges as an important lens to consider the politics of development funding in countries like India and Bangladesh, as showcased in this research. Similarly, critical security studies helps understand emergency politics and human security. By underscoring criticality in research, the Approach helps understand normative aspects of policies and policymaking. It helps unearth values, norms, and interests at play in the process of making policies. • The Approach is most useful in unravelling Complexity, which is a key feature of policymaking today. It allows to access aspects of policymaking that are not entirely accessible due to their latency in the policy process, such as workings of ideology and power, people who are rendered invisible in the policy process, aspects of policymaking such as the mechanisms and methods that are allowed to be hidden as strategic markers, the many nodes in a policy network that shape the policy process, and the contributors to the complexity.

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

307

• Multiplicity as a cornerstone of media policy research has been written about in recent scholarship. The Approach helps unravel and provide space to engage with a multiplicity of voices and deal with a plurality of policy actors. The embeddedness of policy actors in multiple spaces and the plurality of their logics is an important aspect of the Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach. By helping shed light on these plural logics, one can help go beyond a single narrative history or policy narrative that often gets fortified as the only narrative, opening it up to micro-histories and plural policy stories. • The attribute of Deliberation in the Deliberative Policy Ecology is key to the Approach. Deliberation, as elaborated upon in Chap. 2, is closely linked to the concept of communicative action, where policy actors are seen as advancing their respective positions through verbal and non-verbal, symbolic communication, to deliberate in the Ecology. Deliberation is integral to the ecology comprising plural policy actors, since it helps locate the discourse emerging from them, their varied stances, the forms of communicative action they put forth, the reactions they receive, and to map the shift from their initial positions to revised ones upon interaction. • The Approach also works with Emotive Rationality as a key logic, going beyond solely instrumental rationality. By underscoring emotive rationality, one is allowed to access sites of peoples’ participation that are not driven by coldly strategic motivations. It allows to engage with peoples’ movements and grassroot activism, driven by social causes and affiliation to real-world issues. It helps access their mobilisations and recruitment of the masses into civic and social causes, enabling an empathetic enactment of solidarity, in the process. • Staying on the subject of rationality, the Approach is strongly rooted in Open-Ended and Unbounded Rationality. As an ecological approach, it is strongly in favour of going beyond system- and structure-­bound rationalities, in favour of the more open-ended and unbounded variety. In other words, access to information, definition of the temporal and the availability of time, access to people, and access to data are all open to externalities and transnationalisms of different kinds, opening up immensely agile possibilities. • The Approach is rooted in the Glocal, upholding the ability to constantly negotiate the national and the strictly international. Policy actors are at once local actors dealing with international funding flows, transfer of policy ideas, diffusion of policy lessons, among

308 

P. RAGHUNATH

other kinds of transnational interventions. The region emerges as a mediating feature and an anchoring lens in the case of this research endeavour, helping media identities, flows of space and time, and the interface with the international. The negotiating of the universal and the particular, and across the similar and the different, is a constant feature of a policy actor in the Ecology. • A key feature of the Approach, as fleshed out in this book, is the narrativising of policy studies using thick description in the way of Clifford Geertz. By relying on policy narratives to present the divergent policy stories, as opposed to number crunching or presenting solely legal and/or strategic pointers of policy, this study helps bring in policy stories and narratives as legitimate ways of engaging with media policy studies. The Approach benefits from such an intervention, adding to it the thickness and richness of data, as a resultant. • As an addition to the above pointer, the Approach works well with a qualitative study of policymaking, as is evidenced in this research. It helps uncover and unravel a range of perspectives through qualitative interviews, focus-group discussions, the writing of descriptive passages through participant observation, and other qualitative means of engaging with field data. The Approach, incorporating such qualitative inputs, recognises complexity and latent social, cultural, and emotive aspects of the policy process. • The Approach is rooted in reflecting the social and cultural aspects of policymaking and governance in a spatial context. This research looked at and dwelled on the cultures of governance in South Asia, among other things. This allows to go beyond the strictly legal approaches to governance, to consider other ‘softer’ aspects, like culture and society. The approach encourages such a stance, owing to its ability to incorporate emotive rationality of the people, including policy actors being studied, as discussed above. The Deliberative Policy Ecology Approach as showcased in this book provides a theoretical harbour to the qualitative and critical study of media policymaking, in South Asia, in this case. It has permitted engagement with the above drawn out aspects and characteristic features, recognising fluidity, multiplicity of the temporal, and the thicker attributes of researching and writing policymaking for community radio. This book is, at once, a manifesto and a practical exhibit of the Deliberative Policy Ecology

7  A CRITICAL COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY: CONNECTEDNESS, CONTESTATION… 

309

Approach, worked out through the building of Grounded Theory, from rich data that emerged through a critical policy ethnography in South Asia.

Bibliography Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Introduction. Connected Sociologies (pp. 1–16). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Bloomsbury Collections. Bourdieu, P. (1993). The Field of Cultural Production. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Dirks, N. (2008). The Scandal of Empire: India and the Creation of Imperial Britain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Dryzek, J. (2010). Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Democracy. Oxford University Press. Forst, R. (2011). The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice. Columbia University Press. Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 1). London: Heinemann. Habermas, J. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 2). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Herzfeld, M. (2002). The Absence Presence: Discourses of Crypto-Colonialism. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(4), 899–926. Holquist, M. (1990). Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World. Routledge. Honneth, A. (1992). The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. MIT Press. Larsen, S.  E. (2015). From Comparatism to Comparativity: Comparative Reasoning Reconsidered. Interfaces: A Journal of Medieval European Literatures, 1, 318–347. Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age. Cambridge University Press. Starr, P. (2004). The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications. New York: Basic. Subrahmanyam, S. (1997). Connected Histories: Notes Towards a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia. Modern Asian Studies, 31(3), Special Issue: The Eurasian Context of the Early Modern History of Mainland South East Asia, 1400–1800, 735–762. UNDP. (1994). Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security. http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/content/humandevelopmentreport-1994. Volkmer, I. (2014). The Global Public Sphere: Public Communication in the Age of Reflective Interdependence. Cambridge: Polity Press. Volosinov, V. N. (1986). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Translated by Ladislav Matejka, I. R. Titunik. Harvard University Press.

Appendix A: Interview Guide—Sri Lanka

The Larger Context 1. How has the media scene changed over the last 3 decades, corresponding to changes in the economic and political scenarios in the country? (allude to the civil war situation, free market introduced in SL way back in 1977—if there have been significant changes in the form it has taken, concerns over human rights violations from international community, and so on) 2. How have media policies changed as a result of these political and economic shifts over the last 3 decades? 3. What is the current situation and where is it headed? 4. Over the last 3 decades, who are the main actors involved in the media policy space? 5. How did CR enter the media landscape of Sri Lanka in the 1980s? Who were the key actors involved and what kind of values/justifications did they draw upon? 6. How did CR evolve in Sri Lanka since the 1980s and what is the current situation? 7. What is the scope of the broadcasting policy in Sri Lanka? (placing CR in the context) 8. What are the difficulties in working towards a CR sector that is not controlled by the government?

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6

311

312 

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW GUIDE—SRI LANKA

9. Has the approach of the government altered/can one identify shifts in government perception of CR since the 1980s?

The Policymaking Process Organisational/Individual Functioning 1. What is the role played by your organisation, with respect to CR in Sri Lanka? 2. What is your organisation’s view of the progress made in the CR policymaking and implementation (especially the latter), in Bangladesh? 3. Could you name some of the driving forces in the CR policy lobbying and advocacy space in Bangladesh? 4. In your individual capacity, what kind of role have you played? How has it fed into your organisation’s role and the larger CR sector? 5. Who are the key actors your organisation and you deal with, wrt to CR? 6. What kind of activities does the CR sector see, in Bangladesh? What roles do the many actors, including your organisation, play? 7. How does CR operate in sensitive areas—disaster-prone areas, regions like the Chittagong Hill Tracts that have groups like the Chakmas, the areas bordering Myanmar with Rohingya refugees (could bring in experiences from the visit to Chittagong here)? 8. How does CR address issues of development? (could allude to issues around cheap labour—garment sweatshops, among other things) Actor-Specific Questions Formal Actors (will be made specific to officials in each of the ministries): 1. What is the broadcast policymaking process like, in Sri Lanka? (roles of various ministries, inter-ministerial negotiations, comprehensive policy formulations) 2. What are the challenges/roadblocks in the process? Should anything be done differently?

  APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW GUIDE—SRI LANKA 

313

3. How do you perceive non-governmental actors? What kind of role do they play? How often does your ministry interact with them, and at what levels? 4. What is your view of the idea of Community Radio in Sri Lanka? What is CR, in your opinion? What has Sri Lanka’s experience been like, in this sector? (to gauge views on importance of citizen’s broadcasting; views on the efficiency and appropriateness of, or ­ challenges and lacunae in current policy; value systems that govern functioning of the ministry) 5. How has the media’s role and involvement shifted in the past, with changes in political power? 6. What are the major challenges for a CR sector to take shape in Sri Lanka? Are there any challenges emanating from the larger social, political, economic, cultural contexts in Sri Lanka? 7. How does the government approach CR? Is there any merit in working towards opening up the CR sector, according to you? Why or why not? Policies Lobbying for CR in Sri Lanka 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the idea of a CR sector in Sri Lanka? How do you see/evaluate current efforts, like Uva? 3. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 4. What kind of approach/role do international bodies operating trying to work in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 5. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 6. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same?

314 

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW GUIDE—SRI LANKA

7. Sri Lanka is the first country in the region to have initial experiments with CR, way back in the 1980s. How has that taken shape since then? What is your evaluation of the same? 8. Why has the SLBC been hesitant in allowing communities to broadcast by themselves? Why are community broadcasting efforts still under the umbrella of SLBC? 9. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Bangladesh? 10. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Sri Lanka? 11. What are the major challenges that the idea of a CR sector encounters in Sri Lanka? Are there any challenges emanating from the larger social, political, economic, cultural contexts in Sri Lanka? 12. How does your organisation approach CR? How should CR function, in your opinion? 13. What kind of values do you draw on, when you talk of or lobby for CR in Sri Lanka (e.g. development, communication rights, etc.) International/Multilateral Organisations 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the efforts towards a CR sector in Sri Lanka? 3. How do you draw on international CR policies, definitions, and values (like development, information dissemination, democratisation, participation, etc.) in your work on broadcasting/CR in Sri Lanka? 4. How do you evaluate Sri Lanka’s tryst with CR, from way back in the 1980s till now? What are the high and low points, according to you? 5. Does your organisation have a centralised approach towards this? (to see how visions for CR are formulated by these international organisations and how they are then operationalised in a country-­ specific manner)

  APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW GUIDE—SRI LANKA 

315

6. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 7. What kind of approach/role do CR-centred organisations operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 8. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 9. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 10. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Sri Lanka? 11. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Sri Lanka? 12. What, according to you, is the future of CR in Sri Lanka? What kind of role does it have in a country like Sri Lanka? (look for answers connecting CR to issues/aspects rooted in Sri Lanka’s current status on many fronts) Researchers and Observers 1. How long have you been studying the broadcasting sector/media policy in Sri Lanka? 2. What do you make of the idea of CR in Sri Lanka? 3. How does it compare to CR sectors in other countries? (if the observer has been involved in studying other countries) 4. Could you share your observations on the larger media scenario in Sri Lanka, and the trajectories it has taken over the last 3 decades? 5. How does CR (e.g. initiatives like Uva) feature in Sri Lanka’s media landscape? 6. What, in your opinion, are the key milestones in the path taken by CR in Sri Lanka (earlier on)? How does the current situation reflect on the initiatives undertaken in the past? What has been the cause of the change (whatever the change is)? 7. What is your evaluation of the current policy scenario wrt CR in Sri Lanka? (control, challenges)

316 

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW GUIDE—SRI LANKA

8. Who are the key actors actively involved in advocating for a CR sector, at large, and specifically, about the policy environment, in Sri Lanka? 9. What are their respective motivations? 10. How do you evaluate each of their roles? 11. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Sri Lanka? 12. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Sri Lanka? (if the observer has knowledge and/or has worked on this) 13. Do you know of specific initiatives in the CR space that are operational currently? 14. In the face of the ongoing frictions (get them to arrive at and explain the various ‘conflicts’) in Sri Lanka, has, and if yes, how has CR been affected? 15. With respect to such situations, do you think CR policymaking/ work towards it has been impacted? How should CR function, in your opinion?  edia and Technology Law Experts (Collect Policy Documents M and Reviews/Critiques/Key Works on Them) (A)  IPR and Copyright

(B)  IT and digitisation

(C) Spectrum

(a) What are Sri Lanka’s laws around this? (b) How do they impact broadcasting policies in Sri Lanka? (c) How do they impact policies around CR in Sri Lanka? (evaluation of the extent of impact, positive and negative impact, with examples/cases)

Case Studies

Appendix B: Interview Guide—Nepal

The Larger Context 1. How has the media scene changed over the last 2 decades, corresponding to changes in the economic and political scenarios in the country? (allude to the various political changes and economic liberalisation since 1990s) 2. How have media policies changed as a result of these political and economic shifts? (to understand how policies are transformed by such influences and to understand key media reforms in Nepal) 3. What is the current situation and where is it headed? 4. Over the last 2 decades, who are the main actors involved in the media policy space? 5. How did CR emerge as a key component of the media landscape of Nepal? Who were the key actors involved and what kind of values/ justifications did they draw upon? 6. How did the conflict in Nepal impact media policies? (policy shifts— then and now) 7. How did the conflict in Nepal impact the CR sector, and the policies governing CR, in Nepal? (policy shifts—then and now)

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6

317

318 

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE—NEPAL

The Policymaking Process Organisational/Individual Functioning 1. What is the role played by your organisation, with respect to CR in Nepal? 2. What is your organisation’s view on the lack of the policies governing CR in Nepal? 3. How do you view the lack of a CR-specific policy? 4. In your individual capacity, what kind of role have you played? How has it fed into your organisation’s role and the larger CR sector? 5. Who are the key actors your organisation and you deal with, wrt to CR? 6. What kind of activities does the CR sector see, in Nepal? What roles do the many actors, including your organisation, play? 7. How did CR function during the conflict in Nepal? What are your views on the same? Actor-Specific Questions Formal Actors (will be made specific to officials in each of the ministries and will be adapted to on-ground political situation, e.g. if functioning of ministries is in limbo): 1. What is the broadcast policymaking process like, in Nepal? (roles of various ministries, inter-ministerial negotiations, comprehensive policy formulations) 2. What is your view of the CR sector in Nepal and the policies that govern CR? (to gauge views on importance of citizen’s broadcasting; views on the efficiency and appropriateness of, or challenges and lacunae in current policy; value systems that govern functioning of the ministry) 3. What are the challenges/roadblocks in the policymaking process wrt CR? Should anything be done differently? 4. How do you perceive CR bodies in Nepal? What kind of role do they play? How often does your ministry interact with them, and at what levels?

  APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE—NEPAL 

319

5. How do you perceive international bodies operating in the CR sector? What kind of role do they play? How often does your ministry interact with them, and at what levels? 6. How did the broadcast media function during the conflict and afterwards, in Nepal? 7. How should the government approach CR and how should CR function in such situations, in your opinion? CR Bodies in Nepal 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the CR sector in Nepal and the operational policy? 3. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 4. What kind of approach/role do international bodies operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 5. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 6. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 7. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Nepal? 8. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Nepal? 9. How did CR function during the conflict and afterwards, in Nepal? What has been your organisation’s role in this regard? 10. With respect to such situations, how should the policies governing CR be implemented and how should CR function, in your opinion?

320 

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE—NEPAL

International/Multilateral Organisations 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the CR sector in Nepal, and the operational policy? 3. How do you draw on international CR policies, definitions, and values (like democratisation, participation, etc.) in your work on CR in Nepal? 4. Does your organisation have a centralised approach towards this? (to see how visions for CR are formulated by these international organisations and how they are then operationalised in a country-­ specific manner) 5. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 6. What kind of approach/role do CR-centred organisations operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 7. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 8. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 9. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Nepal? 10. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Nepal? 11. How did CR function during the conflict and afterwards, in Nepal? What has been your organisation’s role in this regard? 12. With respect to such situations, how should the policies governing CR be implemented and how should CR function, in your opinion?

  APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE—NEPAL 

321

Researchers and Observers 1. How long have you been studying the CR sector in Nepal? 2. How does it compare to CR sectors in other countries? (if the observer has been involved in studying other countries) 3. Could you share your observations on the larger media scenario in Nepal, and the trajectories it has taken over the last two decades? 4. How does CR feature in Nepal’s media landscape? 5. What, in your opinion, are the key milestones in the path taken by CR in Nepal? 6. What, in your opinion, are the key shifts in the path taken by policies governing CR in Nepal? 7. What is your evaluation of the current policy scenario wrt CR in Nepal? (efficiency, challenges) 8. Who are the key actors instrumental in giving shape to the CR scenario, broadly, and the policy environment, specifically, in Nepal? 9. What are their respective motivations? 10. How do you evaluate each of their roles? 11. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Nepal? 12. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Nepal? (if the observer has knowledge and/or has worked on this) 13. How did CR function during the conflict and afterwards, in Nepal? What has been your organisation’s role in this regard? 14. With respect to such situations, how should the policies governing CR be implemented and how should CR function, in your opinion?  edia and Technology Law Experts (Collect Policy Documents, M and Reviews/Critiques/Key Works on Them) (A)  IPR and Copyright

(B)  IT and digitisation

(C) Spectrum

(a) What are Nepal’s laws around this? (b) How do they impact broadcasting policies in Nepal? (c) How do they impact policies around CR in Nepal? (evaluation of the extent of impact, positive and negative impact, with examples/cases)

322 

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE—NEPAL

Case Studies CR Stations That Have Implemented the National Policy at the Station Level 1. Experiences around receiving the license, annual taxes, and other operational aspects 2. What is your view of the policy governing CR in Nepal? (efficiency, challenges) 3. With respect to the current political turmoil, is there any ambiguity/problem with understanding the national policy? 4. How do you implement this policy at your station? 5. Are there instances where you have circumvented the national policy? Why? 6. Experiences wrt spectrum allocation 7. Experiences wrt copyright of content produced 8. Experiences wrt online streaming—IT laws, if any? Content downloading and copyright? 9. Are you part of any CR body in Nepal? If yes, what kind of role do you play? 10. How can the policy scenario change to enable CR stations like yours do better, in your opinion? Any specific suggestions? CR Stations Who Have Been Operational Through the Conflict in Nepal 1. How did your station function during the conflict? (day-to-day experiences) 2. What kind of content did you air and why? Who was involved in formulating and generating this content? 3. Did your face any problems with censorship? What kind of difficulties did you face? How did you continue to operate? 4. How did your community respond to your CR? How did they make use of your station during the conflict? 5. What have you done in the transition period? What path has your involvement with the community taken? 6. Has the policy shifted or has government perception of stations like yours changed?

  APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDE—NEPAL 

323

7. What is your view on CR and its functioning in conflict and transitional situations? 8. How relevant is your station in a post-conflict era? What are your station’s objectives in this regard? Groups That Have Been Denied Licenses . Why did you want to start a CR station? 1 2. What kind of measures and efforts did you take towards this? 3. What has your experience been?—License application, Communication with the concerned Ministry, Intimation of license denial, Reasons communicated for the same 4. Elaborate on the reasons for denying of the license (if it is for censorship/security—find out more about what motivated the ministry, what activities did the group carry out that led to such a denial) 5. What have you done after your license was denied? (Lobbying with other such groups/CR bodies? Moving towards other avenues for community communication?) 6. What is your future course of action? 7. How important do you think procuring a CR license is, for your group? 8. How did you envisage your CR station would function and what kind of value would it add to the media landscape of your target community, and in general?

Appendix C: Interview Guide—India

The Larger Context 1. How has the media scene changed over the last 2 decades, corresponding to changes in the economic and political scenarios in the country? (allude to the various political changes and economic liberalisation since 1990s) 2. How have media policies changed as a result of these political and economic shifts? (to understand how policies are transformed by such influences and to understand key media reforms in India) 3. What is the current situation and where is it headed? 4. Over the last 2 decades, who are the main actors involved in the media policy space? 5. What space does CR occupy in the media landscape of India? How did it get there and who were the key actors involved and what kind of values/justifications did they draw upon? 6. Have any kind of larger socio-political movements/citizens’ call for justice have had ramifications for CR in India? What is the root of the need for such a medium in India?

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6

325

326 

APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE—INDIA

The Policymaking Process Organisational/Individual Functioning 1. What is the role played by your organisation, with respect to CR in India? 2. What is your organisation’s view of the policies governing CR in India? 3. It has been more than a decade since the 1st policy that allowed educational institutions to broadcast, and eight years since the policy allowing NGOs as well, to broadcast. How has the policy been operationalised in the country? 4. In your individual capacity, what kind of role have you played? How has it fed into your organisation’s role, and the larger CR sector? 5. Who are the key actors your organisation and you deal with, wrt to CR? 6. What kind of activities does the CR sector see, in India? What roles do the many actors, including your organisation, play? 7. How do you view the process of licensing/criteria for approval or disapproval of licensing in the operationalisation of the policy? (refer to the hesitation in approving applications from ‘disturbed areas’) What are your views on the same? Actor-Specific Questions Formal Actors (MIB, MoCIT, MHA, FCRA) 1. What is the broadcast policymaking process like, in India? (roles of various ministries, inter-ministerial negotiations, comprehensive policy formulations) 2. What are the challenges/roadblocks in the process? Should anything be done differently? 3. How do you perceive non-governmental actors? What kind of role do they play? How often does your ministry interact with them, and at what levels? (this helps understand government perspective on how policymaking should happen—is it proactive and government-­ driven or reactive and negotiated?) 4. What is your view of the CR sector in India, and the policies that govern CR? (to gauge views on importance of citizen’s broadcasting; views on the efficiency and appropriateness of, or challenges

  APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE—INDIA 

327

and lacunae in current policy; value systems that govern functioning of the ministry) 5. How do you perceive the various actors in the civil society, lobbying and advocating for CR? What are the issues they primary highlight and what is your opinion on each of them? What kind of expectations do you have of them? How important are they to the process of policymaking? 6. What do you make of the role of international/intergovernmental organisations in the arena of CR policymaking? What kind of role do they play and what are the specific inputs they offer the Ministry? Where does their role end in terms of working with the government? How important are they to the process of policymaking? 7. Who else is involved in the policymaking process? (since CR is to do with the grassroots/citizens, do their experiences in any way feed into the policymaking process?) MHA, MoCIT, FCRA: What are the areas of concern when it comes to CR licensing and broadcasting (within the purview of the work of MHA/MoCIT/FCRA Dept)? What kind of measures does the Ministry/ Department take in this regard? How does the Ministry/Department work with the MIB to convey its ideas—what is the process like? CR Bodies in India (CRF, CRA) 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the CR sector in India, and the operational policy? 3. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 4. What kind of approach/role do international bodies operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 5. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 6. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 7. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in India?

328 

APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE—INDIA

8. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in India? 9. What are the biggest challenges for CR in India? At the policy level, how can this be addressed? International/Multilateral Organisations 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the CR sector in India, and the operational policy? 3. How do you draw on international CR policies, definitions, and values (like democratisation, participation, etc.) in your work on CR in India? 4. Does your organisation have a centralised approach towards this? (to see how visions for CR are formulated by these international organisations and how they are then operationalised in a country-­ specific manner) 5. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same (to gauge perceptions of role and values)? What is your method in working with the government (to understand pushes and pulls)? 6. What kind of approach/role do CR-centred organisations operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 7. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 8. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 9. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in India? 10. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in India? 11. What are the biggest challenges for CR in India? At the policy level, how can this be addressed?

  APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE—INDIA 

329

Researchers and Observers 1. How long have you been studying the CR sector in India? 2. How does it compare to CR sectors in other countries? (if the observer has been involved in studying other countries) 3. Could you share your observations on the larger media scenario in India, and the trajectories it has taken over the last two decades? 4. How does CR feature in India’s media landscape? 5. What, in your opinion, are the key milestones in the path taken by CR in India? 6. What, in your opinion, are the key shifts in the path taken by policies governing CR in India? 7. What is your evaluation of the current policy scenario wrt CR in India? (efficiency, challenges) 8. Who are the key actors instrumental in giving shape to the CR scenario, at large, and specifically, the policy environment, in India? 9. What are their respective motivations? 10. How do you evaluate each of their roles? 11. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in India? 12. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in India? (if the observer has knowledge and/or has worked on this)  edia and Technology Law Experts (Collect Policy Documents, M and Reviews/Critiques/Key Works on Them) (A)  IPR and Copyright

(B)  IT and digitisation

(C) Spectrum

(a) What are India’s laws around this? (b) How do they impact broadcasting policies in India? ( c) How do they impact policies around CR in India? (evaluation of the extent of impact, positive and negative impact, with ­examples/cases)

330 

APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE—INDIA

Case Studies CR Stations That Have Implemented the National Policy at the Station Level Experiences around receiving the license, annual taxes, and other operational aspects 1. What is your view of the policy governing CR in India? (efficiency, challenges) 2. Is there any ambiguity/problem with understanding the national policy? 3. How do you implement this policy at your station? 4. Are there instances where you have circumvented the national policy? Why? 5. Experiences wrt spectrum allocation 6. Experiences wrt copyright of content produced 7. Experiences wrt online streaming—IT laws, if any? Content downloading and copyright? 8. Are you part of any CR body in India? If yes, what kind of role do you play? 9. Does your station network with other people’s movements? How do you intertwine that with CR? 10. What are the biggest challenges for CR in India? At the policy level, how can this be addressed?  R Stations That Have Been Denied Licenses/Have Operated as a Space C for Restoring Human Security

Appendix D: Interview Guide—Bangladesh

The Larger Context 1. How has the media scene changed over the last 2 decades, corresponding to changes in the economic and political scenarios in the country? (allude to shifts in political power and economic policies— the Caretaker government, military coups, the Khaleda Zia-Sheikh Hasina dynamics) 2. How have media policies changed as a result of these political and economic shifts? (allude to the liberalisation of the television sector before the radio sector, among other things) 3. What is the current situation and where is it headed? 4. Over the last 2 decades, who are the main actors involved in the media policy space? (to arrive at answers for whether there exist coherent media policies in Bangladesh, including the ones that are remnants of the British era; also to decode the discourses that drive them) 5. How did CR emerge as a key component of the media landscape of Bangladesh? Who were the key actors involved and what kind of values/justifications did they draw upon? 6. How important is the idea of ‘development’, when seen in the context of the media? Is it, and if yes, how is it invoked in media policies?

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6

331

332 

APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW GUIDE—BANGLADESH

7. How did changes in political power, especially around 2008–2009 impact the CR sector?

The Policymaking Process Organisational/Individual Functioning 1. What is the role played by your organisation, with respect to CR in Bangladesh? 2. What is your organisation’s view of the progress made in the CR policymaking and implementation (especially the latter), in Bangladesh? 3. Could you name some of the driving forces in the CR policy lobbying and advocacy space in Bangladesh? 4. In your individual capacity, what kind of role have you played? How has it fed into your organisation’s role and the larger CR sector? 5. Who are the key actors your organisation and you deal with, wrt to CR? 6. What kind of activities does the CR sector see, in Bangladesh? What roles do the many actors, including your organisation, play? 7. How does CR operate in sensitive areas—disaster-prone areas, regions like the Chittagong Hill Tracts that have groups like the Chakmas, the areas bordering Myanmar with Rohingya refugees (could bring in experiences from the visit to Chittagong here)? 8. How does CR address issues of development? (could allude to issues around cheap labour—garment sweatshops, among other things) Actor-Specific Questions Formal Actors (will be made specific to officials in each of the ministries and will be adapted according to on-ground political situation, e.g. if there is an impending shift in political power): 1. What is the broadcast policymaking process like, in Bangladesh? (roles of various ministries, inter-ministerial negotiations, comprehensive policy formulations)

  APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW GUIDE—BANGLADESH 

333

2. What are the challenges/roadblocks in the process? Should anything be done differently? 3. How do you perceive non-governmental actors? What kind of role do they play? How often does your ministry interact with them, and at what levels? 4. What is your view of the CR sector in Bangladesh, and the policies that govern CR? (To gauge views on importance of citizen’s broadcasting; views on the efficiency and appropriateness of, or ­ challenges and lacunae in current policy; value systems that govern functioning of the ministry) 5. How has the media’s role and involvement shifted in the past, with changes in political power? 6. What are the major challenges that the CR sector encounters in Bangladesh? Are there any challenges emanating from the larger social, political, economic, cultural contexts in Bangladesh? 7. How does the government approach CR in such situations? How should CR function in such situations, in your opinion? CR Bodies in Bangladesh 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the CR sector in Bangladesh and the operational policy? 3. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 4. What kind of approach/role do international bodies operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 5. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 6. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 7. Bangladesh is one of the two countries in South Asia that boasts of a specific policy for CR. How has India’s CR scene influenced the scene in Bangladesh? (look for early experiences)

334 

APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW GUIDE—BANGLADESH

8. The allocation of licenses in Bangladesh follows a peculiar pattern—it is conducted in a phased manner (recent allocation of licenses to 16 stations). How did this come about in Bangladesh and what is your evaluation of this kind of development of the CR sector? 9. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Bangladesh? 10. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Bangladesh? 11. What are the major challenges that the CR sector encounters in Bangladesh? Are there any challenges emanating from the larger social, political, economic, cultural contexts in Bangladesh? 12. How does your organisation approach CR in such situations? How should CR function in such situations, in your opinion? International/Multilateral Organisations 1. How does your organisation engage with the government? (activities, advocacy plan, various venues for interaction, frequency of interaction) 2. What is your perception of the CR sector in Bangladesh and the operational policy? 3. How do you draw on international CR policies, definitions, and values (like development, information dissemination, democratisation, participation, etc.) in your work on CR in Bangladesh? 4. Does your organisation have a centralised approach towards this? (to see how visions for CR are formulated by these international organisations and how they are then operationalised in a country-­ specific manner) 5. What kind of approach/role does the government have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values) 6. What kind of approach/role do CR-centred organisations operating in the CR sector have, and what is your evaluation of the same? (to gauge perceptions of role and values)

  APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW GUIDE—BANGLADESH 

335

7. How does your work differ from the other actors’? (organisation-­ specific details) 8. What do you make of the current scenario wrt policy governing CR, and what are your aspirations for the same? 9. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Bangladesh? 10. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Bangladesh? 11. Do you think CR in Bangladesh has received impetus from a particular kind of politics in Bangladesh (read Awami League’s)? Would there be any change in the way it is perceived or the way it functions, when there is change in political power? 12. How important a buzz-word is ‘Development’, in the context of Bangladesh? Do you think CR has a role to play there? 13. What is your view of the economic policies introduced by, say, the IMF, in Bangladesh? How does that alter the course of ‘development’? 14. What kind of a role does CR play in the face of disasters in Bangladesh? Has your organisation been involved in rehabilitation efforts at any point, and do you have any experiences of deploying CR in the same? Researchers and Observers 1. How long have you been studying the CR sector in Bangladesh? 2. How does it compare to CR sectors in other countries? (if the observer has been involved in studying other countries) 3. Could you share your observations on the larger media scenario in Bangladesh, and the trajectories it has taken over the last two decades? 4. How does CR feature in Bangladesh’s media landscape? 5. What, in your opinion, are the key milestones in the path taken by CR in Bangladesh? 6. What, in your opinion, are the key shifts in the path taken by policies governing CR in Bangladesh?

336 

APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW GUIDE—BANGLADESH

7. What is your evaluation of the current policy scenario wrt CR in Bangladesh? (efficiency, challenges) 8. Who are the key actors instrumental in giving shape to the CR scenario, at large, and specifically, the policy environment, in Bangladesh? 9. What are their respective motivations? 10. How do you evaluate each of their roles? 11. How do you think the other media policies (IPR/Copyright, Telecommunication, IT, and Digitisation) impact policies governing CR in Bangladesh? 12. Have there been any efforts/activities around these media policies, and how they influence policies around and the functioning of CR in Bangladesh? (if the observer has knowledge and/or has worked on this) 13. In the last four years of CR’s development in Bangladesh, how have stations functioned? 14. In the face of the ongoing frictions (get them to arrive at and explain the various ‘conflicts’) in Bangladesh, do you think any of the CRs have been impacted or have had an impact in some day? (look for station experiences/work that stand out) 15. With respect to such situations, do you think CR policy implementation has been affected in any way? How should CR function, in your opinion?  edia and Technology Law Experts (Collect Policy Documents, M and Reviews/Critiques/Key Works on Them) (A)  IPR and Copyright

(B)  IT and digitisation

(C) Spectrum

(a) What are Bangladesh’s laws around this? (b) How do they impact broadcasting policies in Bangladesh? (c) How do they impact policies around CR in Bangladesh? (evaluation of the extent of impact, positive and negative impact, with examples/cases)

  APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW GUIDE—BANGLADESH 

337

Case Studies CR Stations That Have Implemented the National Policy at the Station Level 1. Experiences around receiving the license, annual taxes, and other operational aspects 2. What is your view of the policy governing CR in Bangladesh? (efficiency, challenges) 3. Wrt the current political shifts, is there any ambiguity/problem with understanding the national policy? 4. How do you implement this policy at your station? 5. Do you think there are any problematic clauses in the national CR policy? 6. Are there instances where you have circumvented the national policy? Why? 7. What is your opinion on the way in which CR license allocation and their setting up have been conducted in a phased manner? Is this the way to go? (probe for any experiences of groups that may have wanted to start a station but had to contend with the phased manner of allocation) 8. (Depending on the response) How do you think policy/policy implementation should be tweaked? Do you have any suggestions based on your station’s experience? 9. Experiences wrt spectrum allocation 10. Experiences wrt copyright of content produced 11. Experiences wrt online streaming—IT laws, if any? Content downloading and copyright? 12. Are you part of any CR body in Bangladesh? If yes, what kind of role do you play? 13. How does your station deal with groups like the Chakmas (for Sagorgiri in Chittagong)—What kind of content did you air? Did

338 

Appendix D: Interview Guide—Bangladesh

your face any problems with censorship? How did your community respond to your CR? 14. Do you think a change in the political scenario will impact CR stations like yours? If yes, in what way? Contact Groups That May Had Have Differential Experiences

Bibliography

Aabenhus, O., & Jayaweera, W. (1985). The MCR Workbook: A Summary of Experiences in Community Radio for Rural Development. Colombo: Mahaweli Community Radio. Achterberg, W. (2001). Association and deliberation in risk society: Two faces of ecological democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 4(1), 85–104. Adhikari, D. (2004). A Nepali Quest for Journalistic Professionalism: The Public Life of Bharat Dutta Koirala. Columbia: University of Missouri. Adeney, K., & Wyatt, A. (2004). Democracy in South Asia: Getting beyond the Structure–Agency Dichotomy. Political Studies, 52(1), 1–18.Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (1993/1944). The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception. In Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Continuum. Originally published as Dialektik der Aufklarung. Agrawal, B. (1978). Television Comes to Village: An Evaluation of SITE. Ahmedabad: Space Applications Centre. Ahmed, I. (2002). Governance and IDC: Bangladesh Experience. In H. A. Hye (Ed.), Governance: South Asian Perspectives. New Delhi: Manohar. Alam, R. (2008). Military-Media Relations in Bangladesh: 1975–1990. Washington, DC: World Bank.

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6

339

340 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alhassan, A., & Chakravartty, P. (2011). Postcolonial Media Policy Under the Long Shadow of Empire. In R.  Mansell & M.  Raboy (Eds.), Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. AMARC. (1988). Charter of Community and Citizen Radio Broadcasting. AMARC. (2007). Community Radio Impact Evaluation. Andriole, S.  J., Wilkenfelf, J., & Hopple, G. (1975). A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Foreign Policy Behavior. International Studies Quarterly, 19(2), 160–198. Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy. In M.  Featherstone (Ed.), Global Culture: Globalization, Nationalism and Modernity. London: Sage. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Area-Based Growth With Equity Programme (ABGEP). (2000). (Project SRL/971101). Colombo: UNDP. Arino, M. V. (2008). Nepal: A Gender View of the Armed Conflict and the Peace Process. Quaderns de Construccio de Pau. Asthana, S. (2019). India’s State-run Media: Boradcasting, Power, and Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Atton, C. (2002). Alternative Media. London: Sage Publications. Atton, C. (Ed.). (2015). The Routledge Companion to Alternative and Community Media. Routledge. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to Do Things with Words. Clarendon Press. Avery, T. (2006). Radio Modernism: Literature, Ethics, and the BBC, 1922–1938. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing House. Axford, B. (2013). Theories of Globalization. Polity Press. Bagdikian, B. (1992). The Media Monopoly. Boston: Beacon Press. Bailey, O. (2007). Four Approaches to Alternative Media. In O.  Bailey, B.  Cammaerts, & N.  Carpentier (Eds.), Understanding Alternative Media. New York: Open University Press. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (M. Holquist, Ed., C.  Emerson & M.  Holquist, Trans.). Austin and London: University of Texas Press. Baldock, J., Mittion, L., Manning, N., & Vickerstaff, S. (Eds.). (1999). Social Policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Bandyopadhyay, S. (2015). From Plassey to Partition and After: A History of Modern India. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Banerjee, I., & Logan, S. (2008). Asian Communication Handbook 2008. Asian Media Information and Communication Centre, and Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information. Nanyang Technological University. Baruah, U. C. (1983). This is All India Radio: A Handbook of Radio Broadcasting in India. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

341

Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage. Bendix, R. (1963). Concepts and Generalizations in Comparative Sociological Studies. American Sociological Review, 28(4), 532–539. Benhabib, S. (1996). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Benhabib, S. (2002). The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bereday, G. (1964). Comparative Method in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Berger, S. (1996). The Rise and Fall of “Critical” Historiography? Some Reflections on the Historiographical Agenda of the Left in Britain, France and Germany at the End of the Twentieth Century. European Review of History: Revue Européenne D’histoire, 3(2), 213–232. Best, J. (Ed.). (1989). Images of Issues: Typifying Contemporary Social Problems. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1997). The Postmodern Turn. New York: The Guilford Press. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhabha, H. K. (1994a). Frontlines/Borderposts. Displacements: Cultural Identities in Question. A.  Bammer (Vol. 15, pp.  269–272). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Bhambra, G.  K. (2010). Sociology after Postcolonialism: Provincialized Cosmopolitanism and Connected Sociologies. In M.  Boatcă, S.  Costa, & E.  Gutiérrez-Rodrıǵuez (Eds.), Decolonizing European Sociology: Trans-­ disciplinary Approaches (pp. 33–47). Aldershot: Ashgate. Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Introduction. Connected Sociologies (pp. 1–16). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Bloomsbury Collections. Bhandari, S. (2014). Self-Determination & Constitution Making in Nepal: Constituent Assembly, Inclusion, and Ethnic Federalism. Singapore: Springer. Bhattarai, H.  P. (2007). Nepal. In D.  Mendis (Ed.), Electoral Processes and Governance in South Asia. London: Sage Publications. Blaney, D., & Inayatullah, N. (2002a). Relations and the Problem of Difference. London: Routledge. Blaney, D., & Inayatullah, N. (2002b). Neo-Modernization? IR and the Inner Life of Modernization Theory. European Journal of International Relations, 8(1), 103–137. Blumler, J., & Gurevitch, M. (1995). Towards a Comparative Framework for Political Communication Research. In J. Blumler & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), The Crisis of Public Communication. New York: Routledge. Bohman, J. (1996). Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press. Bohman, J. (1998). Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(4), 400–425.

342 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bohman, J. (2006). Deliberative Democracy and the Epistemic Benefits of Diversity. Episteme, 3(3), 175–191. Bohman, J. (2007). Democracy across Borders: From Dêmos to Dêmoi. MIT Press. Bourdieu, P. (1993). The Field of Cultural Production. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boycoff, M., McNatt, M., & Goodman, M. (2013). Communicating in the Anthropocene: The Cultural Politics of Climate Change News Coverage Around the World. Human Environments Research Group (HERG) Working Paper Series. Department of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Reading. Brady, L. (2005). Colonials, Bourgeoisies and Media Dynasties: A Case Study of Sri Lankan Media. eJournalist, 5(2), 2. Braman, S. (2004). Where has Media Policy Gone? Defining the Field in the Twenty-First Century. Communication Law and Policy, 9(2), 153–182. Braman, S. (2009a). Change of State: Information, Policy, and Power. Cambridge: MIT Press. Braman, S. (2009b). Globalising Media Law and Policy. In D.  Thussu (Ed.), Internationalising Media Studies. London: Routledge. Brayne, F. L. (1929). The Remaking of Village India. Oxford University Press. Brewer, J. (2010). Microhistory and the Histories of Everyday Life. Cultural and Social History, 7(1), 87–109. Brewer, C. (2014). Historicizing in Critical Policy Analysis: The Production of Cultural Histories and Microhistories. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(3), 273–288. Briggs, A. (1961). The History of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom, Vol. 1: The Birth of Broadcasting. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Briggs, A. (1985). The BBC: The First Fifty Years. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond Identity. Theory and Society, 29(1), 1–47. Buckley, S. (2000). Radio’s New Horizons: Democracy and Popular Communication in the Digital Age. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 3(2), 180–187. Buckley, S. (2009). Third Pillar of Media Pluralism: Community Broadcasting in the UK and Europe, LSE. Buckley, S., Duer, K., Mendel, T., O’Siochru, S., Price, M., & Raboy, M. (2008). Accountability Policy, Law, and Regulation. Washington, DC: World Bank. Calabrese, A. (2004). The Promise of Civil Society: A Global Movement for Communication Rights. Continuum, 18(3), 317–329. Carpentier, N. (2007). Expanding Community Media Beyond the Confinements of Locality. Trans-localism and the Growth of the Communicative Rhizome,

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

343

Media and Change. In E.  Vartanova (Ed.), The Media and Changes. Moscow: MediaMir. Carpentier, N. (2011). Policy’s Hubris: Power, Fantasy, and the Limits of (Global) Media Policy Interventions. In R. Mansell & M. Raboy (Eds.), Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society, Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture (Vol. I). Oxford: Blackwell. Castells, M. (2010). The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance. In D.  Thussu (Ed.), International Communication: A Reader. London: Routledge. Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chakravartty, P., & Sarikakis, K. (2006). Media Policy and Globalization. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Chambers, S. (2009). Rhetoric and the Public Sphere: Has Deliberative Democracy Abandoned Mass Democracy? Political Theory, 37(3), 323–350. Chanda Committee Report. (1966). Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Government of India. Chandhoke, N. (2003). The Conceits of Civil Society. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage Publications. Chatterjee, P. C. (1987). Broadcasting in India. New Delhi: Sage. Chatterjee, P. (1993). The Nation and Its Fragments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chatterjee, P. (2011). Lineages of Political Society: Studies in Postcolonial Democracy. Columbia University Press. Chenes, M. D. (1993). Soldiers, Sovereignty and Silences: Gorkhas as Diplomatic Currency. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 13(1, 2), 67–80. Chitnis, E. V., & Karnik, K. S. (1985). The Message and the Experience of the SITE Project. Acta Astronautica, 12(4), 269–275. Choudhry, S. (2008). Constitutional Design for Divided Societies: Integration Or Accommodation? New York: University Press. Choudhry, S. (2010). Bridging Comparative Politics and Comparative Constitutional Law: Constitutional Design in Divided Societies. (Eds.) Constitutional Design for Divided Societies: Integration or Accommodation? Oxford University Press, pp. 4–5 Cohen, D. R., Coyle, M., & Lewty, J. (2009). Broadcasting Modernism. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

344 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Collier, R. B., & Collier, D. (1991). Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Collins, A. (Ed.) Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford University Press. Community Radio India. Retrieved March 31, 2013, from communityradioindia.org COMPASS (Consortium on Media Policy Studies). (2017). About Us. Retrieved from http://compassconsortium.org/ Costoya, Manuel. (2007). Toward a Typology of Civil Society Actors: The Case of the Movement to Change International Trade Rules and Barriers. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Civil Society and Social Movements Programme, Paper No. 30. Couldry, N. (2010). Why Voice Matters: Culture and Politics After Neoliberalism. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. Coyer, K. (2006). Community Radio Licensing and Policy. Global Media and Communication, 2(1), 129–134. Coyer, K., Dowmunt, T., & Fountain, A. (2007). The Alternative Media Handbook. New York: Routledge. Crack, A.  M. (2008). Contending Theories of Transnational Public Spheres: Propositions for an Alternative Analytical Framework. In Global Communication and Transnational Public Spheres (Palgrave Macmillan Series in International Political Communication). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Cross, M.  D. (2013). Rethinking Epistemic Communities Twenty Years Later. Review of International Studies, 39(1), 137–160. Crusz, N. (1998). Livy’s Golden Years on Radio. Island. Retrieved from http:// www.rootsweb.com/~lkawgw/livy.html Curran, J., & Park, M.-J. (Eds.). (2000). De-Westernizing Media Studies (Communication and Society). London: Routledge. Dahal, D.  R. (2010). Post-conflict Peace Building in Nepal: Challenges and Opportunities. Paper presented at a training organized by Nepal Administrative Staff College for Joint Secretaries of Various Ministries on June 20, 2010. Dahal, S., & Aram, A. (2011). Crafting a Community Radio ‘Friendly’ Broadcast Policy in Nepal. Observatorio (OBS*) Journal, 5(4), 45. Dahlgren, P. (2015). (Book Review) The Global Public Sphere: Public Communication in the Age of Reflective Interdependence. Information, Communication and Society, 18(12), 1423–1425. de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. (S. Rendall, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press. de Certeau, M. (1988). The Writing of History. (T. Conley, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

345

Des Chene, M. (1993). Soldiers, Sovereignty and Silences: Gorkhas as Diplomatic Currency. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 13(1, 2), 67–80. Deuze, M. (2006). Ethnic Media, Community Media and Participatory Culture. Journalism, 7(3), 262–280. Dingli, S. (2015). We Need to Talk about Silence: Re-examining Silence in International Relations Theory. European Journal of International Relations, 21(4), 721–742. Dirks, N. (2008). The Scandal of Empire: India and the Creation of Imperial Britain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW). Expert Group Meeting on “Participation and access of women to the media, and the impact of media on, and its use as an instrument for the advancement and empowerment of women”, Beirut, Lebanon. Dolowitz, D. P., & Marsh, D. (1996). Who Learns What from Whom? A Review of the Policy Transfer Literature. Political Studies, 44(2), 343–357. Downing, J. (1984). Radical Media: The Political Experience of Alternative Communication. The South End Press. Downing, J. (2001). Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social Movements. New York: Sage. Downs, A. (1962). The Public Interest: Its Meaning in a Democracy. Social Research, 29(1), 1–36. Dryzek, J. (1994). Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge University Press. Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford University Press. Dryzek, J. (2010). Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Democracy. Oxford University Press. Dunlop, C. (2002). Epistemic Communities: A Reply to Toke. Politics, 20(3), 137–144. Durkheim, E. (1965). The Rules of Sociological Method. New York: Free Press. Ebbesen, K. (1975). Radio Access: The Danish Approach. Journal of Broadcasting, 19(3), 355–362. Elliott, P. W. (2010). Another Radio is Possible: Thai Community Radio from the Grass Roots to the Global. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 8(1). Elstub, S. (2008). Towards a Deliberative and Associational Democracy. Edinburgh University Press. Elstub, S. (2010). The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy. Political Science Review, 8(3), 291–307.

346 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Elstub, S., Ercan, S., & Mendonça, R.  F. (2016). Editorial Introduction: The Fourth Generation of Deliberative Democracy. Critical Policy Studies, 10(2), 139–151. Escobar, A. (1993). The Limits of Reflexivity: Politics in Anthropology’s Postwriting Culture Era. Journal of Anthropological Research, 49, 377–391. Escobar, O. (2015). Scripting Deliberative Policy-Making: Dramaturgic Policy Analysis and Engagement Know-How. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 17(3), 269–285. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Esping-Andersen, G., & Regini, M. (Eds.). (2000). Why Deregulate Labour Markets. New York: Oxford University Press. Etzioni, A. (2008). The Unique Methodology of Policy Research. In R. E. Goodin, M. Moran, & M. Rein (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Evans, M. (2009). Policy Transfer in Critical Perspective. Policy Studies, 3, 243–268. Feick, J. (1992). Comparing Comparative Policy Studies—A Path Towards Integration? Journal of Public Policy, 12(3), 257–285. Fielden, L. (1939). Report on the Progress of Broadcasting in India. The Government Of India Press. Fielden, L. (1960). The Natural Bent. London Andre Deutsch. Fischer, F. (1995). Evaluating Public Policy. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (Eds.). (1993). The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. Durham & London: Duke University Press. Fishkin, J. (1995). The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy. Yale University Press. Fleck, L. (1981). Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Originally published in German in 1935). Flew, T. (2020). Globalization, Neo-globalization and Post-globalization: The Challenge of Populism and the Return of the National. Global Media and Communication, 16(1). Forst, R. (2011). The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice. New York: Columbia University Press. Foweraker, J. (1995). Theorizing Social Movements. Pluto Press. Foweraker, J. (2001). Grassroots Movements, Political Activism and Social Development in Latin America: A Comparison of Chile and Brazil. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD): Civil Society and Social Movements Programme Paper, Vol. 4. Franzese, R., Jr. (2007). Context Matters: The Challenge of Multicausality, Context-Conditionality, and Endogeneity for Empirical Evaluation of Positive Theory in Comparative Politics. In C. Boix & S. C. Stokes (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

347

Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56–80. Fraser, N. (2007). Transnational Public Sphere: Transnationalizing the Public Sphere: On the Legitimacy and Efficacy of Public Opinion in a Post-Westphalian World. Theory Culture & Society, 24(4), 7–30. Freedman, D. (2008a). The Politics of Media Policy. Polity Press. Freedman, D. (2008b). Theorising Media Policy. Paper presented to the Media, Communication and Humanity Conference, LSE, 21–23 September 2008. Freedman, D. (2010). Media Policy Silences: The Hidden Face of Communications Decision Making. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 15(3), 344–361. Freedman, D. (2014). Media Policy Research and the Media Industries. Media Industries, 1(1), 11–15. Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The Economics of Industrial Innovation. London: Pinter Publishers. Funke, P. (2014). Building Rhizomatic Social Movements? Movement-Building Relays during the Current Epoch of Contention. Studies in Social Justice, 8(1), 27–44. Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, Peace, and Peace Research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167–191. Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural Violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27(3), 291–305. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. London: Sage Publications. Gayen, K. (2012). Community Radio in Bangladesh: The Policy and the Spirit. Media Asia, 39(1), 32–39. Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Genilo, J., Bhowmick, B., & Shoesmith, B. (2013). Radio in Bangladesh: Growth, Decline and Transformation. In B. Shoesmith & J. Genilo (Eds.), Bangladesh’s Changing Mediascape: From State Control to Market Forces. Chicago: Intellect. George, J., & Campbell, D. (1990). Patterns of Dissent and Celebration of Difference: Critical Social Theory and International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 34(3), 269–294. Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books. Ginzburg, C. (1980). The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Girard, B. (1992). A Passion for Radio: Radio Waves and Community. Montreal: Black Rose Books. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Gofas, A., & Hay, C. (Eds.). (2010). The Role of Ideas in Political Analysis: A Portrait of Contemporary Debates. Routledge. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Doubleday.

348 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gottweis, H. (2003). Theoretical Strategies of Poststructuralist Policy Analysis: Towards an Analytics of Government. In M. A. Hajer & H. Wagenaar (Eds.), Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gudavarthy, A. (2013). Politics of Post-Civil Society: Contemporary History of Political Movements in India. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Guillame, X. (2013a). The Sound of Silence: Voice, Security and the Mundane. IR Research in Progress Seminars, Sussex University, 7 October. Retrieved from https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=guillaume-7oct.pdf&site=12 Guillame, X. (2013b). Historicizing the International. E-International Relations. Gupta, P. S. (2002). Power, Politics and the People: Studies in British Imperialism and Indian Nationalism. London: Anthem Press. Gupta, D. (2019). The Raj in Radio Wars. Media History, 25(4), 414–429. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Haas, P. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization, 46(1) Knowledge, Power, and International Policy Coordination. 1–35. Habermas, J. (1996/1992). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. (W.  Rehg, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 1). London: Heinemann. Habermas, J. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 2). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Habermas, J. (1988). On the Logic of the Social Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Hachhethu, K., Kumar, S., & Subedi, J. (2008). Nepal in Transition: A Study on the State of Democracy. Stockholm: International IDEA. Hachhethu, K. (2007). Legitimacy Crisis of Nepali Monarchy. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(20), 1828–1833. Hage, G. (2005). A Not So Multi-sited Ethnography of a Not So Imagined Community. Anthropological Theory, 5(4), 463–475. Hajer, M.  A., & Wagenaar, H. (Eds.). (2003). Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. New  York: Cambridge University Press. Hajer, M. (1995). The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

349

Hale, J. (1975). Radio Power: Propaganda and International Broadcasting. London: Paul Elek. Hall, S. (1997). The Work of Representation. In S.  Hall (Ed.), Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London: Sage Publications. Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The Population Ecology of Organisations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964. Hannerz, U. (2003). Being There... and There... and There!: Reflections on Multi-Site Ethnography. Ethnography, 4(2), 201–216. Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Haque, S. (1997). Incongruity between Bureaucracy and Society in Developing Countries: A Critique. Peace and Change, 22(4), 432–462. Haque, S. (2002). The Changing Balance of Power between the Government and NGOs in Bangladesh. International Political Science Review, 23(4), 411–435. Hayek, F. (1952). The Sensory Order: An Inquiry into the Foundations of Theoretical Psychology. The University of Chicago Press. Hearn, G. N., & Foth, M. (2007). Communicative Ecologies: Editorial Preface. Electronic Journal of Communication, 17(1–2), 2–6. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon. Herman, E. S., & McChesney, R. (1997). Global Media: The New Missionaries of Global Capitalism. A&C Black. Herzfeld, M. (2002). The Absence Presence: Discourses of Crypto-Colonialism. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(4), 899–926. Hettige, S. (2010). Youth and Political Engagement in Sri Lanka. In D. Gellner (Ed.), Varieties of Activist Experience: Civil Society in South Asia. Governance, Conflict, and Civic Action: Volume 3. London: Sage Publications. Heynen, N., & Van Sant, L. (2015). Political Ecologies of Activism and Direct Action Politics. In T. Perrault et al. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. New York: Routledge. Highmore, B. (2001). Obligation to the Ordinary: Michel de Certeau, Ethnography and Ethics. Strategies, 14(2), 253–263. Hintz, A. (2011). From Media Niche to Policy Spotlight: Mapping Community-­ Media Policy Change in Latin America. Canadian Journal of Communication, 36(1), 147–159. Hirsch, E., & Stewart, C. (2005). Introduction: Ethnographies of Historicity. History and Anthropology, 16(3), 261–274. Hitchcock, E. (2011). Making Waves: Admiral Mountbatten’s Radio SEAC 1945–1949. Helion & Company.

350 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hoffman, M. (1991). Restructuring, Reconstruction, Reinscription, Rearticulation: Four Voices in Critical International Theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 20(2), 169–185. Holloway, R. (1998). Supporting Citizens’ Initiatives: Bangladesh’s NGOs and Civil Society. Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press. Holstein, J., & Gubrium, J. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of Constructionist Research. New York: The Guilford Press. Holton, R. (2005). Making Globalisation. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Education. Holquist, M. (1990). Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World. London: Routledge. Holzner, B. (1968). Reality Construction in Society. Cambridge: Schenkman. Honneth, A. (1992). The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. MIT Press. Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or Recognition?: A Political—Philosophical Exchange (co-authored with Nancy Fraser). Verso Press. Horvath, A., Thomassen, B., & Wydra, H. (2015). Breaking Boundaries: Varieties of Liminality. Berghahn Books. Housden, O. (2009). Nepal: A Failing State or a State in Transition. Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies Research Papers. IPCS, New Delhi. Howley, K. (2005). Community Media: People, Places, and Communication Technologies. New York: Cambridge University Press. ICT for Peacebuilding. Retrieved March 30, 2013, from http://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2009/07/29/from-community-radio-to-internet-radiomobiles-and-narrow-casting-new-models-for-enduring-needs/ Ingold, T. (1996). Key Debates in Anthropology. London: Routledge. Innis, H. (1950). Empire and Communications. Oxford: Clarendon Press. INTRAC. (2012). Deepening Democracy: A Strategy for Improving the Integrity of Elections Worldwide. Kofi Annan Foundation. Iosifidis, P. (2011). Global Media and Communication Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Jabri, V. (2007). War and the Transformation of Global Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Javuru, K. (2011). Community Radio in East Africa; For or by the community? In J.  Gordon (Ed.), Community Radio in the Twenty First Century. Oxford: Peter Lang. Jayaratne, T., & De Silva, S. (2012). Media Policy and Law in Sri Lanka—Part II: The Political Economy of the Electronic Media in Sri Lanka. Law and Society Trust, 22, 293–294. Jayaratne, et  al. (2007). Legal Challenges and Practical Constraints: A Comprehensive Study of ‘Community Radio’ in Sri Lanka, Colombo: Law and Society Trust.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

351

Jeffrey, R. (2006). The Mahatma Didn’t like the Movies and Why It Matters: Indian Broadcasting Policy, 1920s–1990s. Global Media and Communication, 2(2), 204–224. Jenkins, R. (2001). Mistaking ‘Governance’ for ‘Politics’. In S.  Kaviraj & S. Khilnani (Eds.), Civil Society: History and Possibilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jha, C., & Vienings, T. (2004). Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment. Canadian International Development Agency. Jodhka, S., & Prakash, A. (2016). The Indian Middle Class. Oxford University Press. Jordheim, H. (2012). Against Periodization: Koselleck’s Theory of Multiple Temporalities. History and Theory, 51(2), 151–171. Joseph, A. (2002). Working, Watching and Waiting. Women and Issues of Access, Employment and Decision-Making in the Media in India. United Nations. Kantha, P. (2008). Nepal’s Protracted Democratization in Terms of Modes of Transition. Himalaya, 28(1–2), 59–70. Karim, L. (2001). Politics of the Poor? NGOs and Grass Roots Political Mobilization in Bangladesh. Polar, 24(1), 93–107. Karim, L. (2004). Democratizing Bangladesh: State, NGOs, and Militant Islam. Cultural Dynamics, 16(2/3), 291–318. Karunanayake, N. (1990). Broadcasting in Sri Lanka: Potential and Performance. Centre for Media and Policy Studies. Kaul, C. (2014). Communications, Media and the Imperial Experience. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Kaul, C. (2016). News of the Imperial World: Popular Print Culture, the News of the World and India in the late Nineteenth Century. In L. Brake, C. Kaul, & M. W. Turner (Eds.), The News of the World and the British Press, 1843–2011. Palgrave Studies in the History of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Cornell University Press. Kennett, P. (Ed.). (2001). Comparative Social Policy: Theory and Research. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Kennett, P. (Ed.). (2004). A Handbook of Comparative Social Policy. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Kerr, D. (2002). Orwell’s BBC Broadcasts: Colonial Discourse and the Rhetoric of Propaganda. Textual Practice, 16(3), 473–490. Khagram, S., Riker, J., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (2002). Restructuring World Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks, and Norms. University of Minnesota Press. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins Press. Knoblauch, H. (2005). Focused Ethnography. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(3), 44.

352 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kochanek, S. (1993). Patron-Client Politics and Business in Bangladesh. New Delhi: Sage. Kochanek, S. (2000). Governance, Patronage Politics, and Democratic Transition in Bangladesh. Asian Survey, 40(3), 530–550. Kohn, M. (1989). Introduction. In M. L. Kohn (Ed.), Cross-National Research in Sociology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Krishna, S. (1999). Postcolonial Insecurities: India, Sri Lanka, and the Question of Nationhood. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kumar, K. (2003). Mixed Signals: Radio Broadcasting Policy in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(22), 2173–2182. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso. Lapid, Y. (1989). The Third Debate: On the Prospects of International Theory in a Post-positivist Era. International Studies Quarterly, 33(3), 235–254. Larsen, S.  E. (2015). From Comparatism to Comparativity: Comparative Reasoning Reconsidered. Interfaces: A Journal of Medieval European Literatures, 1, 318–347. Lather, P. (2006). Foucauldian Scientificity: Rethinking the Nexus of Qualitative Research and Educational Policy Analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education., 19, 783–791. Lejano, R., & Park, S. J. (2016). The Autopoietic Text. In F. Fischer et al. (Eds.), Handbook of Critical Policy Studies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Lelyveld, D. (1994). Upon the Subdominant: Administering Music on All-India Radio. Social Text, (39), 111–127. Lewis, D. (2011). Bangladesh: Politics, Economy and Civil Society. New  York: Cambridge University Press. Lewis, D. (2014a). Politics in Bangladesh: No Quick Fixes. South Asia @ LSE, 17 January, Blog. Lewis, D. (2014b). Understanding the Role of Non-government Organizations (NGOs) as Cultural Brokers: A Review of Approaches. Osterreichische Zeitschrift fur Volkskunde, 3, 293–298. List of Regional Radio Stations. Retrieved from www.slbc.lk Litschka, M. (2019). The Political Economy of Media Capabilities: the capability approach in media policy. Journal of Information Policy, 9, 79–110. Livingstone, S. (2003). On the Challenges of Cross-National Comparative Media Research. European Journal of Communication, 18, 477–500. Livingstone, S., Lunt, P., & Miller, L. (2007). Citizens, Consumers and the Citizen-Consumer: Articulating the Citizen Interest in Media and Communications Regulation. Discourse & Communication, 1(1), 63–89.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

353

Ljungman, C., & Thapa, M. (2013). Evaluation of Danish Support to Civil Society. Annex G: Nepal Country Study. DANIDA. http://um.dk/en/~/ media/UM/Danishsite/Documents/Danida/Resultater/ Eval/201301AnnexG.pdf Loftus, A. (2015). Political Ecology as Praxis. In T.  Perreault, G.  Bridge, & J.  McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. London: Routledge. Loomba, A. (2014). Early Modern or Early Colonial? Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies, 14(1), 143–148. Luther, S. (1988). The United States and the Direct Broadcast Satellite: The Politics of International Broadcasting in Space. New York: Oxford University Press. Luthra, H.  R. (1986). Indian Broadcasting. Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Mankekar, P. (1999). Screening Culture, Viewing Politics: An Ethnography of Television, Womanhood, and Nation in Postcolonial India. Duke University Press. Mansbridge, J., et al. (2012). Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. Cambridge University Press. Mansell, R., & Raboy, M. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Manyozo, L. (2012). Media, Communication and Development: Three Approaches. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117. Marston, et  al. (2005). Human Geography without Scale. British Geographical Society, 416–432. Martín-Barbero, J. (1993). Communication, Culture and Hegemony: From Media to Mediation. London: Sage Publications. Martín-Barbero, J. (2001). The Processes: From nationalisms to Transnationalisms. In M.  G. Durham & D.  M. Kellner (Eds.), Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks. Malden: Blackwell. Massey, D. (1999). Power-geometries and the politics of space–time. Heidelberg: Department of Geography, University of Heidelberg. Massey, D. (2005). For Space. London: Sage Publications. McChesney, R. (1993). Telecommunications, Mass Media, and Democracy: The Battle for the Control of U.S.  Broadcasting, 1928–1935. New  York: Oxford University Press. McGuigan, J. (1999). Rethinking Cultural Policy. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. McLaughlin, P. (2001). Toward an Ecology of Social Action: Merging the Ecological and Constructivist Traditions. Human Ecology Review, 8(2), 12–28. McLuhan, M. (1962). Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. University of Toronto Press.

354 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

McQuail, D. (1992). Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: Sage Publications. McQuail, D., & Siune, K. (Eds.). (1986). New Media Politics: Comparative Perspectives in Western Europe. Sage Publications. Melody, W.  H. (1990). Communication Policy in the Global Information Economy: Whither the Public Interest? In M.  Ferguson (Ed.), Public Communication: The New Imperatives. London: Sage. Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age. Cambridge University Press. Mendel, T. (2013). Tuning into development: international comparative survey of community broadcasting regulation. Paris: UNESCO. Meyer, S., & Schulz, N.-S. (2008). Ownership with Adjectives—Donor Harmonisation: Between Effectiveness and Democratisation. Synthesis Report. Fride Working Paper. Mignolo, W., & Escobar, A. (2010). Globalization and the Decolonial Option. Routledge. Mikesell, S., & Shreshta, J. (1990). Mercantilism and Domestic Industry in West-­ Central Nepal: Significance for Anthropological Study of the Community. Occasional Papers in Sociology and Anthropology, 2, 77–89. Mitchell, T. (2002). Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-Politics, Modernity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Mitra, S. K. (2011). Politics in India: Structure, Process, Policy. London: Routledge. Mohammed-Arif, A. (2014). Introduction. Imaginations and Constructions of South Asia: An Enchanting Abstraction? South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal (SAMAJ), 10, 1–27. Moore, A. (2008). Rethinking Scale as a Geographical Category. From Analysis to Practice. Progress in Human Geography, 32(2), 203–225. Moran, M., & Rein, M. (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Mosco, V. (1996). The Political Economy of Communication: Rethinking and Renewal. Mosco, V. (2009). The Political Economy of Communication. 2nd ed.: Sage Publications. Mouffe, C., & Laclau, E. (1992). Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community. Verso. Mutimer, D. (2007). Critical Security Studies: A Schismatic History. In A. Collins (Ed.), Contemporary Security Studies. 4th ed.: Oxford University Press. Mwaura, P. (1980). Communication Policies in Kenya. UNESCO. Napoli, P. (2001). Foundations of Communications Policy: Principles and Process in the Regulation of Electronic Media. New York: Hampton Press. Narman, A., & Vidanapathirana, U. (2005). Transiting from Prolonged Conflict to Post Conflict Development: Locating the Case of Trincomalee District of Sri Lanka. Peace and Democracy in South Asia, 1(1), 13–22.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

355

Nelson, A. (2011). Towards a Post-Crypto-Colonialism: Notes on the Anthropology of Nepal’s Non-Colonial Condition. American Anthropological Association meeting, Montréal, QC. Nijhawan, S. (2016). Hindi, Urdu or Hinustani? Debates through Radio Broadcasting in Late Colonial India. South Asia Research, 36(1), 80–97. Norman, J. (1983). Are the Direct and Indirect Theories of Perception Incompatible? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 729–731. Norman, J. (2002). Two Visual Systems and Two Theories of Perception: An Attempt to Reconcile the Constructivist and Ecological Approaches. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 25, 73–144. Notley, T. (2000). Unpublished Report on the Kothmale Project. Ojha, H. (2006). Techno-Bureaucratic Doxa and the Challenges of Deliberative Governance: The Case of Community Forestry Policy and Practice in Nepal. Policy and Society, 25(2), 131–175. Onta, P. (2005). Radio Journalism: News and Talk Programs in FM. Kathmandu: Martin Chautari. Co-edited volume (in Nepali). Page, D., & Crawley, W. (2001). Satellites over South Asia: Broadcasting, Culture and the Public Interest. London: Sage. Park, S. J. (2013). Opening the Black Box of ICT4D: Advancing Our Understanding of ICT4D Partnerships. Doctoral Dissertation: University of California Irvine. Panday, D. R. (1989). Administrative Development in a Semi-dependency: The Experience of Nepal. Public Administration and Development, 9(3), 315–329. Papanastasiou, N. (2017). How Does Scale Mean? A Critical Approach to Scale in the Study of Policy. Critical Policy Studies, 11(1), 39–56. Parajulee, S. (2007). Seven Decades of Radio Listening in Nepal. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 4(2), 52–67. Pavarala, V. (2003). Building Solidarities: A case of Community Radio in Jharkhand. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(22), 2188–2197. Pavarala, V., & Malik, K.  K. (2007). Other Voices: The Struggle for Community Radio in India. Sage Publications. Pennings, P., Keman, H., & Kleinnijenhuis, J. (2006). Doing Research in Political Science: An Introduction to Comparative Methods and Statistics. London: Sage Publications. Perera, P.  W. S. (1962). Radio Ceylon. International Communication Gazette., 8(3), 255–264. Perrault, T., Bridge, G., & McCarthy, J. (Eds.). (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. London: Routledge. Pickard, V. (2013). “The Air Belongs to the People”: The Rise and Fall of a Postwar Radio Reform Movement. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 30(4), 307–326. Pimlott, H. (2015). Vanguard Media: The Promise of Strategic Communication? In C.  Atton (Ed.), The Routledge of Alternative and Community Media. New York: Routledge.

356 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pinkerton, A. (2008). Radio and the Raj: Broadcasting in British India (1920–1940). Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. Series 3, 18(2), 167–191. Pinto-Jayawardena, K., & Gunetilleke, G. (2012). Legal, Industry and Educational Reforms Pertaining to the Print Media. In Law and Society Trust. Policy Guidelines for Setting Up New Community Radio Stations in India., Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB), New Delhi. Potetee, A., & Ribot, J. (2009). Repertoires of Domination in Decentralization: Cases from Botswana and Senegal. Paper prepared for the Working Group on the Politics on Authority, Land, and Natural Resources at the Workshop on the Workshop 4, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 2–7 June 2009. Potter, S. (2007). Webs, Networks, and Systems: Globalization and the Mass Media in the Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century British Empire. Journal of British Studies, 46(3), 621–646. Potter, S. (2012). Broadcasting Empire: The BBC and the British World, 1922–1970. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Price, M., & Verhulst, S. (2000). Broadcasting Reform in India: Media Law from a Global Perspective. Oxford University Press. Price, R., & Reus-Smit, C. (2009). Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism. In S.  Chan & C.  Moore (Eds.), Approaches to International Relation, Volume Two: Critical Approaches to International Relations: Themes and Theories. London: Sage Publications. Pringle, I. (2001). Seminar on Integrating New and Traditional Information and Communication Technologies for Community Development: Final Report. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. Pringle, I., & David, M. J. R. (2002). Rural Community ICT Applications: The Kothmale Model. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing, 8, 1–14. Pringle, I., & Subba, B. (2007). Ten Years On: The State of Community Radio in Nepal. Paris: UNESCO. Raboy, M. (2007). Part V: Broadening media discourses: Global media policy — defining the field. Global Media and Communication, 3(3), 343–347. Raboy, M., & Padovani, C. (2010). Mapping Global Media Policy: Concepts, Frameworks, Methods. Communication, Culture and Critique, 3(2), 150–169. Ragin, C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Raghunath, P. (2020). Deliberating community radio in India: A policy ethnography. In K.  K. Malik & V.  Pavarala (Eds.), Community Radio in South Asia: Reclaiming the Airwaves. Routledge. Rancière, J. (1998). Disagreement: Politics and philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rao, Y. V. L. (1975). Information Imbalance in Asia. Media Asia, 2(2), 78–81. Rebuilding Public Trust: An Assessment of the Media Industry and Profession in Sri Lanka. (2016). Report of International Media Support and Secretariat for Media Reforms.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

357

Reddi, U. V., & Sinha, V. (2007). Sri Lanka: ICT Use in Education. Retrieved from: www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ict/Metasurvey/ SRILANKA.pdf Reith, J. (1949). Into the Wind. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Reza, S. M. S. (2012). From Elite Perceptions to Marginal Voices: Community Radio in Bangladesh. In J. Gordon (Ed.), Community Radio in the Twenty-first Century. Peter Lang. Ribot, J. (1998). Theorizing Access: Forest Profits along Senegal’s Charcoal Commodity Chain. Development and Change, 29(2), 307–341. Rihoux, B., & Grimm, H. (Eds.). (2006). Innovative Comparative Methods for Policy Analysis: Beyond the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide. Springer. Rijal, N. (2014). Media Development in Nepal since 1990: Challenges and Central Role of Regulation and Reform. Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis. Media and Communication, RMIT University. Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (1999). The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge University Press. Rodriguez, C. (1996). Shedding Useless Notions of Alternative Media. Peace Review, 8(1), 63–68. Rodriguez, C. (2001). Fissures in the Mediascape: An International Study of Citizens’ Media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Rodriguez, C. (2011). Citizens’ Media Against Armed Conflict: Disrupting Violence in Colombia. University of Minnesota Press. Rogers, E., Braun, J., & Vermilion, M. (1977). Radio Forums: A Strategy for Rural Development. In P.  L. Spain, D.  Jamison, & E.  G. McAnany (Eds.) Radio for Education and Development: Case Studies (pp.  361–381). World Bank Staff Working Paper 266. Washington, DC: World Bank. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press. Rosenau, J., & Czempiel, E. (Eds.). (1992). Government Without Governance: Order and Change in World Politics. London: Cambridge University Press. Rothman, K., & Greenland, S. (2005). Causation and Causal Inference in Epidemiology. American Journal of Public Health, 95(1), S144–S150. The Coronado Conference: Scientific Evidence and Public Policy Paper. Roudometof, V. (2015). The Glocal and Global Studies. Globalizations, 12(5), 774–787. Ruggie, J.  G. (1975). International Responses to Technology: Concepts and Trends. International Organization, 29(3), 557–583. Ruggie, J. (1992). Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution. International Organization, 46(3), 561–598. Russett, B. M. (1967). The Ecology of Future International Politics. International Studies Quarterly, 11(1), 12–31. Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Assessment, Revisions, and Implications for Scholars and Practitioners. In P.  Sabatier & H.  Jenkins-Smith (Eds.), Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach (pp. 211–235). Boulder: Westview Press.

358 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sadiraj, V., Tunistra, J., Wan, V., & Frans. (2005). Interest Group Size Dynamics and Policymaking. Public Choice, 125(3/4), 271–303. Saeed, S. (2009). Negotiating Power: Community Media, Democracy, and the Public Sphere. Development in Practice, 19(4), 466–478. Samarajiva, R., & Shields, P. (1990). Integration, Telecommunication, and Development: Power in the Paradigms. Journal of Communication, 40(3), 84–105. Santos, S.  J. (2008, June). Peace Media: A Research Agenda, An Intervention Agenda. [Pax], Online Newsletter. Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra. Scannel, P., & Cardiff, D. (1991). A Social History of British Broadcasting: 1922–1939 – Serving the Nation. Basil Blackwell. Schlesinger, P. (2009). The Politics of Media and Cultural Policy. Media@LSE Electronic Working Papers. Schmidt, V. (2006). Give Peace a Chance: Reconciling Four (Not Three) “New Institutionalisms”. Paper prepared for presentation for the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, August 31– September 3, 2006. Schuller, M., & Lewis, D. (2014). Anthropology of NGOs. In J. Jackson (Ed.), Oxford Bibliographies in Anthropology. New York: Oxford University Press. Scott, J. (2004). Conscripts of Modernity: The Tragedy of Colonial Enlightenment. Durham: Duke University Press. Sebenius, J.  K. (1992). Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review. Management Science, 38(1), 18–38. Sen, A. (2005). The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity. Allen Lane. Seneviratne, K. (2000). Media-Sri-Lanka: Rural Folks Log-on Via Community Radio. Retrieved March 2008, from http://hrea.org/lists/huridocs-tech/ markup/msg00420.html Seneviratne, K. (2007). Sri Lanka: Building Ethnic Harmony with Community Radio. Retrieved March 2008, from http://www.weeklyholiday. net/2007/220607/inter.html Sengupta, A. (2001). Reforms, Equity, and the IMF: An Economist’s World. New Delhi: Har-Anand Publications. Servaes, J. (1989). One World, Multiple Cultures: A New Paradigm on Communication for Development. Leuven, Belgium: Acco. Servaes, J. (1999). Communication for Development: One World, Multiple Cultures. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Shah, S. (2008). Civil Society in Uncivil Places: Soft State and Regime Change in Nepal. Washington, DC: East-West Center. Shapcott, R. (2001). Justice, Community and Dialogue in International Relations. New York: Cambridge University Press. Singer, D. (1961). The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations. World Politics, 14(1), 77–92.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

359

Slater, D., Tacchi, J., & Lewis, P.  A. (2002). Ethnographic Monitoring and Evaluation of Community Multimedia Centres: A Study of Kothmale Community Radio Internet Project, Sri Lanka. DFID and UNESCO. Smith, T. (1967). The Ideology of Nepal’s Panchayati Raj. Master’s thesis. The Arizona State University. Smith, V. (2007). Rationality in Economics: Constructivist and Ecological Forms. Cambridge University Press. Sosale, S. (2014). Mapping and Modernizing the Indian Ocean Rim: Communication Technologies under Colonial Britain. Global Media and Communication, 10(2), 155–176. Starr, P. (2004). The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications. New York: Basic. Stevenson, H., & Dryzek, J. (2014). Democratizing Global Climate Governance. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Steward, J. (1955). Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution. University of Illinois Press. Subrahmanyam, S. (1997). Connected Histories: Notes Towards a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia. Modern Asian Studies, 31(3), Special Issue: The Eurasian Context of the Early Modern History of Mainland South East Asia, 1400–1800, 735–762. Suhrawardy, F. (2010). Broadcasting Policies in Bangladesh: A Case Analysis of Community Radio Installation, Broadcast and Operation Policy, 2008. Masters dissertation. Department of General and Continuing Education, North South University, Bangladesh. Tacchi, J. (2005). Supporting the Democratic Voice through Community Media Centres in South Asia. 3CMedia: Journal of Community, Citizen’s and Third Sector Media and Communication, 1, 25–36. Taylor, L., & Wilson, F. (2004). The Messiness of Everyday Life: Exploring Key Themes in Latin American Citizenship Studies Introduction. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 23(2), 154–164. Thangamani, P. (2000). History of Broadcasting in India: With Special Reference to Tamil Nadu 1924–1954. Chennai: Ponnaiah Pathippagam. Thomas, P. (2016). State and Community Media. Journal of Alternative and New Media., 1(1), 41–45. Thomassen, B. (2012). Revisiting liminality: the danger of empty spaces. In Liminal Landscapes: Remapping the Field (pp. 21–35). London: Routledge. Thomassen, B. (2014). Liminality and the Modern: Living Through the In-between. Routledge. Thussu, D. (2000). International Communication: Continuity and Change. London: Hodder Arnold. Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. New  York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

360 

Bibliography

Tilly, C. (1984). Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New  York: Russell Sage Foundation. Tilly, C. (2006). Regimes and Repertoires. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Tilly, C. (2008). Contentious Performances. New York: Cambridge University Press. Todorov, T. (1984). The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other. New York: Harper and Row. Toke, D. (1999). Epistemic Communities and Environmental Groups. Politics, 19(2), 97–102. Tonnies, F. (1957). Community and Society. Harper and Row. Turner, V. (1967). The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Cornell University Press. UNDP. (1994). Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security. http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-developmentreport1994 UNESCO. (1984). Mahaweli Community Radio: A Tool for Self-Reliant Rural Development. UNESCO. UNESCO. (2001). Kothmale FM Community Radio. Including the Excluded: The Kothmale Experience. UNESCO. UNESCO. (2003). Legislation on Community Radio Broadcasting: Comparative Study of the Legislation of 13 Countries. UNESCO. UNESCO. (2013). Legislation on Community Radio Broadcasting: Comparative Study of the Legislation of 13 Countries. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO. (2004). The Belgrade Declaration. UNESCO. Uphoff, N. (1985). Fitting Projects to People. In M. M.x Cernea (Ed.), Putting People First: Sociological Variables in Rural Development (pp.  369–378). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Urry, J. (2000). Sociology Beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-First Century. London: Routledge. van Cuilenburg, J., & McQuail, D. (2003). Media Policy Paradigm Shifts: Towards a New Communications Policy Paradigm. European Journal of Communication, 18(2), 181–207. Van Gennep, A. (1909). Les rites de Passage (in French). Paris: Émile Nourry. Van Schendel, W. (2009). A History of Bangladesh. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Varney, M., & Feintuck, M. (2006). Media Regulation, Public Interest and the Law (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Venniyoor, S. (2006). Sri Lanka’s e-tuktuks Boldly Go Where No Others Have Gone Before. Retrieved February 2008, from http://www.infochangeindia. org/features371.jsp Verghese, B. G. (2010). First Draft: Witness to the Making of Modern India. New Delhi: Tranquebar.

 Bibliography 

361

Verhulst, S., & Price, M. (2008). Comparative Media Law Research and its Impact on Policy. International Journal of Communication, 2, 406–420. Volkmer, I. (2014). The Global Public Sphere: Public Communication in the Age of Reflective Interdependence. Cambridge: Polity Press. Volosinov, V. N. (1986). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Translated by Ladislav Matejka, I. R. Titunik. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and Desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz (Ed.), On Security (pp. 46–86). New York: Columbia University Press. Wagenaar, H. (2011). Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. Planning Theory and Practice, 12(4), 643–647. Wagenaar, H., & Cook, S. D. N. (2003). Understanding policy practices: Action, dialectic and deliberation in policy analysis In M.A.  Hajer. In H.  Wagenaar (Ed.), Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society (pp. 139–171). Wasko, J., & Mosco, V. (Eds.). (1992). Democratic Communications in the Information Age. Toronto: Garamond Press. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425. White, S.  A. (1994). The Concept of Participation: Transforming Rhetoric to Reality. In S. A. White et al. (Eds.), Participatory Communication: Working for Change and Development. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications. Williams, M. (2003). Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics. International Studies Quarterly, 47, 511–531. Williams, R. (1976). Keywords. Oxford University Press. Williams, P. (2012). Collaboration in Public Policy and Practice: Perspectives on Boundary Spanners. Bristol: The Policy Press. Wilson, A.  J. (2003). Sri Lanka: Ethnic Strife and the Politics of Space. In J.  Coakley (Ed.), The Territorial Management of Ethnic Conflict. London: Frank Cass Publishers. Young, I.  M. (1996). Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy. In S.  Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Zajda, J., & Rust, V. (Eds.). (2009). Globalisation, Policy and Comparative Research: Discourses of Globalisation. Springer. Zivin, J. (1994). The Projection of India: Imperial Propaganda, the British State and Nationalist India, 1930–1947. PhD thesis. Duke University. Zivin, J. (1998). The Imagined Reign of the Iron Lecturer. Modern Asian Studies, 32(3), 717–738. Zivin, J. (1999). ‘Bent’: A Colonial Subversive and Indian Broadcasting. Past and Present, 162(1), 195–220.

Index

A Access, 16 Accountability, 17 Adaptionists, 72 Administering music, 106 Administrative nerve-centre, 64 Administrative will, 258 Advisory Committees, 242 Advocacy, 70 Advocacy coalition framework, 68–69 Aid process, 261 Alignment, 261 Alliance for Cooperation and Legal Aid Bangladesh (ACLAB), 284 All India Radio, 107, 171 Alternative for India Development (AID), 181 Alternative media, 20 Analytic device, 73, 255 Anarchy, 31 Apartheid, 27 Article 14(1)(a), 165 Asian Media Information Centre (AMIC), 157

Association for South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), 200 Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (ACORAB, Nepal), 260 Awami League, 237 B Baandvaerkstedet (the Tape Workshop), 150 Bakhtin, Mikhail M., 296 Bangalore Declaration, 172 Bangladesh Betar, 126 Bangladesh-Myanmar border, 284 Bangladesh Nationalist Party, 239 Bangladesh Network of NGOs in Radio and Communication (BNNRC), 176 Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC), 245

© The Author(s) 2020 P. Raghunath, Community Radio Policies in South Asia, Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5629-6

363

364 

INDEX

Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-­ Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), 49 BBC Media Action, 262 Behaviour, 72 Betwixt, 255 Bretton Woods School, 113 British Broadcasting Company, 94 British Broadcasting Corporation, 95 British Empire, 92 Broadcasting Administration Programmes (BAP), 233 Broadcasting Authority Bill, 167 C Canonisation, 90 Caretaker Government of 2007, 237 Cartography, 48–66 Centre for Development Communication (CDC), 177 Centre for Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), 60 Chakma, 284 Charmaz, Kathy, 65 Charter of Community and Citizen Radio Broadcasters, 22 Citizen’s media, 22 Civil society, 7, 218 Civil society media, 20 Codification, 90 Colombo Calling, 93 Commission under Sean MacBride, 117 Communication Corner, 262 Communication rights, 19 Communicative action, 73 Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-­ UML), 161–162 Communitarian, 57 Communitas, 304–305

Community Information Network (CIN), 262 Community-led broadcasting, 48 Community media, 17 Community Party of Nepal-­ Maoist, 209 Community Radio Association (CRA), 221 Community Radio Forum (CRF), 220 Community Radio Installation, Broadcast and Operation Policy, 242 Comparative cross-national policy research, 57 Comparative media studies, 52 Comparison, 51 Complexity, 306 Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006, 259 Concentric and overlapping circles, 64 Conjunctural ethnography, 288 Connectedness, 49 Consolidation of power, 304 Consortium of Media Policy Studies (COMPASS), 12 Constant comparison, 65 Constituent Assembly, 112 Constructivism, 31, 66 Constructivists, 72 Consultation on Community Radio and Media Policy, 172 Contestation, 58 Contextualized grounded theory, 66 Continuum, 71–75 Cooperative-owned CRs, 260 Cosmopolitan, 57 Counter-hegemonic, 20 CR Policy Guidelines of 2006, 219 Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB), 170 Cr-india, 60 Critical discourse analysis, 37

 INDEX 

Critical historiography, 90 Criticality, 306 Critical media policy, 34 Critical policy analysis, 38 Critical policy ethnography, 34, 58–65 Critical Political Economy, 29 Critical security studies, 33 CR Sammelan, 278 Crypto-colonialism, 90 Cultural symbolism, 302 D Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA), 247, 263 Decolonial, 306 Decoloniality, 33 Decolonisation, 110 Deepening of democracy, 195 Deleuze, Gilles, 21 Deliberation, 37, 307 Deliberation as an epistemology, 79–80 Deliberative-analytic pedagogy, 38 Deliberative democracy, 77, 201 Deliberative policy analysis, 38 Deliberative policy ecology, 34, 73 Deliberative potential, 38 Deliberative spaces, 59 Democracy, 75, 260 Democratisation, 104, 110 Department for International Development (DFID), 175 Development, 18, 110, 300–301 Dialogic, 250 Dialogism, 296 Dialogue, 258 Digital archive, 60 Digital Bangladesh, 247 Digitisation, 14, 35 Diplomatic missions, 256 Dominion, 98

365

Donoughmore Constitution, 106 Doxa, 160 Dramaturgy, 135 DTH policy, 229 E EC Bangladesh, 282 Ecological approach, 71–75 ECR FM, 265 Education, 298 Electronic Media Production Centre (EMPC), 183 Emancipatory politics, 12 Emancipatory potential, 90 Emic, 305 Emotive rationality, 307 Environment, 72 Epistemes, 67 Epistemic communities, 10, 69–70 Epistemic decolonisation, 33 Epistemic pluralism, 75 Equal Access, 274 Ethical considerations, 63 Ethnic strife, 256 Externalities, 74 F Federation of Nepali Journalists, 273 Fluidity, 308 Focused, intensive ethnographic study, 60 Freedom of communication, 16 Freedom of Expression, 250 Frequency, 245 G Gemi Diriya Project, 215 Globalisation, 6 Global Media Policy (GMP), 9

366 

INDEX

Global Media Policy Working Group, 9 Global South, 68 ‘Globalisation, Social Movements, Human Rights, and the Law,’ 174 Glocal, 307 Glocal axis, 57 Gobal governance, 7 Good governance, 261 Good ownership, 261 Governance, 30 Governmentality, 30 Government of India Act of 1919, 93 Grounded Theory, 34 Guattari, Felix, 21 Gyan Vani (educational radio), 183 H Habermas, Jurgen, 67 Harmonisation, 261 Heuristic device, 73 Hierarchal, 250 High-Level Task Force on Media Policy, 159 Historicity, 87–90 Human Resources Development, 275 Human security, 300–301 Hybridisation, 57 I Inclusive, 73 Indian School of development and communication, 113 Indian Village Welfare Association (IVWA), 100 Indigenous knowledge, 111 Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), 183 Information-Education-­ Communication (IEC), 179 Information Imbalance, 123

Institutional design, 73 Institutions, 72 Interdependence, 74 Interest groups, 70 Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC), 230 International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR), 9 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 166 International development, 280 International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC), 152 International Radiotelegraph Union, 92 Inter Press Service, 200 Interstitial transformation, 218 Iterative deliberative-dialectical, 73 J Jan Andolan I, 157 Jan Andolan II, 260 Janata Party, 117 Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, 156 Japan International Cooperation Association (JICA), 247 Justification, 301 K Kothmale Community Radio (KCR), 156 Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan (KMVS), 180 L Language, 296–301 Legitimate, 90

 INDEX 

Legitimation, 293–296 Legitimation Crisis, 293 Letter of intent (LOI), 233 Liberalisation, 51 Liberation, 12, 296–301 Liberation Tiger for the Tamil Eelam (LTTE), 156 Liminality, 255, 306 Lionel Fielden, 103 Listeners’ Club, 196 Listening, 38 Lived experiences, 80 ‘Local,’ 279 Localised radio broadcasting, 256 Local Self-Governance Act, 208 M Maharaja Television Network (MTV), 165 Mahaweli Community Radio (MCR), 151 Mahaweli Development Project, 147 Many Voices, One World, 117 Mapping Global Media Policy, 9 Market-oriented reforms, 147 Marshall Plan, 111 Mass-Line Media Centre (MMC), 175 Media democratisation, 18 Media policy, 3 Methodological glocalism, 57–58 Methodological nationalism, 56–57 Microhistories, 91 Middle-ground, 66 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), 179 Ministry of Communication and IT (MoCIT), 222 Ministry of Defence, 275 Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), 275 Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, 170

367

Ministry of Information and Communication (MoIC), 161 Mobilisation, 70 Mobilities, 57 Monitoring Committee, 246 Montague-Chelmsford reforms of 1917, 93 Multicausality and correlations, 58 Multi-levelled, 38 Multi-party democracy, 259 Multiple temporalities, 61 Multiplicity, 307 Multi-sited ethnography, 59 Multi-situated/multi-situatedness, 63–65, 250 Multi-stakeholderism, 305 Mysore Resettlement and Development Agency (MYRADA), 180 N Namma Dhwani (Our Voice), 181 National Broadcasting Act of 1993, 161 National Broadcasting Policy of 1992, 200 National Broadcasting Regulation, 162 National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), 278 National Education Service (NES), 166 National Foundation for India (NFI), 181 National Frequency Allocation Plan, 245 National Law School University of India, 172 National security, 34, 160 National Strategy for Accelerated Poverty Reduction II, 247 Nepal Bar Association, 204

368 

INDEX

Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ), 159 Nepali Congress, 161 Nepal Press Institute (NPI), 157 Nepal Radio, 132 Nepal Television, 204 Networked space, 218 New International Economic Order (NIEO), 116 New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO), 7 NGO-isation, 32 Non-government radio license, 161 Non-traditional security, 33 Norms, 37 O Open-Ended and Unbounded Rationality, 307 Open Society Foundation, 261 Orality, 89 Orientalist, 89 P Panos South Asia, 261 Paradigm, 29 Parliamanetary Standing Committee, 238 Passage, 255 Pastapur Declaration, 174 Peace Fund, 262 People’s Alliance, 166 Personality-centrism, 303–304 Planning Commission, 238 Policy dialogue, 70 Policy ecology, 73 Policy environment, 38 Policy knowledge, 38 Policy windows, 70 Political societies, 71

Post- or crypto-colonial, 68 Postcolonialism, 32 Postmodern turn, 55 Post-positivist, 38 Post-structuralism, 30–31 Post-2015, 55 Power, 30 Practices, 28, 195 Pragmatics, 37 Prajatantra Radio, 132 Private radio, 208 Problem-solving, 79 Propaganda, 107 Public interest, 15 Public Interest Litigation (PIL), 277 Public service broadcasting, 96 Public sphere, 79 Purna Swaraj, 98 Q Quit India Movement, 109 R Radical media, 21 Radio Bikrampur FM 99.2, 1–2 Radio Ceylon, 119 Radio Denmark, 150 Radio Madhanpokhara, 208 Radio Naf, 284 Radio Nepal, 132 Radio Sagarmatha, 1, 163 Rajarata Sewa, 152 Rakhine, 284 Rationalism, 31 Rebuilding Public Trust (2016), 286 Recognition, 301–305 Reconstructing, 49 Reductionism, 66 Reflexivity, 64 Region, 297 Relational space, 64

 INDEX 

Relativism, 31 Repository, 60 Rhizomatic social movements, 218 Rhizomes, 21 Rights-based approach, 282 Right to Information Act of 2009, 247 Rituals, 255 S The Sarai Programme, 60 Sarojini Naidu School of Arts and Communication, 174 Saru Praja FM/Saru Praja Radio, 2, 212, 217 Satellite Instructional Television Experiment (SITE), 116 Save Independent Radio Movement (SIRM), 1, 210 Scales, 193, 250 Schema, 73 ‘Scientific’ knowledge, 66 Scrutiny Committee, 246 Securitisation, 33 Self-censorship, 257 Shakti TV, 165–166 Singapore Telecommunications Limited (SingTel), 165 Sinhalese, 256 Sirasa TV, 165 Socialisation, 298 Social movements theorising, 70–71 Social Welfare Act of 1992, 201 Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (SERP), 182 South Asia, 48 South Asia from Below, 49 South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), 49, 200 South Asian Multidisciplinary Academic Journal (SAMAJ), 48

369

South Asia-wide seminars, 60 Spatio-temporal contexts, 73 Sri Lanka Broadcasting Act of 1966, 164 Sri Lanka Development Journalists Forum (SDJF), 257 Standing Advisory Committee for Frequency Allocation (SACFA), 232 Stratification, 70 Supreme Court, 170 Sustainability, 300–301 Sustainable Development Goals, 286 Symbolic, 307 Systemic, 69 T Tactics, 88, 282 Tamil Tigers, 256 Technical Sub-Committee, 243 Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), 185 Telecom Regulatory Commission (TRC), 216 Teleological, 111 Theoretical harbour, 308 The Theory of Communicative Action – I and II, 297 Thick data, 34 Thick description, 61 Transformative, 255 Transition, 260 Transnational advocacy networks, 67–68 Transnational democracy, 77 Transnational diplomacy, 303 Transparency International-­ Bangladesh, 248 Two-track model of deliberation, 79

370 

INDEX

U Ujyalo Network, 262 Uncertainty, 69 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 186, 212 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), 19, 151, 172 United States Agency for International Development (USAID), 241 UN Mission in Nepal, 259 Upazila, 242 Uplinking and Downlinking guidelines, 229 Uva Community Radio (UCR), 212 Uva Provincial Council (UPC), 212 V Vanguard media, 21 Village Development Committee (VDC), 208 Village uplift, 100

Voice of the Global from Below, 137 Voice of Tigers (VoT), 256 Voices, 171 W Web 3.0, 6 Westphalian, 17 Wireless Planning and Coordination (WPC), 227 World Association for Christian Communication (WACC), 172 World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC), 22, 209 World Bank, 215 World Summit on Information Society (WSIS), 7 Y Youth Awareness Environmental Forum (YAEF), 265