Media gang-up

In the perception of Big Brother India, notwithstanding almost 23 years of Southasian regional cooperation, its greatest threat comes from the borders (including the maritime boundaries) it shares with six other SAARC countries. So, Southasian regionalism needs to be nurtured for the same reason that the seven countries in post-war Europe came forward to discuss the idea of a regional grouping for their part of the world: because they did not want any more war, and because they needed progress via peace. Likewise, Southasian neighbours need to be at peace with each other before they can tackle their abysmal health, literacy and poverty challenges. The unfulfilled promise of Southasian peace and synergy lies in a single five-letter word: visas. Left to SAARC and its governmental parleys, things may never change enough for the distrust to recede. But open up visas for tourists, researchers, doctors, teachers, media personnel of all kinds (including the producers of serials) and others – and tensions would begin to recede. Surely it is impossible to exaggerate what this could achieve in terms of getting Indians to look outside of themselves, and for allowing all of the countries around India to visit each other and their big neighbour, to discover, compare and collaborate. If Nepal's soft border with India was to be replicated on all of the borders for all of the countries in the region, and if tourists to one country were to receive Schengen-type visas for all the countries in the region, think of the resulting transformation.

This may seem like a fanciful proposition at a time where India is carefully constructing and reinforcing fences on its borders to the east and west. Others might argue that the opening up would simply multiply threats and problems. But it has been well established that 'terrorists' do not need visas to achieve their objectives. Breaking down barriers between people who were once one – at least insofar as the three largest countries of the region are concerned – can only free up defence allocations for more constructive use. Indian tourists can get visas to Sri Lanka fairly easily now, but Pakistan and Bangladesh have been difficult to crack. And Indians need to be told whether their own government is generous on this count.

Visa watch
Easing visa regimes is hardly new as an argument. But to make it a reality requires a missionary zeal that SAARC – or, for that matter, the journalistic initiative on its fringes, SAFMA (South Asia Free Media Association) – have yet to demonstrate. Leadership in ideas usually comes from an individual who is in a position to do something about what she or he is propagating. Take the media in its broadest sense, stretching from news to entertainment. A single editor or channel chief, with the courage of his or her convictions, running a dogged campaign, can indeed make a difference. The Asian Age, for instance, chose to have a page devoted to India's Southasian neighbours, designated accordingly. But much more is possible. Just suppose media houses, convinced of the need for Southasian synergy, or even just a bit less friction on the borders, were to agree to campaign for more visas, even just for themselves. Here is what they could do.

Lobby tirelessly, every month, for visa access. Get journalists in all of these countries to apply and report relentlessly on how many they have received. In India, journalists could use the Right to Information tools or questions in Parliament to obtain regular information on how many nationals of neighbouring countries apply for visas, and how many are actually issued. A prominent 'visa watch' website could be started, publishing this and additional information. This is an approach that could build pressure, but only if all leading newspapers and television news channels in each country were to get on board.

If purposeful elements in the media of each country were to gang up and decide to subvert borders in this part of the world, what other sorts of things could they do? Increase travel writing about tourism destinations in the Southasian countries. Locate serials and feature films that would go well across the frontiers. Each country's tourism department may like to incentivise initiatives, starting a chain reaction. The Vir Sanghvis and Sanjeev Kapoors need to step out and do food shows across the borders. Additionally, have a sourcing executive to select a bold and well-made serial from each of the Southasian countries and run them at home, with subtitles if necessary. With the most aggressively marketed satellite channels in the region, India needs to take the lead on this.

Litterateurs as well as artistes of various kinds are generally more open-minded than are journalists, who tend to peddle notions of so-called 'national interest' when they are reporting on neighbouring countries. Need one recall the jingoism of the Kargil war? So, the non-news media has a tremendous role to play in extending the cultural borders of people's minds in the region. There has been an initiative in the shape of TV Southasia, with the participation of one channel from each country. But in the absence of much wider participation of large, mainstream channels, those that are not confined to a regional audience, this will remain tokenism.

Some of us will remember the late-night stuff that our national broadcasters used to air shortly after SAARC began, called the SAARC Audio-Visual Exchange (SAVE). The programme merely told us that everybody else on the Subcontinent also had their own versions of the state-run Doordarshan. Now imagine that, instead, you have a peppy Geo TV political discussion reproduced on NDTV, or Times Now or CNN-IBN, as well as the other way around, particularly at a time when India-Pakistan relations are going through a prickly period. Would such a move be permitted, given current cable laws? Can those in charge at least put such things on their websites, and publicise them on TV?

Here is one last thought for the newspaper or television news channel that wants to stick its neck out, and attempt to change the politics of the Subcontinent. Do a 'their view, our view' type of programme, with news items focusing solely on bilateral relations. Carry a report from, say, the Press Trust of India on bilateral talks, juxtaposed with a report from the official news agency of the other country. That way, the audience would be able to tell just how much jingoism continues to creep into reporting. Any takers?

~ Sevanti Ninan is a columnist, author and editor of the media watchdog www.thehoot.org.