Hunger, malnutrition, and the media
The Hoot interviews Jean Dreze.
Jean Dreze is Professor, Centre for Development Economics at the Delhi School of Economics. He has co-authored a number of books with Amartya Sen and is a member of the support group of the Right to Food campaign, an informal network of organisations and inDIViduals committed to the realisation of the right to food in
1. Are drought conditions worse today than they were a few months ago, and if yes, is that urgency sufficiently reflected in the media?
Drought conditions usually reflect a failure of the monsoon, and tend to get worse until the next monsoon. This year is no different in that respect. One qualification is that, in irrigated areas, a good rabi crop has made up to some extent for crop failures during kharif. It is in unirrigated areas that the situation is getting worse month after month, with strong prospects of further intensification of human hardships during the summer.
This urgency is inadequately reflected in the media. Media interest in the drought nearly died out after abundant rains in late August and September created an impression that the drought was over. Meanwhile, however, there had been massive crop failures in many areas, especially (but not only) Rajasthan. The revised economic estimates published in last month’s Economic Survey bring out the seriousness of the drought. Quite likely, there will be a revival of media interest a couple of months from now, when the stage is set for harrowing pictures of dead cows, emaciated children and famished labourers. Hopefully, committed journalists will visit drought-affected areas before the situation becomes critical.
2. What can be done to enhance media interest in these issues?
I think that one important lesson from the Right to Food campaign so far is that media concerns can be substantially influenced by skilful activism. Media coverage of hunger and related issues has considerably increased during the last couple of years, and not just because of the drought. Also, there is a useful shift of attention from starvation deaths to chronic hunger, which is absolutely essential if the problem of endemic under-nutrition in
3. You were involved in organising a public hearing on hunger in
The
4. Do you have any observations about recent media coverage of the social aspects of the 2003-4 budget?
I was in the field when the budget was presented, and missed the whole debate. When I read the papers a week later, I was shell-shocked, for two reasons. First, this budget is a budget of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. There is virtually nothing in it for the poor, except for a welcome expansion of the Antyodaya programme (even that, however, fell far short of the Food Ministry’s recommendations). Even the traditional pro-poor sops are missing, and there are ominous elements here of a roadmap for the privatization of social services. Second, it seems that these aspects of the budget were barely noticed in the debates that followed. With few exceptions, all the "experts" who were invited to comment by, say, major dailies were corporate leaders. Predictably enough, most of them applauded the exercise. Only a few committed journalists swam against the stream and drew attention to the elitist biases of the budget.
5. Do you see a connection between invisibility in the media and state inaction?
Certainly. Lack of media concern for hunger and related issues makes it that much easier for the state to get away with doing nothing. A striking example is the neglect of health matters in the media as well as in public policy.