Reporting on the Diaspora

Reporting on the Diaspora

 

 

 

 

Pravasi Bharatiya Divas 2006 floated the idea of having a global media network which can cater to the diaspora across the world.

 

 

 

B P Sanjay

 

 

The Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (PBD) 2006 as usual brought many overseas Indians for their annual meeting and interaction to Hyderabad after Delhi and Mumbai in the previous years.  Underlying many other reasons for wanting to reach out to our fraternity abroad were the strong undercurrents of the investment rhetoric that permeated the conference. While there were plenary and parallel sessions that addressed various issues, on media the issues were sought to be reformulated from the earlier focus on ethnic media. PBD focused on "Reporting on the Diaspora." [i]   The session was chaired by the media advisor to the Prime Minister, Dr. Sanjaya Baru. Panelists were drawn from the US, the Gulf and the Caribbean.[ii] Participants although a small group comprised media persons representing the local and national press and a few academics.

 

The panel noted that the Indian Diaspora was not a homogenous group but fractured and spread across many countries. Their needs were perhaps different and therefore can there be a standard approach or policy was raised as an issue. Efforts pertaining to networking of the PIO were noted and the chair referred to initiatives such as the SAJA (South Asian Journalists Association, www.saja.org).

 

 Neena Gopal, Foreign Editor-Asia of Gulf News, based her response on the work she is doing in the Gulf region where she noted that the nature of governments were different. Familiar Indian perceptions of the media as an adversary are not in vogue among the professionals. Specifically for the Disapora she saw an advisory role for the media especially in situations where the workers are in difficult situations or ‘trapped situations.’ A social conscience approach by the media was also adopted. Commenting on the diaspora situation she said that Indians were getting out of the earlier stereotype of the ayah-butler-cook category of workers. There was a also an emergent professional class comprising business and hi tech persons. This had to some extent altered the nature of coverage pertaining to their needs. The strong perception in the region that India is "Hindu" did bring in additional challenges of fighting the stereotype. Chidanand Rajghatta, Washington correspondent of the Times of India, wanted to know whether the Muslim president, Sikh prime minister and a Roman Catholic widow at the apex of the power centre had altered the stereotype? The spread and popularity of Indian television channels was another crucial source of information and entertainment. Some channels had local centres capable of producing local content of specific relevance to the region.

 

The US and Canadian perspective was shared by Sreenath Sreenivasan, Associate Professor of Professional Practice, Columbia University, and a founder of SAJA, and Chidanand Rajghatta. Sreenivasan referred to his growing up in Fiji and felt that lack of media and expressions had to a great extent affected the diasporic community’s ability to wield sustained political clout. Changes in the nature of the mainstream media in the US were mentioned including the efforts they had launched through SAJA. This network was growing. The Bollywood centric nature of media content aimed at Indian diaspora was mentioned to stress the fact that there was a new group, the second and third generation whose information and entertainment needs were quite different.  He floated the idea of having a global network (a la CNN/BBC) which perhaps can cater to the diaspora across the world. The fact that such ventures needed deep pockets was also stressed. Ramesh Japra, Publisher and CEO of India Post, a practicing cardiologist turned publisher/CEO, concurred with this idea while Raju Narisetti of the Wall Street Journal had a different approach. Quoting the Registrar of Newspapers in India he mentioned the fact that there were already a range of newspapers that perhaps were catering to the needs and should such efforts be carried further. Moreover, keeping in view the difficulties involved in identifying what binds the 20 million or so Indian Diaspora together he questioned the viability of such a network. Does it make a sound business or economic sense should also be taken into consideration.

 

Rajghatta referred to the earlier practices of Indian newspapers posting senior journalists as correspondents reflecting the need for diplomacy and political reportage as the main concerns. He referred to the fact that Indian achievers in those days hardly got any coverage. The present era had seen a change in the nature of coverage helped by changes in media technology and also the fact that blogs and other forms of expressions had become quite important. He felt that the need for a global network was there. The rediscovery of the "mother" country was easier and faster in the present era and he visualized and recommended that in the future PBD can be organised in virtual space. Paras Ramoutar, a politician and media person from Trinidad and Tobago, gave examples from his region and explained how media coverage was slightly different in the Caribbean.  Due to the increasing cases of kidnappings etc., achievers and successful businesspersons were not seeking media attention. He also felt that the fractured nature of Indian diaspora did not necessitate a global network at this stage.

 

The fact that DIVerse media existed in different forms necessitated the need for DIVersity and made it difficult to compress content into a global network.  Responses also addressed the concept of labeling and stereotyping by the foreign media and how to address them. The panel mentioned the fact that the past two days coverage of PBD in the local media was not different in terms of the so-called negative stories. However, this perception  was sought to be corrected by a senior journalist from Vaarta who said that the Telugu press had addressed substantive issues discussed at the PBD. Negative reporting was carried further when the panel indicated that it was a news value whether we liked it or not.

 

The notion of an emerging "Global Indian Worker" perhaps allows for a network that can cater to his/her needs. It was also recognised that presently it was possible for persons from virtually every district in the country to have access to information about what was happening in their region---the media utility patterns had also correspondingly changed. A case was mentioned about a small Indian  business family in a remote tourist centre  where the husband, wife and son had different interests but were catered to by the Internet effectively. Sreenath Sreenivasan referred to the nature of coverage and how China had occupied  a central space in the  (Western ?) media. In business the notion of co-existence that many were wont to believe did not exist and India needs to respond.  He also discussed that educating the students in the US was important to enhance their understanding of the different contexts and referred to the fact that he was bringing about 16 students to travel in North India this summer. Networking and participation in media events such as SAJA conferences would also help to share different perspectives. Questions were asked about what the India story was also about and the Panel indicated that it was becoming loud and overblown. Sania stories were particularly mentioned while stating that better achievers from other countries were not so much in the media. The Panel was of the view that hyped media images and coverage would fall flat if we are unable to perform or deliver what is hyped about in different sectors.

 

The question of access to media channels was also addressed in view of the fact that Neena Gopal mentioned that not all channels, particularly those dealing with news, were freely available. Subdued comments were also heard that perhaps there was a bias towards the elite diaspora and not so much focus on the ordinary working class persons. Although references were made the role of particularly the language media in catering to the specific needs was not adequately probed. The gulf and local editions of some newspapers particularly the Malayalam press needs to be mentioned. A resident from the US mentioned that it was not so much that media did not exist but what kind of a role they were performing was important. He noted that every major US city  does have diaspora media but they were by and large advertising media.  Sreenivasan carried the idea of networking further and suggested that the network should be strengthened and more and more journalists/media persons should participate in forums and discussions to enrich our understanding. A local TV manager stated that since technologies were language independent they were already catering to some extent to the needs of the diaspora. Blogging was mentioned as another useful form of lending expressions.

 

Sanjaya Baru commented that the PBD as a forum could address the question of ensuring free access to media as an extension of the universal paradigm of freedom of information. If necessary the WTO framework for the services sector could be invoked. Further the viability of a global channel to cater to the needs of Indian Diaspora should be worked out. Networking such as the efforts of SAJA, etc. could be strengthened.