COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA
ARCHIVES

The Rediff Interview/S S Gill

'When you change an organisation, vested interests are bound to try and hit back'

S S Gill, 71, the new CEO of Prasar Bharati, is already in the eye of a storm. His first reforms, within a week in Mandi House, have been met with anger, resistance and outrage. With some newspapers joining the disgruntled employees of Doordarshan to call him names.

Is Gill the Tughlak he is made out to be? Or is he simply trying to do a tough and unenviable job to the best of his ability? Is he combatting vested interests or becoming a victim of his own hurried agenda for change? Pritish Nandy spoke to him to find out:

Do you have a clear agenda for yourself? What you want to do, what you hope to achieve?

The first item on the agenda is to get rid of government interference, government control. This is what used to constrict us. We could not give our best. All this has disappeared. The government is no longer in the picture. We are now on our own. This is our hour of test. We have to prove to the media, to the people that we are really independent, that we are making constructive use of the autonomy given to us.

How do you hope to do that?

The very first day I said that even if instructions come from the prime minister, please ignore them. It was a very significant, symbolic message to my people. It meant: Look, we are totally free!

Look at the Doordarshan bulletins now. We have no opening ceremonies, no garlandings, no receptions, no delegations. Nothing! There's no statement of the government or any government agency. From the day I took over I gave these instructions. The bulletins are now completely free.

How will you cope with the political pressures this will inevitably bring? No one's going to let you get away with this for long.

No, there are no political pressures. No one has told me anything. They cannot. For I have a reputation. I didn't listen to anybody when I was secretary, I&B. People who worked with me knew this. Nor am I not going to listen to anybody now. The moment I succumb to pressures, I will demoralise my entire staff!

So, to answer your question, Pritish, that is the first part of my agenda. To implement, to ensure autonomy. The common man watches the news or a current affairs show for 10 to 15 minutes a day. His main concern is entertainment. It may take a little longer to change that, to change the nature of the serials because we have entered into long contracts and it may take six to eight weeks to give them notice to get off. If you look at the serials today, you will see that they are either a rehash of Bombay films or clones of Santa Barbara and The Bold and the Beautiful. They have no roots in Indian culture. This is a matter of shame.

All these must be changed. Third-rate serials must be given notice and terminated. I know there will be a lot of protests but even as secretary, I&B I had terminated any number of serials. People know this?

Newspaper reports say that you have already expressed a desire to terminate the mythologicals, Om Namah Shivah and Jai Hanuman. Is this true?

No, I am not going to terminate a serial because it is mythological. But I want to end serials which are bad. Which are bad in the sense that they are sloppy, badly made.

Are you backing off because of the criticism?

No, there may be contracts in place that are difficult to terminate. We will have to see. But if the quality is found substandard, they have a problem.

What kind of programming would you like to see on Doordarshan?

Channel 1 will be a people's channel. The signal covers 86 per cent of the population. So it must show popular entertainment for the common man, matters of concern for them.

Which means we are still stuck with Hindi films and film-based shows?

No, no, no. Hindi films will go.

But you said popular entertainment?

I introduced Hum Log, Yeh Jo Hai Zindagi, Nukkad, Rajni, Buniyaad. They were more popular than any of today's shows. A programme to be popular does not have to be cinema-based. If you look at the programmes today, you will see that there is not a single programme produced by an outstanding director or producer. I will have to rope them in. They are creative people. They will produce much better programmes than the garbage we are unloading on the nation today.

And what will you do with Channel 2?

DD-2 is primarily an urban-oriented channel. More serious themes, discussions in English, news in English, interviews with people coming from outside. Burning issues, chat shows, more sophisticated, urban-oriented shows. That should be the profile of DD-2. Primarily English shows. Hindi shows will go on DD-1.

But how will that work? South India will not watch DD-1 if you put out only Hindi shows on it. North India will not watch DD-2 if you put out only sophisticated, urban-oriented English programming on it. Won't this exacerbate the North-South divide?

This was how these channels were conceived! But I agree with you. We may need to look at this in greater detail once we have had a look at all the programming.

Are you going to change the mix of commissioned and sponsored shows?

One view is that if the programme is sponsored, the producer goes out of his way to make it more viewer-friendly. So quality suffers. He has to make it cheap, sexy, with lots of crime and violence. I think there is a point in that. Whereas, if it is a commissioned programme, we have control over the content. A good artiste will produce a good show without compromising its integrity.

In that case, if you go for more commissioned shows, how will you fund Doordarshan? That has always been the problem. Quality is not an issue here. Money is.

The government is clear that Doordarshan must do public broadcasting. It is ready to finance it. Even now, more than 50 per cent of our funds come from the government. That will continue. In fact, if we make a good case, more funds can come from them. I am not at all worried on that account. The government is committed. It is enlightened enough to know that if we are going in for better programming, more socially relevant shows, then more money will be required.

Are you planning to increase the public broadcasting quotient of Doordarshan?

Sure. It must increase. That is why I insist that ours must be an activist approach. We will take up issues of special political relevance. For instance, mass education will be my highest priority.

Will you start a new channel for that?

No, no. A separate channel is not available.

What about DD-3?

I don't think we can give away DD-3 to anybody. But I will be very happy to hand it over to education. To UGC or IGNOU or any other educational institution.

But I thought you said education was your priority. Why do you want to give it away?

We do not have enough experience or expertise inhouse. We can give it to them on, say, a nominal lease. Instead of running three sloppy channels, let us run two efficiently, professionally.

What about the regional channels in that case?

The regional channels have to be upgraded. They must be as good as any channel run from Delhi. Our regions are much larger than most other countries. The shows must be first rate and the regional channels should be semi-autonomous.

How can you ensure this since most of the shows are sponsored today?

Even sponsored shows can be good. After the board meeting, I intend to convene a meeting of all the station directors and tell them to improve their programming. If more money is required, it will be given to them. But they have to produce good stuff. Millions of people watch them every day.

Can one change an organisation like Doordarshan overnight?

One can try his best. I have one complaint against media however. If you don't do anything, you are criticised. Now, within four days, I have gingered up the organisation, introduced some 20-odd reforms. I am killing myself. I don't even have time to read the newspapers. But journalists take feeds from disgruntled employees and carry stories without even verifying them. They don't realise that when you change an organisation, many vested interests are hurt. They are bound to try and hit back.

I tell the media: Be my ally. If anything goes wrong, please tear me to shreds. But if something good is done, for the institution, for the country, then please strengthen my hands. Unnecessary, cantankerous criticism does no good for anyone.

The Rediff Interviews