Context

• When the Modi government assumed office in May 2014, Information and Broadcasting Minister promised to transform Prasar Bharati along the lines of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), ensuring administrative autonomy, editorial independence and accountability to Parliament.
• However, twelve years later, public broadcasting continues to face government interference.
• The broadcast of Mann Ki Baat on September 27, 2026, illustrates the continuing use of public airwaves as a platform for the government of the day.

The Unfulfilled BBC Model

• Nehru’s vision of broadcasting autonomy
  • The Emergency of 1975 exposed the dangers of political control when All India Radio (AIR) and Doordarshan became instruments of the ruling regime.
  • In 1948, Jawaharlal Nehru advocated a semi-autonomous broadcasting corporation inspired by the BBC, arguing that broadcasting should not operate as a government department.
  • Former BBC bureau chief Mark Tully emphasised that public service broadcasting is different from government broadcasting.
  • It must remain free from government interference and prioritise public interest over commercial profitability.
• The Prasar Bharati Act and its objectives
  • Following the Emergency, the Janata government commissioned B.G. Verghese to recommend reforms.
  • His proposals informed the Prasar Bharati Bill of 1979, which lapsed.
  • A revised Bill received presidential assent in 1990 as the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990, but was implemented only in 1997.
  • Section 12 requires Prasar Bharati to inform, educate and entertain while safeguarding citizens’ right to receive information freely, truthfully and objectively.
  • It also mandates balanced reporting and contrasting viewpoints without ideological advocacy.
• The gap between promise and practice
  • Despite this legislative vision, Prasar Bharati has failed to achieve genuine autonomy.
  • The political establishment’s inconsistent approach is evident in its initial praise of the BBC model and subsequent criticism of the broadcaster following its 2023 documentary, India: The Modi Question.

At the Ministry’s Mercy

• Weak parliamentary oversight
  • Section 13 provides for a 22-member parliamentary committee to oversee the corporation, but successive governments have failed to constitute it.
  • Former chief executive has argued that ministers prefer retaining direct control over broadcasting officials.
• Absence of an Independent Complaints’ Mechanism
  • Sections 14 and 15 envisage a Broadcasting Council to address complaints and safeguard political impartiality.
  • Its absence has deprived citizens of an effective mechanism for editorial accountability.
• Administrative and financial dependence
  • The Board has been weakened by bureaucratic appointments, while assets and staff have not been fully transferred.
  • Financial dependence on the government restricts independent decision-making.
  • Section 23 also allows the Centre to issue binding broadcasting directions, undermining editorial independence.
  • Section 10 envisaged an independent recruitment board, but implementation was delayed until 2020.
  • The appointment of Jagadish Upasane, associated with the publisher of Panchajanya and Organiser, raised concerns about political influence.
• Staffing imbalance and editorial priorities
  • A 2021 manpower audit revealed structural imbalances.
  • Nearly half of Prasar Bharati’s approximately 25,000 employees worked in engineering, compared with slightly over 10% at the BBC.
  • Content staff accounted for less than 20%, against approximately 70% at the BBC.
  • This suggested that Prasar Bharati functioned primarily as a transmission network rather than a content-driven broadcaster.
• Public broadcasting and judicial principles
  • UNESCO’s 2001 definition establishes that public broadcasting must be neither commercial nor state-controlled.
  • Even Public Service Broadcasting Day, commemorating Mahatma Gandhi’s 1947 broadcast to refugees, has become largely symbolic.
  • In the 1995 Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vs Cricket Association of Bengal judgment, Justice P.B. Sawant affirmed that airwaves are public property and called for an independent authority to regulate their use.

Necessary Reform and the Way Forward

• Institutional and legislative reforms
  • Restoring Prasar Bharati’s autonomy requires constituting the parliamentary committee and Broadcasting Council, transferring assets and staff, and establishing a professionally managed Board.
  • Funding must minimise government interference, while operational control by Indian Information Service officers must be reduced.
  • The 1990 Act must be amended wherever its provisions enable excessive government control.
• Political commitment and accountability
  • These reforms require sustained political commitment. Parties often advocate autonomy in opposition but seek control after assuming power.
  • In August 2026, the government informed the Lok Sabha that it had received no formal complaints concerning Prasar Bharati’s autonomy during the preceding year.
  • However, the absence of complaints proves little when the statutory council intended to receive them has never been established.
• Lessons from past reform efforts
  • The Chanda Committee, appointed in 1966, concluded that a psychological transformation in the government’s approach to broadcasting was necessary.
  • Six decades later, this transformation remains incomplete.

Conclusion

• Prasar Bharati demonstrates the gap between legislative intent and institutional reality.
• Despite the framework established by the 1990 Act, successive governments have failed to implement essential safeguards.
• An independent public broadcaster is vital for informed citizenship, pluralistic debate and accountable governance.
• Its credibility depends on editorial freedom, professional management, financial independence and parliamentary oversight.
• Ultimately, public broadcasting must serve citizens, not the government of the day.