Context: Prasar Bharati was intended to function as an autonomous public broadcaster, modelled on the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), but continues to face concerns over government control and editorial independence.
- In 2014, Information and Broadcasting Minister Prakash Javadekar promised to end government dominance over Prasar Bharati; however, the article argues that meaningful autonomy remains unfulfilled. The broadcast of the 138th episode of Mann Ki Baat on September 27, 2026, is cited as an example of the government's continued use of public broadcasting platforms.
Public Service Broadcasting: The Intended Model
- Nehru's vision (1948): Jawaharlal Nehru advocated a semi-autonomous broadcasting corporation, with government control over policy but not its day-to-day functioning as a government department.
- BBC model: As explained by former BBC Delhi bureau chief Mark Tully, public service broadcasting differs from government broadcasting and requires editorial autonomy, freedom from government interference and programming driven by public interest rather than commercial considerations.
- Emergency experience (1975): All India Radio (AIR) and Doordarshan were used as instruments of the ruling regime, highlighting the dangers of government control over broadcasting.
- Institutional evolution: Following the Emergency, the Janata government commissioned B.G. Verghese to recommend autonomy. His proposals informed the Prasar Bharati Bill, 1979, which lapsed. A revised Bill introduced in 1989 received presidential assent in 1990, becoming the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990, which came into force in 1997.
Prasar Bharati Act, 1990: Mandate and Autonomy
- Objective: The Act envisaged a genuinely autonomous, credible, innovative and flexible corporation accountable to the people and Parliament.
- Section 12 — Core mandate: Prasar Bharati must organise public broadcasting services to inform, educate and entertain.
- Section 12(2)(b) — Editorial responsibility: It must safeguard citizens' right to be informed freely, truthfully and objectively, ensuring a fair and balanced flow of information, including contrasting views, without advocating its own opinion or ideology.
- Article 19(1)(a): The Act's autonomy objective is linked to the constitutional freedom of speech and expression, which includes the public's interest in receiving information.
- UNESCO's 2001 definition: Public broadcasting should serve all citizens and remain distinct from both commercial broadcasting and state-controlled broadcasting.
Why Prasar Bharati Lacks Autonomy
- Parliamentary oversight — Section 13: A 22-member committee drawn from both Houses of Parliament was envisaged to oversee Prasar Bharati, but it has never been constituted. Former CEO Jawhar Sircar argues that ministers retain control by insisting that they alone are accountable to Parliament.
- Broadcasting Council — Sections 14 and 15: The proposed council to receive complaints and safeguard political impartiality has never been established, leaving no effective mechanism for editorial grievances or redress.
- Administrative and financial dependence: The Board has been staffed with allegedly pliable bureaucrats, while the transfer of assets and staff was not completed. The absence of an independent financial foundation leaves it dependent on the Ministry.
- Government directions — Section 23: The Centre retains the power to issue binding directions concerning what may or may not be broadcast, undermining editorial independence.
- Recruitment autonomy — Section 10: A recruitment board was intended to insulate appointments from government interference. It remained unimplemented until July 2020, when Jagadish Upasane, who headed Bharat Prakashan, publisher of Panchajanya and Organiser, was appointed its chairman, raising concerns over institutional independence.
- Operational control: Indian Information Service officers continue to exercise operational influence, contrary to the objective of professional and independent broadcasting management.
Structural Imbalance: Transmission over Content
- 2021 manpower audit: Against a workforce of approximately 25,000, nearly half of Prasar Bharati's employees worked in engineering, compared with slightly over 10% at the BBC. Content staff accounted for under 20%, compared with approximately 70% at the BBC.
- Implication: The imbalance reflects a transmission-oriented organisation rather than a content- and news-driven public broadcaster capable of meeting diverse public information needs.
Public Service Broadcasting: Symbolism versus Substance
- Public Service Broadcasting Day: November 12 was designated in 2000 to commemorate Mahatma Gandhi's only broadcast on AIR, made in 1947 for approximately two lakh refugees at Kurukshetra.
- Erosion of its purpose: The commemorative observance has become largely symbolic. In 2022, controversy arose over an attempt to remove a Christian hymn sung by school students from the national broadcast.
- BBC and editorial tensions: Despite invoking the BBC as a model, sections of the political establishment criticised it for a supposed “colonial mindset” following its 2023 documentary India: The Modi Question. From April 2024, the BBC restructured its Indian news operation to comply with foreign-investment rules.
- Mann Ki Baat: The article cites the September 2026 broadcast as a visible example of public broadcasting being used as a platform for the government's messaging.
Constitutional and Judicial Significance
- Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting v. Cricket Association of Bengal (1995): The Supreme Court, through Justice P.B. Sawant, held that airwaves are public property and that the Centre must establish an independent autonomous public authority to regulate their use.
- Significance: Broadcasting frequencies are a public resource, and their use must serve the public interest rather than remain under exclusive governmental control. The article argues that the direction to establish an independent authority remains unimplemented.
Way Forward
- Activate statutory safeguards: Constitute the parliamentary committee under Section 13 and the Broadcasting Council under Sections 14 and 15 to establish oversight and grievance redress.
- Ensure institutional independence: Rebuild the Board as a professional body, transfer assets and staff, and establish funding mechanisms that minimise government interference.
- Reform operational management: Remove excessive bureaucratic control, particularly over editorial decisions, and ensure independent, merit-based recruitment.
- Amend the 1990 Act: Address provisions and implementation gaps that enable continued government control, including the scope of binding directions under Section 23.
- Build political consensus: Implement the autonomy framework irrespective of the party in power, ensuring accountability to Parliament without ministerial control over daily broadcasting.
- Enforce constitutional safeguards: The public may seek judicial intervention to implement the Prasar Bharati Act and the Supreme Court's direction on independent regulation of airwaves.
Additional Institutional Perspective
- Chanda Committee (1966): Appointed when Indira Gandhi was Information and Broadcasting Minister, it stressed that a “psychological transformation” in the government's approach to broadcasting was necessary. Six decades later, the article argues, this transformation remains incomplete.
- Accountability versus independence: In August 2026, the government informed the Lok Sabha that it had received no formal complaints from journalists or media bodies regarding Prasar Bharati's autonomy in the preceding year. However, the absence of complaints cannot establish independence when the statutory Broadcasting Council for grievance redress has not been constituted.
