Points to Remember:
- Aims and objectives of the McBride Commission.
- India’s stance on the Commission’s recommendations.
- The context of the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO).
Introduction:
The McBride Commission, officially known as the International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems, was established by UNESCO in 1977. Its mandate was to investigate the imbalance in global communication flows and propose solutions to create a more just and equitable international communication order, often referred to as the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO). The Commission’s report, Many Voices, One World, published in 1980, became a focal point of debate, with differing perspectives emerging from developed and developing nations, including India. The core issue was the perceived dominance of Western media in shaping global narratives, often to the detriment of diverse voices and perspectives from the Global South.
Body:
Aims and Objectives of the McBride Commission:
The primary aim of the McBride Commission was to analyze the existing global communication system and identify its inherent inequalities. Its objectives included:
- Analyzing the flow of information: The Commission sought to understand the concentration of media ownership and control in the hands of a few powerful nations, primarily Western countries. This concentration was seen as leading to a skewed representation of global events and perspectives.
- Promoting diversity and pluralism: The Commission advocated for a more diverse and pluralistic media landscape, ensuring that voices from developing countries were heard and their perspectives represented. This involved promoting local media development and strengthening indigenous communication systems.
- Strengthening national communication policies: The Commission encouraged nations to develop and implement national communication policies that reflected their own cultural and societal needs. This included promoting media literacy and fostering critical engagement with media content.
- Improving access to information and communication technologies: The Commission emphasized the importance of bridging the technological gap between developed and developing nations, ensuring equitable access to information and communication technologies (ICTs).
- Promoting freedom of expression: While advocating for a more equitable system, the Commission also stressed the importance of upholding freedom of expression and the free flow of information. The goal was not censorship but a more balanced and representative media landscape.
India’s Position on the McBride Commission’s Recommendations:
India largely supported the McBride Commission’s overall goals of a more just and equitable international communication order. India, being a developing nation with a large population and diverse cultural landscape, felt strongly about the need for a more representative global media system. India’s position can be summarized as follows:
- Support for NWICO: India actively participated in the debates surrounding NWICO and generally supported the Commission’s recommendations for a more balanced flow of information.
- Emphasis on cultural diversity: India strongly emphasized the importance of protecting and promoting cultural diversity in the media landscape. The country feared the dominance of Western media could lead to cultural homogenization and the erosion of local traditions.
- Concerns about Western media dominance: India shared the concerns of other developing nations regarding the dominance of Western media outlets and their potential to shape global narratives in ways that were not always beneficial to developing countries.
- Advocacy for greater participation: India advocated for greater participation of developing nations in international communication organizations and decision-making processes.
However, India also expressed some reservations about certain aspects of the Commission’s recommendations, particularly those that could be interpreted as infringing on freedom of expression or promoting state control over media. India’s commitment to a free press and the importance of independent journalism tempered its support for some of the more interventionist proposals.
Conclusion:
The McBride Commission’s work highlighted crucial imbalances in global communication flows and advocated for a more equitable and representative system. India, while largely supportive of the Commission’s aims, also maintained a cautious approach, balancing its desire for a more just communication order with its commitment to freedom of expression and the independence of the media. The legacy of the McBride Commission continues to be relevant today, as the challenges of media dominance and digital divides persist. Moving forward, a balanced approach is needed, one that promotes both equitable access to information and communication technologies and upholds the fundamental principles of freedom of expression and media independence. This requires international cooperation, national policy initiatives, and a commitment to fostering media literacy and critical engagement with media content across all societies. Ultimately, a truly holistic and sustainable communication system must be built on the foundation of inclusivity, diversity, and respect for fundamental human rights.