He is the Minister of Information and Broadcasting. He speaks as the gentleman in charge of government policy towards the media. Or does he? He claims he is speaking in his personal capacity. Confusing: when Mr.Mahajan speaks to the nation (India Progress, DD1) is he speaking as Pramodji or mantri ji? Can minister's voice personal opinions on official work? Do personal opinions differ from official ones? And if they do, how do we know which is which?

Differentiating between the views of the man and the Minister is crucialwhen the line between them is so thin. Take autonomy for Prasar Bharati Corporation: Mr.Mahajan is of the personal opinion that autonomy is redundant because competition from 20-odd satellite channels has given DD and AIR objectivity.

If we go by Mr.Mahajan's own perspicacious if light-hearted remarks, objectivity is a subjective matter. Thus, the claim that DD and AIR are objective today, is purely his subjective opinion. An opinion few people in the BJP (including he?), subscribed to till a little over a year ago. Then they complained many, many times, that DD was biased against their party.

Those of the 20-odd channels which broadcast news -- and where the question of objectivity arises -- have done so for 2-3 years but they made no impact on DD's objectivity before BJP came to power. Ironic, eh?

Is it the Minister's opinion, personal or otherwise, that autonomy for DD and AIR is synonymous with objectivity alone? Doesn't it relate to a gamut of other functions, from administrative to creative?Autonomy was to loosen political and bureaucratic shackles so that both organisations could breathe more freely, function as broadcasting institutions rather than sections of the Ministry of I&B. Objectivity of the news was only one of the many objectives of autonomy, if one may so phrase it.

Those include some of the minister's preoccupations: how to balance DD's financial books, how to balance the requirements of public service broadcasting with commercial compulsions, how to improve transmission, etc.

Mr.Mahajan has a touching faith in his own abilities. And in the government's. To leave the enormous Prasar Bharati Corporation in the hands of ``seven wise men'' on the Board, or worse, to let one man, the CEO take all the decisions, is wrong, he feels. The implication is that the government (which any way doles out all the dough for DD and AIR), with the able assistance of the men at I&B (seven and counting), are much better qualified for the job.

After all, haven't they been in charge of AIR/DDsince Independence? Precisely. And look at what they've done. The Prasar Bharati Board has been in place for just over a year. Before that DD and AIR were ruled by the wise men in Parliament and Shastri Bhavan. And the BJP, in Opposition, was vociferously critical of both.

Now in government, Mr.Mahajan wants control. It isn't enough for him that the decisions of the Prasar Bharati Corporation, financial or otherwise, are already subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. Also that party colleague and his predecessor in the Ministry, Mrs.Sushma Swaraj revived the 22-member Parliamentary Committee to oversee the functioning of the Board. Mr.Mahajan holds contradictory opinions: he says he wants us to enjoy the latest and best in technology hence his interest in Direct-To-Home TV services; he also wants to reverse the clock and take both DD and AIR back in time to that antediluvian period when they were state subjects.

Link his views on autonomy to his otherwise blameless opinion that news on DD must be uniform:politicians in power can't let go of DD and AIR. For elementary reasons: as the means of communication with the masses, both are so powerful. And when governments feel wobbly, they seek to shore themselves up by sending out the correct signals (as opposed to the wrong ones by the media) to the people over DD and AIR. Rajiv Gandhi did it; Narasimha Rao did it. Now, Mahajan appears set to repeat their mistakes. But that's just a personal opinion.