Those of us who are old enough will remember Jawaharlal Nehru, a Kashmiri from Uttar Pradesh, wearing the headgear of the Nagas and of other peoples elsewhere in the country. Such gestures, for all that they may have showcased the colourfully ‘quaint’, were symbolic of the oneness of India and therefore were given publicity. They were photo opportunities that were meant to influence us.

The only vehicles of visual publicity then were, for the relatively well-off, a few illustrated newspapers and magazines and, for the masses, the Films Division newsreels shown in the cinemas before feature films. In today’s India there are several times as many printed periodicals: but there can be no doubt that the reach and the inherent power of television make it the most potent medium there is.

In the last few decades, the media has not used its growing effectiveness to do anything to promote Nehru’s ideals, democracy and the scientific temper. Quite the contrary. In every sphere and in every possible way, it has tended to promote the most regressive, feudal tendencies.

I recall with dismay how virtually the whole country would come to a standstill so that the faithful and the curious might watch the Ramayana serial; how some would fold their hands towards crackling and hissing television screens; and how not a few would throw reason to the winds by going forward to apply tilak to moulded glass.

I recall with disgust how the grand, spectacular funerals of Sanjay and Indira Gandhi were pictured, with the press and television showing every ritual in gory detail. The regal proceedings became specially obnoxious because the mother was the one who had taken the calculated populist step of abolishing privy purses.

... contd.