Interview with Kiran Karnik, Managing Director, Discovery Communications, India

CI: What in your opinion is the state of development communication in the country today?

Kiran Karnik: There is a lot of good intent. There's a fair amount of work being done, and a fair amount of airtime being devoted to such programs. But the problem is more systemic and organizational. The issue is that developmental communication has not been institutionalized strongly enough to resist external pressures. We need a strong "lobby" of education and development communication professionals and need to identify, or create, 'champions" for this cause in the bureaucracy and among politicians. Also, the issue is how do we make development communication programs that are more interesting given the competition from commercial entertainment programming.

CI: But software has not been the main problem. Development communication efforts in India have been hindered most significantly by management and hardware problems, don�t you think?

KK: I don�t agree with that. In fact, with SITE the management and the hardware were excellent. The availability of working televisions was phenomenally high, upwards of 80 percent. The success of SITE was that it was planned as an overall system � it clearly defined who would maintain the sets in the village and how the ground level management would work. And those days we were working with very sophisticated technology to receive signals directly from satellites � so it did require a lot of coordination.

The problems with development communication via TV [in India] in retrospect, were two: first, the expectations were unrealistically high. Cable channels today are happy with a TRP of 2 or 3 percent; but back then we were not happy with a viewership of 30 percent! The second thing is that real genuine grassroots development to some extent depends on state support in order to have real impact. But there is no political will. The prevailing climate is one in which foreign investment inflows and stock markets matter, not electricity and basic health issues, which don�t figure anywhere in the news. The second problem is that there is a complete lack of political will vis-�-vis development communication.

The management systems were successful in those efforts where ISRO was manager. On the other hand, PREAL (Project in Radio Education for Adult Literacy) was a project of the Ministry for Human Resource Development. The people are very qualified in their respective fields, but management is not their area of expertise, and they were very wary and not understanding of the need for systems management. The strengths with SITE were the management and the organization, but projects managed by other organizations have not paid sufficient attention to these aspects and have consequently suffered.

CI: Why were these projects not sustained, given that they involved rather huge investments of time and resources, and were fairly significant in terms of the software developed?

KK: After SITE, ISRO also stepped back and said they would do proof of concept, but operational systems and implementation were to be left to the concerned agency. The state governments, Doordarshan, the Ministry of Rural Development � none of them took care of systems management. Nobody was designated to do that. Thanks to bureaucratic restrictions, watertight compartments, some things fell through the holes and that was the end of it.

CI: That brings us, then, to a very fundamental issue: some scholars seem to think development communication in developing countries are doomed to fail, thanks to political instability, scarcity of economic and other resources, and a fundamental absence of political will in this direction. Your comment?

KK: I don�t agree with that. Finally governments are not monoliths. Even within the existing structure there are individuals � a health worker, a young deputy commissioner, a district collector -- with whom we have to form "cunning alliances" and win over. Of course, it�s a big help that ISRO represents the central government and has always been perceived as very professional and independent. However, even if the government systems fail, an NGO is likely to lend support.

But it is true that the higher up the development scale you want to go, the more the structural barriers, especially with gender and class-caste. If you just want to promote the use of some seeds and those are available, it�s fine. But if the villagers have to buy that seed, and access loans for that, then you need banks and lending institutions to be involved, and you run into corruption, caste barriers, the difficulties of getting a guarantor � all systemic issues. Individual action in India is difficult, so NGO and collective action is necessary. In this respect, the mass media is helpful in information dissemination, building an environment, and in community mobilization.

CI: How does India compare with other countries in the field of development communication? We have implemented some huge projects.

KK: Specific experiments have been path-breaking, not perhaps in terms of the technology per se � it�s sometimes 15 years old - but in terms of the scale and magnitude of the application. The interactive nature of the technology use and the extent of its use are unique to India. Take, for example, the case of SITE or the Kheda project. Or the training of panchayat members in 20 districts in Karnataka state, through 2-way audio, one-way video in women and child health, water and sanitation. It�s particularly exciting in the context of the Panchayat amendment to the constitution and the devolution of power to local governance.

CI: What are some of the ongoing projects at ISRO?

KK: The project in Jhabua is particularly exciting and potentially has great prospects. It involves integrating different forms of technology - a combination of computers, communication, remote sensing technology -- and, in keeping with ISRO�s philosophy, applying it for the benefit of the poorest and the most disadvantaged in the rural areas.

Also, under the National Agricultural Technology World Bank project a proposal for, among other things, "information shops" that are modeled on the several public pay phone shops that have mushroomed all over the country and now expanding their services to fax, photocopying and even computer/email. These "shops" could provide computer technology for access to the latest data that�s relevant to the rural population -- state and central government data on agriculture, weather patterns, transportation including bus timings and job opportunities. It would also facilitate two-way communication, from the village up to the towns, and would involve an interfacing body such as an NGO to facilitate access to those who can�t read or write. The entrepreneur can charge small fee to make it commercially viable. A VCR could also be set up there, showing educational films or spots. What we�re talking about is a more full-bodied PCO. This way we expand the meaning of communication beyond just broadcast media.

CI: But interpersonal channels of communication work fairly well in rural situations.

KK: They do, but mostly only among those with higher levels of education and information. There are always a few people who go from the villages into the towns for work, and pick up information by word of mouth. However, the harijans who often live in segregated areas in the villages, are very isolated. They cannot afford the bus fare to go the town, and therefore cannot access interpersonal channels outside their own communities.

CI: Over the last few years you�ve proposed commercial channels for Educational Television. What happens, then, to development communication for rural audiences � which is a defining factor in promoting an equitable development in a country? Commercial ETV does not address their needs.

KK: Development communication and public service broadcasting for rural populations is just not commercially viable. There�s no getting away from the fact that they have to be state supported. There has been a fair amount of debate on this issue in India recently � earlier, we had one extreme where the state controlled everything, now we want the state out of everything. In the case of the media, this is just not feasible, it�s wrong thinking. The state has a definite role to play in a democracy, and I�m optimistic that public service broadcasting will happen.

In the last few years, the pendulum has swung to one extreme with commercialization and advertising. Within a year or so there will be a corrective. The corrective will come either from a change in the stance of the government or from the middle class.

CI: Do you think it�s realistic � that the urban middle class will act in the interest of the rural poor?

KK: Yes, the middle class will see that social diseases are as catching as physical ones. They will act in their own self-interest � to promote communication for health and basic education. Right from the days of Nehruvian socialism, it has been the middle class that controls the political agenda. This will translate into more support for public broadcasting. The devolution of power to the local panchayats will also help this process. In the west, public service broadcasting has been partially supported through viewer donations and state subscriptions, but this wouldn�t work in India because the costs of a transmitter are international, and the revenues are national. It�s a good thing that the autonomous Broadcasting Authority has been formed, but television and radio must have state support.

CI: What about the role of radio in future development communication efforts?

KK: Radio has tremendous potential for the future. However, it has not as yet gone through the extreme commercialization that television has. But with FM and more channels coming in, some channels can be freed for public service broadcasting. As the local FM commercial stations increase, so will the demand and the number of studios, driving down the costs of FM radios.

The Broadcasting Bill has a provision for community radio. It could be the start of something new.

Many NGOs especially see technology and radio as tools for oppression by the state, and don�t want to have anything to do with it. But we should use the market just as we use technology, and ride on it. Both NGOs and the government � which has been the biggest defaulter in ignoring the market - need to do this.

CI: Given the absence of political commitment, what are the strengths of development communication in India?

KK: We have highly motivated, qualified people who are dedicated to doing community work. The challenge is to accelerate the pace of political awareness, of socially relevant thinking and development philosophy rather than one determined by commercial imperatives. The pendulum needs to be pushed very hard by the dominant group � the urban middle class which shapes perception in India.

CI: What has India contributed in the field of development communication that other countries can learn from?

KK: In the field of electronic communication India has done exceptional work, even though of limited success, on a magnitude that few other countries have. These are not fundamental breakthroughs, but more of conceptual importance: reorganizing bits and pieces of technology into a needs-oriented system and not just a commercially driven one. It�s a package of technology, operation procedures and management systems and values. The learning at ISRO has been that it�s not difficult to take this package � the same system that has been used for 10-15 years for commercial applications � reconfigure it and apply it for the benefit of the most disadvantaged in the rural areas.

Another key contribution of ISRO�s efforts is that they�ve highlighted the criticality of system management for large-scale communication projects.