One fears that institutions like individuals lose
sight of their mission and purpose.

Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC) and other educational institutions have an obligation to send a clear message to students that there is more to an educational institute than career planning.

Also these institutions have a similar obligation to
reward their professors for teaching. They have an
obligation to make sure their promotion reflects the
highest values of the academics and not the basest.

One has to recognize that one cannot isolate oneself
from a culture that is driven to quantify that which
cannot be quantified. But good institutions can
validate those qualities that lead to a sense of
self-worth.

IIMC as an institution seems quite obsessed with "the
bottom line," a commercial phrase that suggests- the
only thing that matters is profit. And for IIMC,
faculty members and the management it seems all that
matters is production of cannon fodders every nine-month to be disposed of in the media warfare.

It illustrates an insane eagerness to cut the chase
and clear away the interim process between the initial
undertaking and the completion of a task. "The bottom
line" obsession has deluded the thinking about
perspective and has made it appear as if all that
mattered is the final outcome.

But it would be quite far fetched to expect
perspective from Navin B. Chawla who was made the
Secretary of the Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry on May 29, 2004. Chawla is a 1969 batch IAS officer.

After the passing away of Ramesh Chandra, Chairman, IIMC
passed away on 22nd September 2004, Chawla perhaps had
to take a decision with regard to the nomination of next
Chairman of the IIMC but instead he nominated himself
as its Chairman.

Aeschylus, a Greek playwright & a philosopher said,
“Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law
than those who make the law. Wrong must not win by
technicalities.”

But Chawla does not care.

Interestingly, as a Chairman of IIMC, the 2005 batch
students saw him for the first and perhaps for the
last time on the day of their Convocation.

Sources have informed that Navin Chawla is to retire
in 31 July, 2005. In all probability, Chawla would
like to remain the chairman of IIMC till 31 July and
must be planning to continue in that position even after
retirement.

"In Indian bureaucracy while all bureaucrats of similar
seniority are equal on paper, yet some chosen few are
more equal than others. Chawla belongs to the latter
category. Chawla was very close to Sanjay Gandhi and
wielded unprecedented power in his official capacity as
Secretary to the Lt. Governor of the Union Territory
of Delhi, Kishan Chand during Emergency in 1975-77. He
functioned as the de-facto Governor of Delhi and
several bureaucrats who happened to interact with him
during this period have confirmed the fact that he was
known for his unabashed authoritarianism. His
controversial role as Secretary to the Lt Governor of
Delhi was noted by the Shah Commission, which went
into emergency excesses. Chawla did not cover himself
with glory when the Constitution of India was
subverted with impunity during emergency. As one who
occupied a vantage position during that period, he was
charged with arbitrary exercise of authority," says
V Sundarm, a retired IAS officer.

The same Chawla arranged the IIMC Convocation at 9 o’
clock in the early morning of 29th April, 2005 so that
the flop show which perhaps he knew the Convocation
was going to be could not be taken note of by the
media. He successfully escaped the attention of media
in general and some 2900 media professionals from
IIMC. Chawla made no effort to invite the IIMC alumni.

Chawla had called Dr Karan Singh to give the
Convocation Address to the students passing out of
IIMC. Dr Singh came so ill prepared to give his
address that he kept referring to IIMC as IIMS.
Perhaps this was the outcome of Chawla’s briefing. Dr
Singh has a reputation of being a good speaker and one
knows him to be veteran who has given numerous such
addresses. Or perhaps Chawla feels that Philosophy and
Mass Communication are one and the same. One is at
one’s wit’s end to note as to how come Dr Singh was
deemed as the right person to be the Chief Guest at
the IIMC Convocation.

If someone can share the erudite text of the speech
given by both Dr Singh and Chawla, we would be
delighted if for nothing else than for their Sarkari
humour.

We hear nothing about what Dr B. P. Sanjay, director,
IIMC said at the Convocation. Was he so awe-struck in
the presence of a powerful bureaucrat and a powerful
politician that he became speechless?

If possible someone from the current batch may also
share the text of the speech by different course
directors so that we can verify as how far what they
stated at solemn occasion like Convocation is true.

Will Chawla please explain as to why the event of IIMC
Convocation was totally boycotted by the media? Why
even Prasar Bharati remained indifferent to it? What
is the message from such poor media coverage to a
premier mass communication institute?

Why Chawla did not direct Press Information Bureau(PIB)
to take note of the IIMC Convocation?

Does it not seem to be a deliberate policy of some
vested interest that represents corporate interest
instead of public interest to marginalise the status
of IIMC to promote corporate sponsored mass
communication institutes?

The fact remains the way Convocation of 2005 has been
conducted is a reflection of the sorry state of
affairs at IIMC. Its non-serious handling has violated
the sanctity of the occasion. If genuine attempts are
not made to set matters right, in future defaulters
and the culprits will be named and exposed.

IIMC is there to serve the students of IIMCto build their capacity in order to serve in public interest, the IIMC Alumni with their active involvement especially by keeping track of what’s going on at IIMC can help it serve better.

Incindentally, on 29th April itself S. Jaipal Reddy, Minister of Information & Broadcasting and Culture informed the Lok Sabha about the "USE OF MASS COMMUNICATION" while his Secretary failed to perfom his duty by not communicating about the IIMC Convocation to the masses. One can now visualise how he runs the I&B Ministry.

Reddy would serve the cause of Mass Communication better if he paid proper attention to IIMC instead of treating it like one of the departments of Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.