A state with a past history of socialist planning invariably finds innumerable ways to circumvent the market and to extend the monopoly of state-run institutions. In a competitive world there is no reason why Doordarshan should not be treated at par with all other television channels. But Prasar Bharati, which runs Doordarshan, refuses to accept this position. It argues that Doordarshan has greater reach and can get programmes across to 240 million viewers in India who do not have access to cable television. While no one will dispute the truth of this claim, it is difficult to comprehend why Doordarshan needs to carry the telecast of snooker championships to these viewers. This is not a facetious point. The government has released a list of sporting events that Doordarshan will get to broadcast live even if a private channel has won exclusive rights to them. The list includes practically all sports that are shown on television, even those like snooker that have no popular following in India. In the case of sporting events like snooker or chess, it has claimed the right to show it whenever an Indian is playing in the event. Doordarshan?s claim is thus laced with a dose of nationalism. It believes that when an Indian is playing, there can be no such thing as an exclusive right; Doordarshan has a prior right because it is run by the state. For the same reason, Doordarshan asserts that it has a duty to take sporting events to the largest number of viewers in India.

All these claims made on behalf of Doordarshan and Prasar Bharati are spurious. They follow from a privilege that has been ascribed to the state and its institutions. The state has a duty to provide certain basic amenities, like food, housing, health and education to its citizens. By no stretch of imagination can bringing sporting events to its citizens be brought under the rubric of welfare. The argument being put forward by Doordarshan is no more than a ruse to preserve a monopoly that it has lost. Doordarshan claims for itself the status of a public broadcaster. This is another false claim. Doordarshan is funded by the state, it cannot therefore be a public broadcaster. It is a state-owned television channel. By calling itself a public broadcaster, it equates the state with the public. This is a piece of socialist rhetoric which has no basis in reality and is, in fact, dangerous. Doordarshan, if it continues to exist, should not make any special claims for itself and should not enjoy any special rights.