 For many years, we have been associated with the NCSTC and the process of identifying and recognizing efforts in science communication has been both encouraging and at times is of concern. While individual efforts by committed organizations, NGOs, educationists have definitely proved to be beneficial in popularizing science as the macro movement is seized with, the challenge of utilizing the enormous and growing communication resources for this purpose I think is still imbued with substantial issues. One is that the level of the government of India and state governments, no doubt there is a participation support systems are in place and also being developed. But the challenge of education itself in science as a career is also a matter of utmost concern, particularly for some of us who are now savvy with the responsibility of developing programs in what I would call as a green field university. These 12 universities that have come up of one of which I am currently leading are so green field that not a single brick has been gained for these universities. But when I was discussing the matter of what kind of programs we should develop, the immediate concern was that can the new universities, central universities take on the task of building a good program in the sciences that to at the plus two level. So there is a separate dynamics of policy making with regard to strengthening science education in the country, particularly at the higher education in the higher education sector. But that also is limited by the fact that as all of you know that hardly we have space for 10 to 12 percent of our students wanting to have education in the university system. That is the reason why many new institutions are being created. Although there is a lot of debate about the timing, relevance and the location of these universities. The second challenge is that is science and by extension scientific temper an important foundation for building a rational, output looking society. And that is where I think the role of science, science in communication or communication of science in which we want to use the term in combination becomes very crucial. And we are often encouraged by the proliferation of mass media in the country. At the time that mass media grew in the country on a very phenomenal basis. Some of us in the social education sector, we were highly encouraged that here we are in a situation where mass media, print and electronic media have grown to such an extent that they provide enormous multiplier opportunities for communicating socially relevant themes of which science and scientific temper is a crucial foundation block. But this was not the situation. There was a multiplicity of shambles, but as my first point senior colleague Sheikirin Karnik pointed out it was poverty amidst plenty. In the sense that the mass media expansion saw more of the same rather than providing diverse and plural opportunities for communicators to reach their messages to the masses. A very common refrain from the management is that it is so boring. It is so uninteresting how can we even use this material. But my response to some such perceptions, valid as they are from their point of view because media operates in a free market place. Neither the media nor anyone of us intellectuals would like the media to be directed as to what it should do. But at the same time I think media today has an enormous appetite for content. You have a 24 by 7 scenario and let us imagine a situation where even if 3 minutes on the earth is devoted by the 300 plus television channels only, you realize what kind of an impact that it would have in terms of reaching the right messages. It is not repetitive. It is a slot that it can definitely think of because the remaining 57, 58 minutes and if you take away the 17 or 18 minutes of advertisement is in any case repetitive. It is the same story that comes in the loop. So, there is definitely an opportunity for what is considered as the largest scientific and technological human resources in this part of the world to utilize that opportunity. So, the journalism that we taught was always based on what people criticize us as western oriented. But I have a problem in slotting all education into the west and the east because if you look at the tradition of the institutions that we are all talking about, all of them where products of the post printing press development and therefore, they carried the baggage of whatever reformative and renaissance elements that these new inventions were supposed to bring to the communication field. So, communications revolution as somebody would call it is essentially rooted in the science and technology of the west and therefore, it also brings the aberrations of that particular society because the profession is shaped by the nature of industry. Therefore, could we have had a Gandhian model of no advertising newspaper? Some people would order. Now, tell that to the media management today, they will easily ask you to climb the nearest tree and say that what minus advertising can be run the industry. There is no way I mean. So, it is not that models do not exist, but models which are built on high capital technology in this intensive communications environment bring with them certain practices. So, you have advertising which subsidizes the main content and to fuel the perpetuation of the content, the managers will have to constantly evolve the techniques of content management so that advertisers feel that the medium is viable and the media managers feel that the advertising revenue is stable. So, therefore, what they offer to us would be kind of free lunch as some people would call it. Essentially, what media tries to do in this process is to deliver each one of us in this room as a potential what should I say commodity for the advertiser. So, every newspaper ad that you see today does not talk about the thinking or the critical Indian. They talked about that I can give you a socio economic profile of a category, engineers, housewives, IT professionals we deliver them to you. Now, that is the language that newspapers and mass media are trying to develop to say that here is a constituency which we can give you. Now, I am trying to suggest all of these minor what should I say underpinnings of the industry basics to tell you that the symbiotic relationship between media content and the audience per force generates a certain kind of content which is rooted in what they would describe as news values. Now, if that definition of news values and its reflection in the mass media takes a longer time then you have a situation where socially relevant content takes a beating. I am not necessarily talking about science journalism because this is an occasion. We have had situations with regard to other equally important development items being neglected by the media. It is not that many a time that they neglected by conscious design or it is a deliberate act. It is like the typical in the movie a formula sells a hero is there. So, from chocolates to bricks that hero keeps selling and the advertiser keeps thinking that if he can sell chocolates he can sell bricks he can sell cement whatever it is. So, this kind of a formulaic approach essentially has allowed for neglect of certain important issues and prioritizing those issues has been a rallying call from the outside sector. Within the sector few journalists have reflected, few journalists have critiqued, but this criticism has come that what are you doing for development. So, we had a phase where development journalism was the mantra of the nineties. Five years in this field we had the press institute experiments, we had Alan Shacky, we had programs in the Philippines, we had programs elsewhere, where number crunching statistics, economic development, market information, all that become became important. What they said was that the role of a journalist is to allow for giving information that is complex and easy to read, easy to digest form. This by extension became the norm for this field of science journalism, where science and doing science was considered either as complex or as in the realm of expert domain and what is complex and what is in the expert domain needs an intermediary and that intermediary has to be the media. So, science journalism was purpose regarded as something so complex that it required the media to spend more time. But the nature and the sociological profile of the journalists that have come into the field we have all the kinds of people coming into the field. Up to now I do not think there is any decent classification as to who a journalist is. We were at a gathering elsewhere and we talked about regulation, somebody talked about accreditation and so on. A lawyer cannot be called a lawyer unless he or she goes through a basic orientation in law. You cannot call a doctor if he does not have an MBA or degree. But try applying that to journalists. Journalism degree is not a prerequisite for entering into the profession. Anybody with a conscious mind with a critical eye with an ability to communicate theoretically can be a journalist. So, do we regulate the training institutions? If so, where do we draw the legitimacy from? Are we training the qualifications? If so, does the industry have the ability to pay duly qualified people the wages that is decent? Some of the wage conditions of journalists are pathetic, are really pathetic. They kind of live by the day and that explains at times many of the practices. So, we have a situation where this profession although noble although perceived to be held in high esteem does not yet have a uniform layer of either perception or the professional requirements. So, given this kind of a situation, if science journalism is complex, who should be doing science reporting? Who should be doing science journalism? This is the dilemma not for you and me. This is a dilemma for the newspapers because it is easy for them to get a bite out of a person saying that I do not like him, he should be dethroned, etcetera. But it is very difficult to immediately come to the news room and do a story on what is happening in the Copenhagen or wherever it is. It requires that much amount of training, understanding and many of the journalists by nature happen to come from liberal arts, humanities or sometimes no formal education itself as I said. Now for them to get to the root of a process and put it across either it requires an inclination or training. NCSTC the Indian Science Writers Association many like-minded and committed organizations have in the past done exemplary work in trying to have courses designed for them. They have supported university programs. For example, the Madurai Kamra University had a fully funded NCSTC supported program in science journalism where students were also given cycles. Recently we have taken that advantage. Dr. Thirupan is here. We said that science journalism cannot be slotted. So, let us do science journalism as a component of a main course in journalism and communication. But we said we will take the funding and have at least one course on science communication. So, there are models and models available. So, what has happened is that at one point in time there used to be specific magazines and outlets which would unravel the mysteries of science to the common people. Today you have fashion magazines, you have sports magazines and the magazines that were dedicated to science have closed down because they feel that they do not have a critical figure which which they can claim circulation and consequently advertising revenue. So, you have two categories of people who are doing science journalism in this country. One is very eminent scientist who feel that it is the call of their profession to be able to explain science to the common people. They are doing it in English language, they are doing it in Indian languages that is one step. Plus there are journalists who take it upon themselves as a special beat and do stories. But here also you see if you see the distinction between what goes on as AIDS reporting. The gentleman from ICIMA although it was very technical did have a paper which talked about you know what this micro nutrient can do. The AIDS stories are if you look at AIDS stories both in print and electronic media. I think it is perpetuating the commonly had belief rather than telling us that this is something that we can contain with. So, horror sensationalism becomes a norm and it defeats what could have been a good story to explain to the people what it is all about. Similar is the story of much more rampant cases like TV etc. We are doing good stories with regard to Chenryan space. It is because the establishment Indian state space research organization makes it upon to ensure that both its successes and failures are presented properly in a suitably evolved media care. So, therefore, you see lot of coverage because their science their technology is explained to the Germans. So, the owners for science communication apart from the interest that they have to show and apart from the information that the profession has to have is also on the scientific establishment. Unless the scientific establishment what does it matter to people? People know want to know how does your science help me in my everyday life. That is a fundamental question that all of us ask. You see if an ad comes somebody said they should be campaigns washing hands with water etc. Deep rooted societal problems there. Water is a scarce commodity. It is easy for you know a well cushioned media class to talk about some of these practices, but when you really have to go in search of water to other basic needs by cooking I am not trying to say that give away washing campaign etc. But what I am trying to say is that there are many other issues which are related to some of the things that we take for granted. So, when a society is asymmetrical when there are other basic issues unless you have science which demystifies and tells people that there are probably alternative means of doing things the person will not be motivated. Why is the employment guarantee scheme a success? Apart from the advertisement it means that there is an incentive for the person that there is an access to a hundred day wage. Similarly science teaching in single teacher schools in the villages one has to examine where where science is headed. What is this kind of fear that our children develop? First they develop a fear of mathematics by the time they come to 7th, 8th all the parents will be saying this take a hundred out of hundred hundred out of hundred come 9th the marks come down to 60 40 by the 10th it will be single digit. So, this phobia that is ingrained is disuading people. Either we have pedagogical problems in teaching foundations also infrastructural problems because you see a person who has missed the bus and not being able to understand science it becomes very difficult for him to mass media alone to discover the virtues of science. I think what we have to do is to kind of look at science journalism or any advocacy oriented kind of a journalism in a holistic context. And this is where university programs journalism training institutions have a very significant role because the how to do it part the skills part yes it has to be taught how to narrate the story it has to be taught storytelling has to be taught. But apart from that there should be considerable exposure for the students within their own university systems to try and understand what is the science that their faculty is doing. Now, I come from a university of Hyderabad we are supposed to be the number one institution and I am sure that many of us here who come from that university hardly know what is the significance of this scopus publication that people are talking about what does it mean to the neighborhood neither is there an open house neither is there an explanation by the scientists. Yes as somebody said in the morning they are very good at seminars but are they able to translate what relevance their work has every work need not necessarily have relevance. Either it should have relevance or it should be an interesting story unless we are not able to do either one of these two exerting journalists exerting media houses to spend more time on science journalism would be an exercise in Black Hill today we have many other means as I mentioned in the inaugural talk the appetite for electronic media for content is very high and science journalism somebody said that today people are watching discovery people are watching NGC wide etc etc but one has to understand that each program of discovery each program of NGC costs thousands of dollars to make we have a gamdarshan we have our science channel we have it is not that India does not have the infrastructure not for a while in fact you know Manoj was here this morning some of us even debated although I am less enthusiastic but we are even debating a dedicated satellite channel for science communication it is on the card now we have dedicated channel for education we have dedicated channel for science we have dedicated channel for sports I think you know too much of a dedication for slotted areas also is a problem because the human mind can comprehend holistically certain things unless it is able to relate these developments is bit of a sports bit of a politics bit of a topic and then tries to appreciate its threshold of comprehension I think is better that way you have rather than slotting and saying that early morning science afternoon science in school science I think the pedagogy of science I am not here to preach pedagogy of science definitely has to change to sustain the interests of the children who are coming into the scientific domain to the quality of journalists in terms of their ability to do and write science has to improve and the scientific establishment which claims that it is the third largest of the second largest in the world has got to come down to the level of the people and explain itself as to what is the relevance of so many crores of rupees that is being spent for S&T I think LCH etc are doing their job but I think what is happening is the CSIR labs the ICS lab all are supposed to transfer knowledge from lab to land and vice versa it is in their hands that science communication popularization risks unless they network in a dedicated manner with the journalists we will have many more workshops and we will agonize continuously as to why science is not there in the media we must ask a larger question what has overall S&T establishment done to popularize what has it done to sensitize people and today in the era of networking communication networking technologies social people say digital divide etc but I do have figures to say that this digital divide continuously talking about digital divide is perhaps a myth because today the situation is improving a lot we have as I said we have about 43 to 45 percent tele density and I think there is a situation where the proliferation of mass media the phenomenal reach of the print media the expansion of the television the expansion in the telecommunication the delivery mechanisms are in place we need to search for content content cannot be generated by the existing profile of journalists that we have I am sorry to say this can be checked by anybody it can only be generated by the next generation you know trained journalism graduates unfortunately universities also are not doing they are more interested in process they are more interested in asking the civil questions because they feel that their training has to emulate the practices in the field if the practices in the field have aberrations then that aberration continues and we will not be able to do anything much about it