SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY

 ‘The Libertarian Theory’ had according to Siebert, Schramm and Peterson become ‘antiquated, outdated and obsolete’. It had thrown up many questions and problems for which not ready-made solutions were available.

To prove these issues a private commission ‘Commission on Freedom of the Press’ was set up in the US in 1942. Its chairperson was Robert Hutchins, Chancellor of Chicago University. The panel was asked to examine areas and circumstances under which the press of the US is succeeding or failing; to discover where free expression is or is not limited, whether by government censorship pressure from readers or advertisers or the unwisdom of its proprietors or the timidity of its management’. In its report submitted in 1947 the panel said the press had a duty unto society and must keep in view the ‘goals and values of society’. Thus, we see that the seed of the Social Responsibility Theory is in the Hutchins Commission Report.

The report held the US press accountable for serving the interests of the powerful few and not acting as the voice of the common people. The report asked the media to stick to certain principles – ‘provide a full, truthful, comprehensive and intelligent account of the day’s events in a context which gives them meaning’; ‘serve as a forum form the exchange of comment and criticism’, act as a common carrier for the public expression’ and paint a ‘representative picture of the constituent groups of society’.

The theory advocates self-regulation against government control as the means to uphold social responsibility; but it does not consider state control totally uncalled for accepting that some situation may necessitate its use. This would create an objective, informative and independent press that is interested in portraying reality for reality’s sake and not for commercial considerations.

Siebert et al write: ‘Social Responsibility Theory holds that the government must not merely allow freedom; it must actively promote it… When necessary, therefore, the government should act to protect the freedom of its citizens’.

The report advised media owners to consider their empires as public trusts and not just money-making private enterprises. It said ‘Inseparable from the right of the press to be free has been the right of the people to have a free press. But the public interest has advanced beyond that point; it is now the right of the people to have an adequate press’. The report also pointed out the media must behave with responsibility towards society as the reins of the press were in the hands of only a few influential people. It is said that power must be handles with care and caution.