Friday, 16 November 2012

Contrast between two pioneers of Press in India, James Silk Buckingham and James Augustus Hickey



Introduction

Before, we make the contrast and comparison between the pioneers of Indian press-James Augustus Hickey and James Silk Buckingham, let us briefly understand about the coming of the press (newspapers) in India. The newspapers came to India as an alien product, as one the benefits of British Colonialism. The initial strength and power for launching of newspapers was directly fostered in England. James Augustus Hickey has the distinction of starting the press in India. Later, James Silk Buckingham got the title for being called as the Pioneer of true Indian Journalism. I have tried in my writing to show the contrast between the pioneer of Indian press under the scanner: content and its influence
Content and its Influence:
 James Augustus Hickey was an Irishman who is considered as the founder of Indian press. He started a newspaper  called as ‘Hickeys Gazette’ or ‘Bengal Gazette’;  it was aliased as ‘Calcutta General Advertiser’ which came into being on January 29th 1780. It declared itself as “weekly Political and commercial paper open to all parties but influence by none.” It is very important to observe the statement which implicates that the newspaper was not influenced by the Government or other party, but to the interest of people, which although proved to be a tool used by James Augustus Hickey’s personal contention with the British rule or its representative- East India Company.
The content was mainly for criticizing the East India Company. But to make it more catchy and readable, Hickey added other things to this four page Gazette, like a Gossip column, a poet’s corner, news related to the European scandals and most importantly the advertisement. The thing to be noted is that the content was used to emphasise on criticizing the men in power like Warren Hastings and even people related to the rulers like Lady Hasting. The content of ‘Hickey’s Gazette’ was used more for acting as a tool of criticism and not for the benefit of the general masses and public. A severe criticism can be done to Hickey’s Gazette as it lacked the ethics of Journalism and was more abusive-using nicknames of people, and also it wasn't a benefactor to the common public.    

If we compare and set a contrast between Hickey’s contribution to the contribution of James Silk Buckingham; there is no doubt that Hickey provided and initiated a platform for Indian press, but we can’t  defy the fact that Buckingham’s contribution is more legendary and praise worthy. Buckingham was an Anglo-Indian who is titled as ‘the Father of true Indian Journalism.’ He in true sense can be termed as pioneer of ethical Journalism of India. It is said that in the early years of 19th century, Calcutta saw the emergence of a first real and outstanding journalist. Jawaharlal Nehru has described him as ‘the earliest champions of the freedom press in India’ and one ‘who is still remembered’ in this country.Although, he came to India as an editor of the ‘Calcutta Chronicle’, which was started by the Calcutta merchants to safeguard their vested interested, but Buckingham laid more emphasis and meant his content for uplifting the issues of common public, news of local conditions and purified his content from making criticism, fashion, advertisement, gossip and Anglo Social Scandals. He was more concerned about the social reforms and that is the reason, he was more liked by the public. He was also coordinated by Raja Ram Mohan Roy, as he became a pioneer of not only the freedom of speech and expression but a social reformer as well. The reason might be that he was more accustomed to the rituals, cultures, beliefs and values of Indian masses in particular and world in general. He was a prolific writer and was more successful in influencing the hearts of suppressed people of British India.

In conclusion, it can be said that James Augustus Hickey is the pioneer of Indian press; but the title of pioneer of true Indian Journalism, must be given to James Silk Buckingham.

1 comment: