The McBride Commission asked a simple question. Who tells the world’s news, and who gets left out? Its 1980 report called for a New World Information and Communication Order.
How did the McBride Commission come about?
From a stalemate to a commission
Poorer countries felt that rich nations controlled the world’s news. They raised the issue at UNESCO in the 1970s.
At the General Conference in Nairobi in 1976, many opposed the idea. Governments and press groups disagreed.
The only realistic step was to keep studying the problem and delay any decision.
In 1977 UNESCO convened the International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems.
In 1978 the Paris conference agreed, without a vote, a declaration on how the media can help peace.
Sources: WACC, The MacBride Report legacy and media democracy today · UK Hansard statement by Timothy Raison on UNESCO, 1985.
Who sat on the commission?
Seán MacBride of Ireland was its President. He had shared the 1974 Nobel Peace Prize, for his efforts on human rights.
The commission had sixteen members from many countries.
They included the writer Gabriel García Márquez of Colombia.
They also included Elie Abel of the USA and Mochtar Lubis of Indonesia.
B. G. Verghese represented India.
In April 1980 the commission delivered its report, Many Voices, One World.
Sources: NobelPrize.org, Seán MacBride Facts · WACC, The MacBride Report legacy and media democracy today.
Check 1
The McBride Commission had Seán MacBride of Ireland as its President.
Why did the commission say the news flow was unequal?
The one-way street of news
The report spoke of a near monopoly. A few big agencies sold most of the world’s news.
It gave a clear figure. The world received about 80 per cent of its news through London, Paris and New York.
News moved mostly from rich countries to poorer ones. Very little flowed back.
Five agencies held a wide international role. Reuters and Associated Press were two of them.
Sources: UNESCO, Many Voices, One World (MacBride Report), 1980.
Free flow or balanced flow?
The old principle was the free flow of information. It was proclaimed in many human rights documents.
The report said the imbalance made “free flow” look like a one-way flow.
It asked for a free and balanced flow instead.
The report also asked poorer countries to build their own skills and media. It called this self-reliance.
Sources: WACC, The MacBride Report legacy and media democracy today · UNESCO, Many Voices, One World (MacBride Report), 1980.
Check 2
The report said about 80 per cent of the world’s news came through London, Paris and New York.
What was the New World Information and Communication Order, and why was it disputed?
An open-ended idea
The report called the order an open-ended framework of ideas. It was not a fixed plan.
It aimed at a freer, fairer and better balanced news system.
The system would rest on democratic ideas and equal ties between nations.
The report noted that the non-aligned countries had played a major role in shaping these ideas.
Sources: UNESCO, Many Voices, One World (MacBride Report), 1980 · UK Hansard statement by Timothy Raison on UNESCO, 1985.
The case against it
Critics feared that governments could use the idea to control the press.
The United Kingdom made this case in 1985 when it explained its decision to leave UNESCO.
It said the order “posed a threat to the freedom of the press”. It also blamed too much politics inside UNESCO.
So supporters saw a fairer deal for the South. Critics saw a risk to press freedom.
Sources: UK Hansard statement by Timothy Raison on UNESCO, 1985.
Why did Britain and the United States leave UNESCO?
The argument spilled into UNESCO’s wider politics.
The United States gave notice that it would withdraw at the end of 1983.
The United Kingdom followed with its own formal notice. It took effect on 31 December 1985.
Britain said UNESCO had grown too political and badly managed.
So the news order became one strand in a bigger row about the agency itself.
Sources: UK Hansard statement by Timothy Raison on UNESCO, 1985 · WACC, The MacBride Report legacy and media democracy today.
| Side | Main aim or fear | Key idea |
|---|---|---|
| Supporters of the new order | Fix the one-way flow of news from rich to poor countries | Free and balanced flow; self-reliance |
| Critics | Stop governments from steering the press | Freedom of the press comes first |
| The commission | Keep free flow but widen who speaks | An open-ended framework, not a fixed plan |
What did UNESCO do afterwards?
In 1980 the UNESCO General Conference started a media aid scheme, the IPDC.
It backs media projects in poorer countries through training, research and law reform.
In four decades it backed more than 2,000 projects with over 120 million USD in grants.
How can you remember the debate?
Use three key words in an answer.
Balance means more news should flow from poorer countries too.
Self-reliance means poorer countries should build their own skills and media.
Press freedom was the critics’ main worry about the new order.
A good answer names all three and shows both sides.
Sources: UNESCO, Many Voices, One World (MacBride Report), 1980 · NobelPrize.org, Seán MacBride Facts.
Can both sides be right?
A fairer news system needs more voices from poorer countries.
But if governments decide those voices, the press may lose its freedom.
A good answer keeps both worries in view.
It backs balance and also defends a free press.
Sources: UK Hansard statement by Timothy Raison on UNESCO, 1985 · UNESCO, Many Voices, One World (MacBride Report), 1980.
Check 3
The commission wanted the principle of “free flow” of information dropped entirely.
Previous Year Questions
The 2016 Mains asked about the commission and India’s position.
- UPSC CSM 2016, GS Paper II, Q20Aims of the McBride Commission and India’s position. Source.
- How to answerName the 1980 report and its call for a balanced flow. Add the 80 per cent figure. Show the Non-Aligned push and India’s member on the commission. Weigh the press-freedom objection. Close with the report’s influence on media debates.
What should you remember?
The commission began in 1977 and reported in April 1980.
Seán MacBride chaired it, and it had sixteen members.
It wanted a free and balanced flow of news.
Critics, including the UK, feared press controls.
Sources: WACC, The MacBride Report legacy and media democracy today.
MCQ on the McBride Commission
0 of 1 answered Question 1 of 1 0 of 1 answered Question 1 of 1 0 of 1 answered Question 1 of 1 0 of 1 answered Question 1 of 1 0 of 1 answered Question 1 of 1 0 of 1 answered Question 1 of 1
Leave a Reply