The power of information has impacted human affairs throughout history, thereby placing the holder of vital information in a position to make critical and decisive interventions that can affect many people’s lives. The evolution of the modern State ensured that it was the sole custodian and holder of information in the name of security. The monopoly over information allowed the state system to influence people’s opinions, actions, and shape their decision making abilities. However, in order for democracy to be inclusive and participatory, States need to be accountable to its citizens through creating transparent systems.
In recent times, the State’s monopoly over information has been more fiercely challenged due to changes in technology which was revolutionized by the advent of the internet and accelerated even more through social networks. Since the internet perhaps poses the greatest threat to the State system’s control over information, it naturally follows that they want control over the internet as well. Today, most information, including State secrets, is available on the internet. This has dramatically influenced people’s thinking when information is instantly available. In this current technological climate, the State no longer enjoys the same kind of power and control over its citizens. However, this is not the case in all scenarios, such as States that are not strong democracies, and especially for citizens that are under military authority.
Today in Nagaland, a history of protracted armed conflict, is taking place in an environment that is highly militarized and alive with corruption. These conditions make access to information even more critical as the holder of information plays a strategic and decisive role. Ideally, information needs to be available to everyone, and yet in places like Nagaland, people are starved for information from trusted and reliable sources. These conditions are fertile ground for rumors and propaganda which leaves the ordinary citizen feeling disempowered when it comes to making meaningful and informed decisions that affect their lives. The lack of opportunities and access to quality information, analysis and relevant statistics has encouraged rampant corruption and a culture of impunity. Any attempt to uncover information for public consumption in the Naga context is met by fierce criticism.
Considering that the print media is the one of the only organized means of mass communication in the Naga context, it is responsible to uncover and present information vital to public interest. This responsibility is further complexified and challenged when reliable information is not easily accessible. Nagaland’s political context makes it very difficult to get information through the Right of Information, because various stake holders use societal pressure to see that the truth remains buried and inaccessible. Such practices are detrimental to the democratization of information in Nagaland. Naga people are entitled to having ‘the whole truth, nothing but the truth.’ Let’s make it possible for the Naga psyche to prepare itself for a democratic discourse on information!
