A Means to an End: Gandhi’s Use of the Media

Mohandas Gandhi was a great leader in India, with the central beliefs in truth and love. Due to his work in the Indian movement for independence from British rule, Gandhi was honored with the title “Mahatma” meaning “Great Soul”.1 His own father said, “This man [Mohandas] will uphold my reputation. He will make the lineage a distinguished one.”2 Mahatma Gandhi’s great leadership of many social and political movements certainly did this. Before his great changes in India, when he was in South Africa, Gandhi found himself caught in a world of racist conflict and turmoil.3 For this, he tried to use the British conventions of inspiring change, such as writing into newspapers and drafting petitions.4 He describes his thought process by saying “I had then to choose between allying myself with violence or finding out some other method of meeting the crisis.”5 Gandhi went on to formulate his views of nonviolent opposition to laws and regulations that he saw as unjust, while still maintaining his view that India was still benefiting from British rule. He spread these views by focusing on appealing to his intended audience, the Indian people, through journalism and mass media. Gandhi’s use of the press for the benefit of India allowed for this movement against British rule to become a success.

To understand Gandhi’s methods of nonviolent opposition, it is necessary to look at why he believed in nonviolence. This first started with Gandhi’s view that truth is the most important thing of all and that this ultimate truth is synonymous with God.6 He stressed that if “life persists in the midst of destruction… there must be a higher law than that destruction”.7 Gandhi also said that to seek truth one must free the anger and brute in themselves to free the consciousness, and therefore be able to see the truth.8 The conscious decision to engage in nonviolence must also not be out of cowardice, assuming the ability to strike.9 Through this belief in nonviolence, Gandhi developed his weapon of nonviolence, the satyagraha.

Emerging from Sanskrit origins, satyagraha is a compound word coming from satya, which means “truth”, and graha, meaning “insistence”.10 Gandhi defines satyagraha as “truth force,” the powerful opposition to unjust actions, effective through the awakening of truth in ones opponent.11 This action of active nonviolence is meant to appeal to the opponent through reason and suffering.12 Gandhi elaborates by saying:

Pursuit of truth did not admit of violence being inflicted on one’s opponent but that he must be weaned form error by patience and sympathy.13

Gandhi had strict rules for the satyagrahi he chose. Along with patience and sympathy, the satyagrahi, or those who participate in satyagrahas, must not convey anger, nor must never retaliate.14 These principles, Gandhi believed, would lead all peoples to see the truth conveyed in satyagraha. He also believed that “complete independence will be complete only to the extent of our approach in practice to truth and nonviolence.”15 He also said this later to the Indian National Congress in order to convince them that through satyagraha and nonviolence they could achieve independence from Britain. However, in Hind Swaraj, he emphasized communal unity as the key to nonviolence as well, thus showing satyagraha’s diverse application.16

Gandhi’s satyagrahas were used to conquer social, economic, and legal issues. These three genres of conflict are important to note because a community cannot function without all three. The social aspect is what defines a community and is essential whenever dealing with human beings in both rational thought and traditions. It is implied in the very name of “society”. This social aspect also is what allows the community to form. Following the economic aspect allows for the community to continue. Without an economy, a community would cease to have the necessities to grow and the ability to adapt. Some form of a legal system, whether an unwritten code of conduct or a complex constitution, is essential for a community to function. Without this, the community would destroy itself though chaos, due to the nature of humans to think differently from each other. Therefore, it is through these three branches that three of Gandhi’s satyagrahas can be examined for their diversity and success.

It is also important to realize why Gandhi’s movements were so successful. He implemented his ideas into the growing field of journalism. Since World War I, journalism took a new turn towards propaganda. This propaganda took the form of newspaper articles and films. At first, the films seemed vital to Indians to convince some to support the war, such as the Muslims who were wary about fighting against the Sultan.17 The films assured the Indian people that their troops were respected among the British forces.18 However, the continuance of film became difficult because of the rising fear of spies and anti-Ally sentiment. Therefore, British and American propaganda infiltrated the Indian print media, curbing opinions against the Germans and Axis powers. This new method of journalism opened many doors for newspapers and other media outlets to be produced and distributed. However, the press suffered regulation from the British. These regulation practices were meant to be dropped after the war, but a series of uprisings in 1919 convinced the Government of India to keep a publicity organization.19 Despite these regulations Gandhi’s word spread throughout India through newspapers and other media, putting Gandhi in danger of committing sedition several times.

Gandhi’s use of journalism allowed for the spread of this philosophy. He used articles in newspapers to reach out to those whom he wished to rally. However, Gandhi also knew the value of self-control and never used his power of mass communication for selfish needs. He used journalism as a way to convey his message, not as his livelihood.20 Gandhi said, “I have taken up journalism not for its sake but merely as an aid to what I have conceived to be my mission in life.”21 He described this mission as teaching satyagraha by example. To do this he offered his beliefs in his view of journalism saying, “The sole aim of journalism should be service… an uncontrolled pen serves but to destroy.”22 Further more he stated, “When, further a newspaper is treated as a means of making profits, the result is likely to be serious malpractices.”23 Gandhi refused to use advertisements in his works, finding them hypocritical and manipulative.24 Gandhi commented on advertisements saying:

No matter at what cost or effort we must put an end to this undesirable practice or at least reform. It is the duty of every newspaper to exercise some restraint in the matter of advertisements.25

Salien Chatterjee, a reporter who often covered Gandhi said that, “Gandhi always believed and always emphasized that the sole aim of journalism should be service, service of the people and the country.”26 These views merely defend Gandhi against the view point that propaganda and journalism are manipulative. He truly believed that the means were just as important to the ends and often said that, “means are after all everything”.27 Through nonviolence and service, he showed Indians and humanity the loving, truthful, and proper way to fight opposition and achieve one’s goals. Gandhi believed that his mission was to show the world the truth and that how one ‘reaps’ is just as important as what one ‘sows’. Gandhi truly believed this, especially in the field of journalism; his holiness and honesty shine through even in this field. However, Gandhi recognized the use of communications as a practical tool to share and spread his opinion.

Gandhi wrote for several newspapers, starting with Indian Opinion in 1904 in South Africa.28 He used this journal to educate people on many issues including sanitation, self-discipline, and citizenship.29 Gandhi explained that “week after week [he] poured out [his] soul in its columns, an expounded the principles and practice of Satyagraha as [he] understood it.”30 Salien Chatterjee also states that Gandhi, “always stressed the importance of newspapers in educating the people.”31 Gandhi further explains the value of Indian Opinion admitting that “Satyagraha would probably have been impossible without Indian Opinion.”32 Gandhi’s dedication proved valuable to him when he moved on to writing in India.

When arriving in India, he soon created and became editor of two more newspapers the Navajivan and Young India.33 Gandhi provided an effort to educate his countrymen on social, economic, political, and moral-spiritual problems.34 He stated that he “was anxious to expound the inner meaning of Satyagraha to the public.”35 In fear of the press laws enforced at the time, printing presses would not print Gandhi’s works. Gandhi learned that by having these journals have their own presses, he could work around this need to face a “very wide circulation”.36 In these journals, he wrote in simple terms in multiple languages. This allowed for Gandhi’s ideas to spread throughout the diverse regions of India. To further relate to his public, Gandhi used his audience’s frame of reference, which is their way of perceiving things, shaped by their experiences and role in society, to convey his points.37 He used a number of Hindu symbols in his speeches and writings. He felt that this would be greater understood by a larger Indian majority, pulling at the connections both had to traditions and Hinduism. There are some who argue that this is what pulled the Muslims away from Gandhi, but Gandhi also used an Islamic frame of reference when addressing a Muslim audience. He reached several diverse groups of people in India. He commented on his success of circulation saying:

Thus I feel that both the journals rendered good service to the people in this hour of trial, and did their humble bit towards lightening the tyranny of the martial law.38

It was these moments of vigor and his methods that allowed for the spreading of Gandhi’s ideas and actions in his satyagrahas. Through judging satyagrahas in the light of success being defined as the accomplishment of goals and in the three functional necessities of a community, social, economic, and legal, with a stress on Gandhi’s use of the media, one can understand that Gandhi’s movement was a constant search and exposure of truth.

The satyagraha in Kheda, or Kiara, focused on an economic problem in the area. This area of Gujarat had a distinct history of small yeoman farmers, called Patidars.39 In 1918, these peasant farmers experienced a horrible harvest, resulting in wide spread famine.40 The Government of this area decided to still extract the land tax from these farmers, even daring to raise it. Gandhi commented that:

Owing to a widespread failure of crops… the Patidars of Kheda were considering the question of getting the revenue assessment for the year suspended.41

He goes on to say that as the President of the Gujarat Sabha, he made sure the organization sent petitions and telegrams to the Government urging them to reconsider.42 Gandhi added to this saying, “[t]he cultivators’ demand was clear as daylight, and so moderate as to make out a strong case for its acceptance.”43 The Government’s justification for having the land revenue stand is because:

Under the Land Revenue Rules, if the crop was four annas or under, the cultivators could claim full suspension of the revenue assessment for the year.44

However, the Government felt that the crops were valued over four annas and therefore, did not listen to the petitions and telegrams of the people. There is debate about who started it and where. Although Gandhi stated that the farmers began the agitation themselves and it was merely his duty to help their cause45, Brown offers an alternative view that this disturbance could have been started by outsiders, meaning Gandhi and his followers, looking for a situation in which they could go against the Government to promote their message.46

However the conflict started as the Government refused to drop the tax. Therefore, Gandhi decided that he would have to begin a satyagraha. Gandhi did say that one must exhaust “all other means before he resorts to satyagraha.47 He now felt that these alternatives were exhausted, stating, “[a]t last all petitioning and prayer having failed…I advised the Patidars to resort to Satyagraha.”48 Certain goals were implied for the process, such as raising awareness of Gandhi’s ideals of active nonviolent disobedience, keeping the satyagraha isolated in order not to cause mass chaos, and obviously to arbitrate for the temporary cancellation of the land revenue payments.49 The farmers refused to “pay to the Government the full or remaining revenue for the year”.50 Even those who had the money to pay the charge refused to in order to support the poorer farmers.51 With the pledged support of these farmers and financial support of the Gujaratis52, the educated rich in the region, the satyagraha was established, going against the unjust act of the Government of taxing these peoples when they had suffered a natural disaster.

Whether the satyagraha in Kheda was a success or failure is debatable based on how one defines success. For this study, success will be defined as the achievement of the implied goals of the satyagraha, usually applied as the repeal of the unjust action in question. Accordingly, the satyagraha in Kheda must be deemed successful because Gandhi and his followers achieved their goals. The cause remained isolated to the area, allowing for the satyagraha to run smoothly, without being marred by mass violence. The satyagraha was also successful in the goal of keeping separate from the fight for political freedom. Gandhi’s plan focused on the rights of the farmers. Also, the Government took back land revenue charges and even suspended taxes for the next year.53 The satyagraha achieved the goal of spreading news about Gandhi and his cause in India. Many national media sources and people began to follow the actions of Gandhi and pay attention to what his message was. The goals of this event were met and even surpassed. Therefore, according to the earlier definition of success, this satyagraha should be deemed successful and it was accepted this way by the media.

Gandhi stated how active the press was in the movement. He noted that “the happenings were reported in the press from day to day.”54 The press played up the supposed victory of the satyagraha, a victory that Gandhi was not happy with. This is seen when he states, “I could not enthuse over it, as it lacked the essentials of a complete triumph.”55 However, the Kheda satyagraha was seen as a victory to the common Indian man, the peasants involved, and the media. The coverage of the press spread the idea that “the salvation of the people depends upon themselves, upon their capacity for suffering and sacrifice.”56 This message would only be further spread in his other movements.

Gandhi’s satyagrahas were also successful on other levels besides the economic. The satyagraha that he led in Ahmedabad was an example as this was a social and economic problem. In 1918, there was a conflict between mill workers and their employers.57 A bonus was established by the mill owners in order to get laborers to continue to come to work during the plague that was occurring in the region.58 This was important because the mill owners were already under strain due to the drop in their exports caused by the world war.59 However, this conflict had nothing to do with the Government, unlike the satyagrahas previous to this, showing the diversity of the concept. When the plague lifted, the employers took back the bonus that was offered. However, mill workers found this act unfair because during the time of the bonus, there was an inflation of the economy. The workers felt that they needed to be compensated.

There is a notable debate again on whether Gandhi got involved in the situation before or after the workers rallied in strike. Tidrick suggests that Gandhi was involved before the bonus was even lifted.60 However way the problem started, Gandhi first established a satyagraha and then a pledge for the workers to sign because a boycott does not work if it is broken by a few. Employers then retaliated to this act by establishing a lock out.61 Mill owners tried to get back workers that would take a 20% increase, however with the pledge of not taking less than a 35% increase, workers felt the pressure from others to stay the resolve of satyagraha.62 Near the end of this satyagraha, there was a crisis. Some of the mill workers broke their promise of a boycott and went back to work.

Gandhi, however, handled the situation almost perfectly compared to Dewey’s Theory of Crisis Control. This theory was developed well after Gandhi’s death, so the fact that Gandhi’s actions paralleled it shows how Gandhi’s workings in public relations and public opinion were truly ahead of his time. First, Gandhi went back to the basics of his arguments of nonviolence and satyagraha. He wrote journals re-explaining the concepts, hoping to bolster the people around the idea of active, nonviolent resistance. Secondly, he was honest with the mill workers. He conveyed his empathy of their pain and suffering, trying to help them as best he could. And finally and probably most importantly, he acted to bolster the people once more.

On March 15, 1918, Gandhi went on a fast to rally the people once more. He decided to take on a fast in order to rally the workers who had returned or were thinking of returning to work.63 Criticized as merely a publicity stunt, this fast had the unselfish reasons of economic freedom and human rights to defend against this claim. Gandhi was acting out of the good for the people. The fast worked and gave a new drive to the boycott. The media exposed this new drive, shocking worldwide audiences. This added to the success of the satyagraha. This made employers worry about losing such an important leader whose reputation was established in Kheda and most caved into the pressure within a matter of days.64 His fast was seen as a theatrical device to save the failing satyagraha.65 However, one must keep in mind the source and its apparent bias against Gandhi, portraying him as a manipulator. The application of the fast did seem to bring about a solution quickly.

The goals of this satyagraha were also easily identifiable. Obviously, the workers’ goal was to get the bonus increase permanently upheld in order to compensate for inflation. Gandhi wanted this as well, but also wanted to test his method of fasting in order to rally the straying workers. This fast differed from later fasts as it was unannounced and seemed as the desperate attempt to ‘save a sinking ship’. Gandhi also wanted to show the diversity of the satyagraha as a device that could be used for other conflicts that were not against the government. Another goal was to further the reputation of Gandhi as a leader and promote his ideas of nonviolence.
Looking at these goals, overall one could say that the satyagraha was a success. It achieved its goal of securing compensation for the mill workers. Gandhi was able to test his new method of fasting, which created the reaction he wanted. Also, the method of satyagraha smoothly transitioned into one that can be used in a social conflict as well. However, the movement can also be seen as an almost failure because many felt that Gandhi’s fast was the situation’s “deus ex machina,” a literary term referring to some kind of powerful, unstoppable being fixing the ending of an otherwise hopeless story. This viewpoint smears the opinion of this satyagraha as a success and marks it more as a ‘close call’.

Gandhi’s concept of a satyagraha would be soon tested again on another plain of the community, the legal genre. In 1930, Gandhi decided to have a mass civil movement, which its climax would take place in Dandi. This satyagraha was focused on the tax on salt, a legislation called the India Salt Act of 1882.66 Gandhi saw the act as enforcing a monopoly and importation on a country that could produce salt itself.67 This was seen as basically stealing from the India people.

Leading up to this movement was another satyagraha that Gandhi advised in Bardoli, which was a huge victory for Gandhi’s cause of nonviolence68. Bardoli helped to inspire the possibilities of achievement through nonviolent resistance and scared the British into the reality of the power of this concept.69 The media around the world started being attentive to Gandhi and his philosophy, soon making him a house-hold name.70 Gandhi’s movement in Dandi was meant to take these actions a step further. He planned to have a twenty-four day march through villages in the same region as the previous satyagraha, hoping that this would give him the most support and exposure.71 This march would end in Dandi, where Gandhi would procure his own salt from the sea nearby; this would be the moment in which Gandhi would break the salt act, therefore, breaking the law and able to be arrested.

To understand how Gandhi achieved a mass involvement, the reason why salt was chosen as a rally point must be discussed. In order to gain nationwide protest, the rally point had to appeal to the majority of people, as well as most of the minorities. Salt was seen as “[n]ext to air and water, salt is perhaps the greatest necessity of life. It is the only condiment of the poor”.72 Salt was seen as a primary need that India could produce for itself, yet it was forced to import.73 This was an easy symbol to identify with and a conflict easy to point out, therefore being applicable to the uneducated poor. It was critical that Gandhi picked a topic in which everyone was included.

Gandhi’s campaign in Dandi reflected his ideas about inclusiveness. The satyagrahi included young college students, women, and a variety of people from different religious groups74. His followers had a great deal required of them; the emphasis was on the concepts of controlling anger and self discipline.75 For example, an English woman named Madeleine Slade, whom Gandhi called Mira Behn, found it easy to adhere to this strict code of conduct.76 However, most found it difficult to meet the rigorous standards, but they eventually succeeded in meeting them.77 He chose to have this climax of reaping his own salt on April 6, an important day in Indian history and the start of National Week.78 Gandhi had now covered the problems of who, what, when, and where; now what was left was how he was going to go about this march.

Gandhi laid out his plan in a letter written to the Viceroy, Lord Irwin. The two men had a civil and open correspondence previously, which Gandhi trusted.79 Gandhi spoke of his view that British India was no longer a blessing and he would wish to get rid of it, however, without causing any harm to any British person.80 He merely wanted to make “them see the wrong they have done to India”.81 Gandhi also gave the Viceroy all of the necessary information on what he would be doing and when, clarifying that he did not want to cause Irwin any unnecessary embarrassment.82 This openness followed Gandhi’s beliefs on how to treat ones’ opponents. He believed that in order to get the British people to recognize their problem he would have to appeal to their hearts and the “recognition would not humiliate [them] but would uplift [them]”.83 This constant love that was so blatantly shown in this movement caused Gandhi’s publicity to soar.

Gandhi and Dandi received outstanding media coverage that was world-wide. Although at first, both the government and the press saw this movement as silly, soon they began to understand the mass scale to which Gandhi’s message was reaching.84 The Mahatma was even named “Man of the Year” for the American based Time Magazine in 1930.85 Through use of symbolism and a bit of theatrical flair, the movement remained as a popular news subject in every part of the world. Gandhi’s movement was compared to the Boston Tea Party.86 With a continued sensitivity to his audience, Gandhi gained a large amount of worldwide press, many of which was extremely sympathetic to his cause.87 Gandhi was reaching a global audience.88 Probably most shocking and bold of these comparisons was a rising movement in American media to compare Gandhi to Jesus Christ.89 This would hold tremendous weight with the American people, as Christianity was not only the basis for many of the laws of the nation, but also the most practiced religion in the United States. Blake Watson, an American reporter covering the salt march explained that “Jesus [was] ‘winning India’ through Gandhi—and by that I mean the spirit of Jesus, the spirit of truth and love.”90 Gandhi was characterized as the modern Christ in American media. American audiences saw this relationship between Jesus Christ and Gandhi through their spirituality and revolutionary ideas of love and inclusiveness.91 This comparison allowed Gandhi to gain sympathizers from around the world, adding pressure to the authorities to allow Gandhi’s movement to succeed.

Gandhi saw that enacting this satyagraha on this large of a scale could lead to a campaign of civil disobedience centering on independence.92 He also saw that this movement must remain pure; he did this by carefully picking the time, place, and participants of the march. Gandhi also obviously wanted the salt tax to be repealed, all the while allowing his cause to get maximum exposure to the world. If his cause changed public opinion, India’s independence could be made possible.

This satyagraha could be argued to be the easiest to determine whether it was a success or not. Gandhi not only achieved all of his goals for the movement, but also attained more attention than he expected. A large part of this success was from the mass media. The publication of Gandhi’s actions helped change public opinion about the cause around the world. It also gave the movement more exposure in India, allowing for the mass population to understand the actions and soon participate in them. The hesitation of the British Government, due to their apprehension following the Bardoli crisis93, extended the time and momentum of the movement as well. The salt tax was repealed as well. There was only one problem in the entire movement. When in the town of Bhatgam, Gandhi felt that some of the participants of the march were taking advantage of the villagers on their journey and were indulging in “[e]xtravagance [which] ha[d] no room in this campaign”.94 Gandhi called for everyone to “turn the searchlight inward” and discover their wrongdoings.95 This constant ideal Gandhi held the people to, is what ultimately led to the success of the movement in creating India as an independent state.

Once again, Gandhi was ahead of his time, planning an idyllic publicity event to gain public awareness for his movement. The salt march was long, memorable, and created a suspense that drew in international crows. Gandhi’s great relations with the press helped out in this as well as his purity and morality. His letter to the Viceroy, explaining all the facets of his march was similar to a press release or an advertisement placed ahead of the even to create and build interest and allow the media to make accommodations to secure their coverage. One can even argue that all of Gandhi’s satyagrahas were similar to advertisements for the Great Salt March. Once again, Gandhi’s use of communication, with the intent of reaching out to the people, allowed for the success of his movement against British rule.

Perhaps one of Gandhi’s greatest successes of the mass-communication branch of his movement was the identifying of his publics. John Dewey describes a public as a group of people facing a similar unwanted situation.96 He further explains that it is the job of a communicator to recognize what is unwanted in that situation and tap into that public in order to organize a way to change it.97 This Theory of Publics was developed after Gandhi’s death. However, even without the knowledge of Dewey’s theory, Gandhi truly proved himself a great mass-communicator and worker of public relations, which is the communication of ideas and actions to achieve a desired goal. Gandhi did precisely this in his development of satyagraha and his movement against British rule and wanted his public to do the same. He saw the problems of the various laws and practices in each situation, and more importantly, he saw the problems accompanying British rule. He wanted to bolster the Indian people from a latent public, which is a public that is uninvolved with fixing the problem of British rule, to an aware public. He did this by his spread of ideas through the various newspapers and journals in which he wrote thousands of articles. Soon, through the development of satyagraha, Gandhi rallied his people into an active public that was a powerful force against British rule.

It is amazing that Gandhi’s satyagrahas fit the ideal of modern public relations theories today about so many things such as publics, crisis control, and media events. His work with newspapers and journals proved his dedication to communication as a central strength of his movement. However, he had strong moral values concerning journalism, seeing it as a service to the people and not a force of manipulation. This truly shows that not only was Gandhi a very spiritual and caring man, but also a very intellectual one as well, knowing about the nature of people and the way the world works.