| Frederick Noronha [फ़रेदरिक नोरोनया] on Sat, 3 May 2008 11:30:57 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> INDIA: Robust growth and a loss of diversity (IFJ's report for India, 2007-08) |
INDIA: Robust growth and a loss of diversity -------------------------------------------------- IFJ's South Asia Press Freedom Report for 2007-08. Released on May 1 http://www.ifj-asia.org -------------------------------------------------- India's media grew robustly over the year under review. Concerns about diversity and choice, however, remained high. Firm estimates on concentration of ownership and control in the media cannot be made in the absence of reliable statistics. The greatest malaise of the Indian media may well be a lack of transparency. Even so, it seems that the quantitative growth of the media in India has been accompanied by a qualitative deterioration and a loss of diversity. There has been little to suggest an improvement in the conditions of employment of journalists and other workers in the regulated sector, where the Indian Working Journalists' and Other Newspaper Employees' (Conditions of Service) Act apply. Two wage boards were created for media workers (nominally separate institutions for journalists and other newspaper employees, although under the same chairman) in May 2007. The boards' deliberations and sittings have been sporadic; the terms of reference are not clearly defined; and there are ample opportunities within the constitution of the boards allowing for obstructive tactics. At the current writing, it seems likely that the wage boards could announce interim awards by early May 2008. However, the timing of these formal notifications and the extent to which they will be honoured remain moot points. Growth has been very rapid in the unregulated sector, and the competition among rival companies for scarce skills has perhaps led to improved wages. There is no basis for making a firm judgment here, in the absence of a centralised reporting and monitoring system. Employment conditions, however, are governed in the main by short-term contracts. And rapid personnel turnover has been a feature of the pattern of growth in this sector of the media. Media industry a star performer According to an estimate made by a leading business lobby, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), revenues of the media and entertainment industry grew by 17 per cent in 2007, to touch an aggregate figure of INR (Indian rupees) 500 billion (about US$12.5 billion). This estimate places the revenue from advertising at INR 196 billion, or just over 38 per cent of the total industry turnover. Subscriptions in the Indian media industry recover even less of the production and operational costs than counterparts elsewhere. Growth prospects, in this sense, depend significantly on the growth of advertising spending in the economy. There have been conflicting estimates of advertisement revenue growth. While the FICCI study puts the growth of advertising revenue at 22 per cent for 2007, a similar exercise by a leading advertising and market research firm puts it at a more modest 3 per cent. The latter figure points to a more difficult situation ahead for India's media industry. There is considerable anxiety that the sliding profits reported by the Indian corporate sector and the contagion effects of economic woes in the United States could lead to significant cuts in advertising spending. This could have adverse consequences for the fortunes of the Indian media. The surface reality is of a huge proliferation in the media. New newspapers have been launched over the year under review, many of them by major media groups. ------------------------------------------------------------ Main Issues * Concentration of media ownership * Stagnant working conditions * Dysfunctional regulatory systems * Competition and private equity * Uncertain standards on free speech right * Codes of conduct and self-regulation Investigative journalism fettered: Outside India's Supreme Court, three journalists and the publisher of Midday speak out against their conviction for 'contempt of court'. Right, Delhi Union of Journalists and other organisations protested against the judicial ruling. Photos: Courtesy of Midday Publications,Delhi ------------------------------------------------------------ Several new radio channels have started up under the third phase of the FM broadcast licensing process. According to the most recent statistics, 350 television channels are on air, with another 100 slated for launch in the near future. Foreign investor interest in India's media remained high. The US-based media conglomerate NBC Universal announced plans to acquire a 26 per cent stake in NDTV Networks, a holding company for broadcasters in the lifestyle and fashion segment, related through interlocking equity ownership with NDTV 24x7, an English-language news broadcaster, and its Hindi-language counterpart, NDTV India. Global Broadcast News (GBN), which runs several television channels, has similarly, announced plans to raise INR 8 billion to fund an aggressive move into regional language broadcast and print media. This venture will be executed in partnership with the global media giant Viacom, which is already a 50 per cent equity owner in a partner organisation of GBN. Diligent Media Corporation (DMC), a joint venture between India's top Hindi-language broadcaster and second-ranked print organisation, already has an English newspaper presence in four major cities in the western region. It has now announced plans for business dailies in Hindi for several smaller towns in the same region. It also is reported to be making aggressive takeover bids for major newspapers in Nagpur, Bangalore and Thiruvananthapuram. In part, the expansion and takeover projects, will be financed through the sale of a major equity stake in the company to a foreign institutional investor. Big corporate houses, both Indian and multinational, have been increasingly making their presence felt in the media sector. Reliance-Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group, one of India's largest corporate houses, has expanded its presence in FM and announced plans to enter television broadcasting with perhaps 20 channels. India's media has grown faster and more visibly than other sectors of a rapidly growing economy. Yet, unlike other sectors, investment rules and norms in the media remain opaque and often subject to abuse. Murky investment rules and norms In February 2008, eight journalists from NewsX, a news channel that was then yet to be launched, resigned after a dispute with the ownership of the holding company. The episode involved public mud-slinging and allegations of journalists being wrongfully confined and forced to submit resignation letters. A delegation of concerned journalists subsequently went to the Minister for Information and Broadcasting in the Union Government, seeking an investigation into the financial sources of the company. While declining to intrude into what he called 'internal financial matters' at the broadcasting company, the Minister urged that all clauses of the journalists' job contracts be honoured. The financial aspects were referred to the investigative arm of the Union Government's Finance Ministry. When all else is said and the rights and wrongs determined, the immediate verdict that can be offered is that the NewsX episode did not inspire great confidence in the rules of the media game as it is played in India. If anything, the journalists' recourse to the Government as a dispute settlement authority, and the concerned Minister's protestations that he had no authority over investment norms in the broadcast sector, pointed to a seriously dysfunctional regulatory system for the broadcast media. At another level, the Union Government has seemed excessively diligent in scrutinising and holding up a proposal for a private equity firm's investment in the Eenadu media group in Andhra Pradesh. It has been hard to avoid the suspicion of strong political motivations, since the media group concerned has been a major backer of the political party that happens now to be in opposition at both levels: state and union. Since the state government in Andhra Pradesh changed hands in 2004, an investigation was launched into Margadarsi, a financial company under the same ownership as the Eenadu media group. Figures uncovered by an independent audit of the finance company suggested a pyramid scheme, and possible difficulties in redeeming all the deposits the company had gathered. India's Supreme Court intervened to mandate a scheme for the company to redeem depositor funds as they fell due. With the fundamentals of the finance company being declared unsound by credible external evaluators, an ambiguous situation arose with respect to the media freedom implications of the state government's actions. The matter seemed to underline a critical issue for the Indian media: the need to maintain a relatively transparent ownership and financial structure and for other companies under the same ownership to maintain an arms-length relationship with the media interests. The Eenadu group has sought a way out of its financial travails by offloading shares to the private equity (PE) group Blackstone. The US$275 million (about INR 11 billion) that it hopes to raise from the sale of equity is, by its own admission, destined to bail out the Margadarsi finance company. These plans have putatively awakened concerns in the ruling party in the state about interlocking interests between media and other companies. In particular, one member of the Indian parliament from the state of Andhra Pradesh has been responsible for blocking approval of the PE deal on the grounds that a media company raising finance through this route should not be at liberty to divert funds to non-media interests. India's media has grown faster and more visibly than other sectors of a rapidly growing economy. Yet, unlike other sectors, investment rules and norms in the media remain opaque and often subject to abuse. Regulatory vacuum In the absence of a transparent regulatory framework, interpretations of what is right and wrong with the media often come down to contingent political interests. Cross- media ownership and the sale of media industry equity to foreign PE enterprises, which have been looked upon with relative equanimity in other contexts, are considered a matter of vital principle in the case of the Eenadu group. In February 2008, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) introduced a discussion paper on minimum criteria for any entity opening broadcast operations. How far this consultation paper will actually influence policy is to be determined. But the TRAI paper could well be considered an effort to close the stable doors after the horse has bolted, since it questions the entitlement of several bodies that are already significant players in the broadcast media scene in India -- such as religious entities, political parties an cross-linked media houses. In its currently applicable guise, the guidelines specify certain eligibility criteria for obtaining satellite up-linking permission for television broadcasting. These include stipulations on the maximum extent of foreign equity ownership (49 per cent) and the minimum net worth of the entity seeking such permission (which varies between INR 10 million and 30 million, depending on the number of channels leased by the broadcaster). There are no qualifications required in terms of media competence or adherence to ethical norms in any guise. Two recent events highlight the uncertain consequences for the Indian media: * In September 2007, a 24-hour news channel, India Live TV, was ordered off the air for one month as penalty for airing a fake 'sting' operation implicating a teacher in Delhi in a non-existent prostitution racket. The case obviously warranted prosecution under legal provisions covering the offences of falsification of evidence, extortion and incitement to violence. There was also a strong case for lawful recompense to the teacher, who suffered serious trauma and irreparable damage to her reputation. Yet the regulatory response was to take the channel off the air. No explanation has been offered for either the punishment or its duration. * In November 2007, a radio jockey on the Red FM channel was booked under the law for inciting communal violence between the Nepali Gorkha community and others. Red FM broadcasts to various urban markets in India. However, it is not known to have a signal in Siliguri district in the state of West Bengal, where riots broke out over allegedly disparaging remarks made against the Nepali Gorkha community. The individual concerned now faces prosecution in a West Bengal court. Red FM offended against a basic rule of ethical journalism, which is "to do no harm". But the sanctions that the individual faces under relevant provisions of the law dealing with the incitement to violence and creating disharmony among communities, seem excessive and illogical. These two events draw attention to a major lacuna in India's regulatory regime: there are no accepted standards on the exercise of the free speech right in the Indian media. Neither is there a credible regulatory framework in place. More serious transgressions (than that of Red FM) and more serious abuses (than that of India Live TV) escape sanction because they do not (for whatever reason) fuel violence on the streets. This raises troubling questions about how far media freedom can be hostage to inconsistent standards. Absence of accepted standards Media rights in addressing serious failures in the governance process and the administration of justice remain undefined. In September 2007, three journalists and the publisher of Midday, an afternoon daily in Delhi, were convicted by the Delhi High Court for 'contempt of court'. The court held the four guilty for a series of investigative articles and cartoons on the Indian Supreme Court's orders shutting down small commercial establishments and shops in notified residential areas of Delhi. -------------------------------------------------------- In the absence of a transparent regulatory framework, interpretations of what is right and wrong with the media often come down to contingent political interests -------------------------------------------------------- Political faction fight triggers arson: Fire services personnel at the office of the Dinakaran newspaper in Madurai after an arson attack in May 2007 that killed three media workers. Right, staff of Dinakaran in a demonstration demanding prompt action against the culprits. Photos: United News of India. -------------------------------------------------------- The articles argued that India's Chief Justice, who assumed jurisdiction over the matter, may have had an undeclared conflict of interest, since his sons were involved in the property development business. Competent legal authorities who reviewed the articles pronounced them factual and accurate. Although the defendants have obtained a stay on the application of their sentence of four months' rigorous imprisonment, their conviction stands. Other sections of the media have failed to respond to the challenge posed by the judiciary's arrogation to itself of sky-high powers of conviction for the alleged offence of 'contempt of court'. Within the print media, a new threat to diversity has emerged in the rising price of newsprint. Since mid-2007, newsprint prices have increased by more than 40 per cent, compelling many newspapers to rework their advertisement-editorial ratio, and sharpening the competition for advertisement spending. Big print media houses such as Kasturi & Sons from Chennai (publishers of The Hindu), the Dainik Jagaran group in the Hindi belt, and Bennett Coleman & Co in Delhi (publisher of The Times of India) have launched either free or radically under-priced newspapers to tap into the market for advertisements. Many, such as Bennett Coleman and HT Media (publishers of The Hindustan Times), have been offering their newspapers in various combinations at massive discounts. This has made the Indian print media dependent, more heavily than ever before, on advertisement revenues for survival. Smaller newspaper groups are understandably worried, as recent demands from some of them for the enactment of a 'price- page schedule' testify. This regulatory device, which has been introduced in the past and struck down by the Supreme Court as violating Article 19 guarantees of free speech in the Indian Constitution, mandates that newspapers should charge prices that reflect the volume of their content. It was devised to prevent larger newspapers from using their superior access to advertisement revenue to drive out smaller newspapers through price competition. The country's largest print media group, Bennett Coleman, meanwhile announced plans to promote a public relations company. This is seen to be continuous with its aggressive effort to increase its share of total advertising spending. For about five years, the company has pursued a strategy, named Medianet, ostensibly to go beyond the limitations of traditional news-gathering techniques, especially in new areas of audience interest which have high potential for attracting contextual advertising -- such as lifestyle, fashion, entertainment, product launches and celebrity personalities. Medianet involved the payment of a fee for coverage in news columns. The Times management initially committed itself to clearly identifying every story published under Medianet. However, media analysts concluded that the practice of identifying each story that was paid for, seemed to lapse after a few weeks. Media houses are now known to conclude 'private treaties' under which they acquire an equity stake in particular companies, which they pay for through ad support. This assistance in 'brand buildin' and 'corporate image development' is more than paid for since the companies that attract the media houses' interest invariably happen to be entities that are on the verge of seeking a listing on the stock exchanges. Shares in most companies are known to appreciate wildly from the day they are listed and this gives media houses ample opportunities to cash in on windfall capital gains. There has been little public questioning of the conflict of interest issues involved in this practice, to which an increasing number of media houses in both the print and broadcast domains have resorted. With fortunes being made and lost on India's stock exchanges and investor decisions being critically dependent on media coverage, there have been calls in recent times to put the practice of 'private treaties' under the scanner from an ethical point of view. Content code debate In the context of the rapid growth in television broadcasting, India's Government has sought several times in the past to put in place a 'content code' that all broadcasters would be obliged to follow. A draft code was introduced by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in July 2007 and abandoned in the face of resistance from several media organisations. The Ministry then delegated the job of evolving an agreed position to the broadcast industry and its apex organisations. According to reports available at the time of this writing, the drafting of a content code is now stymied by disagreements between two rival organisations of broadcasters. Meanwhile, in disposing of a public interest petition arising from the 'sting' operation that wrongly implicated a teacher in a non-existent prostitution racket, the Delhi High Court held on December 14, 2007, that any channel planning to broadcast programs involving a 'sting' should be legally obliged to obtain prior permission from a government-appointed committee. It recommended that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting should appoint a retired judge of a High Court to chair the committee, which should also comprise two others drawn from the bureaucracy. The judicial intervention, it must be underlined, came well after the offending channel had been ordered off the air by the Ministry. Yet with all this, the grounds on which the Ministry licenses channels are unclear, since the only eligibility criteria specified deal with patterns of equity ownership and the company's net worth (as already mentioned above). The grounds on which the Ministry cancels permissions are even less clear, since the only explanation offered in most cases is a failure to conform to the 'broadcast content code' decreed by the Ministry, which is far from being an agreed document. ----------------------------------------------------- Medianet involved the payment of a fee for coverage in news columns. The Times management initially committed itself to identifying clearly every story published under Medianet. However, media analysts concluded that the practice of identifying each story that was paid for seemed to lapse after a few weeks. ----------------------------------------------------- With voluntary codes of conduct and self-regulation being a distant prospect, India's Government recently notified 'monitoring committee' at the level of each state and every district to enforce its content code. These committees are constituted overwhelmingly by bureaucrats and police personnel. It must be emphasised that all discussions involving ethical practices in the media are currently being conducted between the Government and media ownership groups. The involvement of journalists, media professionals and civil society has so far been marginal. [END OF SECTION ON INDIA] -- Frederick FN Noronha * Independent Journalist http://fn.goa-india.org * Phone +91-832-2409490 Cell +91-9970157402 (sometimes out of range) Please see http://nursing.goa-india.org # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org