Dialogue October - December 2005 , Volume 7 No. 2
Opportunities for Indian media
If there
is one profession where the generation gap is starkly evident, it is journalism.
Most of the media veterans are vocal in insisting that the profession has
suffered an ethical and qualitative nosedive. In particular, they point to the
growing commercialisation of the media to argue that the dissemination of
information today resembles the marketing of soap and toothpaste. At the same
time, the younger entrants into the media express a profound degree of
satisfaction with the fiercely competitive profession. Salaries and perquisites
having risen exponentially in the past 15 years and public recognition at an
all-time high, there is a feeling that the Indian media has truly come of age.
Despite sharing some of the
misgivings of the veterans, my own belief is that the optimism of the younger
generation is not unwarranted. Yet, this gung-ho faith in a better future needs
a few caveats.
To understand how the media and
journalism has changed, particularly since the process of liberalisation began
in 1991, it is important to shed a few myths. First, the belief that journalism
was more than a mere profession, and that it was actually a noble calling, is
not entirely true. It is a cruel but undeniable fact that till the early-1990s
the bulk of those who entered the media did it as an after-thought. True, there
were a few exceptions but they happened to be highly educated individuals
blessed with a private income. The pathetically low salaries offered by
newspapers—the situation was particularly grim in the provinces—ensured that
those who had meaningful alternatives kept away from a life of unsocial hours
and poor pay. Today, the media is a voluntary option of young people who want to
make a success of their lives. While salaries may not have touched the dizzying
heights of the financial sector and IT, journalism today does offer a far better
future than was earlier the case. Consequently, the quality of entrants into the
profession is far higher today than ever before. Indeed, the real problem is
that demand far exceeds quality supply.
Second, the universe of the
Indian media has increased dramatically with the deregulation of TV. The
explosion of cable TV and the mushrooming of news channels have increased the
reach of the media from the educated middle classes to all sections of society.
It needed a basic degree of literacy to imbibe newspapers; there is absolutely
no education barrier to accessing TV. In short, the obligations of the media
have become vastly different. Whereas editors of an earlier era targeted the
opinion makers alone, today’s TV journalists have their eye on a larger social
constituency. This, quite naturally, has a bearing on the selection of news and
its packaging. The experience of post-War Europe shows that tabloid journalism
is a natural concomitant of an expanded market. This is precisely what has
happened in the Indian media.
Third, the newspapers of an
earlier era were disproportionately dependant on the Government of the day.
Beginning with newsprint quotas and stretching to Government advertisements, no
newspaper could seriously be expected to take positions that were sharply at
variance with the official line. This explains why genuine dissent became the
prerogative of daring individuals such as Ramnath Goenka. Most newspaper
proprietors preferred to play safe. This was equally true of journalists whose
futures were linked to government-dictated pay packets and lollipops in the form
of subsidised housing.
Today’s media economics work
very differently. The end of the shortage economy has meant an explosion in
consumer choice and consumer spending. This in turn has triggered huge increases
in the advertising budgets of the private sector. Government patronage is no
longer the key to survival either for the proprietor or for the journalist. The
result is that priorities have changed and the very definition of what
constitutes news has altered beyond recognition.
Fourth, the technology and
communications revolution has resulted in an information overload.
Significantly, this overload is international in character courtesy
international TV channels and the worldwide web. Instant news provided by TV
has, for example, changed the contours of newspaper reporting. Since readers are
no longer content to read a re-hash of what they have seen the evening before on
TV, the very nature of print journalism has had to change. In seeking to offer
something fresh, newspaper editors have perforce become more targeted in their
approach. They have to either create newer and newer angles or hone in on areas
that are not prone to visualisation. The process is evolutionary and leads to
major distortions. The trivialisation process that many serious readers complain
of is a natural consequence of this elusive search for originality. To some
extent, the distortions could have been minimised if the media managers had
spent more on news gathering. However, in India, the budgets for news gathering
remain pitifully small, although sheer competition is forcing a rethink.
Finally, despite its evolution
into a full-fledged industry, including listings on the stock markets, the
Indian media remains deeply regulated by international standards. The
modification of a Cabinet resolution of 1955 banning foreign direct investment
in the media has led to some influx of capital. However, this has mainly been in
the entertainment sector, as the success of the Rupert Murdoch-owned Star Plus
shows. In the news media, the 26 per cent FDI ceiling has meant that Indian
professionals have not yet succeeded in making the world grade.
India has the potential to become
the new media hub of Asia. Its democratic culture constitutes an appropriate
environment for creativity and freedom. Objectively, India is much better placed
than Hong Kong, Singapore and Dubai—places that are at present jostling to get
larger shares of the media pie. The 26 per cent barrier constitutes a needless
investment barrier, as does the inexplicable government ban on private sector
news broadcasting over radio. The obstacles remain in place because there is a
section of the media proprietors who are fearful of full-scale international
competition. They mask their threat perceptions with invocations to swadeshi and
nationalism. Yet their own commitment to Indian values and the very Indian sense
of restrain is non-existent. The fear of cultural pollution from foreign players
is highly exaggerated since the contamination process has been nurtured by
Indian-run enterprises.
I believe that India has the
necessary critical mass of talented media professionals who can make a global
mark and catapult the domestic media industry to the levels seen by the IT
industry. Yet, IT has been the gainer because it never suffered the effects of
intrusive government intervention. If the media is unshackled in India, it has
the ability to become a global player of consequence. For India, that will be
good news.
Dialogue (A quarterly journal of Astha Bharati) |