Mr Khullar, restricting media ownership is throwing out baby with bath water

New Delhi: Rahul Khullar has cracked the whip quite effectively as the chairman of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on myriad issues which affect consumer interest.

But his wish to rid the media of cross holding and prevent promotion of corporate interests through newspapers and TV channels is a bit baffling.

Khullar has opened a debate over cross holding in media houses and referred to the malaise of paid news and projection of corporate interests through media in an interview to The Hindu Business Line today.

“_The question one has to ask is are you doing a media job or are you projecting corporate interests while passing yourself off as media. I recently asked one reporter at a pink paper as to where a particular story came from and he said that they are told what to write. I ask them when will you tell our side of the story and the response I got was that they can’t. Editorials are paid for and articles are mandated or dictate_d,” Khullar told the paper answering a question on the need for a regulation on media cross holding.

More from Business

Hyundai India’s Rs 27,870 crore IPO oversubscribed by 2.28X, largely driven by institutional investors How Indian fintech startups are driving Malaysia’s UPI-like digital payments revolution

The TRAI Chairman said he was all for freedom of the press, but “this is not freedom”.

“_Media is being manipulated to project corporate interest. I am open to a debate and discussion but I can’t do anything about it. By August, we should be ready with our recommendation_s,” he has said.

[caption id=“attachment_840881” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Khullar has opened a debate over cross holding in media houses and referred to the malaise of paid news and projection of corporate interests through media. AFP[/caption]

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

Chennai Ranks #1 in Challan Checks: ACKO Insights for Smarter Car and Two Wheeler Insurance Decisions

Tata Harrier EV vs Mahindra XEV 9e: Design and road presence compared

Khullar never shies away from calling a spade a spade. But with his selective viewing of media cross holding and corporate ownership, isn’t Khullar missing the woods for the trees? Because media, especially newspaper and magazine owners, are today grappling with survival issues which obviously mean they need cash and have to welcome investors, which many times are large corporate houses.

Between 2008 and 2012, advertising in print media has grown by just 9 percent whereas in the same period advertising in digital media has grown by 38 percent.

The share of print advertising is expected to drop by 10 percentage points from 49 percent in 2008 to 39 percent by 2017 while that of television and other forms of media will rise. So print media is especially vulnerable right now.

Also, when Khullar speaks of corporate interests being furthered by the media, why does he forget that many newspapers and TV channels are owned by politicians and therefore political interests are also being allegedly furthered by these news channels? How does he plan to regulate political interests in media?

Khullar may have set out on a well meaning agenda of bringing in more transparency in media ownership but he needs to first provide solutions for media’s very existence and its financial viability. Well known media critic and columnist Sevanti Ninan told Firstpost media viability is an issue precisely because there is too much media. “And there is too much media because ownership requirements are not rigorous. The ministry (Ministry of Information and Broadcasting) gives uplink permission liberally so new TV channels keep coming into existence,” she said.

She also pointed out that a committee could be set up for framing more stringent norms for media ownership.

“They need to determine criteria. You cannot keep out people wholesale by profession because freedom of speech should include freedom to own media. But you can enforce the TV ownership guidelines, for instance, which MIB (ministry of information and broadcasting) has and look at whether they need to be made more stringent with regard to track record, and seriousness of intent.”

So what Khullar perhaps needs to do is ensure that ownership rules are more stringent and that media companies also comply with norms set by the Competition Commission of India.

But restricting ownership by equity or by an owner’s professions is really not the answer.

Anyhow, what Khullar is seeking is not new - the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting asked TRAI for the second time in four years for views on horizontal and vertical media integration in 2012, after being rapped on the knuckles by a parliamentary committee.

In simple words, horizontal integration means one media entity owning different segments such as print, TV, FM Radio. Vertical refers to broadcasters having interests in cable networks etc or vice-versa.

TRAI floated a consultation paper on this issue in February and various media houses and other stakeholders responded by May. Now, TRAI is in the process of framing guidelines. In this paper, TRAI itself has acknowledged that from a business point of view, media consolidation has undeniable advantages.

“It allows for economies of scale which enables media companies to absorb the costs of content and distribution over a large volume of revenue. This in turn allows companies to invest in better resources such as talent and technical equipment.”

But it goes on to add a caveat: efficiency that results from large economies of scale also leads towards small numbers of competitors and can degenerate into inefficient abuse of monopoly power.

TRAI has noted that Sun TV, Essel Group and Star India are three media houses which are present in each media vertical: TV, print, FM, DTH, MSO (cable operators).

Anil Ambani’s ADAG is present in all verticals except MSO. Media houses which have a presence in TV, print and FM are the Times Group, India Today, Eenadu, ABP, Bhaskar Group, Jagran Prakashan and Malayala Manorama Group.

Fair enough. But do you seriously think media lacks plurality?

1. There are over 86,754 registered print publications in India.

2. There are 4,711 registered publications in Bengali; 17,211 in English; 4901 in Gujarati, 43,450 in Hindi, 9 in Kashmiri, 1537 in Punjabi, 4973 in Tamil, 4281 in Telugu, 5813 in Urdu.

3. There are over 800 private satellite TV channels in India.

These statistics show that there is enough plurality in Indian media. It is rather difficult to believe that any one entity in India can have influence over the entire news segment. As for Khullar’s allegations about paid news and editorials, where are the facts? Ninan says there are no facts to prove these allegations because the data is not made available. “Election time advertising which says advertisement in tiny letters and has a journalism format is perceived as paid news. The fact that the Election Commission is scrutinising this closely and taking action is a good thing. Newspaper supplements need to be required to declare exactly which items are paid for, the Press Council should do more about that. It is not enough to say vaguely on the masthead that it is an advertorial, entertainment promotional feature. What does that mean to the average reader?”

Yes, ultimately the viewer or the reader and her opinions count.