Breaking boundaries

At one time, certainly before 1990, there may have been a tacit understanding or even an agreement between newspaper publishers not to encroach on the each other’s territories, markets or languages. But the trend that began 20 years ago with what was considered predation then, has now flowered into a great expansion.

The newspaper industry in India over the last 21 years has grown well in almost all respects and matured in many just as the economy has. With a large parallel growth in literacy, it has weathered the privatisation and multiplicity of television news channels, as it takes advantage of the internet and gets ready for the convergent opportunities of a large base of cell-phones and a tiny but growing base of tablets. The key phenomenon has been expansion in circulation, new editions, more pages, more pages in colour, new media such as radio and television and new print media products as well.

In these years the first wave of FDI in newspapers has led to the first wave of foreign direct investment (FDI) and closely held family companies going to the stock market. Some consolidation has also taken place such as Bennett Coleman’s acquisition of the upstart Vijay Karnataka group and Jagran Prakashan’s acquisition of Mid Day Multimedia’s print assets. There have been fissures and cracks among owner families too, but what is significant is that in most cases they continue to work together while facing the market.

There is a new confidence amongst the Indian newspaper publishers which has erased the old linguistic and media boundaries. Every fast-growing newspaper group has crossed linguistic or geographic boundaries in the past ten years. No territory is sacrosanct as newspapers have to leverage their brands to survive.

It is also nice to see that there is a resurgence among some of the strong newspaper groups that had suffered setbacks in the past decade. Amongst these one sees the resurgence of the Rajasthan Patrika and Deccan Herald groups in winning back circulation and starting new editions as a reflection of the inherent strength of the Indian newspaper industry as a whole. 

Naresh Khanna editor@ippgroup.in

Rajivnama — Distasteful self promotion from the Congress party

Indian newspaper readers woke up to a bizarre print spectacle on 20 August, a day also celebrated as Sadbhavna Divas. Page after page contained advertisements issued by the Congress-led Central and state governments, and various public departments to commemorate the birthday of Rajiv Gandhi, former Indian Prime minister. Initial surprise gave way to shock which turned to irritation, and finally anger as the reader flipped through newspapers that carried the late Prime Minister’s handsome face staring somewhere into the space on almost every page.

In response to a similar advertising blitzkrieg on the death anniversary of Rajiv Gandhi in 2010, Ramchandra Guha had written, “A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that on May 21, 2010, perhaps Rs 60 or 70 crore were spent by the taxpayer — without his and her consent — on praising Rajiv Gandhi. Since the practice has been in place since 2005, the aggregate expenditure to date on this account is probably in excess of Rs 300 crore.”

If spending Rs 300 crore of the taxpayers’ money in self promotion through hero worshipping its former leader (incidentally, named in the Bofors scandal and accused of owning Swiss bank accounts) isn’t corruption, then what is? As the Congress-led UPA government struggles to save its reputation in the wake of accusations of corruption in almost everything it has undertaken in its second term in power, such shameless self advertisement can only ruin its image even further.

Pritam Sengupta from sans serif estimates that there were a total of 108 advertisements amounting to 48¼ of the published pages in the well known English dailies Hindustan Times, The Times of India, The Indian Express, Mail Today, The Hindu, The Pioneer, The Statesman, The Telegraph, The Economic Times, Business Standard, The Financial Express and Mint (Berliner).

‘Sadbhavna’ in Hindi refers to noble thoughts and having good feelings for others. But sadly the action of the Congress party at the centre and across some states displayed little nobility of thinking or action even on the day it has set aside to entertain noble thoughts.

For more on this, please visit
http://wearethebest.wordpress.com/2011/08/20/rajiv-gandhi-birthday-108-ads-across-48-pages/
http://www.wahsarkar.com/2011/05/saare-jaha-se-accha-gandhistan-humara/
http://charts.medianama.com/indian-governments-print-advertising-spend-2009-2010-part-2/
http://sahaas.blogspot.com/2011/08/sycophancy-at-taxpayers-cost.html

- Avinandan Mukherjee

The Murdoch effect

Phones have proved to be the nemesis for Britain’s oldest newspaper — News of the World (NoTW) — and the news of the world is that the symbiotic relationship between phones and journalists has become cancerous. That the latter cannot exist without the former has been the joke in the journalistic world for long. Talking on phone is easier than trudging up to meet somebody in person. It also saves time. Once cultivated, sources usually divulge the big news on phone and stories carrying information about one part of the world can be written sitting in another. But all is fine as long as we tread within the ethical domain and do not turn news gathering into eaves dropping, or worse.

NoTW, which published its last edition on 10 July after 168 years of existence, did just that. In its zeal to be on top of news it got inextricably enmeshed in the process of creating news. It hired services of investigative agencies which would hack into voice mails of people to gather information. In the case of a then kidnapped teenager Milly Dowler, the hacking of the voicemail box led her parents into the false belief that she was alive when she had already been murdered. Stories of the dirty tricks being adopted by NoTW reporters had been doing the rounds since 2005. But it was a whistleblower on the Dowler case published in The Guardian on 4 July that did NoTW in.

The paper had already been incurring losses. The immediate reaction of Rupert Murdoch — folding up the paper — initially looked like a tactical move by the media mogul to save the chances of being able to buy a lucrative television channel BSkyB. It never came to that. The public outrage over the revelations was so great that Murdoch had to withdraw the bid. Several conciliatory and remedial steps were subsequently taken but to little avail. The damage had been done.

The Murdochisation of media (read: thinking only of profits and treating the newspaper not as a medium of social communication but as a product which can be and has to be sold at any cost just like shampoo and soaps) has not left even India untouched. Though so far no media organization has been accused of tapping phones for the sake of getting stories, that being the preserve of the government and the intelligence agencies here, there have been enough cases of journalists being caught on tape discussing ministerial berths and passing information from one party to the other with obvious implications.

There have been very many other instances as well of Indian media houses entering into unethical barter deals and ‘creating news’ for money or planting biased reports in return for favours. The issue is not of journalists tapping phones but a broader issue of ethics. NoTW used phones to pry into the lives of people for the sake of stories, Indian journalists have been schmoozing with corporate brokers for the sake of personal gains. Some may argue that this is worse than trying to collect information for the good of the paper or making sales grow.
Amidst wide-spread condemnation of the tactics adopted by Murdoch and sons for the sake of sensationalism, there are also some voices of dissent which say he brought life to British media and revived its fortunes. This can also be said for one of the most successful media empires in India. But Indian media still respects the privacy of people’s lives to a large extent and doesn’t stoop to the level that tabloids in Britain have.

The NoTW case also brings to light the inevitability of news gatherers going to extremes for the sake of unearthing something different. In the age of Facebook and Twitter when everything and every information is available at the touch of a button, how does one create content which is exclusive? Cut-throat competition legitimises going to any extent for the sake of a scoop. Reporters are hounded endlessly by desperate editors to bring something different. Discussing private lives in public is what we have learnt from social networking. Is it any surprise then that a media house resorted to tapping phones of ‘news worthy’ people? What would have they learnt by tapping the phone of Afghan war veterans — possibly what kind of excesses were being committed by both the sides on war front. That would be both sensational and interesting. And if in turn it helps bring to light injustice done in the name of war, probably no harm in it either. But the same thing becomes unacceptable if it destroys somebody’s reputation or jeopardizes somebody’s life. As happened in the case of Dowler. If the girl had not been murdered or if the tapping had led to the murderer, probably it would all have been for a good cause.

Media houses which engage in sting operations take this risk all the time. It is the ultimate thrill for a reporter to be present at the scene of ‘crime’ while it is still being committed. There would have been nothing better for the ‘rogue’ NoTW reporters, when they were eavesdropping on phone conversations, than getting the story from the horse's mouth. Even if they had been able to see the outcome of their actions some years later, it is unlikely that any of them would have liked to trade their places with someone else. It is only when a sting goes badly wrong that everybody's wrath turns on the third person who had been trying to pry too deep rather than on the actual culprit. There is ultimately a thin line between right and wrong here.

(Aside: Etymologists would find an uncanny similarity between Murdoch and murder. Co-incidently, the name is also close to Mordor: the fabled dwelling place of the evil one — Sauron — in JRR Tolkien's mythical universe of Middle-Earth in Lord of the Rings).

- Shalini S Sharma

The Save Food Conference

Something that most of us are taught in childhood — to finish everything on our plates or to take only what we can finish eating, was the subject of another international conference at this year’s interpack in May in Dusseldorf. I attended a similar conference during the iPackIma event in Milan in 2009 as well, but the recent conference was better organised, attended and focussed.

On the first day of the Save Food Conference we were told that consumers with high levels of education and those who fail to write a shopping list are more likely to waste food. A survey carried out across seven European countries by the German packaging group Cofresco found that more than 20% of household food expenditure in Europe was spent on food which is thrown away, and that more than half of that waste could have been avoided with better planning. Half of the wasted food consists of fruits and vegetables while 30% of packaged food is thrown away without even being opened. Dirk Lohmer, the CEO of Cofresco told the participants, “Only 6% of the respondents even admit that they throw food away.”

Subsequent presentations at the conference estimated world food losses at around 1.3 billion tonnes with the greatest share of this being fruit and vegetables. Europe throws away 71 million tonnes of food each year. Ulf Sonesson of the Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology said that a study conducted last year had found major differences in food wastage between the developed world and developing economies. In developed countries, food losses were very low at the start of the supply chain — at the farm end — but very high at the retailer/consumer end of the chain.

However, in the poorer and less developed economies, the opposite trend was observed — very high wastage at harvest and low wastage by consumers. According to Sonesson, a lack of supply chain infrastructure, including packaging, was at the heart of the food waste problem in developing economies.

The conference had some interesting presentations such as how to reduce food losses through international cooperation and exchange of post harvest technologies. Kenneth Marsh who made this presentation recommended a knowledge supermarket. The conference clearly tried to encourage entrepreneurship and investment in food processing and packaging technology in the less developed and emerging economies. As far as what packaging can do for the food supply chain, it was well argued that when packed, food waste and food losses are reduced by a factor of ten. That increase in packaging cost by Rs 50,000 can reduce food waste by as much Rs 15 lakh.

However, it was also clear that while international bodies talk this talk and even support institutions in the developing countries, there are miles to go before there is global harmonisation of phytosanitary standards. The issue of trade barriers by the rich countries and their huge subsidies to their farmers was also raised both by the moderator of the conference and by a participant in the audience without any real response. Thus there is still a huge disconnect between do-gooders, consultants, and even businesspersons who appreciate the opportunity to invest in food processing and packaging in the emerging economies on the one hand, and the governments of the rich countries who have been holding up the international talks on trade barriers for agricultural products, on the other.

- Naresh Khanna

Kasturi and Sons

The issue is transformation in the face of competition and change

Excerpt from paragraph 8 of the CLB order of 20 May 2011 by Judge Lizamma Augustine.

“The far reaching consequence of the proposals is that a shareholder of the company will be perpetually debarred from holding the post of editor of The Hindu, which in my view is contrary to the tradition and practice followed by the company since its inception. Besides, it is doubtful whether the proposed advisory board which consists of members of the rival groups would be able to effectively guide the non family editor in discharging his duties. I am of the prima facie view that except ‘the wholesale removal of the family editors’, the present proposals do not take in any other aspect. The board had not addressed the aspects (retirement entry and exit norms etc), referred to in my earlier order. It also appears that the Board has given a go by to the idea of framing guidelines for succession or rather they have limited the directions of the CLB only to the extent of removing the entire family editors.”

 

It is not easy for us to add anything sensible to the dispute amongst the owners of the company that publishes The Hindu and Businessline daily newspapers, and the periodicals Frontline and Sportstar. Nevertheless as usual we tend to barge in where angels fear to tread. The dispute has been covered in the daily press which in India is generally loath to write about each other’s problems — most notably and in the main quite respectfully in Business Standard and The Mint. However the headlines and slugs have included, ‘Family Fight’, ‘Family Matters,’ ‘The Hindu battles to transform.’ Expressions such as ‘beleaguered’ have also been used.

We agree that the discussion, dispute and even the court cases are about change and transformation of the reputed family owned newspaper. The main issue is who will lead the transformation of the third largest circulated English daily in the country. The transformation is necessary if the The Hindu is to stand up to Bennet Coleman’s Times of India which has already made an impact with its Chennai edition and will soon add to its South India campaign with three new editions in Kerala in cooperation with Mathrubhumi. Meanwhile The Hindu continues to call itself India’s national newspaper without having editions in the major metros of Mumbai and Kolkata.

Transformation goes beyond new editions or contemporary design — it implies innovation, futurism and the building of a new publishing paradigm which turns several technology and media threats  into a cross media opportunity. The organisation has a very strong production infrastructure which  is wasted on a paper that is crying out for editorial innovation and juice. The professionalisation of the paper’s editorial, design and business functions is overdue and cannot be limited to one appointment, albeit even the first non-family member to be appointed as editor. Transformation will require many steps which have been stayed for a variety of reasons not by the court but by the dysfunction and inability of the owners to congenially map out and implement the plans for change.

It is apparent that in the Kasturi and Sons dispute, one side believes that only they can lead the transformation. This side not only wants to professionalise the paper but also wants to retain some kind of editorial control — ideological and political. Currently enjoying a majority of 7 to 5 on the board, this rival group wants to get rid of N Ravi and Malini Parthasarathy on the editorial side and is largely using the appointment of a professional editor as an excuse to deprive Ravi and Parthasarathy of the responsibilities and power that would have naturally and sequentially come to them as educated and experienced editors as well as part owners of the group’s publications.

While the Company Law Board in its order on 20 May 2011 gave relief to N Murali and restored his responsibilities as Joint Managing Director, it has postponed judgement on whether the 7 to 5 decision of the Kasturi and Sons board to throw out all the family editors including Ravi and Parthasarathy amounts to oppression and whether a special resolution calling for more than a simple majority is needed. The real issues are of editorial control and of who leads the transformation and who ultimately wields power in the process of the company’s growth as a newspaper business. Put simply, transformation may mean taking on Bennett Coleman and bringing in new investment. At this juncture, it may behoove the owners of Kasturi and Sons to remember that newspaper owners have to choose between fame, power and wealth. According to a sage editor, newspaper owners can aspire to any two of these at best, but not all three.                                                                      

— Naresh Khanna (June 2011)

The parallel importation of books amendment

Democracy at work

At the time of the Jaipur Literary Festival in January, there was a rash of articles in the English dailies that enlisted leading publishing luminaries in decrying an Amendment to the Copyright Act that will likely be enacted in the current budget session of parliament. Frankly the rash of articles where  journalists suddenly became very knowledgeable, and publishers and authors very adamant, smelled like clever spoonfed journalism. This is a type of article that appears in several papers with the same outrage caused by a company or group or association doing a bit of strong PR or waging a campaign in order to use the power of the English language press in the capital to influence seemingly unwitting members of parliament on a fairly obscure subject.

Of course these articles were written without finding out or describing the offending amendment or bothering to find out if there was another side to the story. But weekends are a good time to get such stories into the dailies since our editors are even more asleep, and desperate for a live story with a byline and quotes from literary personalities.

In our print issue dated March 2011 we have published a debate where both exponents (bloggers in this case) say that there has not been adequate discussion and consultation on this subject. We concur, although we do not think that the Federation of Indian Publishers or the Association of Publishers in India or the Authors Guild are innocent in this matter. Associations in our country rarely discuss anything transparently with their constituents, let alone with each other, or their common constituencies — in this case the reading and book buying public. (Not to speak of authors and editors).


The Indian book market is large and in fact threatening to become huge. This phenomenal growth in the creation, production and consumption of content and books is impinged by technology allowing both easier and more transparent trade. The content and publishing industry will eventually have to reckon with electronic publishing and eBooks and eContent. The amendment on parallel importation of books threatens the territorial monopolies of some of the large publishers. It especially seems threatening to the English language multinational publishers. As Shalini has pointed out in her Alphageria column in the same issue, the Indian textbook market is itself worth US$ 2 billion.

During the Globalocal event in Delhi in November 2010, we asked the international publishers’ of English books, why there were separate publishing rights for Canada, Australia, India, the United States and Europe and we also asked them how long would this last in an eBooks world without borders. The answer given by Emma House representing the Publishers Association was, to say the least, a bit ingenuous. She said that the current system may last another 25 years and that if it was changed it would threaten the availability of inexpensive English language textbooks that are exported to India.

It is increasingly becoming apparent that the large international text book publishers are in fact generating original content in India for use around the world. This, coupled with the excellent and competitive book manufacturing capabilities of our printers, means that this is an important and interesting discussion. In a democracy there is an opportunity for us (however difficult and onerous) to create and shape the future. Serious publishers and printers need to talk more regularly and sensibly to each other and not merely leave it to their associations. Especially when the associations of the multinational publishers are far more media savvy.

March 23, 2011 | By Naresh Khanna 

Chennai Book Fair robbed of relaxed ambiance thanks to cramped conditions

The St George’s Anglo-Indian Higher Secondary School on Poonamalle High Road is Chennai’s oldest school tracing its origins to the St Mary’s Church Charity School established in 1715. The red-brick buildings on campus are an unmistakable sign of heritage. The playgrounds are simply huge, occupying most of the 21-acre space. The school has played host to the annual Chennai Book Fair the past few years, after the fair moved from St Ebbas in Royapettah.

Despite the huge space available, the book fair itself is confined to smaller space and there is no doubt that the venue may be ideal if only its sprawling grounds are put to better use. For example, instead of the huge area outside the stalls being used for hoardings, posters and welcome arches, it can serve as space for stalls. And that would result in roomier stalls, perhaps even individual stalls for the bigger publishers and, most importantly, enough space for visitors to walk around freely and spend more time with books without being pushed and elbowed around.

This is something the organisers, the Booksellers and Publishers Association of South India (BAPASI), should seriously consider if they want visitors to enjoy the going-to-the-book-fair experience. It is one thing having 600-odd stalls, issuing 500,000 free tickets to school students in Chennai, Tiruvallur and Kanjeepuram and talking about numbers or quantity, and quite another providing a top-quality feel to a book fair in southern India’s largest metropolis.

Most of BAPASI members are made up of small publishers and a couple of those-in-the-know IPP spoke to said that the publishers want equal space for everybody and are not in favour of bigger publishers (read English language publishers such as Penguin or Harper Collins) hogging the limelight with larger space.

“The space in St George’s School is relatively limited but they can use the available space better. The fact that the school operates during the day also provides some constraints. The other option is to have it at the Chennai Trade Centre but the feeling is that the venue in Manapakkam would not draw crowds,” is what K Satyanarayan, director, New Horizon Media Pvt Ltd, a top Tamil publisher told me when I asked him whether the space allotted to stalls was adequate.  Satyanarayan went on to say that there is a general feeling among smaller publishers that if bigger publishers are given more space they will attract proportionately larger crowds. Since there are a lot of small publishers in the association who have a single stall at the fair, their words are likely to carry weight.

A strange thing I noticed was that although there were several make-shift ticket counters, most of them had the ‘closed’ sign and only one counter operated despite a steady stream of visitors. 

                                                                                                                                   Sashi Nair