Feedback

Thanks to two Sardars and a dhotiwallah, privatization process is on at a reasonably good speed and will continue despite barking and braying by the Red brigade. There are two reasons. One, nonagenarian Jyoti Basu himself admitted, with strange candidness, that his party also needs Congress as much as the latter needs the Left. Secondly, the legitimate political aspiration of the Left to extend its influence to the Hindi heartland will make the Left look elsewhere even if the so-called sacred document for both, the CMP, remains just a booklet, or at best an instrument of blackmail, whenever the situation warrants. So, when the newly elected general secretary of the CPI-M, Prakash Karat declares that his party’s twin-pronged strategy was to fight both the communal forces and the economic policies of liberalization and privatization, and as a valued added measure, floats a trial balloon of “Third Front”, one need not despair. As maverick Jayalalitha pointed out the other day, the Left will continue to oppose the UPA outside and support it inside. It is a mutual need.

Therefore, when the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) comes out with a proposal for privatization of terrestrial television, the question is whether any service provider or content provider will be interested at all in such a venture leaving aside the political hurdles. As of now, there are one hundred satellite channels and some more are in the offing. But most of them are urban-centric and the NRS figures speak for it. While TV households in the rural areas are 4.32 crores at the national level, non-TV households in the same rural areas are 10.22 crores. Out of this, only 1.53 crore are C&S households in the countryside. In other words, 2.79 crore households in the rural areas are dependent on terrestrial broadcast (TB) where as the potential is 10.22 crores.

So, no one can dispute the fact that there is great potential for TB. The question is how economical it would be both for the service/content providers and to the viewers. Unlike other countries, public broadcaster, that is, Doordarshan has the sole monopoly over terrestrial network. Though DD has 27 channels, only two channels, DD National and DD News are on the terrestrial mode. The reason is that with a single transmitter, one can telecast a single channel unless there is a transition from analog to digital mode, when it is possible to telecast at least four to six channels from a single digitized transmitter. Another difference between the satellite channel and TB, is that while the former will have a footprint over entire South Asia, Gulf, and South-East Asia depending on the position of transponder, terrestrial one will be highly localized.

This aspect of localization has advantages as well as disadvantages. Advantages are that the viewers need not pay any subscription to the cable operators, no blackmail by them and more coverage of local issues. You need not be dumped with Royal wedding photographs. Just because the British Royal family released the official wedding pictures, one satellite channel carried it quite religiously. Does that make any sense to the viewer in Nalgonda or Nekkonda. There are innumerable examples for such distorted news values. The disadvantage is that the proposal is coming a bit late when the cable TV has established a well-entrenched network even in small towns like Eluru, Guntur, Nellore, Warangal, Nizamabad, etc. So, when we talk of privatized terrestrial television, we have to reckon with the unfair competition these cable networks may pose. As it is, they are law unto themselves and care a damn for the Cable Television Act. Further, if the choice is for digitized territorial TV, the viewer has to buy digital receiver. When we are trying to reach out to rural areas, will they buy set top boxes. Another disadvantage is this. Like private bus operators choose only profitable routes, the private terrestrial TV operators would also prefer profitable locations thus defeating the very purpose of the government’s intention to privatize so as to reach remote and inaccessible areas in accordance with the Supreme Court’s observation that the right of free speech and expression includes the right to receive and impart information.

TRAI has thrown open many issues for a public debate before deciding on the privatization of terrestrial television. What should be the eligibility conditions for license? If FDI is permitted, what should be the limitation, whether the license fee should be on national or regional basis, whether it should be compulsorily on digital mode etc. Besides all these queries, what has to be noted with concern is that terrestrial broadcast lost its charm leading to the growth of cable TV, purely because of Doordarshan’s shoddy programmes, bureaucratic lethargy instead of professional creativity and lack of political will. Privatisation, let us hope, will remove these bottlenecks and try to make the venture a success provided the cost to the viewer is viable. One suggestion was that the privatization process should be in two separate areas, one is to set up a company which can lease transmitters (like VSNL which leases satellite transponders for satellite channels) thus delinking the content providers who will concentrate only on software. This would bring down the cost of operation and thus make TB affordable to the viewer in the rural areas.

Keeping aside all these concerns which are no less important, what should really engage the attention of the government is how to monitor and regulate the content. Though the Information and Broadcasting Ministers of both NDA and UPA regimes had been talking all the while of the need for Television Regulatory Authority, nothing has been done. As a result, we have India TV offering porno shows with complete impunity and utter disregard of viewer sensibilities, all in the name of investigative journalism, and we have umpteen news channels trivializing and sensationalizing news and in the process making a mockery of news values. Some of the serials in regional channels are appalling. Glorification of adultery, pre-marital sex, violence, sexual orgies in the name of capturing night life, and all that which leave a negative imprint in the minds of the youth are on display on these channels. All for the sake of TRPs and a share in the advertising pie at the cost of social responsibility.

Now that the TRAI wants an open debate, let it also include the need for television regulatory authority irrespective of the fact whether the channel is on terrestrial or satellite mode. Whatever the Supreme Court said while endorsing the need for a censor board for films will also apply to television programmes which are much worse than some of the films. Some of the serials go on and on for years without any worthwhile content except taking the viewers for a ride. Some of the sting operations in the news channels have no public purpose. While competition has acted as a catalyst for enhancing the quality of product or service everywhere, it is unfortunate that in the field of television competition has taken the industry to the abysmal level in terms of content while it has to be conceded that the production quality is almost on a par with the international standards, thanks to technology.

While censorship for news and current affairs is unthinkable and highly undemocratic, there has to be a regulatory mechanism for television programmes. Especially when there is a move to throw open the terrestrial broadcast also to private sector, the need for such a mechanism is all the more urgent. When it comes to news, the Press Council can be converted into a Media Council with a few teeth a tleast to keep an eye on the news content of these channels and to adjudicate on complaints received from the public. Satellite television’s news and fiction programmes have already done some damage to the society and when the government is trying to privatize TB as well, regulatory mechanism has to precede the decision to privatize TB. Self-regulation is always talked about. In an atmosphere of unseemly competition to catch the eyeballs of the viewers, it will never work. Let us not entertain any illusions about it.

Note: The author was director of news of a south-based television network.

S R Ramanujan

       Send your views to author

---

Do you wish to reach our readers? submit your guest column

Copyright and Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and not of this website. The author is solely responsible for the contents of this article. This website does not represent or endorse the accuracy, completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal, advice or any other information in the article. Our readers are free to forward this page URL to anyone. This column may NOT be transmitted or distributed by others in any manner whatsoever (other than forwarding or weblisting page URL) without the prior permission from us and the author.

Media war in the offing April 08, 2005

CBFC – What purpose does it serve? March 26, 2005

Why Somnathada gets angry so often? March 16, 2005

BJP protests too much July 11, 2004

All roads lead to villages July 03, 2004

Power centers and Power brokers June 24, 2004