Muzzling the media

Draft broadcast regulation is a Pandora’s Box

Anjan Mitra Delhi

The Congress-led government is once again playing with its favourite pastime of trying to muzzle the media. And, this time around, unlike in 1988 of the Defamation Bill year, the authorities have expanded their proposed jurisdiction to most segments of the media industry.

Draft broadcast regulations, formulated by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry (I&B) for the Indian Cabinet’s consideration, borrows liberally from existing regulatory frameworks across the globe without taking into consideration that many provisions would be difficult to implement in India because multiple languages and cultures dominate various parts of the country.

Particularly worrying is the clandestine manner in which the government drafted a Cabinet Note on the Broadcast Services Regulation Bill 2006, which took the whole industry by total surprise at not being consulted on such an important piece of legislation.

The Broadcasting Bill has been dangling on an uncertain thread for close to a decade now; it was last introduced in Parliament in 1997. Several I&B ministers in several governments have come and gone. In private, some such ministers have termed such a regulatory framework a political hot potato that is dropped every time an effort is made.

The draft tries to address the issue of encouraging domestic originating content on TV channels by mandating a 15 per cent share for it. Then it caps cross service ownership in broadcasting at 20 per cent and, more controversially, tries capping share of voice for a TV channel or cable TV network nationally at 15 per cent.

That the print medium has not yet been included in the draft is a small mercy or it would have sounded the death knell for any media organisation that aimed to be vertically integrated like a News Corp or Time Warner, both of which straddle almost all segments of media and entertainment. Though the ministry has stated that at a later stage it could include the print medium to curtail accumulation of interest.

Not content with crippling business models of media houses, the work of Indian babus at the I&B ministry proposes a Broadcasting Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI), which will oversee the broadcasting industry in all its aspects the same way as the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India does in the telecom sector, and would have a government official as its head.

Little wonder that Star Group India CEO Peter Mukerjea criticised such a move, saying having a government official would never make the regulator truly independent.

The suggestions on mandating a certain quantum of content from India is a laudable move, which will go a long way in giving a boost to local TV production and more so animation. But this feature is one of the rare redeeming aspects of the draft media legislation.

Trying to control share of voice and restricting cross media ownership are features that will not only be controversial, but will severely restrict business activities.

In a country like India where several languages dominate, unlike in the US or the UK, for example, where English is the dominant spoken and written language, how would the government determine a share of voice for a TV channel is not clear at this stage.

On restrictions on accumulation of interest, the draft government note states, “The Central Government shall have the authority to prescribe such eligibility conditions and condition with regard to accumulation of interest in the print and broadcast segments as may be considered necessary from time to time to prevent monopolies across different segments of the media.”

What this means is that a broadcaster like Star, for instance, can have a maximum 20 per cent stake in an FM radio venture or a multi-system operator. If such a stipulation goes on to become a law, a fallout would be that Star, which has a 26 per cent holding in the Rajan Raheja-promoted Hathway Cable & Datacom MSO, would have to bring down its stake by six per cent.

More significantly, the Sun TV group in south India would also have to restrict its interest in cable distribution companies like Sumangli. Further, Sumangli, which controls more than 60 per cent market share in Tamil Nadu providing cable services to consumers, will have to give up a major share.

In the absence of any other cable network worth the name in the State, the law could make several thousands of cable consumers without services in the short term.

“The share of content produced in India shall not be less than 15 per cent of the total content of a channel broadcast during every week,” the draft note states.

It also goes on to state that the share of public service/socially relevant programme content shall not be less than 10 per cent of the total programme content of a channel broadcast during every week.

This would mean that channels like Cartoon Network, Animax, Discovery, Animal Planet and Discovery Travel and Living would have to have a prescribed percentage of content generated from India, which has been a long-standing demand of Indian animators.

The provision that cable operators/ multi-system operators to operate only on licence from the proposed BRAI could well be the catalyst that brings in some order into the cable industry. At present, the only requirement for anyone wanting to start cable services is that he/she should fill in the prescribed form at any post office and pay the nominal fee.

How do the present suggestions measure up to the Broadcast Bill, which was tabled in Parliament in 1997 by the then I&B Minister Jaipal Reddy, and never got much further than a joint parliamentary committee set up to examine the Bill?

 The 1997 Bill stated that a person or a company will be allowed to hold licences in only one of the following category of services: Terrestrial Radio Broadcasting, Terrestrial Television Broadcasting, Satellite Television or Radio Broadcasting, DTH Broadcasting, Local Delivery Services and any other category of services, which may be notified by the central government.

In 1997, restriction of monopolies was more targeted towards newspaper houses. The Bill then had said that no proprietor of a newspaper will either be a participant with “more than 20 per cent interest in or control a body corporate, which is the holder of a licence to provide a licensed service under this Act.”

In 2006, the newspaper houses might have been spared for the moment, but a key question remains: will the Bill, as suggested in a draft, go through this time?

Its passage will depend on how much pressure I&B mandarins, and the Congress-led coalition government, are willing to withstand not only from the Opposition, but also allies, some of whose sympathisers have big media dreams in east and south India.

The Maran family that controls Sun TV group in the south is a political player having large interest in the DMK party, which is presently ruling Tamil Nadu and is an important ally of the Congress at the Centre. Sun promoter Kalanithi Maran’s younger brother Dayanidhi is the telecom and IT minister in the federal government.

Considering that the government proposes to have a Doordarshan-type programming code for all TV channels and arm itself with raiding any media premises in the name of national interest, the draft legislation needs to be opposed.

But for that to happen, the industry and a section of the government need to sink their differences and stop playing politics for a larger gain, a free and vibrant media.

The writer is Executive Editor of Indiantelevision.com