Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Who funds Indian Media

Discussion in 'National Politics' started by abirbec04, Oct 25, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    Who is connected to whom:



    NDTV
    A very popular TV news media is funded by Gospels of Charity in Spain Supports Communism. Recently it has developed a soft corner towards Pakistan because Pakistan President has allowed only this channel to be aired in Pakistan. Indian CEO Prannoy Roy is co-brother of Prakash Karat, General Secretary of the Communist party of India. His wife and Brinda Karat are sisters.

    INDIA TODAY
    Which used to be the only national weekly which supported BJP is now bought by NDTV!! Since then the tone has changed drastically and turned into Hindu bashing.

    CNN-IBN
    This is 100 percent funded by Southern Baptist Church with its branches in all over the world with HQ in US.. The Church annually allocates $800 million for promotion of its channel. Its Indian head is Rajdeep Sardesai and his wife Sagarika Ghosh.

    TIMES GROUP
    Times Of India, Mid-Day, Nav-Bharth Times, Femina, Filmfare, Vijaya Karnataka, Times now (24- hour news channel) and many more...
    Times Group is owned by Bennett & Coleman. 'World Christian Council does 80 percent of the Funding, and an Englishman and an Italian equally share balance 20 percent. The Italian Robertio Mindo is a close relative of Sonia Gandhi.

    Star TV
    It is run by an Australian, who is supported by St. Peters Pontifical Church Melbourne.

    Hindustan Times
    Owned by Birla Group, but hands have changed since Shobana Bhartiya took over. Presently it is working in Collaboration with Times Group.

    The Hindu
    English daily, started over 125 years has been recently taken over by Joshua Society, Berne, Switzerland. N. Ram's wife is a Swiss national.

    Indian Express
    Divided into two groups. The Indian Express and the New Indian Express (southern edition) ACTS Christian Ministries have major stake in the Indian Express and latter is still with the Indian counterpart.

    The Statesman
    It is controlled by Communist Party of India.

    Asian Age and Deccan Chronicle
    Is owned by a Saudi Arabian Company with its chief Editor M.J. Akbar. Gujarat riots which took place in 2002 where Hindus were burnt alive. Rajdeep Sardesai and Bharkha Dutt working for NDTV at that time got around 5 Million Dollars from Saudi Arabia to cover only Muslim victims, which they did very faithfully... Not a single Hindu family was interviewed or shown on TV whose near and dear ones had been burnt alive, it is reported.

    Tarun Tejpal of Tehelka.com
    Gets regular blank cheques from Arab countries to target BJP and Hindus only, it is said. The ownership explains the control of media in India by foreigners. The result is obvious.

    [​IMG]

    http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/09/what-is-media-and-who-owns-media-in.html
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2014
  2. Coltsfan

    Coltsfan <b>SENIOR MEMBER</b> SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,040
    Likes Received:
    502
    All this is published at the blog of Swami Paramhansa Nityananda Sex Scandal fame?

    REAL FACTS - Paramahamsa Nithyananda

    Another news item published on his blog Real Facts - Indian Media: Real Insights on how Indian Media manipulated coverage to attack Paramahamsa Nithyananda

    So the Criminal who was charged in a sex scandal is pissed at the media for exposing his misdeed and is now writing an article as to who is funding the media who reported his sexual escapades?

    Awesome!!! talk about citing credible resources
     
    7 people like this.
  3. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    Why I Quit The Media

    A mega sellout! Journalism outspaced, it was time to put my pen down.

    SUMIR LAL

    India’s Historysheet

    Bengal Gazette was the first Indian newspaper. It was printed by James Augustus Hickey on January 29, 1780, at Serampore near Calcutta.
    Bombay Herald was the first newspaper to appear from Bombay in 1789
    Samachar Darpan in Bengali was the first newspaper in an Indian language. Its first issue rolled out on May 23, 1818.
    Oodunt Marthand was the first Hindi newspaper that appeared in 1826
    Bombay Samachar was the first Gujarati paper. Printed on July 1, 1822, it is still in existence.

    The Indian media formally abdicated from duty that morning in the early 1990s when the Times of India (TOI) threw aside any remaining pretences and put up for sale its own 150-year-old masthead. Readers were greeted with their trusted newspaper proclaiming “Let The Times of India Waitâ€â€”an advertiser had been lured to pay for the additional words, with a pointer to the page where the actual advertisement was placed. The Times of India had just done some straight talking: forget the news, the journalism, the matters of public interest; go directly to the ads because that’s the real purpose of your newspaper. More deliberately, it said, everything that the toi name embodies—credibility, integrity, impartiality—is available for a price.

    Samir Jain knew his times if not his Times. He took over his father’s company in 1982, and spent the 1980s remaking Bennett, Coleman & Co Ltd (BCCLl) into a ferociously aggressive and innovative marketing company. He had sensed the zeitgeist, and was perfectly poised when the liberalisation reform in 1991 unleashed a new Indian with money to spend and immediate desires to gratify. His business proposition was simple: he would connect sellers of goods to this vast market of consumers. To corral and expand this market, he did not need distractions like news journalism, but marketing strategies like undercutting and brand-building. BCCL and TOI have laughed all the way to the bank ever since. Awestruck and lemming-like, Samir’s generation of proprietors has aped his every move, so that today the Indian media industry has unapologetic clarity about the nature of its business: it sells the media platform to commercial clients, not news to readers.

    With proprietors not interested in selling what good journalists produce, the crisis in India is not one of the media industry, but of the profession of journalism. This is the reverse of the West, where proprietor, journalist and recipients all agree on the relevance of the journalistic product, but the existential challenge before traditional media houses is how to take—in an economically viable manner—that product to the electronic spaces and mobile devices where today’s generations prefer to receive and interact with it.

    India’s media barons are no longer in the news business, but news is unavoidable: after all, you do need something to fill the space between the ads, and must dupe enough consumers into picking up your ‘newspaper’ (or tuning in to your ‘news’ channel), else your real customers—advertisers—will not be interested. So ‘news’ today is sleight of hand: paid news by politicians, private treaties with advertisers, celebrity coverage for a fee, PR feeds masquerading as reportage, the business story slanted to serve the stockmarket, the deserving story not done. Alongside, since the Sensex must never fall, the tone is frothy, jingoistic and feelgood so as to keep the middle classes in permanent chest-thumping and optimistic mode. When—surprise, surprise—reality strikes and an inconvenient aspect of India shows up, then news coverage either reduces it to political sensation or morphs to orchestrate middle-class outrage. Investigation and expose, when it happens, is because someone had a score to settle. Instead of agenda-setters, journalists have become handymen, well-paid but increasingly adrift from the craft and ethics of their trade.

    So where does that leave news as we knew it—you know, the story followed for its objective worth? The one based on verified fact and authentic source? That required legwork, questioning and research? That explored the human condition outside of the middle-class consumer bubble? That connected citizen with state?

    Such a vision wasn’t so implausible in 1982. That year, while Samir was taking over TOI in Mumbai, the Telegraph was launching in Calcutta. I was 20 and all set to change the world. I had done some thinking, and had concluded that journalism was the most noble calling there could be. If you were intensely curious, concerned about what ailed your country, wanted to make a difference, were intrigued by why things happened and people behaved as they did, preferred to see things for yourself, and revelled in the elegance of connecting word with fact, passion and thought, then journalism alone was it. And in 1982 there were genuine heroes—Arun Shourie, M.J. Akbar, Aroon Purie, Vinod Mehta and S.P. Singh comprised a new generation of editors who had been blooded during the Emergency, and were now shaking the Indian press out of its stodginess with a new investigative, irreverent, attractively packaged journalism.

    www.outlookindia.com | Why I Quit The Media
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. ek_indian

    ek_indian Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    132
    Beautiful compilation.

    This answers my query why Indian media unnecessaily criticize a political party in particular and a community in general.
     
    m2monty and brain_dead like this.
  5. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    Akbar launched the Telegraph with a handful of experienced colleagues and 40 wide-eyed kids. With breathtaking audacity, we took on the venerable Statesman, a newspaper generations of Calcuttans had grown up on and which was basking in the afterglow of its heroic stand during the Emergency. And what heady days those were. Akbar—choleric, foul-mouthed, intimidating, inspirational, genius—enabled those of us who could survive his high-stress style to live every ideal. Pursuing the story because it was a story and with no other interest, we investigated crime mafias, exposed government wrongdoing, travelled to fields and slums, and reported in a vivid, urgent manner the big events of the time: terrorism and separatism in Punjab, civil war in Sri Lanka, Indira Gandhi’s cynical politics, elections, riots, excesses by the state, assassination. The Telegraph was India’s first modern newspaper, speaking to its readers with a refreshing modular design, a strong emphasis on features, coverage of topics beyond politics, and a willingness to defy convention. Who can forget Akbar’s immortal headline: “Indira Gandhi Shot Dead, Nation Wounded”.

    It was too good to last. Carried away by his own stardom and political ambition, Akbar subverted the paper to ingratiate himself with Rajiv Gandhi. Meanwhile, Samir was luring journalists to TOI (in Delhi) where he needed fresh blood to dislodge the editors he had inherited. I spent a desultory year there, observing from the middle ranks the big changes under way at BCCL.

    The senior editorial team had an air of impotence, its discussions infused with second-guessing what management might want. Marketing managers clearly had more clout—each one’s worth could be measured in revenue numbers, but other than cartoonist R.K. Laxman, not even the most famous byline among the journalists could directly be linked to circulation figures. BCCL’s corporate interests tailored and constituted news. While company-sponsored cultural events got coverage, there were explicit instructions, for instance, to underplay the death of a famed classical musician. Nostalgia and a sense of community were out, you see, because there was no longer a reader with whom you had a psychological connection, only a statistic.

    I reported from Ayodhya in 1990 on a storming of the Babri Masjid, the police firing, the many deaths, the mayhem. After filing my story, I called my wife to let her know I was safe. While BCCL was raking in record profits, the accounts department refused to reimburse me the few rupees for that call. The expense statement went all the way up to the general manager, who did not approve. On another occasion, a colleague covering an election in a sprawling constituency had his taxi bill turned down on the ground that he could have used a rickshaw. That epitomised the contempt for the newsgathering process of a paper that the BBC mysteriously certified as one of the world’s six greatest.

    As a tribe we were still self-deluded. “How can you leave the best address in Indian journalism?” senior colleagues asked in surprise when I quit TOI for the uncertainties of the Pioneer. There, Vinod Mehta bravely created a space where we could still practise professional journalism. It was a welcome prolonging of innocence.

    Aveek Sarkar, proprietor of the Telegraph, persuaded me to return to Calcutta in late 1993 as his deputy editor. Aveek had the reputation of being the best proprietor to work for because of his endearing self-image, at least in those days; that he was an editor first and businessman second. The Telegraph was just over 10 years old, and was now nipping at the heels of the Statesman. It needed a final push. And there was a potential threat: Akbar was back in town, launching his own paper, the Asian Age. In a great example of how I think editorial and marketing teams can work together, Aveek, the ABP’s senior managers and I revamped the paper with a new set of daily feature sections focused on assessed reader needs, expanded pagination, a redesign, technology upgrade, and yes, investment in the training of our younger journalists. The Asian Age never took off, and in 1995, the Telegraph went past the Statesman.

    It is safe to say that the Telegraph defeated the Statesman with its editorial package—unlike the fierce battle in Delhi, where TOI took on the Hindustan Times (HT) on the basis of a price war and marketing gimmicks. But Samir’s mouthwatering commercial success made his formula contagious. Aveek at ABP, Shobhana at HT, and a savvy new generation of regional media proprietors all adopted his model.

    Through the mid-’90s, I observed the ABP management’s snobbery about Samir’s methods turn to grudging admiration, then sheer awe. The Telegraph now went in for the kill. Pandering to the new dictum that news must only entertain, I colluded in trivialising the front page. My greatest day of regret was one of the Telegraph’s best days of sale: a front-page banner headline I wrote during the 1996 cricket World Cup that screamed, “India Forces Pak to Surrender”. The headline could not have been any different or any bigger had it been a story on an actual war. The internal equations quickly shifted. The marketing department, represented by an empowered executive, was now directly advising Aveek on editorial strategy, while he reduced the stature of the editorial side by slicing the paper into sections to be managed by departmental editors. Branding events replaced newsroom initiatives as the means to expand readership, and advertiser imperatives routinely trumped over editorial sensitivities.

    Shobhana had offered me the executive editorship of HT in 1996, which I had turned down for no other reason than Calcutta hubris. Now, in 1998, she asked me to edit her Sunday edition. Shobhana faced a ruthless onslaught from TOI even while contending with an entrenched bureaucracy, active unions, and much else internally. Her response was to replicate whatever TOI did, editorially or marketing-wise, so that very quickly there was little to differentiate the two papers except that TOI moved first. Shobhana, however, was gentler on her journalists and lacked, at the time, a well-oiled marketing department; this meant that I could push the envelope with the Sunday paper as long as I kept clear of the family’s traditional holy cows.

    Then she brought in Vir Sanghvi as chief. Not a newspaperman, his career had been built around his access to Delhi and Mumbai’s A-listers, his celebrity talk show, and his column that delectably celebrated wines, cheeses, fine food, glamour and power. This was possibly Shobhana’s counter to the BCCL’s marketing arsenal, and her hope presumably was that Vir would attract high-end readers for high-end advertisers.

    By now I was marking time. The space to practise genuine journalism depended too much on quirk of circumstance—a momentarily benevolent proprietor, or refuge in a niche not yet in the sights of the marketers. The choices were to swim with the tide, go guerrilla like Tarun Tejpal of Tehelka, or opt out. When an opportunity came, I withdrew—from the Indian media, but not from the attributes that made me a journalist. I am now more deeply immersed than before in the intersection of development, public policy and current issues, but free of the tyranny of the 500-word limit and the shrill headline. I am still the journalist, using my skills to assess political risk and stakeholder concerns in order to help improve the quality of development projects.

    The Indian media has expanded exponentially—newspapers have opened editions all over, TV and cable have taken off, the web and social media are in. In a booming sector of a blossoming economy, proprietors would have made their money anyway. All the more tragic then that they had the most exciting, saleable story on their hands, but have missed it entirely: this unique historical moment when India is at once a rising power and a poor, misgoverned country. Instead of examining, probing and deliberating on the many fascinating aspects of an unequal nation in bold transition, they indulged in petty deceit of their public. (‘Consumers’, I firmly believe, never ceased being citizens, and have craved credible explanation and context; just load those market surveys with the right questions!) Nifty marketing of quality journalism—what a winner that would have been.
     
  6. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    If the ownership data is wrong feel free to come up with the correct ones. :lol:
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    Noam Chomsky - the Greatest Intellectual alive as per recent Times Poll (Interview with Outlook):

    "I spent three weeks in India and a week in Pakistan. A friend of mine here, Iqbal Ahmed, told me that I would be surprised to find that the media in Pakistan is more open, free and vibrant than that in India.

    In Pakistan, I read the English language media which go to a tiny part of the population. Apparently, the government, no matter how repressive it is, is willing to say to them that you have your fun, we are not going to bother you. So they don’t interfere with it.

    The media in India is free, the government doesn’t have the power to control it. But what I saw was that it was pretty restricted, very narrow and provincial and not very informative, leaving out lots of things. What I saw was a small sample. There are very good things in the Indian media, specially the Hindu and a couple of others. But this picture (in India) doesn’t surprise me. In fact, the media situation is not very different in many other countries. The Mexican situation is unusual. La Jornada is the only independent newspaper in the whole hemisphere."

    www.outlookindia.com | ?Media Subdues The Public. It?s So In India, Certainly?
     
  8. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
  9. Guynextdoor

    Guynextdoor Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,403
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Ridiculous crap. Some marketing budget figures per year.

    (Almost all nos. go to top publications/TV channels)


    a) HLL- 2000 Crores
    b) Aditya Birla Group- 1000+ Crores
    c) Vodafone- 200-300 Crores
    d) ICICI- 100 Crores
    e) Cadbury's- 100+ Crores
    f) P&G- 1000 Crores
    g) Ford: 100+ Crores
    h) Maruti: 200+ Crores
    i) Glaxo: 200+ Crores
    j) SBI: 200+ Crores


    AND THESE AREN'T EVEN THE TOP ADVERTISERS
    Now tell me, which spanish missionary organization can even think of this sort of money?

    Cost of a typical TOI Ad: Front Page 240 Sq Cm: 1.5 CRORE- That's just ONE AD for ONE DAY
    NDTV & Timesnow make something like 2000-3000 for EVERY 10 SECS of Advertising sold.

    A PATHETIC ATTEMPT to Malign Indian Media. I don't see the difference between you and consipiracy theorists across the border
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2010
    7 people like this.
  10. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    It is published article in Outlook and the latter is an interview of Noam Chomsky, I do hope you know who Noam Chomsky is.

    There is a special issue of Outlook on this. Follow the links provided and check that out first.



    But what are you implying with Ad-figures is beyond me. Can you simplify your statements so that common uneducated man like me can understand what exactly your point is?
     
  11. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    Advertisement and Ownership are two separate issues. As far as any uneducated dim-witted man like me is concerned I do not know one single newspaper or media house that pays for its own advertisement in its own paper or channel. :lol:

    You are free to correct any wrong ownership info put up in the thread.
     
  12. Karthic Sri

    Karthic Sri <b>STAR MEMBER of the MONTH</b> SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    424
    Actually what the TS meant was,"who controls" the Indian media and rather not "who funds Indian media".Funding is different and who controls is different.
     
  13. Guynextdoor

    Guynextdoor Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,403
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Yeah I know the same Noam Chomsky who sings peans of praises about Arundathi Roy whom you claimed you would personally want to boot in the Kashmir Section. Your first post was full of LIES. CNN- IBN has a maority shareholding by TURNER Networks. Do you even know who he is?
    TOI CAN EAT EVERY SPANISH MISSIONARY AND THEIR FATHERS AND GRANDFATHERS with their LOOSE CHANGE ALONE. Hell they're trying to choke their venerable competitors called Mid Day just for fun. And obviously you won't be able to understad that newspapers or TV companies that get 1000s of crores in adverstising revenues every year don't need to go to shady relegious outfits for 'funding'. Mst importantly...each of these organizations that are supposed to fund them, they can buy them out 10 times over. Period.
     
  14. Karthic Sri

    Karthic Sri <b>STAR MEMBER of the MONTH</b> SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    424
    I again repeat, Funding and controlling are two different things.The issue here is who owns the Indian Media and thereby "influences" the news style

    It will be of great help if you could post the ownership patterns of Indian Media.
    .Saying just its a conspiracy theory will not help.
     
    2 people like this.
  15. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    Source please - source that Ted Turner owns it? Told you before you can correct the wrong info.

    Missionaries don't have money - hmmmmmmm ......... oh yes they are all beggars living in Dharavi ........ :lol:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page