July 17, 2002 | 1445 IST
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Home >
Money > Business Headlines > Special July 17, 2002 | 1445 IST |
Feedback
|
|
|
Who's afraid of FDI in print?B G Verghese The ruckus over the recent governmental approval given to foreign direct investment in the print medium would suggest that the Martians have landed and something terrible must follow. Neither is true. A retreat from the barricades followed by a hard think would be in order. The fact is that the foreign media entered the gates long back without too many people sounding any alarm or being the worse for it. The breaching of borders by radio is ancient history. The satellite television "invasion" is more than a decade old. The earlier beachheads established are being enlarged. Foreign newspapers, journals, books and cinematic films are freely available in the country and foreign wire services feed the Indian media, albeit through the filter of a domestic agency. Nothing has been subverted. Technology has transformed the manner in which news and information are disseminated. Those who cite the Nehru doctrine of 1955, the first Press Commission, the latest Press Council resolution or other hoary sources are just a little behind the times. The chip, computer, satellite, cellular/sat-phone, fax, internet, email, and their rapidly multiplying and incestuous progeny have transformed the ground rules. You can read Dawn or The New York Times in Delhi even as your (NRI) cousin reads The Indian Express or Outlook in Bangkok or Boston. Shut these out - if you can - and we will no longer remain a free society. India would truly be another and less pleasant country. Some believe that FDI will be subversive, with the dreaded "foreign hand" laying down policy on sensitive economic, social and political issues. The best and the brightest Indian papers and journalists would be taken over and the "fourth estate" soon be reduced to a pawn. This would mean a return to the East India Company and would pose a cultural threat. As newspapers are not generally money-spinners, FDI must imply a sinister intent. Such fears are exaggerated, if not fanciful. Recall the nightmares that used to accompany talk of devaluation in the 1950s and the 1960s. There were many who then valiantly rose to defend the rupee as if the nation's sovereignty depended on it. The rupee now freely floats to nobody's great concern. The fact is that the Indian media is too big, too mature and too embedded in India's established democratic ethos to be taken over by anybody. Yes, there could be competition. But this is not something to be feared. As in the case of the transition from self-sufficiency and import substitution to market determination, competition will spur quality, variety and innovation. India will be the gainer. Even while everybody has been readying to battle FDI in print, large chunks of Indian advertising have come under foreign control while nobody was looking. This could in theory influence media directions, but is unlikely to do so in any crude sense because that would produce a political backlash that foreign investors would not wish to invite. A look at what has happened to television is instructive. Despite the entry of foreign satellite channels with little or no regulation, not only has the Indian TV segment grown in numbers and technical sophistication, but the foreign channels operating in India are respectful of India's political and social concerns precisely because they have a stake in the vast and growing Indian market. The government has sensibly done what it was always advised to do, namely, open up the media market with appropriate safeguards. These operate at two levels: less stringently for scientific and technical journals where the foreign cap is 74 per cent, and rather more rigorously for newspapers and current affairs journals where the foreign cap is 26 per cent. Even this is subject to further safeguards such as a case-by-case approval, Indian editorial and managerial control, a greater-than-26 per cent single holding by an Indian shareholder, and so forth. The matter can be further reviewed if necessary in the light of actual experience. There is another set of reasons why the FDIO decision is overdue. In the first round of satellite broadcasting, the Indian government was altogether too coy in granting uplinking rights. Consequently, many broadcast channels invested in uplinking and related facilities in Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai and Moscow. India lost out in investments, jobs, and opportunity. Few critics or many in the government even now realise that India can and should be a major international communications hub with its huge domestic market, an enviable pool of highly skilled yet low-cost human resources, an excellent grounding in English, a vibrant print, television, book, film, advertising and entertainment industry, a democratic society and legal framework, and a growing telecom sector. Geographically and geo-politically, India is well placed to serve and service the West Asia, Southeast Asia, East Asia, Central Asia, Australia and even Western markets. FDI is therefore not a rash political venture or a disaster. It could - and should - be the harbinger of $10 billion of investment and a million jobs (for a start). There could be several other valuable spin-offs in a globalising world. The central foyer of Broadcasting House on New Delhi's Parliament Street has this quotation from Gandhi: "I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows to be stuffed. I want the cultures of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any. Mine is not a religion of the prison-house." These are wise words. They were spoken long before 1955 and will resonate well into the future. Powered by ALSO READ:
|
ADVERTISEMENT |
||||||||||||
