EDITORIAL Cross ownership of media — Dr Abhijit Bora
Sometime back, I happened to read an article on the Canadian media system which contained a passing reference to something interesting. The reference was about the power that mass media ownership wields in the modem worid.
The article stated that about three decades ago the owner of the famous Time magazine planned to launch a Canadian edition of the magazine and the usual process of formalities were initiated by the management. However, because of some rules of the Canadian government there was a major difficulty in allowing this to have taken place. But the owner was so influential that a special envoy of the then US President visited Canada and requested her Prime Minister to manage something to allow the Canadian edition of Time to be published. Otherwise, the envoy explained that if the owner of the organisation was disappointed it would cause major trouble for the US President also.
Further, I read the autobiography of a former editor of United Kingdom’s leading newspaper in Fleet Street which contained another interesting anecdote. While the Iron Lady of the UK, Margaret Thatcher was very much in power her daughter was a middle-level journalist in this newspaper. At one point of time in the early 1980s because of recession and other problems quite a few journalists had to be laid. This also included Thatcher’s daughter. This lady had threatened the management through the editor that she would see how the newspaper carried on its functioning by antagonizing the daughter of the Prime Minister of the country. But despite a lot of threats nothing happened because Thatcher did not even utter a single word to the management of the daily about her daughter’s job loss.
The same autobiography also informs that it used to be a normal affair for the national political leaders of that country - whether those in power, including the Prime Minister, Home Minister or those from the Opposition – to have visited newspaper offices now and then and exchange views on various issues. Of course, even though we can term this basically as a public relations exercise by those leader, yet it also emphasizes how much they do realise anout the extent of media power in making or breaking their individual or their party’s future.
This reference brings to mind another aspect of media power getting concentrated in the hands of a single or a few individuals. The former editor also wrote in detail about how the media magnet – Rupert Murdoch, owner of the STAR TV empire defied all challenges from established trade unions and shifted offices and printing systems of the newspapers and magazines taken over by him from their earlier place of origin at Fleet Street in London without any worthwhile resistance.
Mass media influences our choices and preferences either knowingly or unknowingly.
Nearer home, most of us may recall how the owner of Zee TV media empire dared to challenge the mighty Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) with his Indian Cricket League (ICL) series. It needs mention here that BCCI is the richest cricket administration body in the world with a lot of weight that is thrown around whenever its bosses feel like, both in the national as well as international arena. Even though it could not succeed in the long run for many factors, yet the point was made that mass media wields a serious challenge to any power in this world whenever it is applied.
The Government of India’s pet giants are All India Radio (AIR) and Doordarshan (DD). Between them, they cover almost hundred per cent of the country’s population along with territory at any given time of the day or year. Now, if such expensive mass media outlets were ‘misused’ for spreading subversive messages or sabotage services by any party, we can imagine the consequences. So we can say that in our country at least the Union Government is the biggest media magnet. It is a bit difficult to realise it at first. But if we look deeply into it we will find that mass media houses having a pan-Indian presence in a majority of small and big towns, besides cities have the capacity to mobilise many people. We all know that media has the power to mould public opinion and if this business is taken to a newer height with a propagandist view in mind then anything may happen.
The situation is more serious than it appears to the masses. For example, The Times of India group of newspapers owns quite a few dailies and magazines in English, Hindi and also other regional languages all over the country, commercial FM radio stations, TV channels and what not. Similarly, the Hindustan Times, The Indian Express, Dainik Jagaran, Malayala Manorama, Mathrubhumi, Sakal group of newspapers etc all have a large presence at many places of the country. This can be used for pushing causes which might be favourable for them. This is called cross ownership of mass media.
The situation is somewhat similar to that of ‘cartelization of any business’ in the world by a few business houses. This allows them a highly advantageous position which lets them decide exclusively what content they would let the masses enjoy, at what price, at what time etc as a total monopoly concern.
Experts in the government and the media have provided for the clause of prevention of ‘cross ownership’ of mass media outlets/entities by a few persons or groups so that absolute concentration of media power as may be prevented. Thus, any mass media group is not usually allowed to own a very high number of media outlets either in one specific field or across several categories.
In this regard it is also necessary that a strong mass movement mobilized for forcing the Union Government to implement provisions for prevention of cross ownership of mass media in the interest of the masses against a highly ‘cartelized’ mass media business.
(The writer is Associate Professor, Dept of Mass Communication & Journalism, Tezpur University).
