Archive for the 'Radio' Category

Everybody loves a good car, not a good filter

10 December 2009

The announcement of the launch of Tata Nano, the small car produced by the Tatas, saw the media falling over itself heralding the arrival of the “People’s Car”.

The fact that the car was priced at Rs 100,000 was enough to result in long front-page stories; glowing feature articles on Indian engineering and enterprise; breathless test drives; and fawning editorials and interviews with the man behind the car, Ratan Tata.

So, how does the same media treat the launch of Tata Swach, the water filter/ purifier that is priced at Rs 749 and Rs 999, and in a country like India is likely to reach more people and change more lives, and launched by the same man.

In alphabetical order:

AFP (news agency): 540 words

Associated Press:  772 words

BBC: 245 words

Business Standard: 381 words

DNA: 308 words

Press Trust of India: 477 words

Economic Times: 400 words

Indian Express: 415 words

Hindu Businessline: 461 words

Hindustan Times: 162 words on the filter, 333 words of an interview

The Times of India: 202 words

Copenhagen, anybody?

Carbon intensity?

Photograph: courtesy Paul Noronha/ The Hindu Businessline

Also read: And Ratan Tata sang, PR kiya tho darna kya?

If we can get a car for Rs 1 lakh, why can’t we…?

There’s nothing lost if the Nano isn’t produced

‘What Henry Ford did then, Ratan Tata has now’

Can India survive the Nano?

Tata, turtles and corporate social responsibility

CHURUMURI POLL: Should Tatas scrap the Nano?

The brave last words of Prabhash Joshi. RIP.

9 November 2009

Is India right in barring foreign journalists?

7 November 2009

The Great Wall between India and China is not made of bricks and mortar; it is made of freedom and liberty. Any debate, any discussion, anywhere, on the superpowers-to-be is sealed, signed and delivered by the roaring presence of those essential ingredients in plentiful on our soil, and the utter lack of it in our great neighbour.

China notoriously detests dissent—and democracy.

It bars foreign media from freely moving inside its boundaries; Tibet is off-limits to them as is Tiananmen Square. BBC was famously taken off Rupert Murdoch’s Star Network at the behest of the comrades. Google and Yahoo effortlessly dance to the tunes of the Chinese dictators. Chinese citizens routinely can’t log into YouTube, Facebook and other media. And so on.

But has difference between “us” and “them” been erased by the Congress-led UPA government?

In barring foreign journalists from going to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh to report the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama’s week-long visit to the northeastern State which China off and on claims as its own, has the Manmohan Singh government thumbed its  nose at India’s great democratic traditions?

Has India missed a trick in showing its inviolable sovereignty before a global audience? In behaving much like China would, has the Congress-led regime obliterated the difference between democracy and dictatorship? Or was the government right given the war-mongering that has recently been on display?

Also read: Media freedom is what separates India and China

Censorship in the name of ‘the national interest’?

There’s a new ism in town, and it’s Arnab-ism

5 November 2009

The Indian government’s “Operation Green Hunt” to track down Maoists—described by prime minister Manmohan Singh as the “gravest internal threat facing India”—is the flavour of the season in newspapers, magazines, and on TV stations.

In reporting from the ground; publishing long essays; interviewing key players in studios; debating the whys and the wherefores of various aspects of the promised assault; throwing light on the situation in the tribal belt, the media, it would appear, is doing its job.

Is it, or is it just “manufacturing consent for war”?

From the website Radical Notes:

“It has been assumed that the Maoist movement is not a mass movement; it’s only a bunch of ‘outsiders’ imposing themselves upon hapless tribes. The absurdity of the ‘outsider’ clause becomes obvious if one spares a moment’s thought to the way in which they function. The nature and width of their activities could not have been made possible without mass support. This is not the place to substantiate this assertion. What one needs to recognize at the primary level is that this is an open question and needs to be treated as such.

“If it is an open question with many opinions, the least the media can do is give space to these opinions, and accept the complex nature of the issue.  It might be pointed out that the debate shows on news-channels do bring in people of different opinions. However, a closer look at the dynamics of these shows will demonstrate how easily the biases of the mainstream hijack the entire debate.

“The newer, uncommon opinion cannot be expressed in the 10 seconds given to the participants, unlike the hegemonic narrative that we are all so familiar with. This inability to say everything in the imposed time limit is read as the lack of substance in these new voices, and a consensus on the issue is ‘created’.”

Arnab Goswami [of Times Now] is a good example. He seems to have found answers to all questions posed by him on his show. Furthermore, his show is an exercise in forcing his moment of epiphany upon others. ‘Mr Varavara Rao, is Kobad Gandhy an ideologue or a terrorist, ideologue or terrorist, yes or no?’ We need to move beyond these multiple choice questions – reality is more layered than the media’s projection of it. We can all do with some thinking, including our editor-in-chief. Arnabism is actually symbolic of the lack of depth, and the fear of depths that haunts the journalism of big news houses.

“Maoist violence is highlighted again and again, often with cheap melodrama (showing the lack of humanity implicit in this form of reporting) as if it exists in a vacuum. Such portrayal denudes an act of its nature as an utterance, which responds to a situation (possibly another violent act on the state’s part) and is informed by necessities of a spatio-temporal/socio-political position.

“In the same way the struggles for self-determination are defined only in terms of their separatist or fundamentalist tendencies’, (one could go out on a limb and suggest that the refusal to understand or explain Islamic violence, as something more than madness or blood-thirstiness is a sign of the same problem). Just touching the surface, there too a very small section of the surface, the mainstream media presents it to its consumers (for that is what passive reception is) as the entire reality, the sole and complete truth.

“It needs to be understood, and this cannot be stated any other way, that the media is responsible for manufacturing consent for war. It has taken the State’s call for war forward by eliminating dissenting voices within. In addition to several other things, the majoritarian nature of the media poses serious questions about any semblance of internal democracy. We have to make a choice between pushing for greater democracy within and allowing ourselves to get subsumed in the state’s narrative. If we choose the latter then we need to question the idea of journalism being ‘free and fair’ and see it as an instrument in the hands of a few who hold power and seek to keep it in their hands.”

Photograph: courtesy Outlook

Read the full article: The media question

Link via Shobha Sarada Viswanathan and Nishant R.

‘Indian media better than overseas media’

26 October 2009

Kabir_Bedi_corsaro_nero_

Biting the hand that feeds the oxygen of publicity is a bloodsport among celebrities.

Kabir Bedi, who found his niche in the American TV series Sandokan and later starred in the James Bond film Octopussy, thankfully bucks the trend, in an interview in The Pioneer, Delhi:

Question: Being an ardent follower of news, how do you view media in today’s times?

Kabir Bedi: Media is the fourth pillar of our society. I have great respect for journalists. I myself want to become a journalist but as destiny would have it, I got busy with films, theatre and television and never had time for journalism. In fact, I believe that the content disseminated through print and electronic media in India is far better than what is shown on foreign channels. I am appreciative of the work they do and the important role they play in society.

Photograph: Kabir Bedi as the black corsair in Sergio Solima’s Il corsaro nero (courtesy rohpress)

Also read: ‘Good journalists, poor journalism, zero standards’

BBC journalists secure abducted cop’s release

23 October 2009

BBC News_Subir Bhaumik_23012009

It’s one of journalism’s oldest questions: should journalists in the line of duty play a part in unfolding news events?

Should they be the eyes and ears of their audience at all times, as expected of their profession, regardless of the situation? Or, are there occasions when exceptions can be made like, say, a life at risk?

CNN chief medical correspondent Dr Sanjay Gupta, MD, while reporting from Iraq in 2003, conducted an emergency brain surgery on an Iraqi boy. Yesterday, in West Bengal, two senior BBC journalists helped broker a compromise between the State government and Maoists, leading to the safe release of an abducted police officer.

The policeman had been kidnapped after a raid on the police office three days earlier and held him hostage demanding the release of 14 tribal women.

According to a report in The Times of India, the BBC journos stepped in and acted as “facilitators and served as a bridge between the rebels and the government” when the leader of the Maoists Koteshwara Rao alias Kishenji, refused to deal directly with State officials.

“Initially, the government was a bit confused. On Wednesday morning, they sought our help. Having worked in the North-East for several years, I have been involved in facilitating several such hostage negotiations. We wanted to start a dialogue immediately but couldn’t since we needed at least one government official to participate but there was none,” the BBC’s veteran eastern India correspondent Subir Bhaumik is quoted as saying.

Subir Bhaumik later reported the story of the policeman’s release for the BBC without mentioning the role played by him in it. All’s well that ends well, of course, but what if the journalists had been caught in the crossfire between the Maoists and the State police?

There is also a strange irony in the involvement of journalists to secure the policeman’s release from the grip of Maoists. In late September, a top Maoist leader Chattradhar Mahato had been nabbed by police who were dressed up as journalists of a Singapore TV station. The impersonation had led to an outcry among journalists.

Photograph: courtesy Subir Bhaumik

Read the full reportJournalists brokered cop’s release

Also read: Dressing up (and dressing down) as journalists

Michael Moore takes on Sanjay Gupta of CNN

‘A List’ most A-listers don’t want to be a part of

19 September 2009

The Indian edition of Campaign has brought out a booklet called “The A List”, supposedly the who’s who in media, marketing and advertising, in partnership with NDTV Media.

And the sloppy, incomplete and typo-ridden effort is remarkable for how predictable and boring most A-listers are: the most-admired politician—surprise, surprise—is Mahatma Gandhi, almost everybody’s favourite device is the Blackberry™, etcetera.

Still there are a few trends to be spotted:

# Most owners have a marked inclination not to reveal more of themselves. The Times of India’s Samir and Vineet Jain; Dainik Bhaskar’s Sudhir Agarwal; India Today’s Aroon Purie; Network 18’s Raghav Bahl; NDTV’s Prannoy and Radhika Roy; Sun TV’s Kalanidhi Maran; India TV’s Rajat Sharma; Hindustan TimesShobhana Bharatiya et al haven’t bothered to fill up the form.

# The list is so Bombay-Delhi centric that it would seem that the South and East of India are in some other country. Result: India’s biggest publications like Malayala Manorama, Ananda Bazar Patrika, Eenadu, Dina Thanthi, have no representation in a 100-rupee booklet that claims to represent “our entire ecosystem” (editor Anant Rangaswami’s description).

# The new media goes almost completely unrepresented but for the presence of blogger Amit Varma, and many (Mid-Day’s Tarique Ansari, NDTV’s Raj Nayak) admit they are technologically challenged.

# In a list teeming with people born in small-town India (Meerut, Madurai, Rohtak, Ratlam, Dhanbad, Kanpur, Karur, Manipal, Varanasi), many were born elsewhere: Business India founder Ashok Advani born in Hyderabad (Sindh); Outlook editor-in-chief Vinod Mehta, Rawalpindi; India Today proprietor Aroon Purie, Lahore, and COO Mala Sekhri, London; CNBC’s Senthil Chengalvarayan, Kandy, Sri Lanka; A.P. Parigi, ex-Radio Mirchi head, Colombo; Vaishnavi Communications’ Neera Radia, Kenya; INX chief Peter Mukherjea, London.

Also read: 26% of India’s powerful are media barons

The 11 habits of India’s most powerful media pros

German fellowship open to Indian journalists

27 August 2009

The International Journalists’ Programmes (IJP) is inviting applications from newspaper, TV and radio journalists in Asia and the Pacific,  for an eight-week exchange fellowship programme that will take them to Germany in May and June 2010.

Journalists between 28 and 38 years of age, working in India, China, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam are eligible to apply.

The deadline to apply is November 30.

If selected, delegates will work in German media, research stories and work as correspondents for their home newsrooms. German journalists will simultaneously work in Asian media.

All delegates of the programme will receive a bursary of EU3,600 (approximately Rs 250,000).

For more information, visit the IJP website

Visit the IJP blog

E-mail Martina Johns for further details: johns@ijp.org

Link via Nishant Ratnakar

Newspaper websites get less than 1% page views

21 August 2009

Traditional media—newspapers, TV stations, magazines—live under the assumption that the current drift away from them towards new media is something that will get corrected as the consumer begins pining for “credibility”—stuff they can trust!—and once he does so, they can start charging for content which will bring their businesses back on track.

India is still some distance away from this reality, of course, but how realistic are these assumptions even for a country like the United States?

The Nieman Lab has released numbers that in the words of one Indian new media player are “fairly startling figures”.

# The total “Active Digital Media Universe” (Neilsen’s term for total US unique visitors online during the month, both at home and at work): 195,974,309.

# Of these, 70,340,277 or 35.89 per cent visited a newspaper web site. (On the other hand, 64 per crent got their news elsewhere.)

# The average member of the Active Digital Media Universe visited 2,569 web pages per month. That adds up to 503,457,999,821 page views.

# Of those 503 billion page views, 3,468,549,698 (3.5 billion) went to newspaper web sites. That’s less than 1 per cent of all page views or 0.69 per cent to be exact.

# Neilsen says the average page view (in that univere of 503 billion) lasted 57 seconds. That translates into 7,971,418,330 hours spent online or 40 hours, 40 miutes and 33 seconds per person.

# Of those 7.9 billion hours spent online, time spent at newspaper web sites was 45,022,485 hours. That’s less than 1 per cent of all time spent online, or 0.56 per cent.

When a music magazine takes on Goldman Sachs

12 July 2009

It is probably applicable to other spheres of journalism as well, but it is surely no exaggeration to state that business journalism has completely lost the ability to tell it like it is.

Unless, it is some small, worthless, unimportant target.

Reporters, writers and editors, fearful of losing “access”, are held hostage by PR, freebies, and worse. Publishers and proprietors, trying to squeeze every dollar, are indebted to advertising. Etc.

Result: readers, viewers, listeners, surfers are served up numbers and theories held up by hope.

Little wonder it took a comedian (Jon Stewart) to buttonhole a “mad” CNBC anchor (Jim Cramer).

Little wonder it has taken a music magazine to throw light on the “great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.”

Take a bow, Matt Taibbi (in picture).

The Rolling Stone columnist, who has been compared to Hunter S. Thompson, sticks a long, sharp knife into the investment bank in the latest issue of the magazine, calling it a “planet-eating Death Star of political influence”, accusing it of engineering every major market manipulation since the Great Depression of 1929.

The internet bubble, the housing bubble, the oil-price bubble, and the coming “carbon-credit” bubble (hello, Jairam Ramesh) are all the handiwork of Goldman Sachs, writes Taibbi, accusing the company of an incestuous old boy network to shut out competitors, prevent regulation, and stay out of trouble in perpetuity.

“They achieve this using the same playbook over and over again. The formula is relatively simple: Goldman positions itself in the middle of a speculative bubble, selling investments they know are crap. Then they hoover up vast sums from the middle and lower floors of society with the aid of a crippled and corrupt state that allows it to rewrite the rules in exchange for the relative pennies the bank throws at political patronage. Finally, when it all goes bust, leaving millions of ordinary citizens broke and starving, they begin the entire process over again, riding in to rescue us all by lending us back our own money at interest, selling themselves as men above greed, just a bunch of really smart guys keeping the wheels greased.”

Goldman Sachs responded to Taibbi’s article through Reuters blogger Felix Salmon, calling the Rolling Stone piece “hysterical”; “a compilation of every conspiracy theory ever dreamed up about Goldman Sachs”.

“We reject the assertion that we are inflators of bubbles and profiteers in busts, and we are painfully conscious of the importance of being a force for good,” Lucan Van Praag, Goldman Sachs’ top flack, writes.

Matt Taibbi responds in kind, answering every spineless reporter/editor’s feeble excuse about “giving the other side a chance”, about being “balanced” and “objective”.

“My feeling is that companies like Goldman Sachs have a virtual monopoly on mainstream-news public relations; for every one reporter like me, or like far more knowledgeable critics like Tyler Durden, there are a thousand hacks out there willing to pimp Goldman’s viewpoint on things in the front pages and ledes of the major news organizations. And there are probably another thousand poor working stiffs who are nudged into pushing the Goldman party line by their editors and superiors….

“Goldman has its alumni pushing its views from the pulpit of the U.S. Treasury, the NYSE, the World Bank, and numerous other important posts; it also has former players fronting major TV shows. They have the ear of the president if they want it. Given all of this, I personally think it’s absurd to talk about the need for “balance” in every single magazine and news article. I understand that some people feel differently, but that’s my take on things.”

There have been even wild accusations of “anti-Semitism” in Taibbi’s piece (he is Arab-American) against “the most prototypically Jewish firm around.”

Taibbi has also been accused of picking on Goldman Sachs when there were plenty of other bandicoots with their hands in the loot, like, say, Morgan Stanley.

“Why didn’t we write about Morgan? Because we didn’t. Because it’s your turn, you assholes. Maybe later someone will tell the story of the other banks, but for now, while most ordinary people are only just learning about the workings of the financial innovation era that blew up in their faces last year, the top dog in that universe is going to be first in line to get the special treatment.”

Read the Rolling Stone article: The great American bubble machine

Read Matt Taibbi’s blog: Taibblog

Read an interview with Matt Taibbi

Visit Goldman Sachs’ unofficial blog