Tags:
Journalism of Courage
HOW could something inherently good, acceptable to everyone from broadcasters to the last mile operators in the cable industry be so horrifically botched up? Trust the Information and Broadcasting Ministry to make error a fine art. In seeking to implement the Conditional Access System it has done just that.
Broadcasters tired of getting only 20 per cent revenues from the 42 million cable homes in the country felt the addressible system would lead to greater declarations, and subsequently greater revenues, as that would stop cable operators from fudging subscription rates.
| nbsp; |
|
I038;B Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad could see his career jeopardised and the BJP8217;s Delhi poll campaign torpedoed because of the CAS mess. No wonder he looks glum
|
| nbsp; |
Operators, though very few understand what CAS really means, welcomed it as they felt viewership claims of channels would be finally tested through the system. Lastly, the Government would have benefited by pocketing Rs 1,500 crore as declared tax revenues because consumers had the choice of watching the channels they wanted to.
How did it all go wrong?
Here8217;s how. Right from the day the Cable Television Networks Regulation Amendment Act, 2002, came into existence, making it obligatory for cable operators to transmit their programmes through the Conditional Access System, Information and Broadcasting Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad set up a task force to examine the issue threadbare before coming out with a series of notifications to implement the Act in a phased manner.
While the task force comprising mainly broadcasters, multi-service operators, cable operators and consumers had meeting after meeting, consensus eluded them. What the task force lacked was members with relevant knowledge as opposed to stakeholders with specific agendas8212;but of that later.
|
What the Government should have done instead was to launch a preliminary survey8212;to check consumer preferences, preferably based on socio-economic categories to decipher acceptable pay budgets of households to arrive at a business-like case for CAS. The survey was launched just a month ago!
While this would have provided some clues, ministry officials should have simulatenously mandated technical specifications for the man expected to implement the system8212; the last mile operator. He should have been given sufficient time for rejigging his operations8212; from currently outdated systems to a superior digital system.
The spread should have been confined to a city or two at best. The world over, set top boxes have had a gradual acceptance. People are reluctant to adopt a 8216;8216;black box8217;8217; whose benefits are not clearly spelt out. All of this could have been factored into a strategy: communication, within the city area wise rollout.
The Government should have stayed out of asking the channels to declare their subscription rates. While the Act kept quiet on the price issue, the last 500 hours have been spent by officials talking of nothing but the price of pay channels.
While the Government was mandated by law to declare only the free to air channels, it really had no business to meddle into some one else8217;s business. That, as the ministry officials are fond of saying should have been left to market forces. The alleged motive for the meddling was safeguarding the by now thoroughly confused consumer. The more plausible reason is that Prasad is terrified. If viewers suddenly can get their daily fix of Ekta Kapoor because of a CAS/set top box snafu, his party, the BJP, will be grilled in November8217;s assembly election in Delhi. And Prasad himself will be skewered.
And so the past two weeks have not only seen time being wasted
waiting for price lists, even the PMO has spent close to 12 hours negotiating the CAS mess. Does CAS really need the attention of the highest office in the country? As they say, Indians are such crisis management junkies, if they don8217;t have crisis, they invent one.
