Reading the fine print

The news that the government has decided to open up the print media to foreign participation by allowing foreign direct investment FDI of ...

The news that the government has decided to open up the print media to foreign participation by allowing foreign direct investment FDI of up to 26 per cent 8212; under a strict regulatory regime 8212; has been met with whoops of delight or accusations of a sell-out. The polarised response underlines how contentious the move is and how fiercely it had been resisted for over a decade by powerful media houses in the country, which want nothing more than to be allowed to continue with their long, unchallenged reign in the marketplace. Their accusations do, nevertheless, need to be answered if only because what is at stake is the interest of the reader.

It is argued that the print media is more intrinsically related to the democratic processes in a country and should therefore be protected from the predatory moves of powerful global lobbies; that national interest demands this. In response, one need only turn to the findings of the recent National Readership Survey 2002, which has indicated that TV news viewership has increased by 285 per cent. With an estimated 38 to 47 million cable and satellite TV households in the country, how is television any less intrinsically related to the democratic processes than newspapers? Indeed, in a country where a large number of illiterate people now depend on television to be informed about the world, fears about a 8216;foreign invasion8217; and a return to the days of the East India company must surely be directed at the visual media. The fact is that this sector has been opened to foreign investment for years, and preserving one corner of it as sacred, inviolable and totally Indian-owned space is both illogical and unfair to those players who may require a financial fillip to stay alive. This is not unique to India. A share of Argentina8217;s Clarin 8212; said to be the world8217;s largest circulated Spanish-language daily 8212; was put up for sale. In the UK, Thomson sold its newspapers in the late 1990s, while in a country like France, which takes its national institutions very seriously, laws only prevent the majority ownership of newspapers by non-French companies.

Finally, every media institution, whether wholly Indian owned or not, is only as good as the people who comprise it. Newspapers may be wholly Indian owned but may nevertheless display a wanton disregard for the core values that inform the Fourth Estate. This is where professionalism and commitment come in. There is an unfortunate assumption in the arguments raised against FDI in print that the reader is a fledgling in a nest opening its trusting beak to anything fed to it. This is to do discredit to a readership that is, from all accounts, a vibrant, thinking one, nurtured for decades on the idea of a free press. Nobody, with all the money in the world, can change the definition of what constitutes good journalism.