For me, it was difficult to read both the Garnham and Chakravartty pieces (which is not surprising, since I come from a purely engineering background, and this is definitely out of my comfort zone). However, while going through the readings, I was constantly reminded of the debate in India about the issue of foreign direct investment (FDI) in Indian companies, especially in the news media. After independence in 1947, the Indian government had prohibited any foreign investment in print media (a law was passed in 1955). But in 2002, the decision was reversed, and now, up to 26% ownership of print media in India can be foreign [1]. However, this came with a rider – foreign investment in news agencies is still barred[2]. This is the first step, in the context of Indian print media, towards what Garnham points[3] out as one of the characteristics of the phenomena of mass media turning into full-scale commodity production:
Increased international competition and the resulting take-over of domestic, national publishing companies, advertising agencies, private broadcasting stations etc. by multinational companies.
However, 26% print media ownership is only a tip of the iceberg. In the propaganda model put forward by Chomsky & Herman[4], the second filter that news has to go through is its ability to ensure continued support from advertisers. As with much of rest of the world, Indian print newspapers are largely subsidized, and sold to the reader at a cost that is much less than the cost of production. Advertisements usually are the main source of this subsidy. Currently, the government of India currently allows 100% foreign investment into advertising[5], allowing a potential backdoor for foreign agencies to control the print news industry in India[6].
Interestingly enough, this act by the Indian government was opposed by at least some of the large Indian media groups, most citing reasons that can be usually summarized as “we don’t want foreign interference and/or perspective”[7]. Of course, some saw more into this resistance, and one possible reason for opposition that was put forward was the fact that foreign investment would cause significant disruption in the way some of these groups function (sometimes in not so ethical ways, such as accepting by “edvertorials”)[8]. I would however argue that it is naive to imagine that foreign investment would clean up print media in India – investors care about the returns they get, and much less about journalistic ethics. However, given that, I feel that the opposition from the current set of media-owners do raise a lot of interesting questions, and it would be very interesting to go deeper into this, trying to find other possible reasons for the resistance.
[1] http://siadipp.nic.in/publicat/most_frq.htm, item 9[2] http://www.indiajuris.com/pdf/FI%20in%20Print%20Media.pdf
[3] Nicholas Garnham, “Contribution to a political economy of mass-communication,” Media Culture Society 1979;
[4] Chomsky & Herman, Manufacturing Consent
[5] http://www.livemint.com/2008/08/08002512/FDI-tightening-its-grip-over-I….
[6] http://www.livemint.com/2008/08/08002512/5E8B2F4E-43B2-431D-B469-F63102B…
[7] http://www.livemint.com/2008/07/01001043/75309482-F9A8-48CB-B52D-C90F0ED…
[8] http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FE18Df05.html