MEDIA SCOPE
Much of this column is based on anecdotal evidence gathered over 16 years of reporting on India’s media and entertainment (M&E) industry. But the problem is real: The Indian M&E industry doesn’t get the respect and attention it deserves. There is an air of contempt and scepticism when talk turns to M&E. If it wants to grow more the industry must do something about how it is perceived by audiences, consumers, regulators,the media and policymakers. Could that be the new year resolution for broadcasters, film-makers, theatre chains, radio operators, publishers et al?
Till about 2000, I had been writing on marketing, foreign trade, technology and management. That year a press fellowship took me to Wolfson College, Cambridge. Over 10 weeks of intense research on the issue of copyright in digital music, at the height of the Napster phase and before the iPod, I discovered that delving into the economics, regulation and technology of the music industry was fun. It was my professional epiphany. Back home the editor supported my decision to specialise in M&E. My colleagues, however, were sceptical. Why would I want to write about film stars and TV shows after doing years of “serious” business reporting?
That was 16 years ago. The M&E business has grown over five times — from about ~22,000 crore to ~1,15,700 crore in 2015. Much has changed but the perception that it is a “fluff” business remains. This is most evident in how policymakers treat it. For over 50 years, various committees said that films should be granted industry status. It happened in 2000 after films became a basket case. With that one decision the industry blossomed. In TV, regulation that focuses on content and pricing instead of plugging pay revenue leakages or political ownership has meant that the world’s second-largest TV home market remains sadly under-monetised. Even though 100 per cent foreign investment has recently been allowed, no large global cable firms have come in. Yet come controversy over a news show or a film and everybody has an opinion without an understanding of the business’ contribution. M&E is a tough, competitive business that employs millions of people and generates crores in taxes. But it is not seen that way.
A large part of the blame rests with the industry.
How many jobs does the film industry create? What is its contribution to taxes and how much could this increase by if piracy was throttled and screens incentivised? What effect do India’s creative industries have on its gross domestic product and its image outside of India? How have the real prices of pay TV moved in India? What has this meant for programming diversity? How much do consumers actually shell out for one day of TV?
There is no study that tells you what this industry means to the Indian economy, its society and its democracy. There is no ad campaign that tells you that the price you pay for TV has actually fallen in real terms, that price regulation is throttling programme diversity or that cable TV has empowered women in rural India. That we have an edge over China on soft power because of our popular film industry marks us as a liberal democracy. The Motion Picture Association of America or Creative Industries Council (UK) tells powerful stories on these themes in their countries. Going by various surveys there is little doubt in the minds of the British licence fee-paying audience that the BBC is their best option on news and entertainment. It doesn’t matter if politicians tell them otherwise. The BBC consistently communicates what it offers and the price it offers it at, to all stakeholders.
The Indian Broadcasting Foundation is still fighting internal battles of big versus small and regional versus national broadcasters. Cable has multiple organisations talking in different voices. In films it is impossible to find an industry body that represents the “Indian” film business. And so on it goes. This inability to get together is evident every time a film or TV channel is in trouble.
Could the India M&E industry resolve to get together and fight this battle for perception? If media managers and creative people cannot alter how stakeholders think of their business, who can?