03-14-2005, 10:22 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mudy, What exactly was in those 19 posts? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exposing Times of India, Jain brothers etc. This guy was pro Sanghvi or atleast keep his gloves. I should have kept some post.
Some samples
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Times play spoilsport, yet again
Let me state it upfront: I donât think Starâs modus operandi to beat the government guideline to uplink is bound to raise brows. By getting the likes of Vir Sanghvi, Kumarmangalam Birla, Hemendra Kothari and a cross-section of others to take stake in a content generation company, it may have successfully beaten the system, but the very presence of a newspaper editor (Sanghvi) and one of the countryâs finest dealmakers (Kothari) was sure to irks some.
Perhaps Star should have quietly got an obscure asbestos marketer to pick up a percentage. And make deals within deals â something that is a common practice in our country and its legal advisers wouldâve gladly backed up. But, having done what they have, theyâve got an unlikely Goliath to take on. Mr Samir Jain and all his backroom boys at The Times of India.
In a prominently displayed article, the countryâs best read and most influential English daily has âanalysedâ the new Star deal to get uplinking licence in India. After all, the governmentâs diktat was clear: only 26 per cent can be held by a phirang.
Itâs not that the article is without any substance, itâs just that its intent is suspect. And the fact that the Star TV group of satellite channels, cable, radio and now DTH plays are getting to be bigger than the Times, a fact recognized by BusinessWorld magazine in a recent cover story, is perhaps a prime driver behind the carefully crafted ânews analysisâ.
The Times of Indiaâ s crib against foreigners entering the news space is age-old. Other than The Hindu and The Hindustan Times (whose editor is ironically Sanghvi), Times has been consistently asking the government to not allow foreign direct newspapers. While the government did not change its stand, to level the playing field between print and electronic entities, it added the clause of a 26 per cent foreign equity cap on the uplinking for satellite news channels.
It is evident that thereâs a lot more than editorial judgment that got this unbylined article printspace. Itâs possibly the combined works of the dirty tricks department at Times House and at competition (or disgruntled employees?) thatâs at play.
So what? It will surely get the government to rethink while examining the Star News uplinking and DTH files. If steps arenât taken fast enough, you could even have Star News going off-air. But expect more fireworks soon, for in effect you have a homegrown Samir Jain taking on a mighty maverick like Rupert Murdoch.
Although a major advertiser in the Times and a partner in projects like Channel [V] Popstars, like Jain, Murdoch too is known to not take kindly to those who take on his empire.
Itâs not impossible for Star News to rejig ownership numbers: itâs a question of changing names and numbers on a spreadsheet. Times realises that Star, given itâs unrivalled leadership status on telly, commands more influence than its entire publishing group. What Murdoch doesnât have in his belly is a newspaper. But now, his resolve to have one will be surer.
As for Times, itâs an issue of who occupies the top slot. The party, as they say, has just begun. One hopes though it doesnât spill over on editorial space
// posted by PM @ 7/10/2003 11:49:09 AM<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
other link to enjoy
Exposing Times of India, Jain brothers etc. This guy was pro Sanghvi or atleast keep his gloves. I should have kept some post.
Some samples
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Times play spoilsport, yet again
Let me state it upfront: I donât think Starâs modus operandi to beat the government guideline to uplink is bound to raise brows. By getting the likes of Vir Sanghvi, Kumarmangalam Birla, Hemendra Kothari and a cross-section of others to take stake in a content generation company, it may have successfully beaten the system, but the very presence of a newspaper editor (Sanghvi) and one of the countryâs finest dealmakers (Kothari) was sure to irks some.
Perhaps Star should have quietly got an obscure asbestos marketer to pick up a percentage. And make deals within deals â something that is a common practice in our country and its legal advisers wouldâve gladly backed up. But, having done what they have, theyâve got an unlikely Goliath to take on. Mr Samir Jain and all his backroom boys at The Times of India.
In a prominently displayed article, the countryâs best read and most influential English daily has âanalysedâ the new Star deal to get uplinking licence in India. After all, the governmentâs diktat was clear: only 26 per cent can be held by a phirang.
Itâs not that the article is without any substance, itâs just that its intent is suspect. And the fact that the Star TV group of satellite channels, cable, radio and now DTH plays are getting to be bigger than the Times, a fact recognized by BusinessWorld magazine in a recent cover story, is perhaps a prime driver behind the carefully crafted ânews analysisâ.
The Times of Indiaâ s crib against foreigners entering the news space is age-old. Other than The Hindu and The Hindustan Times (whose editor is ironically Sanghvi), Times has been consistently asking the government to not allow foreign direct newspapers. While the government did not change its stand, to level the playing field between print and electronic entities, it added the clause of a 26 per cent foreign equity cap on the uplinking for satellite news channels.
It is evident that thereâs a lot more than editorial judgment that got this unbylined article printspace. Itâs possibly the combined works of the dirty tricks department at Times House and at competition (or disgruntled employees?) thatâs at play.
So what? It will surely get the government to rethink while examining the Star News uplinking and DTH files. If steps arenât taken fast enough, you could even have Star News going off-air. But expect more fireworks soon, for in effect you have a homegrown Samir Jain taking on a mighty maverick like Rupert Murdoch.
Although a major advertiser in the Times and a partner in projects like Channel [V] Popstars, like Jain, Murdoch too is known to not take kindly to those who take on his empire.
Itâs not impossible for Star News to rejig ownership numbers: itâs a question of changing names and numbers on a spreadsheet. Times realises that Star, given itâs unrivalled leadership status on telly, commands more influence than its entire publishing group. What Murdoch doesnât have in his belly is a newspaper. But now, his resolve to have one will be surer.
As for Times, itâs an issue of who occupies the top slot. The party, as they say, has just begun. One hopes though it doesnât spill over on editorial space
// posted by PM @ 7/10/2003 11:49:09 AM<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
other link to enjoy