The ambiguous state of the fourth estate
The private media sector is barely five years old. The notification from the MoIC concerning ad distribution based on circulation and the audit underway has raised not just eyebrows, but a feeling that the media is being prematurely judged
The brouhaha encircling private media houses and the MoIC began when a notification was passed alerting the news houses of an audit into their circulation figures. This was not the nail biter. It was the indication that government advertisements, which provide a bulk of the media houses’ revenues, would be determined according to circulation figures.
With the exception of Bhutan Observer, all the private newspapers decided that the condition set was “way too soon and way too harsh.” The consensus was it had nothing to do with non-cooperation or boycott, expressions that mislead and paint a picture of a private media fraternity rebelling against the MoIC. The concern was more precisely along the argument that it was “discouraging” and “demoralizing” that such stringent measures was being considered when media houses are struggling to keep alive a medium often credited as the ‘Fourth Estate’ when in reality the struggle to maintain the medium is immense.
The concern is that the audit is premature and being put in the arena with a daily newspaper that has had government patronage, funding, infrastructure and more pertinently, time to grow and establish itself as the kingdom’s largest circulated newspaper is harsh.
“While the ad policy is not even finalized the media houses have already started making various assumptions and remarks about the policy which does not even exist,” the MoIC Secretary said. “If there are certain criterions, media needs to strive for it.”
That was another concern cited by the private newspapers, namely the question “why should circulation be the sole measurer and indicator of getting ads. And if an ad policy is not even finalized then why take these steps?” The Secretary argued that advertising culture around the world is based on reach. And that the media needs to improve their paper circulation by spending some money on paper distribution and human resource development.
“I think it is a basic common sense that ads are not given for journalists but are meant for the readers, for the public, for the customers, and in the case of government ads, for the citizen,” he said. “Would you advise the government to ignore the readership and reach of a newspaper when it pays public funds to give ads?
Much of the hysteria generated by the MoIC was put to rest at the Meet the Press session where the Prime Minister categorically reiterated his stance that the growth of a vibrant media was one of the main concerns and priorities of the government. The PM assured the local media that the ongoing media circulation auditing undertaken by the MoIC will not hinder the growth of the media in the country.
“In no way the auditing is going to alter the commitment of the government to ensure the growth of vibrant media,” the PM said.
“What you should be mindful is that the Royal Government of Bhutan has not taken any policy decision with respect to any change in the way advertisement should be placed with various forms of the media or with various papers,” he said, noting that there had been no policy directives given by the government on the issue.
Making his case, the MoIC Secretary said the ‘Policy Draft’ can also be a guideline for the government – like the ministry advising the government on how to use the ad money efficiently. He added that the ad money is solely for reaching out to the citizens via advertisements and notifications, which is possible only if a newspaper has a good reach to every nook and corner of the country. Therefore giving ads to every newspaper or media house will lead to extravagant loss of government’s ad fund and that certain ads or notifications are more efficiently delivered to the right crowd if the government uses the right media house.
“We are not saying that introducing an ad policy is not necessary and we are not against any circulation audit. It’s too soon,” the Editor of Business Bhutan said,
The other argument is that the ad market is already favored toward and cornered by Kuensel, due to the long history it has shared with the government.
In a telephone interview, the Editor of Kuensel said that circulation alone cannot be the criteria, neither can content as far as ad distribution is concerned but he stressed the fact that the audit was done to keep track of numbers and that it is an inevitable task that has to be undertaken someday; that circulation figures will keep fluctuating constantly and that Kuensel had no monopoly on the issue. He argued that auditing cannot be kept postponed indefinitely – that if time was the factor cited than it will be the same story when new media entrants come to the scene, seek the same considerations at the cost of established media houses that have labored, trained and finessed skill human resources, often losing them out to other newspapers, and having to start the training process all over.
He emphasized that regardless of audit and circulation, people will decide the newspaper they prefer.
The other stone in the media shoe has been the question of content. A June notification had the condition that ads will be considered favorably for media houses focusing on GNH and its Four Pillars. The Secretary said that everything that is relevant and important for the Bhutanese people is relevant to GNH since the “pillars indicate the priorities of the government.”
The Editor of Kuensel also said the issue of editorial independence and the positive GNH factor in news coverage was very broad and inconclusive. “Fears about newspapers folding on account of a perceived government agenda were unlikely. Bhutanese people are no fools,” he said.
The Editor of Bhutan Observer, the only paper that accepted the audit, said, “We understand that ad policy is not all about circulation figures but also about content and specific strengths. The GNH model of content advocated by the policy is not restrictive. It includes all areas that the media are covering right now covering business, corruption, culture, environment stories. It tries to build an inclusive model of Bhutanese media. But we have expressed reservations on how contents will be monitored.”
Allaying doubts, the PM said what the MoIC was doing was information gathering and just as media must function independently and transparently while their independence was not going to be affected by such a questionnaire or survey, he said that in the interest of transparency; it was to know how each of the media houses was faring. And this, he said, was likewise a step that the ministry was undertaking.
“I will assure you that when the cabinet takes a decision it will take into account every aspect of the decision as it affects the growth of the media,” the PM said, emphasizing that the functioning and viability of the growth of the media sector as a whole will require a policy decision and that “must come to the cabinet.”
The PM also said that the media auditing would be helpful to know as to whether the media collectively needed assistance of a kind that the government had not thought of till now, or whether some of the media houses needed support from the government.
By Sonam Dema in The Journalist on November 29, 2010