Kallie Purie said two months ago that “we cannot present another side equally strongly if it doesn’t exist.” When powerful proprietors are unabashedly haughty, amoral, see no problems with genuflection before power and don’t have an iota of remorse after they have been proven terrifically wrong, what can we expect of beat reporters who are pawns in a much larger game?
David Remnick said that journalism can be many things — funny, educational, topical — but, above all, it should be about pressure on power. However, pressure on power is impossible without institutional backing. The person who needs to answer the biggest questions in India Today is Kallie Purie, but she is nowhere to be found now.
Totally agree about the Puries, and for an ageing journalist like me, it is particularly bitter because at one time, India Today was the best newsmagazine in the country (particularly after the shuttering of the Illustrated Weekly by the Times Group). It makes you wonder: What price makes it worth your while to sell your integrity?
Himmlers Hirn heißt Heydrich or HHhH by Laurent Binet. Please check this as well. The original was written in French and later translated in English by Sam Taylor.
Laurent Binet's book, right? Thank you for the reminder -- it crossed my radar, but in my preoccupation I'd forgotten to pick it up. Doing that now. Be well
Today's mainstream media makes one cringe with shame. They have plumbed all depths and are still digging deeper. To get a sense of the ground reality, readers have to rely on articles like yours and of others in the social media space. Some in the media say they speak truth to power, but what they are actually doing is singing hosannas to their dear leader. Another says on prime time that the Nation wants to know, but what we get to see is a Judge,Jury,Executioner one act play.
Lucky to have an alternative source like yours on social media.
The media has two problems: 1. A vast chunk of it is now owned by industrialists who for the sake of their core businesses have to cosy up to power. Given that, such media houses are not in a position to be even remotely critical of the establishment. 2. The business model is broken; the traditional revenue streams are not working, and the media is increasingly dependent for bread and butter on government advertising and additional revenue in the form of the "conclaves" they hold -- where the amount of revenue depends on the attendance and participation of the PM and senior ministers. Put very simply, you cannot hold to account the very people on whom your daily bread depends, so...
Just needed to know from you how does the western media fare. How do they overcome this financial dependence on the Government of the day or are they also in the same boat as ours. The Guardian in the UK is known for its critique of the Govt. How do they manage it.Is it also because press freedom is taken seriously there.
That is an essay in itself, unfortunately. One quick response would be, if you provide quality, people will pay. You will find that true of those western media outlets that are successful. (NYT was twice on the edge of bankruptcy before it got its digital game right -- and now digital earns way more than print, has for a long time). Another example to think of the quality angle is the Washington Post. During the previous Presidential election campaign, the Post did some brilliant reporting. Subscriber base shot up. Since then, they haven't managed the same level of consistent quality -- good, but not indispensable. So the subscriber base began to come down, they had to cut costs, all of that.
The very short answer is: provide value, give a reason for people to subscribe, and you are no longer dependent on handouts by government or big business. (WashPost is big business -- it's Bezos, but he keeps the Post clear of his business interests). And when you build a solid, paying subscriber base, advertising follows. (There are other revenue streams you can tap into, but that is as I said in the beginning too long a post).
Sure, press freedom is taken more seriously there and that is one factor. But I'd argue that the one point above all else is quality content -- you pay for what you think you need. (WSJ was I think the first to go paywall -- and it is successful, because it informs your understanding of the economy).
Side note: Ravish Kumar, Abhisar Sharma etc earn way more today than they did when they were employed by MSM. How come? Content, which brought them subscribers, which brings them revenue via YouTube.
Thanks for the insights and the effort you put into replying to an utterly ordinary fellow like me. I have read you on Cricket.Then there was a hiatus.Then I heard you on Amit Verma's podcast and later came to know you would be writing on substack.It has been well served.Thank you.
Thanks, much. :-) As to the familiar tropes, but of course -- such storytelling has an inevitably reductive element to it. But you do end up picking up things you weren't aware of. BTW, try Ece Temelkuran's How To Lose A Country -- the book is the story of how Erdogan's Turkey swung from democracy to authoritarianism, and I swear it could have been written in, and about, India.
Thanks once again for this excellent piece.
Kallie Purie said two months ago that “we cannot present another side equally strongly if it doesn’t exist.” When powerful proprietors are unabashedly haughty, amoral, see no problems with genuflection before power and don’t have an iota of remorse after they have been proven terrifically wrong, what can we expect of beat reporters who are pawns in a much larger game?
David Remnick said that journalism can be many things — funny, educational, topical — but, above all, it should be about pressure on power. However, pressure on power is impossible without institutional backing. The person who needs to answer the biggest questions in India Today is Kallie Purie, but she is nowhere to be found now.
Totally agree about the Puries, and for an ageing journalist like me, it is particularly bitter because at one time, India Today was the best newsmagazine in the country (particularly after the shuttering of the Illustrated Weekly by the Times Group). It makes you wonder: What price makes it worth your while to sell your integrity?
Having worked in Media, all this is deja vu
Himmlers Hirn heißt Heydrich or HHhH by Laurent Binet. Please check this as well. The original was written in French and later translated in English by Sam Taylor.
Laurent Binet's book, right? Thank you for the reminder -- it crossed my radar, but in my preoccupation I'd forgotten to pick it up. Doing that now. Be well
Today's mainstream media makes one cringe with shame. They have plumbed all depths and are still digging deeper. To get a sense of the ground reality, readers have to rely on articles like yours and of others in the social media space. Some in the media say they speak truth to power, but what they are actually doing is singing hosannas to their dear leader. Another says on prime time that the Nation wants to know, but what we get to see is a Judge,Jury,Executioner one act play.
Lucky to have an alternative source like yours on social media.
The media has two problems: 1. A vast chunk of it is now owned by industrialists who for the sake of their core businesses have to cosy up to power. Given that, such media houses are not in a position to be even remotely critical of the establishment. 2. The business model is broken; the traditional revenue streams are not working, and the media is increasingly dependent for bread and butter on government advertising and additional revenue in the form of the "conclaves" they hold -- where the amount of revenue depends on the attendance and participation of the PM and senior ministers. Put very simply, you cannot hold to account the very people on whom your daily bread depends, so...
Just needed to know from you how does the western media fare. How do they overcome this financial dependence on the Government of the day or are they also in the same boat as ours. The Guardian in the UK is known for its critique of the Govt. How do they manage it.Is it also because press freedom is taken seriously there.
That is an essay in itself, unfortunately. One quick response would be, if you provide quality, people will pay. You will find that true of those western media outlets that are successful. (NYT was twice on the edge of bankruptcy before it got its digital game right -- and now digital earns way more than print, has for a long time). Another example to think of the quality angle is the Washington Post. During the previous Presidential election campaign, the Post did some brilliant reporting. Subscriber base shot up. Since then, they haven't managed the same level of consistent quality -- good, but not indispensable. So the subscriber base began to come down, they had to cut costs, all of that.
The very short answer is: provide value, give a reason for people to subscribe, and you are no longer dependent on handouts by government or big business. (WashPost is big business -- it's Bezos, but he keeps the Post clear of his business interests). And when you build a solid, paying subscriber base, advertising follows. (There are other revenue streams you can tap into, but that is as I said in the beginning too long a post).
Sure, press freedom is taken more seriously there and that is one factor. But I'd argue that the one point above all else is quality content -- you pay for what you think you need. (WSJ was I think the first to go paywall -- and it is successful, because it informs your understanding of the economy).
Side note: Ravish Kumar, Abhisar Sharma etc earn way more today than they did when they were employed by MSM. How come? Content, which brought them subscribers, which brings them revenue via YouTube.
Thanks for the insights and the effort you put into replying to an utterly ordinary fellow like me. I have read you on Cricket.Then there was a hiatus.Then I heard you on Amit Verma's podcast and later came to know you would be writing on substack.It has been well served.Thank you.
There is no "utterly ordinary person" -- alternatively, all of us are just that. :-)
Excellent as always and each time refreshingly so.
Thank you for reading, Deepak, have a good weekend
As usual, lapped every word up.
Great stuff, Prem.
Thank you, Darshak, have a good weekend
Oh thank you, I wasn't aware of this. Will try and find it. (If you know of anyone with a download, would appreciate a connect very much.)
Thanks, much. :-) As to the familiar tropes, but of course -- such storytelling has an inevitably reductive element to it. But you do end up picking up things you weren't aware of. BTW, try Ece Temelkuran's How To Lose A Country -- the book is the story of how Erdogan's Turkey swung from democracy to authoritarianism, and I swear it could have been written in, and about, India.
BTW, prem.panicker at gmail is the best way to get me. I am likely to be away from comp for the rest of the weekend. Cheers
Huh? What message where?