Submitted By: -
Samnan Mohammed Madani

---

[attachment=11045]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Prior to the eighties and nineties, national media system was typified by domestically owned radio, television and newspaper industries. There was major import markets for films, TV shows, music and books, and these markets tended to be dominated by U.S. based firms. But local commercial interests, sometimes combined with a state-affiliated broad- casting service, predominated within the media system. All of this is changing rapidly .Whereas previously media system was primarily national, in the past few years a global commercial-media market has emerged.
The commercialization of the electronic media was given a boost as globalization hit India, bringing about the transformation on Indian television in the early 1990s, accelerated by the combined impact of new communication technologies and the opening up of global markets. Economic liberalization, deregulation and privatization contributed to the expansion of Indian media corporations, facilitated by joint ventures with international media conglomerates.
According to a recent survey made by MPA an ITV, India is the third largest TV market in the world with 109 million television homes and 61 million cable TV homes. It is also the fastest growing cable TV market in Asia with industry turnover growing at an average annual rate of 18n per cent to approach $3 billion in 2004. According to a detail opening presentation made by MPA and ITV, India is the third largest TV market in the world with 109 million television homes and 61 million cable TV homes. It is also the fastest growing cable TV market in Asia with industry turnover growing at an average annual rate of 18n per cent to approach $3 billion in 2004.
A newspaper plays a crucial role in society. Besides providing information to its readers, a newspaper aims at educating and leading the public at large and protecting rights and freedom of the people. Giving right perspective to the facts, providing a forum for debate and discussion, inspiring people for cooperation, love and unity, improving quality of life and entertainment are some of its other goals. A newspaper is, therefore, an instrument of social change. It must uphold moral and ethical values in society, provide a truthful, comprehensive and intelligent account of events, and give meaning to them. Undoubtedly, a newspaper must act with responsibility, be fair and independent, and neutral and objective. Therefore, a newspaper must follow the tenets of journalism.
In this project I more concern only on the social activity and customer loyalty for generating brand awareness.
Rajasthan Patrika is a Hindi lanaguage daily newspaper published from Jaipur and other major cities in Indian state of Rajasthan and also from Banglore, Surat, Ahmadebad and Channai.Company was established in 1956. And founder of the company is Kapoor Chandra Kulish. And the head Department of the company is situated in the Sun City (Jodhpur), Manji Ka Hatha Poata. Opposite ICFAI national college. Company publish his news paper not only Rajasthan, other parts of country. Company has its own news channel on local cable network, and relay some serials .who give report on public awareness and crime report of the week, and also give report on, What happened in all over Rajasthan in per week .for his readers company have different policies like gift system and participate in social activity like as for saving water (AMRTAM JALM) and student is Patrika in Education program in summer vacation
Rajasthan Patrika’s Patrika in education (PIE) is the educational wing of the Rajasthan Patrika. It has been organizing activates for the masses for the student and youth.
Major strength of the company his previous record and quality of printing and paper truth ness of the all news that is written in the news paper and some facilities, which is differentiate to his competitor like, its “Granted gift program” in end of every month and “Patrika in education” in every summer vacation for all type of student and “Amrtam Jalm” for public awareness and increasing customer strength in every year or RAJASTHAN PATRIKA already have leading share in the market. And involvement of Rajasthan Patrika in social activity and connection with many charitable trust. it Company have many features in their product, if we see news paper of Rajasthan Patrika, there are many additional colour paper for his reader. And they have a separate paper for all reader. For youth news paper has Bollywood and Patrika Ravivariya and for ladies Patrika has Parivar .and for child, Patrika has a magazine called “chottu mottu”. This news paper always gives updated news not copied by other .its Editorial paper is one of the major strength of his. It is very special paper .because in this paper a critical matter is given that is related to political and social. Rajasthan Patrika news paper always has little for the advertisement that is so the news paper has more news then other news paper .now days Rajasthan Patrika has its own news channel and music channel. It means if any person not have time for reading news paper then he /she can watch these news on Patrika news channel. And its news channels telecast viewer. Its viewer can see song on his or her choice .Patrika is started a new program called “Patrika in Education” .it is totally no profit no loss program for Patrika .but this program always increase goodwill of the company. On news channel Patrika telecast only news and much discussion and criticize relevant topic. As we know that Patrika also telecast some serial on national network. These serial gives more news related to only own state and many awareness program for people of Rajasthan. And also give information about our culture and our great history. The price of paper is less then to his competitor .so it is also one major strength for its company. Patrika has 17th edition in all over India. And its customer figure and its edition so popularity in all over India .Patrika get all type of award related to media industry it is big strength of company.
1. INTRODUCTION TO THE INDUSTRY
The Global Media System
Prior to the eighties and nineties, national media system was typified by domestically owned radio, television and newspaper industries. There was major import markets for films, TV shows, music and books, and these markets tended to be dominated by U.S. based firms .but local commercial interests, sometimes combined with a state-affiliated broad- casting service, predominated within the media system. All of this is changing rapidly .Whereas previously media system was primarily national, in the past few years a global commercial-media market has emerged. To grasp media today and in the future, one must start with understanding the global system and then factor in differences at the national and local levels .Today media industries is regarded as one of the most oligopolistic in the world.
This global oligopoly has two distinct but related facets. First, it means the dominant firms-nearly all U.S. based –are moving across the planet at breakneck speed. The point is to capitalize on the potential for growth abroad-and not get outflanked by competitors –since the U.S. market is well developed and only permits incremental expansion. The dominant media firms increasingly view themselves as global entities. Second, convergence and consolidation are the order of the day. Specific media industries are becoming more concentrated, and the dominant players in each media industries are becoming more and more concentrated and the dominant players in each media industry increasingly are subsidiaries of huge global media conglomerates. For one small example, the U.S. market for educational publishing is now controlled by four firms, whereas it had two dozen viable players as recently as 1980. The level of mergers and acquisitions is breathtaking. In the first half of 2000, the volume of merger deals in global media, Internet, and telecommunication totaled $ 300 billion triple the figure for the first six months of 1999, and exponentially higher than the figure from ten years earlier. The logic guiding media firms in all of this is clear: get very big very quickly, or get swallowed up by someone else. This is similar to trends taking place in many other industries.
But in few industries has the level of concentration been as stunning as in media. In the short order, the global media market has come to be dominated by seven multinational corporations: Disney, AOL-Time Warner, Sony, News Corporation, Viacom, vivendi and Bertelsmann. None of these companies as recently as fifteen years ago; today nearly all of them will rank among the largest 300 non-financial firms in the world for 2001. Of the seven, only three are truly U.S. firms, through all of them have core operation there. Between them, these seven companies own the major U.S. film studios; all but one of the U.S. television networks; the few companies that control 80-85 percent of the global music market; the preponderance of satellite broadcasting worldwide; a significant percentage of book publishing and commercial magazine publishing; all or part of most of the commercial cable TV channels in the U.S. and worldwide; a significant portion of European terrestrial ( traditional over-the- air) television; and on and on and on.
By nearly all accounts, the level of concentration is only going to increase in the near future. Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation may be the most aggressive global trailblazer, although cases could be made for Sony, Bertelsmann, or AOL-Time Warner. Murdoch has satellite TV services that run from Asia to Europe to Latin America. His Star TV dominates in Asia with thirty channels in seven languages. News Corporation’s TV service for China, phoenix TV, in which it has a 45 percent stake, now reaches forty-five million homes there and has had an 80 percent increase in advertising revenues in the past year. And this barely begins to describe News Corporation’s entire portfolio of assets: twentieth Century Fox films, Fox TV network, HarperCollins publishers, TV station, cable TV channels, magazines over 130 newspaper, and professional sport teams. Why has this taken place? The conventional explanation is technology; i.e. radical improvement in communication technology makes global media empires feasible and lucrative in a manner unthinkable in the past. This is similar to the technological explanation for globalization writ large. But this is only a partial explanation, at best. The real motor force has been the incessant pursuit for profit that marks capitalism, which has applied pressure for a shift to neoliberal deregulation.
Once the national deregulation of the media began in major nations like the united state and Britain, it was followed by global measures like the North America Free Trade Agreement and the formation of the World Trade Organization, all designed to clear the ground for investment and sales by multinational corporation in regional and global market .this has lay foundation for the creation of the media system, dominated by the aforementioned conglomerates. Now in place, the system has its own logic. Firms must become larger and diversified to reduce risk and enhance profit making opportunities, and they must straddle the globe so as to never be outflanked by competitors .this is a market that some anticipate having trillions of dollars in annual revenues within a decade. if that is to be the case ,those companies that sit atop the field may someday rank among the two or three dozen largest in the world .The development of the global media system has not been unopposed. While media conglomerates press for policies to facilities their domination of the markets throughout the world, strong traditions of protection for domestic media and cultural industries persist. Nations ranging from Norway, Denmark and Spain to Mexico, South Korea keep their small domestic firm production industries alive with government subsidies. In the summer of 1998, culture ministries from 20th nations, including Brazil, Mexico, Sweden, Italy, and Ivory Coast, meet in Ottawa to discuss how they could “build some ground rules” to protect their cultural fare from “the Hollywood juggernaut”. Their main recommendation was to keep culture out of the control of the WTO. A similar 1998 gathering sponsored by the United Nation in Stockholm, recommended that culture be granted special exemptions in the global trade deals. Nevertheless, the trend is clearly in the direction of the opening markets.
Proponents of the neoliberlisem in every country argue cultural trade barriers and regulation harm consumers, and that subsidies inhibits the ability of the nations to devolve their own competitive media firms. There are often strong commercial media lobbies within nations that perceive they have more to gain by opening up their borders than by maintaining trade barriers.
If the WTO is explicitly a pro-commercial organization, the international telecommunication union(ITU),the global regulatory body for telecommunication, has only become one after a long march from it traditional commitment to public service values. The European Commission (EC), the executive arm of the European Union, also finds itself in the middle of what controversy exists concerning media policy, and it has considerably more power than ITU. On the one hand, the EC is committed to building powerful pan-European media giants that can go toe-to-toe with the U.S. based giants. On the other hand, it is committed to maintaining some semblance of competitive markets, so it occasionally rejects proposed media mergers as being anti-competitive. Yet, as a quasi democratic institution, the EU is subject to some popular pressure that is unsympathetic to commercial interests. As Sweden assumed the rotating chair of the EU in 2001, the Swedes began pushing to have their domestic ban on TV advertising to children made into the law for all EU nations. If this occurs it will be the most radical attempt yet to limit the prerogatives of the corporate media giants that dominate commercial children’s television. Perhaps the way to understand, how closely the global . Commercial media system is linked to the neoliberal global capitalist economy is to consider the role of advertising. Advertising is a business expense incurred by the largest firms in the economy. The commercial media system is the necessary transmission belt for business to market their wares across the world; indeed globalization as we know it could not exist without it. A whopping three quarters of global spending on advertising ends up in the pockets of a more twenty media companies. Ad spending has grown by leaps and bounds in the past decade, as TV has been opened to commercial exploitation, and is growing at more than twice the rate of GDP growth. Latin American ad spending, for example, is expected to increase by nearly by 8 percent in both 2000 and 2001. The coordinators of this $350 billion industry are five or six super ad agency owning companies that have emerged in the past decade to dominate totally the global trade. The consolidation in the global advertising industry is just as pronounced as that in global media, and the two related. “Mega-agencies are in a wonderful position to handle the business of the mega clients,” one ad executive notes. It is “absolutely necessary for agencies to consolidate. Big is the mantra. So big it must be,” another executive stated.
There are a few other points to make to put the global media system in proper perspective. The global media market is rounded out by a second tier of six or seven dozen firms that are national or regional powerhouses, or that control niche market, like business or trade publishing. Between one third and rest are from western Europe and Japan. Many national and regional conglomerates have been established on the backs of publishing or television empires.
Together, the seventy or eighty first and second tier giant controls much of the world’s media: book magazine and newspaper publishing; music recording; TV production; and motion picture theaters. The end result of all activities by second tier media firms may well be the eventual creation of one or two more giant, and it almost certainly means the number of viable media players in the system will continues to plummet, some new second tier firms will probably be further upheaval among the ranks of the first tier media giant.
The global media system is only partially competitive in any meaningful economics sense of the term. When Varity compiled its list of the fifty largest global media firms for 1997, it observed that “merger mania” and cross-ownership had “resulted in a complex web of interrelationship” that will “make you dizzy”.
This point cannot be overemphasized. in the competitive market, in theory, numerous producers work their tails off largely oblivious to each as they sell what they produce at the market price, over which they have no control. At a certain level, it is true these firms compete vigorously in an oligopolistic manner. But they all struggle to minimize the effect of competition. Today’s media firms are called “co respective’ competitors typical of situations with high level of monopolization rather than classical competitors in an anonymous dog-eat-dog world as assumed in much of economics theory. The leading CEOs are all on a first name basis and they regularly converse. Even those on unfriendly terms, like
Murdoch and AOL-Time Warner’s Ted Turner understand they have to work together for the “greater good.’’ As the head of Venezuela’s huge Cisneros group, which is locked in combat over Latin American satellite TV with News Corporation, explains about Murdoch, “we’re friends. We’re always talking.’’ Moreover, all the first and second tier media firms are connected through their Reliance upon a few investment banks like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs that quarterback most of the huge media mergers. Those two banks alone put together fifty two media and telecom deals valued at $433 billion in the first quarter of 2000, and 138 deals worth $433 billion in all of 1999.
The internet is increasingly becoming a part of our media and telecommunication systems, and a genuine technological convergence is taking place. Accordingly, there has been a wave of Mergers between traditional media and telecom firms, and by each of these with internet and computer firms. Already companies like Microsoft, AOL, AT&T and Telefonica have become media player in their own right. It is possible that the globel media system is in the process of conversing with the telecommunications and computer industries to form an integrated global communication system, where anywhere from a six to a dozen super companies will rule the roost. The nation that the internet would “set us free”, and permit anyone to communicate effectively, hence undermining the monopoly power of the corporate media giant, has not transpired. Although the internet offers extraordinary promise in many regards, it alone cannot slay the power of the media giants. Indeed, no commercially viable media contact site has been launched on the internet, and it would be difficult to find an investor willing to bankroll any additional attempts. To the extent the internet becomes part of the commercially viable media system, it looks to be under the thumbs of the usual corporate
Indian media in the age of globalization:
The commercialization of the electronic media was given a boost as globalization hit India, bringing about the transformation on Indian television in the early 1990s, accelerated by the combined impact of new communication technologies and the opening up of global markets. Economic liberalization, deregulation and privatization contributed to the expansion of Indian media corporations, facilitated by joint ventures with international media conglomerates. Such developments revolutionized broadcasting in what used to be a heavily protected media market, certainly the most regulated among the world’s democracies. Gradual deregulation and privatization of television has transformed the media landscape, evident in the exponential growth in the number of television channels- from Doordarshan the sole state-controlled channel in 1991 to more then 70 in 2000.out of these, in 19 are in Hindi or English and therefore national in reach, while others cater to regional audiences in their own languages.
The privatization of broadcasting made many western transnational media players enter the ‘emerging market’ of India-potentially one of the world’s biggest English-language television market. With a huge middle class-estimated between 200-300 million-with aspiration to a western life style and a well developed national satellite network linking the vast country, their task does not appear to be too demanding. Sectors of the economy, such as information technology, have demonstrated exceptional growth in the past decade.
This has stimulated change in the broadcasting industry, benefiting also from a fast-growing advertising sector, making the Indian television market attractive for transnational broadcasters.
The entry of global media conglomerates into India opened up a new visual world for Indian audiences, first through the live coverage of the 1990-91 gulf crises by the cable news network and later through Hong Kong based Star (satellite television Asian Region) TV, part of Rupert Murdoch’s news corporation. Star’s five-channels satellite service in English (Plus, Prime Sports, Channel V, the BBC World and Movie), originated in 1991, become a major hit with the English-fluent urban elite and the advertisers, who saw in these channels a way to reach India’s affluent middle class.
Buoyed by advertising revenues, cable and satellite television increased substantially from 1992, when only 1.2 million homes received it. By 1999, India had 24 million cable TV homes, receiving programmers from major transnational players- notably CNN, Disney, CNBC, MTV, Star, Sony Entertainment television and BBC-and from scores oft Indian channels. After an initial infatuation with western English-language programming, noted for its liberal attitudes to sexual subjects, hitherto a taboo on Indain airways. It became apparent that the Indian audience preferd television in their own languages, promoting global media companies to adapt their programming strategies to suit the local marketers. Star strted the process of hybridization when realized that it’s mainly US-originated programming was being viewed by small unit of urban elite. It therefore started adding Hindi sub-title to Holly wood films and dubbing popular US soaps into Hindi. In 1996, Star India specific channel, Star Plus, began locally made programmers in English and Hindi.
The sheer logic of market pressure- localizing the products to reach a wider consumer base and increase advertising revenues, was at the heart of this localization strategy.
Western-owned or inspired tele vision encouraged mixing of English and Hindi and the evolution of a hybrid media language-“Hinglish”. The emergence of a mixed media idiom, characterized by the growth of Hinglish, has dominated by the burgeoned mass media as the language of the youth of a ‘libersied’ and ‘modern’ India. While a form of Hinglish had been in existence in urban north India for decades, it was popularized by Zee TV, India’s first domestic, Hindi language private television, lunched I 1992.
Globalization of Indian Media:
The emergence of network such as Zee raises interesting question. It is indisputable that the proliferation of satellite and cable television channels, made possible with digital technology and growing availability of communication satellites, has contributed to the increasing diversity of the global cultural landscape. The role of television in the constriction of social and cultural identities is more problematic in the age of globalization than in the area of a single national broadcaster and a shared public space, such as characterized television in most countries in the post-war years. Though national broadcaster continue to be important in most countries and still receive the highest audience shares, the availability of a multiplicity of television era, a viewer can have simulators access to a verity of local, regional, national and international channels, thus being able to engage in different levels of mediated discourses.
A clear analysis of the complex process of international cultural flow reveals that the traffic is not just one way, from north to south, even though it is overly weighed in the favors of the former. Evidence show that new transborder television network are appearing, with some flow from the periphery to the metropolitan centers of the media and communication corporations. The extension of satellite footprints and the growth of DTH broadcasting have enabled network such as Zee to operate in an increasingly global environment , feeding into and developing what has been called as he emergent ‘diasporas public spheres’.(Appadurai,1996)
The deregulation of broadcasting, which has been a catalyst for the extension of private television networks, has also made it possible for private satellite broadcasters to aim beyond the borders of the country where they are based- unlike state broadcaster who have traditionally seen their role in terms of the nation state. Apart from the major powers, whose broadcasting has had an international dimension, most public broadcasters, particularly in the south, saw their audience as a domestic one. By contrast the private channels, primarily interested in markets and advertising revenues, had a more liberal media agenda. This basic difference between state-centric and market-oriented broadcasters into the lucrative northern markets, conglomerates has given them the technical and managerial support to operate as a transnational channel.
Globalization and the advent of satellite television ensured that the migrant communities of South Asians in the middle East, Europe and North America became a new target as audiences and consumers .(Jacka and Ray,1996) Zee was among the first to recognize the potential of overseas markets for its programming. In its zeal to rope in pan-India audiences scattered through the world, Zee developed a new idiom which by virtue of sheer reach of the medium contributed to making Indian television available internationally. After Star TV purchased 50 per cent of Asia Today (the Hong Kong based broadcaster of the Zee TV) in 1993, it became Zee’s partner in India and beyond. Facilitating their 1992 launch in the Middle East, Zee TV entered the lucrative British market in 1995, when it bought TV Asia, already established in the UK. By 2000, Zee was available on the sky network and claimed to have one million subscribers in the UK continental Europe. It became one of the Hindi and four channels to go digital in the UK, offering programming in Hindi, Urdu, Gujarati and Punjabi. Having acquired a base in the UK, Zee expanded into mainland Europe and is also very popular in Africa –based platforms operators, multi choice.
Today, Zee claims to be the world’s largest Asian television network, covering Asia, Europe, US and Africa and catering to the Indian Diaspora. In Asia where it boasts a total viewer ship of 180 million, the networking spans morethan4 countries and offers round-the-clock programming on four channels-Zees TV, Zee cinema, Zee India and Music Asia. Having reached more than 23 million homes in the Indian sub continent and United Arab Emirates, Zee strategy is to expand its operations in the lucrative north America market.
In recent years India has witnessed extraordinary growth and overseas success in computer software and cinema exports, making it a global force to be reckoned with. (Power and mazumdar, 2000) A recent report on the Indian entertainment business prepared for the federation of Indian entertainment industry, currently valued at Rs. 154 billion ,will grow to nearly Rs. 600 billon by 2005.according to the report, Indian films exports, worth Rs. 4.5 billon in 1999, are estimated to rise to nearly Rs. 120 billion by 2005 ; the Indian music market, currently pegged at Rs. 12.5 billon, is projects to touch Rs. 22 billon, and TV software revenues are expected to soar from the present Rs. 12 billon to Rs. 90 billion in 2005.(Shedde,2000)
The unprecedented expansion of television in the 1990s has also been a boost for the movie industry, as many first dedicate film-based pay-channels haves emerged. In June 2000, the first first international Indian film awards, billed as the “Bollwood Oscars” ceremony from London’s millennium done, was broadcast millennium Dome, was broadcast to more than 122 countries reaching 600 million viewers. It brought together along with Indian film and music stars US Oscar winner Angelina Joile, Chinse star Jackie Chan and Australian pop singer Kylie Minoge. (The times of India, 2000) However, the increasingly international orientation of television seems to have excluded the majority of Indian people (the poor, especially those living in the countryside) who are remarkably absent from programmers on channels such as Zee. According to a 1998survey, less than two per cent of Zee viewers live in rural areas. (Satellite &Cable TV, 1999) a socially relevant television agenda, therefore, does not fit well with the private television networks, which appear to be interested only in the demographically desirable urban middle class or the NRI’s with the disposable income to purchase the products advertised on such channels.
Given these constraints a development-oriented television remains largely under-explored, primarily because it does not interest advertisers. It is ironic that the country that pioneered the use of space technology for education, with the satellite instructional television Experimental (SITE) of 1975-76, which brought TV to the poorest villages the most inaccessible area, and where 40 per cent of the population is still illiterate- according to the United Nation, 30 per cent of all Indian children aged six to 14 years, about 59 million children, do not attend school-has ignored the educational potential of television.
Though Doordarshan receives substantial support from the government, which extended its reach and added new channels (in 2000. it had 21 channels), it is under pressure to provide entertainment as well as education. One result of such competition is the ideological shift in television cultural from public service to profit oriented programming. The growing commoditization of information and the trend towards western inspired entertainment can affect the public service role of television, whose egalitarians potential remains hugely under-explored in India.
As television ids driven by the rating wars and advertising demand for consumers, and given that visual can be a powerful instrument for propagating dominant ideology, the electronic media can play a key role in creation of a marketplace in which their corporate clients can consolidate and expand. Rather then toeing the government line as used to be the case with state broadcasters, are networks such as Zee instead promoting a corporate worldview?
Internationally, despite a counter flow of cultural products, as exemplified by networks such as Zee, US –led western media domination has not diminished. There is a temptation to valorize such a flow, suggesting it may have the potential to develop counter-hegemonic channels at a global level. Indeed, as seen in the case of Zee the network has been modeled after transnational corporation as a market-driven organization for whom the most important consideration is to make a profit. Therefore, it can be safely said that the emergence of regional players contributing to a ‘decent red’ media and cultural imperialisms is not likely to have a significant impact on western hegemony within global media cultures.