MxMIndia

Tag: Peter Mukerjea

  • INX Media may be better known for the alleged involvement of P Chidambaram and his son Karti, but the company has been controversy-ridden ever since it was set up in 2007

    The Rise & Fall of INX Media

     

    By A Correspondent

     

    Former Home and Finance Minister P Chidambaram, one of the country’s top politicians, was arrested in a dramatic fashion on primetime television on Wednesday evening. The scaling of the entry wall and the camera crew chasing the CBI team to the back gate of the former minister’s home in New Delhi was riveting.

     

    Interestingly, it’s the affairs of a media company and the alleged involvement of Chidambaran and his son Karti that saw one of the most high profile and controversial arrests in recent years.

     

    Those from the media and entertainment trade would know that INX Media has seen several controversies even before it was set up.

     

    First the rise of Indrani Mukerjea. Her INX Services offered HR consulting to Star India when husband Peter was CEO. They married in 2002, and five years later set up INX Media and INX News. INX Media ran two channels – 9X, the general entertainment channel and 9XM, the music channel. News X was the news channel with senior journalist Vir Sanghvi as head.

     

    What led to the downfall of INX Media was the failure of the GEC 9X and the news channel being virtually a non-starter despite a state-of-the-art backend. As of to make matters worse for the duo, Viacom18 set up Colors and the GEC rose to the #1 position in less than a year. Rajesh Kamat, the CEO of the channel, worked with Peter Mukerjea at Star, more than a couple of levels junior.

     

    There was some indiscriminate spendings reported by the Mukerjeas, and finally, in 2009, on a day before Holi, the duo announced their exit. Soon, the news channel was sold, and the entertainment channel became part of the Zee network, and the music channel became an independent network managed by veteran mediaperson Pradeep Guha. The music network has been in discussions for a sale but with not much success. The Zee Network also pulled out of the stake buy.

     

    The controversy around Chidambaran and his son was around a case of money laundering with Indrani Mukerjea turning approver a few months back. The Mukerjeas are currently in jail… but that’s over a more personal matter.

     

    Those who know and have worked with Peter Mukerjea can’t believe that he could do any wrong and often blame wife Indrani for the misfortunes of INX Media.

     

    Misfortunes not just for the Mukerjeas, but also the Chidambarams.

     

     

  • Because it was not just the primetime debates but also the all-day broadcasts which have anchors, reporters, random guests and members of the general public all attributing motive as well as diagnosing the prime accused, writes Ranjona Banerji

    Ranjona Banerji: So how long news channels take to prove me wrong in my defence of their coverage of the Sheena Bora murder case?

    By Ranjona Banerji

     

    So how long did it take for news channels to prove me wrong in my defence of their coverage of the Sheena Bora murder case? One day? Two days? I still vigorously defend the decision to cover the murder – surely one of the most intriguing and compelling in recent times – but the manner of coverage? O my sweet lord!

     

    I understand that many of us fancy ourselves as crime-solving detectives. And apparently a good number of us imagine ourselves to be psychiatrists, psychologists and therapists as well. Because it was not just the prime time debates but also the all-day broadcasts which have anchors, reporters, random guests and members of the general public all attributing motive as well as diagnosing the prime accused, Indrani Mukerjea.

     

    Television, sadly, is the worst culprit here. Again, it suffers because it puts its news-gathering process on camera. In a print or web journal, the reader does not know how you got your information and while this means that reporters do not become world famous in their neighbourhoods and their mummy-daddy’s friends, it also means that they do not become notorious. There were times, watching the coverage, when you felt you were in a movie about how bad the paparazzi and an intrusive media can be. This reporter from Times Now chasing after Sheena Bora’s boyfriend and or step-brother or step-nephew Rahul Mukerjea at Mumbai airport is the best example of how not to practise journalism. Or, at any rate, not to share it on air for viewers to be impressed with how low you can sink.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sinr35K4UJo

     

     

    Of course tabloid journalism exists and has a massive following. Let us not fool ourselves that the human race is only concerned with the philosophy of the Upanishads, Plato and Wittgenstein. Anyone who tells you that is a liar and not even a good one at that. The worst of human nature fascinates everyone. But speculation about why someone did what they did is not journalism. It’s drawing room conversation and water filer gossip. And it’s not good journalism, no matter how much it sells.

     

    However, thanks to the media we have found out more about the Mukerjeas, Boras, Khannas, Dases, Rais and their friends than we perhaps know about our own families. We have seen the lure of media fame entice friends, relatives, colleagues into sharing their tiny titbits of information and conjecture and for all we know, downright lies, about the Boras and Mukerjeas. Senior and not-so-senior journalists who worked with the Peter and Indrani Mukerjea have told us what they think of them and shared their experiences. We have also heard from every single person whom Sanjeev Khanna ever had a drink with at the CC&FC in Calcutta.

     

    I want to make it clear that there is no moral high ground here for any of us, especially the media which by its very nature trawls the garbage heaps of humankind. But there is a way of going about this which is not so downright foolish. Arnab Goswami’s nightly courts border on the hilarious, if only because they have become caricatures of themselves. NewsX has been rivalling Times Now with its judgmental hysterics. These so-called high society grande dames, with enough skeletons in their own closets to rattle a few medical college storerooms, sitting on judgment in TV studios is another farce. To me in fact it exposes journalism’s biggest downfall – to have insufficient background information on your sources or public faces. The psychiatrists and psychologists who are happy to come on TV to diagnose the accused, without ever having met them, is nothing but outright publicity-seeking. This includes former police officers, some of whom had terrible track records when in office. These high-powered members of the public showcase themselves as desperate publicity seekers – and not so different from those they seek to condemn.

     

    Newspapers meanwhile have moved on and the Sheena Bora case no longer dominates the front pages. My one beef here (if I am still allowed to use that word) is with the Times of India’s Dehradun edition which did not think the good people of North India needed anything but cursory information about the horrifying assassination of Kannada scholar and writer MM Kalburgi. That is criminal stereotyping of your readership, especially when the news of his death is all over news channels.

     

     

  • The idea of getting Ashvini Yardi (who had earned her stars as programming head at Zee) was a great one. But could CEO Rajesh Kamat and she be able to match the maharathis and former Star India CEOs Peter and Sameer?

    Mediaah!: How underdog Colors won the great GEC battle

    By Pradyuman Maheshwari

     

    Having tracked the journey of both Television 18 and Viacom from their early days (in India in the case of Viacom), there was much desire to see both groups succeed.

     

    But I thought they were being too ambitious to launch a Hindi GEC in 2008. The market was already very crowded and with the whizkids of broadcasting Peter Mukerjea and Sameer Nair also in the fray, the sentiment then was that it was going to be well-nigh impossible for any new channel to be a success.

     

    I was sure the Network 18 team wouldn’t get it right. They had had success with CNN-IBN but entertainment wasn’t like news. Good content doesn’t necessarily maketh a GEC.

     

    The idea of getting Ashvini Yardi (who had earned her stars as programming head at Zee) was a great one. But could CEO Rajesh Kamat and she be able to match the maharathis and former Star India CEOs Peter and Sameer?

     

    I think what changed my outlook to the channel’s launch was the news that Akshay Kumar was signed to do a Fear Factor. The folks meant business and Akshay was then the reigning king of Bollywood. Plus the team was young, friendlier (than the others) and indulged us in the media.

     

    A week before the launch, most of us had wanted Colors to succeed. Even advertisers and media agencies longed for a worthy alternative to the existing slew of channels. And after the ratings for the first two weeks came in, we were sure the channel was a winner.

     

    Even then there were naysayers telling us that the magic would fade away. Regrettably for them, it didn’t. Soon Colors dethroned Star Plus as the numero uno Hindi GEC.

     

    I remember writing then that it was complacency that had seen Star Plus go down, a comment that didn’t work very well with some people internally and of course the biggies in the business. But a year-odd later, when I spoke to Star India CEO Uday Shankar, he admitted that the channel getting complacent. I asked him just to let people know that my earlier statement was based on some digging in, and not speculation.

     

    **

     

    My first major interaction with Rajesh Kamat happened only when I had this interview on the first anniversary of the channel in Impact magazine. It was an extra-long 6000-word interview. Rajesh had then told me how it helped being an underdog. “It made us focus on our own efforts. Also what happens is when you’ re an underdog, you push yourself to give 200%.” He mentioned how he learnt several tricks of the trade from Sameer Nair, and knowing that the former Star India CEO would’ve tracked the rise and rise of the channels, we invited him to do an appraisal for this fifth anniv package.  The Impact interview isn’t on the Net, but I found a Word version on my Gmail archives. Inbox me if you want a copy.

     

    ***

     

    In many ways, the launch of Colors also marks a little over five years I have spent in the M&E media. I can’t claim the same kind of success that the channel has achieved, but, yes, the ability and desire to try and do stuff that has not been done before is there.

     

    Here’s to many, many more colourful years for Raj Nayak and Team Colors (and the folks at Network/TV 18, Viacom and Viacom 18)!

     

  • The economics of the broadcast business would not hold up for very long anywhere if there was 'unlimited inventory' in any market and this is one of the reasons the economics of the broadcasting industry in India is so weak

    Peter Mukerjea’s Media Mullings: Less is More!

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    So, is it a surprise that broadcasters are unhappy with the TRAI for enforcing the 10+2 per hour of commercial time on TV channels?

     

    Short-term pain for long-term gain in simple terms is what it will be. But no one wants short-term pain.

     

    Many of my friends in the broadcast industry are up in arms about this ruling, but when we talk about this, to be fair, they do conclude that it is actually the right thing to do for their business. After all, it will see the advertising rates go up, which will benefit their individual revenue lines and their shareholders in turn. Once the 10+2 regulation sets in and becomes standard operating principle, investors both national and international will re-look at the Indian broadcast industry as an investment opportunity. They will see that the supply-demand ratio is finite and not infinite as it is today. Infinite makes no ‘big picture’ sense.

     

    Advertisers, brand managers, small, medium and large will not like the sound of this 10+2 directive either, as it will mean that they will need to increase their TV budgets if they want to continue to get the same ‘secondage’ as they’re getting today. There just won’t be enough ‘secondage’ to go round and advertisers could get into a bidding war for the best TV properties. But the flip side to that is that they will get a secure share of voice. Surely advertisers see more value in their brands being 1/20 than being 1/30. And, if they tell you they don’t care about that, then that’s the biggest load of rubbish you will hear and you can’t let them get away with that.

     

    And all credit to the TRAI who have now really begun to act like the regulator it should be ie to look at the big picture – digitization, commercial time, quality of service and so on – but not get drawn into the itsy bitsy litigation attempts of the various stakeholders in the business.

     

    There cannot be a single broadcast market anywhere in the grown-up world, where there is ‘unlimited inventory’ of commercial time available to broadcasters. The economics of the broadcast business would not hold up for very long anywhere if there was ‘unlimited inventory’ in any market and surely this is one of the reasons the economics of the broadcasting industry in India is so weak and will not improve so long as it continues with broadcasters taking more ads into their programmes/movies at the expense of the quality of service to the viewers.

     

    And why should sports be an exception to the rule? The ad usage will need to be modified to cater to the differing nature of each sport, as tennis differs from cricket and from football or F1, but the 10+2 rule should stay the same.

     

    All promo tags, bumpers, drop-downs, split screens are all possible so long as they stay within the 10+2 guideline. It’s not that difficult. Of course broadcasters will resist. Someone once said – “Resistance after all, is the best form of seduction.”

     

    In the final analysis of broadcasters’ economic sustainability, growth and profitability, the adage “less is more” will ring true and makes sense for all broadcasters but the faint-hearted or the economically very weak as they will simply not survive, in a survival-of-the-fittest environment.

     

    They will simply have to get better at what they do and compete, or fall over and get out of the business.

     

  • The Newsnight programme screwup has provided the perfect veil for an attack on the BBC and what we are witnessing is a coordinated assault on its reputation and output

    Peter Mukerjea: Never let a crisis go to waste…

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    The UK media the last week has been dominated by the events at the BBC. Yes – the BBC. First, with allegations, made by over 450 people, who have now come forward after three or four decades, on a TV celeb – the late Jimmy Saville, a one-time Radio Jockey and TV show presenter at the BBC. They have accused him of sexually abusing them as children when they had come across him during their visits to the BBC.

     

    Several other TV celebrities have been arrested and bailed in this connection and a public enquiry has been commissioned by the Government. The enquiry is headed by a respected news man called Nick Pollard – former Head of Sky News who was also later appointed by me as a consultant / advisor to NewsX in its early days, for over a year. Nick’s report and findings are now awaited.

     

    Meanwhile, last week, the very recently (barely two months ago) appointed Director-General of the BBC resigned as a result of a poorly and inaccurately produced daily News programme, Newsnight, where there were accusations saying that a Lord McAlpine had, many years ago, sexually abused children who were under the care of the state at the time. The news programme producers had not bothered to check their facts and simply went ahead and named him, and of course he denied it. As a consequence of this level of inaccuracy and irresponsibility, the Director General resigned and a few others have been suspended pending further internal enquiries.

     

    Now, we’re talking of the BBC. One of the most respected, most watched news organizations in the world and they got it wrong and did not have enough measures in place to ensure that the story they ran with was checked for accuracy. And the man at the top took immediate responsibility and stepped down. That certainly wasn’t the case for the head of another news organisation where phone-hacking was conducted on an industrial scale.

     

    Barack Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel once said, “Never allow a crisis to go to waste.” These words have been heeded by all those people who are detractors of the BBC and find its existence to be completely against their free-market, anti-regulation ideals. They are certainly not allowing this situation at the BBC to go to waste. So they exaggerate the sins at the BBC and simultaneously minimize the crimes of their friends at another news organization currently under investigation, even though the police have now identified more than 4,000 people as possible victims of phone hacking, including the families of dead soldiers, relatives of people killed in terror attacks and a murdered schoolgirl.

     

    The media seem to be getting polarized – those for the BBC and those against.

     

    The Newsnight programme screwup has provided the perfect veil for an attack on the BBC and what we are witnessing is a coordinated assault on its reputation and output. The BBC is by far the biggest and best broadcaster in the world and to try and delegitimize or dismantle the BBC based on two screwups by the same news programme is grossly unfair given that over the years there have been a series of award-winning programmes watched by millions around the world – and consistently, year after year. Figures released by the BBC confirm that over 96 percent of the people in the UK consume BBC programmes each week.

     

    An Ofcom (the office of the communications regulator in the UK) survey in Nov 2011 stated that 59 percent of the people said the Beeb was the news source they most trusted. The next was ITV News at 7 percent! “No newspaper reached 2 percent,” the reporters added.

     

    I believe that the BBC, despite its many faults, should be protected from its right-wing enemies so as to preserve high-quality, non-partisan public service broadcasting. Earlier in the week gone by the Director-General was publicly taken to task by no other than one of his own employees in a one-on-one radio interview. Which other news media company would entertain that? Not many, I would think. The BBC have accepted their mistake, lost their DG and paid an out-of-court settlement of 185,000 Pounds (almost Rs 1.5 crore) to the falsely accused Lord. All of this goes some way to preserve its reputation and dedication to honest, fair, unbiased, incisive reporting. Maybe this crisis will enable the BBC to emerge, as a better, bolder and more robust news organization that what there is presently.

     

    I also wonder how many news organizations in India would take this approach – pay a fine, take the rap and follow up diligently with an internal enquiry if they report on a story where the reported facts are wrong and have been aired unchecked. Not many, I don’t think – at least not in a hurry. But let’s live in hope that maybe, just maybe, one day in India we will get DD to a similar state of play and be seen by the world as having a world-class broadcaster which reaches out to the free people of the largest democracy in the world.

     

    Either way, it’s a good reality check and a lesson in not letting a crisis go to waste.

     

    Peter Mukerjea, celebrated media professional and former CEO of Star India, mulls frequently for MxMIndia.com

     

  • This was war at its best. Both sides aimed at each other and fired without fear of retribution or of spilling blood. It was truly a great spectacle to watch, says Peter Mukerjea of the US Presidential debate

    The media event of the week for me. What was yours?

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    When you have probably the most powerful man in the world, along with someone who is looking to topple him from that perch and take his place – you can safely say that you almost have probably the two most seriously powerful men in the world, together in an arena. They are then slugging it out for almost two hours nonstop and are no doubt being watched by a global audience of billions, in goodness knows how many languages; it turns into a most enthralling media opportunity.

     

    For both these two alpha males it was an opportunity to present themselves to their supporters, their opponents supporters and those voters who are fence-sitting and undecided. But also, to the people of the world at large, to other political leaders, students of politics and so on and so forth.

     

    The issues they talked about, their presentation styles, techniques, body language, facial expressions, timekeeping, dress sense, quality of their content were all being minutely analyzed by this vast audience in offices, bedrooms and living rooms around the world – depending on the time zone in which they were watching. It was just great TV viewing. I’m sure this is exactly what was in his mind when one media mogul once said: “Give me a war and I’ll give you the pictures.”

     

    I guess it’s a little easier, not much though, if you’re the challenger and not yet in office but are looking to knock down the incumbent and can therefore be a little more relaxed than if you’re in the hot seat as the President and having to defend your actions of the past four or so years and where the result of some of those actions are still not yet visible.

     

    This was war at its best. Both sides aimed at each other and fired without fear of retribution or of spilling blood. It was truly a great spectacle to watch. I have to say that even though I’m an Obama supporter and a follower of the Democrats’ philosophy, I thought Romney came off marginally better in the debate overall. He was a better speaker and I was a little disappointed by Obama’s slightly lacklustre performance overall. They were both wonderful to watch but neither was as slick or well groomed or more articulate than Bill Clinton – who takes the cake, surely, for public speaking. Clinton is a charmer all round.

     

    They were both terrific though and each had their own moments of glory and moments when they were a little pensive.

     

    But, they attacked, they argued, they growled but with a smile and they defended. They took potshots at each other and did not relent one bit. They were both as slick as it gets on TV, without it being a drama or a soap opera or a late night chat show or a reality show. Well, it was a kind of reality show, with a prize at the end of it and what a prize that is – to be the next President of the United States.

     

    The host of the debate deserves a mention too. She was equally good and remarkable how she managed to keep these two – equivalent of male tigers ie candidates, to their specified times and subjects throughout the duration. It was a boxing match in many ways but without the physical bashing or ringing of a bell signifying the end of every round and a getting final winner at the end of the match.

     

    I was wondering if we will ever be able to see such a debate in India on TV between our esteemed political party leaders and when that might be. And equally important – who would be a capable host for such a debate?

     

    Never mind that. I guess we will when we’re nice and ready to do so.

     

    In the meantime let us sit back and enjoy good TV viewing from the other side of the world and I for one look forward to the next such debate in a couple of days’ time.

     

  • By Invitation: Peter Mukerjea, Jaisurya Das, Sundeep Nagpal, Deepa Gahlot, Paritosh Joshi, Shailesh Kapoor & Sorbojeet Chatterjee

    Our galaxy of weekly and other regular columnists and contributors to write and/or reminisce:

     

    Peter Mukerjea: Where have the last 12 months gone?

    With MxM, I was happy that it was a real honest-to-God startup. The honesty with which I was approached was quite endearing but it is what I really liked and was moved by.

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30684

     

    Jaisurya Das: Way to go…

    ‘Dear MxM’ – our little column has connected with students, professionals and media aspirants week after week.

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30675

     

    Sundeep Nagpal: Striking that delicate balance

    The composure with which MxM has gone about its business in the last one year has only been a reminder that in the ultimate analysis, the aspect that matters most in any race is how it’s run!

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30693

     

    Deepa Gahlot: Critiquing the critics

    Reviewing The Reviews gave me a chance to examine a cross-section of critical responses to a film and see if there was any consensus.

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30672

     

    Paritosh Joshi: From the far side

    The start-up has revealed the opportunity that lay at the ‘x’ roads of ‘m’edia and ‘m’arketing. ‘Obvious’, did I hear someone say? Great ideas always are, in retrospect.

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30677

     

    Shailesh Kapoor: An interesting, satisfying challenge

    There are many things to write about, but with most broadcasters as clients, one needs to strike a fine balance. With time, I may upset a few people. But stating facts the way they are should remain paramount.

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30688

     

    Sorbojeet Chatterjee: Emerging super successful

    I sincerely hope this weekly quiz is doing its bit of spreading some useful media ‘gyaan’ (and increasing the page views of Google!).

    http://www.mxmindia.com/?p=30682

     

  • With MxM, I was happy that it was a real honest-to-God startup. The honesty with which Pradyuman approached me was quite endearing but it is what I really liked and was moved by

    Peter Mukerjea: Where have the last 12 months gone?

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    When I was asked to write a piece on the occasion of the 1st Anniversary of MxM, my first thought was – Wow! – is a year already since launch? Clearly it must be and I began to wonder how quickly the year has gone by and how I first got roped in to write for MxM.

     

    Pradyuman called me and asked me. Simple. I was a little unsure because I had already turned down a few other media website owners, who happen to be friends, but with MxM, I was happy that it was a real honest-to-God startup. The honesty with which Pradyuman approached me was quite endearing but it is what I really liked and was moved by.

     

    He said, “Peter, I’d like you write for us, but to be perfectly honest, I can’t pay you anything as we are short of funds right now as we’re a start up but once we stabilise and I get some investors on board, I will. I can’t say when that will be, but, hopefully that will be soon.”

     

    I found that really rather touching and have enjoyed writing my columns very much, every time.  I’ve enjoyed reading everyone else’s too and particularly enjoy Anil Thakraney’s candidness ( Ialways have ) and also Ranjona’s column. Seeing my friend and ex-colleague Paritosh Joshi’s regular columns too have been a source of inspiration as I’ve always believed that he’s one of the sharper knives in the drawer, when it comes to media matters in India and it’s good to see him writing for MxM.

     

    It’s been wonderful to see industry leaders like Shashi Sinha, Vikram Sakhuja and so on writing for MxM as that is real inspiration for many young people in the industry. To the young, when they read what these ‘big guys’ have to say they take cognisance of their words of wisdom and point of view as many of them will aspire to be like them.

     

    With MxM, I was happy that it was a real honest-to-God startup. The honesty with which I was approached was quite endearing but it is what I really liked and was moved by.

    Further, I’m always reminded of Pradyuman’s initial approach to me and each time I read the latest upload from MxM, I feel happy that I decided to write and continue to do so, because it’s good to see new entrepreneurs get up and get going and I will always try and help in whatever way I can to get them on the road to success. It’s a different kind of success when you’re doing well in a large company, or if you’ve inherited something, but quite a different matter when you’re on your own and I can tell you from experience – I know that feeling well.

     

    Needless to say, I send my column to all my friends and ask them for their comments. I take this opportunity to thank all those who have taken the time and made the effort to make their comments.

     

    Good, Bad or Ugly – they all count and through that I hope that it helps to make, not only my column, but the entire website more engaging for those that reader it.

     

    Several friends have said to me that maybe I should find a platform that has a larger reach and perhaps more profiled, so as to get my views out there to a wider audience. I did give thought to that but have decided against that as I hope that MxM does make the cut and comes through as being a credible source of independent thinking and comment on media related matters. Also, that one day, Pradyuman realises his dream and finds investors for his website, so he can then, one day, send me a cheque. But, actually, it’s rather nice not to get paid – I have the freedom to say what I feel like. Maybe that will change if I start getting paid for what I write.

     

    So to MxM – good luck for the future and I wish you every possible success. And for the readers – keep coming back for more and please send your comments if you think something’s not right or could be made better.

     

    So, now to the next 12 months !

     

    Peter Mukerjea, former CEO of Star India, writes ‘Media Mullings’ from England where he is now anchored.

     

  • In other words, they applied a terrific amount of strategic thinking into each and every sport and took a very business performance management approach to everything

    Peter Mukerjea: 2012 Olympic Games – The philosophy of marginal gains!

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    So now that the 2012 Olympic Games are over, I felt a sense of withdrawal for a day or so. I had got so used to watching hours of fabulous TV coverage across 24 channels – some in HD, of virtually all the events from different venues across the City ofLondonand further afield – sailing and rowing. I wasn’t one bit disappointed though, at not having been to the Games to see anything LIVE, only because the TV broadcast was of such a high standard, that making the effort to steer through the traffic to get there, shuffle with seating, break for snacks or lunch or tea or a pee break, that watching several events at the same time on TV was simply unbeatable, as an option.

     

    But, I did start wondering what it is that the recent 2012 Olympics did for me, in context to India Inc. and what I learnt from the Games themselves. The Games were terrific, as an event of course, the opening ceremony, the athletes, the management, et al, but how did Team GB do so well and so much better than the Beijing Games, just 4 years ago. What was their secret and how did they go about it? I asked a few people who are in the know of these things and the answers I got were astounding, although not surprising. There was also some timely in-depth research done by the IES (Institute for Employment Studies ) which will give us some insight on this.

     

    What stuck out for me was the “The concept of marginal gains”. This simple philosophy has made a big difference to the end result – the medal tally and put Team GB in 3rd place. This was a real surprise for me but not so when I probed a little to find out more.  Each sport had a performance director who had set a very clear goal for the team and at every stage of activity, the same question was asked – over and over again  – “is this going to make us better?”

     

    Be it rowing, sailing, running, jumping, shooting, boxing, whatever. They set a goal and then went about deconstructing the goals to see what needed to be done and how could something new make a slight marginal difference to the performance – a marginal gain each time. Not to make gains in leaps and bounds, but to do this on a step by step basis. And then to collectively achieve a better result each time.

     

    They would do multi-planner activity and had a meritocratic approach to everything – training, teamwork, funding, performance management, but they were also open to criticism. They were self critical at all times, got rid of flabbier organisations as compared to the earlier Games and better understood the concept of loss aversion. In other words, they applied a terrific amount of strategic thinking into each and every sport and took a very business performance management approach to everything. The support and funding that each sport got from Government was also based largely, if not entirely, on results achieved.

     

    None of this is earth shattering in itself perhaps, but the revelation gets more interesting when we see the ‘how’ and ‘why’.

     

    Based on interviews and focus groups with 154 team members, the research goes on to flag coaching and mentoring as key ingredients for a happy and successful team. It shows the team managers are not afraid of change and help create an atmosphere for innovation rather than wallowing in a blame culture. It also outlines 6 areas to avoid for anyone aspiring to engage their team.

     

    1. Never hope it will go away.

    2. Never have a bad day.

    3. Don’t be part of the problem.

    4. Don’t encourage discord and don’t play games to keep people on their toes or enhance competitiveness.

    5. Don’t manage performance before people

    6. Don’t hide, even if you are naturally shy and retiring.

     

    Great team spirit doesn’t happen by chance. The best leaders ensure their behaviour sets the standards for their staff.  The man behindBritain’s cycling success, Dave Brailsford, insists that it’s the little things that make a difference. Hence the likes of Chris Hoy and Victoria Pendleton taking their own pillows to meets, so they sleep better and making sure they clean gaps between their fingers to reduce probability of illness.

     

    Marginally obsessive perhaps, but dedication to success is infectious, particularly when it so clearly gets results. It’s certainly something for all managers to chew on in this post Olympic period.

     

    (But apart from this , what was also most endearing to me , was the lack of commercial breaks during any of the TV broadcasts. By the way, how’s the IBF getting on with limiting the volume of minutes per hour, for commercial breaks? )

     

  • Newly acquired English news channel NewsX mulls a name change. Status quo, INX News, IMN News, India News English, Nation 24 or any other…

    NewsX staff to vote on name change

    By A Correspondent

     

    Recently acquired by the ITV Media Group, English news channel NewsX is mulling a name change. MxMIndia has learnt that the channel is conducting an internal poll on whether the channel should be rebranded and launched with a new name.

     

    ITV Media’s head, Mr Kartikeya Sharma who is now the new owner of NewsX is learnt to have asked all staffers to share their views on the name change and also share ideas for new names. The new names being contemplated are INX News, IMN News, India News English and Nation 24. The team has also been invited to suggest a name other than these four. The last date of polling is July 24 after which  a call will be taken on the rebranding.

     

    ITV Media already operates a 24-hour Hindi news channel, India News. It also has six regional news channels including India News Bihar and India News Haryana.

     

    NewsX has been around since 2008, when it launched in March under the leadership of Mr Arup Ghosh who held senior positions in channels like NDTV, Sahara Samay and Channel 7 (now IBN 7) in the past.

     

    After its acquisition in January 2009 by Indi Media Company Pvt Ltd, a company owned by Mr Vinay Chhajlani, the then-promoter and CEO of Naidunia and Mr Jehangir Pocha, Former Editor of Businessworld, a rebranding and relaunch of the channel was announced in 2010. NewsX was expected to be relaunched with a new look and logo as IMN (Independent Media Network) News. Morgan Almeida, Director of London-based AlmeidaMedia was appointed to work on the new logo for IMN News.

     

    INX Media which owned INX News was set up by former Star India CEO Peter Mukerjea in March 2007. The existing logo of the channel was designed by UK-based Red Bee Media.

     

  • Let's not forget that it's the profits of today's so called BadCo that were used to acquire, build and grow the television businesses in the first place, which are now seen as today's GoodCo

    Peter Mukerjea: GoodCo, BadCo & NewCo

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    So it has finally happened. The break up of a mega corp. And it’s happening before our very eyes, and like global warming, it’s a sign of the times. In years to come, students at media schools in India and elsewhere in the world will be reading how the media landscape evolved and how new media slowly, but surely, took it’s place in society. The demise of print and eventually, television, along with the numerous obituaries on the subject will all be in the history books eventually. How media moguls like Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch were literally pushed off their lofty perches and new names and faces like Mark and Sergei took their places will all be a chapter or two in reference books. The erosion of the powerful dominance of print media brands will be replaced by brand names like Google, Facebook, Instagram. This period in social history will be seen by students of media studies as part of a process of evolution and not much more.

     

    But for those of us who are seeing this unfold, it’s indeed an interesting and captivating phase.

     

    Speaking to friends and ex-colleagues in New York, LA and in London recently, it seems many of them are seeing this as the transitioning of one company which comprises of both GoodCo and BadCo to several NewCos. Many of them are also now wondering how many more NewCos will emerge from this, and how soon, but more importantly for them, who will run them. The share price of the company stock has always been a subject of conversation amongst those fortunate enough to get share options, and the fact that it has been static or of negative value for long periods of time has been a source of annoyance. But the fact that this announcement has caused a flutter of activity and raised the share price is seen by many to be a good thing for them personally, so they can now actually make some use of the stock options and realise some value. Most also believe that this value will increase more dramatically when the family gives up control but that could be like waiting for Godot.

     

    Let’s not forget that it’s the profits of today’s so called BadCo that  were used to acquire, build and grow the television businesses in the first place, which are now seen as today’s GoodCo. Like God made little green apples, surely there will come a day, very soon, given that the seed of thought has been planted, when these very television businesses at GoodCo will also be spun off into individual entities, driven by the same principles that are the cause for the split today – providing better shareholder value and value creation. But that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

     

    The company which is the largest revenue driver within GoodCo could well find a viable financial spreadsheet reason and which showcases a scenario where better shareholder value could be created if certain parts of their GoodCo were then hacked off and cut away into separate entities as they were losing money or were no longer beneficial to their shareholders.

     

    I do think that the possibility that billions of dollars of further investments into the UK and Europe being stopped and being diverted to the US is more of a veiled threat than reality, but the possibility that the Euro Zone and their currency itself may not survive for too long, will have financial planners everywhere crunching their numbers and hedging their bets in all sorts of different currencies, anyway. So for Rupert Murdoch to say this so plainly in a recent CNBC interview is not altogether surprising but is reminiscent of childhood cricket games, where if one could not get to bat then, they would pick stumps, bat and ball and go home so no one else could play either. Maybe some of those billions will head to India or Afghanistan or Pakistan, where there’s plenty of low hanging media fruit and bargains to be had for those with pockets of cash.

     

    In India though, the trend compared to the UK seems to be the reverse and where each of the various media segments – print, television, cable, radio, outdoor and new media are all growing – albeit in an unregulated and pressure cooker kind of environment. This has to be great news for those working in the industry, and the business case for setting up several GoodCo, BadCo and NewCos would be different but the ethos and principles would of course be the same.

     

    Maybe it’s time for the head of an Indian conglomerate to sail across to meet the boss of the media company that is now busy setting up GoodCo, BadCo, NewCo and  ‘make him an offer that he can’t refuse’ as they say in Mario Puzo’s The Godfather. Not that this is in any way connected to the words used by British MPs in the select committee set up to investigate the hacking scandal in the UK – when asking James Murdoch if he ever felt that he was running a mafia company or words to that effect? James Murdoch was, of course, most offended by that question and as expected, he refuted it completely.

     

    Nevertheless, maybe it’s time for an Indian company to do what Rupert did some decades ago when he moved out of Australia and bought papers in the UK, thus  creating a global media company. For an Indian company now to own a few internationally acclaimed newspaper titles around the world, then cut losses by injecting Indian cost control systems and management into them would create real shareholder value – rather like the brilliant way in which Tatas have done with the Tata Motors acquisition of Jaguar Land Rover which was a real BadCo and is now a true GoodCo.

     

    Maybe this is where the NewCo will come in.

     

  • It's not the job of the TRAI to keep broadcasters happy at all times. Occasionally it should be looked at from the consumer point of view, which is clearly the case here

    Peter Mukerjea: Thank you, TRAI (Now, please enforce it!)

    By Peter Mukerjea

     

    News today that TRAI have finally put a cap on advertising time per hour for TV channels is a most welcome move in my opinion. I’m sure all broadcasters, other than the savvy ones, will see this as a backward and a retrograde step because it means that they will start to feel the pressure initially, but I can assure them that this is not so, and the effect will be exactly the opposite on their adverting sales revenue line of their P&L sheets.

     

    First, it’s a simple case of supply and demand economics. Shrink supply and prices should go up. We see that with every product category, be it food, petrol, deisel, cooking gas, etc etc and TV airtime is no different. This will clearly help broadcasters shore up their revenue lines once they’ve managed to get media buyers and clients to understand this logic. That’s not going to be easy, but whoever said that selling TV airtime was a piece of cake.

     

    Ad sales executives in the numerous stations will now, finally, have to earn their keep, rather than simply earning good money and even better bonuses, simply by pushing in more ads into the breaks of movies, sports coverage and news channels. Programmers will need to work harder to get better deals from content suppliers and movie producers alike, instead of paying grossly inflated prices for movie titles and then having to recover the cost by stuffing the movies with ads, such that the viewer experience is diluted to the point of nonchalance. Of course, broadcasters will be up in arms with this directive from the TRAI and will kick and scream and throw their toys out of the crib like all babies do when they don’t get what they want. It’s not the job of the TRAI to keep broadcasters happy at all times. Occasionally it should be looked at from the consumer point of view, which is clearly the case here. So, thank you TRAI.

     

    Second, consumer groups that have had to put up with the barrage of advertising breaks in their TV viewing experience, for years on end, should be feeling relieved that finally the regulator has paid some heed to their woes of getting blasted with increased decibel levels in ad breaks, getting masses of drop downs  during live sports coverage and getting news channel tickers carrying branding of all kinds within it, masquerading as news headlines. Enough is enough and this was all done under the banner of self regulation!  In fact, the shoe should be on the other foot now and TRAI should consider setting up a consumer group forum who should be tasked with monitoring the violations to the new standards, as laid out by the TRAI and report these to the TRAI for further action and enforcement. So, thank you TRAI for improving the viewing experience of millions of long suffering TV viewers across the country.

     

    Sure, there will be several broadcasters who will now be unable to keep carrying more and more ads to secure their bottom line, who will suffer and will be pained by this statute and may well go to the wall and eventually go out of business, but sadly that is the reality of life. Those channels owned by big groups will not suffer at all as they will be able to withstand the initial blips and will come through this just fine. They will then also be at the forefront of the list of beneficiaries in a few months from now, but the smaller ones who do not have the deep pockets to sustain this correction must recognise that this party was not going to last forever.

     

    They should have read the rule book before they started. If they didn’t then it’s entirely their fault , for the ad time cap has been around for a long time and would have known full well that this free for all amount of air time inventory status quo was going to come to an end one day. That day has come. Far too many broadcasters have started up recently on the basis of a never ending supply of airtime being the way to earning revenues. They then produce below average content which then gets below average ratings and that advertisers pay virtually nothing for. This brings the whole industry down by several notches and attracts below average talent who do the same thing day after day thus creating a downward spiral. Thank you TRAI for improving standards in the industry.

     

    There is, in case you hadn’t spotted it yet, however a bright future for the industry. The fact is that with an improving revenue line for broadcasters, there will be a growth in corporate valuations over time which will enable them to deliver better shareholder value and see more investments coming towards the category. For sometime now broadcast media companies have been struggling to get their valuations up and have seen so much of their values eroded. This directive from the TRAI will go a long way in correcting that and so for that I thank TRAI once again. So instead of being a bunch of sour pussies, broadcasters should stop whining and get on with the task of putting their businesses back on track and tasking the ad sales teams to get cracking and reforecast their revenues budgets upwards for the rest of this year (or else they should get no bonuses this year , on the basis that they have less air time time to sell).

     

    Excellent times ahead – thanks to TRAI.