 Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for joining in. Thank you very much to join us virtually today. My name is Robin Kundu and it is truly indeed a pleasure to welcome all of you to Exchange for Media News Next Conference 2022. Well, today is a special day because, of course, we are doing Exchange for Media News Next conference in the morning and Enba in the evening as well. And it's truly an honor to have INB minister Anurag Thakur to be the chief guest. While the conference that's happening right now is happening virtually, the award ceremony is happening in the evening physically in New Delhi at Imperial. This is the 14th edition of Exchange for Media News Broadcasting Awards that will be announcing today. And as I said, the Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting and Youth Affairs and Sports, Anurag Thakurji will be the chief guest. The ceremony is going to embark in the evening and we are going to recognize all the members of Media Fraternity who are helping to shape the future of broadcasting in India. The awards will be given out in several categories, including Best News Channel of the Year, Hindi, English, Best CEO of the Year, Best Editor-in-Chief, and Best Anchors. For the awards this year, 1,000 plus application came in and there were 126 categories. Entries have been received from all the major networks that are present in the country with a major footprint. CNBC, Arstak, ABP, BBC, World News, and NDTV News 24 Times Now, Zee News, and many more regional channels have joined in. The winners, of course, just like always, have been selected by an eminent jury and we have been as impartial as possible. And this year, the jury has been led by Sri Harivanshan Narayan Singh, and we are truly, truly happy to have been guided by the Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha in helping us with a fantastic conversation. So I would like to quickly give a shout out to Ad Factors PR and of course Media Mantra for this. So I'll quickly introduce you to our first speaker for the day and it's truly indeed a pleasure, a privilege and an honor to introduce to you Mr. Uday Mahurkarji, Information Commissioner, GOI Political Analyst and Author. Absolutely thrilled to have you once again with us, sir. Thank you so very much for joining in. I'll leave the stage with you. I've been told to speak on journalism of impact. I've put in about 40 years in journalism. I started my career in early 80s and I was an active journalist till October 2020 when I was appointed as Commissioner in the Central Information Commission. And I, out of this 40 years or, you know, more than 34 years were in Gujarat. So I have covered riots, I have covered rural development, I have covered Mr. Modi's rise as a leader, rise as an administrator. I've also written two books on his governance, one on his 13 years in Gujarat, his Chief Minister and another on his three years as Prime Minister. Plus I have done these studies on radical Islamic movements. I mean, very important subject because there is a dichotomy in the society where a section of ultra-nationalists or ultra-Hindus thinks that the entire Muslim community has become radical, which is not the fact. So I have got wide experience across, you know, when it comes to journalism. Now, what is impact making journalism? You see, getting some development to report first and create waves is also impact making journalism. Breaking a story is also impact making journalism. So, you know, it's a very wide canvas. I think what we should be speaking on and hearing about is a true impact making journalism. Why I use the word true? I spoke about this at a function two days ago, which was organized by the exchange for media. So I'll repeat that again here. You see, in spite of a great deal of transparency which we see in today's journalism, in spite of the role being played by social media in forcing that transparency, still we have a very long way to go. I am of the firm opinion that we may belong to any ideology. There is always space in good journalism to report truthfully, to report honestly. If there's a debate on ideology, yes, you are called upon to share your view. But when there is a development which is impacting the society, which has a deep bearing on the society, society's future, society's peace, then I think there has to be a common minimum agenda in today's journalism for truthful reporting. I will cite the example, a very recent example, I think that example is very apt. We saw the Shobayatra riots about a few days ago on the Hanuman Jainty. What we did suddenly one day in the newspaper was that the Rathrathriyas were passing from certain areas and they were stoned. And that lead to riots at least 10 to 12 places in the country. I having covered riots very closely in Gujarat from 1985 onwards, I know the pattern of this, these kinds of riots will start with the Shobayatra. The image which an average Indian got in newspapers and through the TV was that Yatra was passing and suddenly it was stoned. When I made a phone call to one place in Gujarat which was hit by these riots, the story was same as I thought. The story is that there is some provocation in most cases from such the Rathyatris also, Shobayatris also, and then the alteration starts and the radical elements from the minority community also step in. And of course, there is a very huge radical movement which has grown in the Muslim community. Nobody can deny that. And as I have said earlier in another channel that it is a result of years and years of minority abysm and which the country has seen in the initial years of its birth, not initial 60 years almost. So, our truthful picture should come before the country. There is no knowledge in the country as to which are the radical streams in the minority community. There is no knowledge in the society as to why this ultra Hindus become so aggressive. Obviously, there is some reason also for them which might be unjustifiable. But nobody has gone, tried to go into the reasons behind this very dangerous situation at one level which is developing, which is of clash between two major communities of the country. So, when I saw the reporting of these riots, when I saw how channels were reporting, I, of course, I don't see as much as I used to do earlier because I'm a commissioner and I'm a judge in the central at RTI court and I have to deal with cases every day. So, I am not able to spare so much time. But whatever I saw, I found that there was no genuine attempt on the part of any of most channels and most newspapers to go in deeper into it and find out the reasons. So, I think when something is impending, you know, what we Indians dream of, we Indian dream of becoming a great nation based on our culture, based on our values. You know, but that path is not so easy and media has a major role to play in that because, you know, we have set targets for the country. For one target is over to elimination. Another target is for the field of science. There are many such targets for defense. How will we meet those targets if there is what you call disharmony in the society? So, I think any journalist, I belong to a certain ideology, you can see the pictures behind my back, which makes it very clear as to what ideology I follow, but then I'm of the firm belief that when it comes to issues of national importance, issues which are impacting the society, country's future, we should be truthful in our reporting. And one thing that I said on a channel a few days ago, I'll repeat here, agreed that there is a radical movement which has grown over the years in the minority community, but there is a large section even today which wants to remain in the mainstream and we cannot forget that even in the state of Kashmir, today, at least one Muslim is being killed by terrorists for being loyal to this country. So we have to give that space. Whenever we comment about minority community, whenever we comment about Muslims, we have to keep that space. Even while being aware of the fact that we have to fight a growing radical movement in the society, in the minority community, that is what. I saw the same thing during the Scheinbach issue in 2021. Again, the media was divided into two parts. One was overplaying Scheinbach. Another was saying that Scheinbach is a conspiracy which it was to some extent of radical Islamic movements in the community. But I know very well because I do research on radical Islamic movements and the Muslim community, that there were wide sections in the Muslim community who did not want to join Scheinbach. But nobody tried to tap them. I personally believe that Scheinbach was a conspiracy to defame certain sections of the nationalist movement, including the Prime Minister and the Home Minister. I very strongly believe so. But there were many people who joined the movement because they did not know the purpose behind it. So I think it would have been very good if the media, whichever ideology it follows, whichever side it is taking, should have reported with truthfulness. I think I'll just take two minutes. You see, there was a report a few days ago that the poverty levels in the country came down drastically between 2011 and 2019. Having written two books on the Prime Minister Modi's governance, including one on his three years as Prime Minister, I thought he should get the major part of the schedule for bringing down poverty levels in the country. But I did not see any newspaper, any channel going into it because I have done these books. I mean, his policies have contributed in a major way to bringing down the poverty levels in the country. But there was no channel, no newspaper which went deep into it, broke and found out. As I tried to find out, I tweeted also. I let my book, I tweeted the cover on that particular day that people should read this book to know how it happened. So in the end, in my closing comments, I would say that impact making journalism should be, truly impact making journalism, which would have an element of reporting with truthfulness. Thank you. Thank you, Maavur Kerji. Thank you very much. I would like to invite Mr. Rubil Amit, senior editor at Exchange for Media and BW Business World to continue this conversation with Maavur Kerji. Thank you, Ram. Maavur Kerji, you raised very valid points. The journalism has taken on a lot of criticism, a lot of criticism has come its way, came with the VR, partial, biased. Journalism of impact that we are discussing, how do we find it again? And that's my direct question to you from our viewers as well. How do we find that again? Will we see that or we will see, or will we just see the continuation of journalists belonging to, I mean, taking sites. What is your view on this? It's a long road ahead, but not impossible. I think there has to be a self-interest function in the media fraternity, what? Secondly, we should follow the nation's first of all leaders. For example, I believe in Veer Savarkar. Veer Savarkar has been projected in a particular way. But after having written this book on him, I look at him very differently. I look at him as a person who was truly following the principle of nation first. Veer Savarkar suffered much because of Pandit Javelal Nehru's hostility towards him because of ideological reasons, not personal reasons, correct? Yet, after Javelal Nehru became the prime minister, I was going through old records. I saw that whenever Javelal Nehru, he was the biggest critic of Nehru's policies, particularly on defense and foreign affairs. But whenever Nehru took a good step, he issued a statement praising Nehru and welcoming his policy or statement or step. So, we need to think, you see, first you have to inculcate this whole thing about nation first. Nation is first. Then comes the party, then comes your job, then comes your media house. So, nation first if we can talk. And for that, some top leaders will have to step in and talk about it. I think the time has come. You see, this thought will not go from down to up. It has to come from the top. So, some top people from politics, some top people from the media fraternity have to speak about it. For example, one thing which I am very, which I am very, what do you call, about which I feel very strongly, you know. Suppose one channel has done something good. Another channel will not report it. What kind of journalism is this? Suppose today's awards are being won by everybody. They should be full reporting in every channel. Why should we think that Falana channel is our rival and we will not report their achievements. So, I think that kind of nation first spirit has to be inculcated in the society and in the media fraternity. You know, I mean, I just, on this point, you know, the other day when we were doing the day-long conference of English journalism, 40 under 40, the point was raised by all, you know, people who represented different channels that they need to talk to each other more often. You know, they don't talk to each other actually. So, while we might have that competition, you know, but of course, we have to talk to each other in some way. My final question is also I have to step in. You see, political leaders also have a big role to play. For example, something has happened, you know. And as a spokesperson, I feel very strongly about it that I should stick to this view. The dictate I get from the party leadership is different. Right. So, you know, there should be a common minimum agenda where rats no compromise. Absolutely. There should be common agenda between the media, between political parties. I think there should be in this country a nation-first conference where all the top people with all honesty, with all humility should chart out a common minimum agenda where they should say that they will speak in one voice on these things. Perfect. Perfect. Unfortunately, you know, out of time, but I really want to thank you for joining us on this news next. First, you know, the longest, the conference that we have for the last four days has been going on. But thank you so much for joining us, Mr. Mahulkar. And over to you, Ravan. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you once again, Mahulkarji. Thank you once again for being here with us. And of course, Rohail for making sure that all the conversations that we had with the information commissioner are always enthralling and with a lot of wisdom. Thank you once again. Cheers. Thank you. Okay, so really be happy to invite on stage now our editor-in-chief at Exchange for Media and BW Business World, Dr. Bhattra, to come and say a few words. Can we have the audio? The news next today is 30th April, 2022. And in the evening, we'll be doing the 14th edition of the Exchange for Media news broadcast award at 5.30pm onwards at the Imperial Hotel. I start the day on a somber note, because it's exactly one year back, my friend and our colleague in the industry, Mr. Rohit Sarjana, passed away. May God bless his soul. We remember you. We remember your work. We remember what you stood for. And may God bless your soul. May God bless your family. So I start by remembering Rohit. I can only say that when it comes to news, journalists and editors are doing a very fine job in a very tough environment. And there are lots of things you can learn from Rohit, but the three topmost things from Rohit was asking uncomfortable questions, second being authentic without being offensive, and third, he was very humane. You saw him on the screen, but personally, he was an outstanding person on the screen too. I want to say that the news landscape is changing with digital becoming bigger and bigger. Today, the YouTube channels and the video channels of large networks, large TV broadcasters are also becoming big. So today, throughout the day, we bring advertisers, media planning CEOs, news media CEOs and news professionals together. There seems to be a connectivity issue and we apologise for that, but with the virtual events, I think that seldom is the case that it goes without internet glitch. So I'm sure that Dr. Bhattra would join us when the internet allows us to. In the meantime, I would like to once again welcome all of you to Ad Factors. We are presents Exchange for Media, 11th edition of News Next 2022, powered by Media Mantra. And with this, as Mr. Uday Mohorkar sets the tone for the day with a conversation where we are talking about what really is the need of the hour with the media. And of course, it doesn't come with the perspective of a blame, but it comes with the perspective of the responsibility as the fourth pillar of democracy. And media plays a vital role in that. So continuing on the trend on how we can improve the whole society at large. And of course, with the help of the media, the conversation that we are moving towards is the panel discussion. And we'll be addressing the crisis in today's journalism. Let me quickly introduce the panel to you. We have Mr. Rishabh Gulati, managing editor, News X. Mr. Aalop Mehta, Padmishri, veteran journalist. Mr. Aalop, of course, Chintamani Rao, strategic marketing and media consultant, Dr. Bhuvanlal, author and filmmaker. And the panel is being moderated by Mr. Tarun Nangia, associate editor, special projects, News X. So that's your panel. It's truly an honor to introduce you to the first panel. Mr. Nangia, I'll hand over the screen to you now. Thank you, Ravind. Good to see you again. Good to see all of you again. I've met you at different places at different times in the past six, eight months. But good to see all of these fine minds together on one platform. And as it is, the topic has been introduced of addressing the crisis in today's journalism. And without wasting much time, I would like to request Chintamani Rao, who has been at the top of various news media organizations in the country over the decades, has a lot of experience, say in the next two, three minutes, if you could air the opening comment, which can lay the ground for today's further discussion. It's over to you, Mr. Chintamani Rao. You're not audible. Yeah. Thank you, Tarun. I'm not a journalist. Never have been one. And I know journalists are very sensitive about these issues. I've had many, many, many conversations, obviously with journalists. The crisis in the news media, in a word, content. Why do I say that? Because I think all of us know, certainly looking at the news media in India, it's all advertiser dependent. And therefore catering to the lowest common denominator, the more eyeballs you get, the more money you hope you'll get. And that's been the game for a number of years now. But that's a downward spiral, which we are seeing between each other. With respect to both of you, senior broadcast journalists here, I turn the TV on, news on in the evening. And what do I get? I go from channel to channel. One channel has four talking heads. One has eight. One has 12. And everybody is shouting at everybody else. Where's the news? One TV channel, which all of us know which one it is, has a show called The News Before the Debate. Isn't that brilliant? Let me, the channel is about the debate. Let's get the news out of the way and so we can have the debate. What is the news you are debating, my friend? Why should I sit there and watch eight people or 12 people or four people shouting at each other? I don't. Content is the game. If you have the content, you can make money on it. Don't have the content. You will do what everybody is doing. So that's the opening comment by industry veteran, Mr. Chintamani Rao, but same way and plainly put it. Now I'll go to a man who runs the channel on a day to day, takes calls on the news to be run, takes calls on the debates that have to go on the channel and has done a pretty fine job at that. May I introduce you to Mr. Rishabh Gulati, managing editor of News X. Mr. Gulati, day after day, I saw in the past one year, in fact, two years now, some very serious subjects on foreign policy where the channel has taken a stand, a stand and effectively articulated via some very fine panelists who are experts in their own field. While in the whole din of news media, you see, you know, dumping down of news. What drives you to take these calls day after day? And before that, you give me the opening comment on what you feel in the larger picture of all channels of dumping down of journalism. Okay, let me just, Tarun, thanks a lot for doing this and my credit to you as always. For those of you who know, Tarun is exactly the opposite of what is going wrong in the news media. He is a traditional journalist who spends a lot of time curating his guests, his topics, doing a lot of research and putting together a highly, I won't use the word intellectual because we're in communication medium, but informative telecast. Tarun, thank you for the service that you're doing to the larger community. And I'm just going to pick up where Mr. Rao left off. I'm one generation removed from the editors that I used to work under until a few years earlier. I completely sympathize with the dynamic that they've been trapped in. But the question that I have to ask myself, the thing is that if you have made it to a position where you can influence how one news channel is operating, then hopefully in our network we run 11 news channels, perhaps just like the industry is facing the crisis, which is partly internally driven, partly externally driven, we can remediate. So what's the problem? Number one is the gravitas of why you are watching us has obviously diminished. News channels, news journalists, TV anchors are now a parody. If you look at the popular culture, we are a meme, we are a joke. We are willing to take our PCRs hostage in case of a terrorist strike and willing to pay money to beat others. And it's almost embarrassing watching that. What a perception of news is. The second, of course, is the attracting of talent. It's changed from the time that I was beginning my first steps into journalism. And the reality is that if you're starting off in journalism today, print or TV, you earn maybe slightly more than a person who's a driver earns. There is an attracting of talent problem. And that is also because the gravitas has been affected. The third is a business thing. Now, it's not like money is not to be made to run news. There are aggregators of news, even those in India who are now billion-dollar companies. There are those who are running platforms which take news clips from us, all of us, which are making massive revenue. Google and Facebook, I know Facebook revenues have dipped a little, but have made, they become billion-dollar companies running on AdSense and all the others, of which a small poultry from NewsX to New York Times is distributed. Now, these are the challenges that I'm just going to address in a second, Sarun. What are the options? There are still choices to be made. I'll give you an example. When I was starting off the infamous JNU tapes incident happened. And this is the trap we fall in sometimes in editors. And I have a very young news team. The average is only 25 and I keep reiterating to them. It's the conundrum. I'll give you an example. Senior leader, Member of Parliament, Member of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board yesterday says that there is a plot to kill all Muslims in the country. It is designed to be a provocative comment so that all of us get sucker punched into giving that person publicity in prime time for hours and hours. So this is the conundrum. Do you do make that person infamous because he is doing this deliberately? The people at the Dharma Sansa are doing this deliberately because they want to become infamous because their advices are telling them Kuch Ulta Sita Bolo. Kisi pe pani fek do. I remember one day I was going in for a debate, Tarun, walking to my studio. One party spokesperson comes to me. Rishabh Ji, Rishabh Ji, you have changed your debate. I'm going, what's happened? I'm going to look out, checking with my input team. What has happened, some developing story I've missed on a different channel. Some spokesperson had thrown water on somebody else's face. And this spokesperson was recommending that my debate become that incident. So this is the conundrum. And I'll tell you what you can do just to make changes. Two years ago, we decided we were also in the same trap that if you have a debate, 50% of it is all communal debates. You get somebody with Tilak, somebody with Topi extreme views, shouting at each other. And we think that is great television. Because when there's a lot of energy, passion. If I stand on a roadside with you, Tarun, even if you're my friend, if we start shouting at each other, crowd will gather. That's the base instinct that we logic to. We decided that we are going to find the rational people, the logical people who are going to take on the issues. We won't shy away from the issues. If they have to be discussed, so be it if that's the conversation. But we're going to slow it down. Apply mine to it. And this is what I asked my editing to do every day. Don't shy away from controversy. Controversy is the bed of news. But when something happens, apply your mind to it. Does this person deserve our attention or asking the country to attend to this for the next one hour or not? If an issue, I don't know, Azan is happening. Loudspeaker is happening. Bulldozer is happening. Don't shy away from it because politics is running on that. But apply your mind. What is the solutions that you're presenting to this? What is the hope that you're presenting to it? I'll end it on this, which I was mentioning the other day also. Yes, we have to communicate. There's no point talking to an empty room. Yes, just like in politics, emotion is part of that communication strategy. And yes, anger and hate and controversy are powerful emotions. But there is only one other thing that can replace them is hope, which is an equally powerful emotion. You look at the amount of motivational speakers. You look at the amount of TEDx talks. All of these are popular mediums. You look at the politicians who go on to the yes, we can mantra, who also appeal to hope, which is a lesson we as journalists can learn from. So there are some conscious decisions, Tarun, that we can certainly take. And to answer your question now, when it came to understanding why are we focusing so much on India's viewpoint, India's position in the world, because that is the gap that requires a serious rending, that requires the focus of imagination. Yesterday, the semiconductor conference happened. We were the only people who did hours of coverage. We know that every machine that we are live on right now uses a semiconductor chip. That is a decision which is editorial. Two weeks ago, we had the chairman of ISRO, all the startups of the space sector sitting for us on a two and a half hour telecast focusing on our space sector. That is hope aspirational, which can make for equally compelling television. So these are choices that we can make, Tarun. And if more of us make these choices, we break away from the problem that we are trapped in, as Mr. Rao said, which makes him not want to watch television in the universe. Thanks for that opening comment. In fact, the semiconductor point is really very important because that is where the whole world is facing the shortage now. And I'm glad we took it up. I am going to Mr. Alok Mehta, another industry veteran. And I remember Mr. Mehta once we were sitting together and you opened a few newspapers and instinctively you could point out to more than 16 mistakes on various pages with just one cursory look. And Mr. Mehta, you told me one thing that, okay, we are much faster, but we're getting a lot of things wrong these days. You say, in my time, we would have put in a lot of time to bring out this product. We just passed, but we are going wrong. And that is why the topic also resonates, crisis in today's journalism. Sir, you're opening comments in about two, three minutes. Thank you. I think Rishabh, you also mentioned so many things and many points. I am very much agree with him. And sorry, I'm joining a little late five minutes because of the joke late. But this time in the real crisis, I just wanted to mention, if you go to old files, even at that time, when the Bhindrawale were projected on the print media on the cover pages, people like us used to say, okay, so much publicity they are giving. Same thing yesterday, what happened in the Punjab? If you just, Rishabh, you were just venturing, Kalistan, Kalistan. So unnecessarily we also give so much importance. But if you discuss with issue, which we discussed in their news and the news has to, but that's why I feel that there should be limitations. Even on the, what you said about the print media, when you said some mistakes are going on, then you said, okay, tomorrow we'll say, okay. But nowadays, even the news channel, there are broadcast writers association, number of press council, and all press council is not on a, these broadcasters are not the under of a press council. But even then, I think, this is a controversy. But what I feel, it's a very real, serious time because of the social media and television expansion and digital media also expanding a lot. That's why I think one mistake can create havoc, can create a situation like, if you say the nuclear war, you see number of channels, they are showing, day before yesterday, they are showing nuclear war, Russia just going to throw nuclear missile in United Kingdom. I think you both are, Mr. Rao must have also, I called my daughter, she's sitting in London. So I asked, what is happening, you come here, there's some nuclear missile is coming. No, nothing, not a news item, I have seen, why you see such kind of news. I say, I know, that's why I called you, any very channel, private channel, there's some media, digital media, she's very expert in the digital media, better than me. But that's why I feel very sad about it because it's a slip on our face, you know, if somebody by colleague, even from other channel or in the free media, something did wrong, I always feel I'm guilty. If somebody take bribe, or something, money for some news coverage, then I feel somebody ask me, I hope people ask money for this, for your bulletin, somebody's paying for you, or what you are speaking, somebody, the ruling party, or the apportion party, or somebody paying, it looks that we are all getting money. That is the tragedy, and especially the competition. What I feel earlier also, we had the competition. I remember those days, one newspaper in UP, I'm not mentioning the name, even editor used to go in tempo with Lachi Pitul and the, with the tempo, the newspaper bundles, to just a take, if some other newspaper come there, they will just say, okay, go out, your bundle is destroyed. So editor and the publisher, the management were part of it. Now it's a very big newspaper, but even then, I feel in this kind of, next step is the, what you just mentioned, throwing water, maybe sometime there's some, two, anchor will fight with each other, there will be a new scene, if they are sitting in some, United Nations conference, or some conference, we can have one, they start fighting with each other, why you are not talking about the nuclear, it's a fate, same thing with the communal, what I mentioned in the earlier, certainly religious, everybody feel the various, we should play everything, on E, R, Diwali, Holi, or any festival, Ram, Mandir, or every day, from yesterday, I told my colleagues, that every day, on Ram Jahn time, for a third time, we can just, we did some line on the our children's channel, because thousands, millions and millions, people also watch, what time, they can make this fast. It can just be about viewership, at least they will know, okay, 7 o'clock, we will get this on this channel, or some Guru Nanak Jain, they are there, if they are some fasting, or some prayer, some spiritual time, even if we carry, these channels also carry this, but only on Ayodhya, or something like that, I say for any religion, if we broadcast, we telecast, then it's not the big, because they are balancing, because of the viewership, because both the religion and the community, in the society, they work together, live together, and do something. That's a very telling comment, as an opening comment, Mr. Mehta, thank you for that opening comment. I'll go to Mr. Bhuvanlal. Mr. Lal, I know your knowledge of both the American continent, and the Indian continent is good. So I want to ask you to juxtapose the situation in the United States, with that of India, with regards to news television, in addition to your opening comment. Thank you. Thank you, Tharon. Thank you for inviting me here. I tend to agree with most of what has been said here, but specifically, just wanted to make a few points. One, we pride ourselves as being a huge democracy, possibly the greatest democracy in the history of humankind. And the United States also is a democracy. And democracies, anywhere in the world, have to depend on the media. Media is a very strong element of the proper functioning of democracy. It doesn't need to be said in so many words. We understand that. But where is Indian media? What is the crisis that Indian media and American media face? There was a time when Walter Cronkite, breaking the news of the president's assassination in Dallas, became emotional on television. He also became emotional when Neil Armstrong landed on the move. Those moments are etched in the memory of every American, any viewer of that period. Now, what has happened today? We bring emotional, unnecessary emotion, comic emotion close to drunkenness on television every night. We make a play of what we claim is a debate. It is not a debate. It is an entertainment show. We are a civilized country. 5,000 years of debating. That's not on display on television. Please don't call it a debate. And it's a lot of work. Alok Mehta is here. Ask him what a journalist is. I look up to him. A journalist works 24-7. Even at 3 o'clock in the morning, he will wake up if there's something important and research that. Getting four talking heads under television studio and making them speak loudly on issues which don't really matter to the country is the easy way out. It's, in fact, the easiest way out. And for the marketing people who possibly will hear this, you guys are ruining this business. We are very serious people and we are taking very serious decisions because all debates, so-called debates, all issues that are discussed on television impact the electoral process. We elect our leaders based on this. We make choices. And you're forcing us to ignore so many issues and focus on issues which are completely irrelevant to our existence. The other thing that I'm saying, the quality of people that we see as anchors overall, I'm not specifically mentioning anybody, also don't come prepared. They actually have an agenda. And then they are no longer journalists. They're politicians. They're taking positions. Taking a position as a moderator. For example, right now, Tarun is the moderator. If he takes a position, then he's not part of the moderation process. He should be a panelist. He should join a political party and say, this is my position. So we are giving the viewers a confusedly content. It's not really journalism news. That's not the basic. We should get back to the basics. Some of the journalism schools that are part of your community right now, they should invite veterans like Anur Mehta Ji and they should illuminate before the next generation of journalists walking into the studios tomorrow to understand what this business really is. And lastly, we are not alone in this. North America has similar problems. The crisis in journalism there is acute. The polarization that we see on Fox is unbelievable. They take positions like CNN takes positions. They just take positions which are untenable. This is not journalism. This is politics. That's all I want to say right now. Thank you for that opening comment. I'll go to Mr. Chintamani Rao. Mr. Rao Rishabh Gulati made a comment about the budgets of newsrooms which doesn't allow for hiring the best talent in that sense because software companies, other companies which are manufacturing, the budgets are not so high because the revenues are never so high. Do you think that makes the job of running a newsroom more challenging for an editor? Because if as the management and the newsrooms all over the country are not these very big organizations as far as revenues are concerned, can you throw some light on that issue? You're not audible if you may have to unmute yourself. Sorry. I spent my career in two businesses. Advertising and News. Both have the same set. Sadly, both were once upon a time talent magnets for people who were fired with something, with passion, with fire in their bellies really, with something. We began our careers in advertising because it was something you wanted to do in spite of what you were being paid. It's just something you had to do. It was a passion. It was a calling. Today, sadly, nobody wakes up in the morning and says, I want to be in advertising or I want to be a journalist. Yes. Absolutely. If you can't pay a decent wage, you're not going to get people. I appreciate that and I understand what that means. You know, it's everything is connected. You can't pay decent wage. You can't get good people. You need money, so you need to appeal to marketing people. As Bhuvan said, you will drive you. You got to get the content that will get me the eyeballs so I can get the money and so on. Somewhere, somebody in the system is going to break this chain. Yes. Is that a CEO? Is that an editor-in-chief? I don't know. But, I believe with respect, Rishabh, what it is for editors to do is some of what we've been talking about. You have to, even in this, in the 21st century, you have to have people who will come to you in spite of what you pay. You have to fire them. You have to fire their imagination. You have to light the fire in their bellies. Otherwise, what are all the talking heads about? Talking heads are about it's much cheaper to get five people connected on Zoom or Skype than it is to go out and get get news. Isn't it? So I guess, the answer lies in, somebody is going to break the chain. I'll go to Rishabh Gulati. Because you engage with a primarily younger team. From first-hand experience, I know that you put lots of posters in the office, bought in some furniture, exciting to make the office a young place. I think you yourself put in all of that. Because you're motivating a young team to turn the office into a sort of a place in Gurgaon, like an IT office. Primarily to keep these youngsters motivated. But despite that, if your budgets are low, not like a software company or start-up, because start-ups get funded very well and they can poach your people like how? They can just come pay double the salary and take all your stuff. How difficult it is to get good people in the newsroom? Because in the end, you rely on them for their output. Otherwise, you'll have to do everything all the time despite hiring them. How difficult it is to get work out of them? Second, how difficult has it become to find good people in the newsroom to hire? In the past, since you've been doing this for long now. Okay. Five, six years ago, people were coming to you and we were traditional hirers that people would send CVs and there would be rounds of interview process. That has changed now. Now, Tarun, I happen and this is coincidental, it's not designed, I happen to run a large youth organization in the country. So I have to over the past couple of years, especially during COVID, I've had to actually speak to the bright kids. We discuss foreign policy, so we generally get the smart ones from all over the country, but in places like LSR and Hindu and SRCC here in Delhi. And I have to then tell them what I have experienced through the media. I say, look at me. What have I really done to deserve such a large microphone? I remember interviewing Alok Pethaji when he published his book. I mean, he's looking back at 75 onwards. So I said the ability that this gives, if you were to join an NGO, a think tank, a corporate organization for you to actually drive impact which the TV medium can still do and the one lesson we learned was the beginning of COVID, the first lockdown where everybody put television on because you couldn't rely on Twitter or wait for some YouTube video two days later to find out where which shop is open and where you can find how many people who called in whose rents I have personally paid because they were desperate at that point of time. So to give these examples, I've had to sit down individually with people for hours. And then do exactly what Mr. Rao is saying, to fire them up that I know listen your base pay isn't going to be as impressive as you, but the amount of impact you can have is very high and that impact is across the board. If you are really into it and 12 hours a day, every topic in the world, subject in the world that you can be fascinated about, so that is requiring an effort now and it bears fruit is not just about the sofa and the couch and the things but all these things do help. So I'm hoping this happened, I don't just end this conversation there. Once you fire the talent, what do you do with them? If you are going to bring them into the same environment where their gut call instinct by training is blow this up, make it make it bigger, make it sensational then 10 years later you'll have done a disservice. So my message to them is apply your mind. Just apply, if something is happening apply your mind, does it make sense? There is no harm in taking a position I say. But take a position having applied your mind, don't go on the face value of somebody putting out a tweet, does that make sense? Is it legitimate? Is this authentic? Just apply your mind. Have the checks in back. So I was just saying, apply your mind have checks and balances and when in doubt just double check that speed of wanting to do it first and fast calm down a little bit on because honestly it doesn't make a difference. So this imparting of a little bit of thought process makes a difference in the team and now we can see when these young kids working and actually coming up then listen, this has happened but this is the solution to it. We had one of our colleagues, Divika when the Nirbhaya thing was going on when the mercy partitions were pending because of technicalities. She literally sat down with lawyers Tarun and drafted the regulation changes themselves. Then somebody mentioned on a panel that listen you all talk about Nirbhaya, what about the other cases. Investigating 12 other cases and whether they came to fruition or not. Taking these ideas gives me like I said hope that you can head this in the right direction. I'll leave the last example Tarun because I know we are out of time. I was interviewing the chairman of the UP Madrasa board when this entire thing happened that you need to Jan Ganman and all Madrasas. Now what would have been a non-entity I gave him half an hour at the top of 9 o'clock because this is the guy not the people in the all India Muslim personal law board who are actual pioneers and his point was that you guys in the media take Jan Ganman because you think you can make controversy what we are doing in terms of teacher recruitment reform in terms of curriculum reform in terms of infrastructure reform nobody wants to talk about so I said now you sit with me and let's talk about that so half an hour detailed conversation the style that you do them and put it at 9 o'clock at the top so these people become the faces of what represents the country and the people who say the most nonsense provocative things I'll leave it there. Thanks for that frank comment Mr. Rao wants to come in Just for one second Rishabh I'm reminded of what Steve Jobs said to John Scully when he hired him from Pepsi right? Do you want to come with me and change the world or do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life? That's well said. I'll go to Alok Mehda Ji I have a request to make of you three and a half minutes I have interacted with journalists across the spectrum in the English and in a country there was a tradition of tall editors who used to write many ministers have told me that this editor wrote this in 1978 or in English some of them have gone and later they have written many books there are many editors like this this country has a fine tradition of editors very fine intellectual tall minds do you think that the tradition is vanishing away slowly if you will explain from the 70s, 80s, 90s if you will explain what changes you see in this The most interesting thing is Tarun it's not that everything is ruined and we were also very good in the 70s back then the big two Hindi newspapers used to think that they are the government that's why I worked in both places they were older than me I used to go to work with them I used to work in an agency so I have to say that everything is ruined number one it's okay that the institutions are changed and that's why on the editor's bill when Ajit Bhattacharya Ji and the senior political editor grew up with us when they were angry we said that now the executive editor, the associate editor they are not managers really they are contributing they are literally the editor is not just managing the name of the editor but he is managing so he agreed and we made it in the bill he doesn't go to the bill we are talking about it even today people are on a regional level that's why I have to say it was taught by my mentor Rajan Mathur Ji he came to Delhi he said that Delhi is not just India India is also in Kochi Mahan Mathew Ji India is also in Marathi they are doing very good work in Telugu, Ramaji Rao at that time he was also in HSV he was the owner so it's true that there were many government officials so on paid use on that 40 space people used to sell money and still people can sell so the reader is different as Rao Sahab said the anchor was the first news reader Manal Pandey started as a leader in NDTV she was also jealous earlier but in human medicine so news readers were different news readers were different but I have to say that today a very senior writer after that if you want to take his name then read his comment there are many different comments that should inspire others to ask questions I am different so there are writers that's why I have to sell more money I have to say that news readers are different I have seen different channels I have met people I have tried I am a leader at least in Delhi Patna in that time I used to sell 10 space in Delhi and less than that when I was sitting here I was not doing anything so if you are a good leader and you say okay I have a request you may review it and other places like today when you decide what to discuss in the evening suddenly something can happen give some brief to your anchors the problem is that they think that what questions should be asked they are talented but they are dependent on Google but what happened to them in Canada, in America how they were doing how they were positioning somebody give 5 minutes brief any crucial matter which I already know that today is 15th August everyone knows that suddenly it is 15th August but the Prime Minister said that frankly speaking you used to publish but when you want to report I feel that the leadership the management and pursuing the best person it is right that the money of a medium range will be satisfaction still I meet people young generation who say that I don't want to go to television many people say that I want to go to television I want to become an actor some people don't want I don't want to write I don't want to write I want to do something you can write very well I feel that the need for balance is in our news media and one last point difference of tabloid trend started with trend media that I was in both places in one place the owner used to say that everything was valued I reached India I was in Punjab on the front page I used to publish other stories but not about news I used to say when I am making I used to say I can't play tabloid Deepak Shauri was there I went there Deepak Shauri was there he used to say when I am making I used to say but I can't make this paper as a tabloid same thing with the news channels tabloid is a tabloid make up is sensational you have to compete with it if you don't do nuclear bomb then you don't need it I got a lot of cues from your answer which I will ask from other panelists thank you Mr. Bhuvanlal in the past decade more than a decade more than stories in news channels that car is running without any driver there is something crazy kinds of news and it is attributed to the fact that film makers and because you are a film maker they entered the newsroom as editors we have known some film makers who became editors and they started running the news in a format where they started telling stories which would catch the eyeballs but it was clearly not journalism this phenomenon has also caused this whole race for ratings that a lot of people will watch you if you tell a story which even if it is false people will tune in can you because you are a film maker yourself do you think this trend of film makers getting into newsrooms has caused this Arun I don't think it is anything to do with filmmaking it has to do with as you rightly said catching eyeballs balance has to be drawn continuously believed in putting out frivolous stories which make most head or tail and I just put out to catch eyeballs over a period of time that is the sort of brand you will create yes and if you restrain yourself and continue on the correct path the more difficult path the agenda of bringing truth and credibility to your brand then you will create that kind of imagery so that I think isn't the missing point the balance is lost today we are kind of trying to become number one so what does number one means I am the most watch channel what does that mean does it mean that you are the most truthful does it mean that we will turn to you when there is a crisis does it mean that at 9 o'clock I will shut down everything and watch you what does it mean it means that there is a TRP system which actually is flawed which decides the future of every content creator in the news media room across the country so we need to re-evaluate we need to re-evaluate what our principles are as an industry I want to add to that at the news next conference yesterday day before one of the channel editors said that my channel has gone off TRPs another editor had to make a comment that if you are running all kinds of frivolous news call yourself an entertainment channel don't get categorized as a news channel you are not a news channel I used to as Mr. Rao will tell you be part of the Indian Broadcasting Foundation I was the Secretary General there and we were formulating the laws to allow news channels to come in and one of the things that came up was that the news channels will eventually become entertainment channels and unfortunately some of them have but having said that there are serious journalists also in this profession there are people who do their work we have Rishabh here I watch his shows very balanced, no shouting no extra drama and we should create an environment in which people like Rishabh, people like News X they get rewarded for what they are doing and we should not reward people who are completely relevant to news we should invite them to film fair awards that's where the filmmakers come in and they will probably be very happy to give them awards for really lousy acting because even the anchors some of these anchors they are very bad actors so that's the place where we have to Mr. Chintami also precisely that question to you you hire special kind of filmmaking talent to make stories with sell and get the eyeballs in your race for TRPs and secondly now you have a string of channel saying we are going off TRPs because we can't compete with channels that show infotainment or that show made up stories for TRPs from the management perspective could you share your inputs you know this business of filmmakers have come in and done whatever look filmmaker doesn't walk in and start doing things it's an editorial call what the filmmaker is doing if that is the case so you decide what kind of content you want now you are talking about this car without a driver I was very much in the Hindi news business at that time and that thing happened I remember it so well that was one of the sort of seminal moments in the the opposite of evolution of Hindi news the other one was when that boy fell into the well those two were the big events that shaped Hindi news for the following I don't know 20 years or more but as I said it's an editorial call you are letting that happen I don't know what it means by when you say when somebody says that we are going off TRPs I don't know what they mean do they mean they are not pursuing ratings anymore which is wonderful what are they doing are they then putting on what they think news content ought to be and you know not driving ratings but driving content quality they are doing that great for them I hope there are those that are doing that but you know you can't we can't blame filmmakers for doing this because filmmakers are the last to do you can't blame the rating system because the rating system is not telling what to do you are choosing to be a slave to the rating system that's your option rating system is merely telling you who watched what and if you let that drive you that's your choice Thanks for that comment Bishop now I want 2-3 big points from you you said you did a good debate on the semiconductor industry that conflicts on the very same day if you have another channel with panelists from Pakistan what is akin to a big weapon in their hands and again the other panelists and that gets more eyeballs because you are tending to do play to the gallery what does that when you sit in the newsroom and take that call you know that it's not going to be watched as much as the man who is showing that weapon secondly the TRP system is the same for you and that channel so you can't get that much of TRP so do you think that this concept itself is flawed that some guy who is showing entertainment and you are showing news and you will be ranked by the same TRP metric do you think there is a flaw somewhere could you explain in detail okay let me just jump in on to this because I've been actively doing it for the better part of decade I've been through the process of sitting on every Thursday and going through the numbers literally half an hour by half an hour over several years I have 2-3 comments on this because it's a hot topic the number 1 is system is flawed okay we know for a fact that if you think that by analyzing even good content fabulous content you can forget all of that just by analyzing the data that you get can you make educated editorial calls on what is working and what is not working I can tell you that that is very difficult there will be one particular show you've done on a particular story which let's say affects Tamil Nadu one day it will have the rate system will tell you at 60% viewership the next day at the same time the same similar kind of story same place you'll have 0 0 it'll tell you no not one single person was watching you today okay so it makes less and less sense and it's not easy but the distinction of going off ratings there are news channels who have exited the system that we don't want to be part of the system because the rating system for eternity everybody contributes to the funding of operating the rating system my view on that is a bit different if the industry itself however flawed it might be and we know the flaws there are very public flaws and you know it because they've gone into the legal system now the industry has to come up with the solution if you don't come up with the solution however flawed it is somebody else will come up with a solution for you so not following ratings which means that few years ago we were sitting and every week worrying about them but this gap in the ratings is also given editors like me a chance to listen hang on let's keep an eye on them I won't say they are completely irrelevant but let us do what we are doing and do it well so to answer that question Tarun what are then we doing we are giving you at least an option the viewer has an option if you're flipping channels and you're saying okay shouting screaming 80% of the subject is all the same the guests are roughly the same hour on hour and here's another option or guess what India is making its first semiconductor plant and a massive conference is happening and its high profile and PM is coming and all the things happening here's an option okay the second is that you will have to work harder you will have to be Satyajit Ray because Karan Johar is going to make the more popular film okay so your film will have to be better you'll have to make Schindler's list okay you'll have to put in that extra effort to bring that hope and power if Dr. Bhuvan Lal was to write a rom-com and book on it he could expect to sell more copies if he wants to do a serious book on Hardial he's going to have to do a lot more research making it a lot more impactful go out there and tell people the story more often okay for them to but it can happen it is possible there is a room for the Satyajit Ray kind of movies also the national movies also okay as much as there is for song and dance so these are hope lessons that can be drawn Taran from this thank you for that input and that gives me a cue for my next question to Alok Mehda ji Alok ji, my question is as Rishabh said that you have to take a call in which the news is it is necessary to show it not because it is just a protest you are showing any infotainment since you've been an editor you said in Punjab Kesari you said I won't be tabloid so what Rishabh said in the news channel what you were saying the newspaper dealt with it using a tabloid format that it is a tabloid format if you want such content then go to it and we never use a serious newspaper and we do a tabloid channel using a serious news channel do you think we are making a mistake that tabloid channels and they are serious are in the same basket you keep them in the same basket and compare them do you think we are making a mistake I have said at that time that they are doing tabloid today in Punjab Kesari they have brought news on the first page they converted it into a tabloid they started doing tabloid they have brought news in Punjab Kesari so it is good that you have to sustain according to you the common credibility that we are saying that your viewer will also come I agree with Rishabh that if we think that there is a rating there is a public broadcaster you all know today when you are told to earn money you are told that there is no autonomy there is no government there is no government there is a debate that they will take on to compete the news channels sensational I will also fight I will comment whatever is their opinion I think there should be a system to recognize good credible people and the channels there is no that we have even if we are in the board there are 40 people so we cannot decide we cannot be a dictator this is the truth but in many forums that is why we are talking about self-discipline if you are saying that you are abusing you should stop I am not saying that the government should have the same body but in London in the address when I went there the society's body I suggested that all of them have been input they believe that we have banned Alok Mehta because we have done a lot of work so 10 people will get a message that Alok Mehta has done we have banned until we have a same body we will not decide and if we say from the government he will shoot the government and Alok will shoot the minister and someone else he will shoot so I have to say this is true but not today I am not but in India in Delhi I start from I think the society should take a criticism of government-publicized channels. Why don't you see that this is a credible and good news axe? We will support it so that it will not feel that it is my company. Nothing to do with our company. There was not a lot of outlook. There was not a lot of outlook suppression. Your channel should not be number one. But there should be. The leaders of the opposition were chief ministers. We were very critical about the outlook. The chief minister, Malayam Singh, everybody. But if there was a lot of advertising revenue, if there was a lot of supplements, or if there were 10,000 copies in 30 houses, they would have said that this would be the outlook. I think that the nation should also support indirectly without interfere. I think that this is the duty of our society. We should continue to abuse it. That everything is ruined. We should not look at the channel. We should look at the good channels. We should read the good content. And we should promote it. We should review the head. We should say that we made a mistake. We made a mistake yesterday. At least we can give a message. People will feel bad. But you put it up and shared it with us. Thank you. I got a message. We have 5 minutes left. I would like to hear each closing comment from the panelists. We will start with Mr. Bhuvanlal. Your closing comment for today's discussion. I think we live in an era of hope. I think there is a lot to be done. And with the esteemed panelists today, what we have discussed, if we put that into action, we will achieve and bring the Indian media and entertainment specifically the news networks to an international standard the world looks up to. That's my closing comment. Mr. Chintamirao, your closing comment for today. As you said that if Bhuvanlal chose to write a book on Adairal instead of writing Pulp Fiction, he has to work extremely hard to make sure that he has a good book. After doing that, however, he also knows that it will never sell as many copies as Pulp Fiction. He doesn't care. He doesn't care. He's doing what he's done. He's done what he's done because that's what he does. Yes, that's my message. That's a telling comment. Rishabh Gulatti, your closing comment for today. I'm going to leave it on exactly that. For young journalists out there and people who see journalism, TV journalism, especially with a lot of cynicism, the majority of people I've worked with are not sold out. They are not agenda running. They genuinely come and they're trying to do the best job that they can. If you're reporting on the field, you are sometimes in horrible conditions, men or women. So there are lots of good people. They deserve your respect and credibility. We are trapped in a paradigm. We think that there is only one model that works. If the good people out there just take a step back and say that can we try other experiments? Can we try that seriousness? Can we try the different kind of format breaking away from the debate? Because, yes, absolutely right. It is very easiest thing for me is to have five people on a panel, put an anchor there with absolutely no research, five minutes, notice a startup on something. Because it's filling time. It's easy for me to do the elements and put together the right visuals and the right photographs and the right scripts and the right graphics. Of course, that requires a lot of time and effort, but it is possible. So there are good people in the industry. The vast majority are not sold out. They're not running political agendas. They're just trying to do the best job under immense pressure. If you are messing around with powerful people, don't think that that's a benign thing that has happened. So under a lot of pressure, under a lot of considerations. So give them your respect and credibility and give alternative voices. People who don't make themselves the news that today we are number one. So the next three hour telecast is going to be about ourselves. Okay. Give them a chance. Maybe you'll discover something worthwhile. Thank you, Rishabh. I'll go to Mr. Alok Mehta. Your final closing comment is discussed. Optimistic. I trust India's policies on the channel. Young people have credibility. I believe that there are people. How can we promote each other? If you're doing well, then don't be shy. But if you say that you're doing well, if you appreciate the junior most, even if you don't give money, then we appreciate each other. We are very miserly. We want to hear our own praise. If someone is doing well, Rishabh thinks that he won't take my seat. So the editors, the owners, they think that his mind will be ruined. I'll tell you one last point. We should also carry out a political news channel. There should be balance for three generations. Either from print or visual media. Three generations. One is the old generation. I say you're 60 or you're 50 years old. There's a beach type. 25 to 50. And 10 to 20, 21. You have to cater to those. There's a good thing in entertainment too. If someone is married, maybe it's Kapu or someone's visual, everyone's film crew has to be like that. If you don't show it, then people will say, I don't want to go to this channel. Maybe after that, there's a serious discussion on your digital. They will listen. But if you say, I'm serious. I don't care. What does a young boy want to see? I just want to show you. Then is the problem. So I think we have to cater to three generations of people. Thank you. Good people in our own way. This we bring into our discussion. Thank you, Mr. Alok Mehta, Dr. Bhuvanlal. Thank you for sharing those fine opinions. I think this will be seen. Lessons will be learned. And there are many takeaways from today's discussion. Appreciate your joining us. And I would request Ravind to take over. Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, thank you to all the panel here. Can I can I be a little forward and say that thank you for providing more value in that one hour panel discussion then a month of 9 p.m. prime time for way too many channels out there to be honest. So truly an honor to have all these esteemed gentlemen out here sharing what really needs to be shared. And of course, I would to summarize this. I would like to say that Dr. Rao pointed out clearly responsibility versus TRP Gulatisa said apply your mind while presenting the news. Dr. Lal said journalists taking positions are politicians and not journalists truly. But I'm grateful for Mr. Mehta's comment that said there is hope in the future. And of course, Mr. Nangia, thank you so much truly an honor to have you moderate panels and bring out value like nobody else. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ravind. Thank you so very much. Wonderful. So that is just the first panel of 11th edition of the forum news next 2022. So you can understand that we are having a fantastic time here and I am truly honored to invite on stage the next fireside chat that we have for you. I would like to introduce you once again to on the screen. Mr. Avinash called CEO Network 18 and MD history and TV 18 who's in conversation with Mr. Sudhir Mishra managing partner at Trust Legal. So this is the next session for half an hour. I'm sure you'll thoroughly enjoy this. Mr. Mishra, I'll hand over the screen to you, sir. Thanks a lot, Ramin. And welcome, Mr. Call. Wonderful to engage with you for half an hour. Thank you. It's my pleasure to have you here. And so the topic is very broad. Actually, it's beyond what you handle on a day to day basis. We are talking about the entire conventional media. And with Ellen Musk showing his interest and actually buying Twitter and that said used world over digital platforms and social media platforms are the hybrid of both of them are under a lot of scrutiny, a lot of questioning. You run a very large media landscape and what are your initial thoughts with regard to the competition brewing now, which will which we'll see in times to come. See, I think the competition has always been there. News, unfortunately, unfortunately is a business that ever since the advent of mankind, you know, one has to know what's happening in the surroundings, either to prepare yourself or to warn others or, you know, whatever is happening in other different places with different people, everybody has to know. Now, till the absence of a formal structure of disseminating news, you would gather news, you would pass it by word of mouth, which sometimes led to gossip, sometimes led to information flow. But all in the same way, it has always continued. Competition came as people increased, you know, competition came from different, different sources, different sources has come in. Now, if you look at the current Indian landscape, we already have more than 200 news channels, 24 hour news channels across, you know, 15, 16 languages in India. So there is already a hyper competition, you know, publications, you know, spread across the length and breadth of the country, some with very small circulation, some with large circulation, with multiple editions galore. You also have, you know, online specialized news verticals as well, which are also catering to different demographics, different geographies, different verticals within news. So you're already seeing a hyper competition. Now, you would look at social media, you know, who are also using that to spread news and also to receive news. Now, the good part or the bad part is when you look at a social media context and maybe, you know, I'm kind of preempting what would come next is that while in the case of television news or print or any such online publications, you have a managing editor who is controlling the narrative or who's controlling what you are seeing, which is separating, you know, what is real and what is fake. Unfortunately, in the case of social media, it is your friends on your social feed, who when they like a particular story or share a particular story, contribute to the algorithm. And when the algorithm takes over, that becomes your managing editor. Yes, that shows you what you are clicking more and more. Yes, and that is a very interesting theme because we never we seem to blame everybody else, accepting perhaps because these are we chose them in our social networks and they are sharing this content, which means that they are playing the role of a managing editor in serving us news because the algorithm does think that. So how does one control that? So it's only a choice of in real life, you would control your friends. You would as as, you know, our parents would tell us at one point of time, choose your company wisely. But unfortunately, the same doesn't seem to be applying in social media. Yeah, but it's a very interesting start you have given you have actually quite confident about and competition. You are saying it's already there. There are various platforms which are parallely existing. When we talk about media, people like me who have been reading newspapers because of the parental pressure when I was 11 or 12, I started reading newspapers and I still read three, four newspapers seriously every day. And but we had dedicated programs on television like we will see something on NDTV, something on News 18, something on Z, they will want to write the spots which were like, I know my father would watch this. My mother would watch this. Some of my friends would watch me the people or whatever. But with this kind of onslaught with the mobile phone in hand and the kind of information we are absolutely burdened with and I'm not coming to the business part of it. I'll surely also ask that what are the brightest spots for you so far as conventional media is concerned, whether it's television or print, what are the brightest spots people need to know those stories? See, I would say the bright spots, I don't, you know, it's ironical, you know, we all seem to have a very dim look of the businesses that we run in, but sadly, I mean, that's not the perspective that I share. Wonderful. And I'll tell you why. I mean, I began my career hopefully news in around maybe 2000, which is the time was only 37, 38 million households in India had television. Today, after 24, 25 years, we are 210 million households in India. So every day, we are every year, we are adding around 10 to 12 million households who are not watched television earlier before. So every day, I tell people that if in 365 days, 10 million people, which means multiplied by five, which is the household size, have added television, which means that you have to show up in your best attire and your best game forward every single day because somebody is watching you for the first time. So you have a huge responsibility. You cannot suddenly think that just because few people around us begin to have a dim view of the business, you are still doing the biggest service to the nation, no matter what comes your way. So today, if I were to talk about networking, networking television assets reached out to 70 crore people in India in a year. Now, that's a huge responsibility. Now, one can dismiss it by saying, there is X, Y, Z happening, there are showcases. Now, also look at the challenges. The challenges here are that when we talked about when we were younger, we used to watch a particular show or a B particular show. The number of channels were hardly 10 or 12. Plus, the single screen was the biggest thing staring at you. There was no 4G. There was no mobile phone. There was no smaller screen where you could see personalized content. There wasn't enough even news gathering happening at that point of time because you would just get served what was getting served or not the nutrition or if the leaders of private television, NDTV would do something and that's what would get picked up. Now, you have a challenge where those generations have become older. Now, those are the ones which are probably now in their 60s or late 50s. Now, they prefer debates. The millennials do not prefer those things. Millennials prefer what happened in the earlier panel earlier but marriage. Now, we are caught in an era where television news channels have a linear format of 24 hours and in 24 hours we are quote unquote what is known as general news channels. Now, if you look at general, the word it means that everything and anything passes under the word general. If you look at entertainment, it's the same word used general entertainment channels which means some people can show astrology in that some people can show Saas Bahus some people can say crime stories some people can show you know, tantrics and whatever else is happening. Somebody can show mythology. Somebody can recreate some elements and show some Turkish serials if they think that that is passing under the quote unquote word general. Now, what would happen? Where are the good parts of technology coming? What is happening good? Television is a limitation because television is a linear network and it's expensive to produce and it is disseminated through DTH or setup boxes and things like that. So the entry barriers are pretty high. Now look at the best part the video dissemination happening on online. There is no reason why you wouldn't have a 24-hour crime channel crime news channel only for online or maybe a tech channel. Absolutely. Not only that for example for heart-bombing stories or let's say if I was to launch a channel Motivation 18 as an example which is only about motivating stories about incredible work that Indians have done. Now that is where the golden opportunity lies. You actually just have said about one channel which is likely to come. It's an amazing idea. But what I'm trying to tell you it depends on because you are a multi-cuisine restaurant. You have a lot of chefs. What you decide to serve is dependent on who is coming to you. On one platform if everybody is coming to you are having a mix and match of everything. I think Mr. Kohl you made a very important observation that we are so huge as a country if you see how many people use Twitter or Instagram or Facebook it's not the kind of numbers which justifies the population but so far so same happening to television same happening maybe to print was always something like I know people who will read their newspapers come what may. So I think everybody will have their own place but tell me one thing about the business part of it that the digital platform or the social media platform or the hybrid of them they are garnering lot of advertisement now but it's not that television news or the conventional channels and conventional media also is not getting advertisement I think it is still it is balanced or there is a huge divide happening see let me put it this way you know the best part about what we all do in media and you know we can all in these conference rooms and panel discussions want to think about everything else but the best part and that is what I think is the beauty which is the beauty of the Indian democracy or beauty about everything in the world which is the controls of what people listen to or what people watch is with them they can switch off they can switch on whatever doesn't matter what any managing editor will serve you if you decide to switch off the remote or if you decide to close your ears and eyes you will not listen to it nobody can influence you till you do not want to be influenced right now the same thing that we talk about in Twitter trending topics right now few of us who are obsessed with you know every 30 seconds going on to Twitter check what is happening what are the breaking news is look at today's trending on Twitter he has zero clue he doesn't even know where his next meal is going to come from so what is he going to worry about so it is just that we have created an echo chamber for ourselves and we are listening to these rebound reverbs coming back and forth and we believe that there is a fire in the jungle and that everybody is burning and that everybody needs to you know run towards one corner whereas the reality is nothing is changing even if let's say you know things don't happen like that nobody misses their evening dinner you know on the fight for the dinner just because of some channel deciding because people are smart people are extremely smart with the choice of time and where they want to invest it where I was going where I was going with this is the same is true for the business models for the business models if people find good content they go there and when people go there advertisers follow and when you have advertisers following there it really doesn't matter whether it's on TV or on digital today both are making money but the quality of the content quality of the content will determine the business models nothing else if you look at for example if you go back home and watch a series on Netflix or on Amazon Prime who is the managing editor there and I come back to this term managing editor I'm the managing editor I'm the managing editor no you are not even the managing editor let me also put it that way the recommendation engine which is based on an algorithm is the managing editor but it serves you because the content discovery is a challenge you will never spend 2 hours trying to find the content that you really want to watch it's the same Google thing it's the same Google thing it's an algorithm it's an algorithm it's an algorithm depending on how much time you watched a particular series it throws up similar series in front of you and then you go from one series to another before you know it you've gone down the rabbit hole now it's Alice in Butterland all over again very important thing is to call you are saying here when we want to say that I do a lot of environmental lawyering before we became a large media law firm virtually we work for many channels and we go to all these conventional broadcasting authorities in other places where social platforms don't come as of now I realize that when we say that which is the best environmental law firm I never find my name into the top 2 pages but when it comes to work everybody comes to us even the law firms come to us so I never understood you just told me that it is not something which even a person who wants to reach to a target can decide it's something like a methodology which is absolutely based on absolutely like I told you your choice of friends on Facebook are the ones who determine who you are managing on social media is it's as simple as that change your friends and you will see the feed change very simple try it try it thankfully I'm not on Facebook I just do LinkedIn I'm very happy with that very interesting tell me something about the television a lot of new churning is happening news 18 is of course something which we go there for a lot of balance kind of thing when as you just hinted when there is a war being shown on the screen and nobody actually after seeing for one second where is the bomb going to come the third world war or the nuclear bomb and you realize there is nothing like that happening so you go back to this but what are the sensible things which people are learning from TV and what are the future models you are looking at which are like you just mentioned that motivation can be one area you said about sports and a lot of investment is coming in the conventional media industry including networking which is in the news so what are the sectors so what we are doing right now is you are already aware that we have the largest news network we have 21 news channels in 15 languages probably one in every state the next logical level for us is something that we pilot and digital which is known as local 18 now local 18 is essentially hyper local every district news every district at one center because there are 739 districts in India there is no reason that everybody needs to gravitate towards what is happening in the national scenario because for example if we look at Hindi news channels unless and until there is a war nobody else cares about what is happening in the United States or UK or even Europe on a day to day basis it is supposed to be the role of quote unquote either the English news channels or the international news channels to feed you that yes so somebody is defining your circle on where you want to go now we are trying to look the circles in far closer to what will actually constitute as news that you can use which is news from your own district because you will relate more to it and as logically what would have it your time spent increases the moment you are closer to your home because you talk to your family the most you probably talk to your neighbors the second most you probably talk to your office colleagues equally more or if not more because you spend more time in the office so you always talk closer to the people wherever you are if depending on how many hours you spend in a location you are probably talking within a two kilometer radius far more than anything else so you want to know more what is happening there at a district level I think it gives us a huge advantage in terms of picking up what some of these quote unquote trending topics not using the Twitter terminology but trending topics of each district which kind of makes it a very enriching experience because then you are going just beyond an opinion to actually news that you can use which is really empowering for the people and if you look at some of the bright sparks of these things it uncovers a whole lot of different level of talent because some of the work that the general entertainment channels have done with the reality shows of songs and dance is to build the talent pool of singing and dancing in the country with local 18 it brings in a grassroots all those kind of talent who are looking at developmental works happening in their districts who are looking at some inspirational entrepreneurs coming from that district and when one person such like that motivates 30 others that here is one guy from my district who could do it why couldn't I why shouldn't I and that becomes a positive algorithm because not all algorithms are bad exactly positive algorithms if you spin it off in 739 districts we are hopeful and if others join it might create a virtuous upward circle which might set us free from the shackles that we find ourselves in so basically IPL did that to cricket like we are getting the best cricketers now and we never really took it seriously in the first 1 or 2 years but now it's more important for us because it gives you 100 odd players who have got a chance to come and play with the mainstream cricketers so see anything is going to work in any vertical whether it's football music or any other industry really look at it this way if there are 739 districts and if you are looking at 4 or 5 from each district becoming populated you are suddenly looking at a gene pool that no journalism school in India can produce there aren't enough journalism schools so these are things that really sets a different I will tell you a very interesting thing one of my classmates who is the CEO of one of the new channels and I asked Avinash Pandey I am mentioning so I asked him once that have you seen one journalist on the UP channel he covers and he said you are talking about this guy Brijesh Singh so we started discussing and we realized that both of us had watched his news that how he comes on TV how he talks and he is otherwise a very low key journalist for Bharat Samacha I am sorry Bharat Samacha is the channel but if you open the TV and see him speak on TV you are absolutely captivated and it's about Bareli or maybe something about Lucknow Kanpur but you hear it you rightly talked about it one more thing I wanted to share with you that Veer Sanghvi in his article imprint wrote about that he is not worried about the Elon Musk taking over Twitter and he said that you know a lot of things which are happening people know what Twitter does and the troll and the dedicated IT sales so TV and prints have a very different thing it can't be replicated there so it has its own stature it has also made a very good observation that it's better that these tech superpowers concentrate on making their rockets and leave these platforms to do their own stuff but coming to the people who own the media houses it's always historically rich people business is used to own media houses and they were very responsible about it what do you think about it see media as a business if you were to look at it I am not giving about examples only about news it does need a maverick thinking it does need an independent mind which is willing to see what others can't see so if you look at Walt Disney who had thought that these things would happen Sumner Redstone Rupert Murdoch like all of them very strong individuals in their own right even for that matter it's not even restricted only to media Steve Jobs right creating industries or creating products that nobody else could think so it is just the force of nature in these individuals which is them to go far beyond what normal people can even imagine these are visionaries in their true right and in the media business these are not some things that you know you can have 20 people agree to that vision unlike a banking or unlike a manufacturing sector where over regulation and over safety then brings in committees and consensus now these are individual speakers you go out on a limb and believe in what you want to do and then you go all out to make it happen similar in the case of Elon Musk it's another matter but otherwise the kind of things that he did with Tesla or what he's doing with SpaceX it does need somebody who's completely thinking miles apart than any individual on the planet at this point of time now what he decides to do with it is not known to us today but what he did with Tesla was fantastic now I don't know if the algorithm cycle can be broken to be reversing it and making it a positive virtuous algorithm cycle if he could do that because he has the advantages it would be the biggest benefit to planet earth because otherwise I mean there are enough studies galore if you have heard about the negative bias negative bias is what drives algorithms if I was to take this conversation of ours and typical negative bias would mean that this is what the conversation happened controversial versus a nice picture that you know Sudhir Ji and Avinash's conversation was nice and enriching this one won't go viral the other one will go so that's a negative negative bias and algorithms pick up negative bias give it more legs and you know fire and that goes viral and that's what is happening everywhere whether it is television media whether it is online can somebody change it upside down that's what he was absolutely if you reverse it then that is a positive virtuous circle because people also do like to share good stuff now look at our WhatsApp groups we may hate it but we have certain family might every day say good morning would also say some nice quotations yeah those also some of us don't like it but the point is that there is a huge culture of that going around and that's also going viral and some algorithm picks that up and spreads those motivational things it's just a flip of a button it's just an algorithm now nobody is invested in that positive algorithm because the positive algorithm thus far wasn't really tried and trusted but if somebody were to do that and I would look at people like Elon Musk they would do that they will take out a formula which will basically it can potentially clean up a lot of stuff and that is what the expectation would be there because like I keep coming to the algorithm is the managing editor if they change the managing editor you will see different things or understand until you change the and if the worst case happens if it doesn't go in the positive it goes in the negative sense like as a consumerist king you can go off Twitter you can unfollow the friends and you can clean individuals and this social media platforms their regulation in any country is a issue even in India off late I'm telling you that most of them are lining up in high courts and even one or two issues they are going to Supreme Court unlike televisions and print media where it will go to a local regulation absolutely they have their issues if you do some program which goes to before the regulator you have to go and make your point but it is being it is being seen consistently now that the judgments after judgments are coming where it looks like as if there was no defense and absolutely no preparation so far as the social media giants are concerned like they have taken a stance which was absolutely not needed to be taken what do you think voluntary voluntary controls and like you said that we were not even knowing who is the managing editor now we know who is the managing editor it goes out of their hand or what is the reason see the thing is when social media to disseminate news that is not the first objective now what happens is these are tech platforms which are based on an algorithm that you like nice photographs you will see more nice photographs or your friends will share you will share more of those now unfortunately what happens is when it becomes a feeder into digital you know indices because the referral articles from giants like Facebook or Google are the ones which contribute in large major to what you see as as the online feeding the engine kind of a thing then that's where things start to go wrong right but there is no other alternative to it so the question is that now to retrofit because if somebody were to build a pure play I am building a social network which is not for example known as Facebook but is known as news book hypothetically speaking and there I will only attract the people who are actually only supposed to be looking for news and then in that platform I will build a positive bias and not a negative but it will operate reverse because the positive stories will get shared more and the negative ones will be pulled down by the algorithm so the tech is the same it is the same thing the atomic bomb can be used to destruct the planet or the atomic energy can be used to harness and make the planet energy sufficient so it is it is all in the hands of the individuals technology per se is not really bad it's just the question of where you decide to put it but a lot of legal jurisdictions when we go to countries the kind of ambush which these tech platforms the media tech platform international media tech platforms are facing in European Union and other places because their global ambitions and absolutely being sure that this is not something anybody will interfere there is no sovereign concept there why is it so that we as a nation and you talk about a lot of nationalist thing why we are not understanding this part that one it takes a lot of time everything is on mobile nobody goes to a desktop to do any of these social platforms why India as a country has still not taken a very harsh stand so far as except for TikTok which was bad where we are not talking about looks it is something which is as bad as East India company I am sorry I am making something like that see these are all real things but you know you have to see it from a prism of it's a lot of things combined together like this algorithm that I talked about the algorithm because the same advertising also feeds off on the same thing unfortunately when this algorithm works well for business then there is very little motivation to give it up for a positive one which may not be good for business but it's great for content now those choices of as long as the money keeps coming in then some of these you know choices become difficult to make even for Indian publishers still a large part of the traffic does come from these giants now to take it on there are many conversations which are happening to figure out the share or how there could be different things that could be happening but to be honest right now till there is no big alternative this is what you are left with then you can only hope that someone like we talked about if you know decides to reverse them but there could be a positive spin to that because then you are not only changing revenues and good quality revenue will come because as you go to the least common denominator the CPMs also drop just one of the one of the last questions which I have to ask you is a very personal question about network 18 only because I remember coming in Menka Doshi's program the firm many times why it has been discontinued Mr. Call any so what happens is it's basically the choices of the content vary with years as we are keeping on doing right so at a point of time when there were certain shows that we would do for example one on legal or one on you know different sections merged there was a commodity separate thing they would do on small caps mid caps today you know unfortunately the new admin the millenials the newer younger generations are you know we have now shows far more on crypto on NFTs and you know all those kinds of things but we do which we are not you know able to do on a weekly basis it was a very good program it was a brilliant program and it was condense all the economic issues which had a legal thing and I believe that's missing none of the channels have that product I just thought to tell you I must also tell you I must also tell you there is a huge opportunity of every 24 hour court news channel of all the happenings in the legal because your print is devoting 70% pages on court issues absolutely there is literally a demand because Mr. Anurag Batra started a legal vertical completely I'm doing a show with him absolutely you can also see you can see it on social media with all the newer age platforms and legal tracking the news that's getting huge traction yeah they all have small small micro the firm absolutely they all are doing that small small micro the firm absolutely so thank you Mr. Kaul we are absolutely done with the time and you you have told us so many ideas what you talked about the allogative which I was not aware because I'm not on most of these tech platforms except for LinkedIn but I did understand that there is a positive story which can also develop there is no need for any pessimism and what you talked about the TV industry or the conventional media is very heart warming because I belong to that conventional world and I still really watch my television or read my newspapers so I'm very thankful to you for giving thank you Sudeerji thank you Sudeerji and hi Vikram since you are there now the original editor G is here he knows more he knows more about all kinds of algorithms than anyone would otherwise yeah great hearing hearing you Narshan by the way the interesting algorithms that we now think are the best ones which are emerging are human machine hybrids which is really where I think a lot of excitement is happening but that's that's a subject of a drink that you are going to absolutely absolutely thank you very much thank you to exchange for media for initiating this chat and pleasure talking to you Sudeerji thank you Narshan thank you thank you gentlemen and of course to a millennial who was listening to this conversation and had the pleasure and the privilege of knowing that media TV like any other industry and technology comes from the responsibility on both the ends and moving from opinions to news you can use I think that was something that's going to stay with me for a long long time and we're talking about algorithms that's fascinating because algorithms making decisions as a rabbit hole more difficult to step out of than the friend zone of your crush so with that note I think we'd be very happy to move on for the next fireside chat that we have for you and it truly is one of the technologies he comes with of course humongous experience and I would like to invite on screen from E4M editorial team Simran Sabruwal and Kanchan Srivastava Kanchan I'll hand over the screen to you to take this conversation forward with Mr. Chandra yes hello good afternoon everyone welcome to our news session of fireside chat with Vikram Chandra founder of editorgy technologies Vikram does not need introduction all of us know him since his NDTV days Kanchan I think you can take the screen now okay sure hello good afternoon everyone welcome to our new session of fireside chat with Vikram Chandra founder of editorgy technologies Vikram does not need introduction all of us know him since his NDTV days Vikram is still miss your show the big fight although we have news on TV Vikram there are plenty of 24 by 70 TV news channels in the country at present but Indians are still hungry they are looking for news they can use the news which directly affects them and empowers them as a citizen earlier people used to switch on TV to catch up the latest developments and life issues but now we are surfing social media news TV news over Vikram thank you so much first of all Kanchan thank you for that warm introduction I think I do need a lot of introduction because I still have people saying we see you on TV news and I say I haven't been on TV news for five years so you couldn't be seeing me on TV news anymore but I think the point that you have touched upon is actually the crux of what many of us have been working on for a long period of time but you don't feel informed you're absolutely right you know it's like remember that saying that you're in an ocean and you're saying there's water water everywhere but not a drop to drink there's information there's lots of noise actually there's a heck of a lot of noise but you're not informed you're not comprehensively informed and that's because I think the models are broken and I think the technology that is being used right now is still fundamentally 1950s or 1960s technology the business models on TV news are broken because you're not getting subscription money in India we depend on entirely on advertising advertising comes from TRPs it means you're going to get TRPs which come from 40,000 boxes in a country of 1.4 billion people and we all know that TRPs only come from yelling or screaming or tabloid or those sort of things so that's the environment that there is right and if you're trying to get information from social media and you think that's why I say it's wrong it's really wrong because everyone watching has been watching India everything in India I know because people watch me on Facebook that's the answer is coming to you it will be wrong it will be inaccurate it could be opinionated because How do you get a comprehensive, how are you informed in a comprehensive manner? There's a vacuum out there. So what we've been trying to do is find possible solutions to this. We're at no point, all of us just going on, wringing our hands and saying, isn't it terrible? What is the way the world is? We have to try and find a solution. And I think our institutions will come and I think my own belief is that the solutions will come from technology. Who do you think is responsible for the decline of TV news? And what could be the possible solutions? I mean, you mentioned technology, but if you could broaden this aspect. I think the decline of television news fundamentally started with the business model, as I said, right? You had a situation where the only way that TV news channels could make revenue or lots of revenue was to chase TRPs. Subscription models in India were not working. You thought digitization would fix subscription models? Never happened. So TV news had no choice but to go and chase TRPs. And the minute you get into that, you've got to chase TRPs. Then you've got to do what it takes to get TRPs. There are honorable exceptions and everyone does that. They have still very high quality shows and very good channels out there. But I've seen that's what the logic of the business model dictated. And then I do believe somewhere along the way, certain things. I don't mind people necessarily being, everyone's entitled to their opinions. Everyone is entitled to have their point of view. I think sometimes if you're saying that it's okay if you have a certain point of view, but if you're saying I have this point of view, a pro-government or anti-government point of view. And as a result, because I'm pro-government, I can never say anything bad. Or if I'm anti-government, I can never say anything good. Then somewhere that unbiased and comprehensive sense of information is being missed out. But then again, you know, that's what gets the TRPs from. So that's the way the system is, right? Because it's very clear on television and even on things like YouTube, it's when you're really opinionated and you're giving one person's point of view, that's where the TRPs come from. And that's also where, for example, YouTube views will come from because then that echo chamber comes along and watches you and listens to you and retweets you and likes your videos on YouTube. So that's why it's happened. And I don't see any easy solution. If I could have come up with a simple solution within television news, why would I have left it? I'd been there and very happy and very well-sected for 25, 30 years. I don't know how many years I've been there. 25 years I've done TV news. I wouldn't have left it if I had thought that there were easy solutions that were possible in TV news. So the reason I quit was because I felt the only way to disrupt something or to come up with solutions is to do it entirely from the outside. And that's what we've been trying to do. Video consumption has gone up substantially since we have seen a lot of digital news formats have come up. Digital media houses have come up and many journalists have launched their own YouTube channels. And besides everyone having a smartphone is now a news creator. And the content which they share is going viral now. So how do you see this growth in video news production and consumption growth? I think it's clear to anybody who watch. And this has been clear. By the way, not now. It's been clear for nearly 10 years that there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the future will lie in digital and that the future will lie in streaming. And by the way, it's not just a news phenomena. This is across the board. If you have see all the conversations that are taking place in any gathering, it is about whether the shows that are making an impact in entertainment or movie. Okay, movies are finally being released in theater. But a lot of it is happening around Netflix or Amazon Prime or even if you're looking at the stars or the Z's and what's happening on Z5, what's happening on hot stars. So that's where the buzz is. So it's all around OTT and around streaming. It used to be sports used to be where you would say, okay, you have to go and watch live television. And even they're now increasingly people are watching that online. So the movement towards OTT and streaming and digital is I think irreversible and the pandemic has only accelerated that. You don't have to be dependent on a linear channel and appointment viewing and having to remember that at 8 o'clock, I'm going to switch on to watch the show. That era is more or less gone in my opinion. I could be wrong, but I think that era is gone. So now that it is digital, what is the question around news and information that we're going to look at? I think a lot of the other things are solved. News and information, our view is that the present form factors are not well designed for news and information. And the reason is actually as follows. If you're watching a movie on OTT or streaming, that's fine. You go, you select the video, the movie that you want to watch on the series that you want to watch and you click on it and then you can sit back with your big screen and you can watch it and it will, an episode will last one hour and then you can play the next episode. Or if it's a movie, it'll last two and a half hours. If it's a sports match, it'll last three hours. So you can select what you want and then lean back. The problem is with news and information, you really don't want, you want to be able to watch 25 or 30 news stories in, let's say, 20 minutes. That's what you would want, right? Any news viewer, you want to be informed? You want to get 25, 30 stories in 25 minutes. And then if you want, you can see a long debate about one of the issues that really matters to you. That's what normally users would like. How do you get that in present digital formats? You can't because what you're doing is, and especially imagine it's on the big screen. Imagine having to go on searching for news stories. Now show me a new story about what happened at the Chief Justice's meeting today. Acha, what happened in this? Now tell me what happened in this live chat. Who's going to keep on doing this? It's not a form factor that is natural. So the real, so therefore what people are doing even online is they're just switching on live television news channels and watching it on their, on their digital devices. To me, that's a profoundly unsatisfactory solution because the same issues that television news have in a linear format, you know, that those same issues will be faced if you're streaming a television news channel live on your device. And all the power of having a connected device, the power of personalization, the power of customization, the power of knowing who that user is and being able to create a tailor made newscast for that person. None of that can be done if you're watching a live channel on digital. So that's the issue. That's the problem when it comes specifically to news and information and OTT in streaming. And the day we can solve that, and obviously there's some of us who think we have the solution, but there'll be others around there. But once you solve that, even news and information will decisively move to streaming. Good afternoon Vikram. How? Good afternoon. Hi, Simran. I have a two part question which I'd like to ask you based on what you just said. First just, you know, you mentioned TV viewing translates to TRPs, which in turn translates to advertisers. Monetization on digital platforms is tough as we all know. But even though increasingly we are seeing virality and trending is what's the buzzword with, you know, unique viewer, number of views and unique viewers being the buzzword again. So in this case, my first question to you is, is sensationalism being the, you know, is that being adopted to stand out in the clutter at the expensive objective news? The second part, which is a continuation to this is, how much of dependence on algorithm and tech can you then rely on when your ideological preferences and, you know, your views, what you get to see is based on your history and what, where is the space for gut and empathy in reporting? Okay. I know the excellent questions. The short answer to question number one answer is yes. I mean, obviously we know that opinionated content is what gets TRPs and will also do really well when it comes to engagement and, you know, retweets and shares and, you know, traffic when it comes to digital formats. Tabloid, work, sensationalism works, being opinionated works, trying to be middle of the road and saying, we will give you a comprehensive thing, doesn't necessarily get you, get you that sort of traffic. I wish I had the answers and the solutions for everything, which I don't. I think I had the solutions or some things, but not everything. The answer to that first part of what you said, will I hope come when advertisers, when brands, when others realize that the value of high quality, credible, non-sensational, non-tabloid content is more than the other. So yes, this is sensationalism. This is somebody had in holiday in the Maldives, right? And this will get 100,000 views, let's say, or very high TRPs. This is a very detailed discussion on how digital trends can be used to transform Indian industry, whatever it is, and give you rough examples, or how do you solve the water crisis in India? This will get 5,000 views or 10,000 views. But in some ways it is worth my while as an advertiser as a brand to back this also because it is reaching the right audiences. It is reaching the right sections. This is what my target is. I should be putting some of my money behind high quality content. I think that trend of stories starting to come because I think there are brands who are realizing that just to constantly put your brands behind what you described as sensation is okay for the now to reach that you are getting, but is it necessarily translating into sales? Or is it really making an impact on people's minds? Is it enhancing my brand value or is it diminishing my brand value to constantly be associated as a brand with sensationalism or hate speech or whatever? Does it really help your brand? Or could it hurt your brand? And when that realization comes in, then maybe there will be a movement to say, okay, let's not only back what is the highest PRPs or the highest clicks, let's also back high quality content because you will get brand positioning on that. So that I hope is the answer to the first part of it. That lies in the hands of the brand managers and the advertisers. Coming to the second part of it, that frankly is something which is really, I think the first two years after setting up Energy 2017, 2018, 2019, that was the real question that we were trying to figure out because you're completely right. It took us less than a month to program an algorithm that would essentially say, okay, this is what the viewers are watching. This is what the viewers like. Give them more of that, right? Very simple to do. Automatically all the content that we would have been showing our viewers would have been entertainment or sensational or tabloid or opinionated because that's what the algorithm picks up. It knows that it's what people are going to be clicking upon. We took a very conscious decision that we were not going to do that. So we actually having built a really nice algorithm, we broke it, we switched it off, we said, we disconnected it and said, okay, let's work on something else which does get back the human elements. So you're showing people a combination when you click on that editorgy button on that first video and you open up what we call the AI-driven playlist as opposed to the human-curated playlist. But that AI-driven playlist is not entirely built by AI or by the algorithms. There's a lot of human influence into that as well. So we will give you headline stories to start off with that are dependent on editorial priorities. These are important stories. You people should see this. And then we will also show you what the algorithms say are your interests. But it'll be a, it's a newscast that is assembled keeping both things in mind. Will it get as many to come back to your point? Will it mean that you will necessarily get as many views and clicks as you would have if you're entirely said, okay, we're going to go sensational? No, we know that it will not do it, but that's a sacrifice you're deliberately making because we think people will be better informed. You don't want to be in a situation where you're only getting entertainment news or something and you're going into a lunch and somebody says, isn't it terrible what happened in Ukraine this morning and you're saying Ukraine Kai, what happened in Ukraine, we have no idea. Okay, Ukraine is a bad example, but major meeting today with Chief Justices and the government on judicial reforms. You have no idea it happened. So necessarily good. Hi Vikram, since you provide news in curated and personalized video format, so I would like you to please share the insight of video news consumption in India. I mean, what do Indians watch the most and what is the average attention span at present? See, I, to be honest, if you go by taking your decisions on the basis of entirely on the basis of this is what people are consuming the most of right now. This is what will get the maximum engagement. This is where you will get the maximum traffic. What you will do will be very different to what perhaps a long-term solution eventually will be. And at least at our level, we are trying to, yes, we do have stuff that people will want to watch. And yes, there is a, there are enough videos that we are doing that are getting a lot of traffic and traction. And obviously a lot of them are what you would call popular content, right? Which is fine. Sports, there's entertainment, there is lifestyle, there is politics of a certain side. But I think our real focus is not necessarily to only track that, right? Our focus is try and build a comprehensive news experience because only when you have built a comprehensive news experience, it will take time for that to be popularized. You will not get the instant gratification, the instant gratification of saying, okay, I am putting out a video of somebody having already in the Maldives, right? Wearing a certain outfit. We know what sort of traffic that will get. If you put out a comprehensive newscast, maybe you won't get that sort of traffic today. But as people get, start coming to that, there is a value they will get to that. There is a certain habit which then starts to be built up with that. And yes, it will take more time. But over a period of time, that is the better, that is the more correct, that is the longer term solution to actually finding an answer to the problems that are plaguing the industry right now. There is a vacuum. There is a vacuum today. There's so much information where people aren't informed. You can't find a solution to that by saying, okay, we're going to give you more of the same and say that that is a solution. That's not a solution. That's okay. You're pandering to whatever's happening right now. Is this possible for you to share some regional insights? I mean, I'm really curious. I mean, what kind of news is preferred in UP? What news is preferred in Maharashtra? Or maybe in South? I mean, look, I could share what I think. You know what sort of news is like there. Obviously in Maharashtra, now there's something happening about what is happening with Amir Rana and what's happening with this and who's the resting who. And you know, fine. And then there's, there'll be entertainment news. So I think all of that is fine. I think what I'm trying to say is that our focus is on a slightly different issue. I'm not actually spending my days sitting and thinking about, okay, what is somebody in Uttar Pradesh watching? So let me try and give them what they're watching. That is not necessarily the core of what we are trying to do. The core of what we are trying to do is how can you use technology? How do you use platform theory? How do you use AI and AI theory and the principles of AI? How do you use the theories behind peer-to-peer networks? How do you use not crypto, but the basic logic behind why a blockchain is successful technology? How do you use all these technologies that are so clearly disrupting every industry in the world? They're going to transform everyone's lives as we know them. How do you use these technologies to fundamentally make changes in the video news industry? That's what I would like to spend my time thinking of, thinking about, not necessarily what we can put out to get the highest clicks tomorrow. Because if you are able to do all of that, then the possibilities are sky high, right? If I'm okay, it's very ambitious to talk about companies like Airbnb or whatever, but when Airbnb started off, Airbnb had only looked at it and said, okay, we are going to try and think about how many rooms does the Marriott have? How many rooms does somebody have? And what does Marriott do to get its customers inside? Then you're not thinking about a radically different model. You're then trying to make iterative improvements on what is already happening out there. So we are in a sense trying to do something radically different, may work, may not work, but I think it's worth a shot. You were also trying to know about the challenges in the digital video news segment. I mean, are the challenges different from the TV news, apart from monetization? To some extent, the challenges are similar, right? The challenges are again arising from the fact that if all of your content consumption and content viewing is whether measured in TRPs or measured in time spent or measured in clicks, is if your business models are entirely dependent on that, how do you try and make a change? So that's a fundamental question, which I think underlies both the segments. TV has other problems. TV has other problems, which is that it is fundamentally running on like 50-year-old technology. The core of television news is 50-year-old technology, beaming down to you from somewhere and it's improving, but it's still fundamentally, the concept of linear television is old, it's 50-60 years old, and that's not going to change. In digital, you can apply some of the technologies of the present and use them to transform the business. I think Simran was saying something. Simran? Yes, I just wanted to ask you because you mentioned just something more based on what you want to say. We have an aversion to pay for news. With TV being free still, most of the channels are free to air. Are you seeing now that people, at least in the online space, are they willing to pay for premium content? And it's so what's been the growth that you have seen in this space? Or are you still seeing the resistance like why should we pay for news, particularly on the digital platform? I think in India, there is still resistance. I think overseas that resistance is going simply because everybody oversees now. If you look at just about any foreign publication, and this, by the way, is something which the industry needs to sit together and have a chat in India when it comes to digital. But those conversations have been on for nine years or 10 years even when I was on TV. So I don't know whether they are going. If you look at it, it is next to impossible now to get content overseas without eventually going through a pay wall, right? There's very little free content. You've got to subscribe. Whether it's subscribing to the New York Times or Financial Times or Washington Post or wherever it is. By and large, you would eventually hit a pay wall and you've got to pay a certain free layer, but you have to pay at some point. It is very difficult for a small section or one person or two people or five people to say, okay, we're going to go behind a pay wall in India. While there are still people who are out there saying we're going to give it to you entirely for free. So at some point, the industry is going to have to sit down and talk and saying that we are going to soon or later get troubled if we don't try and find a way of going behind subscription because logically speaking, the answers to just about everything that I have said will eventually line subscription or subscription based models, right? Where it could be one card for everybody. There are lots of formulas that have been discussed. But purely relying on advertising, but have all the problems that I have just spoken about. The minute you start getting people used to saying, okay, I'm going to pay, I'll pay, I'll pay something, but I'll pay, I will pay for getting quality content. That's when you will have a distinct upsurge in quality here in India. And let's hope that day comes. Vikram, a really well-known regional editor had told me once that you can see the divergent news is when you see the headlines of the newspaper and you see the previous, previous days, eight o'clock and nine o'clock news, both the headlines are totally different. Now, when you look at even the digital medium, what is covered on digital? A lot of it is not even covered on primetime news. Say things as simple as say in unemployment and inflation. As a digital medium, how do you see, how can you fill in this vacuum? Particularly now with internet penetration also increasing. How do you see yourself and what role can the digital platform and also editor G play in kind of conveying the voice of the people or addressing some issues which don't seem to be addressed on the mainstream platform. Right. I mean, there are two different aspects to that, right? One is when it comes to depth of content, right? When you're going deep into issues, into individual issues, and the second is one is depth and one is breadth, one is giving, okay, I'm going to give you all the 10, 15, 20, 30 stories that you need to know and one is this is a story that is of interest to X, Y, Z person and I'm going to give you a fairly detailed in depth look at that, at that particular story. Both print and digital are doing, I think, an excellent job when it comes to the depth, right? If you really want to go into the depth of a particular issue, it's not that tough to find. Why? Because for starters, you can search for it. So if you want information on just about anything, you do a Google search for it or you do whatever search it for it is, you will find enough good content on that and you can go into it and you can research it. And within half an hour, you can become the expert on one particular issue. So I don't mean the problem is really that much in that area. It's a solid problem. So while we're doing a lot of that with explainers and in-depth videos and all of that, that is certainly something that we are doing. I mean, the more interesting personally, I mean, the more interesting challenges, how do you give the breath? How do you make sure that someone today, if you want to be, if you want to go to sleep, feeling I have watched, I know that major 30 things that have happened in the country or in the world today. If you actually want to read a newspaper cover to cover, you would have that sense by because you've become the newspaper. Front page has got all the major headlines that you should see. Then there's a sports picture of the headlines that you should see. And there's an opinion page which is demarcated from the main news, which is giving you the opinions. So to that, it's in print is still doing its job, right? If you read a newspaper, you're getting a fairly decent overview of all that has happened in the country. It's on the television side where you're seeing a lot of debates. If you spend half an hour watching TV, you'll probably only see a discussion on one subject and a lot of yelling about it also. So you're not really necessarily getting all the issues that are there. And in digital, it's very tough to find those 30 stories that you need. So it is in video as opposed to print that I think the crisis is the biggest. Print is still being able to give people a comprehensive and a breadth of information. In video, you're not getting it neither on television nor on video news. Are you getting a comprehensive 30 minute newscast which is giving you proper full information? I want to know all the news that is happening right now. Today, right now, there are some shows which do it at particular appointment viewing times, but supposing you want in the next 25 minutes when we finish the show to say, how am I going to get those 30 stories that I need to feel informed in video or audio format? How do you do it? That is where there's no answer. And that's really, that's what we're working on. I mean, add with a quick obvious plug right now. I believe that we've got an answer because you can do it. It is up to open editor G, tap that first button will give you 25 stories that will keep you nicely informed of everything that's happened. So that's why that's why we believe that that's that's that's something which will be helpful. I think I hope. Now we think we are running out of time. Vikram, last question. Do you see any other news format as a potential disruptor in the coming years? There will be lots. I mean, let me not let's not aggregate ourselves into thinking that are we our past solution? What's the solution? Lots of things are going to happen. Lots of disruption is going to come. Lots of change is going to come. And frankly, that's good. The more the change, the more the different format, the more people find different ways of doing things. That's good. The pandemic to that extent has at least shaken the mix enough that everyone feels that things are going to change the same thing that was happening for five years, 10 years, 15 years. The same thing was going on. You'd keep on having discussions about the PRPs don't work. You'd keep on having discussion with a lot of tabloid why is it so sensationalism? Why is it like this? How do we get the correct information? Why is there so much fake news circulating? Why is there so much opinion masquerading? The same issues. Those issues have been doing the rounds for 10, 15 years to at least maybe longer. So with change. Solutions will emerge. Thank you so much, Vikram. Thanks for taking time out and speaking with us. Thank you. Thank you the best. Wonderful. Thank you to both the ladies and of course, Mr. Chandra, one line that's going to stick with me forever is TV news, chasing TRP and subscription model isn't working. So we need disruption and of course future lies in streaming. So with that good hope, I thank you once again for your valuable time. Thank you. Thank you so much pleasure and with that, we will be moving on with our next panel discussion that we have for you. And this is a loaded one who brought down the level of media discourse is what we are discussing. We have Shazia Ilmi representing BJP spokesperson Anurag Badaria from SP, Saeed Ansari executive editor and anchor at Ajta will be joining in 15 minutes from now. Rana Yashwant managing editor at India news network is also with us and joining him is Charu Pragya from BJP. The moderator is Nazia Alvi Rahman from exchange for media. She's the editor and I'll hand over the screen to her. Thank you, Robin. Am I audible audible and visible Nazia all yours. But I can't see my other panelists. Not sure if many of them have joined. I've been I've been told that they have joined but I also cannot see them. So yes, I can see one of the panelists now on. So while all the panelists are joining in, I would be very happy if you can set the tone for the panel discussion that we have here. Sure. I mean, I can also see one of the speakers. I good afternoon. Hello, Mr. Mr. Yashwant. Hi, good afternoon. So as of now, I only see when we are on the amongst all the panelists here. So maybe if we can do a quick check when our others joining otherwise it will become a fireside chat. They are joining. Yes. Maybe you can start with the first question. They are just logging in all of them. Okay. So this is actually a very, very interesting topic. Ruheel does a very good job with curating in a gender. And I think the kind of topics he has been giving me. He is also quite well suited for a television thing that like he can he has this potential of creating very provocative topics to discuss. So today's discussion is that you know when and how is something I would want to know, but who brought down the level of media discourse? Now he is not questioned. He's written this as a statement of fact that it has come down and a day before we had our first edition of top 50 rankings for political spokesperson. And we had several discussions perhaps almost everyone, you know, Univoke Lee said that blamed it on the anchors and that is why we got this idea of, you know, bringing anchors and spokesperson together to understand who exactly is responsible. I think Mr. Rana has also stepped out. I'm the only one right now on the panel. Ms. Chaurup Raikea is just joining us. I think she is there. She's just switching on her camera. Okay. So Rana Ji, if you can give me some idea of, you know, so that most of these spokesperson's blamed it on you, because our anchors keep the same topics. They don't want to talk about infrastructure. They don't want to talk about health. They don't want to talk about education. They only want to talk about very provocative topics. So why do you blame us? So if I can have your first view on that. Sir, your audio offer. It is viewed. Now, you have a big foundation and there is no new in the country. For the last few years, the question keeps rolling. And if you go to many people, then it comes to you and stands that the debate in the television channels, why is the standard of the basic questions removed? And why is that in the fight, in the fight, in the garland, in the garland, in the garland, in the garland? I think there are two or four reasons for this. The first reason is the race of TRP. And the viewer in that race is the biggest income. The viewer of this country, in any news, in any debate, in any conversation, shows a lot of interest. The channel's focus is on those news or on those subjects. Then with the panelists, I am sharing a truth with you. With the panelists, the debate is intense. And it is viewed for a long time through the students. We start calling those panelists again. So, you will see a group that stands on all the TV channels. Some people are sitting here at 5, they will be seen somewhere else at 6, they will be seen somewhere else at 7. So, these are the Pujaris who make the Yajna. So, you will see that they have made the Yajna in the morning, made the Yajna in the morning, and made the Yajna in the evening. Because they know how to make it. And that good Pujari is considered Yajna. So, Mahajan is good, that is why I have called him. So, in the TV channels, some anchors have been prepared. And they have been prepared as well. Because of that, there are some others as well. Not just these. But they have connected themselves with some issues. They have established their identity there. Because they are the anchors of this type of Rujhan. Or the reporters of this type of Rujhan. And the panelists of the same type of Rujhan have also met. So, there will be a community. So, you will see that two types of communities will be seen on TV channels. In terms of the anchors and the panelists as well. So, one anchor... I am asking this to you. I understood this. I mean, three years ago, once, Shahrukh Khan asked someone, why do you make such movies? He said, I do it. But there is a difference. Journalism is also about responsibility. It is about having, taking a moral stand. Acting is not the fourth pillar of democracy. Media is, right? So, we can't get away by saying, this is the environment, this is the difference. So, we are seeing this. With journalism, ethics and morals are also coming. We have to give people certain things that we... We feel that we are also... We should be taken seriously. Otherwise, it has literally become that there are very few thin lines. Who is acting in films? And who is acting in news channels? After listening to you, I was coming to your question. So, Nidha Fazidi Sahab, you are a poet. What do you say to the audience? My phone came in between. So, Nidha Fazidi Sahab, you are a poet. What do you keep looking for? What is the matter? Why don't you go home on time? There are two questions in your mind. They are in all newspapers. As soon as you leave, I am not leaving. I was just showing you a page with which the audience of this country is prepared to say, no, this is TV journalism. This is TV journalism. It is a part of it. You have prepared one opinion with this part. But whatever TV journalism has done or is doing, you simply leave. First of all, there is a crisis in the country today. And with this electricity crisis, there is a discussion on all channels. And this discussion is not just a small issue. There is a problem for 2, 4, 5, 10 years. In front of this country, there is a big problem of natural resource, which is caused by electricity. It is of water and coal. If the future generations want to live without water and coal, then there is an alternative source of water and coal. And where will it come from? So, the discussion is long and goes far. The question is, what is your opinion? What is your opinion? How much does the society think of the Indian society? If I argue according to you, then you think it is right. But when I argue according to the country and society, then it has its own opinions, it has its own context. So, the society and the country have their rights. But the discussion between 2 or 3 times is a fight of TRP. But according to that, if you have started giving the same rights to the community journalists who work in TV channels or TV channels, then you have started giving the same rights. You have started giving the same rights. You have started giving the same rights. You have started giving the same rights. Mr. Charu also said there were other spokespersons also. They also said that they called us because they want to have conversations like that. Otherwise, they also have this urge to engage in much more meaningful conversations which are more about infrastructure or education or issues that we as citizens would want the government to address. So we thought we will have you now speak directly with Mr. Yashwan. Where is it that the problem lies? Thank you, Nazia. It's wonderful to see you again. And thanks for conveying that, Yashwan Ji Namaste. So, when we were together on a panel and we were sitting at different parties, I was also on that panel. It happened that there was so much extreme discussion on TV these days. And if someone wants to talk calmly and talk on the issue, we do not get the to talk about agendas which we feel are more important. So, when your topic will be Hanuman Chalisa, you will not be able to tell the list of people in the country. And that becomes a concern. And obviously, in this panel I also said that where does the fault lie? We need to analyze it now. Is it that people want to see the issue because of TRP? Channels pick these issues. Anchors pick these issues. And then they come to discuss. If you leave business channels or niche channels their issues are like this. And then it is said that this political party spokesperson does not talk about work. He discusses these issues. But people forget that if you look at the topic of the debate, the topic is one sided or the topic is in which there are two political spectrums in our country these days. Whether the parties are fighting each other and on principle they disagree with each other whether something universal will be the truth. Just for the sake of disagreement disagreements start and fights start. And as a result as a viewer I don't really walk out with any kind of new information. I don't get much from this. That is my complaint. I am sitting for an hour and everyone these days has a very busy schedule. I will take an hour and I will go to any entertainment channel. If this is what I want to see. So now come Rohil do we have other panelists or we only have Charu and Rana for now? I will answer Charu's question. Yes of course. Actually in this country there are 135 crore people and they also watch TV channels. The content and deciding unit of channels how does it work? It is very important to understand. It works with politics. The arguments that are against power and power they talk a lot and gradually it is believed that it is interesting whether or not. If people do not see that kind of discussion then the news slowly goes out. But I want to know that in this country is there an economic issue? Is there a non-economic issue in this country? Is there a Karoli issue in this country? But BJP and Congress these two arguments are very serious. We are doing something or there are such arguments that the government has done and it is very important. On the other hand, the government has never given a long speech against the government. But Rana, you call us on these issues. I will tell you the truth is when you call BJP and Congress today we will discuss on the price. So BJP will ask his audience not to go to Congress when you go to a topic that suits BJP and not Congress. The truth is I want to come to you on that. The problem in this country is that before when we were much younger than now there was a point when this suddenly became a decline. We used to have these issues because religion, sensationalism are important to Indians people. But even now if it becomes 2 times then it works. It happens 8 times and sometimes 2 times so is there also somewhere there is a lack of political will. There is an agenda that comes through you or what he is saying that there are channels where people don't send because those channels want to talk about issues that perhaps the government is not comfortable talking about. Respectfully there is only one channel where BJP does not send spokesperson and that is because it is on a question of respect. No other reason and we are stuck to that. That doesn't mean there are no other channels which discuss difficult issues. There are also alternative programs where complicated issues are discussed. It is possible that the people who speak on those issues are less because there is a need to study them. There is a need for preparation which is the extremist issue which is the issue of the Hindu-Muslim type. It is not like you have to study every day. Whereas if you want to discuss things like that, you will have to study a lot more and you will have to get some statistics and data. Learn that and put that out on television for people to understand in an easy way. What I have started thinking is that an image has been made of news channels and even today there are news channels. I am not generalizing but I am saying that the mainstream news that has been seen has become very loud. There are few channels where there are fights and there is no news on news. I want to come back to what Rana Ji said that when we contact you on difficult issues, you don't come. So they have to immediately keep these issues. No, not at all. I am not agree with Rana Ji because all the complicated issues we go to them, whether it is legal issues, economic issues, or taxation issues. But as I said, Nazia, to discuss these issues, there is a lot of research and planning. You have to study a lot. You have to study a lot. You have to see these issues. This is a work. This is a work. I want to say that you note one more thing. If you are discussing with peace, how many channels will be left in today's day? Mostly, there will be a big panel. There won't be a big panel. Even then, you will be encouraged to speak with force. So that whole idea of a decent debate is lost. A decent debate becomes a cacophony of noise in which you are sitting and listening. If a viewer is watching that debate, there is very little take-off when you are not able to debate with peace. When you are not able to speak with peace and not wait for peace to speak with each other. I think we are losing the essence of news. We are losing the essence of debates on news channels. Rana ji, you have a supporter now. Because there are four sensible spokesperson parties. We like to come here and talk to each other. Because there are some people whose language has been improved and their understanding is very clear. And they come with preparation. If you look at the Indian news, I have repeatedly tried to pick up the important and fundamental issues and prepare a opinion between people. And that is a clear opinion. I am probably telling you what I am saying. Okay. This is what we are discussing in relative terms. That we have become worse and worse. This means that the first one was better and better. What was the first one today? When we relate, we believe that we are good or bad. Life is always like this. The TV channel from 2008 was such a time that nobody wants to talk about it. Because Raki, Raju, Naag, Nagin were trapped. And in 2008, when we took the terrorist attack in Mumbai, the country changed its image. People's preferences changed. Their priorities changed. And there was a big change in the world of news. Even today, I say that the channel or content that keeps a relationship with people is made by their life and their government. So, whenever you argue about it, people like it. I am telling you that I have never seen a lot of people praising it. It always happens. I will start this power crisis again tomorrow. But you will see that sensibly designed, what Charu was saying, that you have to read the principles of this country to talk about important things. And you want to see that you have so much understanding that you can correlate it with other things. First, I am talking about a small thing. The Prime Minister of this country is sitting with all the prime ministers and judges. People in this country are trying to be strong and better. Now, in today's history, a person says that Narendra Modi is a hitler and he is like a hitler. So, what is going on today is the opposite of what he is trying to do. Now, in his right because I have believed that I am Narendra Modi. So, I have decided that whatever he does, I will go against him. And people claim that they are actually standing against the system and calling out to the public to do what they are doing. But it is not like that. If they have to stand against the BJP, or if they go to the Maharashtra and stand against the Congress and call out to the BJP, that is not what happens. That is, you have caught a hitler and the rest of the people have caught the hitler and they call out to the government. And when you put yourself under the control of a hitler in some way, I feel that it is important for you to have a promise and then you do not have your wife. Then you are able to prove that you are a lawyer, you are a lawyer, you are not a journalist. This polarization that we are talking about is so much that either you are for or against. Yes. You know, even 10 years ago you felt that you have had a long career in journalism. Can I make an observation? Can I speak in between please? Quickly. Yes. I am very new in the world of news. I am not very new in the world of politics. But because I am not a career politician, I practiced law before I came into politics, I say this very objectively. Nowadays, of course there will be a political leaning. But this political leaning cannot mean that the other party is doing 100 of 100 wrong things. I say that I am a supporter of Modi Ji but the supporter of Modi Ji cannot say that Modi Ji has done all the wrong things. Nowadays, because of your political allegiance you oppose everything in a blanket way which I think is not the right thing. We are a democracy. We should be appreciating the things done by a politician. And criticizing. Yeah. Nobody can be 100% right or 100% wrong whatever your ideology. And I think we have lost that thing. That is how our system has been for many years. I mean that is how we have created this largest democracy. So I am online. Now we will move to another question. Yes Nazia. I will be involved in your discussion. Hello everyone. We were actually waiting then we will switch to the next question. Yeah, thank you. Which I want to understand from you Rana Ji. There is one more point. I will join you people after sometime. Excuse me for that. Just give me 5-10 minutes. Sure. But I am listening to you all. Thank you. You know these discourses discussions we do they are a cheaper option. Versus going out in the field creating content. So it suits the business of the news as well. You 4-5 well-to-do politicians sit in the studio and sit in the anchor and talk to each other for an hour and a half. Versus you send 4 OB vans looking for 10-10 stories and your expenses increase a lot. This is cheap and more sensational content. So is this true to some extent? Nazia, it is true that the reporting of the ground has been reduced and the studio has taken the whole channel in its part. These are all on the ground. Because of the zero of the ground there are expenses because your revenue and expenses should be between these two. Because you are in the news business. But the understanding of the ground and whenever there is a need on the ground your reporters go and do the stories and file the story. The problem is that the big problems are the unemployment and the cost. There are different problems of different states. If you go to different states you have to deal with the fields. People who come from the fields understand this. People who are in the city may not understand the problem that the people who live in the villages are killed. After that, they are forced to leave their homes and live with them. A big population in our country lives this way. The question is about the serious system. You have to work hard to file the stories. You have to put in the reporters. The cost is involved. You try to pick up a few stories and discuss it and prepare a solution in the country. But what has happened in the history is that in the country you try a lot to make a sensible debate and make a good show through the counter-report. You will not get a number. There are 4 panelists and an anchor who will pick up more than 2 and then you will leave in the race of TRP. This is a big concern because in honesty everyone is saying that there is a fight in the news business and there is a fight so you cannot focus on the things that are more important to you. This is the first and basic of the fight and this is going on. Do you think the TRP was shut down and there were no ratings for the last 1.5 years? Was there any improvement at all? Do you think in the phase of COVID there are 4 or 5 doctors from far away from Delhi, Mumbai and you have opened an open OPD and any Indian can call and take their advice when doctors were in hospitals and they were not available to give advice and they were very sick and they needed a doctor at that time you opened an OPD for 24 hours but today I am opening an OPD and some drama is going on and some talk is going on so you have to believe that there will be less people to take advice of OPD and the people who are dying will also be able to see the situation and this is a problem and the people who are in a society and have a good relationship with the society the society is ready for that and they like it sometimes they used to like Raju, Rakhi, Saan, Vichu Baluram today they are discussing something else fundamental questions have come in these 2 years and people have tried to do better work and they were 2 years old and you will see on TV channel they are not in terms of numbers but in terms of content in terms of people's interest and people's concern and their likes do you think it should be in TRP or not? look there is a fight in this country there should be a monarchy and that monarchy is TRP and we have the consumer it is not like the West so now when there is a consumer I will also make one observation when there was a controversy where some senior people were involved in ratings and many brands openly stand and they had stopped advertising on certain news channels and you think maybe we should have people from brands also that we all together can improve things so what if advertisers start choosing for more meaningful content and perhaps you will have that liberty to create better content because your advertisers will invest in you only if you do some possible content if you do this kind of content we will not advertise and it did happen because we are in the business of brands I know several brands who backed out they stopped spending on many channels so unfortunately some of our panelists have not joined so this is more or less a fire side with Rana and they have to answer accountability lies on everyone you can't get away by saying they say when we ask sensible questions politicians don't come to talk to us then there is this entire revenue game so do you feel that we all you know if we can talk more of solutions how can we there is only thing common in what I am saying and Rana is saying quality is bad we are only discussing why it is bad we are trying to put blame on each one maybe if we show better quality people will see so what political initiatives can we take this is only my opinion I could be wrong when we produce quantity then quality gets compromised somewhere or the other and we have discussed this also previously there are so many news channels today 24-hour news channels which is trying to churn out content every single minute and of course the life of content has become very short today you will talk to any journalist the life of the content that was done before I think because of that pressure news channels things become difficult to manage and like you said it is very easy to put people in boxes on a screen on television and have them talk to each other but when there are going to be so many news channels each news channel doing so many shows a day trying to fill up a whole day with information there is this war to see which channel is better than the other which anchor is better than the other your content is so good I cannot even say that the number of channels should be reduced because of course that is not going to be a solution but the struggle for everybody in this space today needs to become more about bringing out quality over quantity so instead of saying that we do 06 shows a day why is it not possible for people to focus on 3 fantastic shows and I know this seems very idealistic I wish I could say the same for political parties that you participate in one debate and get ready for it see it has become an ecosystem so for somebody like me I am assigned a debate from my party I will have to go for the debate which is given to me I will have to prepare the subject which has been assigned to me sometimes it is something that I am more aware of I am a lawyer so I would be happier to talk about legal issues or court things or even you know women's issues things like that but it also becomes a question of what is available on television on a particular day so even if it is something which is not up my alley I am supposed to study I am supposed to understand what is happening and speak about it and basically I am not speaking for myself everything that I am saying today is on behalf of my party it is to carry the message of my party's policies thoughts to the people of my country I am only a medium I am supposed to only say what my party wants to convey the solution can be to very consciously have anchors say that I don't want to fight what has happened on my show successful show has become equivalent to a loud show I think it should be the opposite you also say that I don't want to fight we don't do it I know Rana Ji is going to back me up on this I will never be on a show where I will be shouting I will tell others politely that you didn't speak for me but if that person persists to interrupt my debate then I am forced to do the same see I don't want to be on television with say 30 minutes of screen time and not get a word out at the end of the day this is no charu talking at the end of the day this is bhajpa ka who is on air and I am supposed to convey my party's message so if the person in front of me is going to ensure that everything is interrupted it just becomes a matter of giving it back that is something that I would like to do in the normal course so there are many people who agree but there are many channels who feel that until you are not in a good mood you are not attacking each other the show is not successful so I think the success of a show needs to be measured with how much we are giving to the public how cordially we are able to talk to people we don't agree with rather than it becoming a measure of success how much noise be created so Rana Ji what are the big solutions how can we better our debates how can we better our ecosystem our dependence revenue is so much on advertisers our dependence is on the government these factors were there before I don't know how much you agree but there is the overall respect for our profession even politicians it's gone down because of the kind of work the kind of content we are giving to the viewers so all these constraints existed before but our seniors were managing the way out where have we faltered I would like to explain a little bit what Charu has said from what Charu said I remember Mr. Rahat that the question is not at home but at the foundation the soil of our feet actually the things that are better that you can connect they are kept on TV they are not kept what Charu was saying it takes effort for that you have to read but the content is in people's liking it is liked and the debates that we are discussing are going on for 18 hours from 6 in the morning to 12 in the evening and in that 2 hours or 2 and a half hours but the rest of the 15 hours are news it is not like that it is a debate so after taking 2 and a half hours we are deciding on the whole world we are not talking about this but I say that in the whole 15 hours there is an Indian an ordinary person who lives in India yes the things that are there they can be done better there is a lot of knowledge it is possible to get out of this the reason for that is that there are some anchors some reporters who have their own understanding and they feel that if you do that then you will be fine and there will be a discussion about you because in that show there is a lot of noise and that debate is seen so this is your mental problem this problem has brought you here that you can't get out of it you are helpless but there are people who debate better they come with better content and the channel is better I think there needs to be felt between the earning earning is a big factor to decide the channel and to educate the team that anchors reporter lives in the network he can explain he can change the mode of debate he can change the context of the content he can change the context of the content earning is very important for the anchors and reporters there is a problem that how do you see India do you want to take advantage of it or do you want to give yourself some opinion if I get out of here then if I look back then I did some meaningful work staying in this space for the country and the society or if I stay happy then I will do something better but I have to do my job and keep the number then I will stay in the fight of TRP and I will keep the entire team in the same network this is a fundamental thing that should be discussed everywhere and this should be understood I think we should make a big debate between the earning Anurag ji is here finally Anurag ji can you hear me hello Anurag ji I don't think he can hear us Anurag ji Anurag ji your voice is coming my voice is coming to you yes now it is coming yes now it is coming Anurag ji you are listening to our debate absolutely so you tell me maybe you are a little late in joining we talked about a lot of things that day we were talking you and Charu ji were saying it is not our fault Rana ji and Saeed ji will join us in a few minutes if they ask us questions then we have to answer them now you tell us what will you say to Rana ji the question is not about this I had already said today when there is a debate they ask me questions but when we get the answer of the question they don't listen to my answer they feel that this answer is correct and the message will be correct if they want to ask they are not talking to him then we have to answer they don't want to reach to the public they start talking half the time what you are saying how many answers will you give because we all can't paint the same brush today you can understand when you start talking they start talking to you then you know that this is a rule when you start talking and you start talking you have to make a loud voice when you make a loud voice then he also tries to make a loud voice the anchor also feels that how should I read less because the other people these days the anchor is trying to make the political party happy the anchor is trying to fix the system I think this is wrong as I say it is not true but I feel that I have to make a loud voice and I have to make a loud voice which I don't like but every day I feel that the other party will be given full time they will take the same what you are talking about that is eligible to talk in the TV debate not the other party I feel I have to show their faces and listen to them I mean we will say something we will start shouting last time I understood how to find the solutions now they say when we want to talk about issues then the government leaves the spokesperson the third point is that there is a problem of revenue when PRP comes then revenue comes without me going too much into blame game and we look for solutions how can we fix this in our little ways you have to change your mind you have to say what you want you have to say your issues but I keep quiet till the public for this the other party are a little disturbed because their agenda is not working but I keep saying even if they keep shouting I don't listen to them I keep shouting I don't listen to the audience but I keep saying what I want to say and I keep quiet even after sending a message your PRP will come or not but you are being called so there is some sense of fairness no that is their big problem that they call me but this is my responsibility towards the public I keep quiet by saying what I want Charu you wanted to say something yes I did so actually I don't think oppositions for persons are as much of a victim as they pretend to be because frankly every time I am on a debate I think I am outnumbered so if we talk about Uttar Pradesh Anurag ji comes from UP last big elections were in Uttar Pradesh and other countries so there will be a debate there will be a debate there will be a debate there will be a debate so at the end of the day BJP people are isolated and it is very wrong to say we are cornered I disagree the second thing is it is also very unfair to say that all news channels are out to get you I don't think that's the case at all at the end of the day I understand every Patrakar will also have a political leaning or every news channel also might have a political leaning but trust me most of them don't want to be branded and they will want to give equal space and I say this I have some very dear friends in the media and the journalism fraternity so I have seen that most of them try to keep their personal opinions out of the debate most of them do that and the last point I want to make is Anurag ji himself admits that neither I listen to anchor nor do I listen to other people I just keep saying and let me tell you he is not the only one there are a lot of people who follow this but that only adds to noise, not news that's noise, never news let me tell you how can I stop you you can tell me that you are not the only one I will answer you Anurag ji answer me then I will go look Charu ji said that I have so many thoughts that I get isolated there is no one to question them listen listen listen listen listen listen I just want to come into this and tell you that we are not debating now I want you to meet you three ask anchor how do you accept that we are talking that's not going to happen let me tell you I have a lot of thoughts I can't say Charu ji said that I get isolated from BJP I forget that there are BJP Anchor and the BJP their new a new a new a new a new a new and sometimes comes let's move to solutions how can we fix this now Shazia has joined us I mean you joined us when we are about to wrap up we just left it 10 minutes to go I just want to add one thing I have been hearing everything I want to say something about Anurag ji Anurag ji as you are saying there are political analysts there are also CSDS people there are journalists who are less they are more supporters of congress so it happens on both sides you are also saying it is happening on both sides but the end result is that it is noisy we are talking about how to control that noise and how to make our debates meaningful we have to make an hour for that I can't do it no now Anurag san we will try to answer some questions and not just do the blame thing one point that we believe is TRP and Revenues that these things are necessary for TRP revenue comes from TRP so maybe we should have another debate where we will bring in more advertisers brands into it when we say we will not sponsor the noise shows we will only sponsor when there is more meaningful content and we have seen some brands were old enough to take that stand last year when a particular channel was stuck in TRP controversy they did stop advertising they went out and hopefully said they will not advertise with this channel because of all the controversies around it and one thing that I want to ask Shazia see there are all things but is there also lack of political will because there is a lot that government can also control if the government says that you are not doing such debates means they cannot speak directly but you know there has to be there was an advisory issue recently but advisory is too soft to think advisory is that I have done it you are free to go ahead I asked to save myself but we have issued an advisory issue but advisory not really means anything in a country like India until you impose a fine until there is some kind of a punishment nobody moves so Shazia on the government side where are we lacking is what I want to ask if the same government go to do anything more there is no government advisory this would be this is the same country where the press would get together clamour and say that you know there is an imposition on us we are being muzzled I am just saying that you don't actually do these debates don't do provocative debates but if you do provocative debates means that communal clashes can happen in the country you have seen there is a sudden explosion of communal clashes in the last few years and they have been covered with very bare minimum journalistic ethics even when we used to read in journalism we used to say that if the rights are given we won't tell the name of the community now we will focus on it how many X, how many Y, how many Z there is a clear thing where there is scope for if there is a political will things can get better I mean I as a citizen do believe it and that is why the government is in power they have control they have their own ways of controlling things do you know when that incident happened when everybody was talking about the Maulana's and that particular incident when the COVID incident happened it was the government that intervened and said stop doing this and in fact it was Ajit Doval who had to actually go and meet Maulana said or whoever it was and say that you know you safely go back because every channel went up a few channels went up so you know to control every channel every channel passed yeah but the government cannot control every channel's agenda definitely not this is past what going forward you think can be done to improve this thing I don't think our government is ever interested in being like the congress will impose emergency and the channels themselves NPA themselves have said that we are perfectly capable of regulating ourselves so I don't think the government ever will interfere with the editorial policies of the channels and I think it will Rana Ji, you are listening very late you tell me Shazia is saying the government will never interfere with the editorial policies and the government will allow a free media to run so this means generally you are driving the government in general the government has its own media has its own and we never want the government to regulate the media we have been fighting this for a very long time our own media in which we decide things I will take only 2-3 minutes just like in this country every citizen has the right to make his own opinion and speak against it you have kept your party Mawlana has kept her party one leader is in another party tomorrow in another party Anurag is sitting here in the 2 leaders of their party in another party now I am going to speak against them they feel I am against against a party so they believe less against I believe more of a party but I think for the journalist you have decided you keep saying do not keep your opinion as per your own way but when time, situation and conditions change and challenges change then you have to change today's journalist talks about a better development then he becomes a leader I say for this country, for a society 2-3 developments are given by their own thinking and understanding this is better I am not saying that it is less or less than that but if I try to explain my opinion in this country then I become a leader of a party but the journalist of this country is speaking against a party or in the right of a party on the basis of his own understanding he is preparing a opinion and he wants to give it to his country because he thinks it is better so the previous conditions as you say we will make the rest of the decision, in India there are a lot of ways to come there are a lot of sources there are a lot of obstacles and a lot of people in India can study but they do not have knowledge people are not there if I have understood what you are saying right opinions are mixed with the news and context is mixed with content now we have 2 minutes left but I want to take a closing remark Charu if you are still there I think Charu because she was one of the first person to join I think she is now left Anurag sir tell us your closing remark I think we have not reached any conclusion but I don't know how the debate is that is why I like the channel see atleast I walked out with a clear heart that I tried my best to keep it not in anybody's favor if I complete your point then you said try with honesty remove honesty these days it is just an effort and everyone knows how the efforts are in that effort we also need to reach to the public we also need to try but we need to try with honesty other people have lost the word honesty what efforts do you have people know honesty is also subjective I am sure they are doing it Anurag is also a very subjective thing how do we want to conclude we have one minute to close everyone has their own opinion Anurag has his own opinion this is their opinion everyone's opinion is different I think the government even if it talks about freedom of press freedom of press and true freedom with editorial policy and freedom of people with editorial policy no matter whether they are opponents or supporters people should not talk to them or should not interfere as a guideline as a overall as a mark as a vision they can say but when when there is too much with the security of the country there should be a strict step but we have there has been an increase in sedition cases that have been filed and I think Because when it comes to security of the country, when there should be an incitement and abetment that, you know, let's go against the country and divisiveness because that is hate, that is disavowment, that is promotion of enmity. So I think that should be done with it because it is necessary. And you won't believe that the American embassy was there yesterday. There was an incitement there and I was talking about it. And they were in shock because there were some people there and there were many senior people there. And they were talking about Umar Khalid. You won't believe that. And I told them what Umar Khalid said about Afzal Guru and the senior people there. They were in shock that some people were pointing to Umar Khalid in India. That Afzal Guru was trying to save someone who was attacked in the parliament. They can't even think about it. I mean, whether they are Democrats or Republicans, I said that India is a country where we have discussed it. So I mean, we have gone as far as freedom of expression that Afzal's Gurus, Afzal's Gurus's soldiers, we are not ready to leave them or Supreme Court. So we have done something too much in our opposition that we are not ready to leave Supreme Court. I think it is best for the people to decide that they have come because we feel that some television channels news channels have also crossed that line of where you don't really know what is provocative and what is just a statement being. I don't think it is... Nazia, I am sorry. I am not able to... Nazia, you can take 10 minutes. I am trying to rectify this. My battery, my laptop... Shazia, please continue. Shazia, please continue. I am not able to stretch it beyond maybe 5 minutes or if it... Okay, then I will take the question. In case it's... Yes, yes, please. See, I can see you all but I am not able to hear you people. So I told my IT people to rectify it, please. Give me some time. Nazia, you can ask one more question. Actually, the time is something that we have run out of and I don't know if other panelists can stay back. I could have stayed back. It's just that my laptop battery is about to... Okay, I will ask one question after that. I will ask one question after that. I am just left with 10%. Before I log off, I really hope that we were able to find some answers through this debate today. Rana Ji, thank you so much for joining. You covered up for so many panelists to join late. Your views were very honest, very... You answered all of the questions which is something very rare these days. Anurad sir, thanks to you also. But you were the one who was telling me what you told me personally. Next time when we have a debate, I would want more solutions from you and beyond BJP bashing. Thank you, Nazia. Thank you, Erin. Rohil will continue because my laptop can actually shut down. No worries. Thank you so much. Thanks. Thank you, Nazia. My last question. We have another, say, four minutes, six minutes exactly. One by one. Starting with you, Nazia. Sometimes people say it's a fixed match between anchors and spokespersons. First of all, answer me. The TV debate that people are talking about has gone down to the level of anchors because of the spokespersons. No, it's not like that. And it can't be like that. One can be between anchors and one can be between spokespersons. But as Sudhanshu Bhai told you yesterday, different spokespersons come. Obviously, they decide a party. So it can't be like that. And let me tell you that in one channel, there are different anchors. There are different views of anchors. And there is something going on between them. There is a different party. There are different spokespersons. Sometimes in some people, there is something going on a different level. There is a different battle. So it's not so easy and easy to do it. So it's not like that. And there are a lot of... And there is a personality of anchors. There are some anchors who seriously talk about themselves. And they won't do anything. There are some spokespersons and some anchors. And there are some spokespersons who are very... Their personality is like that. They get happy on TV. They never stay in life. So they make a lot of noise. So there are a lot of factors. Simplify it so much. I can't keep anything. Okay. Anuraj Ji, your views. I think when there is a debate, everyone's own style. Everyone's own style. Everyone's own style. Everyone's own style. Everyone's own style. If I talk to the government, if it doesn't seem right to his policy, I try to talk to the public. But my friends will be my friends. If I don't like something, they will want to talk to the public about their style. Because they will have their own style. Our style is very simple. Both of us are very simple. If we are very simple, we can be very simple. If we are very simple, we can be very simple. We can be very simple. So that's our style. Okay, okay, okay, got it. Rana Ji, your thoughts? Well, my opinion is that the anchor and the panelists, if the debate is good, then the debate can be interesting. We are going to one side where the debate standard is falling. But I say that the topic of the debate, whatever it is, if you have prepared your content, then the debate can be interesting. Let me put it in an example. Today, the US President speaks directly to the Prime Minister of India. He has a virtual meeting and sends his own messenger. And that person is a deputy NSR. The world's most powerful country is that country. The fact is that India is standing in the present state of Russia and Ukraine. The direction of India will be the same as it will be in the world. But when we start discussing this, we forget that there was a time when Nixon had waited for Indira Gandhi for 45 minutes. And he went to talk to Bangladesh. Many people from Bangladesh are coming to our country. And there is a problem in the text. The President calls and says that you will not come out of Pakistan. My army does not follow Lahore. So we will stop giving tax. So we had a time when America's eyes were visible. Today is a date when we sit properly and we are in the thoughts of it. So now when the debate will be on what is the foreign policy of India or how the image of India has been created after Modi came. So if we cut the context and see India, then you can keep many things in different ways. But we will see the old context. Then you will see things that are better. The question is that the topic of the discussion, the debate of the debate, the debate about how beautiful you are and how ready you are. The heart can be any discussion, any discussion. The question comes to you that how you prepare yourself. Alright. Okay. Thank you so much for taking our time and hopefully the big event is in the evening. Many of you will be there. But thank you so much for joining us today on news next conference. Thank you. Robin, over to you. Thank you. Thank you so much to all the panelists here for taking their valuable time out. We truly appreciate you. Once again, Shazia Ji, Baudbhai Shukria, Anurag Ji, Baud Shukria. Rana was here. Thank you. Once again, Charu, Nazia, what a wonderful moderation. So to conclude the session, see, responsibility does not lie with just the anchors, the media houses or the spokesperson. I think that the responsibility comes with ownership. Whether it's advertisers, whether it's brands, whether it's media or political parties. At the end, it's all about the people. So whoever you think out of those 10 people, if eight people are working with an agenda or two are working on the right. So I think we support them as people, we support them as brands. We give them the voice and try to make their voice as strong as possible. And that could be the reason and that could be the answer to uplift the discourse in the media. So thank you so much once again for that wonderful session to the panel. And with this, we'll be moving on to our next session. This is going to be a keynote session and we are truly happy to invite on screen Supriya Prasad, News Director, Arts Turk, India Today and GNT. Mr. Prasad, thank you very much. He is joining us in two minutes. In the meantime, that's happening. Let me quickly thank once again, Adfactors PR for bringing to you exchange for media news next 2022, powered by Media Mantra. And we have some amazing sessions lined up for you. You will be joined with us till five o'clock and then we have the awards, the much anticipated and much awaited ENBA happening in the evening. I'm sure it's going to be a fantastic awards segment. So do join for that in the evening later on. And we're talking about a lot of interesting stuff today. We've had some fantastic sessions and continuing on that trend we have Mr. Prasad. He is well known for his candid conversations and of course, the wisdom that this man carries is known to all of us. So while he's setting up his screen and looking like he's ready for a vacation in Goa, I will hand over the screen to Mr. Prasad. Sir, thank you very much. Mr. Prasad, we've just returned from Switzerland. Maybe we'll go to Goa. Which is such a... I'm not going to Goa. This is a simple set. Thank you so much for joining us, Mr. Prasad. Our conversation is about the issues that are often said about journalists. So we'll take their answers from you directly from here. First of all, it is said that there is a huge pressure system in the newsroom. Sometimes people say that they are more political than journalist. What do you want to say about this when people talk like that? No, nothing like that. In the newsroom, it is only about the news. And whatever the news is about, it is about the discussion. It is about the focus. It is about the work. And political... Since our entire society is political, political issues are discussed. Political news is also discussed. But there is nothing like that in the newsroom. It is only about politicians. If there is a war environment, it is also about the war. Now, Russia is talking about the war in the newsroom. There are a lot of things like that in the newsroom. There is no such thing as politics in the newsroom. But what is right about having political pressure in the newsroom? How do you manage to toe that balance line when you touch upon a sensitive subject? As far as it is so far, there are two things to do. One is to balance a sensitive subject, to see it, to practice it again and again. That is a different thing. The newsroom does not have any balance. There is no balance in the newsroom. I have heard that it is right and I have seen that it is 100% pure. We do not see in the news that how to balance it. But it is about both parties. It is about how to balance it. It is about how to balance it. This is what we are trying to do. One thing is to keep it in front of people in the right way. I do not think about pressure. Especially when I work in the current system, I do not believe in the pressure of the government, the agency or the people. There is no pressure of anyone. This is a situation. People think that there is a lot of pressure on the media. I do not know about the rest. But there is no pressure of anyone in the current system. As far as it is so far, it works. It gives news from the beginning. As soon as the news is read, it is a channel of trust of ordinary people. So, every news of ordinary people's trust rises. For this, we do not have to practice or balance. We do not have to listen to anyone. One more thing is said that there is no news. There are views everywhere. Look, there is a format. You present views instead of news. What is your... If you look at the current system, we have only 2 hours of debate. We only give news. We have 22 hours of news. And the news is kept as news. We do not have any views. Obviously, there is a line of news. We show news on the line of news. But we do not give news by looking at the angle or by adding editorial material to the news. We do not give news by adding material. We only give news by adding news. We have only 2 debates here. And in those 2, which are called political parties, they are more connected. In that, we do not have such a role that we have any thoughts. Or we have to talk to people. Right. One more thing is said that there is a cherry picking of facts. You narrate the story. Only the dramatic parts of it, sensationalized parts are shown. But there is one more thing. There is a lot of negativity. There is a lot of focus. Some people say that good things are happening. Other things are also happening. I know you have a channel on that. But I have a question on the other 2 channels. Is there a focus on negative because it gets more dramatized? Is there something like that? No. This is also what people are thinking. Television is a visual medium. In that, people have to present such things. There is a negative positive in the society. There is no positive in the negative. There is news. There is news. And where there is good news, we show it. You said that our channel is on this. Good news today. We show it in that. But the thing is that what is happening in the society, whatever good news is happening, whatever bad news is happening, we will show the news. But some people are thinking that why did you show this, why didn't you show this, why didn't you show this, why didn't you show this. All these things are far away. I often say that the media should realize these things. Some people will keep on thinking about what you are thinking. They will keep on telling you what you are thinking. But the real issue is that as much news has been broken on all the channels, as much news I have revealed, all the TV channels have not done it. It is not like anything else, whatever big news is there, whatever big news is there, all the big news has not been broken on all the TV channels. And all the TV channels have been given it. So on the TV channels, whatever big news is there, whatever big news is there, all the TV channels have to be shown. Why do you see it as a negative positive news? Or do you want to dramatize something? People say that they have shown this, that they have shown this. This is a television medium. People can present something through visuals. And the visuals are good, what is shown, what is the question in people's mind is it not possible that you have shown this. I sometimes laugh at people saying that this is only being done for TRP while the last 1.5 years were not being done for TRP. People still say that it is being done for TRP. This is happening for TRP. Everything is not done for TRP. The most important news in the TV is related to common people. Common people are aware of common people. If you look at the past then the past whether it is a matter of demand or any issue, whether it is a matter of pollution or a matter of power cut then no news is left behind. And the past keeps everything free. But in this, all the TV channels have to present things in that way. This is the real medium. You have to tell the news that this is happening and this is happening. I don't think that this is wrong. Every place is polluted. Some people are like this in every field, in every profession some are bad people, some are bad people, some are bad people, they cannot be an example. Some people show the news and some don't. If you don't show the news then I agree. Right. I have a colleague who is my relative and he is also here but I will ask a question and then I will go to him. There is one more thing whenever you present news like BBC, CNN, there is so much of some people are saying that this is entertainment news. Anything is happening and the headlines are breaking I mean where is the entertainment news? I mean BBC and CNN are wrong. Their lifestyle is different and their attitude is different. In fact we are different from people here there is no such thing and the song is not like there is so much going on here If you see the news then the news is going on but I mean I am telling you I am not happy with all these things you can see at least 5-10% of entertainment and especially I have shown a lot of channels like we have TV channels and I am telling why should not be shown the program should be shown people are interested see how fast the OTT is people should know who is our star why should not be shown it is a visual medium there is a good picture good visuals are coming with your star Ranveer is coming it should be shown although it is in this time I believe it should be shown why should not be shown people used to read in the newspaper newspapers always published such news there was a photo if you want to see people it should be shown people can see from their eyes what is wrong in that I don't think Mr. Pankaj would you like to ask something Good afternoon sir my friend we have been using fake news for a long time all these ways we have made PIV fact check and many other places but despite this we are not able to use fake news so what do you think how can we use it another question as you have seen after a long time TRP has started but every new channel has its own differences some say it should be some say it should not be but Vivaad is not stopping till long time so let's see there is no doubt in India we have made an anti-fake news we do fact check it is difficult to authorize in the world but this is a problem and especially through social media many things are spread in this way that is why we have talked about this in India especially before spreading the news we should properly check that the news is going well we have seen many times in war many people are showing any news but we have taken care that it should not be spread we should take care of this on this we should be prepared and alert people that anything can come any fake video any fake picture so we try we can guarantee 100% then we try that 99.9% we are left with it your second question about TRP I think TRP should be and TRP is a system when you live in a system TRP is a system what you are doing so you should be good with TRP any system there are loopholes there are some problems there are some changes there are some changes these things are going on and this process will continue but for this we should not I don't believe this I believe that TRP should be a system 100% accurate system should be created whatever loopholes changes or changes should be done we believe this thank you yes yes one more thing there is a culture in newsroom there is a culture for becoming number one it's not that you become number one or whatever the ranking is just because maybe you present it in a certain way this is a successful culture if I ask you how do you make that culture in newsroom how do you ensure that the newsroom stays ahead what are the elements there is no formula I will tell you there is a formula but till today there is no number one there is a lot of effort and a lot of changes I believe that if you keep changing yourself with time this is the most important factor that you don't change yourself with time so when you change according to the time you will understand things and keep that and for that credibility is very important as I said if we are still fighting with fake news then you need credibility is very important no matter what you do no matter what you do for that I believe people these are two very important things and we try to make sure that our news is good people have faith in our news people have come here to see the news in the right way right right one more thing how do you ensure when there is an election or when there are sensitive things at that time whether it is going in someone's favour or not so how do you handle such situations editorially situations look this situation is still going on when everyone wants to have elections people don't want to listen to their own opinion someone feels bad but when it comes to our work we have to show it we don't care whether elections are going on or who will benefit from our news we don't worry about these things we think this is news and people should know this is important news and without any agenda the purpose is we don't work for anyone our motive is to show this news we try to show it we try to show it we don't care who will benefit who will be affected and people still have faith in this because it is important for people what is news no one has gone there nothing happens some people we have some system people who work for foreign these things as I told you before they are exceptional but in any form I have been working since last 25 years since today I am working in this system I have seen it as it used to be and all parties they have so many requests that they are rallying me show it to them they don't put pressure on them I have written that it is natural if they want to do it it is different but the system there is no pressure on you there is no pressure on you I can say this with guarantee I have never said you do this I have never said I have never said people think that it is our rally show it to them show it to them it is also a guarantee it is a natural request that they do it but no one has ever said why you have done this why you have not done this yes it is important that you do such stories sometimes you have to accept some people do this but I don't think there is any pressure there is no pressure for any system I don't think there is any pressure on media I will ask a question after that journalism with impact that is the mission that is what we all strive to be in the last 4-5 months in the last 6 months what stories or news stories will you tell and what impact will you tell no we have every day every month we do 4-5 stories which is the impact which is the government which is the government when we saw the story after that the government told us about the news we saw the news of Rajasthan we saw the news of Rajasthan we saw it in UP people were not getting salary people were not getting salary there are many such news the government we show the news we see the impact of our news the government I saw I saw this it is the impact Mr. Pankaj, do you have any question for sir? no sir I was asking the new generation will they get any message that you have achieved so the new generation wants to move forward what do you want to say for them? I always say I feel that people should work hard and there shouldn't be any short cut we are continuing this session till 30th no short cut short cut I will tell you for anyone any wrong way any form any person no short cut you can't make it permanent that's why you should work hard journalism is a revolution revolution you have responsibility think about it think about it if you are a businessman then you should become a reporter channel head you shouldn't think like that you will get everything and I can guarantee that you are my pride no one can stop you for this you don't need any short cut you don't need any short cut you don't need any chanchagali you don't need any brother or sister nothing comes from here everything is on the market everything is visible in the television if you have talent then it will be visible that's why you should work hard you have your goals how you want to move forward what you want to do you will definitely be successful we are continuing our debate that's what I wanted to say we have another 15-20 minutes then we will wrap it up yes Pankaj ji there is a small question there are many channels in the market and every channel claims to be number one there are many there are many channels but till date there has been a number one there are three reasons there is a number one and they claim to be number one no no there is no claim there are two types of claims number one when the TRP is coming then the number one is on the basis of TRP and whenever that TRP comes then it is on the basis of TRP whatever channel is number one then channel number one claims to be number one in that some people by removing some things we are number one in this we call ourselves number one in this one but those things do not matter they matter the trust of the public and who do you think is the number one the real number one is the trust of the people and I think in this matter there is no channel that's why there is a number one even now it is on the basis of TRP you can go to any system for the news the meaning of the news is the basis if you want to see the news then it is on the basis of TRP that's why the basis of TRP and the basis of TRP is number one from the last 22 years it is not a matter of one or two weeks it is successful I have told you trust and trust there is no rocket science it is a very simple thing if you do it in the right way and in the right way then you will be 100% successful without any of it any channel to see the news if you give it in the right way then you will be 100% successful Thank you Mr. Pankaj, Mr. Vikas wants to join us please help him until then I want to ask Mr. Supyaj you told us that you are a stringer journalist this is your role if I am right this is how you have grown in this field and when journalists take on management roles what is the first thing that a journalist has a conflicted role can he keep his journalism alive besides being a manager at the same time no I don't see any conflict in this this is not right our role is our editorial role I am an editorial head so my role is an editorial role there is no conflict our work to show the news there is no conflict for that I don't have any management there is no system to interfere there are no other things that are part of our system there is no system that is independent we decide what is right we decide there is no conflict we are managers we have a certain team that needs to be led we need to manage this team this is our job we need to manage this team we need to see if everyone is getting a chance or not we need to deliver things this is our job I want to ask you this is my personal favourite the pressure of newsroom is different when you have news break and television news there is another level instant number one the fastest in this you look so calm and composed are there moments when you are so high that it becomes very tough in such situations how do you handle a question about your leadership how will you define your leadership I have never thought of anything like this I work with other producers I also work with the system neither do I consider myself as a boss nor do I work separately I work with the team and when I was a producer I used to work like this I am a new director I work with the team that is why I never understood myself how I became different presser is important sometimes you get news sometimes you get visual sometimes you break other news you get irritation you get pressure you create pressure on the team what happened sometimes it happens but it happens that we work in a peaceful environment we work in a peaceful environment people work and deliver because when the team delivers you don't need a lot of money when you are doing well it is good our 40 under 40 in which you were in the jury we identify new journalists promising journalists there are two things one is that some people who leave the journalism school in an ideal setup they have an ideal concept and the practice they see on TV it is completely different to such students they don't know what they read and what they see they feel they are very different what would you like to say to such people if they want to take up journalism also it is high pressure it is not as like a startup they can burn the money what do you have to tell to people who are looking at journalism as I said before you should not think that you got an award it is fine you should not get awards you should not let them think that you got an award I have done a great job no one should think television or any medium that you have done before it has no value in today's time as I have done 20 years ago and 5 years ago it doesn't matter you have to deliver daily on TV or on TV you have to perform daily Birat Kohli made a century it doesn't mean that you can't make a century you have to leave the captaincy when you are in journalism you won't get an award you have become a great journalist and you think that you got an award it is fine it motivates you you get a kick you should think better you should work harder you should set the goal of your life which direction do you want to go you can't do everything you can't be an anchor you can't be a reporter you can't be a producer you can decide what you want to do what direction do you want to go and since the beginning I never wanted to be an anchor I never wanted to be a reporter I used to work on the desk I used to work on the desk I used to work on the desk so it is not like there is no big or small work I have done everything do your work do whatever you want if you can do it you should decide what work you can do what is your interest another question that is good news that you have taken a step you have taken a step please accept our audience what are your responses what are the new things on that channel. What all has been planned on that channel? The biggest challenge of that channel was to give confidence to our team. To give confidence to our team that we can do something like this. I mean, the team was like, I don't know what will happen, if we are able to do good or not. If we are able to see good news or not, if people like bad news, then it is a challenge for us. But we then prepared a team and forced the team. Because we are used to being in news, that it is 5.30 in the morning, show it to the world, it is done, it is done. The new generation of us, whatever I have prepared for journalism, whatever work I have done in the TV channel, there is a framework in his mind, he thinks what is the news, he has made it in his mind that this is news, this is news. So now it was a big challenge to leave that news and show it to the world. For example, let's assume that there was an accident in Ropey, people said that what will we do in this, now the channels are showing Ropey. Now we are doing good news in this. We were in relief work, those who saved people, we did a story on that. So now our team is ready in that way, which takes out good from it. The good that comes out of it, it takes out that yes, this is good news. So first it was very difficult to prepare the team. The biggest challenge was to prepare the team, to bring the framework in the team's mind, to tell that yes, good news is today. And after that, now I will say, it has been more than 6 months since the channel started. And now I feel that we got a better response than expected. People have come a lot, people have liked it. And the most important thing is that we show the news in it. We have fast news as well. People are watching our news. And we show a lot of programs in it. We show programs on religion. And by showing positive news, people liked it a lot. This is a different kind of experiment, where in the time of Corona, when people had a lot of negativity, and when all kinds of negative news were coming, all kinds of news were coming to die from Corona, and at that time, when we did a clip of this channel, how to make this channel different, so that when people sit at home and watch it with the whole family, without any stress, they will feel that it is very good. It is a really good channel. Mr. Pankaj, do you want to ask anything? I have two more questions, then we will wrap up. Sir, as you said, we took a good news studio for good news. And we tell our friends that we show all the good news. So, only for good news, people will see it differently. The person who wants to see good news, will watch the good news studio. And the person who wants to see all the good news, will watch the other channel. Absolutely. Good news today is a channel based on a concept. In the good news channel, there is a good and different way of doing things. What is important is that until today, the biggest news of the country, can't be different from the news of the past. I mean, if there is no big news, then it is a matter of the past. It is a desire of people from the past to see the news of the past, to see the future of the past. So, we have started a good news studio because there is a different way of showing positive news. There are many good things in the society that we can show in the past. We will try to show the good news in the GNT. We will show the good news to those people in the future. There are many good people in the society. We saw the stories in such a way and the programme, we thought, you know, there are so many good people who are doing good work. It is a good start for society. So, I feel that the good news is working in this matter. Yes. Right. One more thing is about Trolls, it's a reality nowadays. How do you handle criticism? What kind of criticism? People point out that they have done something wrong. We all do, this party, this party, this party, that party, this party, that party. Left, right, centre, all of them do our Aluchna. I think we are doing the right thing. That is why I am the strength of Aluchna, I have the strength to live and to live. There should be Aluchna, Aluchna is bad, you should listen to it. Right, right, right. One more thing is about Aluchna. Sometimes you feel that what they are saying is right, not that Aluchna is just a fake Aluchna. Sometimes Aluchna will learn what they said is right. One more thing, Supriya Ji. I want to bring in one more question from another person who is here. I am sorry, Abhijit Ji. Okay, he is not one to pass. Okay, final two questions I have Supriya Ji for you. One is digital integration. Digital has a lot of influence on TV, news is coming from Twitter, a lot of sources are coming. There is a compulsion on journalists to show their speed or facts at the same time. How do you make sure that the speed of the news is also about the credibility of the news? We have told that we have made that system. We have told that every news should be reported in 5-5 minutes. But until it is verified, we try not to run it. And that is why we will see the current record. So 99.9% accuracy is there. 0.1% we have also made a mistake. We have also run a news like this. But we also try to check the news completely. This is our assignment team. The input team is a trend for this. And the whole process is the same. There are all the filters. After 3-4 filters, the news is broadcasted here. So we ensure that the news comes in the right way. One small question from me. Like how much has the newsroom changed since Corona last year? And the other news collecting procedure. Like the first person used to go to the reporter. He used to sit, bring 2-4 covers. And now that the cable is going, he is talking from far away in Corona. He is trying to get more information on the phone. So now the news is not available in that experience. Is there any effect on it? Look, Corona has definitely affected the society. So it has affected the newsroom as well. But the most important thing about our time is that our reporters, they put their lives on the brink of their lives. As you can see, our 10-12 teams have always been working outside. They were working outside. They were all in the field. And we never let our viewers see that we are not able to show this news because of Corona. Our reporters are not able to go there. Our reporters are working outside. All of us. Every kind of Corona coverage, whether it is going to be in ISU or outside, they have shown all the news. So yes, it is necessary that when the time came in our newsroom, 40-50% of the people were COVID-19, all of them were ill. Still, the few of us, they did it with full awareness. I tried to do it so that the viewers don't have to worry about it. And our attempt is that no matter what happens from behind, but when we work, when we go there, the viewers don't realize it. They don't know it. And let me give you an example. Today is the 30th of November. And a year ago, our friend, Roy Sardana, left us and went away. And you can understand, in his sorrow, in his sorrow, we were very angry with him. We were very sad. We were very sad. The old newsroom was sad. We couldn't work. But after that, everyone delivered the news and presented the news in the same way, kept the news in the same way. Because after my life, after my retirement, the SPC said, we thought about the news. So that the viewers, okay, our sorrow, our pain, and the viewers, we had to influence the viewers. There was a small thing, the one who was talking about the print, then the TV came, then the digital came. Now, how do you think in the future, how will it be? The presence of digital is more than that. From the media, people can watch the news at different times, at different places, in any corner of the world. People can watch the news on TV, in any corner of the world. This is their plus point. This is the power of digital. And that's why in the near future, the digital will be more important. I think. But everyone is in their place. The TV will be in their place. When the TV is coming, the news will be over. The news is not over. People watch TV and watch digital. This is a good thing. The TV will continue to be made. The TV will be over and the digital will come. People will watch the TV and the news will be there. The media will change. The sector boss can watch the news on his mobile. But it won't happen that people won't watch the TV or stop watching the news. Next speaker is already here. Thank you. Supriyaji, thank you so much for joining us on this wonderful conversation on news next or evening. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you once again to all the gentlemen on the screen and I can see another distinguished gentleman joining us just now. Shashi Sinha is with us. CEO, IPG, Media Brands, Indian Chairman at Park India. Thank you very much for joining EPRM 2022 news next edition. And of course we'd also like to invite on screen Mr. Navel Ahuja co-founder. Navel is going to join us at 340 exactly. Till then I'm going to have a conversation because he just landed from Mumbai and started and I'll take it from him. Thank you. Shashi sir, thank you so much for joining us. This is news next. We call it the festival of news. We have the ecosystem here. It's been going on for the last three days at least and we have done a lot of conversations and today we have one more with you which is very critical. I want to begin by asking you it's been a month being the chairman of Park and dealing with the news industry some thoughts how has this month been and very early days for a variety of reasons since I was in Park I was not too keen to get on because I thought others should do it but when people in the ecosystem are board members I also had thoughts for the long haul which probably would affect news also reasonably well. One was what we are doing with 45,000 homes and there were 4 to 5 individuals per home which is 2 lakh people but we thought that there is a large ecosystem in terms of the DTH operators and there are lakhs and lakhs of people there and it's easy to get the data so if we work towards the DTH operators to get a return path which is a possibility and therefore their data will enhance and add to what Park is doing so of course there are lots of challenges in terms of technology and stuff like that that was one thought which I thought if we work in the next 6 to 8 months we can make that happen with everyone's support the DTH operators, the Park team then I think not only will data become a lot more robust it already is pretty good but it will become a lot more robust and also we get all segments of society because just now the way the button pressing behaviour is you need particular segments to also join in so I thought that was one big initiative which you could do. The second one which I thought is that today digital has become very important TV of course is very relevant but I thought digital has become important and while I know the parts are different the CPMs are different for both the medium but Park has worked on the back end for a long time on putting out TV plus digital data so that I think is not a technology issue Park I don't know most people may or may not know is already running a digital panel a TV plus digital panel for 12,000 homes but digital is very small and segmented so digital cannot be measured just to have a sample because of the fragmentation you need sensors so Park has almost been ready the back end is just a matter of getting it in place and getting on with the measurement so that's another challenge but that requires industry support there are lots of other challenges like how to ensure there is no parts coming in all that is an issue so I think these are the two big initiatives that I thought of it but what happened was Rohail that sorry to take some time so those are the long term thoughts that I decided but there is something called the year and now fortunately or unfortunately my technique over coincided with the new ratings coming out the rolling out after almost the 14-15 month gap they came out so obviously there were lots of challenges with that lots of questions because you suddenly found ranking changing so people had lots of questions and therefore we have been putting the data under stress to figure out with it all as well and all so that is happening parallel so I think like any business there is a year and now which in the news case is the news getting coming up because we are doing rolling out which is for the first time so there are lots of details being worked out is the rolling right and all that and obviously what is the result of that and of course there was a European war all the ratings have gone up all the news ratings have gone up across channels so I think these are the two broad strokes one is in the here and now but there is a lot of happened in the last 30 days or 20 days there was this happening this conversation always about the future of TV in a world where digital is becoming a bigger voice and a bigger conversation I mean of course you have spoken about in the past but for our viewers today who have joined us what would you say what is the future of TV for advertising in a digital in a world that is like going largely digital so I will say this to you and that is see today firstly the larger point being made is because of the structure in this country you know because of government reasons and even otherwise competitive reasons subscribers don't pay for content 80% of the revenue which comes with the TV or digital comes in from advertising advertising is paying for the content so any growth of the system whether it is with your TV or digital will come from the fact if subscribers start paying substantial amount as in the world for example sports I have been talking about it but sports primarily subscription or at least 50% subscription in many markets in India it is all advertising so my thinking is that follows because of this always the burden will be on advertising and the burden is advertising then always the existing medium is supported therefore TV CPMs are very high because TVMs still remain a mass medium and in many markets in the world where digital is overtaken TV still plays a strong role so there will be always if I say lack of monetization of digital so CPMs will always be low and that will never make it profitable so in that context I think TV has a lot of juice left in it is my submission lot of juice left in TV I want to touch back on the bath part the concerns that were raised earlier to make it more holistic to make sure that it reflects every conversation in the new the new the new in the new setup that we have now what were the bigger challenges that you saw have been addressed I have seen I have seen a fair deal of data and because my nature is I get hands on if I am not convinced I have seen a lot of stuff in the last three weeks or so I have been there probably every Friday I land up and I see some stuff obviously I do only with the process of the rating that is not my carry but I see postfactor a lot of stuff so there are two things I want to call out one is the news is sensitive the data is sensitive for example without giving too much data away of course elections it will be obvious but even as recent as the problem in Delhi, Thiraj and Delhi the data pictured up so you could see Sunday a spike coming up in news and ask not to question whether what content is the role that you see and you have seen across the board the data picture it up the second thing was the instability of the data that you know the data so to that extent the 4 week rolling average is suppressing the instability I think it has become a lot more stable the downside is that this is the first time 4 week rolling average is coming out so first but clusters could analyze very well they could see their data they could see competition data now the rolling has taken away they will take some time to build that capability so the downside is there are a lot of acts in the market but there are a lot of doubts in the market they are not able to see the benefit they could see the clarity and the train were trained everyone is trained to see the data in a particular way so I think those are the problems where we come from I am seeing the unrolled and the rolled I do a spot check and I see to a great extent of course there is a separate matter of channel tracking changing that is a separate discussion happening it is a parallel track but how can this tracking change that is a separate thing that is for us not to discuss so I think yes people have to get used to the idea of rolling then they bid up the learning girls when we start giving out some high point unrolled data then they will compare and then come to the conclusions so that will happen so this is a national journey I mean the journey just started but at the same time all the rough edges will get to the doubt I will leave these questions to Mr. Ahuja who is joining us in the next 5 minutes but I want to ask you another question which is about media spends how it has after Covid of course a lot has come back and things have improved things are very different well how do you read that shift and what is the kind of growth from here on in your view so two things one is spends have been under pressure so I am not sure whether it will be still back in 2019 because it may not affect news but on overall TV news is about 8-10% of the total TV ads but if you look at if you look at total media spends because of this whole problem started in November December just accelerated it but the whole problem which was due to commodity prices going up all prices problem in transport there is huge cost of one-up and transportation across the world so all this led to big problem in pricing and SMCG is which are mainstream of our they started pulling back reducing advertising so I see it is a tough time to answer your question TV versus digital that is what you alluded to is digital spends digital in performance because in covid times people move focus on performance as on brand building so that would have gone up but just if you look at pure brand building spends and TV plus digital I don't think in my personal opinion digital still not passed TV yet so people say that overall digital but that is mainly because of performance and performance is very difficult to measure and we do have a lot of performance but for us tough means not as bad as covid was but it is going to be careful and watchful but after that we have a strong growth story so finally we are a part of the GDP so growth will come we will gain great on that note Mr. Ahuja is here and thank you for joining us and over to you thank you Rohil Mr. Sinha good to see you thanks for doing this for us today and you know it's been almost a month since you took over as bar chairman I'll get right into it and my first question to you is what is this one month what Rohil asked me so I just quickly repeat so I said you know I had come in with plans this in the long run so I just paraphrased what I just said so you know bar is something which is well as much as you want to plan for the future you also looking at today every Thursday rather so the plan was to look at RPD to spend on the data in the next 6 months the plan was to look at TVPRO these are two part issues I thought but I think just now we have subsumed on what's happening on a week to week basis on ratings news ratings just started so with the rolling average people have to get used to the rolling averages so there are some actually changes on the rolling average side so that is taking a lot of the bar teams time and therefore naturally mine and also we are totally behaving what is the the you know IPL as you know is different from where it was last year so some big things which are here and now with the teams examining obviously with the examining I have a role to play since today is you know more about news as you know we have our news broadcasting awards in the evening the day conferences news next which is about the news television industry your role in bar is you know it's not about the news industry alone it's a lot many more a lot of people you know remind us that the news genre is you know one part a 10% part of the overall you know viewership but I'll focus most of the conversation on the news part of bar let me ask you for you know at the peril of reiteration last you know two years almost one and a half years news ratings were off they have now restarted tell us in just two three points perhaps what are the new things that bar has done in these one and a half years while you know the ratings were off and you know systems were being recalibrated and things were being reset so there are three four things one on the back end and one on the front end so the back end you see because of covid you know bar has a mandate that they have to churn the planet 25% for variety of reasons you know for example with panel fatigue comes in and but yet you have to maintain a consistency also you can't have a perfect churn so what really 25% so bar now and that's a you know covid times churning a panel is not that easy that becomes more difficult how do you go into home and how do you get them to allow you to explain to them what meter is all about so I think we have started the process we also have to be mindful that they can't be too dramatic a change if you churn the page too rapidly then they will run the risk of having too much fluctuation so I think on the back end that's been the biggest challenge is they've done I mean it's also say since I've got this platform that you know bar has not spoken and probably is right for Nakul and Teri to speak about it but there are a lot of technology initiatives they've taken in this pandemic and I think they will talk about it but there's some great stuff especially on the motor parking side which I've seen coming on the front end I think the biggest thing on the front end where people don't realize you see you know when the tech coincidentally I decided to run the tech on that time and now I'm seeing the effort put in my back so when you do the rolling averages rolling average is not too difficult but to do rolling averages along with the data on the same software which is not unrolled for example all the GEC is unrolled like star and ZN this thing that is very tough all the people in the world who normally do a software design from this company in Portugal now data but all of them refuse so for the bar team to pull this up you know to put it out and pull it out I think it's a wonderful achievement I mean people don't give credit because we're so caught up with the here and now and now ratings but it's a remarkable achievement to ensure that on one platform because one of the big demands of the news broadcasters was that we shouldn't be treated in isolation we should be just secondary citizens we should be in the rain software so that planners can see everything together so that's a remarkable achievement no one else in the world has done this there you have some channels so I think that's a big achievement and that's what just come out so I think this is what I want to call out I will also now come to some of the contentious issues the ratings have restarted and a lot of industry constituents have been looking forward to that but exchange for media itself reported few weeks back about some of the concerns one of the the largest industry body which is the NBDA has raised bar with regards to a lot of pointers in the ratings we haven't seen any formal response from bar but if you have some views on the concerns they've raised what is the response there are 3-4 things the broad concerns are in the area of broad concerns in the area of you know what they were used to seeing unrolled data and in the rolling process are things changing and is there a scope for any statistical error coming in that's one so that's the broad area and putting under a box and the other ranking change some rankings have changed third is there's a dramatic increase in reach in the beginning so our whole thing is that so let me answer the last one first the easiest to answer when we launched the ratings the overall genre went up because so much happening outside the war and stuff like that but overall GRBs went up in the news reach went up and that happened for 3-4 weeks and now started dropping because that was the war so that was stabilized so those fears of people that you know why is reach going up so dramatically and you know what we do whenever you see such kind of events our teams don't apply we have an outlier logic we don't apply the outlier which is told to the constituents but problem no one knows in detail so now we have started applying the outliers the regions are coming in so there's a lot more standard and stability on that front that's one the second chapter is that you know which actually even when I took on I was concerned was the gap between unrolled and rolled are there any loopholes there so and I don't want to go into too much of a study so there may be minor issues but broadly speaking I've seen a lot of unrolled data and rolled data the team has shown to me and I think Barkh is pretty consistent there's no problem there the third thing is that channel rankings channel rankings is something you know we are not a content exporter so why have channel rankings changed though channel rankings can change for 2-3 reasons are there is some kind of you know content strategy or something in place which is what we will or there's some infiltration now my point is and which I said and the team Nakul has said and so why and where this forum and to everyone in any broadcaster whether it's a video or anyone listen we open any query which comes to us any hypothesis we are testing and whatever we will test we will respond to we will come back to you now suffice it to say not too much of detail some some trends we are seeing and which we are rectifying you know whatever so I just want to show you when you're the audience through your thing forum that so far we have not seen anything which is in terms of our whole we do a lot of back checks we do a lot of stuff we are doing I won't go into too much detail it's not fair to go into too much detail but the key constituents of variance bodies know what we are doing so the one thing is we have been absolutely transparent with the key constituents we are engaging them a lot of the bulk team's time is going in that information so even mine so the dialogue is on everything we are sharing with me absolutely transparent as possible so and whatever we are finding or not finding we are sharing and reporting so obviously you know if I am known to be candid their public positions and postures people take and they know what the reality is so I think we will be very direct what I can promise you see that we will and the bulk team also double the same to everyone that we will be absolutely transparent it doesn't change from you know on role to role data for moving out which is so everything you throw at us we will answer but throw a logic to us throw something which you see in hypothesis you know so that's what we are doing so I have purposely answered the question I can assure you doing a lot I have answered in a more macro general manner I think the specifics but I can assure you if you talk individually to some of the members you alluded to the letters which came to us they will also say the same thing they will reiterate that we are being transparent and discussing everything possible I think transparency is one very big refreshing change and we hope to see more and more of that as we move along especially big change from the some of the you know going on in the with bark I want to pick you up on a couple of things which are slightly technical in nature I think this outlier thing has been a very big bone of contention not just now but even you know earlier three four years back ever since bark has been operating and you know you as you mentioned you were also head of the techcom of bark for many years before you took on the role of the chairman give us a sense for our viewers to understand you know how does this outlier system work and you know what is the kind of fine tuning that has been done to make sure that there is no kind of skewed absolute there was there were processes in put in place after the problems happened in 2017 discovered in 2019 and now it's completely automated it's not manual to the extent that all of us are scared to say you know so it's a completely process we have been trained you know and you know your audience is very smart they will understand what I will say see the current issues which are rising are not outlier what is outlier there outlier primarily picks up overstated view of behavior someone has left his TV on and gone away from the room and is watching the news for over to any channel for two hours or whatever when you know it's not possible so the outlier picks it so what in bark term is called the ATS the time spent you know that's what it picks up and that is not now the ratings are stable after the first two three weeks the time spent on ATS is not really the problem the whole problem is coming the reach has gone up and some channels reach is you know historically when some channels are seen as strong in reach and others are not and now that's flipped or other cut up on the reach that's the thing and I will suffice it to say that's a large scale thing so you know and I'm saying it as directly as possible it's also as you see this is a small genre not to take away anything from the genre but it is 8 to 10% genre in Hindi news within that is 6 to 7% so a lot of stuff happens in distribution strategies today India is a semi-organized market on distribution and a lot of distribution strategies don't play you know and that so we are the messengers of bark so I'm not saying that we will not examine like I said to you anything within bark we are happy to examine and we will do the speed but I also feel there's a lot happening on the distribution front which smart people understand you know distribution is something for a genre like this for any genre but especially for this genre is something different and that's what probably my personal summary not in bark genre but that's what is happening that's what is playing out one of the associated issues with this has been you know again a long-standing issue of landing pages and we've had you know PRAI intervention in the matter party is going to court there's a supreme court order which is as of date which is still operational as far as landing pages is concerned from bark with regards to landing pages oh thank you for asking this question thank you for asking this question so firstly at this point in time there is a guidance from TRI on landing pages the court is not already at is what I'm told still there's a stay on that time it's an interim order so that's the first point so therefore broadcasters from both sides of the spectrum come to us say you must do something about landing pages and you know others say why should you do the court in the middle let me tell you our stance and this is for the TV industry it affects newsletters more but landing pages affect I mean they're a problem we're looking at the larger industry so the first thing is and I say this on record and if you have faith in believing me one day if you present that bark is created by the landing page algorithm the algorithm is created and I see it's a very very well designed algorithm it's a fabulous algorithm the logic is that I'm sure any anywhere presented in the world as a research paper hands down I was involved in it you're back it's fabulous and I really believe it's fabulous you know having said that the algorithm is designed in a particular way the algorithm is on two chapters it has two inputs one input it is designed not to hurt it is to it is to take away the sampling of little landing pages it is not to take away the viewership from the landing pages and this is a fine restriction people don't make out let me give you a contest a lot of advertisers said listen it's like doing window display in shop if you're doing window display for unfollowing is fine but if you need to purchase we have a what's the problem so the same thing is applied here that if that landing page is needing to sustain viewership so for example I'm not watching IPI but I see a landing page of IPI suddenly says wow cricket is all about fashion and I'm not looking for whatever period 2 hours or 3 hours there's nothing wrong with that genuine viewership but if landing page is you know you're flicking channels you're going from one channel to another and you see a landing page and then you pause and that's caught that may be not that's may not be studied viewership so the algorithm is designed to capture landing pages and there's a time set and which is like with the board's permission the board has decided that this is what pursues and I will not mention on screen my spend is but there's a figure to it so we are capturing that the second thing is you know there's also a formula which we apply and if someone does landing page in some small town beyond the point that we cannot say if someone does massive landing page there will be an impact because if that translates into regular viewership it will be sold out so it's for the board to decide you just cannot you have to knock off all viewership of landing pages that's not what is happening so I'm using this to clarify that the sampling the incident part of the landing page is being caught the regular viewing is happening so it's in two parts and that there's a formula with the board is approved this is where it is so you think the formula is enough to assuage the you know concerns of so I'll tell you so now this is something the board is and I'm saying to strong people I was involved nothing because those who are doing landing pages they say why are you applying a formula if the board has not ruled on it here I have said but here is not the thing that is important so why are you applying a formula in the first place those who are doing and you know those who are not doing landing pages are saying you know even that limit even that thing the people are catching more we are in the middle that we try to protect the TV industry because at one level TV viewership is going down to ensure that whatever viewership is generally it's like like in my field example if you know I did two channels and I saw a landing page on YPL and I came on to YPL and I watched the three hours that genuine viewership so this is the contentious issue that you know you will never swatch people because people are polarized on both sides of the spectrum yeah and it's a as you rightly said if there is a landing page and a viewer ends up being there and then ends up watching that program for a long period of time it is genuine viewership you cannot just you know discount it and you know count it as an outlier so landing page in that sense is a tricky issue the only thing that you know skews the entire equation is that landing pages require investment of money and money muscle then plays a very big part in you know sort of picking that viewership let me come to can I take that on that point because you know large advertisers said listen Hindustani were said and Romantic Indians when the board that they come you know they said listen we have built a infuency and we've gone so big when we do short displays come to some other place you can't do short displays you can't do run schemes you can't do this this is a great practice so you are two ways of looking at the same thing not that I am defending it but I am saying we are here two sides of the coin at any point in time yes absolutely I mean HUL has an X budget and another pair has lesser budget then HUL of course naturally has an advantage and that advantage is earned in the one in the marketplace there is nothing wrong about that absolutely right let me now come to another you know part of the entire equation and there are 2-3 aspects that I will discuss with you you know Barg Chairman being part of Barg is a sort of honorary job that you do for the industry it's a human service you do for the industry you run a large advertising business you are the head of IPG in India one of the top advertising businesses you do a lot of conversations with clients about you know investment across various media vehicles and news is also an important thing now if you were to trace back what's happened in the news domain especially with regards to rating in the last 2 years and where we are today what are the kind of conversations you are having with clients what are the kind of conversations clients are having with you with regards to investment in the news domain especially television news as the viewpoint change as compared to how it was 2 years back and I will qualify this question why I ask this is that a lot of view around is about news being a function of you know 3 sort of pillars one is obviously ratings the other 2 are importantly perception and content right ratings is not the be all and all unlike you know many other media properties news is slightly different so what are the kind of conversations you had with clients which throw some light on you know what's happened in this domain. Thank you for asking this question it's a very important question and I will use this opportunity through your platform to talk about this you know a very wonderful question the first part is as ratings go ratings are important you know let us not get you know be real by the last 20 months or 18 months there because there there was collective commitment to you know start out to move into loading averages and all of us from the agency side to the other side the bodies had turned around and supported this call and say the technology involved and the government coming to say that you know we must allow this to happen but on a long haul you know I would always say that ratings help take advertising decision that's one point having said that there are enough advertisers who also look at content you know so large companies or whatever large companies go by ratings and purely ratings but there are seniors I won't name clients but some of my own senior clients also and I sit on those sessions I started asking questions on you know is the content polarizing or not and what is the content you know they do not necessarily go by this okay put a factor on how the ratings put a factor on that you know and I think that is gaining acceptance I won't use the currency but that is you know and the third thing which is actually an appeal I want to make you know you'd be surprised when I say this now but today unfortunately this whole new space and you know I am not going to say this space has become polarized it's all about share it's all about number one I'm number one and number four between four to five in the morning you know and this is lost to a lot of credibility amongst us and our clients you know and I do various cuts now in the back role I see various cuts because for content on one position to position you know one of the things and one of the things is this genre is not grown think about it the genre is not grown at all in terms of GRPs it is where it is you know in terms of share of these or whatever and you know if I say something to you and I said this to a couple of broadcasts when I met privately CEO's just four or five days after taking over and then listen you know you're so caught up in pulling each other down you don't realize you're pulling the whole industry down I am number one he's not number one or someone cursing someone else you know in the news room it's not you know we are one we are one ecosystem the advertising ecosystem the media is one ecosystem we compete by day we win just now as we speak they are four or five large which is happening but we are friends we take industry decisions together just to this morning just this afternoon I don't mind saying it probably Vikram P.K. M.H.J. Corona call discussing some industry issues you know all the time together so common interests are common interests we're not you know what is happening you know and I'll throw one surprise fact that no one knows today the reach for news is as much as the reach for the agency think about it in HSM so if you take the news genre and today you know a lot of clients cannot reach today news reaches maybe same and maybe more audiences than news that's a big story to tell that's a big story to tell from ensuring you're competing with the I'm not actually the GC guys they are the ones who fund path but that's a story to tell the industry got together and saying this is my story instead of being caught up in you know who's number one this is everyone's number one my client says okay I'll show you some of the big broadcasters I met from my largest clients auto clients I had done a cut for news and who's number one there in that because the client is not credibility and all the details all the mailers coming at him all the things we made it doesn't matter to me so I think somewhere if I could appeal you know I said this personally to many broadcasters this is the time for the news thing to get over the divide of these two associations and you know then fighting with each other and all getting into a share game and say listen what is happening news thing and that's how the question which you ask I'm not confident on the content I'm not confident on content but I say this lands are asking questions that is this the content we want to see you know so so so thank you for asking this but I think yes ratings is the base but beyond the base a lot to be done perception matters and the battle will be lost and people will be to blame with the perception with the news guys themselves and most importantly like you said content is important there won't be any brands who would want to talk who would want to be on content which is negative in nature which is poisonous or vitriolic and I think that concern also plays very importantly in the mind and adding to that ratings is also a function of many things like you rightly said reach is one of very important aspect that news broadcasting industry can talk about you know it is not just time spent reach plays a very big part and for a lot of legacy established players reach is a very very important aspect they are still very ahead on reach I'm making a slightly different point my point is that you know the fight today is on channel shares that you know I'm number one I'm number two I'm not number one you know the game is that how to expand how to grow this business if I was suppose the CEO or whatever association both I would get both of these two guys fighting amongst yourselves see how can you grow the business finally you know how do you grow profitability is a very the country's interest if news become sustainable the country will grow not only from an economic point of view but also from a social cultural point of view and for that it's not about fighting starting a room and saying I've done this to legends of the industry saying this is what has happened and you know what I'm trying to say it is important to be in it together that's the point absolutely we kind of you know work together we join hands together the industry grows we keep fighting each other we pull everybody down let me now come to since we're talking about content let me now come to a recent development last week we all saw the government issue that sort of dictated the government issue advisory regarding content of news channels I know content is not the purview of part but as an industry captain as an as Bach chairman as well as you know head of IPG in India what's your view on you know that government dictates and the observation or the so I'm speaking this in my personal capacity because I'm very mindful that what I say is Bach Bach has no view on content you know Bach is a measurement body just puts out data what happens you know in fact Nakul and me having a discussion I said to him Nakul we should not even hear hypothesis that because of this or that it's just a thing you know my personal view is that it is a sad day that the government has to step in to talk about content you know in a way and I'm not a this is not my area of expertise but I'm sure they're very very senior and smart people here in our competitive pressures we have worked into this whole thing you know today I don't know why but I've not understood today we recommend to our clients that listen you're taking a news channel because reach is there but thanks for this let's take a book it no one takes one news channel every client takes a book here of 5, 6, 7 news channels you know so where is the fight you are getting your rates which you are getting you are getting your pay this why this fight why this fight in ratings to say I'm not number one why this fight in content you know looking at it larger so I personally feel that's the point I was making to you earlier that it's not really rating and advertising driven it is you know a larger cause news has to be particular quality and that's what matters finally we will lose the product so it's very sad that government has to put out a structure saying that this kind of stuff should not happen okay let me now come to the last question I see other panelists have already joined for the next session in the government instituted a committee 2 years back for kind of overhauling the bar ecosystem it was chaired by the Prasad Bharti Chairman Shashi Vempati and a lot of recommendations are made is there any light you can throw for our thank you for calling it all right for what in the middle of this old news my entry to bark with the rolling news coming back everything got subsumed but we are moving the speed on that firstly we have to change the articles all that is with the government but I think there are 3-4 key things on the call out first is independent directors of the board we are the most finalizing we are talking to people once the articles are approved by the government we have the names ready we will get four independent directors in place then Techcom we already decided we have restructured the Techcom to ensure there is fair participation and independent people in Techcom named and finalized they will be coming on board so these are two broad recommendations there are many other recommendations but in all fairness we are moving the speed on so a lot of those recommendations we are moving the speed because they were generally good for the organization so I think fair degree of a lot of those protocols in terms of you asked our question our class being process driven rather than subjective so some of them already in place and hopefully is so lucky to be in the tenure at this point in time and this is happening so you see the next couple of months all this in place fantastic that's so good to hear before I go Mr. Shinaz today is about news newspapers also play a very important part in the entire news ecosystem they sort of the newspapers are still very relevant 20% of the advertising pie still goes there do you think anything is happening on the measurement as far as newspapers are although it's not Barks you know domain but you are an industry leader unfortunately or fortunately both Vikram and me and the same committee at account chair so both of us involved we were trying to do a common currency you know saying because and there were two things we were saying one we were saying that this will be a common currency between you know the baseline of Barks or MRBCI or whatever to create that and there we are pushing very strongly which we are doing carefully in the case of TV but we are pushing strongly for TV again that we are down there because I think a lot of definitely gone online but TV it has but I think the shift is more in print and therefore we are saying those you know instead of it aggregating with all the big aggregation groups if it goes to that newspaper itself so that is a bit of a slow one I mean I'm disappointed that it's running slow the vision is big but it's not there but I would again appeal to those guys to say listen the faster we get measurement of the ground and again it will be wonderful for them fantastic thank you Mr. Sinha thank you for doing hopefully we will be back on ground next year and the session will be face to face with you thank you back to you Ravind thank you Mr. Rahul he was in conversation with Mr. Sashi Sinha and what a conversation that was thank you gentlemen once again for your valuable time and truly adding much more value to this wonderful 11th edition as well thank you thank you and now ladies and gentlemen we are moving towards the last session for the day that we have and this is one of the most interesting sessions that I have been personally waiting for now we are talking about the perils of reporting from a war zone and it's truly an honour to introduce the panel to you these are the faces that have given us the news that really and truly matters in the moments that are the most difficult to do so and with that I would like to introduce the panel to you we have Shweta Singh with us senior executive editor special programming at Aaj Tak we have Manit Malhotra consulting editor News X Mr. Karan Bhatia joining in strategic business consultant at exchange for media Gaurav C. Sawant senior executive editor India Today and Aaj Tak Meghna Sharma assistant executive editor at News X Abhijeet Aayir Mitra well known author and media expert it's an honour to have him and of course the moderator the lovely face synonymous with the exchange for media Mr. Rohil Amin senior editor at exchange for media so that's your panel and I'm absolutely thrilled to introduce this to you Rohil Thank you so much not so lovely but thank you so much for these kind words well we have a very interesting topic which we don't often talk about in media and we have here who have covered news went all the way and seen the real danger face the real danger brought the news to us so we have with us you know I mean I want to start with you Gaurav since you are here and I will bring in Shweta after that then Abhijeet Gaurav give me a sense of when it comes to reporting a war Indian channels versus the global media where do we stand in this because is it just an eyeball game for us still I would really or is it something which is you know humane more driven by bringing out the real facts and agony of the people Thank you very much Rohil for having me on this very lovely panel for us it's not about eyeballs for us and I can't talk about the India Today group because whether it's this conflict in Ukraine or the situation in Ladakh counter terror operations for us it's not about eyeballs it's telling a country about what's happening on ground and reporting it as factually as accurately as possible in the fog of war and that's exactly what Shweta and I have done in Ukraine in Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir that's been our effort throughout and you know whether we are reporting from Libya or from Egypt or from Lebanon or from Iraq the effort was always to get to the heart of the story get to the bottom of the story get your ground realities get our viewers and get our cameras up close you know so our camera persons they would film we weren't shooting from if I may like some other instances with some journalists you know from hotel balconies or receptions or lawns we would get to Kharkiv we would get to Mariupol you know we would be in Boucha and Irpin while those bodies were still there while that Shelling was still on to get to that story and nobody thinks of eyeballs at that time you only want to bring the story to your viewers Rohil Shweta your thoughts on this if you heard my question so sorry we can hear you we can't hear you is it okay now? so I would just say that the Indian media was much more bold than all of the international media number one I would say we did not have bulletproof jackets because like Gaurav went there when the war hadn't started when I went there we had to walk on foot so I already had a 30 kg load on my back walking for 4 km till I could get a taxi to move around in Ukraine so bulletproof was the last of our priorities so we were without bulletproof and yet we ventured into areas where there was active firing and Shelling so unlike the international media which was mostly in Lviv the area where all the embassies were so I would say that yes the Ukraine war was the first time when you saw I would often joke that it's almost like the Vijaychok for Indian media like all of Indian media is there at Vijaychok and all of Indian media was there in Ukraine and I think all of us at least 99.99% of us knew that we were representing our country and when we were venturing into these areas India being neutral our stand as a journalist if whether we were covering it from Ukraine or we were doing it from Russia was completely neutral and we were the bravest journalists I think all across the world every single Indian journalist was the bravest I mean not caring about bulletproof jackets tells the story itself if I had it we would definitely wear it that was just because you have to choose what you've got to put your batteries, your tapes, your cameras and bulletproof can wait we got it later we were issued bulletproof jackets in Kiev before I bring in Vijaychok I do at the end because I have wanted you to sum up what they say I will have also Mr Karan Bhatia asking you a couple of questions you my co-moderator Megha at this point your thoughts of Indian journalists covering war internationally how evolved have we become in your view Absolutely I definitely agree with Gaurav and Shweta and while I was covering from studios and my reporters were out there covering the entire conflict zone there were a lot of challenges there were a lot of problems that these people had to face I would definitely have to say that we, the Indian journalists the Indian reporters were at the top of our game and like Shweta said it was a neutral ground on which we were actually covering that entire it continues to go on even now and it has been more than a month and then the big question about the conflict that the western media portrays when a Ukraine-Russia conflict happens versus what Russia continues to say or the Russian allies continue to say it was important for the Indian media to put up its stance which was a neutral stance and that gave us a lot of commendability from international media as well and I think perhaps the first time around there have been international news channels international media houses that have been looking at Indian media and Indian journalists who have been getting into the trenches figuring it out by themselves and giving us neutral coverage of what actually happened it was a scary situation I had my reporters I had my executive editors who were travelling over there and they were bombing and shelling that would take place behind their back and they would just have to hurry up and that's a scary situation and like Shweta and Gaurav said that you would not have those life jackets to save yourself from the bombings that took place and that's an extremely dangerous situation to be at so kudos to us kudos to Indian media to have evolved to a stage where international media is now looking at us and even gaining some sort of perspective as to how to look and I also feel that we have come of age in terms of not looking at foreign media any longer and already raising a bar and saying that this is us this is what we are reporting and as much as you would like to talk about you being neutral and you being unbiased that's not the situation and here's what the new world order is and here's what our stance is really I think you're muted sorry Vinith I want to bring in sorry yeah can you hear me? hi everyone yes please your thoughts on this how we cover war where have we arrived in terms of experience coverage in terms of insights I saw Gaurav and Shweta go to Ukraine and cover this and when I saw them that's when I think every journalist realizes that that's what you signed up for there could be a situation in your life where you will have to do that unfortunately for me and Megha we could not go but I grew up in Russia my father was a diplomat so I've been to Ukraine, I've been to Russia I know how cold it can get how nasty it can get and how difficult the terrain is the language problem and the way our journalists were able to handle all of that and not even make break a sweat about it it was a very humbling moment for all of us you can sit in the studios and opinionate about a number of things but I think the action is where the war is and this time around what happened in Ukraine I think Indian media was very intrepid it was very bold I think there were wars in the past as well when we did not go all out we did not in fact consider it too important so we did not send as many journalists as we would have liked to but this time I saw everybody did it and it was not for the TRPs I think it was basically to tell the people the truth and I think that was a defining moment in Indian media it's very important to understand that a journalist he could be an important person in the studio but when he goes to a war zone he's vulnerable, he's volatile he's reporting facts we attacked, we have lost a few journalists as well in Afghanistan if you remember when the Americans were leaving we did lose a couple of guys who were risking their life so I think it lent a lot of perspective to people like me as well I have reported in the past but I have never been in a situation where I had to think about my life at the same time figure out what's going on it was a very dynamic situation and I think it was like a Rubicon was crossed we covered it Abhijit here your perspective will be different so as Shweta said it was like a Vijay Chowk where every new channel was seen one Indian news channels have suddenly found not suddenly, they have become now they go out, they report not just India, beyond that how do you see this transition what are your views on it is it happening the right way your observation on that sorry okay is this better so see there's two aspects to this first is when you actually go report on the ground during a war it's different when you're posted out there as a correspondent see getting posted out there being there for 2-3 years at least minimum would give you a lot of ground context as to what's happening whereas when you land up there during the war it's extremely tactical you're covering what you're seeing now one of the problems that I realized was when I landed up in Afghanistan a lot of our trips to interview Taliban and things like that used to get blocked by shelling or fighting or whatever was happening and the problem there was you'd only see what the Taliban wanted you to see when you get embedded like for example on this side Ukraine was very open to having journalists come over and cover everything from their side because you know when you cover a death for example you don't know who's killed that person it could have been either side that killed that person but then the narrative becomes entirely yours you frame this in way you want and you know if you're covering it you see that you see only what you're shown effectively the Russians on the other hand did not you know allow embedded stuff unless you're RTE or things like that which became problematic for them and I think it's very fair to say that they've comprehensively lost the war but this is where the editor in the actual newsroom comes in because remember reporting on the ground you get caught up in the tactical you're not able to see the strategic and this is where a great news anchor or a newsroom person compares it contextualizes the raw reporting in a way that would suit his audience and brings in the balance and the fact-checking and the analysis sometimes it's not even fact-checking it's just analysis right so I think that's war reporting in that sense is technically should be the perfect synchronicity of live on the ground up to date reporting plus the sort of more academic side of a newsroom which is coming things down contextualizing and putting it in the larger picture all right academic side of the newsroom Karan my colleague is here he has a question so you know I was following the whole reporting in Ukraine so as a matter of fact my wife is Armenian and I was there when this old Armenian and other by chance what happened so I know how it feels so one thing which I always found very very you know challenging was the language problem the most of you were there on the ground and you know when you must be relying on some local resource must be telling you what is telling happening then they're at the ground so how do you know validate and authenticate the information coming to you because since you are reaching out to larger audience so that empathy and right information is the key so I will start with your view since you were covering Ukraine extensively so I was there for about two months a little over two months and in two phases so initially when we went we were lucky we landed in Kiev that time the war hadn't started so then we had an Indian translator and an Indian driver who could speak Russian and we always have the Google translator with you to help you a lot of people also speak English but you're absolutely right your perspective comes from the country that you are in but one big thing in this war was access to information and access to internet so you would always have the other side of the story and you know when you're a reporter on ground you cover what you see you know which which often generals describe as worms I view and not the birds I view but then that's exactly what you're there you're reporting tactical stuff while your anchor in the studio is reporting the strategic stuff they have their guess they have information which is flowing in from multiple quarters including from you know Russia for example India today and we had the privilege of having one of our correspondents not just in Moscow but traveling with the Russian army in in Mariupol all the way up to Zephosia in fact from the Russian side across Donbas we had both sides of the story you know Shweta and I would be telling our viewers what was happening on the Ukrainian side and Geeta Mohan who's still there would be telling us what's happening from the Russian side but Abhijeet is absolutely right we've missed out on that perspective in terms of Russia did not give the kind of access that Ukraine give and to the number of journalists that Ukraine give access to so language was a huge barrier for example we were arrested or detained you know detained for several hours and we didn't know why we had all clearances they suspected us to be very close to the Russians because my passport has a number of Russian visas now that was a crisis at one point of time but then when they got to know that we were reporting and they would cross check everything on internet they actually permitted us to go to Bucha much ahead of anyone else so the horrors of Bucha which is contested by the Russians India today was able to bring that out because when we went into Bucha there were bodies that were still lying on the roadside or in malls or outside homes or people who were burying their loved ones behind the houses so yes language was a barrier because we didn't even have a translator that day our translator abandoned us refused to go to Bucha because life shells were still lying there so we still went we almost drove over an anti-tank mine because I was driving myself we didn't even have a driver that day but you used a Google translator with broken English broken Russian that's how you communicated if there was internet you had the Google translator whether I saw you were covering like you called the digital I even saw the bombing happening during that time out of it was for you I even remember one taxi driver refused to drop you to an exclamation and you had no choice but to report I even saw you Gaurav when you were being detained like on there because challenge what I personally because I've been there multiple times when you talk to the local they have say because it's the law of the land but you know being a neutral party when it comes to India the information because when you talk to Ukraine they have their own perspective and you talk to Russian they have their own so I'm sure it must be very tough for you to bring a neutral stance especially when it's there is a war there are a lot of people dying on street you know you have to be more empathetic so I mean I from your view what was your experience especially I'm sure it must have affected you in some way or the other but you know from person standpoint so when you've got to be neutral on screen to your viewers but when you are in a particular country you've got to be on their side otherwise they will just let you move around so the Ukraine army never allowed them allowed us to travel with them yes when we would reach their location they would give a certain amount of access but it was the civilian areas that were being affected or the military bases which were being bombed that we reached and we were trying to so there were just two sets of words that I got by heart and I would say it with all Josh was Slava Ukraini which means victory to Ukraine and Girov Slava the heroes will win so that's all the Ukrainian that I've learned from Ukraine and I every check post that I was stopped I just sent Slava Ukraini and they let you pass and they all respect women more than men Gaurav would vouch for that so it was Gaurav who was detained and the only day I was detained was when I was traveling in the same car so I have that grudge against him even now so now what see we always talk about the beats of reporters and when we see Ukraine now you see a lot of reporters who have not covered defense and who are covering the war now I think it's more difficult for them because we've been with armies we know the weapons because it's almost the same weapons that the Indians use so we can differentiate a T-72 from a T-90 or a BNP from a tank per se so that was one advantage that I think Gaurav slightly more probably I would rate myself 10% lower than Gaurav but then yes we definitely knew what was going on the weapons that were being used the weapons the anti-aircraft guns if they're positioned in a particular way which way should you move so those were the basic that was the basic knowledge which helped us in our coverage and also helped us not to go get into the jingoistic which is the biggest danger of defense reporting and in a conflict situation you can actually go overboard climbing tanks and stuff so you know if a tank has been abandoned there could be some explosives which might be actually harmful so you don't just climb up on a tank and you start doing your piece to camera so those were the things we stayed away from probably that's more impressive but yes so these were the two words that I kept a little bit of some my name helped me a lot because my name is actually a Russian-Ukrainian name if I say swita they were very happy Gita while she was with me in Ukraine as soon as she would say Gita they would say oh Sita or Gita so that was the kind of help we could get from the locals who of course considered us part of what would you call a cultural friendship with Ukraine and similarly in Russia since you are friends so Gita whenever I speak to her she says that the Russians are very warm to her they are very open to her of course restricted the military access is always restricted but that was the personal part I am friends with a lot of Ukrainians and so is Gaurav we have those numbers some in the military who we interact with just to get an update how they are and what's going on so Abhijeet I was being an expert wanted to understand take your view on this scenario especially the language problem and the authenticity so you know what happens is I I can give you a personal example in Afghanistan you know they would always understand Hindi so it was kind of easy very broken bad Hindi but you could speak to a lot like so for example the local Taliban commander in Gaur he would just keep singing Hindi songs between every question and then talk to you in Hindi you could get a long speaking I think the issue is and it was certainly the case for me possibly for Gaurav and Swetha as well even if you understand the language you are not as fluent enough in the language to understand when you're being spun and I think the biggest filter for in any of these situations is other than the sheer fear of death because you never really know when a shell is going to run near you or something a strike bullet whatever is the sense of being spun so for me to be fair I've never reported the kind of extreme stress that Swetha or Gaurav have I go to do research not to report your senses are always heighted you're always looking for cues you're looking for verbal clues and visual clues the intonation what's being said to the mind does and the people around you and things like that on what to do the second thing I found really necessary was to overcome the language barrier is to cross check everything when you're told something you go there and cross check or you ask two or three other people to triangulate a piece of information for you and that usually works out now I'm not too sure if that works out in a high stress situation like in say Bhucha or Irpin or any of those places but more or less remember I come from a research angle so it's kind of I don't have deadlines to meet on an early or minute basis but that I think usually helps in terms of overcoming these things remember everything's a problem but there's always a solution to the problem if you have the time for it and that's the big if when you're being shunned that was very valid you know mega so you know reporting from a news room I'm sure a lot of information is already handy but if you have you can say in some anecdotes your experience especially because authenticity and when you're doing an international reporting it's very important that you know you balance it no absolutely you're right about that there has to be neutrality there has to be authenticity and at the same time you have to be up to speed in providing your viewers the news which is accurate but fast at the very same time remember when it comes to news channels you're actually tracking your competitors as well and wanting to break the news first at the end of the day we have like you said our reporters who are on the ground our correspondents are providing us what they're actually seeing the bombing and shelling and there is a tendency to be portraying the one side of the story which is the Ukrainian side at the end of the day like Shweta also mentioned you're actually hoping and praying that you don't end up getting killed over there now and when you are a journalist you're wanting to put across both sides of the story but when you are in a country that is fighting the enemy which is Russia Russia is the one that is invaded into these places and these army personnel on the ground are extremely hostile there have been several reports we've got a lot of students who are especially Indian nationals who are stuck over there they were not able to pass from one place to another I think took them weeks and weeks together just to reach to Kiev or just to reach the western part of Ukraine and something similar was also being witnessed by other foreign nationals or people who are of colour so it becomes extremely important to be more docile to those who are on the ground those who are under control at that point of time but then the importance and the personality of the newsroom begin and the editors begins to appear and I being at the helm of affairs when it comes to taking editorial lines as well understand because you have like like I said there was a there was a more bombing that took place there were several people dead over there the Ukrainian side said something else all falls in formation so there's obviously this propaganda that is being built by both sides now then it becomes for the journalist for the editor to decide what is right what is wrong you are going to use your journalistic senses you are going to get to understand what are these cues what are the people saying what is my report is saying over there what is exactly happening and then put out a calculated rightful stance on the channel for the public to be made aware and there were also you I think you find the risk of then perhaps turning a certain tide and the number of media channels media agencies that are also accused of doing that and that's why I think it's a sensitive situation that you are at you have to be true to your job you have to be true to yourself you have to be true to your study and then put out what is authentic what is right without being biased towards one country or the other and then you understand how diplomatic relationships work when the West continues to pressure India over certain things when it comes to the Ukrainian war you have other things that are happening in terms of a lot of these dignitaries and delegations coming into India so all this in the largest scenario all these things play out you take a look at a 360 degree view and then you put in that perspective from Ukraine you put in blood perspective from Russia you put in that perspective from United States of Poland or European Union and then you build your story that's how you do you're doing your 9 pm debate or 8 pm debate it's an all-in-compassive view. Vinit I mean you've been in Russia you already mentioned about your experience there yeah especially you know when you I'm sure you've been there you would have you know dead with local people there and you know Russia inside of the story was not pretty much active owing to different reasons but from the playing a neutral role and considering the Indian-Russian relationship as well as the Ukrainian-Indian relationship any experience anything you would like to share from the reporting standpoint when I mean from the authenticity again coming back to the same thing you know when Russia broke up when USSR broke up I was there my dad was posted there and there was a curfew for the week and I remember when the curfew was announced we were in school and by the time when we went to school in the morning everything was fine when we were coming back there was a curfew so instead of buses we could see tanks we could see the militia that's what you call them there you know you could see a lot of army personnel on the road and that's the closest I would ever be you know do an active ground military situation something that Shweta and Gaurav are extremely exposed to I speak Russian fluently so when you speak Russian you kind of also understand what the expect from you over a period of time so I know how Russians think but what I was talking about and what I was reading about in the western media it was quite opposite of what Russia is really like you know so it was a conflict in my heart and my head also as to what I am assimilating and what I have seen in the past you know there was a fight between that but as an anchor you know you have this tendency you have this disposition to get carried away by a narrative which is popular I think in India we stayed away from that or sometimes anchors also try and extend what the government feels about this you getting me so I think that's also a dangerous path at times which most of our anchors I speak for everyone did not take you know there was a lot of neutrality in what I saw and at the end of the day you know understanding Russia and Ukraine is not an easy job you know the complexities between these two nations are very very profound what we are perhaps looking at right now is the tip of the iceberg you know there was no Moscow 200 years ago but there was Ukraine there was a Kiev 900 years ago a lot of people don't know that Russians feel that you know they own Ukraine just because of you know the kind of nuclear power that they have but I think it's the other way around if you look at it traditionally and culturally is the Ukrainians who have always had edge in terms of you know the Ruski pride so I think it's it's very very difficult to tell who's right and who's wrong but just the way India is you know there's a lot of mud slinging against India in the western media there was a lot of unnecessary mud slinging against Russia also in the media and I think we at New Zex and you know all my honourable panellists here as well they stayed away from you know going political we were all a political we were just trying to show things and talk about things on the ground I have friends in Russia who are Russians I have Indian friends in Russia who are married to Ukrainians you know I have Ukrainian friends who are married to Indians so what they feel and what they say is absolutely in contrast to what we have been saying and talking about you know the Russians don't care about this war they didn't want it basically when I say they don't care about it you know it was a decision by an autocrat and they are just paying the price for it now so the Russians did not want it I think it's Putin's ego which is at war and a lot of people are just you know paying the price for it and I think these are like two cents on that Rohail I mean over to you we lost Rohail he's not there I think we lost him so I'll quickly move on to my second question then I'll ask Rohail Rohail are you here? So I'll ask you God considering in the last two years there was a huge issue to very important discussion happened on the global diaspora Rohail you would like to take it or should I move on? Okay Okay perfect one second sorry Alright so God to you my question you know there's also people are you know they were on social media especially critics they said they were worried the way we portrayed the war they were dramatic headlines we got overboard Mahayud you know we use a lot of such words how do you respond to them? So Mahayud it is it's a huge war it is a big war it is escalating and God forbid it may escalate further will it become the third world war? well economically if you look at some of the parameters of what is a world war the beginnings are already there in terms of divisions in camps economic sanctions being imposed so some of those steps are being taken in case Sweden and Finland do join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization then you will see an escalation and it wasn't Mahayud happening but it was Mahayud's our heart is what most people you know seem to indicate that are we heading towards a world war the western media also said that but as Shweta said unlike a lot in the unlike many in the western media the Indian media wasn't safely in Leviv the Indian media was in the heart of action and travelling not to say that the westerners weren't because look at the fatalities unfortunately that have happened they happened in Irpin and Pooja in Kiev voting right in the heart of the story so you know one yes there is escalation was there exaggeration well that's an editorial stance that happened in Delhi but were there killings look at what was happening at Irpin look at what was happening in Pooja look at the way people were massacred and they were so we wouldn't know until an international investigation revealed and that is where I said the Indian media was very neutral while President Zelensky did say that people were caught and killed and they put out some pictures Indian media kept saying that let there be an international investigation for facts to come out the bodies that I saw and I did see a large number of bodies in Pooja but a number of them appeared to be shrapnel injuries people travelling in cars the cars shattered and then bodies killed did I see very close bullet injuries in some instances we did see bullet injuries but there was a line that the government had described torture chambers all of that perhaps the Ukrainian media had better access than we again in Ukraine and this was something information flowed through the government in Ukraine was restricted to those who actually echoed their line to a very large extent they were taken on tours we were on our own we were flying solo you know driving from one city to the other not under any government escort though we did make personal friends who came who are very very helpful in difficult situation that took us to the front lines with them for example in Mariupol we were taken right to the front line from where we could see the Russians across and this was just before the conflict had actually broken out in the in the real sense of the conflict artillery duels had started rockets and missiles were being fired but tanks the armor movement hadn't taken place but for the western media they have access to government guiding them for the Indian media we were doing a lot of our work on our own through contacts and not traditionally through government appointed fixers Shweta also you know one is this did we get carried away at times you know when we look inside also it's a new phenomenon you know from looking from within and now outside but again our reports carry a lot of the habits that we have reporting inside internal facts do you think that is true so I would just like to make a comment first because you know when you're working for television you really have time for yourself leave alone get to know people from other channels so I would like to say that Abhijeet sir of course I keep reading his views on social media so I'm fairly acquainted with him but Megha I would like to compliment which is very much yours and Vinit I wish I had spoken to you before I went to Ukraine you've got such a good experience of having lived in Russia so it would have added to my perspective so it's a great forum right now yes we do go over I wouldn't like to sound apologetic also for that because media in India is completely different from the rest of the world and by the way I have 2-3 videos which I shared with Gaurav of international media doing walkthroughs and we used to cameras in a way which often Indian media is blamed for Gaurav remember that lady from Greece who actually out shouted the Indian journalist when doing a walkthrough that's a world record yes the worst of the Indian media she was worse than that I can show it to you later I still have it on my mobile so yes we went overboard at times when you know there was information coming in so many sources Britain leaking some reports from Russia and saying that there is going to be a nuclear war and people I mean you tend to get eyeballs when you talk of the worst so yes we have been we can be blamed for going overboard at times perhaps this was the first war that was being covered at such a level I mean there have been many conflicts over the over the years but nobody none of the wars have been touted to be the next step for a world war 3 so this time it was completely different and I think we will mature as we move on there were a lot of times when I used to fight of discussions when should we should we be talking about the nuclear war or not but yes if there are reports of some countries and if you attribute it to that particular report then you can say that but we will definitely take up few lessons from this coverage thanks Shweta I mean you have been very frank about it and candid about it Abhijith what does it tell you about the way Indian media is now you know covering international issues do they have this hangover of the way they report internationally do you see a lot of hangover of what they do within the country and what is the next stage you see for the Indian media as far as international report is concerned do you think they will continue to get sensation more over dramatized do you think that is going to stay or it's going to boil down to more nuanced coverage of the war look the thing is for me reputage is a very culturally relativistic thing each reporter reports the way a certain country expects them to report so for example in Japan you are going to have extremely sweet polite reporting in America you might not have very animated reporters on the ground but the context and analysis of the editorial desk would be far worse than some absolute minuscule regional channel with screeching anchors essentially screeching like banshees I mean honestly CNN is unwatchable I'd any day prefer watching an Indian channel coverage of what's happening in Ukraine to what CNN is doing and I didn't realize this till Gaurav and Shweta just said so I didn't realize that there were being those guys were being given the VIP tour and these guys were being left out of their own and this is probably why I will any day trust Gaurav and Shweta over what I see on CNN right so these things are extremely contextual it's fine for them to make fun of us saying oh my god look at the CGI's in this room it's bizarre it's crazy this is a news but honestly you tell me what part of CNN reportage is used by Indian standards the kind of conspiracy theories that are floated out there no Indian channel even the worst regarded Indian channel would have that on a meantime news program right so these and when it comes to that I don't think animated reporting or screechy reporting is a crime you know it's fun to watch sometimes it's entertaining I would much rather have entertainment over outright misinformation wonderful Karan to you over to you we have another 15 minutes left so one thing what I've noticed in terms of that like setting the context to the discussion like when the Armenia Azerbaijan war was there for about 15-20 days there was very limited coverage which was coming out to the media now especially Ukraine and Russia has become the main pivot and international and the reportage was different so when you compare with the Indian reporting what is the international one what are your views on it I'll start with you Gaurav so Azerbaijan Armenia for me it was a big story and it was one of the biggest stories on India first because of the context of the nature of warfare for example you know the fact that you had the TV2's the bi-rectors doing what they were to the tanks and the game-changer role that they played in this battle more than the context of the battle that was taking place it was the weaponry in this battle which was huge in terms of the way we were looking at Azerbaijan and Armenia when it came to Ukraine it was very different because you had about 22,000 Indians studying there there was panic in their families and especially south of India a lot of our viewers south of India kept asking us what are you doing about this why aren't you reporting from ground zero and that's where I was packed off around the 15th of February we took a decision at 17th that was already in Kiev and at that point of time when we travelled to a lot of these universities including the Shivchenko University or the medical university in Kiev children didn't want to come back because they thought there wouldn't be a war their professors didn't want the children to go back because they said there will be something but it will not be the way we are seeing it today but the American media was saying something completely different so somewhere down the line nobody thought this war would escalate to what it has escalated to now or the apprehension that it may escalate to God forbid the third world war in the months ahead with Sweden and Finland now being in the line of Russian fire should they join an anti treaty organization so we were reporting it day on day yet going back to the context we've had a lot of very good guests on our show from Ukraine from Russia from America from England getting multiple perspectives so that our viewers and most Indian channels did that so that the viewers would have a 360 degree perspective and perhaps not Azerbaijan Armenia as much because of Indians present both in Russia and Russia being India's close strategic partner with this special strategic relationship between the two countries there was so much more interest in Ukraine Russia conflict again going ahead with in the months ahead this interest will only increase Shweta one thing when I saw 24 Raj covering reporting there and I was also watching RT I didn't have access moving to multiple regions but BBC or CNN or the international they were just a one or two hour you know discussion where they were panelists and they were showing videos little discussion happened but when it comes to India this time we played a center stage and we bringing out the real information and you know 24 hours seven you know you had your people on ground there was one reporter also there in Ukraine then you have somebody in Russia so must be very challenging but in your experience looking at this war and the way it has escalated and the way international media has projected and the way Indian media brought a neutral stance to it what is your view how Indian media is you know scoring and how we have changed over the years when we compare ourselves with international media in terms of the war zone reporting the media has the same strength as the society it is representing so with India comes a lot of emotions as well we can't do dispassionate reporting I'm not talking biased but emotions in the sense that even if you are talking about a country which you are not on very good terms with if that country sees an earthquake we still empathize we might have fought wars with Pakistan but when the attack on the children everybody in India condemned it every single person in India felt that it was not correct it was not right it should not have happened and I'm not talking about the level of the government but I'm talking about the people so we do not dissociate our passions from anything that we cover so about neutrality I would just like to share an experience while covering in Ukraine because we were not embedded we were not given that the western media had with Ukraine but we were in Lviv that day and about two days back got there was a missile strike on in Lviv which the Russians claimed was a military base and the Ukrainians claimed was a civilian area and that they had lost 35 civilians so I was around looking for a skin card and for my like unit and we were trying to find a shop when I suddenly heard a sermon going on so I walked in that direction and I think Godav had walked in another direction that day and I was walking towards another side because both of us wanted to look for a skin card so either of us had to get in touch once we found the skin card so what I found instead was a a ceremony for the departed soldiers and the departed soldiers happened to be the soldiers so what Russia had said was correct that it had struck a military base they had lost soldiers and I was in the cremation of the soldiers because I happened to walk into it and I was not led by some Ukrainian army into an area where they could show some civilian destruction so that is how we since we were 14's in Ukraine at that time and we were all discovering different aspects so this just added to the spontaneity of our reports and the new quality of the reports as well and we never shied from saying that they were very limited civilian casualties at that time Rajesh Pavlar who was ex-army he is still there in Kiev and when he reports he is not scared that the Ukrainian authorities might become up for actually giving the truth if a residential complex has been bombed and there is no casualty he says I don't see a single ambulance here and I don't see any casualty of activation in front of my eye while the Ukrainian government might be saying that ok there are 50 people who have died and similarly when Dika is reporting from Russia she does not show their line she is just giving out what she is seeing in front of herself Abhijit sir you have had experience in Afghanistan and from the international story and reporting standpoint what are your views when we talk about comparison so this is why I said I think if you look at what Gaurav and Shreeta said that being an Indian having that kind of neutrality this is not our fight nobody was getting emotional about it in India this was as esoteric to us as Pakistan attacking India would be to them it is much more neutral it is much more balanced and let me tell you what happened with me because what I depend upon is every time I hear a new story coming out I try to get it verified through satellite imagery so we buy a lot of satellite imagery usually 30 cm which you can almost tell the ranks on the lapels of officers and things like that what they did was first of all the Ukrainians criminalized any photography on the ground unless it was approved and authorized etc so any mobile phone photography and things like that by ordering people of any kind of damage or military installations is now punishable which kind of very severely restricted what open source analysis we could do and the second issue was almost about 7-8 days into the war they started blurring their images they said that our subscription would no longer give us full images of Ukraine and everything about Ukraine started getting blurred except so when Bhucha happened we wanted to go in and check the time series images out there even the blurring wasn't available to us it was almost completely blacked out we were not allowed to see the time series the New York Times puts out this thing first the New York Times seems to get a story quite wrong then they put out a time series which we think is concocted because nobody else is given access to that time series to see when those people were killed because the ambient temperature in Bhucha was around 7 degrees at that time if you extrapolated over the two weeks by which time the rot of the bodies and things should have set in the other thing was the way and Shweta would be able to tell you this because they were there the way the bodies had fallen down it didn't look like a shooting it looked like a shelling and for this you need to have forensics done as to which side the shelling was coming from we couldn't even see where the shrapnel wounds or those bodies and things were like even on the video coverage that we were seeing from the ground so this again was very problematic where news was being controlled very very carefully to forward a certain narrative and it was impossible you could not buy images from Bhucha in a time series even if you offer to pay extra to these four satellite companies there's only four that provide you with imagery the Korean Airbus Planet Labs and I forget the last one Maxar correct thank you you couldn't get it then there's also the fact and this is a good thing because the Indian press will never be used to sort of spin a story you know they're relatively immune from being spun in that sense because if you remember I don't know how old everybody on the Spandelaar I'm quite old I'm middle age now so if you go back to Sarajevo and what started the NATO intervention in that war out there it was three specific mortar shells that landed in Sarajevo market 75 people that brought on the NATO intervention the NATO classified report on that shows you that at least two shells came from the site of the Muslim Bosniak positions in the hills above Sarajevo the third one was indeterminate and the reason it was done was guess who was in town at that time Christian Amanpour she was there for three days there was absolutely no story she was getting ready to pack up so and voila she gets a story just in the nick of time which makes this I am so glad that our press are not conspirators to and accomplices in that kind of mass murder that the western press very frequently is they know it it's sometimes very clearly done with NATO because NATO incentivizes people to commit atrocities where the lines can be blurred and then justify a humanitarian intervention I am so glad we don't fall for that kind of rubbish in fact quite the opposite if you remember NDTV they caught a picture Srinivasan Jain who caught the picture of Hamas firing rockets from a hotel in which international journalists were being housed now had we been in the Hamas camp like Shweta was able to go and verify that these bodies were actually military bodies mind you even now and all the western press will say oh it wasn't really military we have no proof of that and things like that except we have an eye witness right here who will admit it was okay who can show you it was so the Indian press is very frequently able to get the other side of the story they have to be careful but this is why I am telling you the Indian press is right up there with the rest of the world they will use all these tactics to bring it down because ultimately it's a preservation of your territory you know it's a bit like dogs it's a bit like street dogs when you go on a scooter into a colony defense colony or something like that at night everyone will come in it's like that so you know this I never had issues with the Indian media because on balance it's histrionic it's hyperbolic but the facts are there I would say the facts are much more there in the Indian media than they are in the western media alright which brings me to the final question you know we just have another five to seven minutes Gaurav with you while we are talking about reporting for a war zone give me a sense of did you feel were there any moments when you really felt you know weak you felt scared give me a sense of the person behind the reporter you know what he felt what you've undergone while reporting from Ukraine so as a journalist it was a great experience it was the biggest story and we were getting the kind of play that any reporter would dream of both on Ajta and on India today the best channels in our country and I'm very proud to say that and India Today Magazine so were we scared yes there were some instances you know at a time when the government the Indian Embassy packed up from Kiev first went to Lviv and then went left Lviv went to Poland and when Shelling started in Kiev everyone was advised to leave everyone was told to leave and almost everyone left but I wanted to stay on because I thought this is where the story is so you know and I've preserved all those whatsapp exchanges that I was having with the office when at one point of time I was told this is an instruction leave now actually sent a message saying can I please defy the instruction and stay on you know at my own risk can I sign an indemnity bond can I stay on and ultimately I'm so glad my channel had that faith in me that they permitted us to stay on both the camera person and I Pawan Kumar and I and we stayed on we were forcibly checked out of our hotel because that's when the situation became very bad they forced us out of the hotel they were almost forcing journalists onto trains to take them to Lviv we actually smuggled ourselves into an Indian gentleman's house one Mr. Kuldeep Kumar is a businessman there so we went to his house stayed with him and then travelled on our own because no fixer, no guide no one available to carry to take you anywhere and when we were driving there were instances that people you were being shelled at, fired at when we were coming out of Mariupol we were live on India today and there was firing happening at our vehicle which Rajesh actually reported he said they're firing at us so that happened but and I was driving and I really drove very fast out of there another instance we took a wrong turn and that was the time I was genuinely scared because we drove from Dene Pro towards Kiv and for about 200 kilometers down that road we didn't come across a single other vehicle and I said that's really odd why isn't there a single other vehicle on this road we had actually missed a signboard that said road closed this road is there were minds on that road and we were driving we were zipping down that road trying to get to Kiv until somebody told us get the hell out of here you could die so some such instances but all words covering that war to be able to bring out facts for our viewers Shweta your story I have a more selfish intention than I have a war I always wanted to join the army but women don't have a combat role so I could never get in so I'm not scared to the point of being suicidal and the day Gaurav and I were in Irpin the international media had stopped 2 kilometers before the final check post and there was actually live shelling going on and we were so excited that I said let's go let's go let's go to the point where actually the army was so I love it I don't know what when you get hit by a bullet how would it feel like and I don't want to think about it a stone probably scares me more than a bullet to be handicapped for life but when that day we shot in Irpin the next day the first journalist casualty happened who was actually shot at by a sniper I don't know a Ukrainian sniper or a Russian sniper because Russia never owned up and Ukraine always said it was a Russian and it was BBC journalist and some American journalist and also a few Ukrainians who were there as fixers though they were also journalists so we lost a few journalists to shelling as well there was no point I was scared and God knows that I always want to be there in the front and I don't know I hope there's no bad ending to this because I never think ahead I don't think when such things happen I actually enjoy it especially when my country was not involved we were not using anything Abhijit you said that in a way you love the way we report you know the Indian media reports you know it does the best job as a critic is there anything they could improve in your view as far as war reporting is concerned you know I think it's better if Shweta and Gaurav do not listen to me on this because I'm so occidental I will probably destroy the profitability of their channel if I give them my opinions on how to cover a war so I think you know when I generally while I tend to have grown up in the USSR Vienna and things like that so you know my entire outlook on things is very western in a sense but that is where you come to appreciate that when something violates your sensibilities or rather opposes your sensibilities it can very frequently be much better so I think my only advice is guys just do what you're doing we love you you're actually really great at your jobs so don't I mean we shouldn't be seeking the validation of others let's just do our own thing we created what we do and we should just continue doing that screw all those international awards you know we shouldn't become early rental monkeys to perform in their circus if anything they need to become paid monkeys in our circus absolutely thank you so much Abhijit, Gaurav, Shweta Vineet and make a had to leave for a show and Karan my colleague thank you so much for joining us and yes at Enba we are here we'll see you here thank you guys thank you guys thanks Karan see ya bye thank you guys so that's it that's it from Arzai thank you so much once again and we'd like to thank all of you for joining in today truly truly happy that you could make it to the 11th edition of e4m news next 2022 and of course ad factors PR and media mantra thank you so much for your online support so with this we'd like to take your leave and see you next time thank you so much this is Rabind kundu signing off and on behalf of exchange for media we thank you once again for your valuable time have a fantastic day ahead