Journalists are under attack like never before -- from politicians, self-appointed watchdogs, social media militants and members of the press themselves. Ahead of the elections, the scrutiny has amplified and rightly or wrongly an editor's or TV anchor's every word is dissected to the last inch in a bid to expose some hidden motive, prejudice or political benefaction.

Aam Aadmi Party Chief Arvind Kejriwal has been at the forefront of this operation, accusing the press of being corrupt, sold out, prone to inducements and favoring certain candidates over others. He's even threatened to jail members of the media should they be found guilty of wrongdoing if elected to power.

Meanwhile, the battery of trolls on Twitter whose only job seems to be to stalk journalists and hurl insults continue their free-for-all.

TURNING A MIRROR ON OURSELVES?



One would have expected the media to be up in arms at this perceived harrying by political parties and others. But quite perversely several senior members of the press are seeing these wild assaults as a reason to turn the mirror on themselves.

"For me, this (scrutiny on the media) is a blessing as I see it as a moment to take stock, course-correct and pull back. We have erred heavily not on the side of caution but on the side of carelessness at the very least and connivance at its worst and political interests and lobbies have hemmed us in" wrote Chitra Subramaniam of Bofors fame on her web portal The News Minute.

“Unfortunately when people outside the media criticize us, we have a very thin skin" conceded N Ram, Editor of The Hindu while speaking at an event recently to discuss the state of the media.

"There is an evil out there, an evil which is stamping out all free speech and silencing independent journalists: journalists unite!" CNN IBN's deputy editor Sagarika Ghose warned in an ominous tweet sometime ago.

How has India's fourth estate, which purportedly saw its finest hour under the crippling circumstances of the emergency with journalists fighting censorship with all their might and newspapers printing blank editions to symbolize suppression, morph into this deceitful, prejudiced, and much maligned creature? It goes without saying that there can be no generalizations. Not all media outlets are crooked or subverted by vested interests as Kejriwal would like people to believe. But it would be equally self-deceiving to deny that a growing number are indeed grappling with serious concerns of paid news, curtailed editorial freedom, dodgy ownership patterns and diminished efficacy in a digital environment. Most importantly the battle for survival is getting tougher in an increasingly complicated operating environment.

SURVIVAL PANGS



For television news, fragmentation of viewership is a key concern. There are 389 news channels competing for an ad revenue of Rs 2,500 crore or roughly just Rs 6 crore per channel. Subscription revenues remain low and despite digitization partly kicking in, carriage fees have not reduced as findings from the Ficci-KPMG Indian Media and Entertainment Industry Report 2014 show. Net profit of listed media entities dropped 47% from Rs 1,582 crore in 2011 to Rs 837 crore in 2012 and a staggering 83% to a mere Rs 142 crore in 2013. When the 12 minute ad-cap limit kicks in, business is expected to be further impacted severely. Furthermore, with the advent of the internet, news viewership is also seeing a gradual decline -- accounting for just 7% of television viewership in 2014, down from 7.2% 2013.

Newspapers though seem to be in a better shape. Ironically, even as intense competition from digital platforms has put a question mark on the survival of newspapers globally, the print industry in India has continued to see expansion (by 8.5% from Rs 22.4 crore in 2012 to Rs 24.3 crore in 2013) with regional outlets driving growth and advertisers continuing to remain sanguine, increasing their spends due to the "extensive reach and localization benefits that print offers" (Ficci-KPMG).

For TV channels though, and magazines, this financial crisis has meant layoffs, smaller budgets, a focus on cost efficiencies and most importantly on long term endurance, which has led in the last year, to news channels selling out to corporate groups like Reliance Industries, the Aditya Birla Group and ADAG in a bid to continue to exist. Corporate ownership in itself is not a terrible thing (this paper is majority held by one). Business houses have for decades run news establishments driven by a need to create social capital and support a strong 4th pillar of democracy. But in an atmosphere where all of the above mentioned corporate houses have been sullied by accusations of crony capitalism and of blatantly gunning their support for a particular leader, it is expected that charges of partiality and of being 'sold out' should emerge. It is also expected, and healthy rather for the profession, that there is widespread dissent - both internal (7 high profile editors have quit their outfits) and external.

Amusingly as we discuss this, Wikicable as if on cue, has revealed that Indira Gandhi's government wanted to give total control of The Indian Express to industrialist K K Birla in 1976. No prizes for guessing why!



BETTER TIMES AHEAD?



Which brings us to the question of the future. Are we poised for better times ahead?



Financially, in the short run - probably. Absurd as it may sound, the Lok Sabha elections, the very impetus for the recent backlash against media companies are expected to come as a godsend for both newspapers and news channels. According to Ficci-KPMG ad rates for political advertising will be nearly 30 per cent higher than the average ad rates with news outfits set to rake in approximately Rs 2,500 crore of advertising revenue from the polls, considerably higher than Rs 500 crore spent during 2009. In fact one of the national parties alone has reportedly allocated Rs 400 crore for its mass media ads, which brings to light the serious conflict of interest that the press has to come to grips with - balancing its first and foremost duty as a disseminator of fair, unbiased news while harboring the more pragmatic business approach of ensuring that financiers/patrons/sponsors aren't incensed by its coverage. This is, bluntly put, a wretched dichotomy and wholly damaging to the very idea of a free press!



IS THERE A WAY OUT?



Experts seem to be increasingly of the view that in the absence of a successful state funded, but autonomous public service medium (like the BBC) the only solution to the present crisis is for the now globally emergent trend of non-profit, or patronage journalism to gradually develop in India. India needs to find its local equivalents of investors like Pierre Omidyar, Jeff Bezos (who bought a stake in the Washington Post last year) or Warren Buffett who has been putting his money in reviving an array of regional newspapers across America, perhaps because of his belief in the value of having a thriving 4th estate.

But for that private enterprise itself needs to evolve in India, and unshackle itself from the clutches of government. This will further entail a cleaner polity, reforms in election funding and lesser discretion wrested with policymakers - a long drawn out process.

It would be easier for our politicians, if they truly wish for a cleaner press (do they?), to adopt the Sam Pitroda Committee Report instead, that mulls a rejig of Prasar Bharati (Doordarshan + AIR) and set up a self-regulating broadcaster on the lines of the BBC. This, if followed through would come as the biggest gift from the incoming government to journalism and to India's democracy whose fourth pillar is crumbling.