ITV

Category: Executive Dossier

  • ‘Too much of sensation, not enough sense; too much of Delhi, not enough on the rest:’ Rajdeep Sardesai

    ‘Too much of sensation, not enough sense; too much of Delhi, not enough on the rest:’ Rajdeep Sardesai

    ‘Main zindagi ka saath nibhaata chala gaya,’ is the song that you hear when you call him. With a journalistic experience of 26 years in print and television specialised in covering national politics, this man lets his work do the talking for him. He has never abandoned hard hitting real life stories behind his brand name and has always been open and unbiased about his thoughts. Known for his fearless coverage of news and love for music, he is none other than India Today Group consulting editor Rajdeep Sardesai.

    He is also the author of 2014: The Election that Changed India. Sardesai started his career in 1988 and entered television journalism in 1994. He has bagged several awards for his journalistic excellence. Known for his humble nature and love towards his family, cricket, music, food and news, Sardesai has seen the struggle for a byline in print to an anchor on TV news channel.

    Speaking to Indiantelevision.com’s Megha Parmar, Sardesai sheds some light on PM Narendra Modi, his new hire, social media trends and the big stories witnessed in 2015.

    Read on:

    2015 was all about PM Modi traversing the world… to countries far and wide. Do you believe news channels did justice to the coverage? Don’t you think it was more about discussing his wardrobe choices and pondering about the purpose of him visiting a country rather than putting light on other important ones?

    PM Modi travelling to different parts of numerous countries is just one part of the insight. There are lots of other insights to it. If you see from his point of view, his visits abroad are his highlights. I think no Prime Minister has ever got such coverage before. Manmohan Singh had also travelled to as many countries as Modi in his tenure as a PM, but we didn’t see any coverage on that. Modi is known by his nature and is a great showman. Be it his trip to San Francisco or his trip to Australia, he knows what will sell. Talking about if we did justice to the coverage, I think yes, we did manage to highlight few other important details behind his visit. Having said that, I have also observed that many a times TV news channels act more like cheerleaders and not as journalists while covering such stories.

    In your book, ‘2014 The Election that Changed India,’ you mention about being neutral towards Modi. How difficult was it for you to remain neutral after covering what happened in 2002?

    The 2002 riots have affected me and as an observer I have the right to question politicians and criticise them. The book is my perception on where I stand on Modi. I have just put down my views about the same in my book. I share strong feelings with what happened back in 2002.

    How difficult was it to let go a channel that you had built from scratch? How has been your journey with the India Today Group so far?

    It was very difficult to part ways from the channel. That has been the most emotionally and professionally difficult decision of my life. Talking about the India Today Group, the journey has been good so far. They have been very supportive and have allowed me journalistic freedom and that’s what I value more than anything else.

    Indian media went bonkers over the Sheena Bora case, was it really required or was it simply another way of pleasing the voyeur in us?

    Frankly, it was not required at all. In my view, it’s just an example of how sensationalism replaces sense. The fact though lies that it was indeed a great news story. Mother killing a daughter story is always going to be a great news story. Having said that, we could have covered it much better. We could have laid down many facts than going into so much of gossip and trivia. We lacked on showing less facts, which needed to be covered. It was a big story. But the two questions that are to be asked is, the proportion i.e. did we over cover it and secondly, did we focus more on gossip and trivia and not facts?

    Has the age of a neutral journalist gone? Do anchors or journalists have to start taking sides?

    I don’t want to use the word neutral but according to me the age of the serious journalist, who takes up journalism seriously is under serious threat. A serious journalist would like to do stories beyond what was done in the Sheena Bora case. I don’t think we as journalists should be limited in our thoughts. Though few organisations believe in the idea that unless he or she does not take a strong stand about something, the viewers will be confused. Therefore they resort to taking sides at times for the sake of a strong position. A journalist should always push himself and should be hungry to get something exclusive and unique from a story.

    You voiced your opinion on how news channels missed the bus on the Chennai floods coverage. What steps can be taken by news broadcasters to ensure that this doesn’t happen again?

    The way out is to realise that there is a world beyond Delhi. We need to change our mindset. It is just with the mindset of the people. They have to change their mindset and have to understand that news is not only about Delhi. We followed the Nepal story better than what we did for Chennai floods and we should ask ourselves the reason behind this. I think every big story should be covered in a major way by not restricting ourselves to demographic boundaries.

    Do you think journalists are under threat from people or do you believe that social media is acting as a threat too? Can it affect the newsrooms on what stories to be followed through its trends?

    I don’t think it is a threat. I think social media is a gift to us. One can and should always try to use social media more creatively and constructively. We can’t follow social media just because of the trends or the #tags. It can be a great source of information for good stories. It can play as a compliment to the journalists. But if you only follow what is trending on Twitter or the ‘masala’ on Facebook, then I don’t think we are utilising social media to its fullest.

    If there is a large group on social media that follows me but still targets me, I take pride in that. I have the right to dissent just like everyone but you cannot abuse me. People have to understand what role we as journalists have to play in society.

    Talking about social media affecting newsrooms, today a company can fix the #trends. If the newsrooms get influenced by it, it’s terrible and I think one needs to re-think about what he is exactly trying to do by resorting to such things.

    Do trending #tags like presstitutes bother you?

    It bothers me deeply. It bothers me more because it came from a minister who used such kind of a language. I think and strongly believe that General VK Singh owes an apology to journalists for using that word in the manner he did. And the unfortunate part is that if the ministers do it, then the public will also resort to such things. They will also say that journalists are ‘presstitutes.’ There will be a few journalists who may have done a few things you could object to, but still you can’t use such words. It’s a very unfortunate word and I am sorry to say that a minister has used such a word. Twitter is a double-edged sword. As I said, it can be a great source of information or it can be a deadly aggregator of hate and anger that targets people and will lead on to building enemies. 

    Your views on the usage of the keyword intolerance and the way it was ridiculed.

    I think the way it began was unfortunate. In our country there is so much of threat that even if I give you a serious answer someone will object to it. It’s not about intolerance or religious intolerance. It’s about the lack of respect towards someone’s viewpoint. If I say something you don’t agree with, you might get angry and call me anti-national. That troubles me. India is an extremely tolerate country in many ways. What we are losing is our capacity to listen to the other side’s point of view. I think we need to get some perspective behind this entire debate and we should realise that we need to have a dialogue with each other. Everyone is saying their own thing and moving away in the society, which is not leading any of us to a logical conclusion.

    Is there a reason behind the profession attracting so much of negative criticism in the society?

    I think the fact is that we as journalists have also somewhere lost our way. We have lost our moral compass. We tend to do things sometimes in a manner that it’s bound to face criticism. It’s not that we can hide from that. We are also involved in it. If you mix sense with sensation, there will be people commenting ‘yeh toh nautanki hi karte hai.’ If you reduce a studio to a fish market, people will point fingers at you. But it still does not justify the use of words like ‘presstitiutes.’

    A few days back Harsha Bhogle said how he no longer understood television and its role in sport when he came across young journalists and their obsession with negativity because their editor would not allow anything that was non-confrontational, not aggressive or demanding. What do you have to say about this?

    I am an optimistic. I myself believe that we should have more positive stories. I myself try to do at least one positive story in a day. I agree that there is too much of negativity currently, and you need to have more positive feel-good stories as well. But that doesn’t mean that journalists should abandon negative stories. When there is a negative story, we will obviously have to report it. If in a 24 hours new channel, we cannot see one positive story then there is something wrong and we have to rectify that. It’s all about proportion; cover the Sheena Bora case but don’t cover it at the expense of the other news. Cover other news, but don’t cover it at the expense of the Chennai floods.

    Will we soon see TV news divided into two parts? Debates and News?

    I think viewers are tired of what many of the news channels are providing them. I know it’s a staple diet in the news space; but it is the cheapest way of doing journalism. Getting five people in the studio and making them fight is cheap. It doesn’t cost you much. The viewers want different ways of stating factual information from you. It will work but not in the long run.

    With growing competition, news channels have to witness a fight of breaking news first. What is your take on that?

    The thing about being first is the most stupid thing that you can have in journalism. It is stupid to go through this ‘tamasha’ of who breaks it first. What is important is the way you write and interpret it rather than being the first to break it. Breaking news at one level is breaking down now.

    Is digital gradually taking over TV when it comes to breaking news? What should news broadcasters be doing to keep the TV news audience enact?

    Yes I think so. I think earlier TV was the first resource for information. The traditional is losing its importance now. I think we will have to do much more quality stuff. Quality differentiating news is the need of the hour. The future is about quality and not quantity. The quicker the media changes its working structure; the lesser the TV channels will have to worry about its audience. They will follow the news channels eventually.

    Should ratings determine the editorial strategy as only few people have meter boxes whereas there are so many digital followers of the news channels? Is it fair to curate content for people meters and forget the followers?

    I think we should be conscious about ratings but it cannot decide content, in my view. Content should be decided on the basis of quality. If you give out quality content, you will get good enough ratings in the long run. The system itself is so flawed, that you cannot have ratings to decide your content. It is definitely unfair for the followers who are not a part of the ratings. In the end, we would be left pleasing and entertaining the people rather than enlightening them with quality news.

    Your views on the declining standards of news media is no secret. Where do you think news went wrong in 2015?

    One of the stories that we missed out in this year is Chennai floods. We did not cover it properly in the early days. Later on it was good. The first part wherein Chennai was being hit by the floods is something that I would call as our failure. We have to move beyond the Delhi centric view of the world. And I still think that we tend to focus more on the sensation element rather than on the sense.

    The other one is the Sheena Bora case and how we covered it. I personally enjoyed covering the Bihar elections where I was talking to the people and not the politicians. I think you can cover politics differently and not only through politicians. I think there is too much of sensation, not enough of sense and too much of Delhi, not enough coverage on the rest.

    Will 2016 also see news going the HD way? Is it the need of the hour?

    I think so. But even that depends on the economics of the channel. I don’t think at this moment news channels are going that way. Economically it doesn’t make sense to me. I am sure it will happen in a year or two.

    What will you advise young igniting minds who aspire to be journalists?

    To the evolving mindset I will suggest to keep your minds free and open to ideas. Always be passionate about news and never force your mind towards anything.

  • “Our strategy is clear, we are ready to associate with everybody but we won’t compromise with our transparency:” Tony D’Silva

    “Our strategy is clear, we are ready to associate with everybody but we won’t compromise with our transparency:” Tony D’Silva

    For Hinduja’s Headend In The Sky (HITS) platform – NXT Digital, which was launched earlier this year, the journey so far has been about tussling it out. From procuring the requisite license from the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (MIB) to getting broadcasters on board, for NXT Digital, it was no mean feat. Focusing on phase III and IV areas of Digital Addressable System (DAS), the venture has made it very clear that they mean business and are here for the long haul.

    Led by Grant Investrade managing director Tony D’Silva, the venture is investing heavily in order to achieve the goals that have been set. With an aim to spread its network pan India, NXT Digital has deployed teams on ground to reach out to operators. Speaking to Indiantelevision.com’s Anirban Roy Choudhury, D’Silva speaks about the roadmap ahead for NXT Digital, the recent deal with Zee Entertainment Enterprises as well as India’s cable digitisation drive. D’silva makes no bones about the fact that the company is ready to associate with anybody but will not compromise with its transparency.

    Read on:

    How did the industry respond to the launch of NXT Digital?

    The launch of NXT Digital has been very well received by most markets across the country. Initially people were skeptical about what this system was all about. There was a lot of negative publicity in the market spread by people with various vested interests saying that we would face the same problems that Jain HITS faced. I think we have been able to overcome that gradually. And now we believe that we are a platform to stay. We have made substantial investment and have the financial support to invest more.

    What do you think has been the biggest achievement so far for NXT Digital?

    The most important achievement is the fact that we have successfully signed all the broadcasters. The deal with broadcasters is for both active and passive services (with exception of Zee), which is a greater achievement. Now I think we have started to move faster. Initially the progress was a little slow because there was a lot of confusion in the market as what will be the last date of DAS Phase III. However, now that there is clarity on the final date, the demand has seen a substantial growth in terms of COPE mini headend systems and set top boxes (STBs).

    When you speak about demand, is there any particular region where you are witnessing the demand or is it pan India?

    It is indeed pan India. In fact, we are observing a huge demand in phase I and II areas. But considering our decision to not disturb the existing ecosystem, we have decided to focus on phase III and IV markets only as of now. That said, we will review the model whenever needed.

    How robust is your infrastructure to meet the growing demand?

    We built our infrastructure for a particular demand but we have gone well beyond that demand and hence we have to now re-build our infrastructure. And that’s exactly what we will do to meet the demand.

    Infrastructure will certainly not be a problem as far as NXT Digital is concerned. We are evaluating various options when it comes to STBs. DAS Phase IV will have a different affording power as compared to phase III and keeping the diversity in mind, we plan to offer a variety of options when it comes to STBs. By next year we will add one or two more transponders too.

    How do you plan to ensure cordial reach out to the operators?

    We reach out to the operators through various print, digital mediums, live roadshows etc. Moreover we have an on-ground team, which interacts with the operators. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Once cable operators as well as the market have seen our services, there will automatically be a level of satisfaction and confidence and then they will be our ambassadors.

    What’s your take on pricing when it comes to DAS Phase III and IV?

    The content pricing is a function of broadcasters. We follow a business model where we don’t make any money from content. We don’t want to make money from content. The lower the broadcaster gives us, the lower we offer to our operators. Broadcasters unfortunately don’t see a difference between Phase III and Phase IV even though we have been repeatedly appealing to them because there is a clear difference in Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) in the two regions. I think it’s the function of authority overseeing the digitisation process to ensure the fact that the price quoted is fair for the entire ecosystem.

    Is there a clear enough revenue model?

    I think there should be a differentiation in the markets, or another way to look at it is to see what you can afford and pay for it. But I don’t know if the second one is a right option at this stage. And the reason I say at this stage is because the consumer is used to a kind of model and suddenly you cannot give him another rationale and logic. The transition needs to happen after following a logical approach and that is something that I firmly believe in. You cannot bring in a change by being harsh on the end consumers. 

    How many operators has NXT Digital signed with so far? Are you happy with the number?

    We are very close to touching the 500 mark and I am very happy with the number. The number will go up substantially as we come closer and closer to the D-Day. There are a huge number of people who are still trying to figure out the best way forward. The main reason why operators held back was because they were insecure about us not having all the content. After getting Zee on board that problem has been addressed and now we will certainly see the demand going up.

    The other problem that we faced in the initial stages was our broadcaster friends campaigning against us. They went on to many operators and mis-informed them saying NXT Digital will also be on the same track as Jain HITS as we will not provide them the content. I think we have proved that these were just rumours and hence they don’t count anymore.

    What’s your take on the entire digitisation process?

    Not all operators are equipped with higher education and hence they do not understand the actual meaning of digitisation. Digitisation does not mean putting a digital head-end and STBs but it is also about managing the backend, packaging and bundling. On the other hand, there are a lot of smart, intelligent Chinese vendors all around laying the trap and there are a good number of operators falling in that trap maybe because of the government pressure or lack of understanding.

    The other thing I have been telling the government is that when you look at regulation per se, the entire onus of implementing digitisation lies on the MSO. However, we are forgetting that a very important part of the process is the local cable operator (LCO), who is delivering the signal to the end consumer. Therefore billing, receipt collection, ensuring quality, consciousness and other on-ground responsibilities should remain with the LCO.

    The government needs to understand that unlike many other countries, India is not a homogenous market. On a single street you will find slums and multi-storeyed apartments, which are both are consuming content. The LCO cannot go with a fixed price because it will be more than some or less than some. Moreover, he will also have to pay service tax on it. The concept of billing needs to be realistic and practical. There are a lot of things that need to be addressed if we really want to digitise the country. 

    You are also providing local channel facility, which is something that lacks on DTH. Who takes the responsibility of the content put on those channels?

    We have a mechanism through which operators can have as many as eight – sixteen local channels. The benefit is that they are all encrypted and hence piracy is taken care of. We are clear with the operator that whatever content is put up, should follow the Cable Act. If the operator airs pirated content or breaches the law, the broadcasters can inform us and we will switch off signals. We have the power to switch off, which other MSOs don’t and that’s another advantage that we have. We have to understand one thing that the COPE belongs solely to the operator and therefore the liability of whatever is inserted through that COPE is on him. 

    Can DD Freedish capitalise on the on-ground chaos? If there is a blackout, people may just move to DD Freedish?

    DD Freedish is also like any other DTH platform. I don’t think it meets consumer requirements. The consumer knows what he wants to watch. Setting up a DD Freedish and buying an STB is similar investment. It’s just that there is no subscription fee attached to DD Freedish but it has its limitations when it comes to number of channels. And not only channels, the exposure that we offer is far beyond, be it international with global channels, local channels or value added services. So we are far ahead of a platform like DD Freedish and we are not bothered by it.

    You had all major broadcasters on board except Zee. How was your experience inking the deal with Zee?

    A deal that took four months to be signed cannot be called a smooth one. We went to the MIB, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and then eventually tussled it out at the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). For many years now we have been requesting TRAI to come up with a standard Interconnect Agreement (ICA). There are so many operators across the country who cannot even afford to go to the TDSAT. It’s not an easy process; he has to come to Delhi, hire a lawyer and it needs a lot of financial backup. The deal signing with Zee was a learning experience for me. It was a case of dealing with people who say something and do something totally different. It was a clear case of mis-interpretation of law.

    What is the way forward for NXT Digital?

    Value added services are important to ensure growth and now we are focusing aggressively on that front. I want to make one thing very clear, which is that the Hinduja Group will fight this till the very end. We are not going to be tempered over by anybody in this industry. If there is a genuine problem or concern, we are more than happy to sit and discuss. At the same time, no matter what, we will not be stepped on for nothing. I firmly believe that the whole is always bigger than the individual. If we have all the broadcasters with us and one against, there has to be some vested interest. Our strategy is clear, we are ready to associate with everybody for business or betterment of the industry but we won’t compromise with our transparency. 

  • S Yesudas plays a whole new ball game with triggerbridge

    S Yesudas plays a whole new ball game with triggerbridge

    MUMBAI: Of late there has been much talk about going beyond the sales driven take on advertising among the agencies. The focus should shift back to building brand identity, if brands have a long term vision in mind.

     

    It would have been great if the talk truly reflected the industry’s concern over the matter, but, alas, much of that is lip service according to S Yesudas, the former managing director of Vizeum.

     

    The need of the hour, he feels, is to break this pattern that agencies are so used to, and bring in some disruption in the ecosystem. This is precisely what he plans to achieve with his entrepreneurial venture triggerbridge.

     

    Backed by his expertise in media business for over two decades, Yesudas partnered with Ajit Nair of MX Advertising and Amit Tripathi from IdeateLabs to form this ‘un-agency,’ which has managed to create quite a buzz in the industry ever since its launch earlier this month.

     

    Prior to kick starting his new startup venture, Yesudas was known for his successful stint at Vizeum India as managing director, preceded by Grey Worldwide, Lintas/Initiative Media and R K Swamy BBDO/Media Direction. Interestingly, he was Vizeum’s first employee and built it to a successful position with its current 55 employees within a span of four years.

     

    With an impressive portfolio like this, is it easier to handle his new role in a start up? To find out, Indiantelevision.com got in touch with the man himself.

     

    Here’s what he had to say:

     

    What sets triggerbridge apart from other players in the market?

    We are the ‘unagency’ and are free of all the bondages as that of an agency. The big and basic difference is, our reason to exist is not to help our clients “spend” their marketing resources, but to help their brands build bridges of relevance with consumers in various ways through our philosophy of True Vertexing.

     

    We look at the core of the brand, human insights, storytelling, technology and data and help itself express truly in order to carry the well aligned consumers along as the brand moves to the highest peak, the vertex. Consumers are human beings is a fact that’s forgotten in the world of transaction. We cater to all brand owners who are looking for much more than just short term sales from their consumer relationships.

     

    Few agencies have taken the ‘brand first’ route as well. What is your take on them?

    I’m sure brand love is a dinosaur concept to many. Those who talk about the same, pretend it can be created by the effect and weight of their “advertising” investments including endorsements and other sponsorships. I would leave triggerbridge, the unagency, for our clients to judge us.

     

    What disruptive ideas does triggerbridge have in store for its clients?

    There’s disruption in everything we do. Firstly, we are not just a service, but a product as well. Among the set of products is a platform that aggregates storytellers and technology producers for the benefit of brands. Our focus is the brand in its entirety and not specific specialised solutions. We also have a unique structure of a creative advisory board, which consists of real storytellers like authors and theatre artists along with a business board that consists of members of the board of other companies as well as venture capitalists. We are also looking at a whole new measurement of SoV and SoE as Share of Vision and Share of Empathy as against the transactional Share of Voice and Share of Expenditure.

     

    Since triggerbridge is a product as well, what is the target group or clientele you are looking at?

    Every brand owner who is interested in looking beyond short term results and those who actually believe that the future of commerce is brand commerce, would be a triggerbridge client. 

     

    What is the one thing that the industry is lacking currently?

    I believe lot of agencies today pay lip service to brand building and focus their energy and attention on “selling” their specialised silos to clients for better profitability. Once you create a need and everyone is doing that, the advertisers, knowingly and/or unknowingly will keep following the pattern.

     

    Most often computers create the strategy to connect with humans with emotions. Then it is a mad rush to justify Share of Voice (SoV) and Share of Expenditure (SoE). The result is increasing instances of ad avoidance and the agency then offers one more specialisation to “catch” the consumer’s’ attention. The circle keep going on. We will fill the very vacuum of zero brand love for most brands, by first helping the brand owners understand the purpose of their brands. We will also help them articulate that through executions that will create multi – sensorial impact on the consumers

     

    Can you mention one recent campaign that you think lacked brand identity?

    One campaign that comes to mind is what Pepsi did during IPL, getting consumers to feature in its ads. It was a gimmick that I presume they spent top dollars on. And I personally don’t think it worked at all. They could have done things to bring together larger Pepsi communities across the country, very meaningfully, who interacted with each other in a sustainable manner as they shared their love for the brand, at much lesser cost and left enduring impressions on the consumers. But again this is purely based on their stated purpose/intention.

     

    Tell us about your partners and what they bring to the table in triggerbridge? 

    Ajit Nair has been running a very successful full-service advertising business, MX Advertising, for a quarter of a century and has built many brands through that journey. Amit Tripathi has been running a leading digital business, Ideate Labs for 15 years. I have been in the media business for over two decades.

     

    Our vision, purpose and the conviction about the future of communication business converged at the same point. I also don’t think there could have been a better combination than this which brings all aspects of the communication business together.

     

    What is your target for the upcoming year?

    We have not set a revenue or profit target. Money will follow good and differentiated work that will produce actual results. But we have a five year blue print with clear milestones to eventually see a good part of the “advertising” market practice True Vertexing. 

  • ‘Television has great competition coming from digital:’ Siddharth Kumar Tewary

    ‘Television has great competition coming from digital:’ Siddharth Kumar Tewary

    The man who has taken the mythological and historical concepts on television a notch higher with his creative innovation, Siddharth Kumar Tewary is known for shows like Mahabharat, Razia Sultan and Suryaputra Karn. With exquisite images and content creation Tewary has given a new dimension to shows catering to these popular genres on Hindi general entertainment channels (GECs). Tewary’s production house Swastik Production launched its first show Amber Dhara in 2007 and since then there has been no looking back. 

     

    The production house’s founder and creative director Tewary believes that in the coming times, digital is going to give tough competition to the television broadcast industry.

     

    In conversation with Indiantelevision’s Sonam Saini, Tewary talks about how 2015 has been for Swastik Production, the mythological genre, OTT platforms and more.

     

    Read on… 

     

    How has the year 2015 been for you and your production house?

    It’s been a decent year for us if not a great one. We have done a variety of shows from historical shows like Razia Sultan to dramas like Manmarziyaan. We stretched ourselves to keep us out of the comfort zone. So it’s been a good year for Swastik Production. 

     

    A few things were appreciated by the masses, some have been appreciated by critics, while some others have been liked by the people from the industry as well. As a company, we have always believed in doing something different.

     

    What’s your take on the mythological and historical fare on TV this year?

    I genuinely believe that the mythological and historical genre is really cool. It’s time that such legendary stories with today’s technology and superior presentation take off on television. This is premium content, which is being made on a large scale.

     

    We are making these shows relevant for today’s viewers and it’s really interesting to do mythology. In period dramas, so much needs to be created and you need to transport viewers into that era. And that’s the reason why I am more than happy to do these kinds of shows. 

     

    In the last two years you have taken mythological and historical concepts on TV to a different level with exquisite images and creative innovations. What drives you to experiment in these genres?

    Thanks to Mahabharat, my belief has always been that I need to better myself with everything I do. From whatever work I have done so far, luckily with mythology I got a chance to recreate a world that has not been seen on Indian television. 

     

    I also did the same kind of thing with Agle Janam Mohe Bitiya Hi Kijo. People have not seen the village that we created with the story line in the show, which was a different concept altogether. The same goes with Bandhan, which  again had a different concept. So something, which is really interesting and comes with a lot of challenges to recreate is what excites me. 

     

    I don’t do things for the sake of being different. I do it differently with all my creative efforts. The shows we do should appeal to the masses. 

     

    Mythological and historical shows almost cost double of a normal fiction show. Is it a profitable proposition for you?

    Of course, it is. I don’t think we can survive without profit in the industry but yes the cost of making these is much higher than normal fiction shows because we spend so much on everything from set decoration to costume to jewellery to locations. So since the production costs are much higher, it takes longer time to recover unlike regular daily soaps.

     

    Also with such shows the revenue is already fixed in a way, so one needs to keep an eye on expenses, which doesn’t happen initially. Expenses tend to go higher than anticipated and hence it takes time to recover costs.

     

    With your success in this genre, a firm perception is building that Swastik is for mytho and historical content? Do you see that as a challenge because the fact is that you do create content, which does not belong to this genre?

    As a company we do all kinds of shows. If we have done mythological shows, then we have also done shows likeBegusarai and Manmarziyaan. Though we don’t do typical saas bahu dramas but yes we do differentiated content. So our company is perceived for doing different content. I don’t see that as a problem. We believe in doing creative things and right now people are thinking that we do more of mythological shows but the moment we do something different, this perception will change. 

     

    OTT is making a lot of noise. What’s your take on the platform.

    I think it’s good and it is a great time for production houses and people who create content. As a production house, we are conceptualisers and we started this company to create content. We will stick to doing that for every platform.

     

    Netflix is about to set foot in India soon and they have already started talking to production houses. Have you been approached? 

    I don’t want to comment on that. There certain things that makes the digital space very exciting and from a creative point of view, it gives us a platform where we can tell different kind of stories. Initially, the medium will remain niche and by niche I mean it will only cater to the audience, who are online.

     

    In TV, the IP belongs to channel commissioning the content. If you start creating content for OTT, will you follow the same formula or will you keep the IP with you? 

    We have already started working in that direction. So whether it’s television or digital, we need to create value for the company and I think that is the space content creators should move into. And for creating that value, we need to lessen the number of projects we take on. We have to focus more on the limited content that we create, so the industry needs to change to create that value.

     

    If bandwidth issues get sorted and digital advertising takes off in a big way, do you think digital can be a good medium or is 20 minutes of content on mobile devices a little too much?

    Mobile devices are the platform to consume content through internet only. The ecosystem is constantly evolving. Earlier we used to have three-hour movies, now they’ve been cut down to two hours. 

     

    As storytellers and creators, we need to know who we’re talking to. The most important thing is that we are talking to the younger generation today, who want instant gratification. Hence your content cannot be 20 minutes long. Sometimes if your content is that strong and it can hold your viewers’ attention, then it’s absolutely up to the creators.

     

    Recently the TV industry has seen some negativity and the editors strike was one such example. Do you think it’s getting more and more difficult in Mumbai? Shouldn’t there be more collaboration?

    I will be diplomatic if I say that there is no problem. We are facing some issues. We are currently shooting one of our shows in Gujarat. What’s more, during Mahabharat we were shooting half our shows there because of good infrastructure. So we don’t face any issues on the shows that we are shooting out of Bombay. 

     

    In Bombay, the issues that are raised by others are not always one sided. From cable and satellite point of view the Indian television industry is 25 years old now. I think very soon things will fall into place. 

     

    Do you see the quality of content on television getting better?

    It’s already getting better but it needs to raise the bar yet again. I am happy in the way that other channels and producers are investing in content these days. As a team, we need to push the quality of content more. We have great competition coming from digital. Therefore, we need to push more before someone else asks us to improve.

     

    Indian television content is getting somewhat bold. Don’t you think it can kill the family viewing factor, which has been its strength?

    Television is self regulated currently. It depends on the time in which the bold content is being aired. If makers feel that their audience need that kind of content, they put it because the objective is to keep the audience hooked and not let them go away. People are sensible enough to choose what that want to see and what they don’t want. The choice is always in the hands of viewers.

     

    Has BARC rural data impacted the dynamics of content creation?

    My understanding is still limited because everybody is still figuring out the trend. It will need a couple of more months to find out the actual trends. At least now we know that what the whole country is watching. The best part is that in rural India, Zee Anmol is doing well. Till now we didn’t know what was happening. Our show Bandhan is the number three show on an all India basis!

     

    I believe it will have a great impact on content because now we clearly know who we are talking to. So we need sharper content now.

     

    Where is Swastik going from here? And where would you like to see it by the end of 2016?

    I wish I knew but I can say that Swastik will always be around. If there’s one thing that we always knew, it’s that we have to deliver the best quality of work. Our aim is not to always play safe but to try and do something different. Taking on challenges and not being in our comfort zone is what we do.

     

    In 2016, we would like to mix two famous television series together, which will be loved by all.

  • ‘We have never got the cable television pay model right’: Ronnie Screwvala

    ‘We have never got the cable television pay model right’: Ronnie Screwvala

    Despite having a negative connotation more often than not, “disruption” can be a good thing, especially when it’s planned and executed in a strategic manner. And if there’s one person who is known for good disruption time and again in the Indian media and entertainment industry, it’s Rohinton Soli Screwvala or Ronnie, as he is popularly known as.

    With a quest to grow and excel in whatever he undertakes, Screwvala belongs to the rare breed of first generation media entrepreneurs in India. For him, trying is not enough for he believes in achieving all his dreams as he dreams with his eyes open!

    The pioneer of cable television in India, Screwvala has been best known to build brands and enter untapped territories. From a humble beginning in the cable industry, erecting one of India’s well known media company UTV, grabbing The Walt Disney Company’s attention, foraying into Kabbadi – a sport that was never televised robustly to breaking even in the second year, Screwvala has always pushed the boundaries.

    Complacency and failure are two words that don’t exist in his dictionary. In a country where entrepreneurship means legacy business, Screwvala is the flag bearer for first generation entrepreneurs.

    In a conversation with Indiantelevision.com’s Anirban Roy Choudhury, Screwvala goes back in time and shares his views on the Indian cable TV industry, Disney, sports and more.

    Read on for more :-

    The Disney – UTV deal is touted as a landmark deal in the Indian broadcast space. How does it feel when you look back at it today?

    I feel very proud when I look back at Disney India. We have a phenomenal team, which is doing an incredible job across the board. The channel is doing well and the movie studio is doing fantastic. The live show Beauty and the Beast has given live experiences in India a new benchmark. The best part is that they did it with local talent. It was not some imported show that travelled in here and went away.

    So it’s an incredible job done by the Disney team in India and I am proud of them. The easiest thing would have been to get a travelling show in, but they took the difficult route with local talent so it’s a local Disney show. The Disney team makes me feel proud.

     

    As a pioneer of cable television in India, you played a pivotal role in building it from scratch. What is your view on the evolution?

    When I look at cable, I have to say I have a little bit of regret because we are the only country in the world where we have to explain what cable TV is!

    The concept of local cable operator (LCO), multi system operator (MSO) is not there anywhere in the world other than India. A cable operator means that you need to pay for content. There are cable operators who are actually aggregators of channel. We have never got the pay model right! It started because nobody wanted to pay. Then there was a whole decade of under-declaration and nobody made capital investment.

    There are two things: Firstly, after 25 years of cable we are still not paying for content and secondly, serious investments have not gone into cable. You need billions of dollars……. we are still using the same cable that we were using 25 years back. We are still using the same model that we were using 20 years back. Yes, there have been some improvements, but we cannot call it cable TV. We are not cable TV like the world understands cable TV and that’s my problem.

    On the flip side, I must say it’s an incredible cottage industry. Look at the number of jobs it has created! It’s such a gigantic industry and for that matter if it was not the way it flourished, TV might not have been that popular the way it is. People could still be watching terrestrial TV and there would have been no satellite programming. So the fact that it has spread because of its entrepreneur spirit is a proud moment.

    I am proud of the entrepreneur spirit that has gone in there. However, I am regretful because no serious investment has been made there and we could not manage to get the pay model right.

    Speaking about the pay model, are we getting it right in digital? We are providing content for free and hence making free content consumption a behaviour.

    Let’s be very clear… people think online is free, but we are not doing anything for free. The first entrepreneurship course that we are launching is for Rs 50,000 for three months. Yes, people are skeptical to pay but that’s the way forward.

    The problem with the digital platform is that the biggest player in the ecosystem – YouTube is for free. That becomes habit forming. Things will change on digital once we go to experiential viewing. There has to be something for you other than just watching… I don’t have any idea what that is but we are trying very very hard to figure it out.

    I think the digital paid space will be experiential where you are not paying for watching but for watching plus plus… We are trying to figure out what those plusses are.

    Do we have a content strategy ready for digital? People still consider it to be a platform for 2 to 3 minutes video consumption.

    You will be shocked to hear that since last year, people are watching 30 to 40 minutes of content online even while everyone thought that digital means two to three minutes. 

    There are more people now watching 20 to 30 minutes of content online compared to the ones watching two – three minutes. What’s more, people have been also heard saying that the smaller duration content is snaky. That habit is changing because there are increased offerings. You give people quality content, they will consume it.

    Quality of content and storytelling in digital is changing. People are ready to watch a full movie on digital but they cannot now because of the bandwidth issue. So content size is not an issue, it’s the quality that matters.

    Talking about films on digital, Netflix recently simulcast The Beasts of No Nations. What’s your take on Netflix and what is the revenue model that Indian players should follow?

    Today Netflix’s market cap is as much as 21st Century Fox’s, it is as big as Time Warner and higher than Viacom… with the sole exception of Disney, which is the largest media company in the world.

    The road ahead for digital has to be ad revenue. We cannot fool ourselves on that. But the frustrating part is that we are dealing with people who do not understand digital. So the problem is that when you start a new digital medium, the main constituent – the advertisers – do not understand it at all. They still think it’s niche. They just don’t get it that today movies can be launched on digital.

    There are huge advantages of the platform. Sorry to generalise on the advertisers but the fact is that they do not understand digital and it’s going to take them three to four years to understand it. The big challenge is that while digital players will rely on advertisers, there will be no one available to experiment. So players will have to experiment, prove and only then will advertisers come on board.

    Are you saying that the next few years will be very tough for digital players?

    It will be tough, but it will be tough in a good way. It won’t be scary tough. Only serious players in the ecosystem will stay. The others that are coming with a herd mentality, the MCN players etc… I have no idea what they are up to.

    You cannot wake up to 20 different channels. What is the need? What is the model? Where will it go? What will happen to it? And the worst part is, you got investors backing those models. I fail to understand what they are up to. But yes, serious players who want to be in the ecosystem for good will be there.

    After your successful stint with Kabaddi, are you eyeing any other sport?

    We are investing in football. We are doing global grass root training programmes but it’s not the training that everyone is doing here. The training that we are giving is very different wherein we will take 60 kids to Germany for six years of training.

    Since the cost of something like this is very high, the expenses will be shared by us and the candidates. The will pay for the lodging and boarding, whereas we will pay for the training. We will manage their careers for the next 10 years. The age group that we are looking at is under 12, under 14, and under 16. We have to catch them really young and that’s the challenge.

    There are people who do three months training and summer courses, but you cannot become football stars by that. In our initiative, the kids will have to be away from home for six years. The peer pressure to meet global standards, the environment, discipline and the commitment is what we plan to offer them.

    So is this a business proposition of USports or are you doing this to uplift the sport?

    (Laughs). Of course it is a business proposition! Swades is the only social initiative that I am in for non-profit. Everything else is pure business. I think we are in the process of developing 300 future football stars. Then we will manage their careers for 10 years, that’s our business model.

    What is the progress of your motor-sport innovation?

    My motor-sport venture is an attempt to start a destination sport in India involving two-wheelers. Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu, Leh and Ladakh and Puducherry are the locations that we have in mind. The infrastructure has to step up to it, and the most important part is not the track but safety.

    This year India will be number one in terms of bike consumption, larger than China. The two-wheeler population is massive in India. Therefore, sports is an interesting way to go forward with that. But to us, the most important part is safety. It’s not a rally that we are planning so we cannot do it on a muddy paddy field. The infrastructure will take time to grow. There will be one domestic team and one international. The domestic riders will go abroad and train for six months.

    How much more time do you think it will take to match the quality you need? Are there any other investors involved?

    I would have liked to start it in next six months but the safety level that we are targeting will take at least 18 months more.

    I am doing it on my own and there is no partner involved to start the league. Here, we are going to be a league owner and our partners will be the ones we sell our franchises to.

    You have entered into online education with UpGrad. What are your plans with the venture?

    UpGrad is in the education space for post-grads. We are eyeing 14 to 16 completely different online courses, which will all be post-grad and specialised courses.

    We kicked off on 25 November with our entrepreneurship course. UpGrad received 2000 applications and then eventually we shortlisted 600 participants for the first cohort that started on 25 November. This would be the first time someone is doing a course of such high scale on entrepreneurship. The number that we roped in is huge. For every hundred students, there will be a teacher associate, who will interact with them at regular intervals. There will be a continuous process of mentorship. The course on entrepreneurship is of three months. After that the next one on Big Data will be of nine months to a year. We are launching three new courses, which will be out between March and May.

     

    You recently wrote a book and that inspired many igniting minds. Are you planning a second one too?

    I am not an author for sure! A book takes a lot of effort, I am happy being a business man. I am not even thinking about one more book at this stage.

     

     

     

     

    What are your plans with Swades? How much do you invest in it both in terms of money and time?

    Swades to me is not an investment. We are putting our heart and soul in it. Zarina, my wife, is working full time for that. We are not cutting cheques. Philanthropy is when you cut a few cheques and give it to an NGO. We are building a foundation from ground up. Yes, we are putting our own money but we are also putting our sweat and toil. We have 1200 people working for Swades, which is also quite big. It is a life-long commitment for us and there is no running away from it.

     

     

    You are too much of a TV person to not be in TV. When are you going back? What’s next?

    I don’t feel I am being left alone. Look at the things we are doing with Football, UpGrad and with Kabaddi. If because of Filmfare, five people used to come for selfies, now at least 50 of them come because of Kabaddi. It’s the same in rural areas too. When we travel for Swades related work, we get to know the popularity and the craze of the sport.

    I am happy with what we are doing and have no plans of going back. Swades is a key focus for me and Zarina both and we will continue to do what we are doing.

  • “Working with talent like Priyanka Chopra and Lady Gaga has been a blessing”

    “Working with talent like Priyanka Chopra and Lady Gaga has been a blessing”

    Anjula Acharia-Bath has many achievements to her credit. Among them:  founding deshits.com, bringing Lady Ga-Ga to India,  helping Pussycat Dolls collab with AR Rahman, and appearing on both Vanity Fair’s Next Establishment list and Billboard’s Top 40 Women in Music. 

     

    But her latest tour de force is something which could be a game changer for Indian talent in Hollywood. As manager of Priyanka Chopra, she has played a key role in the waves that the Bollywood star is making in the US in her debut series on ABC –  Quantico. Chopra plays Alex Parrish, a FBI trainee-turned agent-on-the-run, in the series which is topping the viewership charts in the US.

     

    Born to Pubjabi immigrant  parents in the UK, Anjula is increasingly being talked of as the must-talk-to professional for bridging international and Indian entertainment. The lady, who jetsets and parties with Hollywood’s biggest producers (Jimmy Iovine, the founder of Interscope Records invested in desihits) , directors, show-runners, musicians was recently appointed as a partner at venture capital firm Trinity Ventures.

     

    Indiantelevision.com spoke to Anjula to understand how Quantico happened, how she functions as a manager and many other topics.

     

    Read on:

     

     

    How did you meet Priyanka?
    Priyanka and I initially met through Salim and Sulaiman (Merchant) via Devraj Sanyal who was working with me at Desi Hits at that time. 
     

     

    Priyanka’s moving into Hollywood began with her music releases, followed by TV series. Was it by design or did it just happen?  What was your role in this strategy?

    It was definitely a strategy. I had this thought that we would have to tear down the pillars of western pop culture. It started with Football (NFL) including music collaborations (Will.I.AM & Pitbull), fashion (GUESS GIRL) , film (Disney Planes) and now the biggest driver of pop culture in America is hit TV shows! Think Scandal, Game of Thrones, Homeland , all these shows dictate pop culture and I wanted PC to be a part of that.  
     

     

    Priyanka, though she has the right credentials – a Miss World, a Bollywood star – was unknown amongst the biggies in Hollywood. How long were you working on getting her the right entry before the chance meeting with Kelli Lee in Ron Myer’s house which led to the series on ABC?

    I wasn’t working too long. I have a lot of access to incredible people who wanted to join this journey with Priyanka and I.

     

    Was ABC your only stop? Or did you make others?

    No. Though we had offers from other studios, ABC was our first choice because they really had mastered on creating strong diverse female characters
     

     

    Lee flew down to India to get Priyanka sign the deal. What convinced Priyanka to do so because she probably was busy with her Indian projects too?

    I think a lot of very influential people talked to Pee Cee about the opportunity. But when she met Kelli, she felt very comfortable with the way things were to be handled and was happy to understand that her ideas and views would be heard.

     

    What does being Priyanka’s manager in the competitive artist management world of Hollywood entail? 

    A lot. I would say that the three main skills a manager should possess are deep lasting connections, a relentless nature and a passion that goes beyond simply making money.  Priyanka is a passion project for me. I work full time for a VC Fund (Trinity Ventures). I think the skills required in our business are the same – the ability to identify talent, which is an entrepreneurial role; next is to help them build an incredible company, bringing meaningful connections and sticking next to the entrepreneur when things get tough. 
     

     

    There are so many other Indian actors who have gone to  Hollywood. But Priyanka seems to have got an ideal platform: a chunky meaty lead role, great promotion all over the US. How did you manage that?

    We just showcased her talent and made the right connections. 

     

    You have collaborated on bringing other big US stars like Lady Ga Ga  to India and AR Rahman and PussyCat . Which way is more challenging – India to the US or the US to India? And why?

    I think India to the US for sure, simply because western pop culture travels across the globe more fluidly.  Bollywood had a lot of penetration across the world (40% of revenue is outside of India) but language is a bigger barrier. 
     

     

    Do you see yourself in the role of taking many more Indian artistes into Hollywood or are Priyanka and Trinity your focus now? What advise would you give other Indians – whether musicians or actors – wanting to enter Hollywood? 
    Trinity and Priyanka don’t leave much spare time for me. I am passionate about tech stars and pop stars! My advice to Indian talent is to use the web as much as possible to get the word out – drive your social media engagement.  Then, when you have created enough critical property for yourself, find someone who believes in you and is relentless about championing you.  Like I said it, finding the right investor is a very important factor. 

     

     

     Sofia Vergara is amongst the highest earning actors in the US. And she is amongst the diversity stars that you and Lee talked about in the Forbes interview. Do you see Priyanka heading in that direction of being in the league of the highest paid too? 
    Yes I do. Priyanka is one of the most incredible talents I have ever met; and I have met a lot. She is a triple treat. She dances, sings and acts and in addition to that, she is ridiculously beautiful inside and out. 

     

     

     The buzz is that she is getting a talk show. Is that true? If yes, then why a talk show? Why not a big Hollywood film?
    You can’t believe all the rumors you hear 😉 stay tuned!

     

     

     How is your association with Trinity panning out? Do you welcome pitches or do you go around scouting for places to park investments? And is it just seed capital or is it large tranches of capital? What do you look for in projects? And what happens after you find one you like? The process from liking to getting the funds to the enterprise, what does the entrepreneur have to do?
     We invest primarily in series A and B companies mainly based out of the USA. Every partner here has his or her specialty area on which they draw upon their expertise and network to assess the investment opportunity. Then they bring it to the table for full partnership approval.  Everyone is different in their approach but personally I look for deals that solve a particular problem with founders that I think are stars! Trinity has a long term view on entrepreneurs which is something I really subscribe to; it’s very much about relationships. 
     

     

    Would you consider proposals  from young entrepreneurs from India – especially women – who have kickass local and global ideas? What advise would you give them?

     On a personal level yes, I love hearing from women entrepreneurs who have unique and powerful ideas.   
     

     

    Your journey from England to the mainstream of Hollywood to Silicon Valley has been interesting. What kept you going? And where do you see yourself in the next three to five years? 

    I think my desire to grow and nurture talent is something that has been a theme throughout my life in different iterations.  I love connecting with people at a human level. My passion is interacting with people. Your enjoyment in life is all about the company you keep – that’s a truth for me.  My faith is a big part of everything I do; I want to make positive changes in the world and that’s a focus I have tried never to stay away from.  Working with talent like Priyanka and of course Lady Gaga has been a blessing from that perspective – they both have an agenda and drive to make a difference and that is everything.

  • “There is a market for “failed” and low-budget films on OTT”

    “There is a market for “failed” and low-budget films on OTT”

    Netflix shook up the cinema establishment in the US when it had the temerity to release Beast of No Nation simultaneously in theaters and on its streaming platform. The movie, acquired at a cost of Rs 78 crore, did not do well at the theatrical box office (less than $100,000 gross), but it got more than 3 million views on the Netflix app.

     

    However, CEO Reed Hastings are going ahead with their strategy of doing simultaneous releases of future projects like The Ridiculous Six, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon II in the coming months.

     

    Indiantelevision.com got in touch with Essel group OTT player ditto TV CEO Debashish Ghosh on what he thought about Netflix ‘s bold gambit, whether it would be tried in India, and whether it would work with Indian viewers.  Read on to hear his views in one of the more entertaining interviews we have had in some time.

     

    Excerpts:

     

    Q: Were you stunned by Netflix’s move to do an OTT release for Beast of  no Nation simultaneous with the theatres like the mainline exhibition community in the US was- so much so that they refused to release the film and it got a limited release?

    “Stunned” may well be too sharp a rhetoric – since its not unnatural for subscription OTT platforms to find ways to showcase content PRIOR to standard and accepted platforms. Otherwise why would a consumer pay?

    That’s one of the reasons we at DittoTV are also looking at driving “content before TV / Anywhere” as a proposition as well. Significantly before!

    But please don’t ask for more details as of now – give me 15 days and then we shall give you an exclusive if you want it.

     

    India is in the nascent phase of OTT. But it has a strong heritage of filmmaking and is probably the largest producer of films worldwide.

    No doubt about that. But the mindset of film producers understandably is different here – especially the mainline ones – as they prefer making money upfront rather than later.  While we understand why, it is still a limiting factor as well – for most OTT platforms – which are not also producers of films as well.

     

    How large is your film catalogue for OTT both Bollywood and  international?

    We do not yet have a significant International Catalogue of movies but there are some imminent actions on that soon.  As far as Bollywood is concerned – we can only put up content on our platform – for which we have rights. And we have a library of around 3000 movies – which are already up and running.

     

    Does films get views? How much of your audience watches catalog films on OTT? How much time? And how often?

    Not really – if you ask me. Especially Bollywood – most of those movies are already available in myriad other platforms – and there is no REAL Uniqueness here. And thanks to Pirates and Torrents there will never really be.  So playing the game with the strengths of Movies alone – is not a viable proposition – at least today. And even platforms like YRF or Eros are struggling on account of that fact.

    Having said that – it’s not as though people don’t watch movies on OTT platforms – but it’s few and infrequent and essentially driven by some sort of unique demand – on the part of the consumer (note: NOT the platform). For example : “ I am having a debate about a particular dialogue with my friend and I want to prove a point about a move when I am outside at a bar!” Such scenarios are so infrequent that they don’t drive business case – frankly.

     

    OTT players have just begun their run in the space with original content for television shows. Is acquiring films exclusively for premieres the logical next step? How far are the Indian players from doing something like Netflix did?

    This question you have to ask Netflix actually. Are THEY making money for the movies that they are acquiring at huge costs and efforts? Or are they doing it because they today have money to spare? And can using it for drumming up PR mileage like your article will serve to do?

    Though that’s strictly not a bad strategy – if you ask me. But then you need to have international valuation and dollars to burn. Most OTT platforms cannot afford it. So it won’t be commonplace. And Business case will NOT let even Netflix sustain the movie strategy for too long.

     

    Will there be sufficient views for a movie released on an OTT platform? Will there be enough ROI on big-ticket movies on OTT?

    Well not really. But someone like Netflix can surely show the way and experiment – (Thanks to their success and surplus funds) – so that all other platforms can learn at their expense 😉

     

    Will the exhibition industry accept film premieres on OTT? Or will they revolt like they did in Kamal Hassan’s case?

    Ask the industry – they are the rich folk! OTT people are poor and struggling anyways – don’t rub salt on their wounds.

     

    Will premiering films on OTT affect the revenue flows from theaters?

    Not at all – to my mind. Theatres and OTT are not just about content – it’s about their respective experiences – and there is nothing overlapping about those distinct experiences.  I won’t say that the audiences are different – because that’s too passe 🙂

    How can Bollywood use OTT platforms better?

    By synergising and using OTT for its advantages. Theatrical and Satellite releases are all about the movie in itself. So instead of treading that trodden path – OTT platforms and Producers can synergise and think together to bring greater value to the consumer. Like releasing unseen footage, shooting goof-ups, candid reactions of stars (post doing a tough shot for instance) etc. – on OTT platforms – over and above the film – or contextual to the film. Digital OTT platforms have many intrinsic advantages that need to be leveraged – which unfortunately neither the Film Industry understands nor do the OTT platforms innovate sufficiently enough – mostly since they are so fund strapped – thanks to paying huge content rights monies to producers.

     

    There are 800 films released each year. Many don’t make it to the theaters. Some disappear after day 1. Do you think there is a market for such films on OTT? Would it make sense for smaller budget films to take this route? Will you premiere such niche content on your platform? What would the deals look like: revenue shares, or minimum guarantees (MGs) or outright purchases?

    Too many questions in one!  But yes – there is surely a market (even if that’s not a big one) for theatrically “failed” or smaller budget films on OTT. And yes OTT platforms should premiere such content – but as I said producers (big or small) are looking at quick upfront returns. And if their need can be logically channelised – all of this is possible and even more. But mindsets need to change (for the better) for that – and change is always very difficult.

    Such deals should be revenue share and not MG / outright – as the risk is equal on both sides.

     

    Will films work in SVOD or T-VOD? Or AVOD?

    TVOD or AVOD is where it works for the consumer as of now. But AVOD does not really pay for its costs.  SVOD for movies has not really worked – even for Netflix (remember Game of Thrones?).

  • ‘If you can’t take people to theatre, take theatre to people:’ Shailja Kejriwal

    ‘If you can’t take people to theatre, take theatre to people:’ Shailja Kejriwal

    A pioneer in the Indian media and broadcast industry, Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd chairman and Essel Group promoter Dr Subhash Chandra has been a major force to reckon with for more than two decades now. With his exemplary vision and forward thinking, he has always been a step ahead in the game.

     

    While over the years, he has consistently demonstrated his ability to identify new businesses and lead them on the path to success; this time round too, Chandra has deftly raised the curtains on something that no one else has done before in India. In a bid to restore theatre’s glory and culture in India and give it its due, Chandra has launched a new vertical called Zee Theatre, which will not only boost the art form in the country but will also make it available across platforms.

     

    It wouldn’t be incorrect to say that television, films, video, satellite and digital’s gain has been theatre’s loss in more ways than one. It was also the lack of facilities, infrastructure, less revenue and diminishing audience, which led to theatres being converted into movie cinema halls. And therein rose theatre artists like Nasseruddin Shah, Om Puri, Shah Rukh Khan, Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Shabana Azmi and their ilk, who then stepped into the film world.

     

    In conversation with Indiantelevision.com, Zeel chief creative – special projects Shailja Kejriwal speaks about the new vertical and the company’s plans ahead.

     

    Excerpts:

     

    Was the idea behind this initiative? Why Zee is showing interest in theatre? 

     

    Zee as a broadcaster has been known for doing new things in cable satellite television. We are constantly trying to create something new for the audience in terms of content. These days the entertainment industry is trying to outsource content from overseas and remake it. We want to change that and look in our own country for content, which has not yet been used and is ignored.

     

    Firstly, we want to invert the cycle of importing content. Our aim is to show the world the rich traditional culture of India. Secondly, while earlier people had to travel to see and enjoy theatre, now they can watch it on the internet, mobile, DTH, television, in-flight as well as at screenings in multiplexes. If they want to watch it live, they have also the option of watching the live shows that we will be doing.

     

    Our idea is to take theatre to the maximum number of people so that everybody can enjoy the content.

     

    What kind of content will Zee Theatre focus on?

     

    We will be starting with India first. We have a very rich culture in theatre with plays in multiple languages like Marathi, Gujarati, Bengali etc. With over 5000 year old traditions of Natya Shashtra, India has numerous plays right from Kalidasa to absolutely modern plays. 

     

    Our focus will be on Indian plays first and then of course later we will open up to the rest of the world. In the beginning, we want to offer all kind of theatre content to our audiences and later we will be looking at some plays, which we can adapt in Hindi. We have classic plays like Hamida Bai Ki Kothi and Sandhya Chhaya, as well as musicals like Piya Behrupiya to modern ones like 30 Days of September.

     

    Will plays be adapted from other languages?

     

    Yes, absolutely! We are doing the production from the ground. We are going to take the script and translate it to Hindi, then we will cast for it, rehearse, do the whole production and then we will film it. That is the reason why we are ready to do live theatre as well as film theatre. We’ve started to make plays in Hindi first and then they can be subtitled and dubbed in all parts of the world.

     

    How is the response from founder sponsors and advertisers?

     

    Everybody is very positive and quite excited about the initiative. It is a new kind of content. We need to see more content, which is based in India. It boils down to the question of how long the audience will see the same kind of song and dance, chat shows and stand-up comedy. It has to change. It’s about time that the audience got something new apart from film and television. 

     

    Theatre has new genre of content; it has new kinds of stories, which have not been told before on films and television. Plays have relevant social messages and genres include comedy, news, musicals, tragedy, psychological thriller, fillers and more. So, advertisers are showing good interest for this project. We will be rolling out in early 2016 and will collaborate with sponsors then but as of now, brands that we have spoken to, have evinced interest.

     

    So far, Indian theatre has been under indexed and under pushed. Are you going to raise the bar for theatre production in India?

     

    Yes, that is exactly the reason why we ventured into this area. With our investment in theatre, we want to make grand sets and beautiful costumes. The biggest names in theatre are working with us and guiding us on how theatre works.

     

    For each play, we have two directors – a filming director and a theatre director. We are following the process involved in a film production so we will have a casting director, costume designer, set designer and every aspect to make it grand and raise the production quality. I believe audience will be happy to see a marked change in visual production quality.

     

    Is Zee Theatre looking at starting any festival of theatre plays?

     

    Yes, we are planning to start festivals for plays. We will be doing these on-ground and on-air too. Gradually we will be doing live theatre festivals as well as on cinema screens. Right now, we just want to make our intention in the space known and in 2016 we want to release it out on digital, cinemas, live and broadcast and take it forward.

     

    International theatre companies provide world class production quality. What are the new innovations you will be investing in for bringing in advanced technology and better quality production?

     

    We have a very skilled set of people who will be ideating on how to raise the bar for theatre in India. We have our crew from the movie business comprising sound recorders, set designers and fashion designers. On the other hand, most of our casting directors and actors have theatre as well as film background.

     

    Names like Uttara Baokar, who will be seen on television after 20 years is associated with us. We have theatre doyennesses like Mahasweta Devi, Dr Vijaya Mehta and Ranjeet Kapoor on board with us. Dr Mehta is a noted Indian film and theatre director, who will be directing a play after 1993.

     

    We sit with these stalwarts along with designers, light designers and everyone else involved while producing the plays. It has been very challenging because it is a new thing that we are trying to do.

     

    How will the production logistics work? Will you be working with other production houses?

     

    For now we are co-producing all the plays. We have people who will produce with us but as producers, we will take it forward.

     

    We are working with people who are from theatre and those who produce theatre, along with a set of expertise from television, for example people like Mukud Upadhayay and Romanchak Arora.

     

    A motley bunch of creative talent from television, theatre and films like cinematographers, editors and music directors have come together to make it possible.

     

    Who will own the play and script rights that are produced under Zee Theatre?

     

    We are going to take scripts from the biggest names in theatre from all parts of India and translate them it in Hindi for the production. We have acquired play rights from the likes of Vijay Tendulkar, Jaywant Dalvi, and Mahasweta Devi amongst others.

     

    Disney recently brought Broadway to India with superior quality production. Are there any plans to bring production from abroad?

     

    We want to take our culture abroad. Personally I don’t understand why we have to constantly look abroad to bring content here. Why can’t we take our content overseas? Our prime focus is on how we can take our content abroad. We do have a huge audience for theatre abroad, so why shouldn’t we take classics like Abhigyan Shakuntalam abroad? Our culture and theatre should go abroad rather than getting their content here.

     

    Are there any deals in place with any of the platforms – online, flights, cable etc?

     

    The advantage for us is that we are available across all the platforms in any case. That’s the advantage of being a multi-media broadcaster. So whether it’s cinema, online or broadcast, we can do it on our own platform.

     

    Additionally, to syndicate and distribute the content, we have offices around the world. The plays will be subtitled, dubbed and then showcased.

     

    As of now we have not struck any deals because we have just announced our intention. The process will start soon and by next year, we will have a list.

     

    Zee Theatre plans to have 100 productions over a span of three years. How will the releases span out? When we see the first production going live?

     

    We will be rolling it out next year. Since our intention is to make the plays available across all platforms namely digital, cinema, television and theatre, we are looking at early 2016. 

     

    We have stories on varied topics like internet romance, old parent left alone by their children and girl child abuse. These are very relevant plays that are about subjects in society, which is not usually discussed in cinema or on television. These subjects need to be discussed in an entertaining way and with good story telling. We want to have social relevance through entertainment.

     

    Will you also be looking at promoting street plays and outdoor plays with Zee Theatre? Will it include college theatre? 

     

    We have 15 plays right now, which are under various stages of production. We are very proud that we were able to manage 15 productions; it’s like having 15 films with two hour content each. Working with such scale is quite challenging. Our plan is to do 100 productions over three years and we will be experimenting all sorts of things but one after the other. Then we will focus on the outdoors. Yes, we are planning to take it to schools and colleges too; the youth needs to see it. We are tying up with schools and universities to keep screenings for them.

     

    Will there be programming on theatre plays? For example; talk shows and behind the scenes programs.

     

    We want to make people see the process in terms of what happens behind the scenes. We have interviewed directors, actors, set designers and will do programs capturing the process. We have also shot the rehearsals, where directors are talking about the play and how it works in the theatre production. The material is being prepared, which will definitely  be shared with the audience through programs.

     

    What kind of audience are you targeting in India? Will you be looking at the South market too?

     

    The content we have created is for everyone as the issues are very social and people can relate to them. We have selected topics, which are universal in nature. I believe this will be new form of entertainment; people are a bit tired of seeing the same kind of shows on all channels. As there is less variety in terms of content, it will give them a choice.

     

    I think people will welcome this change and it will give entertainment an alternative. Theatre needs to become a viable option. It should come out as refreshing change like we did with Zindagi. People are ready to accept fresh content and that too which is from their own country. While it won’t be very easy for the audience to accept it but theatre will grow on them and the audience will become habitual to it as they did to daily soaps and comedy shows.

     

    Is Zee Theatre a cultural move or a commercial move? Are you planning to monetise it aggressively?

     

    These cannot be separated from each other. There’s no cost for revising our tradition and culture. We have to take it to our future generation. We invested in whatever was required.

     

    Firstly, we want to create good content for our viewers, but then great content can get commercialised. The audience should enjoy the content first. We are trying to reach out to more people. We are not in a hurry. Our aim is to let the culture flourish and it will become great archival material sometime in the near future.

     

    There are limited quality theatre halls in Mumbai like NCPA and Prithvi. Will Zee be investing in building infrastructure for theatre halls and auditoriums too?

     

    Bombay still has infrastructure for theatre but to do live theatre, it needs certain amount of investment for good quality. For more investment, people need to get the investment back to make more plays. Because of the legacy of theatre in Maharashtra, we have theatres in Pune also. But as cinema came in, all the theatres were converted into movie theatres.

     

    The vision and aim behind starting this initiative was that if we can’t take people to the theatre, then let’s take theatre to people. We will give people an option of watching quality plays from the comfort of their homes as well as theatres. 

     

    We do plan to invest in the infrastructure but that will depend on the reaction and reach this initiative gets.

     

    Mumbai’s Prithvi Theatre has a legacy like no other and is one of the most recognized players in the space. Are there any plans to collaborate?

     

    We are ready to collaborate with anyone who is ready to collaborate with us. We want to reach to the audience in all parts of the country. Our main focus was to finish the productions first. After that, we will get out in the market and collaborate with whoever is interested.

  • “We plan to introduce innovative disruptive new age content in 2016:” Deepak Dhar

    “We plan to introduce innovative disruptive new age content in 2016:” Deepak Dhar

    Millennials in India have grown up watching reality television perhaps even before they could pick their favourite subjects or role models.

     

    Shows such as Bigg Boss, Master Chef, The Voice and Emotional Attyachar amongst others need no introduction, nor does their production house Endemol Shine India, which is heralded by one of the brightest minds in India’s reality TV landscape – Deepak Dhar as managing director and CEO.

     

    Dhar joined the production and content creating giant in 2005, after paving a successful career in media with companies like Star TV, MTV, Channel V, etc. Armed with his expertise in reality television, Dhar went on to lead Endemol with some of the most challenging and ambitious projects.

     

    At the launch of Khatron Ke Khiladi’s seventh season, which is slated to go on air on Colors early next year, Dhar speaks to Indiantelevision.com’s Papri Das on the current landscape of reality TV, prospects of producing home grown format shows in India, the company’s relationship with broadcasters and more.

     

    Excerpts:

     

    What’s new in Khatron Ke Khiladi season 7 from the production perspective?

    We have 60 different stunts lined up this season. It’s already a task to set up one and now we have 60 of them to put in place. Not to mention, the scale of each stunt will go up this season, matching international standards. The new locale (Argentina) has also allowed us to try different things and explore various possibilities in terms of the type of tasks. The schedule includes shooting in Argentina in Buenos Aires for 40 days. Our crew of about 160 people and contestants will celebrate their Diwali there.

     

    Have you tried anything new when it comes to production technique?

    We are shooting in Argentina, which is an evolved market from a technical standpoint and that works in our favour. We plan to use drones to shoot some scenes as well. They are not easily used in India as there are restrictions, but shooting in Argentina will enable us to do so. These are stunt friendly locations. We have a few things in mind but we plan to explore them once we reach the shoot location.

     

    Do you notice any new trends in the landscape of reality TV shows in India?

    I feel that reality TV has become a very staple diet for Indian viewers. It has also seen an evolution of sorts. At some point in time it used to be more focused on song and dance. People have now moved on from that and are looking for edgy content dealing with relationships, drama and danger. It is all about making it more real and how the people onscreen can relate to the people watching them.

     

    That is why shows like Bigg Boss, Master Chef, Fear Factor etc are doing well as they feel more real, and connect the audience with a sort of warmth on screen. I wouldn’t call this a new trend but that’s just how things are shaping the landscape.

     

    Are there any plans to introduce new international formats in the Indian market in the near future?

    There are quite a few formats from the Endemol Shine system that we are bringing in. Shows like The Hunted, The Circus of the Celebrities and The Australian Spelling Bee. There are a lot of innovative disruptive new age content that we have to offer, that will hit the screens next year.

     

    Are Indian production houses at a stage where a home grown format can be taken internationally?

    Why not? Largely a lot of song and dance reality formats have been home grown here, for example Dance India Dance (DID). A lot of drama, stunt based shows and game shows do come in from across the globe because we want something tried and tested. We don’t want to invest in something that might have a chance of not working with our audience. I do feel that India has the potential to create a home grown format in the song and dance segment.

     

    We also made something called Big Switch for Bindass a few years ago that involved switching people’s identities and their circumstances. We successfully ran that for two seasons and probably will come up with a third very soon.

     

    As producers do you get enough freedom from the broadcasters?

    As far as Endemol Shine India is concerned, our relationship with broadcasters is mutually beneficial. Colors for example has lapped up our formats for reality television quite well. They have taken Bigg Boss and Khatron Ke Khiladi to the next level, with a huge push on the marketing and celebrity side as well as by simply scaling up the content. They believe in airing disruptive content and we tend to have a lot of that.

     

    Out of all the reality shows you have produced or been part of, which has been the most challenging?

    They were all challenging and fun in their own right. But if I had to pick and choose, I found producing five seasons of The Great Indian Laughter Challenge a refreshing experience. It was a challenge because it was an unchartered territory for Indian reality TV. We couldn’t pre-calculate the parameters and variables involved that could go right or wrong for the show. It was all new for us. Comedy wasn’t mainstream those days. It was in the realm of smaller events. We picked it up and established an entire genre of reality shows from it.

     

    With VOD platforms like Hotstar, Voot, HOOQ, ErosNow et al emerging as the new medium for content consumption, how is Endemol positioning itself in the programming ecosystem?

    We are already creating and producing digital content formats for some of these OTT players. We have brought in formats from our international partners because those are evolved markets familiar with OTT and digital content. We are in talks with some of these players to see how we can start mounting them up.

     

    Is India finally catching up to short format fiction shows?

    The shortening of content is bound to happen due to fragmentation of mediums and due to the gradually reducing attention span of viewers. People are getting restless. They want to see the start and end of a scripted program and binge watching is becoming a concept as well. People now want to watch and complete a series maybe within one or two weekends or maybe over a month. With this viewing behaviour spreading across genres, producers must also shift and re-think in that direction, and go for more and more finite shows.

     

    What does week 41 and 42 BARC data mean for you as a content provider?

    It’s still too early to comment or even start shifting gears based on the data. Let the ecosystem stabilise and settle a bit. It is just about stabilising, so we must wait before forming any opinions based on it or our content strategy. The new numbers will throw us new trends as well, and we are keeping an eye on them for new possible show concepts.

  • “We’ve prevented more than 100 potential TV show failures from going on-air:” Shailesh Kapoor

    “We’ve prevented more than 100 potential TV show failures from going on-air:” Shailesh Kapoor

    The television ecosystem is replete with executives who have entered the sector after getting qualified as engineers, management graduates, hoteliers, biologists and what have you. Shailesh Kapoor belongs to this cadre. An IIT Delhi electrical engineering graduate and an IIM Kolkata alumnus, he has been involved in the television business for about 17 years in various roles in marketing, content and strategy, working for companies such as Sony Entertainment Television, Zee Cinema, indya.com, Zoom and Filmy. The entrepreneurial bug bit him in 2008 when he set up Ormax Media along with consumer insight specialist and veteran Vispy Doctor.

     

    And since then there has been no looking back. The company celebrated its seventh year of growth recently and its client roster has been growing from the film, television, print, and branded entertainment categories. Its products have helped film and television content creators understand their audiences better. 

    Kapoor is an avid film fan himself. He is also an active blogger.

     

    When he is not working, watching a film or writing, there is a good chance that you will find him exchanging views and thoughts on Twitter! We spoke to Kapoor on Ormax Media and its products.

     

    Excerpts:

     

    Seven years. Ormax Media has been consistently building new products. What keeps the company so dynamic? What has been the strategy? 

    Our strategy has been to create products that address business needs that are industry-wide. For example, the need to bring a consumer perspective to a movie’s campaign and make film marketing accountable led to Ormax Cinematix, which is a tracking and forecasting product for the film industry, subscribed to by more than 15 film companies today.

     

    Similarly, Ormax True Value was born from the knowledge that more than 75 per cent of new launches fail, and that conventional research methods have been unsuccessful predictors of what will work and what will fail. Hence, the need to create a testing product that can forecast actual on-air performance with proven accuracy over time.

     

    How large is the Ormax Media team? How many offices?

    The team is 35 people strong. We run one of India’s most advanced CATI (Computer Assisted Telephonic Interviews) setup from Surat, which employs another 50 people. Some of our key products, such as Ormax Showbuzz and Ormax Cinematix, run out of this centre. We have business offices in Mumbai and Delhi. But we are present across India, in various forms, be in through affiliates, online research or CATI. More than 25 per cent of our work in the last year has been in villages or towns of population less than 50,000.

     

    Ormax True Value (OTV) is among the more reliable barometers, which programmers use before launching new TV shows. What has been the reason for this?

    I’d like to believe the reason has been a proven track record. The accuracy of forecast speaks for itself in a product such as Ormax True Value (OTV). Several long-running and successful shows on TV today, which unfortunately I cannot name, are OTV certified products. Thirty one shows currently on-air were tested using OTV, across genres like Hindi general entertainment channels (GECs), Regional (Marathi, Bangla & Tamil), Kids and Youth. More importantly, we have prevented more than 100 potential failures from going on-air. That’s some money saved.

     

    More than 200 programs tested across 21 channels in six years. That is some track record. How different is the product OTV today from the time you launched in 2009? What are iterations you have built into it and why?

    The core idea of the product has remained the same, that is, to predict the likelihood of on-air success. All such products tend to be self-learning products, whereby learnings from one test feed into the larger black box running the product. Hence, the sharpness of attributes and accuracy of forecast have improved with time. In 2013, we introduced TSV (Time Spent by Viewer) forecast as the single-number output of an OTV testing. Among the shows that have gone on-air since then, we have been within 10 per cent of actual TSV for 88 per cent of shows.

     

    Is OTV a decision-support tool or a decision-making tool? Can you illustrate with examples? How much does it cost clients to use it as a service?

    OTV allows for two types of decisions to be taken based on consumer data – to go or not go ahead with a show and to identify the core target audience and markets for the show, and its ideal positioning to win these audiences. We test shows at various stages, right from the audio pilot to video stimulus (for example, pilot episode or even the first episode).

     

    Decision-making or decision-support would depend on the context. We have tested shows where the channel head or programming head has a strong hunch that the show will work or vice versa, and they have used OTV to validate that hunch, which is more like a decision-support process. Often, it does get validated, but sometimes, the results vary from the hunch significantly, in which case, the channel takes an informed decision.

     

    Cost would vary depending on the markets and sample size. Broadcasters have tested shows in as many as 10 markets and as little as two markets too. The cost of testing one concept could be between Rs 2-6 lakh depending on choice of markets and TG.

     

    With VOD and OTT services growing are you looking at servicing that segment too?

    Definitely. Work is on in full swing on adapting OTV to online content. The principles of the product are media agnostic. We just need to calibrate the model and identify the drivers for the online medium, as they would vary vis-?-vis those for TV. Within TV too, weightages of the drivers vary for fiction and non-fiction content, for example.

     

    How have programmers used the tools you provide to improve their decision making process?

    OTV is a part of the standard commissioning protocol in many channels, which means that a show cannot be commissioned till OTV testing has been done. So I think we have been able to influence decision-making processes for the better.

     

    Is pre-testing a big part of your overall business?

    Definitely, and it’s the growing part too. Over time, everyone has realised that you can’t save a bad show idea beyond a point. Similarly, you can’t save a bad film from sinking Monday onwards. In both TV and films, the industry has become a lot more open to pre-testing than ever before. We tested more shows in the first half of 2015 than in all of 2014. Similarly, we tested more films and scripts in the last four months than in all of 2014. Ormax Moviescope is OTV’s equivalent product for film and film script pre-testing.

     

    Do you see traditional television reacting to the innovative programming that OTT services will launch?

    The audiences are different and the idea of “innovation” has to be contextualised to the audiences of the medium. Innovation has to be there even in traditional television, as audiences would demand new stories and ideas all the time. But reacting to OTT content is not a good idea, and the intersection between the two audience sets is minuscule.