Monday, 30 January 2012

Journalism Faculty needed in Cuttack/BBSR

Prof Mrinal Chatterjee has posted the following at media educations

Sub: Recruitment Drive
We are looking for right candidate for faculty in our Journalism in Mass Communication Department. The details are as follows:
Requirement: Faculty in Journalism and Mass Communication (JMC) Dept.
No. of vacancy: 3-4
Place of Posting: Cuttack/BBSR
Salary: 15K-30K
Qualification: MA. In JMC; M.Phil/P.hd (preferable)
Experience: Min. 3 -4 years
(Fresher’s with excellent academic track record may be looked into)
Apply to:
Contact Person: Mahesh Patnaik (9937052335)
Company Profile
The HERITAGE VISION EDUCATION TRUST (HVET) is an approved agency by Dept. of Higher Education, Govt. of Orissa for running professional courses within the premises of Govt. Universities and premier Autonomous Colleges in collaborative mode like RAVENSHAW UNIVERSITY CUTTACK, BJB AUTO. COLLEGE BHUBANESWAR, G.M AUTO. COLLEGE SAMBALPUR, KHALLIKOTE AUTO. COLLEGE BERHAMPUR since last 10 years.
HR Policy
HVET have a sound HR policy, PF & Gratuity, LTC, Insurance, Benefits of pursing higher Education etc. We are functioning since 2002 with more than 100 plus manpower.

We would like you to circulate the above details to the interested candidates for participation in the Recruitment Drive. Looking forward for a positive response
Mahesh Patnaik

Wednesday, 25 January 2012

All India Essay Writing Competition for Post-graduate Students. Prizes to Win Rs 10,000, Rs 7000 and Rs 5000

Prof Achyut Vaze, the Dean of FLAME School of Communication, Pune, has announced All India Inter-collegiate Essay Competition for post-graduate students in India. The prizes are Rs. ten thousand, Rs. seven thousand and Rs.five thousand.
For details, please visit

and circulate the message through posters, e-mail and other media.

Kiran Thakur

Saturday, 21 January 2012

The theme video of the Kolkatta conference of January 10-11

Prof U S Pandey has provided the following via a post on Media Educators
This was the theme video for the UGC Sponsored National Seminar on Journalism in the Age of New Media organised by Dept. of Journalism and Mass Communication, Surendranath College for Women, Kolkata on January 10-11, 2012. All credit to Prof Somnath Gupta.

Thank you both, Prof Pandey and Prof Gupta! That was novel, educative, and entertaining.

Friday, 20 January 2012

IGNOU announces PhD programmes

Here is an opportunity to seek admissions to MPhil/PhD programmes in various disciplines. The INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY ( has announced the schedule for its admissions process. The list of the disciplines includes Journalism and Mass Communication.

Please click for details:

Research Degree Programs

Tuesday, 17 January 2012

Who will bell the media cat?

Reproduced from with permission from the Editor of the Editor of India Together. Kiran Thakur

Who will bell the media cat?
If issues concerning media standards and ethics are not swept under the carpet as in the past, some good may result from the recent storm over Justice Katju's observations, writes Ammu Joseph. 
3 December 2011 - Justice Markandey Katju, the new chairperson of the Press Council of India (PCI), stepped on many media toes and was widely accused of overstepping his authority when he recently aired his controversial views on the news media, with particular reference to television. 
Admitting that he had a poor opinion of the media, he said they were 'not working for the interests of the people' and tended to 'divert attention from the real problems,' 'divide the people' and 'perpetuate their backwardness.' He also admitted he had a poor opinion of media people, their intellectual capacities and their knowledge of economic theory, political science, literature, philosophy, etc. Suggesting that fear was required to improve the situation he called for powers to stop government advertisements, suspend licenses, impose fines, etc., albeit only 'in extreme situations.'
Several media organisations, including the Editors Guild, the Broadcast Editors Association and the News Broadcasters Association, were quick to respond, registering their strong opposition to both the tone and the substance of his comments and proposals. The NBA even appealed to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to intervene in the matter, which is ironical considering their customary stance against governmental interference.
Justice Katju may have won back some friends in the media by promptly going public with his disagreement with the orders of the High Court of Bombay and the Supreme Court of India in the matter of the Times Now news channel and its wrong use of a photograph of Justice P B Sawant (instead of Justice P K Samanta) in connection with the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam. 'With great respect to these orders,' he said, 'I am of the view that they are incorrect and require to be reconsidered.' He also suggested that the Rs.100 crore fine imposed on Times Now was "grossly disproportionate" to the offence.
However, his diagnosis of and prescription for the media's ills remain defective and disturbing at many levels. His subsequent clarification has done little to alter the perception of oversimplification and lack of discernment and balance, not to mention condescension ' even among media professionals who are genuinely concerned and critical about many current media trends and practices. According to Justice Katju, however, his criticism was meant only to 'remind the media persons of their historical duty to the nation' and help them 'to give up many of their defects' so that they can become 'better media people.'
Need for debate
Having recently assumed charge of the PCI, Justice Katju was well-placed to initiate a serious, informed and constructive public debate on the subject with the participation of all stakeholders in the media, including journalists and members of the public. He may have won more friends and influenced more people and, more importantly, served the cause of media reform better if he had opened up the conversation before airing his own somewhat superficial and provocative opinions.
But perhaps such an initiative can at least be the next step. Certainly the time is more than ripe for an honest exchange of information and ideas which can lead to meaningful action that respects and protects freedom of expression and, at the same time, upholds and fosters media standards, ethics, responsibility and accountability.
If there was any doubt that the credibility of the news media is currently at an all-time low, the disenchantment of a substantial section of the media audience can no longer be ignored. For example, a recent television survey showed that nearly three-quarters (74 per cent) of the viewers who responded supported Justice Katju's views, while comments in the social media and blogosphere also revealed widespread agreement with his remarks. It is also significant that several journalists have argued that the baby of professional principles and practice must not be thrown out with the bathwater of the PCI chairperson's generalities. 
Justice Katju is not the first person to notice or point out that the priorities and preoccupations of significant sections of the news media today are far removed from the realities and anxieties of the majority of citizens. Quite a few journalists and media-watchers have been documenting and critiquing the skewed nature of present-day media coverage, which accords inordinate attention to certain people, events and issues while giving short shrift to a wide range of other situations and developments that critically affect large numbers of people across the country.
Similarly, the falling standards of journalism (in terms of both content and language) and the 'dumbing down' and 'broadloidisation' of even the so-called quality press have all been regularly highlighted and criticised within and outside the profession. Among the deplorable trends evident in influential sections of the media (principally but not only TV) are the growing tendency to trivialise and/or sensationalise news; the regular jettisoning of basic tenets such as accuracy, fairness and balance; the frequent blurring of lines between fact and opinion, investigation and speculation; the common disregard for the privacy and dignity of ordinary people caught up in news events; the inclination towards high decibel 'media trials; the ultra-nationalism bordering on jingoism that often underlies coverage of international relations (especially with Pakistan); the alarming proclivity for sabre-rattling if not war-mongering, etc. The communal, caste and ethnic biases of some sections of the media are also widely recognised.
If criticism is to be taken seriously, however, credit has to be given where it is due ' and there is little doubt that the news media have, at the same time, played a positive role by helping to highlight a number of important issues, including some that Justice Katju has referred to, and to expose dereliction of duty, misuse of power and corruption in high places.
Watching the watchdog
Justice Katju is also not the first person to moot the idea of a Media Council to cover print, broadcast and online media. The concept of such a body has been floating around since at least 2004, though the idea appears to have been mooted in 2001, too. It is actually quite astonishing that the proposal has remained in the realm of general, intermittent discussion over the years, despite the rapid expansion, transformation and convergence of the media sector over the past decade and more, thanks in large part to the fast-paced development of information and communication technologies.
One problem that has dogged efforts to move towards a broad-based Media Council has been the virtual absence of consultation and debate. Official statements every now and then have rarely, if ever, been followed up with any attempt to involve the media, let alone the public, in serious discussions on the proposals. The latest such announcement was made earlier this year, when the government revealed that it was in the process of setting up a National Broadcasting Content Complaints Council, the description of which closely resembles that of the PCI.
Interestingly, there has been no mention of this initiative in the furore that followed Justice Katju's comments.
Similarly, periodic attempts by the government to introduce some form of regulation for the broadcast sector (most recently in 2006 and 2007) have also failed primarily due to the communication and dialogue deficit that has led to the perception that the purpose of any such move is to control or even muzzle the media. A more transparent and inclusive process of informed, tripartite (at least) discussion about media regulation in a democracy could create a more conducive environment for a dispassionate assessment of what forms and levels of regulation would best serve the inter-dependent interests of the media industry, the media profession and media audiences (not to mention society as a whole).
Experiments in self-regulation
The furore over the draft Broadcast Bill and Content Code of 2007 did have a positive fallout in the formation in 2008 of the News Broadcasters Association (NBA), with a membership of 20 news and current affairs broadcasters (representing 45 news and current affairs channels), which set up a News Broadcasting Standards Authority to deal with complaints about coverage. From the nine decisions covering the period March 2009-October 2011 posted on the NBA website it would appear that not many specific complaints are lodged despite the fairly widespread criticism of TV news practices in the public sphere.
The governing body of the Broadcast Editors' Association (BEA), set up in 2009 'to raise the bar of journalism and strive to protect the freedom of expression, comprises representatives from 11 news channels (eight Hindi and three English). Of course, the ability of these organisations to be impartial arbiters has occasionally been called into question.
Meanwhile, the Indian Broadcasting Federation (IBF), made up of non-news broadcasters representing over 250 TV Channels (according to their website), has also set up its own Broadcasting Content Complaints Council and drafted a set of self-regulatory guidelines. The summary of complaints received in the last quarter (June-September 2011), which is posted on the site, suggests that viewers of non-news channels are more active in registering their grievances (relevant or otherwise) than those who watch TV news.
It is another matter that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting lists 727 ' permitted' TV channels (as of July 2011) and that 359 of these are classified as news channels. Even if not all the channels that have secured licenses are actually on air yet, a substantial number seem to be operating outside the ambit of the industry/professional bodies that presently serve as the self-regulatory platforms favoured by private broadcasters over any other form of regulation.
It is surprising that Justice Katju made no reference to the Supreme Court's 1995 judgment, which held that 'the airwaves or frequencies were a public property (and that) their use had to be controlled and regulated by a public authority in the interests of the public and to prevent the invasion of their rights.' Both the government and the broadcast industry have so far conveniently ignored the court's instruction to the former 'to take immediate steps to establish an independent, autonomous public authority representative of all sections and interests in society to control and regulate the use of the airwaves.'
Among the weaknesses of Justice Katju's critique of the media is the fact that it scarcely addresses some of the contentious but vital issues that media regulation in the public interest cannot afford to ignore.
Questionable ethics
For example, the so-called Radia Tapes brought the unholy nexus between the news media and public relations outfits/corporate lobbies tumbling out of the closet in which it had been able to flourish without attracting much public attention. It is interesting that the NBA website makes no reference to the scandal that rocked the media world after selected transcripts of the tapes were first published in November 2010. Close to two months later, in January 2011, the then chairperson of the PCI (Justice GN Ray) seemed to think it was 'too premature' to take any action on the matter; no statement or press release on the subject has appeared on the PCI website to date.
The question of whether the journalists ' including senior editors ' named in the Radia Tapes expose were guilty of naivete, self-importance, poor judgment, vaulting ambition and/or worse is still up for debate. However, a development recently highlighted by Hartosh Singh Bal, political editor of Open magazine, concerning a substantial investment in NDTV by a US-based hedge fund company soon after it entered into a joint venture with one of Radia's client companies raises more troubling questions. Information about the deal was first reported by financial journalist Sucheta Dalal in Moneylife magazine over six months ago.
Similarly, eyebrows have been raised over some aspects of NDTV's coverage of the ongoing financial crisis faced by Kingfisher Airlines in view of the fact that the group's lifestyle channel, NDTV Good Times, was launched in 2007 in collaboration with Vijay Mallya's UB Group, which is believed to have made a five-year advertisement commitment worth Rs. 100 crore to the channel.
This is reminiscent of the 'private treaties' pioneered by Bennett, Coleman and Co. Ltd. (BCCL), which owns the Times of India group that has interests across all media sectors, and reportedly imitated by several other media houses. Launched in 2004, the initiative involved BCCL picking up stakes in various companies in return for long-term advertising and publicity. It is widely known within the profession that favourable coverage ' and the flipside: no negative coverage ' are among the benefits offered to partners in such private treaties.
Then there is, of course, the infamous practice of 'paid news,' which came to public notice during the 2009 general elections and the assembly elections in Maharashtra later that year, but is clearly not confined to election coverage. A new documentary film, titled 'Brokering News' and made by Umesh Aggarwal for the Public Service Broadcasting Trust, focuses on other forms of paid news in coverage areas ranging from movies to sports, as well as related unethical practices.
Unfortunately, no section of society  including the apparently awakened civil society ' seems inclined to tackle the problem of media misconduct in any serious, sustained, democratic manner, as media critic Sevanti Ninan recently observed.
It is significant that the PCI, which set up a two-member sub-committee to inquire into the practice of paid news in election coverage, ultimately chickened out and suppressed the report put together by two of its own members, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and Kalimekolan Sreenivas Reddy. The report, titled 'Paid News: How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy,' also looked into the private treaties phenomenon. The official PCI report on the subject was a watered down version of the original. Only when the Council was directed by the Central Information Commission in September 2011 to post the latter on its website did it do so ' with a disclaimer making it clear that the document was uploaded under duress and that 'the sub-committee's report was not accepted by the Council and was only relied upon' for information for drawing up the final report.'
Clearly Justice Katju will have his hands full if he wishes to put the PCI house in order so that it can fulfil its function as an independent watchdog charged with preserving the freedom of the press and maintaining and improving standards in the press. To begin with, it may be worth exploring the possibility of a more broad-based structure ' with more public participation, such as those adopted by Media Accountability Systems elsewhere in the world ' whether for a new, improved PCI or a multi-pronged Media Council or both.
Full disclosure
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) recently used the Right to Information legislation to access and analyse the Register of Interest of members of the Rajya Sabha. The register, mandated by the RS ethics committee in 2005, provides information about the financial interests of members of the 'upper house' of Parliament. According to the ADR/National Election Watch, this information is important because it can help deal with issues of conflict of interest with regard to discussions in Parliament, the formation of various standing committees and panels, and so on.
It may not be possible or advisable to mandate any such disclosure by media houses/proprietors and media professionals but the questionable practices of some sections of the media certainly raise questions about possible conflicts of interest vis-a-vis coverage. The adoption by the media of the kind of transparency they often advocate for governmental and political affairs could serve to repair their damaged credibility.
Some commentators point to what they see as the power of media consumers, suggesting that 'they have an inherent protection: protection by the market.' According to one writer, While the downside of competition is a herd-like tendency to follow trends, the upside is that for every view there is a counterview and for every plug there is an alternative. Don't like paid news? Cancel your subscription. Can't stand the opinions of a certain anchor? Switch channels.' Certainly audiences can try to choose between various anchors, but how is the average reader or viewer to know whether what they are reading or watching is peddled news of one kind or another?
There is, no doubt, a section within the media who think there is nothing wrong with the industry or the profession and/or that the current trends are inevitable in today's world. However, many media professionals are not at all comfortable with the state of affairs and are willing to participate in efforts to improve the situation that are respectful of the freedom of expression and the right to information of the media as well as of citizens. Sections of the public are also obviously looking for course-correction that would restore their faith in the news media as an important means through which they can exercise their right to know as well as to express themselves.
Perhaps the time has come when issues concerning media standards and ethics can no longer be swept under the carpet as soon as the heat and dust of the increasingly regular, if sporadic, eruptions of official or public criticism have diminished. If so, some good may result from the recent storm over Justice Katju's observations. 
Ammu Joseph
03 Dec 2011

Ammu Joseph is an independent journalist and author based in Bangalore, and writing primarily on issues relating to gender, human development and the media. 


I don’t read rival newspapers: Bhaskar Das

 As a News Writing teacher in media schools, I used to take students to task if they attended the class without reading local news in the mornings of the city. Such students were asked to leave the class, go to library and come back after reading the dailies. My class would begin only the students told us important stories based on which we would discuss local issues and understand politics, crimes and so on. I remembered this today because the title, I don’t read rival newspapers: Bhaskar Das, of the following story in . Had he been a student in my class, I surely would have insisted that he read all the local dailies. Jokes apart, the feature throws light on the approach and attitude of the influential group of newspapers in the Times of India stable. Read on..

By Anil Thakraney

I have met Bhaskar Das on and off. (I once even secretly freelanced for him in my advertising days.) During my stint with Mumbai Mirror, I got to know him a little better. He has always come across as a cool, calculating and sharp business manager… but someone who’s smart enough not to build his own image over that of his company. In a long conversation inside his plush corner office (previously occupied by Pradeep Guha), Bennett Coleman’s president answers searching questions on his long career with the Times, the group’s ideologies and sometimes controversial practices.

The one new thing I discovered about Bhaskar during this discussion is that he’s a deeply spiritual person, and often, as he himself said to me, uses learnings from The Gita to ‘sanitise’ his various marketing strategies. Wonder what Lord Krishna would have to say on Media Net.

But I must say the man who heads the nation’s largest newspaper house retained his composure even when facing tough queries. Spirituality at work, I suppose.

Boss, when do you retire? You are 58.
See, retirement has two different connotations. For me, it’s ‘Retyrement’. Like re-treading tyres. And that means adding new capabilities. Coming specifically to Bennett, I have a flexible retirement plan. As per the company’s desire, I should stay as long as I am mentally, physically and intellectually fit. But I must add that I live by the day. So I am only bothered about the now.

You’ve been with the company for 32 years. Never got bored of the same place?
Boredom only happens when you don’t love your job. I have continuously rediscovered and redefined my space, so the journey has always been very exploratory. I don’t know whether the excitement would have been there if I had worked in a bank or in some other financial company. Newspaper is a 360 day product. Because of my personal liking for content, I have always been involved in it in some form or the other. Honestly, for me, 32 years feels like 32 days.

The flip side is some people would say Bhaskar is risk averse.
It’s not the question of being risk averse. By that logic if you continue in a marriage you are risk averse! I don’t believe in changing jobs for the heck of it. People use it as a spring board for becoming financially more solvent, and that has never occurred to me. For me, a job is a gateway to learning and it’s not for pay slips. Also, even if I have worked in the same company, I have done multiple roles in multiple markets. Our shareholders have always been great teachers. So, I have updated myself continuously, and I can challenge anyone in terms of my cognitive bandwidth on various industries.

Your biggest achievement in all these years?
I am proud of having been a part of the company when it re-invented itself. The process started post-1985, when our Vice Chairman took over the reigns of the company and subsequently the Managing Director. And finally, in the last six years, I have been able to drive the ambitions of the company to such great lengths, that today the company is the biggest media house in terms of both, turnover and profitability.

Bhaskar, the real challenge lies in turning around failed, small brands. Anyone can build on success.
That’s the classical model. For me, taking a giant brand and making it bigger and taking it to a different level also requires equal guts. And even for a loss making brand, we have done that. Mumbai Mirror, when we started, was making losses.

Today it is a Rs200 crore brand. This has become possible over a period of six years. And I have to add that I have taken many risks, in terms of launching new brands and making them successful. A number of big groups have also folded up, they screwed up. Success is its biggest enemy. When you are No 1, there’s only place for one person. To stay there requires more energy than reaching there.

How many years do you give newspapers to survive in India?
I am very optimistic about news per se. Today, we are leveraging the core and also investing in the embryonic and the emerging media, in terms of a news channel, websites, and so on. We are seeing ourselves as a complementary option as opposed to a substitutive option. Point is, TOI of 1830 and TOI of 1990 and TOI of 2020 will be a very different paper. We are constantly re-inventing to develop the complementary utility of the brand. We have become very futuristic, we are creating more and more niches. As for the newspaper itself, it is a matter of conjecture. I think in the Indian context, there’s a peculiarity, which is that English language is a big deal. Let me explain. To think of India as one nation is a mistake. There is a developing India, there is a developed India and there is an under-developed India. The developed India’s behaviour is more or less like the West, so there might be some erosion of the newspaper in this segment as they shift to Iphones and Ipads. But for the other two Indias, newspapers will continue to prosper for some time. For them, English is a gateway to career and growth.

Coming back to your question, I am not an astrologer, but I do agree with the gentleman who said that in 2040, the last copy of a newspaper will get printed.
Having said that, I do not suffer from format myopia, because that would kill a corporation. I think of news as a genre, not as a format.

There’s been some buzz of an IPO from your group. True?
This can always be on the agenda of any corporation, including ours. But as of now, nothing has been decided. I am not saying it will never happen, but not in the near future.

Do you admit that competition has been good for the TOI as a newspaper? Pre HT and DNA, the TOI in Mumbai had lost its edit focus. Now, the news coverage is remarkably superior.
I have always believed competition is good. Obviously, one has to respond, not react. If, while responding, the quality of the product improves, then that’s damn good. But it’s a part of the re-invention process. In Calcutta, we are the dominant force now. Or for that matter in Bangalore and Delhi, where we became the competition. But not all market leaders have responded positively. We are a dynamic group; it’s in our genetic core to re-invent.

What are the innovations Bhaskar Das has masterminded in the last five years?
I have not, it’s all a team effort. ‘I’ as a word does not exist in my dictionary. In our group we all work as a team. No individual is bigger than the team.

Private treaties, for which your group has been both, admired and dissed… it hasn’t eventually paid off, right?
It’s thriving; it’s a part of our deep strategy. We didn’t want to make money on these.

Whoa, the whole idea is to do a space and equity barter for revenue. And to encash on the acquired equity.
If we wanted to encash on the equity we would have gone to the stock market. Our strategic intent has not been understood, and we want it to remain not understood. It’s a demand-side innovation, and nothing else. Private treaties are now called Brand Capital out here, we have re-invented it and it’s doing extremely well.

Is Pradeep Guha your mentor?
I have had many mentors in my life, and he is one of them. He has been a great teacher for me.

Some years ago, in this very room, Guha said to me that for the group, the target audience is the advertiser. Do you agree with this ideology?
This kind of question cannot be answered with ‘one size fits all’ sort of a thing.
We have two customers: Readers and advertisers. Agreed, that our business model is so skewed that we are dependent on advertisers, but we have never forgotten that the reader is the franchise that leads to advertising revenue. The point is to get ad relevant audience… which means people who are culturally and financially solvent enough to engage with the advertisers. But for getting that also you need interesting content. So it’s both, Lakshmi and Saraswati.

In 2004, you were about to buy Mid Day. What went wrong?
Nothing went wrong. We wanted to buy and even Mid Day wanted to sell, but in any such deal both the partners have to have a buy-in on terms and conditions. That didn’t happen.

Regret losing out on Mid Day?
Now that Mirror has come, Mid Day is not required.

It’s generally believed Reponse calls all the shots in your group. True?
There’s no truth in this. I worked in Response for 30 years, and I have never seen any semblance of power. Only thing is, because of the business model, which is that advertising gives us 90 percent of our revenues, it’s perceived to be the most powerful. Every division plays its part. We have no say in the content. If that had been the case, the TOI wouldn’t face the maximum ban from clients (amongst newspapers). We have the Chinese wall, though we do Brand Capital. The editorial is completely independent.

Cross your heart and tell me. You have never gone to one of your editors to ask him or her to plug an advertiser?
I have never done it.

That’s very hard to believe.
Trust me. I cross my heart. When clients approach us, we ask them to approach the editorial director. Because it will never work if it goes through us.

Funny that happens in a media company that runs Media Net.
That’s because people haven’t understood Media Net. Others do it secretly, we are very clear we do it only for the entertainment publications, and with clearly defined protocols. Others do it as legitimate coverage.

Truth is, Media Net sowed the seeds of paid journalism in this country.
I don’t think so. There have been enough examples in the past, where, for financial and public issue ads, journalists always got a bad name. I would say it is much more transparent and protocolised out here.

Are you proud of MediaNet?
(Slight hesitation.) See, it’s not the question of being proud of it. Life is not black and white. It’s a part of the strategic process we have done. I feel what used to happen previously was more unethical, where, if you knew a journalist, you could get a plug. And we have openly announced these are promotional supplements.

You’ve kept a very low profile. Looks like you don’t want to repeat Guha’s mistake.
(Smiles widely) No individual can be like another person. I can’t be what I am not. I don’t think Mr Guha was high-profile; the job is such that you get noticed. Now, maybe there’s nothing noticeable in me! I always say that ultimately it’s the corporation that gives you the halo. And I have no personal halo.

I think you have decided to be clever about it.
That’s your conclusion. I did exactly what I believed in. That my work is to serve the company, which I do.

An Indian editor you admire. Someone not from your group.
Unfortunately, I can’t comment because I have not worked with them. Also, I don’t read competitive products.

You don’t read rival newspapers?
I don’t.

Don’t you want to know what the competition is doing?
For that my MIS reports are there. My brand team is keeping an eye on the competition, I don’t have to do it. I don’t have the time to read everything, it’s better to read a few publications in-depth.

Vir Sanghvi said to me that even if it was the last job in the world, he would still not work at the TOI.
It’s a democratic country, we respect individual opinion. These things don’t affect me at all. I am a spiritual person.

When did you become spiritual?
I have always been spiritual, it’s a journey. We are all expressions of god. And so you must love everyone and not be judgmental of others. When you are spiritual, you love everyone.

I think the Jain family’s spiritual beliefs have rubbed off on you.
It would have happened anyway, even if I had worked in any other corporation.

Monday, 9 January 2012

National conference in Pune on Technology, Communication and Culture

Prof Dr Madhavi Reddy, head, Department of Communication studies University of Pune 
has sent me the following: 
A national conference on 
 Technology, Communication and Culture
  Department of Communication Studies, University of Pune is organizing
National Seminar on “Technology, Communication and Culture 
in Pune from March 8 to10, 2012.

About the Conference:
Technology has always been considered as a great determinant of societal changes. While the popular perception generally tends to give technology the status of the most critical factor for a variety of social and cultural changes, the academic response has- besides following this view with more qualifications- also included a minority view of technology itself being shaped by social and cultural milieu. Whether one takes up the discussion in popular domain or academic, whether one follows technological determinism or cultural, there is unanimity about one position- the relationship between technology and culture remains complex but irrefutable.
For further details click the following link:

(Note: Before you raise a query, please make sure that you have read the relevant information in the corresponding conference webpage link.)

Contact details:

Seminar Co-ordinator - Mr. Vishram Dhole:
Head of Department - Dr. Madhavi Reddy:
Telephones 020 - 25696348 / 49

Monday, 2 January 2012

DoCJ Pune Annual Get-together on Sunday, February 05, 2012

Prof Ujjwala Barve has sent in the following invite for the annual get-together:  

Department of Communication and Journalism, University of Pune has organized "Annual Get-together" on Sunday, February 5, 2012 at Ranade Institute Campus on Fergusson College Road from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. All past/present students and staff; visiting faculty and well wishers of the Department are cordially invited for the event, which will be an opportunity to be in the department once again, meet old friends and colleagues and revive the sweet memories of days spent in the Department. So please do come. We are waiting for you…

Head, faculty, staff and students
Department of Communication and Journalism
University of Pune

For more details contact:
Dr. Ujjwala Barve,
Head, Department of Communication and Journalism
University of Pune
(25654069, 25673188.