From Caravan magazine,
http://www.caravanmagazine.in/vantage/the-big-five-the-media-companies-that-the-modi-government-must-scrutinise-to-fulfill-its-promise-of-ending-crony-capitalism
CHRIS JACKSON/GETTY IMAGES
Through loans and
investments, Mukesh Ambani, Mahendra Nahata and the industrialist Abhey Oswal
have given the five media companies funds that range from tens to hundreds of
crores of rupees. As a result, the control that the three businessmen wield
over these media networks varies from 20 to over 70 percent.
Filings with the registrar of companies in the ministry of
corporate affairs have revealed that five Indian news media companies—NDTV,
News Nation, India TV, News24 and Network18—are either indebted to Mukesh
Ambani, the richest Indian and the owner of Reliance Industries, or to Mahendra
Nahata, an industrialist and associate of Ambani’s, who is also on the board of
Reliance’s new telecom venture, Reliance Jio.
Through loans and
investments, Ambani, Nahata and the industrialist Abhey Oswal have given the
five media companies funds that range from tens to hundreds of crores of
rupees. As a result, the control that the three businessmen wield over these
media networks varies from 20 to over 70 percent. This is a cause for concern
for the freedom of speech in this country. The state of affairs also raises
questions about monopolistic practices that may be in conflict with the
competition laws of India.
On 12 August 2014, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India,
TRAI, published a paper titledRecommendation
on Media Ownership. In its opening remarks,
the paper said, “The right to freedom of speech is essential for sustaining the
vitality of democracy. This is why the right is sacrosanct; it is fiercely
protected by the media. The question that arises is whether reposing such a
right in the media simultaneously casts an obligation on the media to convey
information and news that is accurate, truthful and unbiased.” “What happens in
the media,” the paper went on to state, “is the concern of the entire country.”
The TRAI had highlighted this belief in the context of its argument that the ownership of media companies by a handful of entities would increase the “possibility of misuse of the rights of the media for interests that are not in the larger public good.” The paper warned against such structures because of their “negative impact on media diversity and plurality.” Elaborating on these fears, it stated, “There may be thousands of newspapers and hundreds of news channels in the news media market, but if they are all ‘controlled’ by only a handful of entities, then there is insufficient plurality of news and views presented to the people.”
The TRAI had highlighted this belief in the context of its argument that the ownership of media companies by a handful of entities would increase the “possibility of misuse of the rights of the media for interests that are not in the larger public good.” The paper warned against such structures because of their “negative impact on media diversity and plurality.” Elaborating on these fears, it stated, “There may be thousands of newspapers and hundreds of news channels in the news media market, but if they are all ‘controlled’ by only a handful of entities, then there is insufficient plurality of news and views presented to the people.”
A day after the paper was released, R Jagannathan, the former
editor of the Indian news website Firstpost, published an
editorial on the website that declared, “Trai’s media ownership curbs make no
sense: half of India’s media may have to shut down.” Jagannathan
opened his piece by saying that TRAI’s recommendations “need to be thrown in
the nearest dustbin.” Arguing that the lack of corporate finance in media
companies was no assurance of an impartial media, Jagannathan valiantly defended
the current structure, going so far as to assert that the TRAI’s
recommendations would only create a more opaque system. “If corporates want to
run media houses,” he noted, “they will do so, Trai or no Trai.” Jagannathan’s
blanket dismissal of the recommendations was not surprising; only perhaps, a
little ironic. The website whose editorial direction he was steering at that
time, and on which he had published this point of view, is a part of Network18,
a media conglomerate that owns CNN-IBN, IBN 7, CNBC Awaaz, CNBC TV18, IBN
Lokmat and Firstpost.
In his editorial, Jagannathan
said, “Given the growing non-viability of media, a lot of corporate money has
come in to support news media.” Nahata and Ambani appear to excel in extending
such support. Since television news in India is not a lucrative business,
the generosity of these two businessmen is called upon frequently. Such
favours, it is safe to conclude, are not acts of philanthropy.
Transactions of this nature
are rarely straightforward. As the TRAI paper observed, “there are numerous
other ways by which an entity can exercise control over another.” This
prophetic finding is validated through the complicated structures that both
Ambani and Nahata have used to invest in the five media companies. The control
that they exert over these groups is a function of the investments they have
made through direct loans, Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures
(OFCDs)—loans that can be converted into shares at the investor’s
discretion—and direct ownership of shares.
The two centerpieces of this complex jigsaw puzzle are Shinano
Retail, a wholly owned subsidiary of Reliance, and Vishvapradhan Commercial
Private Limited (VCPL). VCPL was earlier owned in part by Shinano and another
Reliance subsidiary. As I had noted in my December 2015
story on NDTV, VCPL’s directors, Ashwin Khasgiwala
and Kalpana Srinivasan, were both employees of Reliance. The company was also
registered under the same address as Shinano. In an affidavit submitted to the
Delhi High Court in September 2015, the income tax department quoted its report
from June 2011, stating that VCPL “has no business activity and is not a
genuine concern.” In the financial year 2012, VCPL was sold to Infotel
Televentures and Skyblue Buildwell, both of which are entities related to
Nahata.
In May 2014, Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) acquired
Network18 for Rs 4,000 crore. A statement on shareholding patterns that was
released by Network18 on 30 September 2015 lists Shinano as one of its two
promoter groups. Shinano holds 1.85 percent of Network18’s shares. This is a
part of the 75 percent stake that RIL owns in Network18.
The transactions that diluted the ownership of Radhika and Prannoy Roy—the co-founders of NDTV—over their channel are slightly more complex. Between 2009 and 2010, the Roys took a loan of Rs 403.85 crore from VPCL and signed an agreement on behalf of Radhika Roy Prannoy Roy Holdings Private Limited, or RRPR—an entity that they set up in 2005, and in which they placed NDTV’s shares beginning mid-2008. The agreement gave VCPL the right to convert this loan into 99.9 percent of RRPR’s equity—effectively, complete ownership—not just during the period of the loan but even after. By the time RRPR got the loan in March 2009, its total shareholding in NDTV was 29.18 percent, and the agreement effectively sold this portion of NDTV’s shares to VCPL. In the 2012 financial year, VCPL received Rs 50 crore from Eminent Networks, a company owned by Nahata. All of these loans were interest-free and unsecured. Although the money Eminent lent to VCPL was much less than the amount that VCPL had lent to RRPR—Rs 403.85 crore—it now owns OFCDs worth the same amount with VCPL. This may also mean that Eminent has now taken over the 29.18 percent of NDTV that VCPL owned. Which entity among these indirectly controls NDTV is not clear at the moment. It is, however, certain that these transactions have resulted in the Roys losing a significant amount of control over their company.
The transactions that diluted the ownership of Radhika and Prannoy Roy—the co-founders of NDTV—over their channel are slightly more complex. Between 2009 and 2010, the Roys took a loan of Rs 403.85 crore from VPCL and signed an agreement on behalf of Radhika Roy Prannoy Roy Holdings Private Limited, or RRPR—an entity that they set up in 2005, and in which they placed NDTV’s shares beginning mid-2008. The agreement gave VCPL the right to convert this loan into 99.9 percent of RRPR’s equity—effectively, complete ownership—not just during the period of the loan but even after. By the time RRPR got the loan in March 2009, its total shareholding in NDTV was 29.18 percent, and the agreement effectively sold this portion of NDTV’s shares to VCPL. In the 2012 financial year, VCPL received Rs 50 crore from Eminent Networks, a company owned by Nahata. All of these loans were interest-free and unsecured. Although the money Eminent lent to VCPL was much less than the amount that VCPL had lent to RRPR—Rs 403.85 crore—it now owns OFCDs worth the same amount with VCPL. This may also mean that Eminent has now taken over the 29.18 percent of NDTV that VCPL owned. Which entity among these indirectly controls NDTV is not clear at the moment. It is, however, certain that these transactions have resulted in the Roys losing a significant amount of control over their company.
Eminent also features in the account books of News24—a 24-hour
Hindi news channel—and E24 Glamour, an entertainment channel. Both News24 and
E24 are owned by Anuradha Prasad. As of March 2014, News24 had taken a loan of
Rs 12.5 crore from Eminent. This loan was taken in the form of OFCDs. According
to the agreement, the OFCDs could be converted into equity at any point during
a period of eight years, starting from the date on which the debentures were
allotted to Eminent. The debentures were worth approximately 36 percent of
News24’s paid-up capital—the amount of its capital that was funded by its
shareholders. This loan had originally been given to News24 by another Nahata
company, Digivision Holdings, which transferred the debentures to Eminent on 14
November 2013. As of March 2014, Eminent also lent Rs 12.5 crore to E24 Glamour
in the form of OFCDs. During the 2013 financial year, E24 Glamour invested
close to Rs 63 crore in the form of OFCDs in a company called Oscar Software.
Oscar owns over 18.6 percent of News24’s shares. This would mean that E24
Glamour, which is indebted to Eminent, exerts an indirect control over News24.
According to a February 2015 Economic Times report by Rohini Singh and Vasudha Venugopal, the journalist Rajat Sharma’s India TV does not fare much better in this regard either. In September 2012, Nahata’s Infotel—which owns half of VCPL—bought 23 percent of India TV’s shares from Shyam Equities, a company that is related to Reliance Industries. Shyam had bought this stake for Rs 100 crore in 2007. It was sold to Infotel for Rs 12.5 crore.
According to a February 2015 Economic Times report by Rohini Singh and Vasudha Venugopal, the journalist Rajat Sharma’s India TV does not fare much better in this regard either. In September 2012, Nahata’s Infotel—which owns half of VCPL—bought 23 percent of India TV’s shares from Shyam Equities, a company that is related to Reliance Industries. Shyam had bought this stake for Rs 100 crore in 2007. It was sold to Infotel for Rs 12.5 crore.
This sphere of influence also
extends to News Nation, a 24-hour Hindi News television channel which is headed
by the industrialist Abhey Oswal. Oswal Greentech and Oswal Agro, companies
that are owned by Oswal, own 3.64 crore shares in News Nation, which amount to
about 50 percent of the channel’s shares. Last year, in November, Digivision
Media, (Nahata’s company that owns 50 percent of Infotel) invested Rs 10 crore
in News Nation in exchange for 10 lakh non-cumulative redeemable preference
shares. A preference share ensures that the holder of the share is assured a
fixed sum of money—and on priority over other kinds of shareholders—from the
company’s reserves or profits. A non-cumulative preference share would mean
that Digivision would not be entitled to claim a foregone dividend that News
Nation did not pay in a particular month or year, at a later date. Since the
preference share is redeemable, News Nation would have to pay back the amount
of money that Digivision had invested in it, on a date that would have been
agreed upon by both the companies. The amount that Digivision invested accounts
for 13.9 percent of the paid-up capital of News Nation. Shinano already owns
1.3 crore shares in News Nation, which are worth 18 percent of the channel’s
equity.
The media groups in which Ambani and Nahata have invested are
aligned to all hues of the political spectrum. Prasad, the owner of News24 and
E24 Glamour, is married to the Congress leader and Indian Premier League
Chairman Rajeev Shukla. She is also the sister of Bharatiya Janata Party’s Ravi
Shankar Prasad, who is the telecom minister of India. India TV’s Sharma is
perceived to be close to the BJP. As a student, he was a leader of the Akhil
Bharatiya Vidhyarthi Parishad—the BJP’s student wing—and a member of the
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. NDTV’s co-promoter Radhika Roy is the sister of
Brinda Karat, a senior Communist Party of India leader. Apart from his shares in
News Nation, Abhey Oswal, whose son-in-law Naveen Jindal is an industrialist
and a Congress leader, also owns 14.17 percent of NDTV.
This information is already
with the government. Not all of these investments were made during the last
year, of course. Several of them were made when the Congress government was at
the centre. But, the BJP had come to power with promises of ending crony
capitalism. Will it act against industrialists such as Ambani and Nahata by
initiating an enquiry into the five media houses to provide a non-monopolistic
media business?
Three of the ministries that
can act against this concentrated ownership of the media—the ministry of
corporate affairs, the ministry of information and broadcast, and the ministry
of finance—are all headed by Arun Jaitley, who maintains a largely favourable
relationship with both the media, and media owners. Jaitley is particularly
close to Sharma, who is also deposing for the minister in his defamation suit
against Arvind Kejriwal, the chief minister of Delhi.
On 4 January 2016, I sent a
questionnaire to Nahata. He responded by saying that his investments in media
were not “strategic” but “portfolio investments made from time to time.”
According to Nahata, his companies were not acting in concert with any other entity.
He added that since he did not “control any media entity,” there is no threat
of a monopoly.
Reliance’s spokesperson
Tushar Pania responded to my queries by saying: “Reliance group has invested in
Network 18 [sic] group of companies through Independent Media Trust. TV 18
[sic] a subsidiary of Network 18 and Shinano, a company 100 [percent]
economically owned by Reliance Industries also holds investment in ETV
channels.” ETV is a Hyderabad-based satellite television network. “The group,”
Pania wrote, “does not hold any media investment in any form apart from this.”
Krishn
Kaushik is a
Staff Writer at The Caravan.
No comments:
Post a Comment