User:Ms Sarah Welch/sandbox/Paid news and private treaties

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Paid news" is the practice through which organizations (for-profit and non-profit), public figures/celebrities, politicians, political parties, brands/movies pay cash or equivalent to a media group or television channel or a newspaper or a magazine or a journalist, to be in the news, for sustained positive coverage, and to avoid negative coverage. This is either a limited time payment(s) or a contract.

"Private treaties" (also called "brand capital agreements"[1] or "strategic agreements" by Indian media groups[2]) are signed, long term private confidential agreements between a person or party or organization and a media group or television channel or newspaper or magazine. A private treaty gives an equity position, or equivalent ownership/commission/payment interest to the media group/owners. Such an agreement financially benefits the media outlet, in exchange for manufactured/plugged news, create positive coverage/buzz and avoid negative coverage over the period of contract.

This is a widespread practice in India and has been a growing phenomenon over "six decades", according to a 2010 investigation by the Press Council of India, their official media ethics watchdog (1, p. 4). A similar phenomenon termed brown envelop journalism is found in Africa, and equivalents exist elsewhere.

Media groups, newspapers, magazines and news websites that publish paid news, or private treaties, or both – with or without disclosing such relationships or unclear disclosure – are listed below. Sourcing any content from these sources may raise the same concerns that the wikipedia community has with "paid editing" and "conflict of interest". (See Ongoing discussion)

Issues[edit]

Quote Reference Implications
"But in a series of interviews with leading editors and media owners, Lloyd too hears of the widespread corruption amongst journalists and the practice of paid news [in India]" [emphasis added] James Painter[3] The practice is widespread, the list below may be incomplete. In general, the independence and reliability of the Indian media as a reliable source for wikipedia articles is suspect.
Want Press Coverage? Give Me Some Money Paul Beckett[4] This Wall Street Journal article also states that the practice is widespread in India
"Perhaps the most common method of boosting revenues in India is a new genre that has come to be widely known as ‘paid news’. Newspapers or television channels ask companies or politicians to pay for editorial space. Compounding the deception, they do not make it clear to the reader/viewer that the ‘news’ item has been paid for – that it is at best an advertorial and at worst simply paid fiction." [emphasis added] Prannoy Roy[5] An article published in an Indian newspaper or magazine may be "paid fiction".
"But it [India's Journalism] has problems. Most vividly, and most noted by Indian commentators, is its commercialisation, which shades easily into what is generally considered corruption. Journalists are often paid by those about whom they write stories – both business people and politicians. A television channel is considered indispensable for a big business, so that it can put pressure on the government, which wins contracts. Paid-for news is a regular item in newspapers and magazines – sometimes signaled as such usually in very small type, sometimes not." [emphasis added] John Lloyd[6] Issue-type and cause advocacy articles in the Indian media may be 'planted news' to 'win contracts'
"Manipulation of news, analysis, and comment to suit the owners’ financial or political interests [in Indian media]; the downgrading and devaluing of editorial functions and content in some leading newspaper and news television organizations; systematic dumbing down, led by the nose by certain types of market research; the growing willingness within newspapers and news channels to tailor the editorial product to serve advertising and marketing goals set by owners and senior management personnel; [...]; advertorials where the paid-for aspect of the news-like content is not properly disclosed or disclosed at all; private treaties; rogue practices like paid election campaign news and bribe-taking for favourable coverage." [emphasis added] Narasimhan Ram [6] paid news may be disclosed, or not properly disclosed, or not disclosed at all; even the editorial space is tailored and may have a conflict of interest
"from ‘planting’ information and views in lieu of favours received in cash or kind, to more institutionalised and organised forms of corruption, wherein newspapers and television channels receive funds for publishing or broadcasting information in favour of particular individuals, corporate entities, representatives of political parties and candidates contesting elections, that is sought to be disguised as ‘news’. " Paranjoy G Thakurta, quoted by John Lloyd in the Financial Times[7][8] News and opinion pieces in the Indian media may be "planted information and views", rather than a product of field research with critical analysis
Paid news is a practice where those who are able pay media outlets to not only feature in the news but also to ensure positive coverage in a sustained manner. [...] Consequently, even a media literate reader/viewer remains oblivious to the fact that the 'news' that is so featured is not a product of rigorous journalistic processes. The debate on 'paid news' has been constructed around the assertion that it is a blow to democracy, that it violates the ethical principles of journalism and works in the interest of the few, rather than in the interest of the public, all of which is no doubt true. [....] The payment could involve the publication of an advertisement masked as news, or eulogistic accounts of an individual, product or organization (not identified as advertorial) or even to running 'a negative campaign' against an individual, product or organization. Maya Ranganathan[9] The disclosure practices in Indian media can be unclear, and a media literate reader/viewer (wikipedia editor) can be oblivious to the fact that he or she is sourcing from a paid news that is either a positive campaign in favor of an individual, product and/or organization, or a paid news that is a negative campaign against an individual, competing product and/or organization.
The PCI [Press Council of India] says that its attention was first drawn to paid news as early as April 2003 by one of its members, the late N. Thiagrajan. At that time, the Council with self-confessed limited powers had asked the media to introspect and advised that journalistic propriety demanded that advertisements should be clearly distinguishable from editorial content. T.K. Krishnamurthy, former Chief Election Commissioner, is said to have started noticing the malpractice since the 2004 General Elections. Anuradha Sharma[10] The problem can be traced at least to April 2003.
"Paid news is a complex phenomenon and has acquired different forms over the last six decades." Press Council of India[11] According to the official media-ethics watchdog of India, the 'paid news' practice has existed in India in some form since the 1950s.
The entire [politics-related paid news] operation is clandestine. This malpractice has become widespread and now cuts across newspapers and television channels, small and large, in different languages and located in various parts of the country. What is worse, these illegal operations have become “organized” and involve advertising agencies and public relations firms, besides journalists, managers and owners of media companies. Marketing executives use the services of journalists – willingly or otherwise – to gain access to political personalities. So-called “rate cards” or “packages” are distributed that often include “rates” for publication of “news” items that not merely praise particular candidates but also criticize their political opponents. Candidates who do not go along with such “extortionist” practices on the part of media organizations are denied coverage. Paranjoy G Thakurta and K. Sreenivas Reddy[12] The problem is systematic, and even criticism articles may be 'paid news' and a product of journalistic corruption.
"Dhariwal [a media group executive] is of the opinion that the detailed website of Brand Capital is good enough and disclosures with every story are not required. We don‘t have to state it in every story." Anuradha Sharma[13] Wikipedia editors should not expect to see a disclosure of existing financial interest or disclosure of extant conflict of interest in every article.

Private treaties[edit]

Example
  • Indian media groups enter into private treaties with companies, movies, celebrities and others, thereby gaining financial interests in their future income or equity. For example, according to the Press Council of India, the Times Group entered into a private treaty with the Pantaloon group – later rebranded as the Future Group – and published articles that appear to be paid news. However, in the articles themselves (1, 2, etc), the media group did not disclose that the article may be a paid news, or the private treaty, or any agreement between the two, or that it has a financial interest in Pantaloon or Future Group. In December 2009, two of the Times Group publications boasted of their private treaty success story under an ad titled "How to perform the Great Indian Rope Trick".[14]

Potentially PNPT sources[edit]

A[edit]

B[edit]

C[edit]

  • Calcutta Times (Reason: part of The Times Group[1])
  • CNN-IBN (Reason: brand paid news plugged in as features, interviews and panel discussions[16])

D[edit]

E[edit]


F[edit]

H[edit]

M[edit]

N[edit]


O[edit]

P[edit]

R[edit]

T[edit]

V[edit]


Z[edit]

  • Zoom (Reason: part of The Times Group[1])


References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x "Citizens Jain Why India's newspaper industry is thriving". Ken Auletta. New Yorker. 8 October 2012. Retrieved 20 April 2018.;
    Usha M. Rodrigues; Maya Ranganathan (2014). Indian News Media: From Observer to Participant. SAGE Publications. pp. 123–127. ISBN 978-93-5150-158-9., Quote:"Other media organisations have institutionalized the practice [of "paid news"] much the same way done by Bennett, Coleman and Co. Ltd (BCCL), the publishers of Times of India.;
    Paranjoy G Thakurta; K. Sreenivas Reddy (2013). ""Paid News": How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy". PCI (a 2010 report initially suppressed by members of the India media groups, later released on the orders of Central Information Commission of India). pp. 13–14. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
  2. ^ In Need of a Leveson? Journalism in India in times of Paid News and Private Treaties, Anuradha Sharma, University of Oxford (2013)
  3. ^ James Painter (2013). India's Media Boom: The Good News and the Bad. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. p. xii.
  4. ^ Paul Beckett (May 6, 2009). "Want Press Coverage? Give Me Some Money".
  5. ^ Prannoy Roy (2013). James Painter (ed.). India's Media Boom: The Good News and the Bad. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. p. xii.
  6. ^ a b John Lloyd (2013). James Painter (ed.). India's Media Boom: The Good News and the Bad. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. p. 19. Cite error: The named reference "lloyd19" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  7. ^ John Lloyd (October 19, 2012). "A week inside India's media boom". Financial Times.;
    John Lloyd (2013). James Painter (ed.). India's Media Boom: The Good News and the Bad. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. p. 24.
  8. ^ V. Eshwar Anand; K. Jayanthi (2018). A Handbook of Journalism: Media in the Information Age. SAGE Publications. p. 120. ISBN 978-93-5280-629-4.
  9. ^ Usha M. Rodrigues; Maya Ranganathan (2014). Indian News Media: From Observer to Participant. SAGE Publications. p. 122. ISBN 978-93-5150-158-9.
  10. ^ In Need of a Leveson? Journalism in India in Times of Paid News and Private Treaties. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. 2013. p. 19.
  11. ^ Press Council of India (July 30, 2010). "Report on Paid News" (PDF).
  12. ^ Paranjoy G Thakurta; K. Sreenivas Reddy (2013). ""Paid News": How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy". PCI (a 2010 report initially suppressed by members of the India media groups, later released on the orders of Central Information Commission of India). p. 5. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
  13. ^ In Need of a Leveson? Journalism in India in Times of Paid News and Private Treaties. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. 2013. pp. 36–37.
  14. ^ Paranjoy G Thakurta; K. Sreenivas Reddy (2013). ""Paid News": How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy". PCI (a 2010 report initially suppressed by members of the India media groups, later released on the orders of Central Information Commission of India). pp. 13–14. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help);
    According to Anuradha Sharma, for the Indian media group BCCL, the idea is to "make celebrities and companies pay for publicity they generate through the [news] coverage of their public events, for example, fashion shows or product launches" and BCCL considers this to be "more honest than reporters being slipped envelopes with cash or accepted favours in exchange for positive coverage". – In Need of a Leveson? Journalism in India in Times of Paid News and Private Treaties. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. 2013. p. 17.
  15. ^ a b c d e f Paranjoy G Thakurta; K. Sreenivas Reddy (2013). ""Paid News": How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy". PCI (a 2010 report initially suppressed by members of the India media groups, later released on the orders of Central Information Commission of India). pp. 25–28, 35–36. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
  16. ^ Paranjoy G Thakurta; K. Sreenivas Reddy (2013). ""Paid News": How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy". PCI (a 2010 report initially suppressed by members of the India media groups, later released on the orders of Central Information Commission of India). p. 14. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
  17. ^ a b c d e f g "India: 'Paid news' report spectre returns to haunt Press Council". Kuala Lumpur, Sydney, Bristol: Asian Correspondent. 2011.;
    Self-admission after election time: P G Thakurta (2011). "Manufacturing 'News'". Economic and Political Weekly. 46 (14): 13. JSTOR 41152044.
  18. ^ a b c d e f P Sainath (December 15, 2016). "Yes, we spent money on paid news ads". The Hindu.; Quote: "Less than a month earlier, the Press Council of India held quite a few dailies guilty of doing much the same thing during the 2010 Bihar assembly polls. These include Dainik Jagran, the newspaper with the highest readership in the country. The others are Dainik Hindustan, Hindustan Times, Dainik Aaj and Purvanchal Ki Raahi. Also, Rashtriya Sahara, Udyog Vyapar Times and Prabhat Khabhar."
    P. Sainath (January 29 2013), ‘Yes, we spent money on paid news advertisements’; Note: The Press Council of India, an organization – a majority of whose members are the journalists and media representative – cleared HT Media of these charges on April 12 2013. However, this list is based on individual confessions to the Election Commission of India who submitted that they paid for "paid news" to HT Media representatives."
  19. ^ a b c Paranjoy G Thakurta; K. Sreenivas Reddy (2013). ""Paid News": How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy". PCI (a 2010 report initially suppressed by members of the India media groups, later released on the orders of Central Information Commission of India). pp. 28–29. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ms_Sarah_Welch/sandbox/Paid_news_and_private_treaties&oldid=1195376088"