Monday, June 29, 2015

Radiance of flowers + liquor = Love?

शोखियों में घोला जाये फूलों का शबाब
उस में फिर मिलाई जाये थोड़ीसी शराब
होगा यूँ नशा जो तैय्यार वो प्यार है

Mix the radiance of flowers.
Then add a small measure of liquor.
The state of giddy stupor
That you get from all the above
Is what we call love.








Tuesday, June 23, 2015


Blame it on Sam Pitroda





India’s Economic Policy and the Communication Revolution 









Monday, June 22, 2015











Sunday, June 21, 2015


Social Media








Till then, keep reading, and please do comment. 

Friday, June 19, 2015


The Internet


(Image src:




(Image source:




Thursday, June 18, 2015





(Image source:







Here are the links to the first two in this series:


#mediastudies #MediaEconomics #DigitalMedia

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

From Consumers to Producers - The Indian Story - Part 2

From Consumers to Producers - The Indian Story - Part 2


Still Cameras




Video Cameras





More in the next post.... click

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

From Consumers to Producers - The Indian Story - Part 1




From Consumers to Producers - The Indian Story - Part 1







But more about that in the next post.


#mediastudies #MediaEconomics #DigitalMedia

Monday, June 15, 2015

Karlo Duniya Mutthi Mein - Part 3





Image source:






Sunday, June 14, 2015

Karlo Duniya Mutthi Mein - Part 2






Saturday, June 13, 2015

Karlo Duniya Mutthi Mein - Part 1







Meri umar ke naujavanon, relive your past. Enjoy.

Friday, June 12, 2015

The Colour of Love - Part 2






Media Economics with Mallika Sherawat




(Picture source:

Do visit her website. Here's the link:






Barbie - Barbie in Princess Power
Zee Institute of Media
Acme Oasis - Construction Company
Microsoft Azure
Official Dubai Ad for vacations- Plan you Dubai vacation today
Coke Studio@MTV
Go Daddy - Dainik Bhaskar
Amul Butter
Fashion and You - Exclusive Shopping for Women
Ask Me Bazaar
Hiba Party Suits
Saarthi Group
Sobha Developers
Facebook Page on the film Politics of Love
Marriot Hotel
Godrej Properties
Bharti Axa Life Insurance
Sheltrex Group
The First Group Dubai
Khemani Group
Portea Medical
Runwal MyCity
Wadhwa Group

Talk about Media Economics now!



or has this to say about the media,



Mallika, are you listening?

Thursday, June 11, 2015

Pehli Nazar - Love at First Sight

Haven't you ever fallen in love at first sight? With a man or a woman, with a tourist destination, a phone, a dress, a saree, a tie, a shirt, a pair of shoes, a watch? Someone, or something you just saw was made just for you, and you simply had to have it? Well, you are certainly not the first. And the reason you did fall in love at first sight was because of the 'Halo' Effect.

Visual communication is a fascinating subject. Every living and non-living thing communicates something or the other. Of course, you need to be able to recognize it. But usually we do, like we form an opinion about a thing when we first see them.

Edward Thorndike coined the term 'Halo Effect', a cognitive bias, where we form an impression about a person, a product, or a brand, the moment we see them for the first time. This 'first impression' is quite persistent, and overshadows the judgment about other qualities of that person.

Several experiments have been conducted to study the halo effect. Let's take a look...

In one experiment, it was found that teachers expect better performance from students who have a better physical appearance.

Don't we all make the mistake of judging a book by it's cover? Or thinking that a movie would be fantastic based on it's promos? Studies have shown that the first visual impression of a product affects the consumers, who believe that because the product is aesthetically pleasing it would also be of a good quality.

There is another interesting study. Participants were given functionally identical phones to use to complete similar and familiar tasks. The phones, were functionally similar, but were dissimilar in appearance; one was like brand new, good looking, the other had a less appealing appearance. The results showed that users found the more appealing phone to be more usable.

A search on the Internet will reveal several such studies which demonstrate the importance of the halo effect. Visual communication is an interesting subject to study, and I will keep sharing some interesting concepts here.

But all said and done, that 'pehli nazar ka pehla pyar' (Love at first sight) is unforgettable, right?

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

The Colour of Love?

Colour communicates. Period.

When I was in college, we did not have these 'days'; traditional day, friendship day, saree day, blue day, or even the Valentine's Day. Quite boring, isn't it?

But I have been always intrigued by Valentine's Day. This particular import of western culture has been picked up by the young, commercialized by people selling everything from greeting cards to flowers, then further popularised by the media, by giving full page space to the ads selling these products. I am not going to judgmental about it. You like it, go ahead and celebrate it. Present a red rose to the person you love, or think you love. But is the colour of love RED? Deep down, do you really think so? If the answer is NO, here is probably the reason...

We have ben learning about the meanings and psychological effects of colour based on the colour wheel, developed by western philosophers, researchers, and thinkers. However, we have forgotten the Indian context of colours and their significance in the Indian context.

This is what Natyashastra says...

Bharata Muni enunciated the eight Rasas in the Nātyasāstra, an ancient work of dramatic theory, written during the period between 200 BC and 200 AD. Each rasa, according to Nātyasāstra, has a presiding deity and a specific colour. There are 4 pairs of rasas. For instance, Hāsya arises out of Sringara. The Aura of a frightened person is black, and the aura of an angry person is red. Bharata Muni established the following:
  • Śṛngāram (शृङ्गारं) Love, Attractiveness. Presiding deity: Vishnu. Colour:green.
  • Hāsyam (हास्यं) Laughter, Mirth, Comedy. Presiding deity: Ganesha. Colour: white.
  • Raudram (रौद्रं) Fury. Presiding deity: Rudra. Colour: red.
  • Kāruṇyam (कारुण्यं) Compassion, Tragedy. Presiding deity: Yama. Colour:dove coloured.
  • Bībhatsam (बीभत्सं) Disgust, Aversion. Presiding deity: Shiva. Colour: blue
  • Bhayānakam (भयानकं) Horror, Terror. Presiding deity: Kala. Colour: black
  • Vīram (वीरं) Heroic mood. Presiding deity: Indra. Colour:wheatish brown
  • Adbhutam (अद्भुतं) Wonder, Amazement. Presiding deity: Brahma. Colour: yellow

Interesting? I have much, much more to tell you about colour in the Indian context. But more about it in the next post.

Why the pessimism?

Should we be really so pessimistic about technology, especially the emerging new media technologies? Communication is a social construct, born out of the need to be able to survive. We, the Homo sapiens, have persisted and survived, and progressed over the past 100,000 years, mainly because we have developed the skill of communicating with each other. What has really changed, is the way we have started communicating. If we overlap timelines of evolution of the present human race and that of evolution of media, media has been around for a miniscule fraction of the time.

The problem is that we have simply not been able to really understand this new form of communication. We don't know how to deal with it. We are mesmerized by the moving images, captivated by them, and are unable to distinguish fact from fiction. We develop parasocial relationships with the fictional characters on television. We are addicted to the shows, to the games we play on our play stations, and to the fascinating online social media.

When we buy a new mobile phone, we spend a few days trying out the features, playing with it, downloading apps, watching videos, taking pictures. We are in awe of the new, wonderful technology that has fallen into our hands. If you look at the larger picture, the humankind has found a new toy for communicating with each other. We are all in awe of the power of communication, and in our new- found ability to communicate. Where the traditional media failed in allowing us two-way communication, we have now the power of social media.

True, there are several detractors of new media, and they are probably right. As Jean Baudrillard says, we have become individual units, each with a smooth, cool surface of the screen, connected to each other only when we are in a network. There are several other scholars who treat new media almost with contempt. They could be right when we think of the present generations. But in the larger context, we, as humans, are in a constant state of evolution. New media technologies are a way of life today, and we are in awe of these technologies. Humans are survivors. We will get over the awe of new media in a few generations, and use it simply as a part of our life. We will learn when to, and when not to use the technology and how to use it to the optimum. I don't think we need to be pessimistic about it.

It's just a matter of time.

Sunday, June 7, 2015

Power to the Digital Nation






Here's a link to Digital india website :

Friday, June 5, 2015

"Darling, switch to that advertisement channel please, I want to catch the news in the breaks."

Any product manufactured, has a life cycle. There is a phase of development and launch, followed by the growth and the maturity phase, leading to decline and then the end. So do media products follow a similar life cycle? If not similar, what kind of life cycle do they follow? Do they have a life cycle at all? 

(Image source:

In this post, lets speak of the economics of news media products. I had a lot of fun when I had presented a paper titled 'The Life-cycle of News'. As soon as I uttered the title, there was a sanctimonious uproar by some members in the audience who actually felt insulted, that I called 'news' a product. Some agreed with what I presented, some did not. I still reiterate - 'news' is a media product. I cannot fathom why some people feel it cannot be so. Interestingly, my friends in the news media agree, but some who 'study' media, don't.

Let's consider the following:

News does not come free.
It costs a lot to produce news, probably more than reality shows or a scripted show.
Some news stories are followed up, are reported, broadcast over a period of time.
Some news stories are one-time.
The popularity of news is rated just like other shows.
The news readers become celebrities, just like actors in shows.
The news bulletins are given fancy names.
News, newspapers are advertised.
News is sold to advertisers, and advertising rates decided on popularity/readership/viewership ratings.
News is also advertised. Oh they actually make promos of the prime time news bulletins, so they can be sold to the viewers.
And there are ads in between news stories.

Isn't this enough to call 'news' a product? And I am not even making a comment on news and news media being an important part of society, being the fourth estate, the watchdog of the society, the keeper of social justice, being the moral police, being judgmental,  conducting media trials, exposing corruption...... oh well!

(Image source:

Vineet Jain said in an interview, "We are not in the newspaper business. If 90 percent of your revenues come from advertising, you are in the advertising business." No one could have put it better. So like it or not, in media economics terms, 'news' is a product, and it is produced and 'manufactured'  like any other product in any industry. But unlike other industries, its a media product, so news as a product is advertised, but in turn, also advertises other products. More about that in another blog post. 

Just one thing, so that my stance is clear - Journalism, by itself, is sacrosanct. News IS a product.

So I am justified when I say, "Darling, switch to that advertisement channel please, I want to catch the news in the breaks."

Thursday, June 4, 2015

Danger ahead! Don't (re)RUN

In my last post I wrote about the economics of reality shows. In the same vein, let's explore the economics of re-runs on television. 

Some television shows are runaway hits. The only problem is, these shows don't run away; they don't even go away! They keep 'running' on one channel or the other. How many times have your seen Ramanand Sagar's Ramayan? 


And B.R. Chopra's Mahabharat? Whenever any channel buys the rights to a movie, it 'premieres' it. So we see a 'TV Premiere' of the same movie on several channels! The channels also go to the extent of advertising it on radio, newspapers and putting up large hoardings at premier locations for the motorists who drive to office daily. Why do we see these reruns at all? Afterall, audience is always hungry for something new to watch, to enjoy, and to pass time. Well, it's not as simple as that.

Television programmers favour reruns because of commercial as well as audience gratification. Reruns on television provide the audience a sense of nostalgia. Some people relate episodes to personal episodes in their life. For example, the moment I think of Ramayan, I get nostalgic, because it used to allow us to play cricket on the empty streets! 

I relate to the 'Samay' in Mahabharat, because I had received a tongue-lashing from my mom, for the 'samay' at which I had got up from bed - exactly when the 'Samay' in Mahabharat was explaining how Shakuni won the game for the Kauravas, and how it gave Mahabharat probably the most important twist in the story - I also got my ear twisted! Everyone who watches a rerun, probably remembers something from the past, making watching it enjoyable.


But there are commercial reasons too. In my last post, I touched upon the economics of reality shows. The cost of syndication of a rerun is almost minimal, arguably even lesser than producing an unscripted reality show. Producing an original programme requires money for every new episode and becomes a far more expensive proposition than reruns of older shows.

Also, for reruns of very popular shows, advertisers too don't hesitate in spending, as they are assured of a dedicated audience. Most channels now run 24X7. It is almost impossible for any channel to fill up 24 hours with original programming, all with new and original content. The channels have to rely on reruns, and repeats too. Though the reason for repeats is mostly to allow viewers to catch up with what they could not watch.

However, trends in television economics are fast changing. For popular shows, the cost of syndication has gone up. In some cases, reruns have failed to garner the required viewership ratings. Too many reruns have faded the excitement and the feeling of nostalgia. Moreover, popular shows have a rerun on one channel or the other, so viewers could have already watched a rerun. With so many channels, this should not come as a surprise. 

The other challenge to the business of reruns is the Internet and the mobile phones. Most popular serials are now available free online. They are also uploaded in a highly compressed format (to reduce data consumption), so viewers can watch them on their mobile devices while on the go. The ad revenue flows have changed over the last few years, with the Internet and mobiles eating into the revenue pie of the traditional media.

Being a media student, I cannot but wonder where this is heading to. One thing, though, is certain. The next few years will decide the future of economics of television, and revenue flows in the media business. And all this is happening when the Media, Entertainment and Advertising sector are growing at a CAGR of a whopping 13%. Don't believe me? Here's a link:

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Really? The Economics of Reality Television

Why do people watch reality shows? Why are they so hooked, mesmerised and addicted to them? Research has shown that some people watch reality because it deals with real people in real-life situations. Some watch simply because they like to see other people in painful, embarrassing and humiliating situations, and enjoy laughing at them. Some people seek catharsis, others seek sensation and seek the pleasure of being openly voyeuristic. The Uses and Gratifications theory states that the audience chooses the programmes that it feels gratified by, and discards or avoids other content in media.

The media, in turn, capitalizes on this behaviour and produces reality shows - simply because they sell, and earn the channels the much wanted revenue. But wait... there is also another important thing about these reality shows too. Generally, in a reality show, channels do not have to hire established actors or celebrities (apart from the judges). In many cases, there are no sets other than just one. Most of the action is uncontrolled and unscripted, doing away with script writer and directors. Overall, the cost of producing a reality show is quite often, much lesser than producing a scripted serial, series, or other scripted programmes. Even news production involves a massive team behind the newsreader, who is just the face of news.

Thus, it is a win-win situation for all. The audience gets its 'kicks', and the media provides the audience with what it wants (but not what it needs), while raking in the moolah. That is how the economics of reality shows works. And that is why understanding media and studying media is so exciting - quite different than any other sector. No other sector engages the audience, and hence the consumer of the goods that it produces, as the media does. No other consumer, other than the consumer of media is as involved with a product as a media consumer. Exciting, and fascinating, isn't it?

*Reality Shows image source:

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

What's so great about media?

What's so great about media? So it's there, omnipresent, when I eat, sleep, drink, play, study, teach, learn...... So what?
Well, let's look at it from the Media Economics angle. Like all the other goods, media also produces so many products. TV serials, news, reality shows, and what not. But there is a difference. Suppose I manufacture, say, a watch. Really speaking, I have no connection with you, the consumer. At the most, I will provide you some after-sales service, and pretend that I care a lot about you.
But think of this - with due respect to Amir Khan and Ashutosh Gowarikar ......
I produce a Lagaan. When I am making it, I first connect with you with the promos and ads. I also release music and A R Rehman does his magic for me, my revenue earning starts, and my connection with you gets strengthened. Then I release the film, it becomes a hit, and I earn hundreds of crores. You all love me for the film, you also love the characters. You identify yourself with them, and connect with the story, because of the power of the narrative.
I then sell the satellite rights, and you watch Lagaan again and again, and fall in love with it so many times. Remember, I am still earning revenue. And don't forget the overseas rights.
I release the film on CDs and DVDs, again connecting with you, and again earning revenue. And when the hype starts dying out, I release 'Making of Lagaan'. By this time, the channels have done several 'TV Premieres', and after some more time, I release it again in the theatres, earning more revenue.
Almost exactly 14 years after it was release, Lagaan still remains in your hearts, and I still keep making more money.
That, my friends is one of the unique features of Media Economics. Media and media products maintain an almost lifelong connection, and keep earning revenue. You may either love or hate media, but you simple cannot avoid it, and cannot avoid paying for it!!!