Another major area of ethical self-construction among Odisha’s newspapers involves the pursuit of profit and the ethic of entrepreneurialism. This ethical framing is linked to the broader
transformations associated with economic privatization and neo-liberalization, through which the government and public institutions have increasingly sought market-based models of operation as well as adopted the support of the free market as one of their objectives. This has been accompanied by an ethical shift in the imagination of the citizen from one that that needs taking care of by the state to one that encourages the citizen to make free, rational choices for his or her own upliftment (see Rose 1999). Aihwa Ong has observed that this emphasis on economic calculative action in Asia differs from that of the United States, with an emphasis in Asia on its role in solidarity production. Across Asia “citizens are urged to be self-enterprising, not only to cope with uncertainties and risks, but also to raise the overall ‘human quality’ of their societies.” Odisha’s newspapers increasingly seek to demonstrate this ethic, that entrepreneurialism is not
merely for the benefit of the individual but that this “neoliberal ethics of self-responsible citizenship are linked to social obligations to build the nation” (Ong and Collier 2005, 698).
In Odisha, assertions of this entrepreneurial ethic are broadly framed through the popular narrative about the reshaping of the journalism profession and the local newspaper industry in the 1980s. The narrative typically consists of a discussion of the professional organization of newsrooms (such as distribution of labor according to routine “beats”), the adoption of current technology (specifically, off-set printing and then computerized production with desktop publishing), and—at the heart of the story—the beginning of newspapers as profitable businesses. Odisha’s media proprietors recount the same story: Odisha did not have a professional press until the 1980s. Until that point, Odisha’s politicians required low capital investment for newspaper production: technology was relatively cheap because Odisha dramatically trailed national standards, most newspapers were only a few pages, content itself was often reproduced from other publications and news agencies, and most financial income came from government advertisements and notifications which could themselves be guaranteed through political influence (see also Jeffrey 1999). In the 1980s, first Sambad and then the already-existing Dharitri purchased off-set printers, (re)organized their newsrooms, and gradually created an environment in which the other newspapers could not but follow. By the mid-1990s, circulations had increased to the point that local newspapers were beginning to attract national advertisers—circulation numbers were beginning to matter.
On the public-side, the most significant shift enabled by this period was the transition in how the newspapers stood in relationship to Odisha. What qualities of Odisha did the
newspapers demonstrate to the world? Topmost among these public qualities was the transition from afternoon and evening editions to the international metropolitan practice of morning editions, long contrasted in local understanding with the local dak or post editions. The late or slow news of the late-day editions, necessary because of the time it took to set out the movable type, embodied Odisha’s own qualities of backwardness, slowness, and non-modernity. Outside of the city of publication, the newspapers might come several days or even weeks late. Now the morning edition is delivered around the state, and is even available on the same day in the most remote areas of the state. Now the newspapers’ up-to-date industrial practices act as prominent signs of their modernity, professionalism, and cosmopolitanism—which in turn allows the newspaper producers to offer themselves as a synecdoche for Odisha’s modernity generally.
The growth of revenue from advertisements are the foundation of the contemporary
newspapers’ modernity. As noted, government advertisements have long been and continue to be a major purchaser of newspaper ad space. Since 1955, the central government’s advertisement purchasing has been managed by the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity [DAVP] within the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Newspapers must apply to the organization in order to be included in their purchasing, submitting extensive annual documentation. The normalization of prices led to the categorization of newspapers according to large, medium, and small newspapers; prices per space are determined by these circulation categories The periodical recalculation of these prices is contested, with the Indian Newspaper Society representing the interests of the industry in the negotiations; in the last recalculation in 2009, the DAVP settled on
fixing advertising price to the newsprint price.21 By contrast, at the state level, per the
Advertisement Policy of 1998, the state Information and Public Relations Department enters into annual contracts with individual newspapers, basing the rates on the DAVP but not being bound by them (Odisha 1998). This flexibility in rate contracts mirrors private sector advertisements, which are also negotiated: newspapers produce standard rate cards, but businesses negotiate what they actually pay. The state’s advertising flexibility is a frequently cited concern when Odishan journalists decry the ethics of the political ownership of newspapers—if you run the government, you can pay yourself whatever you want for advertisements.
There is a long history in India of anxiety about the threat that profit poses toward the freedom of the press. In 1956, the Central Government adopted the Newspaper (Price and Page) Act, 1956, which sought to limit “unfair competition among newspapers so that newspapers may have fuller opportunities of freedom of expression.” Though ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court, concern with the threat of “profit motives” embodied in the Act had a lasting impact. This has been echoed most recently in a national concern about “paid news,” which has largely focused on the payment for favorable news coverage by political candidates. In Odisha, some people have laughed at this national concern, because of the obvious irony that paid news in Odisha is not a problem since the politicians already own the newspapers—“why would they pay themselves?” (Though one senior journalist quipped, “they probably would pay
themselves!”)
21 Newsprint is one of the highest expenses of newspaper publication in India. Newsprint is distinguished
by foreign and “desi” or Indian newsprint, and the top newspapers have a clear preference for the foreign which Odisha’s producers justified through descriptions of quality, especially how the papers hold the ink. During my research newsprint prices were jumping dramatically (up by 40% in 2008), making newsprint a top financial concern across India’s newspaper producers.
Despite the concern with neutrality and independence at the discursive forefront of the national conversation about commercialism in India, the history of political ownership in Odisha allows commercialism to paint itself as neutral by comparison. This is best exemplified by the daily Dharitri, one of Odisha’s most explicitly commercial and market-oriented newspapers that also claims to be the “only neutral publication in the State” (Dharitri 2012). Dharitri was
established in 1974 by Nandini Satpathy, Chief Minister of Odisha from 1972-1976; she was only the second woman to serve in the top position in any state government since Independence. Born Nandini Panigrahi, Satpathy came from a family associated with the freedom movement; her uncle had established the Communist Party in Odisha in the 1930s. Her father, Kalindi Charan Panigrahi, was an Odia-language writer best known for a Gandhian novel called Matira Manisha (Man of the Soil), which was later made as a film by Bengali social realist Mrinal Sen, and she was herself an author and literary translator into Odia. As described above, Satpathy participated on and off in state and national politics from 1968 until her retirement in 2000, primarily as a representative of the Congress Party.
Dharitri itself was initially established in 1974 as non-profit newspaper with a social mission under the Samajbadi Society22, a society established in 1973 by Satpathy’s novelist father, Panigrahi, for the purpose of running the newspaper. According to its Articles of Association, the broad goals of the organization included “to strive for securing the ends of social justice, liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; (ii) equality of status and of opportunity, to promote among all fraternity, assuring the dignity, of the individual and the
unity of the Nation; (iii) towards that end, to publish newspapers, journals, magazines,
periodicals, books, pamphlets and other literary words” (quoted in Samajbadi Society v. Assistant CIT (2001)79ITD112Ctk).
Since the late 1980s, Dharitri has been run by Nandini Satpathy’s second son, Tathagatha Satpathy. A trim man, clean-shaven and with silvery hair trimmed close to his head. In 2007, Tathagatha Satpathy looked a bit like Sting, an impression not disrupted by his wife and managing partner, the former model and actress Adyasha Satpathy.23 Satpathy is a member of Parliament (Lok Sabha) from Odisha in the Bharata Janata Dal [BJD] party, elected from his home district of Dhenkanal, and, like many national-level politicians, he is usually photographed wearing hand-loomed cotton shirts. From 1985-6, Dharitri began to adopt those features of national newspapers that were signs of modernity and professionalism: off-set web printing, high page numbers, color photos, multiple editions, local reporting, and specialized divisions of labor.
This latter characteristic, the specialized divisions of labor, is especially important to Satpathy’s representation of Dharitri’s role in Odisha. During a long conversation with Satpathy in early 2007, he emphasized how the division of labor protects the interests of the newspaper. Though he is the titular Editor on the masthead, and though he stands legally responsible for what is printed, he said “all [of the people who work at Dharitri] make sure that I have nothing to do with things” because, he said with a self-effacing laugh, “other colleagues are balanced.”
23 It is a curious coincidence that the three women most active in Odishan media management are non-
Odias who married into Odia political families. Monica Nayyar Patnaik, Joint Managing Director of EML (Sambad) is Soumya Ranjan Patnaik’s nephew’s wife and Jagi Mangat Panda is the co-founder and Managing Director of Ortel and OTV, Odisha’s top local cable television station.
“Dharitri is there for the sake of journalism,” he said, implying that the other newspapers published for different reasons.
Publicly, this neutrality is achieved by appealing to a particular kind of Odia reader: the upwardly mobile urbanite. In our interview, Satpathy emphasized the introduction of the first Odia-language business section and other regular features that would appeal to the “young and upcoming leaders of Odisha”, such as Sudoku puzzles, “info tech,” and career pages. The combined emphasis on Dharitri’s achieved neutrality and its appeal to the upwardly mobile “upcoming leaders” of the state is producing a new understanding of how a newspaper can “serve” Odisha through an emphasis on class aspiration and entrepreneurialism.