41–50 of 135 posts
Funny how all the authoritarian governments are following the same script. Restricting foreign investment in media while keeping the inland investors under control sounds a lot like my native Russia.
If I had to fund a media organisation in a foreign country which only runs losses. Either I am a philanthropist or more likely have a sinister motive. Several foreign dictatorships are heavily invested in controlling the media narrative in India. This was perhaps triggered by the war with China. India's liberal foreign ownership gives China a one way strategic advantage.
But unfortuanately(as a side effect?) policies like this hinders the operations of goodwill nonprofits like Amnesty International[1]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/29/amnesty-to-hal...
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Amnesty_Internati...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I interpret pro-government as "supports the current administration's agenda". You seem to be interpreting it as "anti-anarchy" or at least 'pro-democracy". But a free (to be critical of the government's policies!) and independent press is crucial to the functioning of a democracy.
Well, in practice, there is not much difference. The same freedom that allows the media to criticize legitimate concerns when it comes to the government also allows hostile foreign interests to amplify minor issues or manufacture fake ones to take down the government and install one that they can control from the outside, often to the detriment of the country and the citizens. So, my theory is that the countries that…
You put scare quotes around both aid and news. Neither of these things are inherently bad.
Misinformation is the threat, not simply foreign information.
Government control of media is not a remedy to misinformation. In fact it is frequently a source.
You seem to be espousing an isolationist strategy but the genie is out of the bottle. Any country that tries to pull back from the rest of the world will suffer in comparison.
Doesn’t seem so crazy that they don’t want some foreign media mogul to influence their country.
a big chunk of the mainstream traditional media in India is pro-establishment and pro-government. Digital news organizations were predominantly anti-establishment, thus the efforts by the government to toe the organizations to its line. First it introduced the FDI regulations for foreign media as mentioned in the article. Second they have recently proposed to bring Digital news organizations and streaming platforms u…
Huffpost.in was not at all a popular media outlet. I doubt it had any significant revenue. At some point, fundamentals of the business matter.
> I doubt it had any significant revenue. We don't know, and what's significant? Return on investment regardless of size of investment is significant when running any business. > At some point, fundamentals of the business matter. I think the fundamental outlined in the article is "Narendra Modi government’s new foreign direct investment norms for digital media," and not described in relation to revenue.
> I think the fundamental outlined in the article is "Narendra Modi government’s new foreign direct investment norms for digital media," and not described in relation to revenue.
That's an opinion piece. The fact is they shut down operations. And if the reason is lack of foreign investment, then it's imminently obvious that they made no profits.
If I had to fund a media organisation in a foreign country which only runs losses. Either I am a philanthropist or more likely have a sinister motive. Several foreign dictatorships are heavily invested in controlling the media narrative in India. This was perhaps triggered by the war with China. India's liberal foreign ownership gives China a one way strategic advantage.
But unfortuanately(as a side effect?) policies like this hinders the operations of goodwill nonprofits like Amnesty International[1]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/29/amnesty-to-hal...
Several comments are implying that HuffPo is an influence operation or conspiracy... ???
There’s a clear boogeyman (the Chinese) and a grand arching conspiracy stopping the country from being great. This is fascism 101
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, in practice, there is not much difference. The same freedom that allows the media to criticize legitimate concerns when it comes to the government also allows hostile foreign interests to amplify minor issues or manufacture fake ones to take down the government and install one that they can control from the outside, often to the detriment of the country and the citizens. So, my theory is that the countries that…
Didn't the WHO literally do a house call to the entire country of India in their ultimately successful quest to eradicate smallpox? I wouldn't rush to condemn international aid. You put scare quotes around both aid and news. Neither of these things are inherently bad. Misinformation is the threat, not simply foreign information. Government control of media is not a remedy to misinformation. In fact it is frequently a…
Well, China has greatly benefited from doing exactly that. They greatly regulate and control foreign influence while they exert their influence every where they can. India is a big rival and they have been funding everything from the Naxalites (the underground Indian communist organization) to mainstream parties, organizations, media, universities... whatever they can which gives them political advantage.
The nationalism in these comments isn’t surprising. But it is disappointing. Several comments are implying that HuffPo is an influence operation or conspiracy... ??? There’s a clear boogeyman (the Chinese) and a grand arching conspiracy stopping the country from being great. This is fascism 101
E: I should mention that I am Indian.
The nationalism in these comments isn’t surprising. But it is disappointing. Several comments are implying that HuffPo is an influence operation or conspiracy... ??? There’s a clear boogeyman (the Chinese) and a grand arching conspiracy stopping the country from being great. This is fascism 101
From personal experience, most Indians in the tech space are conservative-leaning. I don't network a lot, but I do talk to people enough to know that "liberal" in the western sense is a very rare viewpoint in this industry. E: I should mention that I am Indian.
This won’t end well.