FICCI Frames 2008: I said so...

Where Day 2 of FICCI Frames 2008 saw a gripping session on filmmaking, with some well-known filmmakers vociferously airing their views, the concluding day of Frames saw a similar gripping session, but this was on sports. Sparring on the platform were cricketer Ajay Jadeja and Lalit Modi, Vice-President, BCCI, and Chairman, Indian Premier League (IPL) – the former associated with cricket for years and having played for the country and the latter who has taken upon himself to take cricket to an even higher platform (if that is possible) with IPL. Marketing the League has pumped in a staggering Rs 8,000 crore even before the start of the Tournament season.

Along with Jadeja and Modi, the session on ‘Sports: The big entertainment options’ also had panelists Ayaz Memon, Editor-at-Large, DNA; Peter Hutton, Senior Vice President, Programming and Production, Ten Sports; and Thomas Hoehn, Economics Partner, PwC, UK, presenting their views on the buzz generated by IPL and the Twenty20 format, ICL and future of Indian sports.

Modi taking control

Modi opened the session with a key note address on the IPL vision and Indian sports in general. He said, “Sports is one thing that binds India together, and like all aspects of the society, sports, too, has seen massive changes. India’s wealth has increased and so has our demand for entertainment, be it in the form of multiplexes, different art avenues, etc. In the last couple of years, we have seen top quality live entertainment, and with IPL there would be much more of it. While cricket is a passion in India, it hasn’t been on the line of the English Premier League in the UK, and was never marketed that way. But now is the opportunity to market cricket like never before and give the world a chance to watch domestic cricket in IPL, which would be aired live around the world.”

Modi further said, “A lot of in-depth research has gone into creating IPL, we studied how international leagues operate. We thought Twenty20 was the format to go with, and it is going to be a huge success factor in India. People can see the match after office hours, and this is extremely important.” Citing some challenges, Modi said that cricket was a game that was more skewed towards the men, attracting women was one of the challenges.

Ridiculing competition

In a surprising admission, Modi said that his competition was the usual prime time ‘Saas Bahu’ sagas and not ICL. Though it seemed amusing to a few in the panel and part of the audience, Modi reiterated that his endeavour was to bring the current prime time viewers in watch IPL.

What about ROI?

On the revenue side of the business, questions could be raised about the ROI aspects. How would the teams generate the required ROI from the city based teams owned by a bunch of biggies? Commenting on this, Modi said, “These teams are an asset to their respective owners. Initially, you can’t expect anything new venture to generate high returns from the start. It will at least take a year for these teams to fructify revenues.”

Addressing a question from the audience on having just a single IPL season, and its possibilities of clashing with the ICC schedule, Modi agreed that that IPL could have had a longer season as against the scheduled 44-day tournament starting April. He, however, explained that the 44-day schedule was a prudent decision given the fact that a lot of things happened around the year right from setting up the required infrastructure to coaching and nurturing talent.

And the conflict begins…

Modi’s remarks on the love for the game among the Indians didn’t go down well with Jadeja. Having played the game himself, and being an avid follower, he observed that Indians were not crazy about the game of cricket. Instead they were crazy about the Indian cricket team, he insisted and corroborated his point with viewership stastistics, saying, “The viewership data of matches like India versus Bangladesh is much higher than say an Australia versus South Africa match that happens at the same time. If India was a cricket loving nation, you would have lots watching the Aus-SA match.”

Jadeja further added fuel to fire stating, “The general tendency among Indian cricketers is such that even when they are paid heavily for performing at an exhibition match, their interest levels are down, affecting their performance. This could pretty much be the case with these Leagues. After all, playing for the country is the biggest platform a cricketer looks for.”

Modi was quick to respond to this, and said, “Owners like performance. If players don’t perform, they will be thrown out!”

Ayaz Memon presented some interesting figures. He said, “After 16 years of existence, the total revenue of English Premier League is $3.6 billion, and contrary to this, a 30 seconds ad costs $2.7 million. In 1992, Sky Sports was the only specialist sports channel in the UK. Now they have six channels, and overall there are 30 channels for sports in the UK, while India has only eight.” He further stated that in 2006 Winter Olympics, NBC Network had generated advertising revenues to the tune of $900 million.

Ten Sports’ Hutton, though being a competitor of IPL (given his connections with ICL), was appreciative of the amount of money IPL had been able to generate and market itself across the world. “A lot of new money has come into sports, and IPL is a fantastic example of this,” he noted.

Need more money? Bring in IPTV

Hoehn chipped in at the end of the session, as he too presented insightful views on Pay TV as a concept in India. “My experience shows that if you want to have increasing right fees, it is only possible if Pay TV kicks of in India. We don’t have Pay TV in India and this is putting a limit on the money that could be raised,” he remarked.

When eminent filmmakers like Vidhu Vinod Chopra, Shimit Amin, and Sudhir Mishra, who also formed the panel for the topic on ‘Rethinking Film Marketing and Distribution: Beyond the Box Office’, were confronted with the question as to what works best at the Box Office, they were almost synonymous in their opinion when they said that such a question would never have an answer for many years to come.

The thought was also seconded by noted filmmaker Ramesh Sippy, who was also the moderator for the session. Chopra was very clear right through the session that a filmmaker made a film because he had a strong belief in the concept of the film. “Nobody knows the damn thing!” he said. “Ramesh Sippy, who is here in the panel, had challenged Jaya Bhaduri on the sets of ‘Sholay’ on her acting, and people at that time thought he was a mad man. People weren’t convinced with what he was doing, and today everybody knows what ‘Sholay’ has done for the business of entertainment,” he pointed out.

History recalled

Chopra recalled the early days of ‘Munnabhai MBBS’ when it was being filmed. “People said ‘Munnabhai MBBS’ was a sure flop, and distributors too shied away initially. Looking at the promos of ‘Chak De’, a lot of people in the industry thought it was a documentary. In hindsight, many films have done a great job when people predicted their failure. Now looking at the data, one can argue that a particular genre of film works, and try to create something similar in the future. Believe me, it doesn’t work. If you have a strong belief about a concept, you really have to back your instincts and go for it.”

Filmmaking – Is it a self entertaining business?

According to Amin, filmmaking was about passion, about the interest in creating something new. “Filmmaking is a game that you want to keep playing - we as filmmakers love to entertain ourselves with this interest of ours. We are obsessed about films, and we make them not because it’s a good business proposition. Films are the worst business propositions I would say - there is no guarantee of what works and what does not,” he said.

Mishra was of the opinion that filmmaking was an act of arrogance. “For me, filmmakers/directors are arrogant – they tell stories which they believe in – not thinking in foresight. Thus, filmmaking is an act of arrogance backed by craft, talent and passion,” he maintained.

Mishra further noted, “There is a tendency among people in the business to define Indian audiences. We have some territories in India, and then we have the overseas market, a market which I think is the ‘Home Sickness Market.’ Indians abroad expect us to bring back the Indianess to them in the form of cinema.” Getting back to what works for today’s audience, Mishra said that “those who are able to send the audiences back home in a mood better than the time they arrived in the theatre, are the ones that can be said as good or successful directors.”

Director–Producer differences

Instances of films being abandoned due to differences between the producer and the director are very typical to the Indian film industry. Replying to one of the questions from the audience regarding this issue, Chopra said that never at a shooting stage could there be two directors. “As a producer, I will not interfere in the making of the film, rather I would only give my suggestions in the editing room once the shooting is done. I am a co-writer, and I do help my writers /directors in the scripting process of the film,” he said.

‘An ideal film’ -- Just another terminology

The word ‘ideal’ had no relevance to the film industry according to Sippy. “The word ideal has different meanings to different people. There is nothing called an ideal film. If people may consider what they think could be an ideal film, then they would always want to do something on the same lines, and that is where a formulaic approach in filmmaking comes in. Such films don’t work because at some point of time people would get fed up of repetition.”

Distributor’s role in filmmaking

Sippy stressed that a distributor was an important entity in the business, but at no cost could he interfere in the making of a film. “Distributors aren’t movie makers. As movie makers, we should not compromise on anything, whoever it be. If distributors want to invest in production, they very well can; and in fact, the industry is encouraging them in this regard,” he rearked.

Though the session was interspersed with virulent statements and inputs from the panel, the core question, ‘What works for the audience’, remained largely unanswered. ‘Nobody knows’ - was the stand taken by the eminent panel of filmmakers.

It is true that we are living in the age of information explosion, where media plays a significant role in empowering, educating and even molding mindsets of many. The question that arises during such times is that pertaining to ‘Social Responsibility’. Has the media and the entertainment space proved its ranks, is a question that bothers not only authorities from the I&B ministry, but also citizens of our country.

A panel discussion titled ‘Is Media & Entertainment Socially Responsible: Where does freedom of speech and expression end and social responsibility begin?’ saw the panel engage in heated debate with a lot of contradicting views being witnessed. The panel comprised of big names as Pritish Nandy, Founder, PNC; Sharmila Tagore, Chairperson, CBFC; Zohra Chatterji, Joint Secretary, Ministry of I&B; Amit Khanna, Chairman, Reliance Entertainment & FICCI Convergence Committee; and Filmmakers such as Mahesh Bhatt, Shayam Benegal and Pritish Nandy who moderated the session.

Nandy started off the proceedings on a hilarious note as he said, “Freedom is freedom! It’s like virginity - you either have it or you don’t.” On a serious note, Nandy explained that media was only the most liberated space in the world to be able to inflict changes in the society, and thus with that comes social responsibility. “But I do feel that with these responsibilities, what comes to fore are political powerplays by bureaucrats. Media and Entertainment guys must abjure social responsibilities and stick to what they know best because the decisions that government officials take are often hypocritical.”

Nandy pointed out that media in the past had been successful on many occasions in exposing the truth about the menace of many criminals. “Allow the government to intervene in free media and never expect the truth to be exposed,” he affirmed.

He also stated that media has nothing to do with social responsibility so media should adjourn this nonsense related to social responsibility.

Tagore, on the other hand, tried best to clear the position of the Censor Board. She said, “Our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, and its important to have freedom of expression in a democracy. But India is a country of different cultures, and thus freedom of expression sometimes can hurt the sentiments of many. The Government of India has given us (CBFC) the mandate to monitor films for that matter.”

Tagore also stated that film business was a good contributor to the economy’s growth, and that the Censor Board doesn’t intend to mar this development. “CBFC is an enabling body between producers, civil society and the government. Every country has some form of censorship. In America, censorship certification is handled by its own fraternity, but in our case it is handled by the government. I understand that the primary responsibility of cinema is entertainment, but we cannot leave behind Social Responsibility. It is a collective responsibility, and thus everybody including the producer, the director and everybody should take cognizance of the same.”

Benegal was appreciative of the Censor Board that is in place today, and he confessed that in his entire career span, nobody had restricted him from making a film of his choice. Referring to the past and the way the Censor Board in India operated, Benegal said, “During my early days, the Censor Board would actually tell me what things I should have in my film and what I should not. Things have certainly changed today.” He also believes that the industry has to live with such censorships, because at some point of time, a filmmaker has to accept censorships for the fact that he would be able to show a film freely all over the country without controversies.

Bhatt, as he usually does, awakened the audience with his witty remarks. “Freedom is the lifeblood for Entertainment and Media, it is our breath, and we shall protect it from dying. You make a spectacular ‘Jodhaa Akbar’, and all you get is belittlement from a few for no reason,” he remarked. Bhatt was totally against restriction of freedom of expression, in fact, he propagated ‘Absolute Freedom.’ “The fear of censorship is so much that a director starts thinking about censorship the moment he gets an idea or a thought from which he could make a movie.” Bhatt concluded by saying, “While it is the responsibility of the state machinery to ensure law and order, their helplessness in the matter is pathetic.”

Amit Khanna expressed anguish at the sheer tenacity with which the political leadership had clung to the controls of media. He referred to different laws on investment to regulation in telecom, broadcasting and TV that had made the situation totally chaotic. “The media has a great responsibility as it will ultimately change the way we are governed and who we are governed by,” he added.

Chatterji was also pro-social responsibility as she said, “The Government is trying to put together a Content Code for the media and broadcasting industry. It is important for media to exercise social responsibility and do research on consumer preferences and not just be guided by TRP ratings.”

The New Age space in India is always faced with changes of varied sorts. Given the opportunities and the endless platforms for ventures to expand, what the future entails for the medium can never be foretold. The session on ‘Online Media Platforms: Creating an audience of one and a billion’ at Day Two of FICCI Frames saw the panelists debate the real future of online media platforms; whether it would come from user generated media or traditional media? Whatever the reality, what was agreed was that user-generated media would play a significant role in the years to come.

The panelists included Vikram Chandra, CEO, NDTV Networks; Sanjeev Bikchandani, Founder and CEO, Info Edge India Ltd; Sushmita Vij, Product Director, Microsoft, USA; Kamal Gianchandani, COO, BigFlicks.com, Reliance Home Entertainment; Ringo Chan, VP, Wireless and Distribution - Asia Pacific, Turner; Leonard Brody, VC, Entrepreneur, Co-Founder and CEO, Now public, Canada; and moderator Stefan Rust, Chairman, Mobile Entertainment Forum, Asia.

Speaking on the revenue models on the Internet, Bikchandani said, “Web 2.0 is great but earning revenues over the internet is a challenge as most consumers do not pay to access, the services.” On the increasing shift to mobile phones as a mode for browsing, Bikchandani said, “Mobiles are used mostly for e-mail and not browsing, as one would assume.” He admitted that ‘flavour of the month’ phenomenon is one issue that needs to be tackled as of now. He followed his statement by citing the example of Orkut, which is seeing its users increasingly shifting to Facebook.

While agreeing to the fact that the online medium is growing rapidly, Vikram Chandra, however, refused to believe that the growth of user generated media would result in the shutdown of television. “We have to embrace internet and mobile devices as these are the main streams. This is the future,” he said.

According to Chandra, NDTV has always being following such a pattern, a case in point being the Jessica Lal murder case and the ‘Save the Tiger’ campaign. According to Chandra, much of the success of the two campaigns could be credited to the public involvement through SMS, online petitions, and even blogs that were created for the purpose.

Stressing on the future of online entertainment, Sushmita Vij said, “The future of online entertainment is the consumer; it’s going to be about my choice, my device and my control.” She emphasised on the fact that user generated media provides an opportunity to people to express their editorial voice and allows them to tell their story. She further said that what happens behind the scene is what matters to the people, which is also a form of entertainment. “The future is entertainment online,” concluded Viz.

Providing his perspective on citizen journalism, Leonard Brody said, “The truth about citizen journalism is that it is not journalism, citizen journalism is about being in a place where no one can be. Except for India, the newspapers across the globe are a sinking ship,” he said. Brody also spoke on the shifting patterns of News with the arrival of Facebook, Orkut and YouTube. He noted that there was now a big shift observed in the concept of Breaking News on the web. Stressing on the same, he said that for a user it was breaking news whenever he got the news, even if it might be a year old!

“Online platforms are one of the threats I foresee to the entertainment industry,” said, Kamal Gianchandani, adding, “The audiences are loyal to the content brand as it is the content and not the platform that attracts the people and the key to success would be to find new content.”

Gianchandani’s thought was seconded by Ringo Chan, who summed up by stating, “If we don’t embrace the New Media, the threat may eventually turn out to be true.”

FICCI Frames 2008, the annual convention of the media and entertainment industry gets underway in Mumbai from March 25, 2008. The three-day event will cover the entire gamut of media and entertainment like films, TV, radio, digital entertainment, animation, gaming, visual effects, etc. Over 1,500 delegates are expected to attend the convention.

The inaugural session would see Minister for Information and Broadcasting, PR Dasmunsi, release the FICCI-PWC report on the media and entertainment industry as well as the FICCI Amarchand Mangaldas Law Book. This would be followed by the Minister’s address to the delegates.

Following that, keynote addresses would be delivered by Yash Chopra, Chairman, FICCI Entertainment Committee, Yashraj Films; Kunal Dasgupta, Co-Chairman, FICCI Entertainment Committee, and CEO, Sony Entertainment Television; and Asha Swarup, Secretary, I&B Ministry.

In the past, Frames has been addressed by eminent personalities such as Paolo Gentiloni Silveri, Minister of Communications, Government of Italy; Dan Glickman, President and CEO, MPAA; Barrie Osborne, Producer of ‘Lord of the Rings’ triology; Tom Freston, President and CEO, Viacom; James Murdoch, Chairman, STAR Group; Michael Grindon, President, Sony Pictures International Television; Mark Zoradi, President, Buena Vista International; Andy Bird, President, Walt Disney International; and Stewart Till, Chairman, United International Pictures, among others.

This year, too, sees a fair representation of the international personalities at the Frames with Stewart Beck, Assistant Deputy Minister, Investment, Innovation and Sectors, Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Canada; Dominique Dreyer, Ambassador of Switzerland to India; and Viviane Reding, European Commissioner, Information Society & Media, European Commission, as guests of honour at FICCI Frames 2008.

This year, Frames would have a touch of Swiss magic with Switzerland as the partner country for the mega event.

There would be over 30 sessions across three days of the convention which would be split into six different tracks.

Frames this year would confer the FICCI Living Legend in Entertainment Awards on two popular actors of yesteryears – Rishi Kapoor and Sridevi. Kamal Hassan and Rekha were the recipients of these Awards last year.

Also read:

FICCI Frames 2008 to bring industry stalwarts together from March 25-27 in Mumbai

FICCI Frames 2008 to kick off on March 25 with a touch of Swiss magic

FICCI Frames 2008: Redefining television content – be it news, sports or media choices

FICCI Frames 2008: Animation – making waves in India and abroad

Indian television is going through major changes in content, which is constantly redefining itself. Do we see TV channels falling into niche segments and breaking down into sub-genres in the coming year? What would be future trends for Indian television content? The session on ‘Redefining Television Content: shifting patterns’ sought to answer these questions and much more.

Moderated by LV Krishnan, CEO, TAM Media, the panelists for the session included Peter Mukerjea, Chairman, INX Group; Paul Gertz, Executive VP, Rainmaker, Canada; Sunil Lulla, Director, Alva Brothers; Anurradha Prasad, Chairperson & MD, BAG Films & Media Ltd; and, Monica Tata, VP, Advertising Sales and Networks, India & South Asia, Turner International.

Opening the discussion, BAG Films’ Prasad said, “Being a content provider, I’m only going by my gut feel. And my gut feel, I felt, would make me a broadcaster. Therefore, I decided to launch a channel and go with the mantra, ‘News is Back’.” She, however, admitted that it was extremely difficult to always go with that ‘mantra’ when everyone looked at TRP ratings.

Talking about how Turner International had revolutionised kids’ programming, Tata said, “Kids were not getting entertainment of their liking. This is where we created Pogo, which turned out to be successful. We understood what our audience needed and put the content accordingly, and within 6-8 months, we doubled our kids’ share.”

Mukerjea noted, “General entertainment should not be a 4-plus audience, but 15-24 plus.” Commenting on 9 XM channel’s success, he said that having grown up watching MTV and Channel [v], they wanted 9 XM to be different. “We did a lot of research before the launch and learnt what the Indian family wanted. We saw 9 XM as being a light entertainment channel and since the essence of Bollywood movies is songs, therefore, we decided to play songs without any interruptions from VJ or anyone else,” Mukerjea said, adding, “Anything more than two years old is an old song for us. We play only big song hits.”

Sunil Lulla remarked, “Make consumers the centre of your decision making and not the market. The heart of our business is determined by consumers. Execution can always change, but there is need to focus on the big stories, also get views and opinions on the story.”

He further said, “Whatever is important is news, the audience wants entertainment even in news and it can be through graphics or even locations.”

Paul Gertz elaborated on how he had used social networking sites to launch a programme that went off air some five years ago. He said, “We asked five writers to come up with new ideas, they were different and posted it on various social networking sites and asked them to decide which was the best story for ‘Reboot Reborn’.”

There have been several instances in the past when editors of Indian News channels have been stuck between taking a call whether to relay news that lack wisdom but guarantee a high viewership, or beaming stuff that are classified as being categoric and genuine, irrespective of the numbers it garners. The Prince incident that rocked the nation is one classic example, where questions were raised about the over-explosion of content on the topic, especially when another important incident -- the Beirut episode, where 400,000 Indians were stranded, should have got ample and more importance on the same day.

In a session titled ‘Is News Entertainment changing the face of television news in India’, News specialists like Sanjay Ahirwal, Executive Editor, NDTV India; Rajeev Bajaj, Vice President, Sahara Samay; Satinder Bindra, Special Correspondent/ Consultant; and G Krishnan, CEO, Aaj Tak debated on the factors that should determine the content being beamed on television news channels and several other issues.

In his presentation on the changing face of News channels, Krishnan said that different people look at News from a different perspective. He explained: “An advertiser will want more eyeballs on the channel irrespective of what the content would be, while the editor will always be in a dilemma as to what works better – is it the true sense of journalism that matters or should we give the viewers what they want? Today, the consumer demands the 4Cs, namely Cricket, Cinema, Comedy and Crime. There is no option for News channels, but to feed the viewers with what they want.”

When a question based on News’ channel’s ‘social responsibility to deliver genuine news’, was thrown open to the panel, Krishnan, talking on behalf of AAJ Tak and Headlines Today said, “We do carry stories that matter, and we do deal with social responsibility. But at times, when things really get demanding and competitive, we have to take a call to go for what the viewers want and not think of social responsibility for the interest of our channels. That’s a call you have to take as the editor/head of any news channel.”

However, Ahirwal of NDTV was completely against playing with genuine news. “News can’t be entertainment and entertainment can’t be news. These are two different genres, and one should not try to mix them. What channels are doing today during prime-time News is not News at all. It happens a lot with Hindi News channels. Going by the content which is being aired currently, I reckon we don’t require News reporters. Let’s do something about this, and restore the credibility of News as News!

Bajaj of Sahara Samay argued that striking a right balance was critical. Talking about Prince and the Beirut episode Bajaj said, “I understand that the Beirut incident was important for News channels to cover, but the Prince episode too was generating a lot of interest among viewers. We have to strike a balance here and ensure that no News is given more importance than what it deserves. At the end of the day, the decision should be based on what affects you and the viewer the most.”

Recalling the Vidarbha farmers’ suicides episode, Bajaj noted that viewers weren’t interested or bothered to elicit responses on the same matter once a mobile campaign was on air. “The poor response to the Vidarbha incidents’ is a sign that the tastes of Indian viewers are changing. May be we are not giving News in a manner that they want, or may be that with the coming of age of technology and the rising economy, people have become more aspirational. We need to come up with News which is inspirational, and educational.”

Considering the number of News channels already in the market, and some other awaiting launch, the questions that arises here is ‘How many more?’ Commenting on this front, Bajaj explained that there was space for everybody in the market, and whoever could deliver relevant News that matters to the viewers the most, would be able to survive in the long term.

Bindra is of the opinion that in ‘News entertainment’, channels were losing journalism in true sense. “It’s really a question of wanting a short term gain or a long term benefit. News entertainment is all about short-term gain and long-term pain.”

After a heated discussion on what works most effectively in the Indian News domain, the session concluded on a common ground that it was important for News channels to strike a balance between commerce and content.