The “LoC” imagery seems to have struck a chord with many readers of this newborn blog. Not surprisingly – perhaps, closer observation would reveal that most of the responses are from the “Azad” side of the LoC raising obvious questions about Human Rights and Freedom of Speech on the “occupier” territory. (You’ll get the “occupier” vs. “occupied” drift if you read my other blog on Kashmir: “Politically Incorrect”). But honestly, I am just being provocative here in the hope of eliciting some response from the “second floor” (or is it Gurgaon now?) types ?
Be that as it may, the issue raised was whether the LoC is going to remain a permanent reality. Are the differences really so irreconcilable? My friend Indrani – who has worked on both sides of the fence, as it were, feels the ‘twain shall never meet’ – whereas Rajeev (Dubey) a former young editorial colleague from BW has asked if we need the LoC at all? Kalyan (Kar) thinks, the LoC may not be such a bad thing after all – as it lends some dynamics that keeps the adrenaline flowing. Saurjyesh, our man from Reuters, talks of arrogance and lack of communication on both sides.
While teaching I use another analogy – which I am not sure will go down well with members on either side of the LoC. But, what the heck – we are not here to please anyone, are we? I like to compare Media with the Restaurant business.
There was a time when the best restaurants were owned by the top chefs. They would hire a “Manager”, a steward or captain and a few waiters to run the place. You would not see a single advertisement of the restaurant anywhere in town, in any newspaper or magazine. Reputation was built simply by the word of mouth (quite literally so).In the age of competition (where success is measured in “footfalls” or “eye-balls”) things are bound to change. Enter the promoters and professional marketers. They identify a “niche”, develop a “concept”, “create” a brand and then engage a Chef to run the kitchen. So far so good, an Imtiaz Quereshi needed a Nakul Anand to market the Dum Pukht and a Hemant Oberoi is happy to be a celebrity Chef and work for the Taj at a salary that would make many CEOs salivate (more than they do while eating the food he dishes out - tho' I am told that the remuneration top editors are commanding these days, with Stock Options et al, would make many a corporate honcho's eyes pop-out in disbelief). But, the problem arises only when the Marketing Manager starts dabbling with the recipes and tells the Chef how to cook or how much ‘dum’ the Biriyani should have.
Surely there are the Alain Ducasse’s of the world (or our own Rahul Akerkar of Indigo, Mumbai fame) – Michelline starred Chefs who run their own signature restaurants.
But, how many 'owner-editor(s)' like Aveek Sarkar do we have in business? For the better part – you need an A D Singh to start an Olive ( btw – A D, I believe, is the son of Nippy Singh – ex ToI, India Today and now Express – one of the original “sabun-wallahs” who crossed over to Media ). But, I doubt if A D would ever take “punga” with his Executive Chef.That brings me to the point made so articulately by my old schoolmate Eskay (journo turned Corporate Communicator): “The rules for success are surprisingly the same - a good product, well-targeted with the right marketing mix. Sure, there will always be aberrations and so the not-so-best product will, for a while, be the leader. But that happens in every marketplace as you'll know only so well”.
My question is what makes a “good product” ? Is it what the Chef turns out of the kitchen or the packaging, presentation and ambience of a restaurant ? You’ll say, of course, both. I disagree slightly. The two together don’t make a product but a “total experience”. And, there rests my case – Media too ( Print included ) is not just a “product” it’s an “experience”. It’s another matter though, some try to convert it into a “product of expedience”.Shall wait to hear your views...….
