BTV and the private channels: A comparison drawn

---

Shaikh Saleque
The 35-year monopoly reign of the state owned Bangladesh Television (BTV) ended with the emergence of private television in the country at the fag end of the bygone century. Within a span of little over a decade, the number of private televisions in the country has now crossed twenty while a few more are in the pipeline. It is no doubt good news for the information and entertainment hungry people who, in the past, had to tune into foreign radios or wait for the next day's newspaper to know events that took place in their immediate vicinity, particularly that of a political confrontation or a bloody clash between rivals, or the government's actions to contain a violent demonstration. The 24-hour satellite private TV channels inform us of any major development instantly- through scrolls or in the form of breaking news, or through their regular news bulletins. At times it would seem that the viewers are over-informed.
In one word, most of the private TV channels in Bangladesh are doing fairly well- they are doing good business, creating jobs, creating artists and stars, and promoting corporate culture. Some of the channels attempt to play the role of 'fourth state' through their efforts to safeguarding democracy, human rights and rule of law; and depicting social problems and human miseries. These are no doubt praiseworthy, but what concerns many is that some of the private channels are found over-acting against the one-sided publicity of the government. It is widely seen that news of the opposition 'talking heads' receive priority treatment in their news bulletins compared to those in the government or the ruling party. Negative aspects are prioritised while positive news or those about achievement or success hardly find any space.
BTV during its monopoly rule quenched the thirst of the entertainment-hungry people not because of its monopolistic role only; BTV's quality programmes and dramas could successfully attract and impress the viewers. The telecasting of such dramas and programmes used to be the talk of the town, and they still kindle fond memories in the hearts of many viewers. Gone are the days, and those catchy programmes and dramas of BTV remain an event of the past. BTV programmes have now witnessed drastic deterioration in quality.
BTV news, because of various limitations, all through remained far from meeting the expectation of viewers. It was mainly because of two reasons: one-sided publicity, and careless and non-professional presentation. Even after traversing almost half century, BTV news has not changed much; neither in its content nor in its presentation quality. Inability of BTV news to meet the demand of the viewers made it easy for the private televisions to carve out a niche. They immediately filled the vacuum amongst those information hungry people- a vacuum created by the state-owned channel. Irony is that BTV still suffers from the complacency that it has the largest number of viewers. Because of it being the only terrestrial channel, BTV transmission stretches all over the country including the remote rural areas where the private channels do not have access. BTV's claim may have some arithmetic value in that consideration. But with the rapid process of urbanisation and development of growth centres, the private channels are stretching their footprint and giving remote control to the hitherto captive audience of BTV.
There is no reason for the private channels to be complacent of being able to win the BTV viewers. They are now in tough competition among themselves, and the viewers have the wide choice of deciding which of the Bangladeshi channels to tune on. Moreover there are Indian and many other foreign channels- many of them in Bangla.
The popularity and viewership of private TV channels is again determined by the quality and objectivity of its newscasts. Hence news remains the dominant factor, the very survival of channels depend on the objectivity and quality of news they present.
There is similarity between BTV and the private TV channels of Bangladesh- both remain humbly dedicated to the publicity of their masters. BTV being a government channel is dedicated to government publicity and on sideline to the publicity of the ruling party. They speak the way the government wants it to speak, and there is no hide and seek in it. And the private TV channels are they free from this vice? The owner of one private channel has been hitting the news headlines almost everyday on non-news events. Director of another channel while appearing as a reporter breaks all protocols of news. One channel while making reports on electioneering campaigns of a Jatiya Sangsad by-election to a city constituency, burying objectivity and neutrality, openly sided with one candidate- the candidate was none but the owner himself. A newly commissioned channel has almost made it a one-man show of the owner himself. There are scores of such examples where the insignificant and non-news events get high profile news treatment if the top notches of the channels are involved in them. This phenomenon is not restricted to the electronic media, owners of print media are also found on news. One proprietor-editor regularly published news containing a title awarded upon him by the reporters and writers. Another proprietor-editor of a traditional daily, he being a lawyer, used to give wide coverage of all the cases he won, and of course all other social engagements he used to have. So it is the owners' show in almost all the private media- some do it subtly and some openly.
Private channels are privately owned personal properties, and hence its owners reserve the right to make their personal projection the way they want to -- how far this claim is justified? The only source of revenue stream of the private channels is the advertisement. And who caters the fund for the advertisement? It is no one but the consumers of products and services. The money spent for advertisement is ultimately levied upon the consumers. In that way the private television channels are being run by the extra money the consumers are paying for advertisement. The consumers are none but the general people who constitute TV viewership. Moreover viewers have to buy TV sets at their own cost and pay for the electricity consumed for keeping the sets on. So like BTV, the private channels also run with public money. The question for BTV's one-sided publicity is equally applicable for the less-than-objective and biasness in news treatment and uncalled for projection of the authorities of the private channels. Since the government provides fund for BTV, it can afford to run without advertisement; but the survival of private channels very much depend on it.
Time has come for the emerging private TV channels to address these issues and keep up their sunny days. The general masses and viewers never fail to make proper judgement, as do the advertisement providers. Once viewers turn their back on the private channels, advertisers will take no time to follow suit. And once there are no viewers and advertisements, what fate awaits them is not difficult to visualise.

(The writer can be reached at email: Saleque0707@yahoo.com)