It’s now official – the once mighty media business of
Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) will now be receiving $180 million of tax payers’
money a year for the next five years. The Minister for Communications and
Information, Ms. Josephine Teo, explained to parliament that it was essential to provide
this funding because “preserving local news media was critical,” and the
funding would provide relief for the media outlets to transform. More on the
story can be found at:
A lot of things are being said about this move and
what it says about the Singapore media scene. I will leave that debate to the
more qualified. However, I will state that the fact that the government had to
step in and provide tax-payer funds to “preserve local news outlets,” should be
seen as nothing less than the humiliation of the management of the media
outlets. The local news outlets had a duopoly (Singapore Press Holdings controlling
the print and MediaCorp controlling the broadcast) and had captive readers and
viewers. They also had a license to print money in as much as advertisers didn’t
have a choice.
Whilst newspapers around the world bled, ours were in
robust financial health. My mother, a former editor with the Straits Times (Section
2) and her contemporaries remembers generous bonuses and annual leave.
So, what happened? How did a company that once had a
license to print money end up in a position of needing a hand out from the tax-payer?
Well, the answer is simple, the media houses were essentially dinosaurs that failed
to evolve. The focus of business was not on providing the consumer with what the
consumer wanted but on maintaining their monopoly. One only has to look at how
the management of both media companies spent time snipping about whether
readership or viewership was better when they could have used that time to
focus on how to reach their consumers.
You can argue that the media houses were behaving like
dinosaurs because there was no need for them to behave otherwise. They were the
biggest creatures in the jungle and nobody else could take them on. What they
failed to see was the smaller creatures were nimbler and found ways to beat the
big dinosaurs.
However, size and power should not be an excuse for
people and organizations not too evolve. There are companies that are using
their size and cash power to prepare for a future where their mainstay is
likely to be no more.
Interestingly enough one of the best examples of a big
company trying prepare for a future is the largest oil company in the world – “Saudi
Aramco.”
The Saudi National Oil company has been actively
trying to brand itself as a responsible steward of the world’s energy supply. Part
of that stewardship involves the role of how the oil affects climate change and
Aramco is actively trying to show that it is trying to minimize the affects of fossil
fuels on the environment:
However, there are other oil companies that are purely
commercial and also working to prepare for a future without their main business.
Just take a look at this Shell Station in Singapore.
Ironically, one of the industries that has been
particularly successful at reinventing itself is also one of the most reviled –
the tobacco industry. One of the biggest players in that industry is Philip
Morris, which now talks about how it is preparing for a “Smoke-Free Future.”
The global debate on alternative products is ranging. Singapore famously bans
alternative smoke products but allows cigarettes to be sold freely. However,
there are markets that have recognized that the alternative products could help
reduce tobacco usage. Say what you like about the tobacco industry but it has proven
to be resilient despite every legal effort to cripple it and it has shown itself
to be forward thinking and not used its cash to get complacent.
Evolution and revolution are word usually associated
with the technology industry. However, they apply to all industries. Any
government that wants to claim that it manages a good economy, should ensure
that there is a certain amount of pressure on any given industry for all the
players to compete and think of the future. If a government allows a market
situation where the main players spend their days talking about their market
dominance and how its beneficial for consumers to donate to the industry, that
government is likely to go the way of the dinosaur along with the industries
that it protects from competition.
No comments
Post a Comment