Reader Bhushan Nigale writes in:
I was expecting you to link to the hard-hitting Mint story (incidentally published on the 15th of January) on ‘Private Treaties’, BCCL’s yet another innovation that compromises journalistic and ethical values. Instead, I found your post on ‘Classical Liberalism and the Times of India’. This amused me no end.
I refuse to believe that the newspaper can stand for anything, except for protecting and furthering the interests of its ‘private treaties’ and ‘MediaNet’ clients. It stands for violating the trust of its readers, by selling news for money and equity.
Fair point, and had I noticed the Mint story, I would certainly have blogged about it. I have no respect for some of the practices of the Times of India, as regular readers would have noted. If their edit pages do end up improving, that won’t absolve them of their business practices—but it is still worth commenting on.
Update: Devangshu points me to an earlier story on private treaties in Business Standard:
The Times of India publisher Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd must be doing something right with its three-year-old Private Treaties division.
Otherwise newspaper groups such as HT Media Ltd, Dainik Bhaskar and Dainik Jagran would not be eager to duplicate their arch rival’s business plan.
Read the rest here.