IFFI 52, 046: The urge to merge – DFF, two other units, to become part of NFDC
Students of Business Administration, Management and Public Relations are taught about the reasons, modalities and possible consequences of mergers and acquisitions of companies. Terms like Holding Company, Group and Subsidiary Company come up and are defined. In the corporate sector, major companies undertake a massive PR exercise, leading up to the merger/acquisition and for some time afterwards, are undertaken. No such thing will be really required when some of the entities under the wing of the Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry of the Government of India (GoI) are pushed under the umbrella of the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC).
That is so because all of them are mere divisions or units of the I&B Ministry, with NFDC enjoying the most independent status in its operations, and the Directorate of Film Festivals (DFF) working with the Entertainment Society of Goa (ESG) in organising the International Film Festival of India (IFFI), ever since IFFI moved to the western costal state in 2004. It is believed that the arrangement is a 50-50 partnership, between ESG, wholly owned by the Government of Goa, and DFF, wholly owned by the Government of India (GoI). DFF also holds the annual national film awards in New Delhi, where ESG does not come into the picture. Other units of the I&B Ministry do not have partnerships, and are run with grants from the GoI. These include: Films Division, Children’s Films Society of India (CFSI), National Film Archive of India (NFAI). The proposal is to merge these three units, and bring them under NFDC.
It is pertinent to note that I&B does not have only these three units/agencies/divisions. In fact, there are a large number of them, as the list below show:
Films Wing
The Films Wing of the Ministry administers the Cinematograph Act, 1952, which looks into certification of films for public exhibition, import of films for theatrical and non-theatrical viewing, export of Indian films, import of unexposed cinematograph films (now redundant) and various types of equipment required by the film industry, all matters relating to the film industry, including developmental and promotional activities thereto, promotion of good cinema by the institution of State awards for films produced in India and assistance through the National Film Development Corporation Limited, production and distribution of documentaries and newsreels and other films, and film strips, for internal and external publicity, preservation of films and filmic materials, organisation of International Film Festivals in India and participation of India in International Film Festivals abroad, organisation of Film Festivals under Cultural Exchange Programmes, etc.
Attached and Subordinate Organisations
1) Press Information Bureau.
2) Bureau of Outreach & Communication
3) Publications Division
4) Office of the Registrar of Newspapers for India
5) Central Board of Film Certification
6) Films Division
7) Directorate of Film Festivals
8) Photo Division
9) Electronic Media Monitoring Centre(EMMC)
10) National Film Archives of India
11) New Media Wing
Autonomous Organisations
1. Prasar Bharati
a. All India Radio
b. Doordarshan
2. Film and Television Institute of India, Pune
3. Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute, Kolkata
4. Children`s Film Society of India
5. Indian Institute of Mass Communication
Statutory Bodies
1. Press Council of India
2. Film Certification Appellate Tribunal
Public Sector Undertakings
1. National Film Development Corporation Limited (NFDC)
2. Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Limited (BECIL)
It will be seen that the proposed merger pulls out two Attached and Subordinate Organisations - DFF and NFAI, and one Autonomous organisation, CFSI – and pushes them under the roof of NFDC. In its press release, the I&B Ministry states that this “…will lead to convergence of activities and resources and better co-ordination, thereby ensuring synergy and efficiency in achieving the mandate of each media unit.” Having observed the working of each of these organisations, albeit sporadically, since the late 1960s, I do not swallow the reasoning one bit.
Any organisation promoting cinema that is funded by the government, with the exception DFF’s annual IFFI, depends on grants and subsidies from the government’s exchequer. The only two ways of recovering investments are by super-efficient marketing and public-private partnerships. In a socialist country (our constitution defines us as socialist) country, the public-private partnership is generally discouraged. So, we have to depend on super-efficient marketing, and reconcile to the fact that a part, maybe a large part, of funds, channelled to such organisations, are for research and development, or promoting artistic media, as differentiated from commercial media, with no hope of recovery.
“Convergence of activities and resources and better co-ordination, thereby ensuring synergy and efficiency in achieving the mandate” are not the real issues at all. In the electronic age, what prevents convergence of activities between units of the same ministry? All resources come from the GoI, routed via the I&B Ministry, so where is the problem of convergence of resources? In future, will they all work from one office? Hardly likely, considering the staff strengths of each respective organisation. So how will they achieve better co-ordination? The only way is electronic, which avenue is in operation even now. So what will change? It has also been specified that all employees will be retained. This leads us to believe that the problems did not lie in the personnel, but in the distance between the various organisations. Tell me another.
A short-listing of the problems that have plagued these organisations over the last few decades will lead to the following observations:
- 1. There is no consistent policy that governs these organisations.
- 2. Annual budgets are slashed (usually) or enhanced (rarely) arbitrarily. DFF, for example, often cites reduced budgets year-on-year for some lack-lustre film festivals. NFAI would do a much better job of preserving and restoring films and related material with more funds coming its way.
- 3. The functioning of the CFSI, and NFDC itself, needs to be put under the scanner; is the Film Market, on the fringes of IFFI, NFDC’s only flagship?
- 4. There is deep-rooted corruption in awarding contracts and tenders, funds for film production, etc., across these units.
I do not see any good coming out of the move, which has all the makings of a bureaucratic exercise, merely giving in to the urge to merge. Oh, I want it to work, from the bottom of my heart, for I have been associated with all four units, time and again, and have been pained at the way they I found them functioning. Moreover, it is always easier to manage smaller units than large conglomerates.
One organisation that had 50% of its activities already hived off is DFF. What is more, for two years, its Director was superseded by another person who was not from DFF. While the Director retained his position, IFFI had another director in-charge. It was sad to see him hanging around, while an outsider took hold of the reins. What more is in store, we shall know over the next three months or so. In all probability, the changes will take shape from the new financial year, i.e., 01 April 2022. One cannot escape being reminded that the date it is also All Fools’ Day.
P.S.: Take a good look at the logos of the three units pictured above. Soon, they will disappear forever. And who knows? NFDC might have a new logo too, to match its new status.