Netflix and TVRI: A Collaboration for a Larger Public Interest
- Izzan Fathurrahman
- Jul 13, 2020
- 4 min read
The history of mankind has shown that the crisis will bring inevitable innovations in human life aspects. The internet and GPS, for instance, were invented during the period of Cold War and initially to serve the military purpose. Decades later, the human is hard to not being associated with the internet in their daily basis.
The inevitable innovation during the crisis seems to bring its effect in the collaborative roles between public and private sectors to serve a larger public interest in Indonesia. Six months ago, I wrote about the bitter consequences of banning Netflix by the government of Indonesia in this The Jakarta Post. The government had two choices, whether to preserve its ambiguous economic approach by disallowing the platform or kept on their imperfect neoliberal track by accommodating it.
The latter seems like to be the choice of the government. The collaboration between Ministry of Education led by its techpreneur background minister, Nadiem Makarim, and the giant online streaming platform has included TVRI, the state-owned television broadcaster, as the mediator.
At the glance, this breakthrough will benefit TVRI, a broadcast platform that has been prolongedly devaluated by the outdated, conservative and state-centrist image. Viewing the program quality offered by Netflix, this collaboration could impose a progressive transformation for the image as well as for the broadcast content of the state-owned television broadcaster.
Reflecting on the bigger picture, the internet of things phenomenon has demonstrated tremendous development in these past two decades. The current pandemic even highlights its essentiality. While countries start to impose the lockdown and restrict mobility, people have shifted their consuming behavior to online practice. Three Indonesian biggest e-commerce has marked a larger transaction during this pandemic. Bukalapak experienced 10 percent new user growth in March this year.
The innovation is inevitable and so is its disruptive effect. The disruptors always leave two options for the traditional market actors, whether to merge or to challenge them. This phenomenon does not only happen in the context of an emerging country like Indonesia with unsolid foundation of market institutions (e.g. the legal framework, taxation system). The phenomenon has crossed the geographical boundaries and even beyond the dichotomy between developed and developing countries. The German automotive part supplier, Bosch, acquired the carpooling start-up, SPLT, to gain a better end-users behavioral data.
On the other hand, this also creates a question of monopoly and competition among business actors within the market. The collaboration between Netflix and TVRI also could not escape from this. There have been protests from the private television broadcasters regarding the presence of online video streaming platforms and Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) has warned the government that the collaboration might hinder the development of local content creators.
The complex disruptive effect requires careful attention. Therefore, it is highly essential to understand what the root cause behind the presence of online streaming platforms and the collaboration between the government and private sector in this matter. Instead of blaming the disruptor presence, the existing business actors and authorities should evaluate themselves.
The emergence of better quality alternative products perhaps is the result of poor broadcast quality of the existing local business actors. On the other hand, the structural problems behind it might have not been solved yet. For instance, the monopoly of the rating assessment by a particular market research agency leads to a slow and even the worst quality development of the local broadcasters’ products. On the other hand, KPI has been prolongedly questioned for its controversial censorship mechanism.
In terms of competition, how do the other associated variables, such as the state regulation and infrastructure development, contribute to the unprogressive competing environment among all actors? Putting all the risk and streamlining the long-existed structural problems by scapegoating the disruptor may hinder the innovation, particularly during the time of crisis where this our best chance to view the system differently.
Indeed, the emergence of disruptors will possibly lead to the business stealing effect. In this case, the innovators merely replace the existing market leaders and create a new monopoly practice. To avoid the full risk on the public side, the government must catch up with its regulations while on the other hand capturing the public perception of the related innovation.
The innovation economy since the first time it was argued by Joseph Schumpeter decades ago, always aimed to serve the public interest. In this matter, a survey of public opinion or consumer assessment is essential in preserving innovation. So, it does, at least, reflect the public interest.
The pandemic has revealed the importance of data in making a critical decision. In this innovation economy practice, the government and its collaborative partner should emphasize on the public interest data in pursuing the innovation. The same applies to the status quos who are challenged by the collaboration between Netflix and TVRI.
The local-private television broadcasters or KPI can gather public opinion regarding their service or the perception regarding new competitors. So, if there is going to be a competition as aimed by all actors, it is supposed to be based on reliable public interest data. In the end, this situation will be beneficial to the public in general since the people will have a certain parameter in basing their choices.
Comments