The government’s decision to cap foreign participation in television news channels at 26 per cent is difficult to understand. On the surface, the rationale is that it puts the print media and the television media on par.

Second, if a newspaper is not published in India, the chances of it being accessed in any meaningful way by the Indian public are low (other than through the Internet — which is not quite the same thing).

In contrast, whether or not a television channel is located in India, or up-linked to satellite from a facility based in India, it can still be viewed in the country. With this policy, foreign television channels such as Rupert Murdoch’s Star TV will have to re-work their entry plans into the country — Star is to begin its own news operations in 10 days.

But this restriction applies only to foreign channels that wish to up-link from India, and pay the government huge fees for the pleasure. Foreign channels like CNN and BBC remain free to broadcast into the country by linking up to satellites from Hong Kong or Singapore or anywhere else.

So, if the purpose was to ‘protect’ Indian audiences from the perceived bias of foreign television channels or to seek control in Indian hands, the latest government decision doesn’t achieve much.

All that it does is to create an artificial divide between foreign channels that seek to operate out of India, and those that don’t. If anything, the effort should have been to incentivise up-linking from India.

Channels like Star and Zee (which has a substantial shareholding, on account of non-resident Indian holdings being clubbed with other foreign investment—unlike the case of print) now have two choices.

They can continue to relay news overseas with the stipulated time delay of a few seconds or minutes, and then up-link from there. This is no great problem and it is what they have already been living with.

Alternatively, they will be forced to partner local businessmen to meet the 74 per cent Indian ownership stipulation. If channels like Star want to choose the first option, there will be considerable time involved in finding a suitable Indian partner, working out the commercial arrangements, and then applying for clearance — assuming, of course, that Mr Murdoch is inclined to hand over control of a channel that he has been running for several years.

The near certainty then is that the preferred course will be to continue up-linking from overseas. Since this is the pre-existing situation, the new policy changes nothing.

What’s curious is the definition of foreign participation being adopted by the government. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj indicated that this 26 per cent would include not just equity contribution but even foreign loans.

This is a stipulation that has not been applied to any other sector, and if it makes commercial sense to borrow overseas, or to take advantage of supplier credits when it comes to buying equipment, why should the opportunity be denied? For there is no control issue here, and dominance for the local shareholders is already guaranteed on account of the 74 per cent local shareholding. All in all, this is a policy announcement that could do with a quick revision.