The Bhutanese Leading the way.
From available public records Kuensel in 2021 made a revenue of Nu 150.09 million a good chunk of which was made possible by direct government printing, advertising and other works as pointed to by the current Finance Secretary who said the government subsidizes Kuensel through such jobs.
However, the same organization questions and begrudges Nu 700,000 a year given to each private newspaper through the Media Enterprise Development Budget (MEDB). This was apparent in its misinformed story and Editorial on the issue last week.
For many decades, Kuensel held a monopoly in Bhutan. There was a time it could refuse advertisements, asking businesses to resubmit them the following day or week, and even charged a surcharge for advertisement submitted later in the week.
The newsroom, too, was relatively calm and less dynamic compared to what we see today.
However, a significant shift occurred in 2006 with the emergence of two private competitors—Bhutan Times and Bhutan Observer—which provided a rude awakening to the established order.
Of the two, Bhutan Times, became enormously popular and amassed a huge following, especially in a country that was predominantly young.
It must have been a difficult transition for Kuensel, as it had long enjoyed an unrivaled position as the largest and most prestigious newspaper in the country, and serving as the sole voice of the nation for decades.
However, the rise of private media turned out to be a blessing in disguise for Kuensel. The newfound competition spurred the organization to evolve, transforming it from a once-sleepy institution to be more dynamic and competitive to get better stories.
While it is true that Bhutan Times blundered in not going daily, Kuensel always had the edge over the private media when it came to getting direct government printing jobs and advertisements.
A senior bureaucrat once remarked that they preferred advertising with Kuensel because, in their view, it was essentially “money from the left pocket to the right pocket” of the government. This was despite the fact that 49% of Kuensel’s shares were held by private shareholders, including some of the most affluent individuals in Bhutan.
On hindsight, Bhutan Times, despite its short-lived brilliance, never had a chance as the entire government system— in its very DNA— favored Kuensel over private newspapers due to the government ownership structure.
No matter how innovative Bhutan Times or Bhutan Observer became with their marketing strategies or how much high-quality content they produced, the default instinct of any government official would be to advertise with Kuensel.
Kuensel has always consistently received a steady flow of direct government printing jobs, bypassing the tendering process altogether. If the same was done for rival private printing houses or papers, there would probably be RAA Audit memos, ACC complaints and a Kuensel story to boot, but since it was “money from the left pocket to the right pocket” even the RAA closes its eyes.
Despite this, private newspapers were able to thrive until 2010. However, after that year, there was a noticeable decline in the overall advertising budget. While Kuensel experienced some impact, the private newspapers were hit hardest. Bhutan Times, which once boasted a staff of 99, has since seen its numbers drop to fewer than 10, with its office now in a modest underground basement.
Despite its substantial success and after even getting the sheer majority of advertisements and no competition as a daily, it has kept up its snarky and petty attitude towards an increasingly struggling private media.
When one reads Kuensel’s stories and editorials on the media one gets the distinct impression that Kuensel is portraying itself as morally superior, and the only newspaper truly serving the national interest while the private newspapers are deemed almost unworthy.
Despite Kuensel’s attitude the private media has stood in support of Kuensel at crucial times.
In May 2010 there was a proposal by the Druk Holding and Investments (DHI) to take over Kuensel. This raised concerns within the Kuensel newsroom about potential threats to its editorial independence, as it would be reporting to multiple layers of new management under DHI.
The Editor of this paper then working in Business Bhutan wrote a front-page story, raising concerns about the implications of such a takeover on Kuensel’s editorial freedom. The Editor asked the then Prime Minister during the monthly meet-the-press whether the government would allow such a move, emphasizing the risks involved. After considering the issue, the Prime Minister assured that Kuensel would never be allowed to come under DHI, a decision he made on the spot.
The Bhutanese launched with some investigative and critical stories in 2012 which was not appreciated by the government at the time. In August 2012 a senior bureaucrat, acting as a whistleblower, shared an April 2012 circular marked confidential issued by the then MoIC Minister asking government departments not to advertise with The Bhutanese. This was an unprecedented assault on press freedom and an effort to close down the paper for its critical coverage.
Counting on journalistic solidarity, the Editor of The Bhutanese approached the Kuensel Editor at the time with the circular and shared the story. Unfortunately, Kuensel’s coverage of the circular downplayed its significance. The editorial dismissed the circular’s intent to target The Bhutanese and lectured us not to expect advertisements as a right. This response was disappointing, as it missed an opportunity to defend journalistic freedom and solidarity.
In 2018 during the time of the second government, the Prime Minister at the time was upset with a series of Kuensel editorials that he felt were unfairly targeting the government or were not factual in his opinion. He had compiled a long list of them and in a meeting with senior Editors in his office, he announced his intention to forward the editorials with a complaint letter against Kuensel to BICMA for investigation and action.
The Editor of The Bhutanese appealed to the Prime Minister not to take such a drastic action against Kuensel, whatever the validity of his grievances, as it would have a chilling effect on press freedom in Bhutan. The Prime Minister in a meet-the-press later declared that he had intended to file the complaint to BICMA against Kuensel but he stopped based on the appeal by the Editor of this paper.
It is clear that private media in Bhutan faces significant challenges, not just in terms of competition, but also due to the institutional support enjoyed by state-owned media. The government system views state-owned media as strategic assets, as outlined in a 2013 Ministry of Finance report, and this dynamic is unlikely to change.
Despite these systemic challenges, journalistic solidarity remains crucial. However, true solidarity cannot be achieved unless Kuensel reconsiders its unhealthy stance toward the private media.
A more collaborative and supportive approach, rather than one rooted in hostility, would benefit the entire media environment in Bhutan.
“A free press is one where it’s okay to state the conclusion you’re led to by the evidence.”–David Carr