The process of granting television channel licences has long been influenced by political agenda, turning what should be a regulatory process into a tool for rewarding the allies of every ruling party.
Since the initiation of the country’s first private television ATN Bangla in 1997, the licensing system has been riddled with favouritism, with political and business connections often outweighing eligibility.
52 licences, only 33 operational
The history of private television channels in Bangladesh began in 1997, with the then Sheikh Hasina government granting several TV licences in the following years. A total of 52 licences has been issued since then, but currently, only 33 channels are operational.
The high number of unlaunched or defunct channels raises concerns about the credibility of the licensing process. Many licences have been tied to political favouritism rather than the channels’ ability to operate effectively.
Under the then prime minister Sheikh Hasina’s first term (1996-2001), channels such as ATN Bangla, Ekushey TV, and Channel i were licensed.
While these were the first private broadcasters, they were linked to political allies, a trend that continued under successive governments.
In 2001, the BNP-led coalition government awarded licences to more channels, including NTV, RTV, and BanglaVision, many of which were owned by political affiliates.
‘Next TV’ and ‘Live TV’ get licences
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting recently issued licences to two new private television channels, “Next TV” and “Live TV.”
According to the ministry, Mohammad Arifur Rahman Tuhin has received the licence for “Next TV,” while the licence for “Live TV’” has been granted to an individual named Arifur Rahman. The ministry is still in the process of finalising the official regulations regarding these licences.
As per the ministry’s guidelines, any Bangladeshi citizen can apply for a private satellite television channel. Sources at the information ministry said the process is underway to grant licence to more TV channels.
Politicisation of media ownership
The ownership structures of private TV channels reveal a clear pattern of political patronage.
For instance, NTV was owned by Mosaddak Ali Falu, a close associate of BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia, while Channel 1 was owned by Giasuddin Al Mamun – once a close friend and associate of Tarique Rahman.
The spread of TV channels under this system raised concerns about media independence, as these channels were often used to promote government narratives while sidelining opposing viewpoints.
This practice of granting TV licences to political allies continued with the Awami League’s return to power back in 2009.
In the first few months of Hasina’s second term, the government granted licences to 10 new channels, including Ekattor TV, Channel 9, and Independent TV. Many of these channels were owned by businessmen with close connections to the ruling party.
For instance, Independent TV was owned by Salman F Rahman, a top Awami League leader and businessman. Similarly, Channel 9 was backed by influential figures close to the government.
In 2010 and 2011, the trend continued with licences granted to Channel 24 and SATV, among others, many of which were also linked to government-aligned business and political figures.
By 2013, the government had approved licences for 12 more channels, including DBC, Duronto TV, and Nexus TV. These channels were owned by individuals with direct connections to the then ruling party.
Licensing: A political tool?
The process of awarding TV licences has often been used to strengthen political control over public discourse. Pro-government channels have flourished, while those critical of the government have often faced shutdowns.
For instance, channels like Diganta TV and Islamic TV were closed for broadcasting content unfavourable to the Awami regime, while government-aligned channels were favoured.
Moreover, many channels granted licences lacked the financial capacity to operate, yet their owners, often with political connections, were able to secure licences and later sell them for significant profits.
This system has allowed media owners to leverage their political connections to secure lucrative deals, undermining the independence of the press.
Politics, business intertwined
Many media owners had and still have political affiliations or business ties to high-ranking government officials. This has created a media environment where media outlets often prioritise government narratives over journalistic integrity.
For example, channels like DBC and NTV were owned by individuals with strong political connections. These owners have been accused of using their channels as platforms for political messaging, further diminishing the role of the media as an independent check on power.
What about accountability?
The licensing process could certainly use more transparency and accountability. The absence of an independent regulatory body has allowed political influence to dominate the process.
Many TV channels have been granted licenses based on political connections rather than their ability to operate, and many channels have failed to launch despite receiving licenses.
In some cases, media owners have sold their channels without regulatory oversight, profiting from political connections rather than through the legitimate operation of a TV station.
This lack of transparency has contributed to a media environment where independent reporting is sidelined in favour of political favouritism.
‘Ministry moving opposite direction’
The politicisation of TV channel licensing in Bangladesh has created a media environment where the independence of the press is compromised.
This system of granting licenses based on political connections has led to a situation where most media outlets serve the interests of the ruling government, rather than fulfilling their role as independent sources of information.
Commenting on Bangladesh’s media landscape during an exclusive interview with TIMES of Bangladesh on 9 September, Media Reform Commission chief Kamal Ahmed said, “The commission did not make any unrealistic recommendations.
“Most of its proposals could have been implemented simply by updating existing government directives and policies. Instead of implementing these recommendations, the information ministry is moving in the opposite direction.”
It is apparent that to ensure a free and fair media environment, Bangladesh needs to implement comprehensive media reforms.
This includes the establishment of an independent regulatory body, merit-based licensing criteria, and mechanisms to hold media owners accountable for their actions. Only with these reforms can Bangladesh create a media landscape that is truly independent, unbiased, and accountable.
