Abstract
The availability of a large number of smartphones, widespread internet access and the penetration of high bandwidth, coupled with competitively priced data plans, spurred tremendous growth in the Indian media and entertainment industry, particularly in the realm of over-the-top (OTT) platforms. The demand for OTT services surged even further during the lockdown period brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. The focal point of this case lies in the entry and expansion of the multinational corporation ‘Netflix’ within India. The case delves into the company’s employment of the marketing mix to address the escalating demand for the novel OTT service in India amid intensifying competition and emerging challenges. In its eagerness to produce original content, Netflix appeared to have inadvertently offended and disregarded the sentiments, religious emotions and beliefs of its audience, resulting in consumer protests. This, in turn, led to the formulation of various regulations governing the content presented on OTT platforms. Owing to its controversial and insensitive content, Netflix faced backlash in India and globally, leading to legal battles in several countries. A recent instance occurred on September 18, 2021, where Nona Gaprindashvili, a Georgian chess prodigy who made history as the world’s first female grandmaster, took legal action against Netflix for defamation and invasion of privacy. This lawsuit was filed in a federal district court in California in response to their show titled ‘Queen’s Gambit’. The core of the lawsuit revolves around a scene in the final episode of the show, wherein a radio commentator suggests that Gaprindashvili was not regarded as a significant contender by her male counterparts. The lawsuit accuses Netflix of belittling Gaprindashvili’s achievements to craft a more sensational narrative and dismissing her previous defamation claim without issuing a public apology or retraction (
Discussion Questions
What issues are faced by Netflix in the emerging market of India?
What strategies has Netflix adopted to design its products for the Indian market?
How does the sociocultural factor impact the business of Netflix?
Compare and contrast the marketing mix of Netflix with its competitors in the Indian market.
Critically analyse the impact of legislation in India on the working of an MNC like Netflix.
Do you think that Netflix must redesign its products? Give reasons to support your answer.
On 12 November 2020, Ms Bela Bajaria, the Vice President of Global TV at Netflix, USA, found herself poring over a strategy document when a notification from The Hindu appeared on her phone. The article’s headline read, ‘Government to Regulate Netflix, Amazon Prime and Other OTT Platforms in India’. This news did not allow Netflix to simply ‘chill’, as the company was already under the spotlight due to ongoing legal disputes. Ms Bajaria knew that conquering the Indian market would not be straightforward; she understood the need for extreme caution when selecting content for the Indian audience.
With this in mind, she decided to converse with Ms Khurana, the Director of Public Policies, and Ms Shergill, the Vice President of content. These two individuals had recently been accused of promoting ‘love jihad’ in one of the series, adding to the challenges Netflix was facing. As she gazed out of her office window, lost in thought, Ms Bajaria reflected on past instances when Netflix had been subjected to legal actions in India for its content’s perceived insensitivity towards the religious sentiments of the Indian viewers.
Netflix: ‘The Journey of Experiments’
In the past, when individuals engaged in battles for the television remote control with their siblings, the concept of ‘binge-watching’ was entirely foreign. However, during a drive down Highway-17 on their journey back home to Santa Cruz, Marc and Reed formulated an idea that would eventually integrate itself into our daily routines—the birth of Netflix. In an interview with Fortune, Hastings revealed that his experience of incurring a $40 penalty due to a delayed movie CD return prompted him to conceive a solution that eliminated late fees and penalties.
Founded in 1997 by Marc Randolph and Reed Hastings, Netflix initially commenced its operations in Scott Valley, California. It stood as a leading global streaming entertainment service. Beginning as a movie rental platform, the company operated on a pay-per-rental model. Users could place orders for movies via its online portal, after which Netflix would dispatch the chosen movies to their doorsteps. After viewing, users would return the DVDs to Netflix. The rental fee for each DVD was approximately $4, with an additional $2 for postage. In 1999, Netflix transitioned to a subscription-based model, driven by its substantial growth. Under this new arrangement, subscribers could retain DVDs for as long as they wished, but acquiring a new film required the return of the previously rented one.
Netflix’s operations encompassed four main regions— the United States, Europe and Africa, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific. Notably, the most rapidly expanding market for Netflix was in Asia (as shown in Exhibit 1). The service was available in over 190 countries and boasted more than 195 million paying subscribers. It offered an extensive assortment of TV shows, documentaries and films spanning various genres and languages. Notably, subscribers could access this content without advertisements at their convenience, anytime and anywhere (as stated on the Netflix website). The company’s evolutionary journey over the years is encapsulated in Table 1.
Timeline of Netflix Evolution.
The Arrival of Netflix in India
Netflix was introduced in India in 2016 and swiftly expanded its footprint within the country. The platform offered an extensive array of genres, including action, adventure, comedy, drama, romance, science fiction, sports, thriller, travel, food, history, fantasy, crime, biography and animation, among others.
Initially, Netflix carved out a niche for itself among the English-speaking audience in India by providing high-quality series and Hollywood movie content. However, recognizing the linguistic diversity of India, the company shifted its strategy and collaborated with local production houses to deliver vernacular content tailored to Indian consumers.
According to a study conducted by KPMG, it was found that 30% of Indians consumed content in languages other than English and Hindi (Rakheja, 2020). In response, Netflix joined forces with various Indian production companies to produce more original content catering to its Indian audience. For instance, through a partnership with Tipping Point, the digital content arm of Viacom18 Studios, Netflix introduced three original series—‘Taj Mahal,’ ‘She,’ and ‘Jamtara’.
The content on Netflix spanned across more than 27 global languages, licensed for a specific duration, leading to a continuous influx and departure of series and movies from the platform practically every week. In terms of the number of individual titles of series and movies, Japan boasted the largest library with 6,032 titles, surpassing India by 28%. India ranked sixth in this regard, with a total of 4,706 movies and series in its library.
Netflix strategically decided to allocate funds towards creating original content tailored specifically for the Indian market (Table 2). The company announced its intention to invest approximately ₹3,000 crore (equivalent to around $418 million) into producing original content for Indian audiences in 2019 and 2020. In 2020 alone, Netflix successfully launched 11 series and 22 movies originating from India.
India’s Netflix Library in Comparison to Other Top Ten Countries.
During a conference held in New Delhi in 2019, Hastings, the key figure at Netflix, shared insights into the company’s plans. He stated, ‘Netflix, with its targeted $15 billion global cash entertainment investment goal for 2019, anticipates directing approximately ₹30 billion ($420 million) towards content generation and licensing within India, spanning the years 2019 and 2020.’
This deliberate course of action, combined with an enhanced production workflow, was envisaged to facilitate Netflix in reestablishing its prominence in the realm of content production within the Indian market. Paramount for Netflix was to attract a larger customer base, set premium pricing in comparison to its competitors and establish a significant presence in India’s thriving online video consumption sector.
Price Does Matter!
Initially, Netflix introduced three distinct monthly plans: Basic (₹499), Standard (₹649), and Premium (₹799). These plans provided subscribers with unlimited access to content, offering the flexibility to select according to their budget and preferences. However, the Basic plan permitted viewing on only one screen, the Standard plan allowed simultaneous viewing on two screens, and the Premium plan extended this to four screens.
In line with catering to the Indian market’s dynamics, Netflix adjusted its pricing strategy. In July 2019, the platform unveiled a monthly subscription plan priced at ₹199, specifically tailored for streaming content on mobile phones (as indicated in Exhibit 2). This marked the first instance of a streaming platform modifying its pricing structure to target a particular segment. Mr Ajay Arora, Director of Product Innovation at Netflix, explained the rationale behind this move, stating,
Our members in India exhibit a greater preference for mobile viewing compared to anywhere else globally. We firmly believe that this new plan will make Netflix even more accessible and will particularly resonate with individuals who enjoy watching content on their smartphones, both while on the move and at home. (Malvania, 2019)
On 14 December 2021, Netflix introduced new and more affordable monthly subscription plans in India. The mobile-only subscription started at ₹149, a reduction from the previous ₹199 per month. This move was labelled as ‘Happy New Prices’ by the company. The adjusted subscription plans included a basic plan at ₹199 per month, a standard plan at ₹499 per month and a premium plan at ₹649 per month. The motive behind this cost adjustment was to expand its user base in the face of intense competition from other streaming players like Amazon Prime, Disney+, Hotstar and various domestic platforms. Monika Shergill, Vice President of Content at Netflix India, shared with the Economic Times that ‘Netflix aims to provide value through entertainment while also offering attractive prices’ (Mahanta, 2021).
However, even with the reduced prices, Netflix’s rates remained relatively higher compared to other major streaming services. The challenge lay in finding the right balance between pricing and maintaining a premium service. Experts believed that Netflix might not have fully considered the purchasing power parity in India, where the wealthiest 98 people possessed the same wealth as the bottom 552 million (Lidhoo, 2022). The rise in smartphone users in India to around 859 million by 2022, up from 468 million in 2017, with a compound annual growth rate of 12.9%, supported Netflix’s emphasis on the mobile platform.
Given the prevalence of unauthorized content availability, persuading customers to pay for legitimate content became a challenge for streaming platforms. Copyright infringement remained a significant hurdle for entertainment companies entering the Indian market, and Netflix was no exception. In an interview, Mr Suri Gopalan, CEO of Vista India, a Mumbai-based digital distribution company, highlighted the situation, stating, ‘In India, the home video market, like DVDs, which is larger than the Western theatre industry, never thrived due to rampant piracy’ (Lidhoo, 2022).
Some might argue that Netflix erred by initially launching at such a high price point. Mr Rohan Dhamija, the Head of India and South Asia at the digital media consulting firm Analysis Mason expressed his concerns, suggesting that Netflix might have overpriced itself, potentially putting it at a disadvantage in the competition. He also shared that, considering India’s sizable youth population, Netflix’s entry into the Indian market could eventually yield benefits. Nonetheless, Dhamija emphasized that the company’s pricing strategy would pose a significant challenge.
Despite the fact that Netflix’s monthly subscription fee was only about one-tenth of the average cable television average revenue per user in the range of $80 to $100 in the United States, it still amounts to approximately 2.5 times the average monthly cable bill in India.
Mr Dhamija commented on the situation, stating, ‘The most significant hurdle for Netflix lies in the fact that, unlike the United States, Indian consumers are less inclined to spend money on online video content due to the affordability of linear TV and the thriving video piracy industry’ (Parekh, 2016).
In addition, Netflix encountered fierce competition from several prominent platforms that provided their services for free. Notably, Hotstar, one of the most popular streaming media platforms, granted free access to various shows broadcasted on Star Network TV channels (as illustrated in Exhibit 3).
India’s Over-the-Top (OTT) Landscape
OTT was described as the ‘productized practice of streaming content to customers directly over the internet’. This marked a significant change from traditional terrestrial, cable, or satellite dish television’s traditional tune-in, ‘consume-what-you-are-fed’ paradigm into a digital on-demand age of choice. It was defined as an online video service that offered several television series and movies through website streaming (Schechner & Stewart, 2012).
It procreated three types of online programming (Steinkamp, 2010). The first type included the transfer of several movie trailers, daily soap clippings and various other shows to the internet for promotional purposes, which helped web users to watch them online before watching them on television or in theatres (Carey, 2004). The second type covered internet-original content, which consisted of web series, short stories, movies, and so on, that were created particularly for the internet platform (Pavlik, 2000). The third type included full-length movies and shows, which could either be watched online or offline, that is, after downloading them. In India, the culture of OTT began in 2008, when BIGFlix by Reliance Entertainment made movies available online. In 2010, NextGTV (the first mobile application) streamed the cricket series IPL in 2013 and 2014.
Sony Liv was launched in 2013 when streaming was a niche activity, but it became famous after it started streaming the India–South Africa cricket series in 2018 (Mitter, 2019). It was based on a freemium model where revenue was generated through advertisement on freely available content along with monthly and annual subscription charges of ₹99 and ₹499, respectively. The platform claimed to have 85 series in its portal.
In 2015, Star India introduced its streaming application named ‘Hotstar’. It emerged as a prominent video streaming service, holding a 24% market share in India’s OTT industry (Pawar, n.d.). Hotstar cultivated content partnerships with major global studios, including Fox, Disney and HBO. The platform offered select shows for free, while it adopted a two-tier subscription model for premium content—₹299 per month and ₹1499 per year. Hotstar provided a diverse range of content spanning dramas to sports from around the world, presented in eight languages.
A domestically developed platform, Eros Now, also made its debut in 2015. This platform primarily serves as a hub for Bollywood movies, constituting a significant portion of its content. Eros Now expanded its focus to include the production of original content in both Hindi and English. It offered free and premium content, with subscription plans classified as a Basic plan at ₹49 and a Premium plan at ₹99 per month.
Amazon Prime entered the Indian market in 2016 and secured a 9% market share. It stood as the sole streaming platform that presented formidable competition to Netflix, which held only a 5% market share within the industry (as demonstrated in Exhibit 4). Amazon Prime actively participated in the realm of Indian original content. Recognizing the price sensitivity of Indian consumers, Amazon Prime kept its subscription fees affordable at ₹129 per month and ₹999 per year. The platform offered content in English, Hindi and various regional languages. It operated across approximately 16 countries, with India boasting a subscriber base of 13 million.
Aside from offering a 30-day-free trial to attract new subscribers, Amazon Prime demonstrated a commitment to producing regional content. While Netflix achieved a remarkable 700% revenue growth in India in 2019, it appeared to have faced challenges since then. Hastings acknowledged that the company struggled to attract new users due to a lack of compelling content in the country. As a result, if Amazon could deliver cutting-edge content at a competitive price, Netflix’s aspiration of reaching 100 million subscribers in India might remain unrealized.
In 2017, Balaji Telefilms Limited stepped into the realm of OTT platforms with the introduction of Alt Balaji in India. The platform featured approximately 32 original shows spanning languages like Hindi, Tamil, Gujarati, Marathi and Bengali. Subscriptions were priced at ₹300 per year or ₹100 for a 3-month period. In 2018, Zee Entertainment Enterprises launched its streaming platform, Zee5, which offered both live TV and on-demand movies and series. The platform boasted an extensive collection of Indian and international movies, shows, music, health and lifestyle content available in 12 languages. Zee5 operated on three subscription tiers—₹99 monthly, ₹599 for six months and ₹999 yearly. Notably, it not only produced Indian series but also provided access to international shows in Hindi.
Witnessing the surge of streaming media services in India, numerous other platforms entered the market. This included Voot in 2016, Viu in 2016, MX Player in 2019, TATA Sky in 2019 and Flipkart Video in 2019. The most recent development was the collaboration between Disney+ and Hotstar, which led to the launch of Disney+’s streaming service in India in 2020 (Sen, 2018).
The entrance of Disney+ into the Indian market posed a formidable challenge to Netflix. Disney not only incorporated some content from Netflix, thereby shrinking Netflix’s content library, but it also garnered 10 million subscribers on its inaugural day. Nevertheless, Disney+’s long-term prospects seemed uncertain as most of its content had previously been released as movies over the years.
The strategic release of new content by Netflix consistently gave it an edge and drove an influx of subscribers. Moreover, a substantial portion of Disney+’s material was animated, making it particularly appealing to children rather than adults. In contrast, Netflix catered to the entertainment needs of both children and adults. Initially, Disney+’s enjoyed considerable hype. However, this enthusiasm waned when non-Marvel and non-Star Wars enthusiasts exhausted their content options. Consequently, Netflix needed not to be overly concerned about whether the new competition would directly impact its market position (Jagielski, 2019).
Consumption Pattern of India: Media and Entertainment
Increased income and improved lifestyles paved the way for significant growth prospects within the Indian media and entertainment industry. Projections indicated that the industry was poised to experience an annual growth rate of 13.5% during the span from 2019 to 2024 (IBEF, 2020). The spectrum of media consumed by individuals across various demographics through diverse channels encompassing movies, television, radio, music, animation, video streaming, gaming, digital advertising and print.
Print media, notably, had a deep-rooted history in India, with the inaugural publication dating back to 1780. The subsequent introduction of radio and television followed in 1924 and 1959, respectively. However, fast-forwarding to 2018, the landscape of media consumption underwent a revolutionary transformation. The proliferation of smartphones in the market, coupled with widespread internet accessibility and competitively priced data plans, rendered media accessible to virtually everyone (Mitter, 2016).
While print and television maintained their positions as the two dominant sectors, digital media surged past film media to become the third-largest segment within the Media and Entertainment industry as of 2019 (EY, 2020).
The manner in which Indians engaged with media underwent a radical metamorphosis over the last decade, ushering in both challenges and opportunities for conventional broadcasters. Forecasts anticipated India’s mobile sector to ascend as the foremost medium for content delivery and consumption. With a population of 1.3 billion, a tele density reached 89% of households, 688 million internet subscribers and nearly 400 million mobile users, India was poised to become a paramount hub for content consumption. Notably, India stood as a preeminent global market for applications, with entertainment applications constituting a significant portion of consumer engagement (EY, 2020).
Millennials allocated more of their time to streaming platforms than to television, and over 20% of them watched shows on their mobile devices. The Indian market encompassed a population of 600 million individuals below the age of 25, constituting the world’s largest youth demographic. Streaming services flourished, with approximately 60% of consumers engaging with them on a monthly basis. The rapid proliferation of internet access through mobile phones transitioned content consumption into an individualized activity.
In line with an article published by Business Insider in 2015, the period from 2013 to 2014 experienced remarkable growth in Subscription Video-On-Demand services. A significant driver behind this growth was Netflix. Ernst and Young, in their research, highlighted videos and music as the most favoured entertainment categories, collectively accounting for over 90% of consumer preferences. Their projections anticipated India to emerge as the world’s second-largest video-viewing audience by 2020.
Consumer behaviour leaned towards shorter content formats, evidenced by the average video length viewed in India being around 20 minutes. Approximately 62% of the content consumed on YouTube consisted of short-form content. This trend prompted content producers like Eros International, Viacom 18 and Star India to concentrate on generating exclusive and easily digestible content. Looking ahead to 2025, the proliferation of 750 million mobile phones was projected to drive demand for localized, user-generated and brief content. This development was expected to foster a robust short-video ecosystem, potentially generating a substantial number of jobs.
The evolution of affordable data plans and increased smartphone penetration facilitated digital content consumption even in rural areas. A substantial 65% of video consumption originated from rural regions, effectively dispelling the notion that only urban populations engaged with online content. The advent of Reliance Jio, which rapidly garnered 280 million OTT subscribers, swiftly positioned India as a nation providing mobile data at one of the most competitive rates globally (Sharma, 2021).
In March 2020, India implemented stringent measures to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a prolonged period of lockdown. This lockdown inadvertently proved advantageous for OTT players, catalyzing a surge in subscriptions for platforms like Zee5 and AltBalaji, and propelling them to newfound popularity (Kaushal, 2020). According to a BARC Nielsen survey, the lockdown prompted a notable increase in television and new platform usage. Social distancing, self-quarantine and the shift to home-based living significantly influenced media consumption patterns. As individuals spent more time indoors, their viewing preferences underwent a transformation. The time spent on smartphones witnessed an upswing of 1.5 hours, accompanied by a heightened usage of mobile applications. Adults dedicated an average of 6 hours and 25 minutes daily to screen engagement during the lockdown. An impressive count of 12 million users embraced services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+, along with other emerging platforms (as depicted in Exhibit 5). Notably, even older audiences, who traditionally gravitated towards regular network television, extended their engagement to encompass online services (Rajan, 2020).
Regulation or Restriction?
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting
After India gained independence, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting was established. Among the most prominent ministries, it served as the government’s conduit to reach the masses. Its primary responsibility was disseminating information regarding government policies, programmes and initiatives through various mediums such as the press, radio, television and social media.
Furthermore, the ministry was tasked with overseeing policy matters concerning the regulation of private and public broadcasting services, print media, movie certification and advertisement promotion. It operated through three distinct wings: the film wing, the broadcasting wing and the information wing.
Under the film wing, the Cinematograph Act of 1952 held authority. This legislation governed the certification of films for public exhibition, as well as the promotional and developmental activities within the film industry. It also oversaw the export and import of Indian movies, encompassing both theatrical and non-theatrical viewing. Additionally, it encompassed unexposed cinematograph films and various equipment requirements within the film industry (Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, n.d.).
The broadcasting wing took charge of tasks related to the development, installation and maintenance of radio and television broadcasting. Through the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995, this division supervised the content broadcasted by private satellite channels and local cable operators.
The information wing was entrusted with the oversight of print, electronic and digital media policies and practices. It also established pricing standards for government advertising across multiple platforms. This wing encompassed the Press and Registration of Books Act of 1867 and the Press Council Act of 1978.
Central Board of Film Certification
The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), commonly called ‘The Censor Board’, operated under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. It was established in Mumbai in 1952. This organization held the exclusive authority to review movies, TV shows, advertisements, and other visual content. It was responsible for issuing certificates to films and programmes, a prerequisite for their public release.
Rule 41 of the Cinematograph Act 1952 dictated that a movie would receive its certificate within approximately 68 days. Following the viewing of a movie, the members of the Censor Board collectively determined the appropriate type of certificate to be assigned. The board’s role encompassed censoring double entendre, explicit language, adult-oriented humour, pornographic materials and the like. Additionally, it ensured that films and series refrained from disrespecting the sentiments of any caste or religion.
The CBFC issued three main types of certificates: U (Universal) certificate, A (Adult) certificate, and U/A (Universal/Adult) certificate. A ‘U’ certificate was granted to films devoid of violence, abuse and explicit content, making them suitable for family viewing. The ‘A’ classification indicated that a movie contained mature content and was restricted to viewers aged 18 and above. Lastly, films labelled with a U/A certificate fell into the category of unrestricted public display. Such movies might include sexual content, offensive language and violence. However, children above 12 could watch these films under parental supervision.
Cable Television Networks (Regulations) Act, 1995
Due to the absence of a licensing mechanism for cable providers, many cable channels transmitted unregulated programmes. This circumstance prompted the enactment of The Cable Television Networks (Regulations) Act of 1995, aimed at governing the quality and services of cable network outlets. Its purpose was to curtail the unchecked proliferation of cable television networks.
The Ministry was drawn to the content broadcast on these platforms due to the availability of signals from international television operators via satellite communication. Foreign media networks were considered a ‘cultural intrusion’ as they reflected Western society. Additionally, the Ministry sought to establish accountability concerning technical and content quality, the use of copyright-protected materials, the airing of uncertified films and safeguarding subscribers against broadcasts contrary to national interests from outlets antagonistic to the nation.
Under the Act, a two-step mechanism was put in place to regulate cable television networks. This encompassed mandating a compulsory registration process for cable providers to maintain oversight. Moreover, it incorporated rules aimed at regulating the content transmitted by cable operators (The Centre for Internet and Society, n.d.).
OTT Platforms Censorship
There was no law or autonomous body governing digital content. However, the Government of India announced that OTT platforms would fall under the purview of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
Previously, the government had urged OTT platforms to establish a self-regulatory framework. The Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), a consortium comprising 15 streaming players, including Netflix, had endorsed a self-regulation code. Nonetheless, the government later expressed dissatisfaction with IAMAI’s approach. This shift was largely due to the inconsistency in defining prohibited content and the absence of an ethical code. Consequently, many viewers began to demand censored content on these platforms.
Netflix in Legal Soup
Netflix became a target of protest due to numerous cases and complaints that were lodged against it. In 2018, a legal case was filed against Netflix and the creators of the series ‘Sacred Games’ by Nikhil Bhalla, a lawyer and a member of the Indian National Congress. The case was presented in the Delhi High Court and centred around the controversial portrayal of former Prime Minister Mr Rajiv Gandhi (Kalra & Jamkhandikar, 2019).
The petition argued that the show ‘Sacred Games’ contained objectionable dialogues, political attacks and speeches that were insulting and damaging to the reputation of the former Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi. The petition emphasized that allowing content, regardless of freedom of speech, that negatively impacted culture could not be condoned.
Furthermore, the show faced additional legal challenges for its ‘offensive scenes’ and content that offended religious sentiments. As a result, the show’s creators were compelled to remove those scenes from the series (Aggarwal, 2019).
A Twitter trend, labelled #CensorWebSeries, gained traction on 27 May 2020. The purpose of this trend was to protest against another OTT platform. However, Netflix found itself inadvertently affected by this trend as well. The supporters of the trend advocated for the censorship of web series, a significant feature of Netflix’s offerings as well (Bhatia, 2020).
In 2020, an FIR was filed against Netflix by a Bhartiya Janata Party youth leader, accusing the platform of promoting ‘love jihad’ in one of its series. The complainant demanded an apology and the removal of scenes that were perceived to encourage ‘love jihad’ from Ms Shergill, Vice President of Content at Netflix, and Ms Khurana, Director of Public Policies at Netflix. In an interview with NDTV, the petitioner stated, ‘The depiction of kissing scenes inside a temple of Lord Maheshwar, a historic town on the banks of the Narmada, has deeply offended Hindu sentiments. This also propagates the concept of “love jihad”’ (Dwary, 2020).
In another incident in 2020, a Netflix movie titled ‘AK versus AK’ sparked controversy on social media. The Indian Air Force (IAF) demanded the removal of specific scenes from the movie that showed a veteran Bollywood actor using offensive language while wearing a military uniform. The Indian Air Force communicated through its official Twitter account: ‘The portrayal of the IAF uniform is incorrect, and the language used is offensive. This goes against the decorum of the Indian Armed Forces. The contentious scenes need to be removed’.
In response, Netflix India promptly issued an apology through a tweet, expressing regret for any unintended hurt or disrespect caused (Reuters, 2020b).
With a government directive bringing all internet content under the purview of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B), it seemed that the various protests had yielded outcomes. For the first time, the OTT sector found itself in a position where it needed to engage with the government to determine what it could present or withhold.
The government introduced new guidelines for digital media advertising. As part of a mandatory Code of Ethics for digitally curated content, OTT platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hotstar were required to categorize their content by age. The Ministry of Information Technology communicated to all OTT platforms that they must classify their content into five categories: ‘U’ content for universal viewing; U/A 7+’ content for viewers aged 7 and above; ‘U/A 13+’ content for those aged 13 and above; ‘U/A 16+’ content for viewers aged 16 and above; and ‘A’ content meant solely for adults. The guidelines also stipulated that content should be classified based on themes, language, violence, nudity and drug use. These classifications must be prominently displayed along with viewer discretion warnings. Publishers of curated online content rated U/A 13+ or higher must ensure the implementation of access control mechanisms, such as parental locks, to restrict children’s access to adult-rated content. The guidelines also stressed the need for sensitivity and consideration towards India’s diverse ethnic and religious makeup, requiring publishers to exercise ‘fair caution and judgment’ when depicting behaviours, beliefs, customs, or views of any racial or religious group (Mathur, 2021).
Road Ahead for Netflix: Smoothly Potholed
Netflix succeeded in establishing a strong presence in the subcontinent. Still, Ms Bajaria acknowledged the complexity of the Indian market, which brought along challenges like competition, government regulations, legal constraints and public dissent. She recognized that Netflix had a significant journey ahead and recognized the urgency of monitoring the content broadcasted in India. To maintain its leading position, innovative strategies were essential to retain its subscriber base. Thus, several questions arose in her mind: What form would Netflix’s future original content take? How could they ensure originality while respecting the religious sentiments of all viewers? How could content remain engaging without becoming provocative? Had Netflix possibly priced itself out of the competition? Should Netflix consider a makeover of its marketing approach in India? How could Netflix position itself amidst global giants like Amazon and Hotstar, as well as Indian homegrown OTT platforms such as Zee5, AltBalaji, MXplayer and Voot?
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.