iWorld
How Netflix is cracking the Indian market
MUMBAI: India is no longer Netflix’s great white hope—it’s the real deal. The world’s most populous country has become the streaming giant’s number two market for paid subscriber additions and number three for revenue growth in the second quarter. Not bad for a company that spent years struggling to crack a market where price sensitivity makes Scottish frugality look positively spendthrift.
Theodore Sarandos, co-chief executive, is pleased but unsurprised. Speaking on Netflix’s Q4 earnings call, he dismissed suggestions that India’s surge was merely a content blip and that the growth can only continue in the sub-continent quarter-on-quarter.
“India’s growth is a story that we see around the world,” he said, pointing to the company’s tried-and-tested playbook: nail the content-market fit, attract members, keep them hooked, then watch the revenue roll in. “It’s the same formula everywhere we go.”
But the second quarter’s performance wasn’t just formulaic—it was spectacular. Sanjay Leela Bhansali, one of India’s most celebrated filmmakers (known simply as SLB to devotees), delivered what Sarandos called “this incredibly ambitious series.”
Bhansali directed every single episode himself, a Herculean feat in television, and the result is Netflix’s biggest drama series to date in India. When Indian cinema royalty commits that hard, punters notice.
The SLB series sits atop a growing mountain of local hits. Netflix has been shrewd about licensing films fresh from their theatrical runs—the so-called pay-TV window—as well as commissioning original films that resonate with Indian audiences. “We pick them well. We programme well,” Sarandos said, with the confidence of someone who’s finally figured out the recipe after years of experimentation.
The strategy is deceptively simple: improve product-market fit, boost engagement, grow subscribers, grow revenue. But executing it in India—where JioHotstar dominates with cricket rights and local languages fracture the market into dozens of micro-audiences—requires precision. Netflix appears to have found its groove.
Sarandos was quick to note there’s “plenty of room to grow in India” so long as Netflix keeps “thrilling” audiences. That’s corporate understatement at its finest. India has over 1.4 billion people, roughly 450 million households, and a rapidly expanding middle class with disposable income and an insatiable appetite for entertainment. Netflix’s current subscriber base there is a rounding error compared with the potential.
The India success story also validates Netflix’s global content strategy. Rather than force-feeding American shows to international markets, the company has invested heavily in local production teams who understand regional tastes, star systems and cultural nuances. What works in Mumbai doesn’t always work in Manchester, and vice versa. But when a show does work locally, it often finds a global audience—Netflix’s Indian hits frequently chart in dozens of countries.
The numbers tell the tale. India isn’t just growing—it’s accelerating. Second place for subscriber additions and third for revenue growth in a single quarter suggests Netflix has moved beyond the experimental phase into proper scale. The combination of prestige projects like the SLB series, smart licensing deals and an expanding library of original films has created a flywheel effect.
Of course, challenges remain. India’s average revenue per user is far lower than in the United States or Europe, which is why subscriber growth outpaces revenue growth. Price competition is fierce, with multiple streaming services vying for eyeballs and rupees. And cricket—the national religion—remains largely locked up by JioHotstar, giving them a structural advantage during major tournaments.
But Netflix isn’t trying to be everything to everyone. It’s carved out a niche as the home for premium storytelling—the place where India’s top filmmakers and actors come to take creative risks without the constraints of the traditional studio system or the Indian cinema box office. The SLB series is exhibit A: ambitious, expensive, and exactly the sort of project that reinforces Netflix’s brand positioning.
Sarandos’ confidence isn’t misplaced. Netflix has been building towards this moment for years, assembling the content library, refining the user experience, and learning which stories resonate. The fourth quarter’s results suggest the investment is paying off. India is no longer a market where Netflix is merely present—it’s a market where Netflix is winning.
The real question is whether Netflix can maintain the momentum. One blockbuster series doesn’t make a trend, but a consistent pipeline of hits does. If the company can keep delivering the goods—more SLB-calibre projects, more smart licensing deals, more films that audiences can’t stop talking about—then India could eventually rival the US as Netflix’s most important market.
For now, Sarandos and his team are content to follow the formula: thrill the audience, watch the numbers climb, rinse and repeat. It’s working in India. It’s working everywhere else. And with “plenty of room to grow”, Netflix has only just begun to scratch the surface. The Indian film world has met its match.
iWorld
Karnataka to ban social media for children under 16; Meta warns of risks
Meta urges parental oversight over blanket bans as debate on child online safety grows
KARNATAKA: Karnataka may bar children under 16 from accessing social media platforms, chief minister Siddaramaiah said on Friday while presenting the state budget. This marks the most definitive move yet by an Indian state to regulate young users online.
The proposal aims to limit the harmful effects of excessive mobile and social media use among children, the chief minister said, amid growing concerns about screen addiction and mental health.
If implemented, Karnataka would become the first state in India to formally move towards a ban on social media access for minors under 16. Other states, including Andhra Pradesh and Goa, have previously said they were examining similar measures.
The idea has been under discussion within the state government for months. Earlier this year, state minister for information technology and biotechnology Priyank Kharge, told the legislative assembly that the government was studying ways to ensure responsible use of artificial intelligence and social media by young users.
Health minister Dinesh Gundu Rao has also raised concerns about excessive screen exposure among children. Meanwhile, BJP MLA and former minister Suresh Kumar urged the government to treat the issue seriously, warning that unrestricted social media use could affect both education and family life.
Siddaramaiah had previously discussed the issue with university vice-chancellors as well, seeking their views on restricting mobile phone use among children under 16.
Karnataka’s proposal comes amid a widening global debate over children’s access to social media.
Countries such as Australia have introduced stricter limits on younger users, while governments in the United Kingdom and Finland have also been exploring regulatory safeguards.
In parts of Europe, including France and Spain, schools have imposed restrictions on smartphone use in classrooms to reduce distraction and improve student focus.
Policymakers worldwide are increasingly concerned about the impact of social media algorithms, digital addiction and online risks on minors.
India’s Economic Survey 2025–26 also flagged excessive smartphone use among young people, linking it to sleep disruption, anxiety, reduced attention spans and rising academic stress.
Experts say the dangers extend beyond simple screen addiction.
Cybersecurity specialists warn that children often share personal information online without understanding privacy implications. Social media platforms, gaming apps and messaging services routinely collect location data, behavioural patterns, voice samples and browsing habits, creating digital profiles that could later be misused for surveillance, identity theft or targeted manipulation.
Online grooming is another growing concern. Law enforcement agencies globally have warned that predators increasingly use social media, gaming chats and messaging platforms to gain the trust of minors before exploiting them.
Artificial intelligence is also complicating the landscape. AI-powered recommendation systems and chatbots can keep children engaged for long periods while collecting behavioural data. In some cases, experts say these systems may inadvertently expose young users to harmful content.
Technology companies, however, argue that outright bans may not be the most effective solution.
Responding to the proposal, Meta said governments should prioritise parental oversight rather than blanket restrictions.
A Meta spokesperson said the company shares the goal of creating safer online experiences for young users but believes parents should ultimately decide which apps their teenagers use.
“We want the same thing as lawmakers: safe, positive online experiences for young people and believe parents should decide which apps their teens use,” the spokesperson said.
The company warned that sweeping bans could push teenagers towards less regulated websites or workarounds that bypass existing safety protections.
“Governments considering bans should be careful not to push teens toward less safe, unregulated sites, or logged-out experiences that bypass important protections,” the spokesperson added, pointing to safeguards such as Instagram’s Teen Accounts.
Meta also argued that focusing on a handful of platforms may not address the broader issue, noting that teenagers typically use dozens of apps each week. Experts say blanket bans may prove difficult to enforce in practice. Young users could circumvent restrictions through virtual private networks, anonymous accounts or lesser-known platforms that operate outside major regulatory frameworks.
Because digital platforms also provide access to educational resources, coding communities and creative opportunities, policymakers are increasingly exploring a middle path. That approach combines age-based safeguards, stronger privacy protections, parental supervision and digital literacy programmes instead of outright bans.
