Resources
All for control, says Star’s Mukerjea of Trai recommendations
NEW DELHI: Broadcast and cable regulator, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), may have come out with its recommendations, but Star India, for one, feels that there seems to be an attempt by the government to regain control, rather than go in for further de-control.
“Regulation has to be counter-balanced with policies so as to suggest a way forward, unlike control, which is trying to dictate terms,” says Star India CEO Peter Mukerjea.
Speaking to indiantelevision.com at length on various industry-related issues, including the Trai recommendations, Mukerjea says that the freedom to launch new channels is getting slightly restricted (in India), unlike in the recent past.
“The government feels that it is an opportunity to regain control, rather than divest control,” he says.
Dwelling on the price freeze on cable TV subscription, the Star India head honcho says that it’s not only “anti-competitive, but also anti-constitutional.”
Putiing forth the broadcasting industry’s point of view, Mukerjea says that considering that the prices have been frozen for over eight months now, it does not mean that other developments have come to a stand-still as the business has to go on.
Taking a swipe at the regulator’s stance, which is more in line with the government thinking, Mukerjea asked whether the newspaper industry would have agreed if a regulator had told them that a Times of India or a Hindustan Times or an Indian Express would not be able to “review their prices” till the regulator came out with a mechanism to decide how such things should be done.
“Does the price freeze mean that the cost of production has come to a standstill? Do we tell our producers (of programmes) that they would be paid later as the industry has been told by the regulator to freeze prices without any definite commitment? Do we stop production altogether,” Mukerjea asks, adding, “It’s almost like controlling the way a business venture is conducted and trying to suggest that the standards of programming should be standardised like (pubcaster) Doordarshan.”
Even while Mukerjea appreciates Trai’s efforts to bring about some semblance of orderliness in the industry, which has been unable to sort out intra-industry problems and issues, he feels that the industry, including Star India, is “still recovering from the after shocks” of the price freeze.
When pointed out that every sovereign government in the world reserves the right to set forth some guidelines for doing business in a country — Star’s parent company News Corp does business in a more controlled environment in China and is still investing there — Mukerjea countered that such steps should have some “definitive direction and a time frame.”
Offering an explanation, the veteran Star/News Corp executive says that Star India, like many others, would be comfortable if the regulator or the government, for example, tells that 18 months down the line there would be a price freeze for a year when various issues would be addressed.
“This would give the industry time to re-draw strategies and business plans and anticipate the unknown too,” Mukerjea says, which is unlike the present scenario where the path forward is full of unknowns even as “everything has been brought to a grinding halt.”
According to Mukerjea, Trai’s efforts to equate the yearly hike in subscription price to the annual inflation are also like “dictating terms” as to how a business ought to be conducted.
“Cable TV service does not fall under essential services, nor is it a product or a service like petroleum where the government or a regulator should feel the need to control prices. Has the automobile industry been told that the price tag of cars could not go beyond a certain limit? If no, then why is the cable and broadcast industry being singled out?” Mukerjea quips.
The Star India CEO also described as “absurd” Trai’s recommendations that a new channel’s price should be equivalent to a prevalent channel of the same genre as existing on a certain cut-off date.
Pointing out that there may be some similarity in products of the same genre, Mukerjea, however, made it clear that every single product or a channel would have its own uniqueness.
“It’s like saying that all the tyres that are available in the market are the same and, hence, should be priced at the same price. So what would be a difference between Bridgestone and MRF Tyres? Of course they have their own little USPs despite falling under a category,” Mukerjea further hammered home his point, adding that by that standards, every Yash Chopra (a Bollywood film-maker specialising in romantic movies) film should be the same, which is not the case.
Star, which is planning to launch a slew of channels as part of its bouquet, may find it hard to price new products if the Trai recommendation on pricing of new channels is accepted by the government.
Asked if Star is worried over the must-provide (making available all TV channels to all platforms on a non-discriminatory basis) clause being flaunted by Trai to give equal choice to consumers, Mukerjea said, “We are
not an exception. A large section of the broadcasting industry is worried. If such a scenario comes about, there would be no difference between a basic service and a premium one (like DTH, for example).”
Further quizzed whether such a system prevailed elsewhere in the world, as Trai has been saying while defending its suggestions, Mukerjea says the onus of doing such a thing is not on the broadcaster, but a platform manager.
According to Mukerjea, in the UK, for instance, a platform owner is mandated to give a channel it owns to other cable networks and platforms at 75 per cent of the retail cost of the product, which ensures the other player too can play around a bit with pricing before passing it down to the consumer.
How does it work? Space Sports (a hypothetical channel from a yet to-be-launched service by the Tata-Star joint venture) could be made available to Dish TV too at 75 per cent of the retail price of Space Sports. But, Mukerjea clarifies, Space TV, the entity that would manage the DTH operation, cannot force another bouquet channel or a broadcaster to follow suit as it does not own the channel.
“Trai seems to have got its wires crossed (on the must-provide clause),” Mukerjea said with his tongue firmly in cheek, even while admitting that a certain section of the broadcasting industry (read Zee Telefilms) would lap up such a clause if enforced.
The flip side of all this is that though under constraint on various fronts, including a continued price freeze, Star India is unlikely to increase commercial airtime per hour from the present level to partially neutralise losses.
“Taking in more ads is an option, but we would not do it,” Mukerjea said, making it clear that Star’s USP is top quality production and a better viewing experience for the viewers, which would not be compromised by increasing commercial airtime from the present industry standard of 10 minutes per hour.
Where does that leave consumer choice and benefits? The less you regulate, more the consumers are likely to gain, Mukerjea feels.
“Take the Maruti Esteem, for example. Till a few years back it used to cost more than Rs 600,000. But today, because of competition from new entrants and a wider choice available to consumers, the same car has slashed its price tag to about Rs 450,000. The same would happen in the cable and broadcast industry too,” he adds.
Is the regulator listening?
Jobs
Is 2026 shaping up to be another year of mass layoffs?
Nearly 160,000 jobs have already been cut across 145 companies in the first nine weeks of 2026 as AI adoption, corporate consolidation and organisational “flattening” reshape the global workforce.
MUMBAI: If 2025 was widely labelled the “year of the efficiency drive”, 2026 is beginning to look like something even more consequential. Companies across industries are no longer just trimming costs; they are fundamentally redesigning how organisations operate.
In the first 60 days of 2026, more than 145 global corporations have announced layoffs affecting nearly 160,000 employees. The pace and breadth of these cuts suggest the workforce reset that began in 2025 has not slowed. Instead, it is evolving into a structural shift in the global labour market.
Corporate leaders are also becoming more direct about the reasons behind these moves. While macroeconomic uncertainty once dominated earnings calls, executives are now openly citing AI-led automation, organisational flattening and industry consolidation as the forces driving job reductions.
Unlike the layoffs of 2025, which were largely reactive, the cuts in 2026 appear far more calculated. Businesses are eliminating roles to redirect capital towards artificial intelligence infrastructure, automation technologies and leaner organisational structures.
The media industry offers one of the clearest examples of this transformation. The newsroom at The Washington Postunderwent a dramatic restructuring in February 2026, eliminating more than 300 journalists, roughly one-third of its newsroom. The move included shutting down bureaus in the Middle East, India and Australia while discontinuing dedicated sports coverage. Former editors described the cuts as one of the most difficult moments in the publication’s recent history.
In India, Sony Pictures Networks India also announced layoffs affecting about 10 per cent of its workforce, largely targeting senior roles in distribution and channel marketing. The move reflected a subdued advertising market as well as the company’s shift towards a more integrated digital-first business model.
Industry consolidation is also fuelling job anxiety. The proposed $111 billion merger between Paramount Global and Warner Bros. Discovery is expected to trigger thousands of redundancies as overlapping streaming platforms, marketing teams and newsroom operations are consolidated. Analysts believe departments associated with CNN and CBS Newscould face restructuring once integration begins.
The technology sector remains the epicentre of the restructuring wave. At Block Inc., co-founded by Jack Dorsey, the company announced plans to eliminate 4,000 jobs — nearly 40 per cent of its workforce. Dorsey stated that new AI-powered “intelligence tools” allow smaller teams to accomplish work that previously required far larger organisations.
Meanwhile, Amazon has continued its multi-year efficiency drive. The company recently cut over 100 white-collar roles from its robotics division, affecting teams responsible for building warehouse robots and automation systems used across its fulfilment centres. The teams develop robotic arms and conveyor technologies designed to improve efficiency inside warehouses.
The layoffs were first reported by Business Insider and later confirmed by Reuters. Amazon said it routinely reviews its organisational structure to ensure teams remain aligned with innovation and customer delivery goals. The company did not disclose the exact number of roles affected.
The robotics cuts are part of a broader restructuring that has been underway for months. Since October, when Amazon initiated layoffs affecting roughly 14,000 corporate employees, the company has eliminated nearly 30,000 white-collar roles. These reductions are linked to efficiency gains driven by artificial intelligence as well as efforts to streamline internal processes.
The restructuring has also coincided with strategic shifts in Amazon’s robotics development. Earlier this year, the company paused work on “Blue Jay,” a robotic arm system unveiled at a previous technology event. The multi-arm robot was designed to pick multiple items simultaneously in tight warehouse environments but development of the project was halted in January.
Beyond robotics, Amazon has also trimmed smaller numbers of roles across its devices and services, books, podcasts and public relations teams, reflecting a broader effort to recalibrate spending priorities. Even with these cuts, corporate layoffs represent a small share of Amazon’s global workforce, which stands at around 1.5 million employees, the majority of whom work in fulfilment centres and other hourly roles.
Other technology companies are following similar paths. Meta Platforms has reduced roughly 10 per cent of its Reality Labs workforce even as it commits $40 billion towards expanding AI infrastructure. Platforms such as Pinterest and eBay have also cut hundreds of roles while redirecting investment into artificial intelligence development.
Automation is simultaneously transforming sectors outside technology. Logistics giant United Parcel Service has announced plans to eliminate up to 30,000 jobs in 2026 as it expands automated sorting facilities and deploys new delivery technologies. The shift is expected to generate about $2 billion in annual savings.
The financial sector is undergoing similar adjustments. Morgan Stanley has cut about 2,500 jobs across investment banking and wealth management, even as the firm reported strong revenues.
Three structural forces are driving the current wave of layoffs. The first is the rapid shift from AI experimentation to AI deployment at scale, where automation is replacing routine analytical, administrative and coding tasks.
The second is organisational flattening. Companies such as ASML and Citigroup are removing layers of middle management to create leaner corporate structures. Analysts estimate that director and senior manager roles account for nearly 45 per cent of corporate layoffs this year, highlighting the dismantling of the traditional middle-management layer.
The third trend is what economists describe as “invisible unemployment.” While layoffs dominate headlines, hiring freezes are quietly tightening the job market. Surveys indicate that around 66 per cent of CEOs do not plan to increase headcount in 2026, leaving displaced workers and new graduates facing fewer opportunities.
The ripple effects are already being felt in the broader economy. In India, investors are reassessing the outlook for technology-driven cities such as Bengaluru and Hyderabad, where real estate stocks tied to the tech sector have reportedly fallen by as much as 20 per cent amid concerns that slower hiring could weaken demand for premium housing and office space.
In the United States, the unemployment rate remains around 4.3 per cent, but economists caution that the full impact of layoffs may not yet be visible because severance packages keep employees on payroll for months after job cuts are announced.
Taken together, these developments suggest that the wave of layoffs seen over the past two years may not be a temporary correction but part of a deeper transformation in the global workforce. As corporations prioritise AI investment, operational efficiency and leaner organisational structures, the question facing employees and policymakers alike is becoming increasingly urgent: is 2026 truly shaping up to be another year defined by layoffs?
