The state, the military, and the market: Capture in the new Burmese media landscape on authorities to create a more level playing field and an enabling environment for free expression in the ethnic states.27 Nonetheless, to diversify their revenue sources and to become more resilient, some ethnic media, along with their national media peers, are acting as content producers for state media, including the national broadcaster, as well as for crony broadcasters and the country’s private satellite broadcaster DVB Multimedia Co. Ltd.28 How media business problems lead to capture As in other parts of the world, the business struggles of independent media in Burma are making it easier for wealthy cronies of the government and military to maintain and strengthen control over the media sector. After 17 months in operation, the closure of the only private daily in Mandalay—Mandalay Alinn Daily News—in mid-2016 tells part of this story. Owners say it had long-term financial difficulties, exacerbated by increased competition from state media for audience and advertising (Maung Zaw 2016). The two remaining dailies—Mandalay Daily Newspaper and Yadanarpon Daily Newspaper—are owned, respectively, by the Mandalay City Development Committee (government) and the Tatmadaw (military). Of the 13 daily print newspapers launched since the beginning of the transition, the six survivors are Daily Eleven, 7 Day Daily, The Voice Daily, The Standard Time Daily, Democracy Today, and the Myanmar Times (Cunningham 2014). A seventh (Burmese-language) daily was launched in early 2017 by Myanmar Consolidated Media Ltd., owner of the English-language daily The Myanmar Times. Private media in Burma share a common struggle with their peers around the world: identifying viable revenue models to support independent journalism. Pointing to increased competition for advertising revenues, competition from state media,29 as well as increased digital competition for audiences due to a rapid growth of Internet penetration, private media say they are being killed in the marketplace, and that one can survive only if supported by a rich patron. The state, the military, and its cronies have powerful joint ventures that serve their common interests, and also benefit from media cross-ownership and years of having enjoyed preferential treatment and prior existence in the market. Practitioners underscore the need to break up monopolies and, since broadcasting is by far the most lucrative part of the media market, open up the broadcast sector to independent players.30 67