The state, the military, and the market: Capture in the new Burmese media landscape Media that is state-controlled13 The three state-run dailies—with privileged access to public funds, government advertising, printing presses, and distribution networks— continue to bring in a strong stream of revenues. Meanwhile, observers say the six surviving private national print dailies are struggling; the plight of the seventh, launched in 2017, remains to be seen.14 After Aung San Suu Kyi publically stated that government-owned media were not good for democracy, many hoped that she would close or privatize state-controlled print operations.15 Yet subsequent initiatives to further increase their reach,16 coupled with their more competitive pricing that private media cannot afford to match, as well as efforts to improve their content and digital presence,17 have made them more competitive than before, leading private media owners to say it is now even harder to compete.18 An April 2, 2016 issue of the Global New Light of Myanmar features a picture of Aung San Suu Kyi laughing with generals, a sign of new times in Burma. Because of their advantages—high print runs, nationwide reach, and the political advantage of supporting the government—state media were already popular with advertisers; now that the NLD is in power, a new stream of advertisers are said to be seeking space in the dailies they control.19 Media analysts say print operations currently have an estimated 10 to 20 percent of the total media advertising market, and of that, the government and military are believed to control some 60 to 75 percent. That leaves a very small share for the private print media sector.20 Even so, the content of state-owned media remains weak; PEN Myanmar founder Ma Thida describes it as “unreadable propaganda that has now become readable propaganda.”21For Burma’s independent media sector, it is clear that the government should focus on expanding press freedom and free expression, protecting journalists, and improving the overall environment for independent media ownership, including getting out of the print media business. Yet there is no consensus on how to achieve these goals. Closing state media would throw thousands of people out of work. If put up for sale, it is likely that only business cronies—who already wield enormous power in the media sector—could afford to buy them. Private media actors also have suggested a third option: transforming state print media 65