The Boobed Tube

The irony is that everyone claims to have known this for the last ten years. Ratings, otherwise known as TRPs, are important because they are the only tool media planners have to measure audience viewership, on which to base advertising decisions. As a cynical media planner puts it, “This controversy is almost cyclical, and crops up every time one channel is pouting.” So what’s different this time around? There are underlying accusations about rival channels in the NDTV suit (it maintains loss of revenues, reputation and goodwill due to inaccurate and manipulated ratings data). Given this allegation, no channel wants to stand out in the crowd. And only a few of the people contacted by Outlook were willing to comment or come on record.

NDTV is up against serious competition from rivals like Times Now and CNN-IBN. Its ratings are low and its financials are not pretty. Clearly, the timing of NDTV’s suit merits questioning. But, the reactions that have issued forth from the industry have been equally questionable. If, as has been reported by various publications, everybody already knew about the issues with TAM, why wasn’t any noise created earlier? Is it only because NDTV has managed to collate actionable evidence that this case becomes relevant?

Speak to any media planner and he will acknowledge a dissatisfaction with the efficacy of TAM data. “No one has chased the issue because, quite frankly, everyone has gained from the data at some point or the other,” says an independent media consultant. There are several core issues the complaint brings to light: the sample size, being small, can be easily manipulated, its inadequate security measures, cases of corruption where TAM households have been paid by rival channels in order to get favourable ratings and so on.

“Sure, there are issues with the system: you ask 10 people about it, they will give you 20 views on what needs to be changed. At the end of the day, though, whose responsibility is it to fix it?” asks Atul Phadnis, CEO of Whats-on-India and a former TAM India employee. Media planners and industry watchers admit openly that there hasn’t been a serious push to set up the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC)—an industry body that was intended to commission, own and monitor the viewership data. Pradyuman Maheshwari, CEO of MxMIndia, says that blame lies with both the industry and TAM. “It’s high time this acted as a catalyst to kickstart the BARC,” he says.

The industry bodies involved in this set-up—the Indian Broadcasting Foundation, Advertising Agencies Association of India and the Indian Society of Advertisers—have been more concerned with passing the buck on the inaction. A senior official at the ministry of information and broadcasting told Outlook, “We’ve to chase them to get a meeting organised. The industry should be self-regulated, rather than the government intervening.” The ministry is likely to involve TRAI and the Competition Commission of India (since TAM has a monopoly) in the probe. “I think the industry should be very wary of the government getting into this action,” says Maheshwari.

One industry observer points out that one key solution to the manipulation of ratings should be to shift the onus onto the advertiser rather than the channel. “If the advertisers are complaining about not getting value from these ratings then they should take ownership and monitor the data,” he adds. A standing criticism of the TAM ratings has always been the sample size: tiny, at 8,150-odd households. Market watchers contend that since TAM is a commercial establishment, the additional costs of expanding the sample size to 30,000 (estimated at roughly `1 lakh per box, plus other charges) should be borne by the channels, agencies and advertisers. “Advertisers and channels do not want to put in that much more investment, but they do want more representative data,” says one media planner.

And what about NDTV’s case? Will it stand? NDTV insiders insist they have a watertight case, delivered after much internal deliberation. “NDTV clearly has waited to ensure they have a strong enough case in order to pursue it legally in the US. That, to me, says they are serious and it is quite possible that they are confident there will be an out-of-court settlement in their favour,” says a media stock analyst. Market watchers also say that since several PE players have stakes in Nielsen, it is more than likely that they will want a quick settlement since they might not be able to profitably exit their investments if the matter is in court.

It may be cynical, but many feel the situation is beyond salvaging. Ten years is a long time to spend cribbing about a mess that no one in the industry has bothered to clean. Of course, the right noises are being made too. “It is possible that measures put in to place by a joint industry body can transparently measure TV viewing, it’s just a matter for the industry to have the will for it,” says Lynn de Souza, chairperson & CEO, Lintas Media group.

For now, though, it is the status quo. To media observers, this is just another episode in a long drawn saga. For stakeholders, there is a lot of money riding on finding a solution to the problem. To NDTV, it could mean a lucrative settlement, but no guarantee of a change of fortunes. To the consumer, however, it is a clear sign that, no matter what you have been told, you are only watching what the companies and channels want you to.

Unanswered Questions