By Srabana Lahiri & Simran Sabherwal
Though the stakeholders aren’t talking, we present the undercurrents of the hottest spat in the industry that threatens the very system of television ratings
When major television networks Multi Screen Media (MSM) and Times Television Network (TTN) wrote to TAM Media Research recently, conveying their decision to stop subscribing to the weekly TV rating service with immediate effect, it set off the kind of turmoil India’s broadcast industry had never seen. Over the last week, the industry saw more action, drama and suspense off screen than on-screen on any of the regular entertainment channels. What followed was finger-pointing at TAM, with more channels including NDTV, Sri Adhikari Brothers Television Network, Star India, Network18 and Viacom18 rejecting TAM ratings. While broadcasters questioned TAM’s ‘erratic’ data, falling ratings and small sample size, TAM remained adamant asking for a formal wishlist of issues that broadcasters wanted it to address.
In all this, the main thing that struck one was the timing of the chain of events. Why did broadcasters choose this particular time to shout out accusations against TAM? Why not earlier? And weren’t the issues they brought up the subject of ongoing debate in the industry for years? So what was the trigger?
‘Buying media may soon be like buying vegetables!’
SHOULD TAM LISTEN TO THE GOVT OR BROADCASTERS? WHAT CAN SOLVE THE IMPASSE?
LC1 MARKETS: THE NEW BONE TO PICK
WHY THE UPRISING NOW?
The question many in the industry asked was why didn’t MSM unsubscribe while its biggest property, the Indian Premier League, was on? While there may be a rational answer to this, one major reason given by broadcasters off the record is erratic data and drop in ratings. This is because new additions to the TV universe in Less than Class 1 (LC1) – towns with population less than 1 lakh - markets (particularly in UP) have shown a viewership pattern different from larger towns. Analysts say that looking at the data, media planners could suggest advertising on local channels and even cable TV to their clients over national networks.
Another factor could be the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) mandate on time limitation of ads on TV (10+2 minutes per hour) applicable from October 1, 2013, which could affect channels. As subscription revenues post digitization are still low and will take time to come in, low ratings at this stage could negatively influence advertisers and have an adverse effect on the channels’ revenues. According to FICCIKPMG’s Indian Media & Entertainment Industry Report 2013, advertising revenue for TV in 2013 is seen at Rs 138.6 billion, and projected to grow to Rs 240.3 billion by 2014. It is this kitty that TV channels are eyeing. But, advertisers look for GRPs and low ratings will not augur well for channels, hitting their bottom-lines. Hence the panic.
Another viewpoint, apparently, is that channels had hiked ad rates on the back of the TRAI guideline, and are trying to deflect attention from it by blowing up the TAM issue.
WHAT WAS AT PLAY
Just after the commotion broke, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) sent out an advisory telling broadcasters, “We suggest you do what is in your best interest”. As broadcasters remained tight-lipped, the Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA) and the Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI) solidly put their weight behind TAM. Just a few months ago, optimism had ruled the industry. Digitization was seen as the game-changer, promising accurate data about who watched what, increased subscription revenue, lower carriage fees among the many benefits. Broadcasters pushed for its implementation with the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (MIB). As part of this exercise, TAM also upped its sample size to include LC1 markets, expanding its footprint to analyse the viewing patterns of the semiurban/rural viewer who is increasingly being wooed by marketers reaching out to Tier II and Tier III cities. Just before the second round of digitization, TAM included LC 1 towns across five regions which carried a weightage of 20.8% in the new Hindi Speaking Markets (HSM) universe. But addition of LC1 markets and lower average rating points seem to be the broadcasters’ main grouse now.
As for TAM, it was understood that the industry would fund its gradual expansion in sample size (the Amit Mitra-FICCI report set the targeted sample size at 30,0000 People Meters). However, TAM alleged that the industry failed to live up to its promise and did not provide the required funds. TAM also said that subscription revenues do not cover its operational cost.
THE CASE FOR A REGULATOR
“LV does exactly as he pleases,” said a prominent media agency professional, on condition of anonymity. “There is no formal body or regulator to check TAM’s functioning. There is no legal framework to monitor ratings either.” But in the absence of a regulator, has TAM abused its mandate? “That’s frankly ridiculous,” says Chintamani Rao, independent media consultant and a member of the TAM Transparency Panel. “TAM is not a statutory or government-ordained body. It is a commercial service-provider. If indeed it has ‘abused its mandate’, why has the entire broadcasting industry suffered the abuse? Some years ago, an alternative service provider came into the market. Why didn’t the industry switch to it? Think about it.”
On the flip side, industry sources have alleged that the distribution staff of television channels try to find out TAM’s PeopleMeter homes, and there is no one to regulate their misdemeanour. TAM’s functioning is also sometimes affected by people and events outside the broadcast industry – for example power cuts, political turmoil and natural calamities - against which there is no guard.
BLOW HOT, BLOW COLD
While the relationship between TAM and broadcasters has been tempestuous, the industry got together during the first phase of digitization and TAM heeded the request from channels to defer its rating report for eight weeks during the onset of the Digital Accessible System (DAS). There were regular meetings, dialogue with TAM and much camaraderie as the entire industry collaborated on digitization. In fact in 2007, though industry funds for expansion were not forthcoming, TAM had gone ahead on its own and upgraded its technology to the latest digital TVM5 PeopleMeters, in preparation for digitization.
However, this co-ordination now seems to be missing with both sides alleging that the other does not heed its request. While TAM says that it is willing to address the various concerns of the broadcasters (such as transparency, sample size, data points) and also work under a regulator, it is still to receive a definite response from the broadcasters. On the other hand, broadcasters allege that TAM is unresponsive, leading to a deadlock between the two sparring parties.
IS THERE A SOLUTION IN SIGHT?
Ratings were initially intended to be an advertiser’s currency, i.e, a key tool in the allocation of their marketing budgets. It has now become the broadcaster’s currency. Proof of this: channels have used TRPs to tom-tom their No.1 position, hike up their ad rates on the back of guaranteed GRPs and axe shows also by using the same yardstick. But with broadcasters not willing to accept this currency, and no other alternative measurement system in place (BARC is far from being functional), it’s advertisers and media planners who seem to be left in the lurch. With media spends allocated on ratings and media planners under constant pressure to deliver ROIs, they have no choice but to continue using ratings as their primary currency. Broadcasters, on their part, are likely to use their distribution data and ride along with perceived brand image. The catch point here is that in India, viewers are loyal to shows and not to channels, and Indian channels have until now had limited success in brand-building.
While many see BARC as the magic wand which will bring in more transparency, there is no guarantee that the same problems will not crop up. The questions still being asked are: What is the ideal sample size for a country like India, and more importantly, where is the money coming from? With TAM still short of funds needed to increase the sample size, how will BARC be able to raise money and who will fund the process? This simple question does not garner a reply.
For the moment, TAM may re-deploy the meters to other areas as suggested by the industry. The question again arises that should meters be deployed in areas which suit the channels or should they truly reflect the choices of the entire country - after all, India lives in its small towns and villages. Should ratings aid advertisers to spend their money effectively, or allow channels to advertise themselves and hike up ad rates?
That said, even as we go to print, sources indicate that a compromise could well be on the cards and we could soon be “One Big Happy Indian Broadcast Family”. After all, like in any hit soap or blockbuster movie, who does not like a happy ending?
Feedback: simran.sabherwal@exchange4media.com
