Reality challenge for India's TV ratings

Raja M

No sensible person in the country believes that the television programs that draw the maximum advertisements are actually very popular among the people. Not surprisingly the debate about the television ratings is finally out in the open and people have begun questioning the method that decides the distribution of more than two billion dollar advertisement revenue when 60 per cent of TV sets are in rural areas where there is no way of monitoring the audience response. 

In an overdue face-off, India's television advertising industry and the government are wrestling over the credibility of TV viewer ratings, the powerful indicators of program popularity that decide advertising revenues for the numerous channels in India's US$5.8 billion television industry.

Two rival rating agencies - the 10-year-old Television Audience Measurement (TAM) and the four-year old Audience Measurement & Analytics Limited (aMap) - measure television rating points (TRP) from "PeopleMeters" installed in a mere 7,200 to 6,000 sample households across India.

That sample supposedly represents the choices of 122 million viewers, and that in a vastly diverse country with more than 30 major languages, perhaps 500 cable channels and 270 satellite TV channels.

Critics say the present TRP system lacks transparency and credibility, even as it influences which TV channels hog the $2.1 billion in annual television advertising revenues, and which channels struggle in the red. TAM is a joint venture between AC Nielsen and Kantar Media Research/ IMRB; aMap is said to be backed by investors in the US.

Clients of the ratings agencies pay for various analytical products, leading critics to argue that market surveys can favor those who commission it. Only about 100 advertising agencies among over 800 accredited advertising agencies in India subscribe for various analysis products of TAM. The Business Standard daily reported that TAM subscription rates range between $7,000 and $14,000, though TAM chief executive L V Krishnan did not confirm the subscription costs, saying that the company does not reveal subscription figures.

"The sample size of TV ratings is too small, given the large amounts of money involved," said Ralph Pais, a Mumbai-based regional manager of a leading national daily and an international media consultant. "It's a very big issue with high stakes involved as even small percentage shifts in ratings makes big revenue differences for TV channels."

Defending its ratings data and sample size, TAM told local media that its 7,200 PeopleMeters were among the largest such gauge in the world. Such coverage may be sufficient in a more homogeneous country such as United States, but not for India, argue critics.

"Even in a culturally diverse city such as Mumbai with a population of 20 million, 7,000 PeopleMeters might be barely enough," said media veteran Ralph Pais, with over three decades experience in the advertising industry.

TAM has not publicly responded to allegations that it does not have a single PeopleMeter in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, two of India's largest states with a combined population of over 250 million - raising more questions about the decision-making of leading advertising agencies that not only spend billions of their clients' money using dubious TV ratings, but also reject calls for an accountable watchdog.

TV ratings have greater clout among media planners than print media readership surveys, as ratings shift weekly, unlike the static annual readership numbers. Abhijit Bannerjee, managing partner of the $3.4 million Wavelength Communications advertising agency in Mumbai, said that current TV ratings are accepted primarily because of the "there's nothing else" factor.

Given the TV industry's high growth rates, the idea that a mere 6,000 households accurately reflect choices among 122 million viewers has inevitably raised suspicions of marketing hanky panky and cartels. This year, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), nudged by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, proposed either regulation of ratings or the creation of a government TV ratings agency. The views of the advertising and TV industry were sought.

The debate on TV ratings then took a more sinister turn. Information and Broadcasting Minister Priyaranjan Das Munshi revealed in parliament that "vested interests" had threatened him, five times, "with dire consequences" after he had questioned the accuracy of TV ratings. He asked the TRAI to investigate.

Nothing more has been heard since of the alleged threats, but the advertising industry has strongly asked the government to stay out of the ratings business.

The worst hit by limited TRP vision are niche channels, such as Turner Classic Movies and regional language channels, which may have a dedicated TV viewership but suffer advertising famine.

The TV ratings stakes are increasing as advertising budgets grow along with the country's booming economy. Media agency Carat estimates in its latest global advertising industry survey that the Asia-Pacific region, with an average ad-spending growth rate of 8.8%, is the second-fastest growing area in the world for 2008, after Latin America with 12%. India at 20.6% and China at 19.7% lead in the Asia-Pacific.

To correct the underdone ratings system and to counter governmental intrusion, advertising industry players are to start a third TRP rating agency, the Broadcast Audience Research Council, with a sample size of 1.5 million households. The move exposes the credibility gap TV advertising business has been happy to live with up to now with the current TRP system.

On May 7, the TRAI released responses it had received to its consultation paper on regulating the television rating points system. Nineteen television and industry players responded, including trade associations and satellite TV networks such as Zee TV and ESPN.

Industry heavyweights such as the Advertising Agency Association of India, the Indian Society of Advertisers, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation and some leading TV channels, including ESPN, emphatically declared that they see no need for government intervention in ratings measurement. Local media publicized comments by the nay-sayers, but support for regulating TRPs was largely ignored.

State-owned telecommunications giant Mahanager Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) is among those pushing for regulation. In its response to the TRAI, it said, "There is a strong need for regulating the TV industry so that proper programs gets the proper TRP and unscrupulous elements do not benefit by manipulating the industry."

MTNL, which made $85.8 million pre-tax profit for the quarter ended March 31, runs its new broadband Internet-based pay TV service and announced plans on May 8 to launch mobile phone TV services, starting with 21 channels.

MTNL recommended a TRP sample size of 100 homes per district (India has about 540 districts), with 80 urban and 20 rural sample households in each district, or suitably divided according to the cultural diversity of the region. That's a minimum of 540,000 sample homes for TRPs.

MTNL also suggested having government representatives in the rating agencies and oversight bodies to prevent collusion between rating agencies and their subscriber clients, and called for four different rating agencies to operate, "to give competition and ensure quality of work".

Essel group (owners of the Zee TV network and India's first direct-to-home satellite dish service, Dish TV), stands on the other side of the argument, but did acknowledge in its 55-page reply to TRAI that 60% of TV sets in India are in villages and not reached by the PeopleMeters.

Essel also acknowledged how easy it would be to manipulate a small sample size of viewers with PeopleMeters, where each member in the household is required to use his or her assigned PeopleMeter "on/off" button in confidence during each 24-hour viewing period each day while the household is part of the TRP sample size.