Sundeep Nagpal, Director, Stratagem Media Pvt. Ltd.
At the outset, let me state that this piece is not meant to comment on whether or not there have been any malpractices in the TRP measurement process. Nor is it designed to be an opinion on whether any channel is guilty of abetting such unscrupulous practices or not. It is not my role to comment on this aspect. That’s the job of the law enforcers and the fact that there is an FIR on this, certainly suggests that there has been some malpractice. Most importantly, given that some skeletons may still tumble out of the cupboard, as we are seeing in the course of the daily investigations, it’s too early for anyone to pronounce judgement.
So, what is this article about? It’s meant to lend a perspective on various aspects of the issue at hand. And it is being written purely on the basis of my experience as a media professional, who not only uses data to allocate brand advertising budgets to channels, but also as someone who has worshiped data, trained no less than a thousand individuals on its utility and strongly propagated its application in the decision making process, for the last 3 decades plus!
So, in my humble attempt to lend perspective to this “scam”, my first thought is – Rs. 30000 crores ? Really ? Where did this number come from? Has any industry professional provided this figure or verified it? Can anyone substantiate and explain how it has been arrived at? Has BARC even hinted at such a large figure? Let’s understand, that Rs 30000 crores could be less than the profit of RIL, but it is humongous for anything to do with the advertising /media business, (which generates roughly Rs. 75000 crores across all media, annually).
So, again, where did this number come from? Or is it that, after the various ‘Big Boy Billionaire’ scams, the yardstick for any issue to be labelled as a scam, has suddenly increased to a few thousand crores, by default? Otherwise it may not be taken seriously? So, the question here is not just as to what we are being told, but what we end up believing?
There can only be two reasons for such a headline – it’s either a desperate attempt to grab audience attention or it reflects the ignorance of the writer, about the TRP system, or perhaps, both!
So, let’s start by trying to understand what has allegedly happened. (Media professionals can skip the next three paras, which are almost a brief tutorial about the BARC system itself).
BARC (Broadcasters Audience Research Council), is an industry body that is responsible for measuring viewer ships of TV channels. It is governed by senior representatives from all 3 factions of the industry – Advertisers, Media Agencies and Broadcasters (TV Channel Networks).
The viewership of TV channels is measured electronically on a real-time basis. The device that is used for measuring viewership, in approximately 44000 sample households across the country, is called a BAR-O-METER, which basically collates real-time logs of whichever channel is playing on the TV in each one of those sample households, for every moment that anyone is watching. The BAR-O-METER also enables every viewer in the house hold to individually log in and log out, as and when he/ she starts and stops watching TV, with a separate remote control, and thereby also records the viewership incidence of each of the individuals in the house hold. This data for each house hold, is then statistically extrapolated to the TV viewing population of the market unit, which that house hold is part of, in order to arrive at the viewership estimate for each channel. These viewership ratings are called TRP’s (Television Rating Points).
Whether the sample number of house hold’s is large enough for an accurate estimation of viewership of every channel, (including small and niche channels), is another question altogether. In fact, this has been the subject of debate for at least 3 decades. However there are many hurdles to cross before increasing sample size, the primary among them being the cost and need for additional funds. But to be fair to the system, the sample size of the BARC ratings study has increased rapidly over the last few years in the BARC study.
BARC has outsourced the physical operations of this process to a third party – an agency called Hansa Research.
One or more, executive level employee of this third party / agency, had been allegedly offering / paying some amount of money (to the tune of a few hundred rupees only), to some households in Mumbai, to purportedly keep the TV set relaying a particular channel for a few hours, even when no one in the sample household was watching TV, in return for a small monthly sum – a practice that can obviously increase the viewership of the channel in question. And this source has apparently revealed the names of 3 channels which have indulged in this fraudulent practice.
Incidentally, the number of channels that are included / covered by the system, are in excess of 400 !
Also, the total amount of advertising revenue generated by all channels put together is about Rs. 30000 crores !
So, any such claim / headline that alleges a scam of Rs. 30000 crores, must necessarily imply that all (more than 400) channels, have been indulging in this fraudulent and illegal practice, of artificially boosting their viewership ratings, by paying small amounts of money to sample households, right through the last 12 months !
Now, for the mathematically inclined, here’s a small extension of this theory. Of the 44000 sample house holds in the country, only about 2000 of them are in Mumbai. It’s impossible that more than a few of these could ever be paid off, in the above manner. (According to an earlier news report, this was allegedly done in only 4 or 5 house holds). So, as a ratio of the sample HH’s all over the country, where viewership is being measured, to what extent can the viewership of these channels stand to gain, from this miniscule rigged sample? In other words, how much can the TRP go up, even if the viewership in these few sample house holds is artificially boosted?
Let me say this (based on my experience a media professional for the last 34 years). This is preposterous. It’s a ridiculous allegation / claim to make – that this is Rs. 30000 crore scam. And if the malpractice is only being followed by the particular channels that have been named, then the magnitude of the “scam” can at best, only be estimated to be in single digits (of Rs. crores). However, I would reserve any further comment on the magnitude, since the on-going investigations could reveal more.
So, firstly the “scam”, if there is one, is probably not worthy of the magnitude of the hue-n-cry / attention that it has generated so far. In my opinion, the news-worthiness of this entire “so-called scam” (and I’m being objective, here), comes from other reasons, given at least one particular channel that has been implicated.
Another reason for this, is that this is really not the first time ever that such a malpractice has come to light. There were at least two similar instances in the distant past, which were curtailed and rectified in a short time. And so, hopefully, so would this.
Secondly, think about this. Do advertisers, media planners, marketing professionals rely only on TRP data for their decision making? Don’t they understand the limitations of the data collection methodology? Surely there’s got to be some way in which their experience and ‘first-hand’ feel/ non-data related expertise, come into play?
It is my humble opinion that any media analyst, worth his salt, understands when and where not to apply the data, in the decision making process, and how to make the decision on other, less tangible/ non-tangible factors.
It is my strong belief and contention that niche / special interest channels, from genres such as English Entertainment / English News / Lifestyle / Infotainment or even the Children’s channel genre, mostly do not attract advertising based on their viewership estimates. These channels are chosen by advertisers primarily based on their content and profile, which need not deploy the use of any data.
This aspect can further reduce the intensity of the issue at hand, (for whatever has unfolded upto this point in time, unless more skeletons come out from the cupboard later).
Ultimately, I do believe that no matter how superficial audiences may be, w.r.t their understanding of somewhat technical issues, they are not idiots. Sometimes, we tend to undermine their ability to connect the dots and come to their own conclusions, about the underlying causes that turn such a matter into such a big issue. We may be under-estimating the possibility that our audiences can realize that this issue may not have any implication on their lives, whatsoever ! As media professionals (journalists or media planners), we ought to be more concerned about how to retain and enhance the credibility of our own role / effort.
Satyameva Jayate !