TAM Ratings Row: Is unsubscription a move to counter 10+2 losses?

Market sources and industry experts have been long vocal about the friction between the audience measurement provider and the broadcasters. Some more interesting angles are coming to light now.

Bone of contention
Industry experts feel that there is a serious lack of node between the broadcasters and TAM. Both talk on different platforms and do not understand what the other is trying to say. They also feel that the blame game and impulsive decision would be detrimental to the health of the industry and stress that various stakeholders should go for an amicable solution.

Chintamani Rao, Member of the TAM Transparency Panel mentioned, “I am aware of the precipitate action taken by some broadcasters, but I’m not aware what their specific issues are. To just make broad, general allegations of manipulation is irresponsible. The same broadcasters have regularly been using TAM data to advertise their channels, as recently as a few weeks ago. So, is the problem only a few weeks old? Or was the data not manipulated in the specific weeks or days or markets or for the audiences in which they were number 1, as their ads said they were?”

He further said, “Making generalised public statements doesn’t help solve any problem, nor does opting out. The measurement system doesn’t only measure those who subscribe to it. If one stops subscribing, it will still be measured and the data would be used by advertisers and agencies. Some broadcasters have approached us with problems and we are addressing their issues.”

What broadcasters say
Shailesh Shah, Secretary General, IBF remarked, “The fundamentals of measuring ratings of channels are misplaced. TAM as an organisation means well, but its measurement mechanism is not effective any more. If you compare the sample size of 40 million for a vernacular market to the sample size of 400 million, which is national market, the ranking of channels becomes fundamentally vague.”

A broadcaster from a network of channel that has not unsubscribed from TAM said, “TAM does not take into account the diverse geography and cultural preferences of places into consideration. There should be more people meters to check more diverse audiences. Factors such as language, culture, etc., should be taken into consideration. One channel cannot have vast differences in ratings on two consecutive days. Strange ratings are coming up post digitisation. A market which had minimal influence in ratings before has suddenly become the most significant one. TAM needs to be upbeat with changing paradigms and expanding viewership.”

Sources have also revealed that broadcasters feel that TAM keeps sharing claims at forums, but never to the customers. Broadcasters feel denied of the know-how of basic audience tracking mechanism.

Is TAM unsubscription timed to counter 10+2 losses?
Industry experts cite that in the prevailing circumstances there is more than what meets the eye. A senior media planner observed, “The TAM unsubscription has been rightly placed. The 10+2 ad cap will lead to channels going for less ads, and therefore, increase prices. In case the credibility of TAM goes down, the accountability of data would suffer, and hence, it would be easy for broadcasters to increase prices the way they want. Broadcasters may muddy the water like this.”

Industry experts and some media planners have already warned against the above perspective. They also see the above perspective, if it exists, as a strategy by mainline channels to push the small viewership channels. Although some broadcasters we spoke to denied any such possibility. “10+2 is a regulation, which has to implement and we would work in all respects with the norms prescribed by TRAI”, was the standard answer by a broadcaster.

Of late there have been complaints against broadcasters of misrepresenting the TAM data.  “It is important for people to use data responsibly. Audience measurement, like all market research, is only a sample survey and as such suffers from the limitations inherent in all sample surveys. The smaller your category or genre or brand, the greater the limitations”, said Rao.

“A fact needs to be understood that TAM is a sample survey and not a census. The projections would be a sample of the viewership and not the exact viewership. Blaming TAM would be inappropriate. Broadcasters need to understand this”, said a senior media planner from Delhi.

The industry experts feel that the issues can be resolved effectively provided the industry behaves in a mature manner. It would be interesting to see how the developments shape up in the future as all the stakeholders should keep the best interest of the industry in mind.