Viewpoint: Why the TRAI order is a wrong idea at a wrong time
Industry players are now unanimously questioning the timing as well as TRAI’s locus standi to interfere with a privately-run body like BARC that doesn’t serve consumers
The recent recommendations released by TRAI on restructuring of BARC and the various suggestions on improving the measurement system have created a stir in the Media and Entertainment industry, which is already grappling with the financial implications of COVID-19.
Industry players are now unanimously questioning the timing as well as TRAI’s locus standi to interfere with a privately-run body like BARC that doesn’t serve consumers.
How does it affect consumers if there are discrepancies in the accuracy of the ratings and measurement of a channel or not? In 2014, BARC was replaced with TAM with due notification by the government. The whole idea was to have a body that is controlled by all stakeholders —broadcasters, agencies and clients. This was a clear upgrade from TAM, which was a 50:50 joint venture between AC Nielsen and Kantar, a WPP company. Contrary to this, in case of BARC broadcasters had up to 60% share with the remaining split between agencies and clients. Why would a body like this, which has been purely created for business purposes like measuring of ratings to sell inventory, need government intervention?
The second question that has been doing the rounds in the industry is regarding timing of the recommendations, one of them being that the rating agency should be mandated to increase the sample size from the existing 44,000 to 60,000 by the end of 2020, and 1,00,000 by the end of 2022 using the existing technology. While the idea sounds great, the industry has raised questions over the funding for the same. Moreover, BARC in most of its meetings held over the years has agreed upon increasing the sample size but in a phased manner. The recommendation to abruptly increase the sample size by end of this year, when economists are still struggling to calculate the losses brought in by the pandemic (which is still not under control), has left many in the industry asking – how can stakeholders shell out this extra money now?
Having said that, there is no denying that over the years at every IBF meeting one or the other member has expressed disappointment or raised a grievance against BARC. Questions have been asked with regard to its efficiency, transparency and inability to put together a system for digital measurement.
In 2016, BARC faced its worst crisis when all English news broadcasters decided to pull out of the body over allegations by the News Broadcasters Association about multiple LCNs being used by Republic TV. NBA had then asked BARC not to release the viewership data of Republic TV stating that they were "inflated and corrupt".
However, while most broadcasters still stand by their versions of shortcomings in the measurement system and the immense scope of improvement, the latest recommendations by TRAI have suddenly spurred them to speak in one voice. Hence, the question that still remains is - even if the suggestions are valid, is this the time to implement them?
