Follow Us
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB)'s draft amendment to exclude landing-page impressions from television audience measurement has unsettled India’s broadcast industry, particularly news networks, which have long relied on these high-visibility slots to boost ratings.
Industry insiders estimate that India’s top five news broadcasters together shell out between Rs120-150 crore annually on landing-page buys across cable networks, making it one of the costliest visibility tools in the TV ecosystem. With the proposed change ensuring that landing page viewership will no longer count toward TRPs, networks are now weighing whether the hefty outlay is worth continuing.
What began as a distribution tool has evolved into a high-stakes visibility war, creating an ecosystem estimated to be worth nearly Rs 250 crore, said experts.
Read e4m report on how the MIB move to drop landing page from ratings may cut cable revenues by 20%
The cost of visibility
Industry executives say this scramble for visibility has turned the landing page into one of the costliest and most fiercely contested pieces of real estate in television distribution.
A senior executive associated with a leading English news broadcaster said, “For most mid-sized networks, maintaining landing-page visibility costs around Rs 25–30 crore a year. It’s a massive commitment, but in a TRP-driven market, visibility directly translates into survival.”
Read e4m deep dive on whether the new metrics calculation will be easier said than done
Another industry insider familiar with distribution deals added, “In their peak, a leading news channel that rose to the No. 1 position over the past year spent close to Rs 65 crore on landing page slots alone. During election-heavy periods, those costs can climb even higher.”
Sources also mentioned that there was no fixed rate card for landing page deals, and prices fluctuated based on negotiations, timing, and platform demand. In fact, news broadcasters are often outbid by general entertainment channels (GECs), which have deeper pockets and wider distribution budgets, driving up overall market rates.
Read on: What is the landing page puzzle?
Some industry executives describe landing pages as the broadcast equivalent of premium retail shelves, a space that guarantees exposure the moment a viewer turns on their TV.
“There’s nothing inherently unethical or illegal about landing page placements,” said a senior broadcast executive.
“It’s a legitimate marketing and distribution strategy, no different from how FMCG products buy better shelf visibility in a store or sponsor top listings on an eCommerce platform. When a broadcaster invests money into landing pages, they’re essentially paying for placement, visibility at the point of consumer choice.”
Under the current system, multi-system operators (MSOs) or cable distributors sell landing page access through short-term or long-term deals. According to experts in the know of how the landing page mechanism works, ticket sizes of landing page deals vary dramatically depending on the event or region.
On a standard day, the cost might range between Rs 10 and Rs 15 lakh, while during high-stakes events such as election result days it can go up to Rs 20 lakh, industry insiders shared.
“Some leading GEC players have gone berserk with their spending in a desperate bid to amplify their ratings,” another source said, adding that “cable profitability for certain networks has jumped 150 to 200 per cent purely because of these deals.”
Inside the landing page machine
Not all landing page deals operate the same way. Industry sources outline three broad formats: short-term campaigns used to promote specific programming, single-day boosts for high-impact news cycles, and long-term lockdown placements where a channel remains the default screen across 80 to 90 per cent of its distribution network.
Some operators even deploy what insiders call barker systems, technology that freezes the remote control for 30 seconds when a viewer switches on their TV. During that window, viewers are forced to remain on the channel, artificially inflating reach and ratings. “This doesn’t help with ad effectiveness or engagement, it’s just a manipulative way to stay visible and maintain rankings,” an executive explained.
While some broadcasters insist the system is transparent, with viewership counted only if a consumer stays for at least 60 seconds as per BARC norms, others argue that the practice distorts competition. “If the viewer immediately switches away, that interaction doesn’t count,” said a distribution head. “So, if a channel holds attention for over a minute, it’s because the content has some pull, not manipulation. This model doesn’t harm consumers or advertisers. The only ones truly affected are legacy players who’ve long benefited from brand recall without reinvesting in visibility.”
The push for regulation
The MIB’s draft proposal has sparked intense debate across the broadcasting ecosystem. While some see it as a long-overdue correction, others believe it will penalise smaller or newer players who rely on marketing muscle to challenge entrenched networks.
“See, the landing page issue is still under discussion, it’s a draft proposal, not yet passed, but I personally feel the approach being taken is the right one,” said an industry veteran. “Many people portray landing pages as marketing tools, but in reality, they’ve become a channel for manipulation. Ideally, there shouldn’t be any landing pages at all. But even if they continue, the viewership generated from them must be shown separately and not counted toward a channel’s total ratings,” an industry player noted.
Another executive countered that banning landing pages would tilt the playing field in favour of legacy giants. “What’s worrying is that the move to restrict or ban landing page deals actually works against competition,” the person said. “It protects dominant networks and makes it harder for new entrants to break in. The government’s role should be to prevent unfair trade practices, not to stifle new players or intervene in a business model that doesn’t harm consumers or advertisers.”
The distortion debate
The controversy around landing pages for the new genre at least, is not new. In 2017, a new entrant in the English news domain was said to have unseated a reigning broadcaster within a week of its launch. The meteoric rise, industry watchers alleged, was powered by extensive landing page and dual-LCN (Logical Channel Number) deals that ensured the channel appeared by default in millions of homes and in some cases, occupied multiple slots within the same genre.
The strategy drew widespread criticism, with rivals accusing the channel of artificially inflating viewership. The debate intensified in 2020 when a forensic audit by Acquisory unearthed evidence of deeper manipulation in television ratings, exposing vulnerabilities in the measurement ecosystem.
For many, that episode remains emblematic of how aggressive distribution tactics can distort the playing field. “Instead of investing in content, broadcasters are pouring money into buying visibility. It completely undermines editorial value,” said a senior media executive.
What lies ahead
If the MIB’s proposal is implemented, the impact could be seismic. Industry insiders predict that total spends on landing pages could drop by 70-100 per cent, hitting both broadcasters and cable operators hard.
For MSOs, who have relied on these deals as a vital revenue stream amid growing digital migration, the change could mean a major loss of income.
Broadcasters, meanwhile, may be forced to pivot from distribution-driven growth to content-led differentiation. “Dikhega toh bikega” has long been the guiding mantra of television visibility, but as the next phase of competition may no longer be fought on who can buy the most visibility but on who can truly hold it.