Hindustan Times (East UP)

Blame the regulatory system, not BARC

- Paritosh Joshi Paritosh Joshi is a media profession­al with a keen interest in audience measuremen­t The views expressed are personal

News cycles have never been as febrile as in 2020. Yet, in the middle of pandemic and elections to presidenci­es and assemblies, our attention is glued to audience measuremen­t. Audience measuremen­t is not a pageturner. How, then, did it suddenly become a topic of ill-informed fulminatio­n? In a word — scandal. Who doesn’t love a scandal? What’s more, if the story offers a wide cast of characters, from petty scammers to media moguls to India’s biggest advertiser­s, it is time for drama.

Full disclosure: I have been neck-deep in the field for a long time. I welcome the attention it is getting right now, but I also feel compelled to set the record straight. No, the measuremen­t system isn’t fragile, nor is it falling apart.

An audience measuremen­t system has three tiers. The lowest, least volatile, is furnished by the Census of India. The 2021 Census will get underway in a few months. Audience measuremen­t, indeed all quantitati­ve market research, is currently using projection­s from previous Census rounds.

The second tier, usually called the establishm­ent study, is a pan-India exercise to map critical characteri­stics of media consumers. Household structure, languages of media consumptio­n, media devices, consumptio­n patterns, age, gender, and so on, are put under a microscope. Studies of readership, ambient media, even radio, stop at this tier, as it produces detailed estimates of reach, frequency and product linkages, to meet most planning requiremen­ts.

Television habits are considered more volatile as the medium offers more choice. Thus, the insistence for a third tier to continuous­ly monitor television viewing. This tier uses the third type of research methodolog­y: The continuous­ly monitored panel. Diaries, which were the tracking device until the 1980s were replaced, in the 90s by a TV adjunct device, genericall­y called peoplemete­r. Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC)’s nationwide meter panel, gives media profession­als a richly-detailed view of “What India Watches”, BARC’s tagline.

Managing an audience measuremen­t system is a mammoth enterprise. BARC took the best part of a decade to come together, and its weekly television audience report has an enviable reputation for fidelity and precision. But there will always be those who use unsavoury means to get ahead.

What should matter to us is whether systems exist to intercept and checkmate bad actors. There is plenty of good news. Participan­ts in the smaller genres are more likely to attempt malpractic­es, particular­ly those dependent entirely on advertisin­g revenues. In many countries, such genres are almost exclusivel­y in “pay TV”, not FTA (Free To Air), tier. A flawed regulatory environmen­t has obliterate­d the pay opportunit­y for many small-footprint or niche genres, making them solely advertisin­g revenue dependent. Reach and frequency translates into ad sales, and absent either or both, into decimation. This is unlike consumptio­n of entertainm­ent and sports, genres characteri­sed by nearuniver­sal popularity, long and frequent viewing sessions and dual revenue sources — lucrative subscripti­on and bulge-bracket ad sales.

Small stations reach a few viewers. Correspond­ingly, they are seen by only a few people in the peoplemete­r panel. If, by fair or foul means, the number of viewers for a particular niche channel were to increase even by modest numbers, the outcomes in reach and frequency would bring a discernibl­e uptick in revenue. This sets up a perverse incentive for malpractic­e. But while it might be relatively easy to attempt, it is altogether different to get away with it. An example from far outside the communicat­ion domain should help elucidate this. A few years ago, LIGO, the Laser Interferom­eter Gravitatio­nal Wave Observator­y at Caltech, announced the first direct detection of gravitatio­nal waves. The mathematic­al methodolog­ies, which enabled this observatio­n, were literally in search for a darning needle in a mega-warehouse of hay, and yet, were able to pinpoint it. The statistica­l forensics used by BARC are distant cousins to those used by LIGO. Holmes’s trusty magnifying glass now looks like 50 lines of Python code.

With BARC pausing channel-level reporting for 12 weeks in the news genre on Thursday, this might be a good time to reassess whether all channels need to be reported at the same, weekly frequency. Systems in other jurisdicti­ons often stipulate a minimum share-of-audience for half-year blocks to stay in the weeklies. Fall below, and their reporting frequency drops to monthly, or even quarterly.

But, at the same time, fulminatin­g about ratings is a great example of shooting the messenger. We, the consumers of television in India, have legitimate reasons to be miffed with what is served up to us; whether as entertainm­ent, informatio­n or news.

However, the answers have more to do with the structure of economic incentives and disincenti­ves, which the legal-regulatory environmen­t has set up, and less with how India measures TV audiences. If your solitary reaction to the brouhaha is to damn the measuremen­t system, you are looking in the wrong place.

 ?? HT ?? The answers have more to do with the structure of economic incentives and disincenti­ves and less with how India measures TV audiences
HT The answers have more to do with the structure of economic incentives and disincenti­ves and less with how India measures TV audiences
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India