In-depth: TV9’s exit from NBDA - A microcosm of the many maladies ailing TV news

TV9 exiting the News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBDA) in protest against the latter’s “clear attempt, yet again, to stall BARC ratings” cannot be seen in isolation. Scratch the veneer of this development, and you will see the many festering maladies that have afflicted the Indian broadcast industry, the news genre in particular, at multiple levels. The mad rush for ratings and the alacrity to be the number one channel at the cost of basic journalistic principles, multiple industry bodies that are accused of giving prominence to individual interests than that of the industry, regulatory intrusiveness, policy bottlenecks and bureaucratic hassles, and so on and so forth.

When TV9 Network claimed to be 'number one' within three months of its launch, no established broadcasters liked it. A huge split happened there, which is evident from TV9 walking out; and now the bad has become worse, says a broadcast veteran who wished to remain anonymous.

“TV9 is a regional entity and a new entrant in NBDA. They are moving to the News Broadcasters Federation (NBF), which is more of an association of regional players. It is also a fight between the so-called national channels and regional channels,” he added.

According to a Mumbai-based media analyst, “NBDA’s statement saying ‘we stand vindicated’ is just hogwash. No industry body would ever destroy the industry. It is very irresponsible of NBDA to stall the ratings because there are only a few handful of people in their board who are getting benefitted (from the TV news ratings not being released.) You cannot put an entire industry at stake.”

Continuing further the analysts asked, “Why is an industry body formed? It is to develop an entire industry and protect the interests of all the stakeholders. Not just a few stakeholders who are on your board.”

As per news reports, even before the final decision to walk out of NBDA, TV9 had posed faith in the NBF as early as July 2021. TV9 chose to side with the NBF, when, as an industry-wide initiative, it led a petition to the then I&B Minister, seeking the release of news channel ratings, which was signed by both member and non-member channels.

“It was a humungous task. We reached out to even non-NBF members. They signed the petitions for BARC ratings. We did not discriminate among NBF members or non-members. Our position was that the entire news FTA channels have to get it," said R Jai Krishna, Secretary-General, News Broadcasters Federation.

Terming TV9 Network’s decision to walk out as a right decision, an industry analyst, said, “I wouldn’t want to be a part of an industry body in which I didn’t have a say at all. It is counter-productive. I am actually paying money to be part of an industry body to be victimised.”

NBDA wants the ratings to come out after the upcoming assembly elections in five states. The analyst affirmed that there was no reason to stop the TV news ratings in the first place, and there is no rationale to withhold it further.

R Jai Krishna added here, “NBF has clearly told BARC and the MIB that if some channels are not happy with the methodology, let them not take it. We trust BARC and we want the data. If some channels are not happy, let them get out of the ratings methodology. Nobody is stopping them and nobody is forcing them to continue.”

“When Arnab Gowsami left Times Now to set up his own channel, Times did not want to give a room or a seat to Arnab in NBA. He then formed his own body – NBF, which is very close to the current dispensation,” said a senior broadcaster, preferring anonymity.

NBDA is trying to serve the interest of only three or four networks, alleged the media analyst. “Some time back, NBDA had said they don’t trust BARC. Now the same process has only been approved. Whatever processes were discussed last April, which were approved by the board in July, have been approved by the MIB. You were not happy with the same decision in July. Are you happy with it now? It is dual standards. They did not want the ratings to come out because they knew where they were standing.”

Adgully reached out to Rajat Sharma to get the NBDA’s perspective, but he declined to comment. An email sent to the official ID of the body seeking comments remains unanswered until the time of filing this report.

Rally behind TV9

Smaller channels, obviously, are welcoming TV9’s move.

“It is a very bold and right decision. We need many more such decisive channels,” said TV5 CEO Anil Singh, referring to TV9’s exit from NBDA. According to him, BARC in its current form is a bankrupt organisation in terms of credibility, independence, and accountability.

Shankar Bala, CEO, Fourth Dimension Media, too, called it a “very bold and encouraging step by a reputed media group like TV9 to pull out of the NBDA”. He added, “This definitely means that somewhere there were let down by the existing group on the ratings imbroglio. Them pulling out would send a strong signal to the industry.”

According to a broadcast veteran, Rajat Sharma was the first one to join NBSDRA (News Broadcasting Standards Disputes Redressal Authority), the self-regulatory body for news channels created by the NBA. “He was the first one to walk out of it and then later returned. When it was set up, former Supreme Court Justice JS Varma was heading the NBSDRA. He gave a ruling against India TV. He penalised the channel and asked it to carry an apology for a report. But, Sharma refused to do that and walked out of it. However, he later came back,” he recalled.

All of these are in a complete mess because each one has failed their own sectors. “As a veteran, I can say that nothing is going to happen to this sector. They blame one another, but they themselves will not change,” he lamented.

According to him, these news channels are so compromised that they survive from elections to elections, be it state or national, gathering maximum revenue during this period with election-related special programmes and advertorials.

The capital-intensive TV biz

A broadcast industry called the whole news channel versus BARC tussle “silly”. He noted that the news channel business in India, which is completely dependent on advertising revenue, is completely wrong.

Going back to the genesis of the problem, he talked about the 2005 and 2010 uplinking and downlinking policies, which enabled many players to enter. Because of this, many people, who had nothing to do with journalism, entered the business. “They have a very different idea of doing journalism,” he said.

“Hoteliers, real estate guys, politicians, and people who believe in extortion all got into this racket. The business model is not at all transparent. And that is the licensing part. The regulatory part also didn’t help, playing a double whammy. The news business is costlier, with heavy capital expenditure and human resources. You need a constant pipeline of investment on a monthly basis. Then only you will be able to produce quality content. You have subscription revenue and advertising revenue. The subscription revenue is so skewed because of TRAI’s regulation and micromanaging. When you are completely dependent on advertising revenue, you have to be shockingly sensational, shockingly careless, and you have to shout from the rooftop, and compromise editorial quality. You have to shock and awe the audience. Then you will be able to get the ad revenue,” says the veteran executive.

Continuing further, he said that unlike newspapers, news channels do not get any concessions. “They have to pay the frequency charges, uplinking fee, and monitoring charges to the government. These three are constant. Then you have capital expenditure, human resources expenditure. Now comes the regulatory part: TRAI. Since they have started pricing the channel, news channels have had to make it advertisement-driven. Because of TRAI’s heavy-handedness, news channels themselves opted out of the subscription system. Now they depend completely on advertisements,” he said, adding that right now, there are 910 channels, of which news channels themselves are 600. In primetime, a GEC charges Rs 1.5 lakh to Rs 2 lakh for a 20-second ad, whereas news channels charge between Rs 25,000 to 30,000.

He revealed that there are news channels that are ready to accept even a paltry sum of Rs 5,000 because they are so desperate. These channels are only helping advertisers, he argued. “News channels neither bother about their duty as the fourth estate, nor are they answerable to their viewership. Nor are they answerable to their own journalism profession. As a result, only the intermediary benefits. And on top of it, there are cable and DTH operators who charge carriage fees and platform fees. Almost 80 per cent of the ad revenue goes to service the distribution business itself, as cable operators, carriage fees, platform fees, and marketing fees so that the channels continue to be available so that there is some kind of TRP. When there is TRP, advertisements will come. Here, TRAI is helping only the distributors by heavy regulation. TRAI is also forcing these channels to only go for advertisement revenue,” he elaborated.

The ratings war

Thanks to cheap competitive journalism minus any quality, channels are constantly looking for ratings on a weekly basis. The day the ratings are out, they want to slice and dice their standing on each week, remarked a broadcaster.

He added, “One channel will claim I am number one. Another will claim the same thing. Even though they are talking about data, they have this imagination to claim to be number one. But, advertisers are cleverer than these channels, because they are investing money. They want the target to be protected and to ensure their RoI. So, they will see who the real number one is and who is number two.”

As long as they are ‘number one’ everything is hunky dory, he said. “But when they become second or third, they cry before TRAI and the Ministry, saying that the BARC is compromised, their methodology is wrong, etc. It is immature,” he maintained.

“Everyone goes before TRAI and complains, depending upon their standing on the ratings during a two or three week period. They launch a whispering campaign that reaches the decision-makers. And they are waiting in the wings to get into anything because they want to have control. So, TRAI would come out with a consultation paper. These channels forget how and why BARC was formed. I was involved in the BARC formation. Everybody was complaining about TAM. As per the original mandate of BARC, it has to be an industry-driven body, which comprises IBF and two advertisement associations. That set the criteria set by the ministry. We all know that there is something wrong with BARC,” he maintained.

The BARC brouhaha

According to the executive, the CEOs and promoters of news channels should have started discussing the BARC problem without letting the regulators or policymakers get into this. Because it was formed like an industry-driven body, they should have started a discussion and found a way, taking all kinds of remedial measures. “But nobody had the vision and maturity to do that,” he added.

“And TRAI came out with a recommendation, which was so intrusive it was like micromanaging BARC. They wanted to have a say in BARC, forgetting the fact that the stakeholders are investing in BARC. And it is very difficult to set up a BARC-like institution. Because it is very highly capital-intensive. And can only a BARC-like body do the measurement? No. because the technology has evolved so much that there are other technological tools and calculations available to measure the same audience. To come out with recommendations to micromanage the body is tantamount to killing that body,” he further said.

“Now they say randomly that if you have only 50,000 people meters you increase to one lakh. There should be a road map to see whether that kind of investment is available with the body. And if that kind of investment is needed, who is going to pay for it? If you are asking for a seat within BARC – they want to become a stakeholder – then you should participate in the investment as well. And if the regulator is on the BARC board, and if something goes wrong who is going to take responsibility? Now, the Prasar Bharati CEO is there on the BARC board,” he adds.

According to him, everybody is silent on the role of Shashi Shekhar Vempati. “Doordarshan was one of the members of the BARC board. Did the board not know what was going on? So, they should have asked Vempati to take charge or take responsibility and make himself available on the board. He cannot do it on his own as he has to consult the board members. So, it is once again back to square one. You have to discuss within the board, involve the stakeholders and take the remedial measures. Why should the government get into this? The whole thing is not going to help anyone,” he affirmed.

He admitted that there is a split in the NDBA. While stating that he did not like TRP ratings for news channels, the industry veteran felt that there should be some other methodology. According to him, “Right now in the absence of BARC ratings for TV news channels, things are normal, because no one knows who is number one. “The ‘number one’ business is the ugliest thing. When you want to become number one, you go to any extent to garner that. In the absence of the number one claim, there is an absence of shrillness in the editorial content. The acidity is there, but there is no rooftop shouting happening.”

At the same time, he maintained that without BARC ratings small channels cannot survive, and felt that news channels have to be subscription-based.

“News channels know there is a problem with licensing or regulation. They never discuss this issue. Have you ever seen a programme on any TV news channel on the issue of BARC, regulation, or licensing? Who is going to bell the cat? No one is ready to do that,” he noted.

Is there a haste?

The analyst pointed out that the release of ratings is a contract between BARC and the channels. “Under the Indian Contract Act, no third party can interfere in a mutual contract. It is actually a criminal act to interfere in a contract. If somebody goes to court, every single NBDA member has to pay a penalty. What they are doing is a criminal act. If one channel goes to court, the minimal damages would be Rs 20-25 crore,” he informed.

Has the MIB gone about issuing the missive on ratings to BARC in a hurry? Is the ground ready for the ratings to return after a 15-month-long hiatus?

According to the broadcaster, the ball is in the open court right now. The committee needs to be formed immediately. “A BARC source was wondering about the need for this urgency. From the start date, BARC needs at least 10 to 15 days just to do the groundwork and reactivate the meters. They need that much time to start measuring the data. They have to reconnect and recalibrate and test. Then only they can go online. For all these, they need time. They apprised MIB of this. Without understanding this, the Ministry came out with this order. So, that means somebody, who is in need of revenue, is pushing them to issue the order,” he said.

Adgully is receiving various kinds of feedback from industry stakeholders on this story. It has always been our endeavour to present a well-balanced viewpoint and an equal share of voice to all. We make it a point to reach out to all stakeholders to get all-round views – while some respond to us, others don’t. We are more than happy to publish such divergent views. Please reach out to us to share your views.