So, nobody hit the news television ratings: Ring the bell?

For some genres the inadequacy of the sample size for Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) reports may be an issue. Some, such as English special-interest channels, have even smaller samples of news. However, his ratings have not stopped. So, we have a frightening question: Who and why stopped Indian news ratings?

One of the directors of the Board of News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBDA), of which I am a member, reached out to me a day before the ratings closed. He stopped me over the board’s decision to come out of BARC ratings. I protested, as I could see that such a move would cause a serious loss of credibility and revenue for the news genre. The damage was done a day later.

On the other hand, the News Broadcasters Federation (NBF), which is the only association recognized by the government (where I work as the vice president) is knocking on all doors to restart news ratings. All the NBF heard was, “It wasn’t me.”

Despite the illogical suspension, an industry-appointed BARC technical committee apparently approved some modifications and nod for resumption of ratings in July this year. But even today the rating is stalled due to the same unknown reasons.

Fortunately, India’s Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) has intervened and the minister has assured us that ratings will resume soon. But then, who should be responsible for the irreparable loss of reputation and revenue for the entire news genre since last one year? The absence of viewership reports is hurting the revenues of around 400 news channels, most of which are free-to-air and therefore rely on advertising as the sole source of revenue.

There is no perfect system. BARC improvement is a continuous process. Withholding data for just one genre for more than a year, while being released on the basis of the same sample of households by the same organization with an 88% revenue-share for other genres, is unfair and discriminatory.

I am told that the main issue cited by news broadcasters is misconduct, which either endorsed or asked for suspension of BARC ratings. I have a few suggestions that can make BARC data malpractice (if any)-proof.

First, the raw data collected programmatically by BARC should equitably be stored in the safe custody of an independent body such as the Indian Statistical Institute or, similarly, outside BARC control. This means that data collected from sample houses will be stored in two servers: one with Bark and another elsewhere. This will ensure that such raw data remains tamper-proof for any future reference.

Second, all interventions in data analysis, such as eliminating any exceptions or aberrations, must be carried out under a transparent and uniform standard operating procedure, and be available for an audit review.

As an obvious solution, sample homes should be audited and rotated periodically to ensure that they appropriately represent the nation’s TV-watching population.

If minute-by-minute data is not collected for low viewership, sampling inadequacies can be addressed. For example, why would news require half an hour or even daily data?

We cannot create news and ratings cannot affect news coverage. If this happens, it will be in the content creation domain, compromising the judgment of journalism.

Contrary to general entertainment practice, advertisers do not pay any premium for the slot chosen on the news channel. Conversely, for any change in the advertising rate of a news channel, advertisers typically consider 12-16-week average data when making a decision.

The news genre requires rating data on a monthly rolling average, so that TRP can only be used as a tool to measure advertising potential and not adulterate journalistic content. I heard the Minister of Information and Broadcasting expressing the same view.

If the sample applies to the whole day – or why not over a week or even a month? – Instead of a half-hour collection, the inadequacy of its size can be easily dealt with.

If the sample is not an accurate representation of the universe (i.e. all Indians), the wide reach of TV programs can change thought processes and build mass psychology in the wrong direction. We need to be fairly precise with the process and ensure periodic verification by experts.

With a sample size of 44,000 households, India does well. However, if you consider India’s diversity, is that enough? Let’s leave that for another day.

The idea is not to argue against having more houses in the sample. However, banning ratings for news genre is detrimental to the spirit of democracy.

Let those ratings be restored as soon as possible to end this discrimination.

Barun Das is the Chief Executive Officer of TV9 Network.