Without a ratings currency, India's TV industry heads into its biggest season blind

India’s television industry is heading into its most important advertising season without a universally accepted weekly ratings currency — the consequence of a regulatory transition that could not have come at a worse time. Since July 2, viewership figures across genres have been unavailable, and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) is yet to grant the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) provisional registration to continue measuring and publishing audience data. Broadcasters, advertisers and media agencies are therefore entering the festive planning cycle without the numbers that have traditionally determined the value of television inventory.

The 75–90-day festive window begins with Onam and Ganesh Chaturthi in late August and builds through Navratri, Durga Puja, Dasara, Dhanteras, Diwali and Christmas. This is the single largest advertising period in India, accounting for 30% to 50% of annual advertising expenditure across media. The overhaul may have a sound long-term rationale, but allowing the transition to disrupt measurement at this juncture has exposed the industry to avoidable uncertainty.

The policy shift stems from the Television Ratings Policy, 2026, which replaced the earlier 2014 framework and requires fresh registration before agencies can publish viewership figures. The government has also mandated changes in measurement, including the removal of ‘landing page’ viewership from official data, along with stricter governance, audit, sample-size and privacy standards.

Under pressure from the industry, the MIB is expected to permit BARC to resume publishing ratings until January 2027 while expanding its panel to 80,000 households and restructuring its board with 50% independent directors. Broadcasters and media buyers have warned that a prolonged blackout would complicate media planning, rate negotiations and campaign evaluation, accelerating the migration of advertising budgets towards digital platforms.

The digital divide

Digital accounts for about 60% of India’s advertising expenditure under the expanded AdEx definition, compared with 21% for linear television. Performance-led categories such as quick commerce, e-commerce and fintech can more easily redirect marginal festive budgets to digital video and connected TV (CTV), where impressions and outcomes are tracked in real time.  While these metrics can provide useful evidence of engagement, they cannot fill the immediate gap left by the ratings vacuum.

Broadcasters, meanwhile, can rely on historical ratings, CPRP benchmarks, sponsorship deals, fixed-rate packages and first-party data. Advertisers can supplement these with brand-lift studies, search behaviour, app downloads and web traffic. But these alternatives too cannot fully replicate a common, independently recognised currency for buying and selling television inventory.

The impact, however, will not be evenly distributed. Large national networks with strong brands, extensive historical data and cross-platform reach will be better placed to defend their rate cards. Regional, niche and mid-tier channels face much greater pressure. In markets where festivals such as Onam or Durga Puja account for a disproportionately large share of annual advertising revenue, the absence of fresh weekly TRP spikes removes an important bargaining tool. Risk-averse agencies may hesitate to commit premium rates without current evidence of audience delivery.

The festive season is also when general entertainment channels typically introduce premium programming, including fiction and non-fiction shows, high-profile reality formats and special properties designed to maximise family co-viewing. These launches are commercial bets that can command premiums of 20% to 50%, but without current ratings, advertisers and broadcasters have less common ground on which to negotiate.

A badly timed policy shift

This is where the government’s sequencing deserves scrutiny. It knew that replacing the 2014 framework would require fresh registration, governance changes and methodological adjustments. Yet the transition has collided with the quarter that is critical to the commercial health of much of the television industry.

Television is not a marginal sector being asked to absorb a temporary shock. Advertising runs into tens of thousands of crores annually, and a substantial portion of inventory is negotiated and locked in well in advance. A more orderly transition was possible: new requirements could have been phased in after the festive quarter, or provisional registration could have been granted before the blackout rather than weeks into it. The long-term objective may be defensible, but the uncertainty was avoidable.

The case for a competitive ecosystem

The government’s broader aim is to break BARC’s virtual monopoly and create a more competitive measurement ecosystem. The new policy reduces the minimum net-worth requirement for rating agencies from Rs 20 crore to Rs 5 crore, lowering entry barriers for specialist analytics and big-data companies. The policy also moves towards technology-neutral measurement across linear television and digital platforms. Eventually, this could lead to a multi-agency, hybrid approach that would better reflect how audiences consume content today and reduce dependence on a single source.

In the immediate term, however, the industry needs ratings restored. True-up and make-good clauses can provide some protection, but they also create complications. If post-facto ratings show underdelivery during the quarter, broadcasters may have to provide free commercial time in January-March, putting pressure on future inventory. Disputes may also arise over whether historical ratings or the new landing-page-free methodology should serve as the benchmark.

A provisional BARC registration would therefore provide essential tactical relief as the festive advertising season approaches its peak.  But the episode should also prompt a larger rethink of how television is measured. The government is right to seek a modern, competitive and cross-platform ratings architecture. What is harder to justify is undertaking such a disruptive transition when the industry depends most heavily on reliable measurement.

The argument is not that reform should be postponed, but that it must be sequenced with greater sensitivity to market realities. A ratings system designed for the future is necessary; forcing the industry to navigate its biggest revenue cycle without one was an unnecessarily costly way to get there.

(The author is a certified independent director who has held senior leadership positions across print, broadcast and digital platforms.)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not in any way represent the views of exchange4media.com.