BARC ratings suspension revives API debate, but Big Tech data remains out of reach

The suspension of television ratings by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) until the renewal of the industry's measurement licence has reignited a familiar debate: should India abandon sample-based audience panels altogether and move to API-driven census measurement?

A growing section of industry voices argues that the answer lies not in expanding television panels but in accessing first-party viewership data directly from digital platforms.

"The fix is not a bigger panel. The fix is API access," one proposal circulating within industry circles argues. It calls for every OTT platform, connected TV (CTV) service and digital video distributor to provide accredited measurement agencies with real-time API access to anonymised viewing data. Under the proposal, every piece of content would carry a common watermark, enabling a single "Content Rating Point" (CRP) across television, streaming and connected devices.

The promise is seductive: no sample bias, no investment in people meters, no household recruitment, and audience measurement based on a census of millions rather than panels of a few thousand homes.

But industry executives, media agencies and measurement experts told e4m that the proposal overlooks the single biggest obstacle: the world's largest digital platforms have little commercial or regulatory incentive to share their underlying data with independent third-party measurement companies.

"Everyone assumes APIs are sitting there waiting to be plugged into. That's not how platform businesses work," said one senior executive at a global media company, requesting anonymity. "The question isn't whether the technology exists. The question is whether companies like Google, Amazon, Netflix or Meta are willing to open their data."

Closed ecosystems, not open measurement

Unlike linear television, where broadcasters collectively created and funded a neutral industry currency through the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC), digital platforms operate as independent ecosystems.

Global technology companies including Google (which owns YouTube), Amazon (which owns MX Player and Prime Video), Netflix, and Meta have historically retained tight control over audience data, allowing advertisers to access performance metrics primarily within their own ecosystems.

While both companies support measurement partnerships through selected APIs and clean-room environments, they do not provide unrestricted third-party access to their underlying viewership datasets.

Independent measurement firms therefore rely on a combination of modelling, publisher integrations, software development kits (SDKs), census tags and panel calibration rather than direct access to platform-level viewing logs.

"The assumption that every platform will simply hand over census-level viewing data to an industry body ignores commercial reality," said an executive from an OTT platform. "These are companies worth trillions of dollars. Audience data is among their most valuable strategic assets."

Even in mature markets such as the United States, cross-platform measurement remains fragmented despite years of investment by companies such as Nielsen, Comscore and VideoAmp.

No market today has succeeded in creating a universal, platform-neutral measurement system spanning television, YouTube, Meta, Netflix, Amazon Prime Video and every connected TV ecosystem using common APIs.

APIs don't solve governance

Industry executives argue that replacing people meters with APIs merely shifts the trust problem rather than eliminating it.

"If the measurement body receives data from platforms, who audits the platforms?" asked a former BARC board member.

"Today, panels are audited, inspected and statistically validated. If tomorrow all the numbers come from platform APIs, you're effectively asking the industry to trust self-reported data."

Several executives pointed out that API access itself can change over time.

Technology companies frequently modify APIs, alter definitions of engagement and introduce privacy restrictions, often without industry consultation.

"The currency cannot depend on whether one platform changes its developer policy next quarter," the executive said.

Measurement is more than counting views

Experts also argue that audience measurement involves significantly more than collecting impression logs.

Television currencies estimate co-viewing, demographic composition, household characteristics and duplication across viewers—variables that raw server-side viewing data often cannot fully capture.

"Knowing that a device streamed a programme is different from knowing who watched it," said an executive from the broadcast industry.

"Advertisers don't buy devices. They buy audiences."

This becomes even more complex in India, where multiple viewers frequently watch television together and where connected TVs are often shared within households.

The watermark challenge

The proposal also assumes universal watermark adoption across broadcasters and streaming platforms.

While watermarking technologies already exist, achieving industry-wide implementation would require competing broadcasters, OTT platforms, smart TV manufacturers and technology companies to agree on common technical standards.

Industry executives describe that as a governance challenge as much as a technical one.

"Standardisation sounds simple until you ask competitors to adopt identical protocols," said a broadcast technology executive.

Policy may enable technology—but not cooperation

Supporters of API-based measurement often point to the Television Rating Agencies Policy, 2026, which emphasises technology-neutral measurement frameworks and leaves room for new methodologies.

Industry experts agree that the policy creates flexibility for innovation but caution against interpreting it as a mandate for platform data-sharing.

"The policy enables multiple technologies," one executive said.

"It doesn't compel private companies to expose proprietary audience data."

Without either regulatory intervention or voluntary industry agreements, independent measurement companies would still face the same access barriers that exist today.

The current suspension of BARC ratings has renewed scrutiny of panel-based measurement, particularly after repeated controversies over panel tampering and sample size.

However, several industry leaders argue that abandoning panels altogether would create bigger challenges than it solves.

Across global markets, hybrid measurement models are increasingly becoming the norm—combining census-level digital signals with statistically representative panels to estimate demographics, co-viewing and cross-platform duplication.

That approach allows platforms willing to share data to contribute census information while maintaining an independently audited panel as the calibration layer.

The search for one currency continues

Advertisers have long sought a single audience currency capable of measuring television, connected TV, streaming and mobile video through one comparable metric.

The vision of "one programme, one number, every screen" remains compelling.

But industry executives say achieving that outcome depends less on technology than on governance, incentives and market structure.

"Technology is the easy part," said a senior media buyer.

"The hard part is getting competitors—and especially global platforms—to surrender control over the data that underpins their advertising businesses."

For now, India's measurement debate is likely to focus not on replacing panels with APIs, but on building a hybrid system that combines the strengths of both—recognising that in digital advertising, access to data is ultimately determined not by technological capability, but by who owns the platforms.