Benefit from landing page ratings cannot continue forever: Kerala HC

While vacating the interim protection granted earlier this year, the court observed that the methodology adopted for measuring television ratings falls squarely within the government's policy domain

by Imran Fazal
Published: Jul 24, 2026 7:14 PM | 5 min read

The Kerala High Court ruled that broadcasters and distribution platforms do not have a vested right to dictate television viewership measurement methods, reinforcing the Union government's authority in this area.
The court vacated an interim stay on the government's decision to exclude "landing page" viewership from TV ratings, emphasizing that audience measurement is a matter of public policy rather than commercial entitlement.
The ruling clarified that the methodology for calculating television ratings is distinct from regulatory issues related to channel placement, and it rejected claims that the policy infringes on broadcasters' rights to conduct business or freedom of speech.
The court concluded that landing page viewership does not accurately reflect viewer choice, allowing the government to implement its TV Ratings Policy, 2026, which excludes such viewership from audience measurement.

In a significant ruling for India's television measurement ecosystem, the Kerala High Court has held that broadcasters and distribution platforms cannot claim a vested right to determine how television viewership is measured, while vacating its interim stay on the Centre's decision to exclude "landing page" viewership from TV ratings.

The order strengthens the Union government's position that audience measurement is a matter of public policy and not a commercial entitlement, potentially reshaping the long-running dispute over landing pages—a contentious practice that has for years been at the centre of debates around television ratings and advertising revenues.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while vacating the interim protection granted earlier this year, observed that the methodology adopted for measuring television ratings falls squarely within the government's policy domain.

"Television rating is a matter of policy of the Government. What should be included for identifying TV Rating and what should be excluded, are all prima facie matters of policy," the court observed, adding that broadcasters "do not have any vested right to demand that the TV Rating must be based on a particular method."

The observations came in a petition filed by the All India Digital Cable Federation challenging a provision in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting's TV Ratings Policy, 2026, which mandates that viewership generated through landing pages shall not be counted while measuring television audiences. The policy, however, allows landing pages to continue as a marketing tool.

Distinguishing policy from regulation

One of the central questions before the court was whether the Centre's policy was inconsistent with pending litigation before the Supreme Court relating to TRAI's Landing Page Regulations.

The High Court drew a clear distinction between the two.

It noted that the proceedings before the Supreme Court arise from TRAI's exercise of statutory powers under the TRAI Act, including whether the regulator had jurisdiction to prohibit broadcasters from placing rated channels on landing pages. That dispute concerns regulation of channel placement.

The present case, however, concerns the methodology adopted by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for calculating television ratings.

"The directions of TRAI dealt with the question of placement, as against the present clause, which deals with rating," the court said, concluding that the ministry's policy cannot prima facie be considered without authority merely because the TRAI litigation remains pending before the apex court.

The distinction effectively removes one of the principal grounds on which the petitioners had sought continuation of the interim stay.

No constitutional guarantee to maximise commercial gains

Perhaps the most far-reaching aspect of the judgment lies in its observations on commercial rights.

Rejecting the petitioners' challenge under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, the court held that the government's policy neither prevents broadcasters from carrying on business nor restricts their commercial operations.

Instead, it merely changes the methodology used for audience measurement.

"The right to do business is distinct from the right to profitability," the court observed, adding that Article 19(1)(g) "cannot be stretched to include within its ambit the right to generate profits in the manner the petitioner wants."

The observation is likely to resonate beyond the broadcasting sector, reinforcing judicial deference towards policy decisions that may alter commercial outcomes without restricting the underlying business activity.

Landing page viewership not equivalent to viewer choice

The court also accepted, at least prima facie, the government's rationale that landing page viewership differs fundamentally from voluntary audience choice.

Explaining the concept, the order notes that a landing page is the default television channel displayed automatically when a subscriber switches on the set-top box. Since the subscriber does not actively choose the channel, the resulting viewership cannot necessarily be treated as an accurate reflection of viewing preferences.

This distinction formed the basis of the Ministry's decision to exclude such impressions from television audience measurement.

The court went a step further by observing that ratings generated through landing pages "are not a true reflection of the viewer's choice," weakening the petitioners' argument that the practice should continue because it had existed for years.

Free speech challenge fails

The petitioners had also argued that excluding landing page viewership infringed broadcasters' freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), relying on landmark Supreme Court decisions including Bennett Coleman.

The High Court found no merit in that argument.

Justice Thomas observed that the policy neither restricts broadcasters from carrying advertisements on landing pages nor prohibits them from using landing pages altogether. It merely excludes such viewership from the audience measurement framework.

"What is involved... is only the methodology to be adopted for rating of a TV channel and not any restriction or prohibition of advertisements," the order states. Consequently, the court held that it could not prima facie discern any infringement of free speech.

Interim protection withdrawn

The petitioners had further argued that since broadcasters had long benefited from landing page-generated ratings, the balance of convenience warranted continuation of the interim order.

Rejecting the submission, the court held that no broadcaster has a vested right to continue enjoying a commercial advantage that is not based on genuine viewer preference.

"The benefit, if any, enjoyed by the petitioners all along, cannot be expected to be continued forever," the court observed, particularly after recognising that such ratings are not based on actual viewer choice.

Holding that the petitioners had failed to establish a prima facie case for continuing the protection granted in May, the court vacated the interim stay, allowing the Centre to implement Clause 5.4.1 of the TV Ratings Policy, 2026 pending final adjudication of the writ petition.

The ruling is expected to be closely watched by broadcasters, distribution platform operators and advertisers, as it endorses the government's authority to redefine television audience measurement while signalling judicial reluctance to interfere in policy choices governing the media industry unless they infringe constitutional or statutory rights.