Guest Column: Demonetisation is a groundbreaking move and will benefit the country in the long run: Rohit Gupta
Demonetization is good as it will benefit the country in the long run. This will bring in plenty of cash into the banks, which can be directed to sectors which need funds. The sentiment around is pretty positive, but there is a bit of an uncertainty about what people are going to do. But a brave step will definitely come with some glitches at initial stages, writes Rohit Gupta, President, Network Sales & International Business, Sony Pictures Networks India (SPN)
We have all been shaken up by the demonetisation and are currently divided by pro or anti this move rather than caste or other barriers – which in itself is a good thing! My view is that demonetization will benefit the country in the long run. Banks will become cash-rich and this cash can be directed to sectors which need funds. Despite the positive sentiment around, there is a feeling of uncertainty on how this step will ultimately play out.
Short term hiccup
There will be short term hiccups that will impact media houses – especially from an advertising perspective. Spends will slow down slightly in the short term but will definitely take off thereafter. I don’t see that much of a loss in advertising revenue for the television industry as indicated in a recent article by Mint (Rs 500-600 crore). If that was the case, then big broadcasters would lose Rs 150-200 crore each and that’s not happening. Yes, for a few weeks there hasn’t been much of tactical advertising on television but from a sales point of view, this is short term with plans getting postponed. I believe this is a minor hiccup and things should pick up soon. When it comes to news, there is a bit of chaos created as channels somehow like to put things across in a negative context, which has been the case for the last five to six years. Positive news doesn’t get them the ratings, as a result of which deciphering viewers are moving away owing to the credibility factor.
However, the common man is optimistic about it and confirms that it is a good move. It is, in fact, a big and brave step which has never been taken in the history of India. No government has had the courage to do it in the past. Sentiments are very different to what the 3-4 per cent of news channels are currently showcasing.
Long term benefits
In the long run, there are bigger advantages because now money will come into the system legally. The government can spend that money on infrastructure, education and healthcare. The other point is that this step will encourage people and businesses to pay their taxes which they haven’t been doing honestly earlier as compared to the working class who do. With this, the tax bracket will widen and probably bring down the tax rates for the middle class and corporates. As a result, the overall bank interest rates will come down. People will have more disposable income and spending capacity will rise, resulting in more advertisers. Money will be put into infrastructure improvement and new industries will emerge which will also ultimately need the visibility of advertisements. With the kind of reach that television has, it will continue to play a huge part and thus benefit everybody.
Handling cash-based transactions
I asked few people around about their difficulty and they mentioned that do not have any issue because they don’t have that kind of money on them. When it comes to the unbanked population, they have time to open accounts till December 31, 2016. For instance, one of my house-helps who didn’t have an account earlier, has opened one.
In smaller countries like Thailand everything is plastic money. But in India, we are so used to cash that unaccounted for money had become a parallel industry. I am glad that the government has taken this bold step and is getting in a lot more transparency into the system.
Impactful changes ahead / Why television industry hasn’t been affected much
Buying habits are sure to change now. People will be more conscious about spending. Sectors like luxury and housing will take a hit. How can a country survive with a parallel economy like the one we had? With this step, there is a bit of turmoil that will stabilize over time, but I do believe that this is what the economy needs today. This will not affect the television industry that much because both the real estate and luxury sectors were never big on television advertising. The latter had started putting more money towards print and magazine advertising. For other industries it’s a temporary hit which should get sorted in about a month’s time.
Overall, I think it is a groundbreaking move and as responsible citizens, people have to get to do the right thing for India.
(The author is President, Network Sales & International Business, Sony Pictures Networks India)
Disclaimer: The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not in any way represent the views of exchange4media.com
Read more news about Television Media, Digital Media, Advertising India, Marketing News, PR and Corporate Communication News
For more updates, be socially connected with us onInstagram, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook Youtube, Whatsapp & Google News
TOP STORIES
POPULAR
The current ratings system lacks trust: Rabindra Narayan, PTC Network
During the recently held e4m media debate, Rabindra Narayan, MD and President, PTC Network, spoke for the need for multiple TV rating providers
The current system of ratings by BARC lacks trust and credibility, said Rabindra Narayan, MD and President, PTC Network, at the e4m debate on Wednesday while asserting the need for multiple rating agencies in the broadcast ecosystem.
The e4m media debate on ‘India needs multiple TV rating providers because competition drives excellence’, held in New Delhi, was chaired by Anurag Batra, Founder of e4m and Editor-in-Chief of Businessworld Media Group.
During the debate, Narayan, who was speaking for the motion with other panellists, questioned the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) ratings, particularly for news channels saying that politicians spending money to advertise on news channels and not GECs, is proof enough that the genre is doing much better than the ratings given by BARC.
“The fact that we are having this discussion, implies that the current system lacks trust. It lacks credibility. BARC analyses only linear TV that is beamed and received through satellite and cable. TV viewing today is not just linear TV, it also has several forms like connected TV and Fast TV coming on the same screen but BARC is not measuring it,” he said.
Narayan further said that it was time to innovate and look at content rating rather than just television rating points.
“As per BARC, news genre reach is 6-7% in the entire country, if that is true then why are politicians eager to spend on advertising on news channels? Why not on GECs? Why all the money spent by advertisers to reach maximum consumers, based on this Bible (BARC) which is junk? Why are we fighting for TV rating points and not content rating points when the technology and the system is changing?
“The current system of ratings (by BARC) is flawed, biased as it is controlled by a handful of people. Broadcaster lobby is controlled by four business houses so it will always remain in their favour. The data shows it,” he argued.
In his concluding remarks, Narayan said that BARC needs to improve and for that it does not even need to invest in more meters than it already has because cable operators and DTH are now digitised.
“They don’t even need to invest more. They don’t even need more meters than the ones installed already because every cable operator is now digitised and has two-way addressable communication available,” he said.
Sharee4m Media Debate 2024: Call for multiple ratings agencies to break monopoly
Industry players discussed the authority of the current ratings system and whether having multiple agencies will cause increased complexities, discrepancies and expenses
Indian TV news media and advertisers today rely solely on the data released by the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) India to strategise media plans and budgets.
Hence, many suggest having multiple rating systems which will allow for a more nuanced understanding of viewership patterns across different demographics.
Rabindra Narayan, MD and President, PTC Network; Mona Jain, Chief Revenue Officer, Zee Media, and Karthik Sharma, Group CEO, Omnicom Media Group believe a multi-ratings system will drive excellence amidst competition.
On the other hand, multiple ratings systems may also present challenges such as increased complexity, potential discrepancies in ratings, and higher costs for broadcasters as well as advertisers.
The current system of ratings is “flawed” and “biased, as it is controlled by a handful of people,” was the view of the industry veterans who advocated the need for multiple rating agencies instead of just one, which is currently the BARC, saying “monopoly makes people complacent”
During the debate, things got intense when some of the panellists, who were speaking for the motion, questioned BARC ratings, particularly for news channels saying that politicians spending money to advertise on news channels and not GECs, is proof enough that the genre is doing much better than the ratings given by BARC.
To present a viewpoint against the motion, Chintamani Rao, Strategic Marketing and Media Consultant, Rajiv Dubey, Head of Media, Dabur India, and Varun Kohli, Director and CEO, Bharat Express News Network joined the debate at e4m’s Media Debate in New Delhi. Dr. Annurag Batra, Chairman and Editor-in-Chief, BW Businessworld Media Group and Founder, e4m Group, chaired the debate.
Jain opened the discussion and said, “There is a dependency of an advertiser to take up a particular media plan via the agency. On the other hand, the broadcaster is absolutely at the mercy of the measurement system which decides where you rank. The issue is nobody looks at what the reality on ground is. Hence, I have started telling agencies and advertisers to also look at my digital platform’s ranking but the rating in BARC still holds significant value for them.”
She further suggested we should have an authenticated, validated, acknowledged currency which is recognised and valued by advertisers and agencies as well.
Presenting an opposing stand, Rao explained, “There many doubts about BARC and its functioning but I continue to maintain that audience measurement is no business of the government.”
At the end of the day, it is not about the number of vendors but how they are managed. Two poorly managed are not better than one, he added. The key issue is that BARC is dominated by one of its constituents and that is the one which is being measured.
“If advertiser’s money fuels the entire media ecosystem, why did they accept a structure with Indian Broadcasting & Digital Foundation (IBDF) at 60 percent?” questioned Rao.
Sharma, who joined virtually, expressed that if we forget the industry for a while, why do we need the NSE and BSE? Why do we need CIBIL and Experian? The short answer is innovation and competition. If there would be no competition, we would have one brand in every category we operate in.
“Even in a market like the USA, which has the largest AdEx market, there are two systems. Even the UK, Australia, Malaysia, Philippines and so many more countries have two audience measurement systems. In a largely populated country like India two systems will help in better sampling and segmentation,” he added.
Dubey took the stage right after and spoke about how one, two or multiple rating systems don’t matter to an advertiser. At the end of the day, it should help the brand sell. His objective is to reach out to the consumers in the cheapest possible manner.
“The idea of BARC was to have a robust system which could measure everyone well. Have we been able to do that? Probably yes or probably no,” he said.
With changing times, the audience needs have changed and NCCS was a system that measured the class of people based on the ownership of consumer durables. But now, the newly proposed ISEC fulfils those gaps.
Consumers have also started consuming content on different platforms, more towards digital and OTT. Dubey believes, “We haven’t been able to measure that audience correctly yet. Hence, the Indian TV industry needs one system and that system needs to be strengthened in such a way that it measures TV and digital audience equally.”
On having multiple audience measurement systems, the Dabur spokesperson said, “To solve the problem, you should not create another problem, but fix the problem instead.”
Narayan of PTC, who stood for the motion, expressed, “The fact that we are standing here and debating the issue, implies the current system lacks trust and credibility. We are also setting the premise that by TV ratings, we only mean linear TV ratings because that is what BARC does.”
He further shared that BARC does measurement via image mapping and hence, when any channel puts its watermark on any platform, it should become measurable for BARC since they already have the technology for it.
“Then why don't they? Because they need more focus on analysis, not more investment. The trouble is the ecosystem is not allowing the expansion of those ratings,” he added.
Today, BARC says 9 out of 100 people watch PTC, which is impossible and advertisers bargain for the ad rates accordingly. The channel today continues to invest in good shows but advertiser interest is low due to BARC’s data. If there is any truth to this, why wouldn’t players like PTC fight for multiple ratings systems?
“When Chandrayaan was launched, everyone in the world and India was watching it but if you see the BARC data, that particular week the ratings of the news genre went down. Is that even possible? News genre is much higher than what BARC is projecting,” Jain added.
Even on a day like the launch of Chandrayan, there was no spike on BARC data. Jain and Narayan both believe the current system is flawed and biased because it is controlled by a handful of people.
“The fact that we are having this discussion, implies that the current system lacks trust. It lacks credibility. BARC analyses only linear tv that is beamed and received through satellite and cable. TV viewing today is not just linear tv, it also has several forms like connected TV and Fast TV coming on the same screen but BARC is not measuring it,” Narayan said.
Narayan further said that it was time to innovate and look at content rating rather than just television rating points.
“As per BARC, news genre reach is 6-7% in the entire country, if that is true then why are politicians eager to spend on advertising on news channels? Why not on GECs? Why all the money spent by advertisers to reach maximum consumers, based on this Bible (BARC) which is junk? Why are we fighting for TV rating points and not content rating points when the technology and the system is changing?
“The current system of ratings (by BARC) is flawed, biased as it is controlled by a handful of people. Broadcaster lobby is controlled by four business houses so it will always remain in their favour. The data shows it,” he argued.
Kohli of Bharat Express, said, “BARC came into existence because publishers wanted a different rating system and then a mechanism was conceived. Now, questioning that system just because ratings aren’t in the right proportion or it doesn’t map digital audiences and to further ask for a separate body, I dont think is the right way.”
The industry needs to come together and exercise jurisdiction with BARC to tell them what more is needed and where they can get better, he suggested as a solution.
Rao also suggested it is better to have an aggregator rather than multiple players. In that case, the aggregator can also become the provider of data. BARC can always collect multiple data from various sources and present it.
The mapping of the audience correctly will also solve the problem in a way, which will be done with ISEC majorly. Having a unified measurement is also another solution, said Dubey.
According to Sharma, “Having more than one player will definitely fuel innovation and have a little competition, which is good. Different rating systems could also focus on different target segments, cohorts and more.”
“We need to focus on screens and not linear tv or digital. It is a screen-based world and people are just consuming content which is meaningful for them. So different types of consumptions require different types of measurements. My argument is innovation is critical as it is high time.
“Consumer is looking at the screen through mobile or TV sets. How are we measuring it? Some competition is healthy. It is important to have a mindset of how one system can help the other. The current system is not wrong but the newer system can enhance what we have,” he said.
Narayan concluded, “Television viewing and consumption has changed. Either BARC grows up to the changing times or others should come in and fill the gap. The market forces will decide who will remain and who will go, whose data is authentic and whose is not. There is no need for a debate here.”