IBDF is not resisting ISEC: Broadcasters push back on stalled rollout narrative

Days after an e4m report cited broadcaster resistance as a key factor behind the stalled rollout of the Indian Socio-Economic Classification (ISEC), broadcasters body have pushed back, disputing the perception that they are holding up progress.

A senior broadcast executive and top official at the Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF) told e4m that there was “no resistance” from the body and that the perception of broadcasters acting as a roadblock was misplaced.

“IBDF is not resisting ISEC. There is no roadblock or apprehension from our side,” the executive said, adding that the implementation of the new classification system is a collective decision involving multiple stakeholders.

The official pointed out that the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) operates through a multi-stakeholder structure, which includes advertisers represented by the Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA) and research bodies such as the Market Research Society of India (MRSI). “If ISA, BARC and MRSI are willing to take the new classification system ahead, they can anyway go ahead,” the executive said.

The remarks come in response to e4m’s earlier report, which highlighted that ISEC—introduced by MRSI in February 2024 as a successor to NCCS—continues to remain in limbo more than two years after its launch, amid what several stakeholders described as broadcaster pushback and lack of empirical validation.

This marks a clear attempt by broadcasters to distance themselves from concerns that a revised classification could reshape audience profiles—particularly if it captures shifts such as the migration of affluent or urban audiences to digital platforms.

While such apprehensions have been widely discussed within the industry, broadcasters now appear keen to underline that no formal opposition has been articulated at an institutional level.

E4M reached out to BARC, MRSI and ISA for their perspective on IBDF’s position and the roadmap for ISEC implementation. The story will be updated once responses are received.

Resistance to alignment? 

Industry sentiment so far has suggested that broadcasters—particularly General Entertainment Channels (GECs)—have been cautious about the potential implications of ISEC on audience measurement and advertising revenues. A revised classification could impact Television Rating Points (TRPs), especially if it captures behavioural shifts such as the migration of affluent and women audiences to OTT platforms. 

However, the IBDF’s latest stance effectively shifts the focus from resistance to alignment. By indicating that other stakeholders can move forward if they are in agreement, broadcasters are positioning the delay as a function of broader ecosystem dynamics rather than a single point of friction.

Industry observers note that this reflects the structural complexity of India’s measurement ecosystem, where any change to audience classification has cascading implications across planning, pricing, and performance benchmarks.

“The issue is less about one stakeholder blocking progress and more about the absence of industry-wide consensus,” said a senior marketer. “ISEC requires alignment across advertisers, broadcasters, and measurement bodies—not just in principle but also in terms of methodology and transition.”

MRSI also believes that adoption of any new system takes time. “As with the introduction of any new framework, even globally, adoption and implementation take time. We are working closely with our members and stakeholders across the industry to implement ISEC. We will continue to support the industry in every possible way to enable the smooth implementation of ISEC,” the MRSI spokesperson told e4m earlier. 

This is particularly relevant given that the implementation of ISEC would require integration with BARC’s existing measurement systems, recalibration of panels, and a phased migration from NCCS—factors that make immediate rollout challenging.

Debate Far From Settled

The pushback from IBDF comes even as advertisers continue to advocate for a more granular and contemporary classification system to enable sharper targeting. This is crucial since India’s annual advertising spend has crossed Rs 1.2 lakh crore due to exponential rise in digital advertising. At the same time, spending on traditional media, especially on television, has stagnated or declined due to a range of reasons including dwindling viewership. 

For marketers, ISEC represents an opportunity to better map evolving consumer behaviour—something the current NCCS framework is increasingly seen as inadequate for.

At the same time, the lack of empirical validation and the operational complexity of transitioning measurement systems remain key hurdles.

The latest response from broadcasters adds another layer to an already nuanced debate—suggesting that while no stakeholder may be overtly opposing ISEC, neither is there sufficient alignment to drive it forward.

For now, the future of ISEC appears to hinge less on intent and more on execution—specifically, whether the industry can move from broad agreement in principle to coordinated action.