TV Ratings Policy 2026: Ambitious redesign faces execution test

India’s television measurement ecosystem is entering a decisive new phase with the rollout of the TV Ratings Policy 2026 by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

The policy attempts a fundamental redesign of how audiences are measured, expanding beyond panel-based television data to incorporate inputs from distribution platforms, digital ecosystems and connected devices, while also opening the market to multiple rating agencies and tightening oversight.

The shift signals a move away from a single currency system dominated by a single ratings body towards a more complex, multi-source framework. While the direction has found broad support, industry leaders indicate that the transition will hinge less on intent and more on execution, interoperability and consensus.

Read: Govt notifies TV Rating Policy: Landing page viewership excluded from measurement

DPOs, Big Tech and OTT platforms allowed to release viewership data under new TRP policy

TV Ratings Policy 2026: ₹75 lakh penalty for third violation, licence at risk

Data at the centre of the reset

At the heart of the policy lies the ambition to create a unified view of audiences across platforms. This includes integrating return path data from DPOs, viewership from OTT platforms and signals from large technology ecosystems.

Vinay Hegde, CEO-Investments, Media, Madison World, sees this as a structural leap forward, but cautions that its impact will depend on how the industry treats such data. In his view, unified datasets represent the single biggest upgrade to media planning, yet their value will remain limited if they are used merely as an analytical overlay rather than evolving into a trading currency.

“Unified data is the single biggest upgrade to media planning but only if it becomes a currency, not just analytics. A unified dataset combining DPOs set top box return path data, OTT platform data, Big Tech signals Google, Meta, YouTube creates the first true cross platform view of attention, not just TV viewership.”

He explains that such integration could unlock duplicated reach and enable true incremental reach measurement. This, in turn, would allow planning to move from a focus on TRP delivery to business outcomes such as search, installs and sales, while also enabling greater precision in allocation.

At the same time, he introduces a critical caveat around scale. The risk, he notes, lies in data abundance, where the volume of signals could complicate decision making in the absence of standardisation.

Ashish Sehgal, CEO of Times TV Network and Chief Growth Officer at Times Media and Entertainment, echoes this duality. While the inclusion of DPO, OTT and Big Tech data adds richness to the ecosystem, he warns that it also raises the possibility of multiple “currencies” emerging. In such a scenario, he notes, broadcasters may highlight favourable metrics while advertisers selectively benchmark performance, creating complexity in planning and evaluation.

“What the industry needs is one robust, independent measurement system as the primary currency, with other data sets acting as mirror metrics at best,” he says, adding that standardisation and transparency, particularly in digital measurement frameworks, will be critical to ensure comparability and trust.

Oversight recalibrates trust

Alongside data expansion, the policy strengthens government oversight, a move that has drawn a carefully balanced response from industry stakeholders.

Varun Kohli, Director and Group CEO, Bharat Express, sees the policy as an attempt to restore discipline across the ecosystem. He points to the combination of larger and more representative samples, stricter governance norms and the removal of landing page viewership as measures that will improve credibility over time.

At the same time, he warns that the transition phase may be disruptive. “We are likely to see short- term disruption, including data gaps and recalibration of rankings, which could impact planning and buying decisions,” he says, adding that execution around panel expansion timelines and audit compliance will be critical.

Hegde notes that government oversight has a dual effect on the ecosystem.

“It increases confidence because it brings in accountability and governance and also reduces risk of panel tampering and encourages opaque methodologies but also raises concerns because measurement becomes policy-sensitive and is not purely market driven.”

Sehgal similarly points to a structural shift from self-regulation to tighter regulatory oversight. While measures such as reduced entry barriers, stricter conflict-of-interest norms, independent boards and dual audit frameworks strengthen transparency, he cautions that these will likely increase operational costs for the Broadcast Audience Research Council, costs that may ultimately be passed on to broadcasters already operating under financial constraints.

This tension is particularly pronounced in the news genre, where perceptions of external influence can shape both editorial behaviour and advertiser sentiment.

Correcting the landing page distortion

Among the most consequential changes is the exclusion of landing page viewership from ratings calculations, a move widely seen as a correction of a long-standing distortion.

Amit Tripathi, Chief Revenue Officer, TV9, offers a detailed illustration of how such distortions have operated in practice. He notes that television ratings have often been influenced by artificial factors, particularly in markets such as Mumbai where language channels receive forced visibility through default placement.

“For instance, a Marathi channel placed on a landing page ends up being viewed by a large non- Marathi speaking audience, sometimes 60 to 70 percent, which inflates its ratings without reflecting genuine viewer preference.”

Such forced exposure inflates ratings without reflecting actual consumption, even though these numbers continue to influence advertising revenue. The policy’s move to exclude landing page viewership is therefore expected to bring ratings closer to genuine audience behaviour.

Tripathi also views the broader push towards transparency and inclusion of digital data as a positive step, noting that performance trends often remain consistent across linear television and OTT, with similar content resonating across platforms.

Granularity reshapes investment logic

One of the more transformative implications of the policy lies in the granularity of data it promises to deliver.

Hegde argues that deeper segmentation will expose inefficiencies that have long been masked within aggregated metrics. Over investment in national general entertainment channels may become more visible, as will under delivery in specific audience cohorts.

“Granular data may expose over investment in national GECs or under delivery in specific cohorts, long tail becomes measurable.”

As these gaps emerge, the industry is likely to witness a redistribution of spending. Investments may increasingly flow towards regional clusters, niche channels and hyperlocal digital environments, as well as connected television ecosystems that offer more targeted reach.

Sehgal believes that the expansion of the sample size to 1.2 lakh households will further accelerate this shift. A larger and more representative sample, he notes, will bring greater stability to genres such as English news, which have historically been volatile due to limited sample bases. It will also recalibrate performance across regional and niche channels, rewarding consistent performance and strong local relevance over short-term spikes.

Digital integration with structural gaps

The integration of OTT and connected television data reflects the growing importance of digital consumption, but also introduces new complexities.

Tripathi points out that OTT environments offer more precise and granular data, strengthening the case for their inclusion. However, he cautions that the ecosystem is not yet level.

“OTT platforms are not yet equal opportunity ecosystems; not all channels are represented, which creates disparities in visibility and measurement.”

This structural imbalance, he argues, can skew comparisons between linear and digital performance. While the inclusion of such data is essential, presenting OTT and connected television metrics separately from linear ratings could ensure greater clarity, fairness and accuracy.

Sehgal adds that cross-platform measurement will be the real inflection point, introducing a more diverse audience base and potentially increasing the overall share of news within the broader television ecosystem. At the same time, he notes that beyond a certain point, incremental increases in sample size may deliver diminishing returns relative to cost, making cross-platform integration the more meaningful structural shift.

Opening the market, inviting complexity?

The policy’s decision to allow multiple rating agencies marks a significant departure from the long-standing single currency model led by the Broadcast Audience Research Council.

Hegde describes this as a trade-off between innovation and fragmentation. Increased competition is expected to encourage methodological advancement and enable cross validation. At the same time, it introduces the risk of divergent datasets.

“Markets like the US’s Nielsen versus Comscore show that there were years of confusion with multiple currencies before convergence.”

Sehgal reinforces this concern, noting that in a multi-currency environment, broadcasters, advertisers and distribution platforms may each interpret data differently, potentially leading to disputes in pricing, benchmarking and even subscription negotiations. He also flags the possibility of increased LCN costs and higher promotional investments as broadcasters compete for visibility and sampling advantages.

In the Indian context, this could translate into weaker pricing benchmarks and increased planning complexity unless a unified currency or interoperable metrics are established.

From single currency to systemic shift

Taken together, these changes point to a broader transformation in how media value is defined and traded in India.

Hegde encapsulates this shift by noting that the country is moving from a single currency, panel-based system to a multi-source, cross platform ecosystem. Unified data, he suggests, will dramatically improve planning precision, but will also raise questions around standardisation, governance and currency fragmentation.

Sehgal adds that sharper measurement and larger samples will narrow the gap between perceived and actual audience strength, making viewership more stable and representative across markets. As confidence in data improves, advertiser interest, particularly from categories such as FMCG, could increase, especially in genres like news that have historically faced measurement volatility.

The challenge, therefore, is not data availability but the ability of the industry to arrive at a shared framework for measurement and trade.

Crisis as catalyst

The origins of the current overhaul lie in the events of 2020, when the Mumbai Police launched an investigation into alleged TRP manipulation. The probe placed a leading English news channel at the centre of a national controversy and exposed vulnerabilities within the panel-based system.

The fallout was immediate. The Broadcast Audience Research Council suspended news ratings, while the News Broadcasters Association urged members to step back from weekly rankings. The episode triggered a broader reassessment of measurement practices across the industry.

Subsequent reforms in 2021 tightened audit requirements, enhanced transparency and strengthened governance norms, laying the foundation for the more comprehensive changes now being implemented.

The road to consensus

The TV Ratings Policy 2026 represents the most ambitious attempt yet to align India’s measurement ecosystem with a fragmented, multi-screen media environment. It promises greater transparency, improved accuracy and a more holistic understanding of audience behaviour.

Yet, as industry voices suggest, the transition will be defined by how effectively competing priorities are balanced. Precision must coexist with simplicity, oversight with independence and plurality with standardisation.

In the final analysis, the success of the new framework will depend on whether the industry can converge on a shared understanding of value in a landscape where data is abundant, but consensus remains the most scarce currency.