Drama continues!!!!!!

Is the TAM issue that of TAM alone?

TAM is an organization that was started by the industry for the benefit of the industry- mainly the broadcasters and the advertisers. But, sadly what’s been happening for years is that none of the stake holders wants to take onus collectively to solve the issue of television ratings. Till the time the ratings of their respective channels are good broadcasters are happy. The moment they see a dip in the ratings they are up in arms against TAM alleging the ratings are fudged or are riddled with sampling and methodology glitches.
I have seen this happen so often in 17 years of my career. Infact when the ratings are good the channels themselves used to call and try to plant a story saying how well they have been performing. In my blog yesterday I had mentioned that its now etched in everybody’s mind that TAM is the only culprit. Nobody wants to think otherwise or ask questions to the other stakeholders. If there is a so much of an issue with TAM then why not collectively ouster TAM just as they did with AMAP, another rating agency that had been started to create competition and then died a death within 2 years of starting off. Why only two or three channels have decided to get themselves out of TAM subscriptions.
The recent issue has cropped up because MSM that runs SONY TV and MAX had an issue with TAM as the IPL ratings are far below than was expected.  How can anyone be so sure that everyone is dying to watch IPL? How do media organizations make such assumptions? Have they done some research on who is watching what?  
I guess it is important to understand the basics here that TAM did not start on its own in India. TAM was formed at the insistence of media owners (the top TV channels), advertisers (Indian Society of Advertisers) and agencies (Advertising Agencies Association of India). But, after the initial years the Joint Industry Body (JIB) decided to let TAM operate on its own with no collective dialogue whatsoever on any matters relating to TV ratings. TAM was supposedly the advertisers’ currency but today it is Broadcaster’s currency.
There has been several discussions on TAM’s monopoly and that there needs to another ratings agency. BARC (Broadcaster’s Audience Research Council) is therefore being launched. BARC is yet again a body formed by the industry stakeholders such as AAAI, ISA and IBF. Do you think that once BARC comes into play all will be hunky dory? What’s the guarantee that the ratings will not be fudged?
Competition is good. But will the industry be able to come together and support another research body when TAM has been evidently facing funding problems for all these years in terms of increasing people meters. Secondly, what’s the guarantee that after BARC is launched 30,000 people meters will suffice and that there will be no issues. If one goes by Dr Amit Mitra’s report the decision to arrive at 30,000 people meters was also in consultation with TAM.
According to me the ideal solution is to open dialogue supported by a systematic and a clear blueprint that will talk about the exact needs of the industry.

The Never Ending Saga…

Every story generally has an end. But, in the case of TAM (Television Audience Measurement) Media Research it seems more like a never ending saga.

TAM is yet again in news. I cannot remember a single moment in my 17 years of covering the Media industry when TAM was in news for some good news. It’s kind of etched now in people’s mind be it the broadcasters or the Aam Janta ( common man) that TAM - is this large devil which we all need to get rid off.
It’s been almost 15 years since TAM started and within four years of its existence the problems with TAM also started. The issue then was the sample size and issue now is not only that of the sample size but some broadcasters (largely one of the bigger GEC which has recently   also questioned TAM on its methodology having witnessed low ratings in the recently concluded IPL-6).

This is despite TAM having set up an independent ‘vigilance desk’ will be headed by a former top officer from the Maharashtra police department, the six member ‘transparency panel’ of ombudsmen - includes M. Damodaran, former Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi), broadcasting and ad industry veteran Chintamani Rao; former McDonald’s International Media Director Giovanni Fabris; UK television audience expert and BARB and ITV veteran Ivor Millman; former GroupM Insights Director Sheila Byfield; and former MRSI President and Hansa Consulting CEO Praveen Tripathi.

The idea of setting up the vigilance panel was to address all queries coming from broadcasters. Broadcasters can claim that this was set up too late in the day when they are already disillusioned by TAM’s approach and workings. But, the point is it’s better late than never. At least till the time BARC does not start operations there is something for broadcasters to approach and address all their issues.

I am surprised not one report has talked of the independent panel and if broadcasters in question who have pulled out of TAM did approach this independent panel before pulling out. It does not seem like even the reporters reporting the issue has bothered to ask these basic questions. Journalism today is all about only What? And not about  (5 Ws and a H).      

That’s not all TAM also updated the guidelines for all TAM data users only in early May 2013. The update guidelines clearly states that over the past decade, the data and its dimensions itself have vastly increased; more sample size, more geographies to analyze (28 reported markets in 2008 to 42 reported markets in 2013), platforms like Digital emerging, explosion in number of active channels 427 in 2009 to 509 in 2013 etc.

TAM in 1998 had started with a mere 1800 meters across 9 cities. Today it has close to 10000 peoplemeters representing 36,000 TV viewing respondents across 225 cities and towns that have a population of one lakh or more – the largest in the world!  TAM has increased the size purely through internal accruals and help from its parent company Kantar…whereas when it was set up fifteen years, the industry commitment was that it will fund TAM in all its expansion and upgradation endeavors!

The recently update guidelines prescribes what a TAM data user should keep in mind before analyzing and representing data or seeing the products of such efforts. It does not claim to be exhaustive but covers the most common areas on data (mis)representation. The guidelines which is available on TAM’s corporate website clearly states all the necessary dos and don’ts and also explains each aspect of sampling and methodology very clearly.

I recently, read in one report about a English news channel (Times Now) claiming it got zero ratings. Now the guideline note clearly states the meaning of Zero Ratings. Zero ratings does not mean that no one watched the channel all it means is that its below the actual threshold of sample size which is why it is categorized as zero rating.

The guidelines note clearly explains the above as take for instance, if the actual population TVR of a show was 0.5% and the analyst was analyzing data on a sample size of 50 individuals, there is ~80% chance that she will get a zero TVR in the output. But at a sample size of 1000 individuals, this chance of a zero rating dramatically reduces to just ~1%. Even a sample size of 200 individuals reduces the chance of a zero rating output (when the true population TVR is 0.5%) to ~37%.

Now assume that the analyst was looking at some estimates for a show whose true population TVR was 1%. The chances of her getting a zero TVR for this show at a sample size of 50, 200 and 1000 individuals is ~61%, ~13% and 0.004% - a large improvement over the above 0.5% case.

The bottom line therefore is to choose reasonable sample sizes for analysis and also treating relatively small TVR estimates with care while analyzing them.

The other aspect highlighted in the guidelines note is the Trend in data. We often have mailers from channels claiming they are no.1 channel this week in their respective genre.

According to TAM, the biggest advantage of the TAM panel is that one is measuring more or less the same people (20%-25% average yearly churn) over time. Due to this, changes in viewing behavior are reported more precisely than if we were to simply conduct two separate surveys at different points in time. But the power of the panel is not about just calculating a change over some two points in time.

We can see how gradually or suddenly this change is happening by also trending the data between the two points of time. And importantly, to judge whether this change was a ‘one-off’ or part of a systematic change.

Take for example a claim that states (only) that a channel’s reach “has increased by 30%”. Closer examination of the claim showed that two specific weeks were used to show this growth (Week 9 and 18). The claim as such is numerically correct. But the conclusion gets reversed completely when we look at the trend of the channel’s performance and find that reach is actually in a declining phase.

The aspects that the guidelines highlights is on the rankings, use of averages, estimates, use of right basket for analysis, use and/or interpret relative channel shares with discretion., use or interpret time spent per viewer with discretion, use of straight perpendicular graphs and not 3D graphs which  are generally misleading.

Global experts in the field on media audience measurement will tell you about many instances where the TV Broadcast Industry’s faith on its neutral & central audience measurement service has gone through fluctuations. Understandably so. As much as the measurement service provider wants the client/industry to focus on audience insights and analytics, the story for them, starts and ends with the bi-product of report card/rankings. What comes to the rescue and resolve of such situations is when media audience measurement provider work very closely with the Industry Body and if need be, individually, with its stakeholders.

Today, TAM India, is in a similar state. Certain sections of the TV Broadcast industry are reviewing their faith on the very service, that, if you come to think of it, actually helped them grow their own stature and business over the last many years. If you actually come to think of it, it was because of TAM in India that its TV AD market today stands at Rs 12000 crores. Do you think advertisers would have invested had there been no TAM?

If you think about it, whether it is the government, advertisers, broadcasters, agencies or even the academia, do you think they would have got to the know the following had there been no TAM?:
• That news genre has grown and moved out of the 1% share mark...today it stands at around 6%.
• The grand success and growth of Big B from big to small screen.
• Without measurement, we would not have learnt that IPL has become such a success.
• 5 years ago, a Hindi General Entertainment Channel was launched. Without measurement, would we have known of it as one of the established and leading channels?
• It is only with measurement that the industry got to understand how digitization made an impact on consumer/audience behaviour.
• In the year 2000, the industry had less than 100 TV channel getting reported. Today, the number touches close to 600. Would the growth of these channels be possible without the presence of measurement?
• All these years, the industry has seen a healthy (sometimes even double digit) growth of TV advertising. Would this advertising investment have happened in the absence of measurement?
• Would the industry have known how the women audience lapped up the 2003 and 2011 Cricket World Cup? It is only through measurement.
• Without measurement, none of us would have realized the potential and growth of regional TV Channels
• Measurement helped the industry understand the dynamics and difference in viewership between small and big towns.

The Industry never had a dialogue with TAM. For that, ofcourse, the first they would need to do is to prepare and arrive at a common consensus and agenda across ISA, IBF and AAAI on what they want from TAM system...what TAM’s KRAs and KPIs should be. Will someone or some industry body take the onus of creating that for TAM?
My conclusion to this whole issue is that Broadcasters will continue to call TAM a devil until they see lower ratings. So long as the ratings are good and is in their favor, all’s well with TAM! Unfortunately for TAM –they are caught between the devil and deep sea.

Amar Chitra Katha reloaded

Amar Chitra Katha comics has been part of every Indian child’s legacy and imagination. The comic book series carries tales of Indian culture, history, fables, religion, humour, biographies, heritage, sports etc. over the years the comics have changed owners thrice to currently be owned by Retail magnet Kishore Biyani's Future Ventures. I recently, traced the journey of this legendary brand from when it started to its present times and the changes and challenges it has undergone over the last couple of years.

read the full story that appeared in Open

http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/art-culture/eternal-tales-in-the-electronic-age

Revisiting History …..100 years of Indian Cinema

“100 years of Indian cinema is being celebrated by people who know Indian cinema only for the last 30 years”- this was the opening line of Rafiq Baghdadi who runs the Movie Club at the Mumbai Press Club. Two weeks ago he had organized a short discussion along with two screenings –one documentary on 100 years of Cinema and the other film was Dilip Kumar starrer ‘Amar’ where for the first time he plays a negative character: 

We got to know of lot of trivia associated with Indian cinema. I am sure all of these are available across several books on Indian cinema. But, to hear it from a man who eats, breathes and lives cinema is different. Some of these are facts like 

** In 1896-the first film was screened and show to public in Mumbai at the Watson’s hotel- (Which still exists and is one of India’s oldest surviving iron cast buildings. The building stands on Iron stills and the building was shipped from York and assembled here). 

** Theatres in Mumbai started as single cinema talkies in 1920s. Dadasaheb Phalke’s Raja Harishchandra was screened at Olympia Theatre and Coronation Cinema in Girgaum. There were several other theatres around Grant Road, Girgaum, Dhobi Talao and Mumbai Central. The old theatres then had a ticket costing of Rs 1 to Rs 2.50. 

** Mumbai was the hub of Indian cinema but, did you know that the Mumbai University does not have a Phd programme on Indian cinema. 

The documentary took us through the history of cinema. The film also had important personalities from the world of cinema giving their opinions. 

The French might have introduced the concept of moving images, but little did anyone know that India would one day become the largest film industry in the world producing over 1000 films a year.

Indian cinema has a unique identity. Dadasaheb Phalke introduced us to cinema at a time when cinema was not considered a good profession. Working in films was considered a taboo. But, after the release of Raja Harishchandar several filmmakers in Bombay and Madras (Mumbai and Chennai now) started making silent films. 

By the mid 1920s, Madras had become the epicentre for all film related activities. Raghupathi Venkaiah Naidu, SS Vasan, AV Meiyappan (AVM) set up production houses in Madras to shoot Telugu and Tamil films.

The silent era came to an end when Ardeshir Irani produced his first talkie, 'Alam Ara' in 1931. The film released on 14th March at the Majestic Theatre. For the first time the film had songs and since then music became a defining element in Indian cinema. 
Indrasabha, a film adapted from a play by the same name was released by Madan Theatre in 1932. The film had 69 songs.   

South Indian films also saw the beginning of a talking era during the same year. The first talkie films in Bengali (Jumai Shasthi), Telugu (Bhakta Prahlad) and Tamil (Kalidass) were released in the same year. 
Early 1930s saw the emergence of the studio system in Indian cinema. Prabhat Studio established in Kolhapur by V Shantaram, V G  Damle, S Fatelal and two other film technicians was one of the leading studios of that time. It eventually moved to Pune. The studio’s first films Sant Tukaram was released in 1936. 
Popular literature became the main source for film subjects. ‘Devdas’ was one such film among several others. 

40s and 50s Indian cinema was institutionalized. Every individual became the individual became the institution by his work and contribution to Indian cinema. 

Another theme or subject that took the fancy of filmmakers was social issues. The social films of V. Shantaram, more than anything else, paved the way for an entire set of directors who took it upon themselves to interrogate not only the institutions of marriage, dowry, and widowhood, but the grave inequities created by caste and class distinctions. Some of the social problems received their most unequivocal expression in Achhut Kanya ("Untouchable Girl", 1936), a film directed by Himanshu Rai of Bombay Talkies. The film portrays the travails of a Harijan girl, played by Devika Rani, and a Brahmin boy, played by Ashok Kumar. 

The disciplined Studio system however got a jolt during the 2nd World War. Money then started coming into the industry from wealthy individuals. This upset many filmmakers who made films for a passion and not for commercial reasons. Independent filmmakers started concentrating on music more than the story. Infact. 40s and 50s was the golden era of music.  

Shankar Jaikishan, O.P. Nayyar, Madan Mohan, C. Ramchandra, Salil Chaudhury, Naushad, S.D. Burman - all had their distinctive style. Each vied with the other to produce some of the most unforgettable melodies India has ever known. 

50s and 60s were considered as the Golden Age of Indian cinema. Filmmakers like Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, Guru Dutt, Bimal Roy, Mehboob Khan, K Asif, Raj Kapoor, KV Reddy, L V Prasad and Ramu Kariat made waves in their respective film industries and they went on to make classics like Pather Panchali, Madhumati, Do Bheega Zameen, Shree 420, Awaara, Pyasa, Mother India, Mughal E Azam, Mayabazar and Chemmeen among many other films. 

In the south, N.T. Rama Rao, M. G. Ramachandran, Sivaji Ganesan, Rajkumar, Prem Nazir dominated the film industry for more than three decades before making way for the next generation of actors like Rajinikanth, Kamal Haasan, Mammootty, Mohanlal, Chiranjeevi and Balakrishna.

The 70s completely changed the way films were made, especially in Hindi film industry. Changing social norms and changing economies influenced movies and the companies that made them. The narrative style changed. The story structure changed. Characters changed. Content changed. The genre promised instant attraction and had great entertainment value. 

While Indian commercial cinema enjoyed popularity among movie-goers, Indian art cinema did not go unnoticed. Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Ritwik Ghatak, Aravindan, Satyajit Ray, Shyam Benegal, Shaji Karun and several other art film directors were making movies that gave India international fame and glory.

Indian cinema, despite all its peculiarities, has been a reflection of the socio-economic, political and cultural changes that took place in the country. Here's hoping that Indian movies continue to entertain us the way they've been doing since 10 decades.

BARC sees traction: Appoints a new CEO

Finally, there seems to be some traction at the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC). The 
Audience research joint body formed by Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), the Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA) and Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI) has finally found a CEO in Partha Dasgupta. Dasgupta, who has been earlier in the media industry with companies like Times Now and Future Media will be responsible to put the organization in place and roll out BARC’s services in a tight frame of time. 
Broadcasters push for an independent audience measurement system to fit into the emerging digital media world led to the formation of BARC. 
BARC story is an old story that started almost six years ago. Over the years there has been considerable debate in various forums, extending even to the Parliament, about the TV audience measurement system, referred to in popular parlance as TRP system. A number of committees were formed, the most recent being the MIB's appointed and Dr. Amit Mitra chaired Committee on TV Audience Measurement. A key recommendation of the Mitra Committee was the establishment of BARC representing the interests of all key stakeholders.
Then the idea was to set it up as a joint venture between the IBF and the ISA on a 60:40 ratio and initial investment of Rs 300 million. However, ISA wanted AAAI also to be a part of the joint body.
BARC has been formulated on the lines of BARB (Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board) of UK. Just like BARB, BARC will also not conduct audience measurement directly but commission independent specialist research vendors.
Unlike Television Audience Measurement (TAM) Media & Research firm which is currently the only TV audience measurement system in India, BARC, will not conduct audience measurement directly but commission independent specialist research vendors. They are also clear that they will not compete with TAM and the primary objective of BARC is to conduct and commission media research using appropriate research methodologies, to provide accurate, up to date and relevant findings relating to broadcast audiences, including TV ratings. 
Currently, according to the broadcasters the major challenge will be to cover all the broadcasting modes in the research – terrestrial, cable & satellite, DTH platforms, developing and new platforms.
BARC will engage in extensive industry consultations with stakeholders, specialist research consultants, existing & potential measurement service providers to identify the key concerns and requirements with regards to audience measurement.
The system of generation of Television Rating Points (TRPs) has come under the close scrutiny of the Government following reports about several lacunae in the present rating system in India. Since TRPs have a major impact on the programming content of Television channels, issues of accountability, transparency and objectivity in TRPs assume greater significance as false and misleading rating can hurt not only broadcasters and the advertisers but more importantly the viewing public.
Most Broadcasters who currently subscribe to TAM data say that there is nothing wrong in the data provided by TAM, but it is inadequate. In a sense that TAM only has 9602 people meters in households across 225 towns in India and the total TV viewing universe in 153 million. 
Dr Amit Mitra Committee report also took a serious view of this small sample size used by TAM. The Committee observed that the rural areas have been left out from the current system of TRP measurement. The Committee has recommended an increase in the current sample size of people meter homes to 15,000 urban & rural households, over a period of two years, and then to 30,000 (Thirty Thousand) over the next three years covering urban areas, rural areas and small towns, J&K, North east  thereby providing a complete geographical coverage of the country.
TAM's initial mandate it got from the industry stake holders was to cover Class I towns (all towns and cities with a population of 1 Lac+). As of today  TAM has increased its coverage to include also Semi Rural Towns (Less than 1 Lac population). 
TAM has never denied to issues in methodology. It is willing to increase the sample size but, the investment to do is very high. For TAM with a top line of a mere Rs 50 crore or so doing this by itself is a tall task. 
Funding has been an another issue when it comes to the increase of sample size. TAM which was also formed by the industry body was never funded by the industry to increase sample size. 
As is understood from sources within the industry till about four years after TAM was launched by a joint industry body (JIB) in India, the initial funding was there. But, after 2002, JIB's interest in funding TAM depleted. Current, increase in people meters  by TAM has been funded through internal accruals.
But, with regard to BARC, Dr Mitra committee report suggests broadcasters, advertisers and advertising agencies should pay a certain percentage of their relevant turnovers to BARC on an annual basis to fund the expansion of sample size for TRP measurement. 
The total cost of expansion of TRP measurement system over 5 years would be around Rs 660 Crores which is approximately 0.32% per year of the total TV industry size in India. The committee feels that this level of expenditure should not be very difficult for the industry to meet. 
Interestingly, the industry bodies that have been so vehemently opposing the methodology of TAM, the above suggestions in Dr Mitra's report has been borrowed from TAM's Methodology Report. 
Will stakeholders who formed BARC be open to setting aside a certain  percentage of their turnovers of this purpose and secondly whether the suggested increase in sample size to 30,000 actually help in getting better results. That’s anybody’s guess.  Mere increase in people meters in households will not do wonders, there has to be a scientific methodology in also selecting the correct sample size to deliver accurate results.  
One will really have to wait and watch how BARC pans out and what services it rolls out and will it be a win-win situation of all the stake holders. 

Feel good about yourself and your beauty: Real Beauty Sketches

How many of us feel that we are not beautiful? How many of us keep comparing ourselves to others? I guess these are natural human tendencies where one tends to be harsh about one’s own self.

In Dove's “Real Beauty Sketches” ad it shows how women imagine their own faces. A forensic sketch artist is shown asking questions to subjects whom he cannot see and each of these subjects describes   herself to him. Later, he draws her again, this time as described by a stranger who has just chatted with her. The stranger’s version usually looks more attractive.

In the ad all the women conclude that they look more beautiful in the sketch described by a stranger about them. One woman in the ad says: “We spend a lot of time as women analyzing and trying to fix things that are quiet grey. Instead we should be spending more time and appreciating things that we do like.” The ad ends with the line ‘you are more beautiful that you think’.

The international ad has two versions -a 3 minute version and a 6 minute version and has gone viral on youtube. The longer version is understood to have got over 1.6 million views on Youtube.

The ad has also received several criticisms from International ad critics. Slate, a well known online magazine for news, Politics and culture found the ad cynical and even labeled the campaign as both racist and misogynistic. It felt that this ad was another example of Dove “using a faux representation of ‘real’ women.” Well, yes the women shown in the ad are all young, fairly good looking, but I think the concept is interesting and it’s a brilliantly made ad.

According to me the ad goes to prove that all women should be confident about themselves and their looks.  

Dove included this description with the video:

Women are their own worst beauty critics. Only 4% of women around the world consider themselves beautiful. At Dove, we are committed to creating a world where beauty is a source of confidence, not anxiety. So, we decided to conduct a compelling social experiment that explores how women view their own beauty in contrast to what others see. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpaOjMXyJGk#aid=P-j-ppcGERs