The Battle to Define India’s First Unified OTT Rating System
A fresh measurement framework could redraw ad budgets and sharpen streaming algorithms for an audience of 545 million viewers.
Hey Streamers 👋,
A warm welcome to the 95th edition of the “Streaming in India” newsletter, your weekly news digest about streaming players, OTT trends, and analyses. If you are not already a subscriber, please sign up and join thousands of others who receive it directly in their inbox every Wednesday.
Agenda
Rating the Raters: How India’s new OTT measurement framework could reset ad dollars and algorithm wars
Why India’s Ratings Needed a Reset (A Brief History)
What’s Changing: Inside the New Measurement Framework
Pros: A Bigger, Better Ratings Ecosystem
Cons and Concerns: Fragmentation, Conflict, and “Too Many Cooks”?
Impact on OTT Platforms and Content: The Coming Algorithm Wars
Looking Ahead
And….Action!
Rating the Raters: How India’s new OTT measurement framework could reset ad dollars and algorithm wars
The Fight for Eyeballs Gets a Referee: India’s media industry is on the cusp of a measurement shake-up that could transform how streaming platforms compete and how advertisers spend their money. The Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (I&B) has unveiled a draft policy to overhaul audience ratings, opening the field to new players and new technologies. With streaming video now mainstream – India counts over 545 million OTT users and a ₹12,000 crore (~$1.5 billion) streaming market – the absence of a trusted, unified metric for digital viewership has been a glaring gap. The proposed framework aims to fill that gap by “democratising and modernising” how audiences are measured across TV and online platforms [indianexpress.com]. This week, we dive into what these changes mean, weighing the pros and cons of a wider playing field in ratings and how it might intensify the battle for viewer attention in the OTT era.
With so many players splitting viewer attention, a common measurement currency is seen as crucial to compare and monetize audiences.
Why India’s Ratings Needed a Reset (A Brief History)
For decades, Television Rating Points (TRPs) – essentially TV viewership scores – have been the currency of India’s ₹90,000+ crore advertising industry [storyboard18.com]. These ratings, provided exclusively by the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) in recent years, determine where ad dollars flow on traditional television. BARC was formed by broadcasters, advertisers, and agencies in 2015 to restore credibility after earlier private rating systems (TAM and INTAM) fell into disrepute amid data leak and manipulation controversies. While BARC’s industry-backed governance brought more trust, the system has struggled to keep pace with changing viewership habits. Its panel of about 58,000 people-meters covers only 0.025% of India’s 230 million TV households – a sample critics argue is too small to capture India’s vast diversity. More importantly, TRPs have only measured linear TV consumption, leaving out the booming viewership on smartphones, smart TVs, and streaming apps. In 2020, a high-profile TRP rigging scandal further underscored the system’s vulnerability, prompting calls for reform. Simply put, the way Indians watch video has evolved, but the way we measure it has not. This is the backdrop against which the government is now looking to “rate the raters” and rewrite the rules.
What’s Changing: Inside the New Measurement Framework
The I&B Ministry’s draft policy (July 2025) proposes to overhaul the “Policy Guidelines for Television Rating Agencies” in India, originally set in 2014. The changes are sweeping. First, the ministry plans to end BARC’s monopoly as the sole ratings provider. Multiple companies will be allowed to measure TV and OTT audiences, creating competition where previously there was none. In fact, the door has been opened wide: OTT platforms, digital distributors, telecom and tech firms can now apply to become official rating agencies under the new guidelines. The goal is to “modernise the audience measurement ecosystem” by bringing in fresh players, methods and investments.
To enable this, the draft removes or amends several restrictive clauses that were seen as barriers to entry. Notably, it would scrap the cross-holding limits and conflict-of-interest rules that so far prevented broadcasters, advertisers, or any entity with media business ties from owning more than 10% in a ratings agency. Previously, these rules were meant to ensure a ratings agency stayed independent. Now, the government is relaxing them to encourage wider industry participation and funding. All rating agencies will, however, have to register with the ministry and follow a new framework of eligibility criteria, operational procedures, data standards, and compliance norms. In essence, the government is swapping strict entry barriers for a regulated open marketplace of measurement services.
Crucially, the new framework isn’t just about TV ratings – it explicitly talks about capturing OTT (streaming) viewership. TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) and the ministry have noted that today’s ratings don’t track audiences on smart TVs, streaming sticks, mobile apps or laptops. The draft guidelines aim to fix these gaps. Future rating agencies are expected to devise “newer mechanisms” to measure viewership from connected TVs and digital platforms in addition to legacy cable/DTH TV. In other words, the definition of “audience measurement” is being broadened to wherever the eyeballs are – whether watching a prime-time soap on a Tata Sky set-top box or bingeing a web series on Netflix. The ministry’s note emphasizes that as viewing habits evolve, “so must the way we measure them.”
Pros: A Bigger, Better Ratings Ecosystem
The government’s “wider playing field” approach comes with several anticipated benefits:
Innovation and Tech Upgrade: Allowing multiple rating agencies is meant to foster competition, and with it, fresh methodologies. New entrants (possibly deep-pocketed global firms) can bring in cutting-edge technology. We could see AI-enhanced viewership analytics, passive measurement via connected devices, and real-time reporting instead of weekly spreadsheets. Larger sample sizes are on the table too – the draft policy itself calls the current 58,000 homes inadequate and expects a more representative panel. More meters and new digital data sources mean richer, granular insights (urban/rural splits, minute-by-minute viewing, multi-screen behavior, etc.) that were previously elusive.
Holistic Audience Picture: A key advantage of the new framework is the push toward cross-platform measurement. “The consumer is not living life in silos,” as media veteran Ashish Bhasin puts it – one moment a person might watch TV, the next moment video on a phone [storyboard18.com]. Yet until now, marketers had to piece together siloed data to guess total reach. A unified or at least interoperable measurement system can reveal the full viewership pie: for example, how a popular show’s audience splits between TV broadcast and OTT streaming, or how many unique people you reach if you advertise across both. Such insight helps content creators and advertisers optimize strategies. “Ideally, a content maker or advertiser should know exactly where consumption is happening, who is watching, and for how long,” notes Ashish Golwalkar, former Sony India executive [storyboard18.com]. Capturing OTT audiences in the net – especially on connected TVs where streaming looks a lot like traditional TV – will broaden that view.
Transparency and Trust (with Checks): With external oversight and multiple firms in the fray, data credibility could improve. No single entity will control the narrative. If one agency’s numbers seem off, stakeholders can cross-check with another’s. This competitive accountability can act as a safeguard against deliberate ratings manipulation. Moreover, requiring all agencies (incumbent BARC included) to register with the government under uniform standards may impose more rigorous auditing and data quality controls. The Ministry is signaling that it will set common data standards and compliance rules, which all players must follow to stay licensed. In theory, that means “rating the raters” – ensuring they deliver robust, fraud-free metrics. The inclusion of OTT in the framework also compels streaming platforms to be more transparent. Even subscription-based streamers that don’t rely on ads may need to disclose viewership data for the greater ecosystem’s measurement. While some SVOD giants might resist at first (why share data if you don’t sell ads, after all?), being part of industry metrics can build credibility with creative talent, investors, and regulators. Over time, as norms solidify, this transparency could benefit the whole value chain with better benchmarking of content success.
Global Best Practices & Investment: By removing legacy restrictions (like the 10% ownership cap and Indian ownership requirement), India is inviting global expertise into audience measurement. Companies that operate internationally bring learnings from other markets – whether it’s Nielsen’s techniques in the US, BARB’s hybrid TV+streaming panel in the UK, or new digital measurement standards being tested elsewhere. This cross-pollination can only help modernize India’s system. Industry watchers predict an influx of funds (>$50 million) and technology as foreign entrants set up shop. For instance, meters that capture OTT app viewing on TVs, watermarking or fingerprint tech to identify content across platforms, or big-data approaches that complement panel data could all become part of the toolkit. “Global players will inject capital, methodological diversity, and global best practices into what has historically been a domestically controlled and often opaque space,” notes an industry advocate [storyboard18.com]. The end result could be a far more robust ratings ecosystem that keeps pace with the complexity of today’s media consumption.
Better Monetization and Content Decisions: When viewership data gets richer and more transparent, it’s not just advertisers who benefit. Streaming platforms and broadcasters can also make smarter decisions. They’ll know which content truly performs across all platforms, helping with licensing and production investments. Creators could get more insight into their audiences, not just from their own platform analytics but via independent measurements that capture spillover viewing. As one media consultant put it, “broadening the net of capturing data... is good for both makers and marketers” in understanding the heterogeneity of viewership [storyboard18.com]. In the long run, having credible audience metrics for OTT content might also enable new monetization models (for example, dynamic ad rates for streaming ads based on viewership spikes, or benchmarks to price sponsorships for digital-only shows). It essentially legitimizes OTT content value in the eyes of buyers who have been trained on TV metrics.
Cons and Concerns: Fragmentation, Conflict, and “Too Many Cooks”?
While the new open framework has clear advantages, industry players have also flagged significant concerns. Chief among them: too many rating agencies could muddy the waters.
Multiple Currencies = Confusion: Advertisers often say they need one common “currency” for audience data – a single number they can trust when buying media. If each agency comes up with different ratings for the same show or channel, it can cause chaos. “One must ensure that there is one measurement system and one currency. Multiple currencies will create disruption,” warns RS Sodhi, echoing a common sentiment among brand marketers [storyboard18.com]. Imagine one rating service says a web series got 50 million views while another (using a different method) reports 30 million – which does an advertiser believe? There’s a real risk of “dueling ratings” that erode confidence in all data. In the past, competition between TAM and a rival ratings firm in India led to exactly this kind of confusion, ultimately forcing the industry to consolidate. Many stakeholders would prefer a unified cross-media metric (say, one agency or a joint industry dashboard) rather than each medium or agency giving its own numbers. The Indian Broadcasting & Digital Foundation (IBDF), a key industry body, has already voiced opposition to the multiple-agency idea, advocating instead to strengthen a single measurement body for credibility.
Economic Feasibility: Running a national audience measurement service is expensive and complex. It involves deploying tens of thousands of meters, sophisticated data processing, and regular field maintenance and audits – easily a ₹1,000+ crore venture to scale pan-India, according to insiders. It’s debatable whether India’s ad market can sustain more than one or two major rating systems given the costs. “Even the suggestion to have a couple of rating companies is economically not feasible. Better [to] improve the existing system,” argues Partho Dasgupta, ex-CEO of BARC [storyboard18.com]. If new entrants find it hard to achieve profitability, there’s a concern that the quality of data or longevity of service could suffer. We might see a scenario where multiple agencies start, but eventually shake out or consolidate – and in the interim, the instability could be problematic for the industry.
Trust and Neutrality Issues: By allowing companies with media interests (broadcasters, OTT platforms, advertisers themselves) to own or operate rating agencies, the potential for conflicts of interest increases. The earlier 10% ownership cap was there for a reason – to prevent, say, a network from indirectly influencing ratings in its favor. Now those guardrails are being relaxed. This raises an important question: who will watch the watchmen? If an OTT platform runs a measurement service, will other players trust its data? As one media veteran pointed out, BARC’s strength was that it was an industry collective – “one trusts BARC today because it’s an industry body with self-correcting mechanisms... if it’s a private player, why would anyone trust it if it’s just trying to sell you the data?”storyboard18.com. History offers warnings: TAM Media Research, the private ratings provider before BARC, faced allegations of panel tampering and partisan reporting, leading to years of mistrust until it was phased out [storyboard18.com]. The new guidelines do mandate that agencies avoid any other business that could conflict with ratings, and the government could enforce audits. But perception of bias might still plague any non-neutral entity. The success of this multi-agency approach may ultimately hinge on strong regulatory oversight and perhaps an industry council to vet methodologies – otherwise, the first major credibility scandal could take us back to square one.
Data Fragmentation: Another worry is that each agency might use different methodologies and metrics that aren’t directly comparable. One might use panel surveys, another might lean on set-top box return data, a third could analyze streaming app logs – each will have its own algorithm to extrapolate audience figures. Without a standard baseline, media planners might end up juggling disparate datasets. This is why countries like the UK are striving for unified measurement (e.g. Barb’s Dovetail that combines panel and census data) rather than parallel private systems. If India’s approach leads to one service measuring TV and another measuring OTT separately (and both calling their output “ratings”), that could perpetuate the very silo view the industry is trying to escape. The TRAI has suggested frameworks for OTT data disclosure so that all agencies can tap into similar inputs, but implementation details remain to be seen. Interoperability and data sharing between these new agencies might be needed to truly get a single version of truth.
OTT Platform Buy-In: The new framework’s effectiveness, especially for OTT measurement, hinges on how cooperatively streaming platforms participate. Many OTT services guard their viewership stats tightly, considering them proprietary or sensitive (for competitive and PR reasons). Notably, subscription-driven platforms (SVOD) with no advertisers – like Netflix – have little incentive to volunteer detailed numbers. “In the case of OTTs, especially SVOD which doesn't attract external advertisers, why would a platform want to disclose their viewership data?” Golwalkar points out. If some major players hold out, the “transparent” measurement could have blind spots. The government might need to nudge or mandate OTT data sharing in some form. An industry expert revealed that BARC had piloted tech to track OTT viewership (through its PrimaVU project) years ago, but “that requires buy-in from all OTT players and this should have happened by now”storyboard18.com. Getting dozens of fierce streaming competitors – from YouTube to Netflix to domestic players – to agree on measurement and share data may prove challenging in practice. Until that happens, any new rating agency attempting OTT metrics might rely on limited panels or third-party data, which could be less accurate or acceptable.
Regulatory and Privacy Concerns: With big tech and possibly foreign firms entering the fray, some have raised data sovereignty and privacy issues. Audience measurement today can involve tracking viewing behavior at a granular level (devices, apps, possibly personal data). “Foreign players’ entry raises data sovereignty and legal concerns,” warns Sonam Chandwani of KS Legal [storyboard18.com], stressing the need for data localization and strict audits. India’s data protection laws would apply – meaning rating agencies must handle user data carefully and likely keep it within India. Additionally, there’s a competitive angle: if a global giant like Google (which has both YouTube and Android TV data) became a measurement provider, rivals might worry about how that data is used or whether it unfairly advantages their own platform. Robust governance will be required so that the new measurement environment is fair and secure. The ministry appears aware of this, with experts calling for “strict governance and regulatory vigilance” alongside the liberalization [storyboard18.com]. This could entail independent audits of rating methodologies, confidentiality of raw data, and perhaps oversight by a neutral technical committee to prevent any gaming of the system.
Impact on OTT Platforms and Content: The Coming Algorithm Wars
Beyond the boardroom debates on ratings agencies, these changes are likely to reverberate on the ground in how streaming platforms operate. With viewership numbers becoming more transparent and standardized, OTT services will effectively be entering a new kind of arms race – an “algorithm war” for audience attention with high stakes.
Until now, each streaming platform has been a walled garden, using its own recommendation algorithms and marketing strategies to maximize watch-time on its service (and then selectively touting its success metrics). Netflix, for instance, uses its famous algorithm to keep you binge-watching and only releases limited data (like hours viewed for top shows) when it suits them. If India moves to a world where an external rating tells advertisers and media buyers which platforms or shows are truly commanding eyeballs, the competitive pressure on platforms will intensify. Much like TV channels in the TRP era jockeyed for higher ratings week after week – sometimes tweaking show timings or content to boost those numbers – OTT players may start optimizing for the new metrics.
What form could this take? Potentially, product and content strategies might be retooled to win in the ratings. For example, if the new measurement emphasizes “viewing minutes” (total minutes watched, a metric BARC has piloted for premium homes), streamers might double down on autoplay features, longer episodes, or binge-release formats to rack up more watch-time. If unique reach (number of distinct viewers) becomes a key currency, platforms could invest more in mass-appeal content and free sampling strategies to broaden their audience base. Already we saw moves like a popular TV franchise (Shark Tank India) shifting exclusively to OTT and breaking engagement records – with credible cross-platform data, such experiments might become more common as platforms seek to boost their share of total audience. The net effect is that recommendation algorithms and content curation could be increasingly geared not just to serve user tastes, but to maximize measurable outcomes that the industry is watching. In a scenario of multiple rating agencies, one could even envision platforms cherry-picking the metrics or reports that cast them in the best light – leading to a battle of narratives (each backed by some data) about who is “#1” in streaming.
On the positive side, these algorithm wars for viewership could lead to a burst of innovation in user experience and content offerings. Platforms will strive to keep viewers hooked (to score well on the ratings), potentially investing in better personalization AI, user retention tactics, and marquee content that drives water-cooler buzz. We might see OTT services being more transparent with their own dashboards or partnering with measurement firms to highlight strengths (e.g., claiming leadership in a certain demographic or region, backed by third-party data). For content creators, if multiple agencies publish performance insights, it provides more feedback loops to understand what works and where. The competition for audience attention – already fierce – will now have public scorecards, which could push everyone to up their game.
However, there’s a cautionary tale in traditional TV: when channels chased TRPs at any cost, it sometimes led to formulaic or sensational programming aimed squarely at boosting ratings. Streaming platforms until now have enjoyed the freedom to cater to niche audiences or focus on long-term brand value without the tyranny of daily ratings. With the advent of a common metric, they might feel pressure to chase the lowest common denominator or over-emphasize quantity of viewing over quality. For instance, an algorithm might aggressively promote whatever content is likely to generate immediate clicks and views (as YouTube’s has been accused of doing), potentially sidelining content that builds slowly or serves niche but loyal fanbases. It will be a delicate balance for OTT providers to satisfy the new metrics without alienating users – essentially aligning the algorithms that serve viewers with the algorithms that count viewers.
Highly recommend that you check out the TVF Originals / Specials on Zee5 - The Viral Fever is arguably India’s best web series focused production house with some fantastic writing, slice of life characters and brilliant actors that bring a variety of subjects to life. Enjoy and take your pick!
Streaming in India is a weekly newsletter exploring the trends that matter to streaming professionals in India. If you are not already a subscriber, sign up and join several others who receive it directly in their inbox every Wednesday.
Please sign up for my other newsletter focused on “eyeball economy” focused startups (Media, Entertainment, Gaming, Ad Tech & Sports), the Indian / Middle East startup and venture capital ecosystem; in your inbox every Monday: Mehtta Ventures Dubai.
I represent the Adsolut Media business in the Middle East and am a “board observer” for their growth. We have amongst the largest supply of Connected Television premium inventory in the Middle East - Sub-continental corridor along with one of the largest mobile / web inventories as well. Please get in touch for your monetization requirements.