MxMIndia

Tag: Shailesh Kapoor

  • We are a big country and niches are available, contrary to what our mass television may sometimes make us believe, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Online Fiction Content: The Promise, The Challenges

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    There’s been incessant talk over the last few years about non-linear and on-demand television replacing linear television viewing. By now, there’s enough evidence from across the world to suggest that linear television is not going to become irrelevant anytime soon, at least note for the next decade, even two. It still accounts for more than 85 percent of television content viewing in the developed markets. In India, it’s the only way to watch television for more than 99 percent viewers.

     

    However, percentages may not always tell their story. In 2013, Netflix premiered House Of Cards as its first original series. The conventional, linear television broadcast industry had to sit up and take notice. The Netflix Originals model is scaleable, and has since proven to find its diehard fans.

     

    In India, we got the first real taste of an equivalent, at a much smaller scale though, when The Viral Fever (TVF) launched their fiction series Permanent Roommates late 2014. The five episodes, available on YouTube and TVF’s own platform, clocked more than a million views each. Of course, that the content is free fuelled this reach. But the numbers are remarkable nonetheless.

     

    Encouraged by the success of Permanent Roommates, TVF launched Pitchers earlier this season, a quirky take on the corporate world and start-ups. Both the shows offer content that’s conspicuously absent on mainstream, linear television, which caters to the lowest common denominator of audiences. The characters you see in these two shows demand your attention. It’s not content for everyone’s palate, but it doesn’t aspire to be that either, which is why it can work in a world of its own. We are a big country and niches are available, contrary to what our mass television may sometimes make us believe.

     

    But it’s not been a smooth ride for TVF Originals either. The third episode of Pitchers has been delayed “due to production hassles out of our hands.” I’m not too sure what to make of the “out of our hands” part in this update on the TVF website. The moment you play the game of providing original content, you need to live upto a schedule. One episode a fortnight is not a good idea as it is, but one episode a month is a mini-disaster.

     

    The TVF Originals journey should help other aspirants of original online content learn a thing or two. On the positive side, you can make engaging and finite fiction series in reasonable budgets and not look tacky.

     

    But on the side of caution, you need to be consumer-oriented, like any other good offline business. There’s no harm in aspiring to break the rules of mainstream television production in India – endless episodes being shot the evening before telecast, and at times being uplinked almost in real time for broadcast. Those are problems of linear television. You have an FPC and you have to deliver to it all the time. But the absence of one in non-linear television does not absolve you of your commitment to viewers and their viewing habits.

     

    We want to see more content from TVF. We also want to see other content providers like TVF entering this space. Stand-up comedy, sketch comedy and spoofs are hugely popular, but real growth in any medium comes from fiction content, where storytelling is the hero.

     

    The online medium in India needs more stories of it own. But before that happens, there’s the small issue of the missing Pitchers Episode 3 to be taken care of.

  • In the merit list of probable FTII chairpersons, Gajendra Chauhan would struggle to make it to the first million, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: FTII Row: The Chauhan School of Delusions

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The student strike at FTII, in protest against some key appointment, in particular that of Gajendra Chauhan as the institute’s chairperson, has found its way to primetime news, after almost a month of cursory headline coverage. It took a YouTube video by Ranbir Kapoor for mainstream media to take up the matter in all earnestness. It may not be a burning issue of national importance, given the killer scam that’s being unearthed in another part of the country, but with an unmistakable political slant, the FTII story should not be restricted to the entertainment sections either.

     

    There aren’t too many layers to the story. It’s like the proverbial open-and-shut case. You have an actor who has played supporting parts or bit roles in about 300 films and 700 serials (I’m sure he means episodes when he says serials), and has no fraternity support worth talking about, no previous academic experience, not even writing or directorial experience. In the merit list of probable FTII chairpersons, he would struggle to make it to the first million. But here he is, a BJP hand, at the helm of the film school, with the blessings of the Government.

     

    Last night, on The Newshour, Gajendra Chauhan decided to make an appearance in person to field questions. He came up with some gems, which only worsened his position:

    1. You are questioning my body of work (which he also called ‘body of stature’). I’ve worked with Salman Khan. (I’m sure that doesn’t win him any support at FTII!)

     

    2. If a film is a hit, it is an A-grade film. (That hit Jungle Love was a silver jubilee was spoken with great pride too as an example)

     

    3. I refuse to answer that question (when repeatedly asked what, according to him, is good cinema)

     

    That he has never attended MAMI or any other International film festival was also admitted candidly, perhaps fearing another GK Test if he said he had. At the end of it all, Anupam Kher had clear advice to give Chauhan, asking him to just step aside with dignity. Just leave it, he said.

     

    Chauhan’s false sense of confidence on the show, as indeed over the last few weeks, is not surprising. The film and TV industry can be a delusional world, we all know. There’s little room for reality check when you have an ecosystem that’s populated with people telling each other how good they are.

     

    One can make some sense of the delusion if the big stars, producers or directors were to display it.But in all my experience, they are the most grounded, at least in relative terms. Perhaps because they have seen the highs and the lows. It’s the bit players who try and hide their insecurities, sometimes mediocrity, by portraying success, almost demanding to be respected at times. It’s an archaic idea that has little foothold in this day and age.

     

    I’ll be surprised if Chauhan can hold on for too long. He has nothing going for him. Stepping down from FTII and taking up a Bigg Boss invitation will be a good idea. But he may tell you that the former is not a pre-condition for the latter anyway!

     

  • It's become an industry in itself with the emphasis to perform (and hug!), writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Are Reality Show Judges too Eager to Please?

     

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The season of reality shows has well and truly taken off. It’s a typical phenomenon every year after the IPL concludes, but there seems that much extra on-air this year. Star Plus has Nach Baliye, and there will soon be Dance+. Colors had India’s Got Talent and there will soon be Jhalak Reloaded. One variant of DID on Zee has given way to a new season of the main DID show. Indian Idol Junior on Sony and The Voice on &TV complete the GEC reality list. So, if you have been tracking the category, eight reality shows have been in the mix, either on-air or in promotional stages. Not to talk about half a dozen others on youth channels.

     

    All the eight mentioned above have a format that needs a jury. So, we are talking of more than 20 different judges across these shows. Now, that’s an industry in itself. Choreographers, film directors and actors typically dominate the list.

     

    Watching a typical episode of one of these reality shows will make you feel there’s immense pressure on this lot of 20 to ‘perform’. It’s like a mini-competition on the sidelines of the larger channel battles. Everyone is out there to make an impact, without an understanding of the respect and awe that should accompany a jury chair.

     

    It’s cue-a-gimmick judging, where interspersed between performances (all eight are talent shows, though two of them are about celebrity contestants), a judge would take off on a journey that’s ridiculously disconnected with the show. Reading shaayri is the latest favorite. What Anu Malik and Navjot Sidhu started has now become everyone’s domain.

     

    Then there’s this sudden urge to hug contestants on stage that about a dozen judges should be medically treated for. It takes about 30 seconds of footage and barring rare exceptions, you don’t feel a speck of emotion watching it.

     

    The new favorite that’s emerging can be called ‘Let’s pull each other’s leg’. Admittedly, it’s a lot more entertaining than the shaayri and the hugs. But when it happens every seven minutes, you begin to wonder whether you should call it a talent show.

     

    Reality shows have been a core area of our work over the last seven years. There are three essential ingredients of what a good jury member should have, irrespective of the format of the talent show.

    1. Should be an expert in the field.
    2. Should encourage and motivate participants.
    3. Should come across as humble and rooted.

     

    The first one may seem obvious on the face of it, but go through the list of 20 and you would know there are at least five crosses on it. But it’s the second and the third where the real gap would lie. Fans of MasterChef Australia would know what these three points mean. The jury of that show embodies them. And yet, there is no trace of gimmick and showmanship on the screen. It’s a natural, free-flowing format that delivers emotions and entertainment within itself. Nothing needs to be ‘cued’.

     

    The original Dance India Dance jury (Geet Kapur, Terence Lewis & Remo D’Souza) met this brief very well. They had no star value at that time, and yet, would count in my book as the most successful jury combination in the two-decade history of reality television in India.

     

    The India’s Got Talent jury for the last two seasons (Kirron Kher, Karan Johar & Malaika Arora Khan) top the current set of juries. There was a lot of free flow in the judging process, especially aided by Kher’s disarming persona, and the gimmicks, while they were present, rarely interfered with the format.

     

    But at a larger category level, it’s time for producers and channels to question their penchant of ‘over-writing’ reality shows. Let the ‘reality’ prevail, and we may have better content!

     

    And a note to the hosts: When you ask for state capitals to test a contestant’s knowledge, it is not called an IQ Test.

     

  • The focus of our news media has shifted progressively over the last two decades from reporting the news to owning the news, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Lalit Modi: A Scam-Starved Media’s Saviour

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The first 11 months of the Modi government at the Centre haven’t been the most eventful ones for the news media. In UPA-2, the media had the problem of plenty. One after the other, new scams would emerge, competing with each other for attention and news space. But that dried up May last year, after Narendra Modi came to power.

     

    The Delhi elections and the exciting, sometimes dubious, brand of politics by the Aam Aadmi Party ensured that there was some fodder for news channels to provide their viewers with their daily dose of political voyeurism. The occasional foot-in-the-mouth statements from the fringes in the ruling party also helped. But overall, it has been a lean, scam-free year.

     

    Till last week only, though. Starved for scams, the news media took to the Lalit Modi story like fish to water. It was like a homecoming after being away for an extended period of time. Five days down, the relentless coverage continues across channels and newspapers. And we know we haven’t seen the end of this ‘scam’ yet.

     

    Compare this controversy to 2G, Coalgate, CWG and other such big stories from UPA-2 and you would agree that this one is much weaker in content. There’s no real sense of loot after all. And lobbying and politician-corporate nexus have existed from times even before any of us were born. But, as they say, never let facts come in the way of a good story. Or in this case, never let facts decide how big a story it can be.

     

    There are many elements that make the Lalit Modi-Sushma Swaraj-Vasundhra Raje revelations newsworthy and highly entertaining too. First, the protagonist itself. Lalit is a media character in his own right. He’s not exactly the most pleasurable listening experience, but his unapologetic display of defiance makes it tough to ignore him. He gets journalists to fly to far-off Montenegro to interview him, and while a couple of them are in-flight, tweets that he will have to cancel the interviews because his ‘UK Lawyers’ advised him so.

     

    In many ways, Lalit is the face of crony capitalism that the Prime Minister has been accused of encouraging. It’s difficult for the Congress to launch a full-blown attack given the Robert Vadra precedent, but the controversy offers a delicious opportunity to the opposition nonetheless. I’m surprised no one has connected the common surname of the two Modis yet and tried to create a story out of it. Or may be I missed it.

     

    That the other two protagonists are women who have risen to powerful positions gives the story even more teeth in a country where politics is still a male bastion. This is a heady cocktail of powerplay, IPL, family ties, women empowerment, lifestyle of the rich and the famous, and even cancer. Our media would have to be too naïve to not lap it up.

     

    How this story has developed is also a good commentary of the state of our news media today, where the focus has shifted progressively over the last two decades from reporting the news to owning the news. There is bound to be impact and a head or two may roll in this case. And since the next scam may not be in sight, this story will be dragged for as long as it can sustain.

     

    So you know which industry you want to join if you want free trips to Montenegro and the likes.

     

  • Even as new fiction struggles, non-fiction continues to make some impact. The latest season of India's Got Talent is by far its best and the first two episodes of The Voice India were impressive, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Getting Used to BARC

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The new (BARC) ratings are settling in and individual-level data is now available as well. As the market adapts to a new measurement system, there is a hint of confusion in the air. And there’s one dominant reason for it – the constant comparison between the old (TAM) and the new measurement systems.

     

    No two designs of a large sample study give similar results, especially when there are several conceptual changes in their design, like that of the NCCS being adopted instead of the SEC system. At best, one can compare ranks. For example, it is reasonable to expect that the No 1 channel in a category would not be different in the two systems, especially if there was a wide gap between the Top 2 in the old system.

     

    BARC has been built on the premise that it is more robust, secure and future-ready compared to the old system. It was created because there were widespread concerns about the old system. A comparison exercise, then, becomes a contradiction in itself. Hopefully, the dust will settle soon, and the focus will shift on the new data than its comparisons with the old. And there will be enough and more to unravel.

     

    The Hindi GEC programme ratings of the latest week (as well as recent weeks) tell their own story. The Top 5 programmes last week were Saathiya, Ashoka, Sasural Simar Ka, Balika Vadhu and Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai. Except Ashoka, which launched earlier this year, the other four are old horses, with an average lifespan of five-and-a-half years!

     

    There’s a clear consumer statement in this rather simple, back-of-the-envelope data point. More than 150 new fiction shows have launched over the last five years. Yet, the audiences have stayed with their staple primetime diet over half a decade! That’s less a comment on the high quality of the staple and more a comment on how the new attempts have not managed to take the offering to the proverbial next level.

     

    Even Diya Aur Baati Hum, which would have made it to the list in another week, is a 2011 show. What exactly happened to Hindi GEC fiction content in 2012-14? Equally importantly, because large proportion of viewership of the top shows isdriven by habit and nostalgia, wouldn’t there be viewership attrition (if and) when these shows are off-air? We would need many more Ashokas to keep the fiction flag flying high.

     

    Meanwhile, even as new fiction struggles, non-fiction continues to make some impact. It may not feature in the Top 5 this week, but the latest season of India’s Got Talent is by far its best. There’s little to fault in this reality show that combines outstanding talent with great production, and a jury that should get full marks for their chemistry alone.

     

    I was also impressed by the first two episodes of The Voice India. The format is strikingly different from other singing shows, and the casting of the four coaches makes it a near-coup. I’m curious to see how the show shapes up, especially once the team selection process, the current differentiator, is over.

     

    Yes, there’s enough to talk about on the content front, once we shift focus from TAM vs. BARC.

     

  • Celebrities too applying self-censorship rather than going about signing up endorsements recklessly in what tends to become a rat race between them, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Celebrity Endorsement Pangs and the Kangana Solution

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    It’s been the week of the Maggi fiasco, the discussions around which have been laced with more humour than anger or fear. While the real issue, of whether Maggi noodles are safe to consume or not, is still being investigated, someone’s fertile imagination propped up an entirely fringe element in this controversy – that of celebrity endorsers being held liable if the brand they endorse breaches standards of safety or ethics.

     

    The topic is of immense interest to me, given that a part of our work involves understanding popularity and imagery of celebrities, and its impact on the brands they endorse. If I had to summarise five years of collective learning on the topic: The top 15-20 celebrities in the country bring genuine value to brands they endorse (subject to threshold creative executions), and a long-tail of dozens of other celebrities get endorsements, because these brands cannot afford the Top 20, but add no real value to their brands at all.

     

    On an average, a topline celebrity endorses about 4-5 brands at any point of time. That would mean that about 100 topline endorsements are being advertised at any time. Add to that co-branded associations with film, in-film placements, IPL and other sporting leagues-led endorsements, fringe celebrities, etc. and the count would cross 300.

     

    Much as I have tried to objectively understand how celebrities could be held accountable for the conduct of brands they endorse, I have made little headway. If Madhuri Dixit signs a contract with Nestle to endorse Maggi on defined commercial terms, and the contract explicitly states that the brand will be responsible if Maggi is found to be lying to its consumers (or some such articulation), it should be Madhuri Dixit who should be contemplating a lawsuit against Nestle for tarnishing her image.

     

    What did we expect her to do? Take Maggi noodle packets to Government labs herself and get them tested? If a product is on the shelf, it is deemed to have passed all the statutory tests of safety. And if it is indeed found to be unsafe later, the testing authorities (Food Safety &Standards Authority of India in this case) and the brand itself must be accountable in an investigation that may reveal huge lacuna in some of the testing processes, not to speak of the potential corruption that could exist.

     

    Celebrities have been soft targets for years now. While we should be critical of celebrities making insensitive comments in their attempts to show solidarity towards co-celebrities who were found to be on the wrong side of the law, we should be equally critical of (mostly) fringe groups that exploit celebrities as soft targets, sometimes for fame, sometimes out of jealousy, sometimes out of plain stupidity.

     

    The celebrity endorsement market has its own set of challenges. Things are far from perfect there. For me, the big story from this market over the last month was when Kangana Ranaut revealed that she has refused fairness cream endorsements and went on to explain her stand: “People tell me that I don’t know English but they should know what is acceptable and what is not. You are pale, you are dark, you are brown or you are black; there is nothing called fair. So stop using this humiliating word.”

     

    Much of the media industry advocates self-censorship, and celebrities too should be applying the same to their choice of brands, than going about signing up endorsements recklessly in what tends to become a rat race between them. We need many others like Ranaut to portray a more responsible and wholesome image of the celebrity fraternity. Much as that expectation is a “fair” one, lynching celebrities for just going about their work in a professional way is not cool either.

     

  • You may not be a big fan of the IPL. But you cannot deny the success story that it has proven to be, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: 2015: IPL’s Watershed Edition?

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    Since its start in 2008, the Indian Premier League (IPL) has managed to grab advertiser and media attention like no other property ever did, before or after IPL launched. Today, it may not seem to be such a big deal, but the success of IPL was never a given. But on the opening night in 2008, when Brendon McCullum got the league zooming at top speed, no one has doubted whether IPL would work. It’s always been a question of how big a success it would be.

     

    2008-10 were strong, settling-in years for IPL. Audiences lapped up the entertainment, and viewership saw steady consolidation. However, it was clear by the end of 2010 that creating franchises with solid fan base will be no child’s play. Only Chennai, Mumbai and Kolkata managed to create a strong base for themselves, while others like Delhi, Punjab, Rajasthan and even Bangalore struggled to build brands.

     

    As a result of this fragile franchise loyalty, IPL became an “entertainment dose” for most viewers, than an emotional rollercoaster. This, in turn, led to low involvement viewership. When the 2011 season started, at the back of a long and highly satisfying World Cup for India, the cracks showed. Viewership dropped, because the need for the entertainment dose was not felt after the World Cup win, and the emotional benefits were missing anyway.

     

    2012-14 were difficult years as well. Viewership was stagnant to declining, depending on whether you consider the newly-introduced LC1 markets in the mix or not. Spot fixing controversies plagued the league’s credibility in the media in particular, and the cricket itself was, at best, semi-competitive.

     

    When the 2015 season started, again at the back of a long World Cup, there were question marks on how well the IPL will perform. But what we have seen this season may well be the turnaround story in IPL’s short history.

     

    To begin with, viewership has increased by a significant notch. Even as the industry gets used to a new currency, there are enough data points, including some run by us, that suggest this has been the best season since 2010 in terms of viewership and engagement levels.

     

    A series of close games have contributed to this success in no small measure. But that’s the cricket part that, unlike what some may like us to believe, is beyond the stakeholders’ control. The part that has been controlled well is the stability of team compositions, which has been a major concern in the past. Key players have now built strong associations with their franchises, and viewers know what to expect from each game, as a result. Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata still remain big draws, but with enough star-power packed in, Bangalore has managed to pull in a sizeable viewer base too.

     

    Equally importantly, this has been a clean season, with no controversies on or off the field. The focus has been more on the cricket and cricketing entertainment, than on the frills that tend to spice up IPL on the face of it, but have damaged its core from within in the past.

     

    You may not be a big fan of the IPL. But you cannot deny the success story that it has proven to be, and the way it has impacted two ends of its stakeholders – the cricket community (players and boards), in whose life IPL is a very significant factor, and television viewers, who continue to be entertained year after year, even as mainstream television entertainment continues to test their patience.

     

    So, more power to IPL. May the two remaining games, tonight and this Sunday, cap off its best season so far.

     

     

     

  • It's been a breakthrough that we have waited many long years for as Priyanka Chopra plays the lead in the ABC Network's Quantico, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Priyanka Chopra: India’s Breakthrough Girl

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    It’s been a breakthrough that we have waited many long years for. ABC network commissioned Quantico, the new drama series starring Priyanka Chopra in the lead, last week. Our mainstream media, including the entertainment media, largely ignored the ‘news’. It was perhaps understood as another Indian actor taking up another bit role in a US production, in her desperation to go global.

     

    But when the trailer and the poster were released mid-week, the degree of Priyanka Chopra’s achievement was visible in full measure. Playing the half Indian-half Caucasian Alex Parrish, Chopra was at the centerstage of the promotional material, which unambiguously pitches her as the lead protagonist of the show.

     

    Though the news story got momentum after the trailer, I’m not sure if its true significance has been understood. For the last four decades, perhaps more, we have craved for representation in the Hollywood market. Every little ‘achievement’ has been celebrated, be it Amrish Puri’s Molaram in the Indiana Jones film, or Vijay Amritraj’s two-bit role in Octopussy.

     

    We pretend to own Slumdog Millionaire as if we produced it. We can make a big deal out of our leading ladies visiting Cannes. The Indian media would pick up any story that pitches an Indian celebrity on the global stage. Even Ali Fazal’s blink-and-miss in Furious 7 got its share of coverage.

     

    But in all these years, there have been very few real achievements. Indian actors have been cast in films like Gandhi or Slumdog Millionnaire because the nature of those roles demanded that Indian actors be cast in them. (Even there, Bin Kingsley was preferred over Naseeruddin Shah!). There have been some individual accomplishments such as those by Anil Kapoor, Irrfan and Nimrat Kaur, but nothing as significant as Priyanka Chopra’s latest victory. After a singing debut that can, at best, be described as a semi-successful experiment, she’s bagged something any Indian actor would be willing to give up the 200 crore blockbuster for.

     

    If Quantico succeeds, it would be an added bonus. But even if it doesn’t, the floodgates may have opened in no uncertain way. Bagging prominent parts in Hollywood is as much about talent as it is about having the right agency representation. Chopra’s breakthrough may encourage many others to aggressively look at how they represented and positioned globally.

     

    The media response over the last three days has been on expected lines. There has been basic news coverage headlined around Chopra, some troll pieces on her accent in the trailer, and then, the focus moved to her white Zac Posen dress at the Quantico event two days ago.

     

    When the series goes on-air, you can be sure that Chopra will have to face her share of brickbats from the social media and the Indian press. But none of that will take anything away from her spectacular achievement at the global stage. An achievement we must celebrate whole-heartedly.

     

    PS: On a related note, Quantico can be a massive boost for the English Entertainment category on the Indian television, which so far continues to languish as a super niche cousin of the English Movies category.

     

  • There is no such entity as "the Indian media". It is a mere collection of individual businesses, engaged in cut-throat competition, often taking jibes at each other, through promos and readership claims and counter-claim ads, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Salman Verdict: If GECs won’t entertain you, News Channels will

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    Wednesday was a day of high drama for news television. It was the day of verdict in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case. Thirteen long years after the incident in question happened, it was finally the Judgement Day.

     

    No news channel worth its weight in the business was going to squander this delicious opportunity. Most promoted their plans of a day-long, non-stop coverage. It was much like Election Results Day – those rare occasions when a news channel actually knows well in advance that a particular day is going to be a day of big news.

     

    As the day unfolded, channels realised they were getting even more than what they bargained for. First the conviction, then the sentence and then the bail, it all happened within six activity-packed hours. As I write this on Friday morning, another chapter in this dramatic book could be written later today.

     

    Our news channels have mastered the art of ‘non-stop’ coverage even when there is no content to speak of, in real terms. Cameras are not allowed inside the courtroom, so all reporting was based on accounts of those inside. There were sizeable time gaps during the day, when nothing much happened, but news channels kept themselves busy by showing the ‘excitement’ outside Galaxy Apartments, trailing Salman’s car and speaking to anyone who cared to come on record. And then of course, there were tweets to fill in the time that was still left.

     

    By the nature of it, this story has essentially no inherent longevity. It could be forgotten in less than a week. Its importance lies in the moment in which the story is unfolding, and news channels are savvy enough to know that. Not to say that print and online media is too far behind. I have received almost a dozen calls over the last two days requesting for a quote on the impact of the verdict on the film business. Most such calls start with roughly the same sentence (no pun intended): Everything that could be written has already been written, but I still have to do a story on it.

     

    In a fortnight in which it came under attack for its conduct in Nepal, the Indian media proved (yet again) that it does not care much about its reputation. And certainly not when it is out to further its business interests (read viewership or readership).

     

    And why blame the media for it? After all, there is no such entity as “the Indian media”. It is a mere collection of individual businesses, engaged in cut-throat competition, often taking jibes at each other, through promos and readership claims and counter-claim ads.

     

    I, for one, am not complaining. We are in an era where weekdays entertainment television is increasingly failing to offer any real entertainment value at all. If news channels have to pitch in to fill the gap, so be it.

     

    PS: I’d doubt if Salman Khan would host this year’s Bigg Boss, even if he’s out on bail, in the event of the hearing on his appeal dragging over the next couple of years. That, to me, will be the most significant impact of this verdict on mass entertainment.

     

  • After a two-year long trailer, the film has been released, but it will reveal itself reel by reel, scene by scene, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: BARC Is Here: New Ratings, A New Era!

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    Finally, the first BARC ratings were released yesterday. Ongoing debate, both reasonable and fallacious, around the credibility of the ratings system, that lasted over a decade can be set aside. We finally have a “solution” in sight. Just that BARC will have to earn its way into becoming that solution.

     

    Evidently, what was released yesterday was the first stage of reporting that BARC would eventually deliver. To begin with, it is household data, not individual data. I don’t remember seeing any peoplemeters-based household data in India over the last 15 years. So we definitely have a new measure to keep us statistically occupied, till BARC shifts to individual data. If they continue to report both individual and household data in the long run, we can be in the most interesting viewership analysis that you could potentially have.

     

    The coverage of urban LC1 and rural markets will be the next stage, which should hopefully be not too far away. And then, of course, is the big promise of increasing the sample to 50,000 over the next three years, a task of monumental proportions, the operational complexity of which is ill-understood by many, including many in the television industry and certainly many in the I&B ministry.

     

    Comparisons to TAM are bound to happen, though they are highly inappropriate, given that so much has changed, right from the market composition to the change from SEC to NCCS to the change from individual to household reporting in this first round. Yet, the big GEC headline that was doing the rounds in the industry last evening was ‘Life OK beats Zee TV to take the no. 3 spot’. Sometimes, the diagnostics are lost in the pursuit of headlines.

     

    I also saw BARC “on-air” last night. Never to skip an opportunity, Arnab Goswami had a promotional video airing in prime time, where he quoted the first BARC ratings freely, stressing on the wide gap between Times Now and “other small English news channels.” The promo ends with “Times Now Welcomes BARC”.

     

    Though a standalone, single-channel promo, it says a lot about how the data could be received by broadcasters in general. You can expect to see a flurry of e-mailers and one-on-one client communication by channels that have done well in these first ratings. And there are bound to voices of dissent from those who haven’t, though I suspect those voices will be more like murmurs, given the whole-hearted IBF backing to BARC.

     

    TAM, meanwhile, has been portraying the image of a battered soldier who refuses to surrender. It should be worthwhile seeing what they come up with. Clearly, we are not in for a two-currency system. So, it would have to an offering that’s distinctive from the BARC repertoire. We shall know, with time.

     

    From before-BARC to after-BARC, an era may have changed yesterday. Be prepared for an eventful 2015, where talk about ratings will dominate all talks about content and brands in the television space (so what’s new, some may say). After a two-year long trailer, the film has been released, but it will reveal itself reel by reel, scene by scene. Grab your popcorn!

     

  • Replicating existing success stories through variants (called 'formula' in our industry) is fine to a point, but when that becomes the only way of working, you are in for long-term trouble, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Wake up to a World beyond Formulaic Entertainment

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    We are 12 weeks down in 2015, and it’s not been the most action-packed year on the entertainment business front. If you discount the Cricket World Cup, which just happened to be scheduled in this period, and the cautious excitement around BARC, there’s little that the TV industry has to show at the end of the first one-thirds of 2015.

     

    &TV’s launch has been one of the highlight events, but the channel has subsequently stabilised around its launch numbers, now waiting for the next push that could take it into the big league. There have been the regular show launches on Hindi GECs, and some of them have emerged as financially-sound propositions for their channels with above-par ratings, but none of them have made an impact that could fundamentally change the nature of programming in the category.

     

    Ironically, the most exciting programming news of the year so far was around foreign content. HBO brought Game Of Thrones Season 5 to India at the same time as the rest of the world. Despite catering to a niche, it was a move big enough to be taken note of.

     

    But look for other such moves and you would struggle to find much in these four months. The news, the regional, the movie and the kids genres continue to dish out their regular fare. No ideas have been powerful enough to shine through and make an impact.

     

    Star’s immensely successful launch of the Hotstar app is perhaps the biggest television success story of 2015 so far. But if content innovation goes missing, no platform would help over time.

     

    The story is not very different on the Bollywood front. In fact, it’s worse by a margin. Four months down, no Hindi film has crossed the 100 crore mark, which was being seen as ‘too easy’ till a year ago. The only film in line to achieve that benchmark is a foreign film, Furious 7, which has opened and sustained better than any Hindi film this year. And with the next Avengers movie lined up for April 24, we will soon have Hollywood taking the top two spots, while Hindi releases struggle to stay afloat in what is turning out to be the worst period for the industry in about a decade.

     

    At the heart of all these symptoms is the problem of not innovating enough. Replicating existing success stories through variants (called ‘formula’ in our industry) is fine to a point, but when that becomes the only way of working, you are in for long-term trouble.

     

    The audience taste, and exposure to content online and worldwide, is evolving faster than ever before. So while mainline channels struggle to innovate, we have TVF’s Permanent Roommates clocking more than a million views per episode. Before we know it, another couple of online ideas work and we could be talking of a potential dent in television viewership that’s visible on the left side of the decimal point.

     

    Wake up, people. Show us something new, something that stands out as original and exciting, something that truly breaks the clutter, as you like to say.

     

  • Shailesh Kapoor lists five expectations from BARC for it to emerge as not just India's unanimous TV currency, but also an industry favourite for years to come

    Shailesh Kapoor: Expectations from BARC on the Eve of its Debut

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    Finally, it’s happening. After two exciting years that were forever pregnant with possibilities, the first BARC (Broadcast Audience Research Council) ratings will be out later this month. While the original announcement on formation of BARC dates back to 2008, the lawsuit NDTV filed against TAM in 2012 was perhaps the momentum trigger, whose results we will begin to experience soon.

     

    So far, broadcasters, who are stakeholders in BARC via IBF, have been unanimous that BARC ratings should be the only operating TV currency in India in the future. We have seen with the new IRS in 2013 that things can take an ugly turn when the actual data is out, but chances of that happening in TV ratings is significantly lower, because of the nature of the industry and broadcasters’ wholehearted endorsement of BARC thus far.

     

    Yet, a lot will be expected from BARC once the ratings begin to roll out. Here are five of my expectations (in no particular order) from BARC for it to emerge as not just India’s unanimous TV currency, but also an industry favourite for years to come.

     

    1. Don’t let the pressure get to you: There are bound to high-pressure situations once ratings roll out. Broadcasters who are at the wrong end of the proverbial stick are bound to create stress in your lives, demanding explanations. There are bound to be comparisons to the TAM ratings, however unwarranted they may be statistically. Just take firm stands in such situations, and the rules of engagement will be set for the future.

     

    2. Stick to data reporting, don’t offer advisory services: Stick to reporting and do not offer advisory services at any time. The moment you begin to guide channels on what they can do to increase their viewership (TAM has done that for a while through S Group), you are essentially losing your status of a data reporter operating at an arm’s length. It is much like a critic who hobnobs with the studios during the week and then reviews their films on the Friday that follows.

     

    3. Offer an ‘elite audience’ service soon: The area of measuring the ‘elite audience’, the small fraction of wealthy India that many premium products target, remains an unfinished agenda. It may not be on your agenda any time soon, but do keep it on the task list. There is a large piece of the ad revenue pie that the television industry is potentially losing to print because TV ratings do not have meaningful measurement in this audience segment.

     

    4. Price and package innovatively: Remember, there are not just broadcasters and media agencies, but many other types of firms who would be served well with your data. This includes content producers, insights firms, digital agencies, film studios, etc. Be innovative in pricing, so that affordability is ensured without dilution of value. Get your data into the bloodstream of the media industry, not just in the broadcaster and planning world.

     

    5. Open up data bureaus soon, very soon: Do not delay the “licensing” (is there a better word?) of data to approved data bureaus, who can create their own products around the data, offering them as standalone services to the relevant target audience, e.g. a category of channels or advertisers. In the digital world today, third-party ideas that build on your data can be game-changers. The possibilities can be endless. Just open the gates!