Author: Sahil Shukla, Chandigarh University
To The Point
When the Mumbai Police announced in October 2020 that they had discovered a racket involving the fraudulent inflation of viewership ratings, in response to a complaint from Hansa Research Group (a vendor hired by BARC for meter installation and data collection), the TRP manipulation scam came to light. Bribing the homes where people meters were installed was the main tactic the police claimed was used. These households were allegedly paid to keep particular channels tuned in for extended periods of time, artificially increasing their TRPs. These households were frequently from economically disadvantaged groups and occasionally included people who did not even understand the language of the particular channels. Fakt Marathi and Box Cinema, the original First Information Report (FIR), and Republic TV, which is owned by ARG Outlier Media, were both under investigation. The police claimed that these channels could bargain for significantly higher advertising revenues by inflating their TRPs, thus misleading advertisers who depended on these ratings for their marketing expenditures.
Use Of Legal Jargon
Numerous criminal offenses under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), as well as other pertinent statutes, were implicated in the TRP manipulation scam. The following were frequently the main accusations made by the investigating agencies:
• A key charge in these complex scams is criminal conspiracy (Section 120B IPC), which alleges that two or more people conspired to commit an illegal act or carry out a lawful act through unlawful means. The coordinated attempt to manipulate data and bribe households would be considered criminal conspiracy.
• Cheating (Section 420 IPC): This section addresses deceitfully persuading someone to deliver property, create, modify, or destroy all or a portion of a valuable security, or anything that has been signed or sealed and has the potential to be turned into a valuable security. The alleged victims of this cheating were advertisers who purchased ad slots using manipulated TRPs.
• Breach of Trust (Section 406/409 IPC): Although this is less directly related to the channels, anyone who worked for BARC or one of its suppliers and may have participated in the manipulation may be charged with criminal breach of trust, particularly if they were given access to private information and misused it.
• Sections 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC, which deal with forgery and forgery for the purpose of cheating, may be applied if any electronic data or documents were altered to reflect inflated TRPs.
The Investigations also brought into question the industry’s self-regulatory mechanisms and adherence to ethical standards and broadcasting regulations established by organizations such as the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB).
The Proof
The Mumbai Police’s investigation relied on several key pieces of evidence and allegations:
• The Internal Report and Complaint of Hansa Research: According to reports, the scam was discovered after Hansa Research Group’s internal audit revealed questionable behavior by a few of its former workers. The FIR was based on the complaint that Hansa Research had filed.
• Panel Household Statements: It is alleged that many households with installed people meters admitted to accepting cash payments from agents to maintain the tuning of particular channels. These eyewitness accounts were essential in supporting the allegations of bribery.
• Confessions of Accused People: A number of people were taken into custody by the police, including former employees of Hansa Research and people connected to the accused channels. According to reports, some of these arrested people confessed to the bribery scheme and the channels through which it was carried out. For example, Hansa Research’s former relationship manager, Vishal Bhandari, was arrested for allegedly pressuring households to watch Republic TV in exchange for money.
• Financial Trails: Examining the financial transactions associated with the purported bribes given to panel households and the increased advertising revenue that the channels received.
It is important to remember, though, that despite the Mumbai Police’s evidence, the accused channels and individuals continuously refuted the accusations, accusing the investigation of being a politically driven witch hunt. Specifically, Republic TV insisted that the evidence was fake and that it was the victim of malicious prosecution.
Abstract
The October 2020 revelation of the Television Rating Point (TRP) manipulation scam rocked the Indian broadcasting industry by revealing a murky underbelly of unethical practices meant to artificially inflate viewership numbers. The Mumbai Police and then the Enforcement Directorate (ED) were the main investigators of this purported fraud scheme, which implicated a number of television networks, including Republic TV, Fakt Marathi, and Box Cinema, in a coordinated attempt to manipulate TRPs. The controversy brought to light the significant effects of manipulated ratings on public trust in the media, advertising revenue, and content quality. This article offers a thorough examination of the scam, exploring its workings, the legal framework cited, the supporting documentation, significant case developments, and its wider implications for Indian broadcasting ethics.
Case Laws
Pleas to quashing FIRs, anticipatory bail applications, and challenges to the investigative process were the main legal disputes and judicial interventions brought on by the TRP scam.
• Arnab Goswami’s Arrest and Bail: The legal situation became even more complicated when Arnab Goswami was arrested in an abetment to suicide case during the TRP scam investigation. In a landmark decision on November 11, 2020, the Supreme Court of India denied Arnab Goswami temporary bail, highlighting the value of individual freedom and denouncing the Bombay High Court for allegedly failing to fulfill its constitutional obligation. This decision highlighted judicial scrutiny of police actions and the promptness with which personal liberty issues should be addressed, even though it did not directly address the merits of the TRP scam.
• Hansa Research’s Plea for CBI Transfer: The complainant, Hansa Research Group, petitioned the Bombay High Court to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), claiming that the Mumbai Police Crime Branch was coercing its staff into making false statements. This draws attention to the conflict between agencies and raises concerns regarding the investigation’s objectivity.
• ED’s Clean Chit to Republic TV (September 2022): A noteworthy event took place in September 2022 when the Enforcement Directorate allegedly gave Republic TV and R Bharat a “clean chit” with regard to the TRP manipulation allegations in its prosecution complaint (charge sheet). Panel households denied receiving funding to watch Republic TV or R Bharat, and the ED’s purported analysis of their raw data revealed that they were watching channels other than Republic TV. The case became more complicated and contentious as a result of the Mumbai Police and the ED coming to different conclusions. However, the ED kept looking into other alleged channels and people.
• Prosecution Withdrawal (March 2024): In The state government’s request to drop charges against Arnab Goswami and all other defendants in the TRP manipulation case was granted by the Mumbai Esplanade Metropolitan Magistrate Court in March 2024. No one, including advertisers, BARC, or TRAI, had come forward to claim they had been defrauded, according to the special public prosecutor. Without a final court ruling of guilt or innocence for many of the main accused, this essentially ended the Mumbai Police’s criminal case.
Conclusion
For the Indian broadcasting industry, the 2020 TRP manipulation scam marks a turning point. Even though the Mumbai Police launched a thorough investigation and produced what they deemed to be substantial evidence, such as witness statements and digital communications, the follow-up events—specifically, the Enforcement Directorate’s conflicting conclusions and the state government’s eventual decision to drop the criminal prosecution—have raised questions about the guilt of some of the high-profile defendants.
The scam unquestionably revealed systemic flaws In the TRP measurement mechanism and brought up serious ethical concerns regarding media practices, regardless of the ultimate legal outcomes for particular entities. It highlighted the tremendous pressure on media outlets to increase viewership for financial benefit, possibly at the expense of fair competition and journalistic integrity. Calls for increased transparency, more stringent regulatory oversight, and a reassessment of ethical standards in the broadcasting industry were sparked by the incident. The primary duty of news organizations to provide the public with accurate and objective information should never be subordinated to the pursuit of TRPs. The fraud acted as a clear reminder that media credibility is an inalienable asset; any attempt to manipulate viewership metrics damages public confidence, which in turn threatens the fundamental basis of a free and fair press.
FAQS
First, what is TRP?
Television Rating Point is referred to as TRP. The percentage of the target audience that watches a television program or channel at a specific time is a metric used to show how popular it is.
How are TRPs determined in India?
The Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) in India mainly uses “people meters” that are placed in a representative sample of homes to determine TRPs. These meters anonymously log the family members’ preferred channels and shows.
What was the 2020 TRP manipulation scam?
In order to keep their channels tuned in, some television networks, most notably Republic TV, Fakt Marathi, and Box Cinema, were accused of bribing households with installed people meters in order to fraudulently inflate their viewership ratings (TRPs).
Who looked into the TRP fraud?
The Mumbai Police started the initial investigation. In accordance with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) also carried out a parallel investigation.
Which TV networks were most frequently implicated in the fraud?
The primary channels that the Mumbai Police accused were Republic TV (as well as its Hindi counterpart, R Bharat), Fakt Marathi, and Box Cinema.
What was the Mumbai Police’s main piece of evidence?
The Hansa Research Group’s complaint, confessions from panel households acknowledging receiving bribes, the confessions of those who were arrested, and purported WhatsApp conversations between Arnab Goswami and former BARC CEO Partho Dasgupta were all used as evidence.
How can TRP manipulation be avoided in the future?
The measures include tightening penalties for manipulation, improving regulatory oversight by organizations like BARC and TRAI, boosting transparency in data collection, and fortifying the integrity of the people meter system. Additionally important are industry self-regulation and ethical broadcasting practices.
