ITV

Category: IBF

  • IBF targets surrogate political ads

    NEW DELHI: Some surrogate political advertisements on various TV channels, including those in South Indian languages, may just go off the air from mid-day on Monday.
     
     
    Feeling that they are likely to get caught in between the crossfire of the government and the Election Commission, the broadcasters have decided to take their own initiative regarding political ads that are being put on air by front organizations of parties.

    According to information available with indiantelevision.com, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), apex body of broadcasting companies operating
    in India, are meeting on Monday morning here to discuss the issue of surrogate political ads and the controversy that it has generated.

    The IBF is likely to take a stand on the issue and would advocate restraint on the part of the members on this issue.

    Claiming that IBF would urge its members to “follow self-regulation”, a source in the organization said, “Before the government or the EC cracks down on channels, which may put a stop to some additional revenue that is likely to flow in from political parties, it is better that broadcasters
    screen political ads, surrogate or otherwise, to ensure no personal attacks are made and limits of decency are not crossed.”

    However, a final shape of this initiative would only emerge after the meeting where members would discuss various modalities. Some members who would not be able to make it to the Delhi meeting would be contacted over
    phone for their personal views on the issue.

    On a complaint filed by the Congress Party, the Election Commission on Saturday directed the government to revert with an action taken plan by Monday on some ads that are doing the rounds of TV channels and, which
    Congress feels, is an unjust, indecent and direct attack on its president, Sonia Gandhi.

    The government can direct TV channels to stop airing certain ads under the programming and advertising code of the Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act, 1995. But since the ad in question, which has upset the Congress, has been put out by an organization whose links could be traced back to some senior members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, the government finds itself in
    a bind.

  • IBF says ‘no’, govt. ‘can’t’, EC mum

    NEW DELHI: It has turned out to be a game of football with everybody concerned attempting to kick the ball out. Even as the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) in the afternoon took a stand on surrogate political ads, the government in the evening tried wriggling out of the situation saying it cannot take any action as rules don’t get attracted.
     
     

    The IBF today decided that its 24 member-broadcasters would not entertain any political ad, surrogate or otherwise, which makes a direct and personal attack on any political personality dead or living.

    The decision of the IBF has been conveyed to the election regulator, which might have to issue some directive in this regard as the information and broadcasting ministry said that “present provisions of Rule Seven of the Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act are not attracted in the matter in view” of
    an order of Andhra Pradesh high court recently.

    “The Commission is, therefore, requested to consider regulating these ads under the model code of conduct as these ads are clearly being aired in the context of the ensuing elections,” a communication from I&B ministry to the EC states.

    Though the ball seems to have been lobbed back into the EC’s court, the latter can take heart from the fact that broadcasters — may be egged on by certain section in the government —are going in for self-restraint. The decision of the IBF has also been conveyed to the Election Commission
    through a letter to the chief election commissioner TS Krishnamurthy.

    Talking to indiantelevision.com after the decision was taken, IBF’s secretary-general NP Nawani said, “The IBF has decided that with immediate effect, the member broadcasters would refrain from accepting advertisements from any society, trust, political party/ candidate, etc., which contain personal attack on leaders of any political party.”

    In case of political discussions, debates and speeches, the editorial control would have to be exercised by the participating leaders themselves, so that certain minimum levels of decency and decorum are maintained on the
    electronic media, the IBF has maintained.

    Asked by what time surrogate political ads, currently doing the rounds of some news channel, would be taken off the air, Nawani said that it would take some time for the channels to do that, but the member-broadcasters are “committed to do so.” He added, “Hopefully by tomorrow all such ads would
    not be seen on any channel.”

    When further quizzed what would the IBF do if some channel decides to play truant, especially a non-member like Jaya TV, Nawani was optimistic that the electronic medium would set exemplary standards in self-regulation.

    “In case, some body doesn’t follow the advisory, then the IBF board would decide on the future course of action,” Nawani said, adding that, however, in case of non-members like South Indian channel Jaya TV, the Foundation would not be able to do much.

    The decision of the IBF has been welcomed by the industry by and large. “Of course, there would be some loss of revenue, but the spirit of democracy demands that we, broadcasters, behave responsibly and don’t become party to
    slanging matches between politicians,” Zee Telefilms vice-chairman Jawahar Goel said.
    Victory… here I come – Prime Minister AB Vajpayee

    The surrogate ads in question, reportedly, have been released by non-governmental organizations having links to politicians. One such ad makes an attack on Congress chief Sonia Gandhi’s foreign origin and the other targets prime minister A B Vajpayee, where he is shown to be allegedly having acted as an informer for the British during pre-Independence days.

    The Election Commission, had on Saturday, reverted the issue of political advertisements on the electronic medium back to the information and broadcasting ministry, saying the law was adequate in dealing with the issue. While the EC had directed the government to revert with an action by today, the IBF has taken the lead in dealing with the issue on its own.
    Just you wait… – Congress leader Sonia Gandhi

    The EC stand had come to the fore after the Andhra Pradesh high court ruling last week, quashing the EC and the government’s stand on banning political ads on electronic media. The EC took up the issue of surrogate political advertisements after the Congress lodged a formal complaint with it, saying that some surrogate political ads made a direct attack on Sonia Gandhi.

     

    GOVERNMENT’S CLEVER PLOY

    It is interesting to note the stand that the I&B ministry has taken on the issue of political ads, in particular surrogate ones.

    A meeting of the advertising committee, set up by the ministry, took place today where the surrogate ads were discussed in the light whether they flout any provision of the programming and advertising code.

    While admitting that one such ad, casting aspersion on Vajpayee, on Aaj Tak “vitiates the level of political debate in the country,” the cleverly worded government missive states that since such ads were originally banned on TV, regulation norms have not been prescribed.

    “During its deliberations, the committee noted that the provisions of Rule Seven (of the CATV Act) related to ads for goods and services bring broadcast on the electronic media, as political advertisements were specifically prohibited under Rule 7(3). Due to the ban on political advertisements, no norms have been prescribed for regulating such ads.

    “On the other hand, the contents of the two ads viewed by the committee clearly have relevance to the electoral process. The only provision of relevance to these ads was contained in Rule 7 (3), the operation of which has been stayed by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh high court in an interim
    order on 23 March, 2004,” the government communication states, cleverly evading taking any responsibility.

    It has been further stated that under these circumstances, the committee has come to the conclusion that the present Rule 7 “are not attracted by the two ads” and the EC should take a final view on the matter.

    Now all eyes would be trained on EC for a directive from it. But can it override a court ruling? The last word is yet to come on the issue.

  • IBF to accredit ad agencies

    NEW DELHI: The Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), an apex body of broadcasting companies operating in India, has decided to go in for its own accreditation of advertising agencies, including those that are not members of the Triple As of I (Advertsisng Agencies Association of India).
     
     

    Explaining the rationale behind this decision, a source in the IBF said, “The accreditation process is akin to what the Indian Newspaper Society (INS) does to bring about more accountability and facilitate recovery of dues of members from clients. We are also planning a similar initiative.”

    The accreditation process is to start shortly and is expected to further bring down the level of cumulative outstanding against the IBF members.

    The sources added that for the accreditation of non-AAAI members, mainly comprising smaller agencies, would also bring about more interaction with such companies.

    When the IBF was formed over three and a half years back, the accumulated outstanding of members, including chronic defaulters, was almost to the tune of Rs 4 billion. This amount has over a period of time been reduced to approximately Rs 900 million.

    Though IBF has an internal panel monitoring surrogate advertising,
    surprisingly it is quiet on tobacco and chewing tobacco ads that have been flooding the satellite channels under various garbs like mouth fresheners.

    “The panel of advertising does not look at the issue of chewing tobacco ads,” the IBF source admitted, adding that ,anyway, soon the health ministry would come out with a notification that would put a ban on all such promotional activities.

  • IBF to discuss service tax issue this week

    NEW DELHI: The issue of service tax is once again rearing its head and the broadcasters feel that a tough line needs to be taken. The contentious, but unresolved issue, which has been dogging the media and advertising industry since 2002, would be discussed by the Indian Broadcasters’ Foundation (IBF) at a board meeting slated to be held later this week.
     
     

    According to sources in the broadcasting industry, if all the members of the IBF agree, then it is likely to be decided that those clients who are not including the eight per cent service tax in the release order would not be entertained and their ads would not be aired.

    It is also being contemplated that a provision for a separate entry for service tax be made on any business transaction paper that would enable broadcasters to collect the service tax from clients and forward it to the authorities concerned.

    However, taking such a tough stance would need a lot of willpower on the broadcast industry’s part as such “experiments” tried out earlier had fizzled out no sooner had they been kicked off.

    In September 2002, some top channels, including Star, Sony and Zee TV, had stopped airing ads of Hindustan Lever products as well as Colgate from the first of the month. Reason: these are the two biggest advertisers who were still not adding the then five per cent service tax (imposed by the government) in the final ad release order.

    But even at that time, not all broadcasters blacked out ads of “truant” companies. Looking at the present case scenario, Prasar Bharati, for example, is still undecided on what course of action to take where defaulters are concerned, This is in spite of having sent out a letter to all advertisers to this effect last week. Prasar Bharati has recently said that those advertisers who book bulk time on DD News would be exempt from service tax.

    Harking back to the situation in 2002, the boycott did not continue for long and soon most advertisers were back on TV channels. The pressures of revenue losses took their toll. Taking the case of HLL, its annual TV ad spend in 2002 was streets ahead of any other advertiser at Rs 1.5 billion. On Star alone that worked out to Rs 2 million every day then.

    Can the broadcasters bite the service tax bullet in 2004?

    Keep tuned in for more details later this week.

  • IBF sets norms on surrogate advertising

    NEW DELHI: The Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), an apex body of broadcasting companies operating in India, is of the opinion that all advertisers of brand extension products (especially where it concerned alcohol companies) should be asked to provide a certificate to the broadcasters stating that the products were genuine and were being sold through established marketing networks in India in sufficient quantities to warrant advertising on television.

    The IBF sub-committee, which went into the issue of surrogate ads related to tobacco and alcohol, also felt that any real product or services (non alcoholic/non tobacco), which have wide distribution in the market through established distribution networks “should not be denied speech even if the product or service shares a brand name with a liquor or tobacco product or a company.”

    Still, in the same vein, the IBF has said that where there is a TV ad which mentions a liquor/tobacco brand or a company without promoting a real (non-alcoholic, non-tobacco) product or service, it will be deemed to be “indirect advertising for liquor/tobacco and will not be permissible.”

    In a document that has been prepared by the IBF to act as a guideline, as part of self-regulation where advertisements regarding alcoholic beverages were concerned, it has been stated that the “Confederation of Indian Alcoholic Beverages Companies (CIABC) has already drafted a certificate and given it to all its members.”

    The IBF has also decided that the organisation’s secretariat would study the self-regulatory practises relating to tobacco around the world, specifically the self-regulatory code of the American tobacco giant Phillip Morris.

    The sub-committee, under Zee group broadcasting chief executive Sandeep Goyal, which went into the issue of surrogate advertising relating to alcohol, has also decided that there was no justification available for radico Khaitan 8 pm Apple juice ad and it should not be carried. An official IBF document, a copy of which is available with indiantelevision.com, also states, “It was also decided that the ACP Black Apple juice ad (where the punchline is “kuch bhi ho sakta hai”) was in bad taste and should not be broadcast by the members of the IBF in its current form.”

    However, indiantelevision.com learns that the ad concerned is still being aired on some channels where cricket and fashion rule supreme.

    The members of the IBF have also suggested that every time there is a rejection of any ad by a member broadcaster of the IBF, the secretariat should be informed about the development.

    “This will assist in coordinating the activities relating to surrogate advertising or brand extension. Similarly the ads that are selected for broadcasting relating to brand extension should be listed and the IBF secretariat should be informed of the same,” the IBF paper states.

    The IBF’s moves come in the wake of show cause notices which had been issued by a government panel, headed by Anil Baijal, additional secretary (broadcasting) in the information and broadcasting ministry, to several TV channels over the past two months over surrogate liquor and tobacco ads.