ITV

Tag: Kantar

  • WPP welcomes lower court dismissal of NDTV law suit

    MUMBAI: Global media communications conglomerate WPP has issued a statement welcoming the lower court of New York’s decision to dismiss the law suit filed by Indian news broadcaster New Delhi Television Ltd (NDTV).

    On 4 March, the New York court ruled in favour of dismissing the case lodged by NDTV against WPP, Kantar and Neilsen regarding corruption in the television ratings system in India by Television Audience Measurement (TAM).

    WPP’s statement reads –

    “As previously noted, NDTV‘s case was dismissed 4 March 2013 by the court on jurisdiction (“forum non conveniens”) grounds, on the basis that there were “minimal contacts” with New York.

    “Further, the court did in fact address the causes of action raised by NDTV. According to a transcript of the oral argument and the decision rendered by the Court, Judge Sherwood stated that if he were to look at the various claims he would dismiss those claims as well.

    “The Court could go on and look at the claims aimed at dismissing the individual causes of action. In the interests of time I am not going to do that. Although, I will tell you that were I to go through them all I would dismiss those claims, as well[…] I could go on and talk about the other causes of action for fraud and breach of contract and so on […] And were I to go through those The Court would dismiss those, as well.

    WPP is pleased with the Court‘s decision and welcomes the complete dismissal of this ill-founded and inappropriate law suit. WPP is confident that if NDTV elects to appeal this decision in New York, the judge’s well-reasoned decision will be affirmed.”

  • TNS appoints Richard Ingleton as global CEO

    MUMBAI: TNS has appointed Ernst and Young partner Richard Ingleton as its new CEO. He will be joining on 1 July and will replace Eric Salama who held the combined role as Kantar CEO.

    Ingleton has led the global customer practice at E&Y for the past five years and the global marketing effectiveness practice at Accenture prior to that. He has also held roles at Virgin and Tata.

    Salama said: “I’m thrilled that Richard is joining. I knew he was the right person for us from our very first meeting. He has had tremendous impact with clients, built a strong team and grown the practice globally and has generated tremendous loyalty. I have no doubt that our people and clients will benefit from his leadership.”

    Ingleton said, “Over the past few years my clients have shown more and more interest in the value that comes from insight, research and big data. TNS is fantastically well-placed to do something special in this space – and that’s why I’m so keen to join.”

  • New York court wants TV ratings case to move to India; NDTV to appeal against verdict

    MUMBAI: The lower court in New York, which was hearing arguments on whether the US or India is the appropriate forum for the case that New Delhi Television Ltd (NDTV) had filed against Nielsen and Kantar over TV ratings manipulation, has ruled that India would be a more convenient forum than the US.

    The Indian news broadcaster has decided to appeal against this verdict. NDTV said that the lower court‘s decision is based on “several misconceptions, legal and factual errors”, and “this would be outlined in the appeal.”

    NDTV said, “The New York lower court did not go into the merits of the case on corruption in the Nielsen Process as used by Nielsen and Kantar through TAM, (Nielsen and Kantar are the owners of TAM). The court merely looked at where the location of the case should be heard. NDTV firmly believes it must be heard in New York and we will pursue this on appeal in New York.”

  • NDTV argues for hearing of its petition in New York

    MUMBAI: New Delhi Television Ltd (NDTV) has defended its decision to file a case against television ratings providers Nielsen and Kantar in New York as it involves the misuse, manipulation, and corruption of the Nielsen Process, which originates and is controlled in the US.

    In its reply to pleas for dismissal of its petition in the New York Supreme Court on grounds of jurisdiction, the Indian news broadcaster has argued that its case against the TAM owners should not be dismissed under the doctrine of forum non conveniens because NDTV has chosen to sue these Defendants in Nielsen‘s home forum in New York.

    According NDTV, the defendants mis-characterise this case as a dispute between foreign citizens, arguing that the “real parties in interest” are all Indian residents. “Defendants are wrong. NDTV specifically chose to litigate in New York because it is the Nielsen Defendants‘ home and where the Nielsen Process is controlled. Choice of a defendant‘s home forum is an important factor to be considered,” NDTV said.

    The company said that the defendants‘ argument is based on the false premise that “the gravamen (grievance) of this lawsuit is about the subscription that NDTV purchased from TAM.” NDTV‘s contractual relationship with TAM consists of simple sales order forms through which NDTV purchases TAM data reports.

    NDTV stresses that the claims are not about late payments or the failure to deliver purchased reports. “The claims are about Defendants‘ negligence, promises, acts and omissions relating to the dissemination of the corrupted, manipulated data in the marketplace, regardless of whether NDTV purchases it or not.Advertisers rely on that data, not NDTV. NDTV simply buys it to monitor the information that advertisers receive, whether corrupt or not.”

    Also, the defendants have asserted the stunning proposition that this Action has “no nexus” to New York. NDTV said that the amended complaint, however, is premised on the misuse, manipulation, and corruption of the Nielsen Process, which Defendants concede is controlled in New York. Consequentially, numerous acts at the center of this lawsuit occurred in New York. Defendants‘ 2012 investigation was run by Nielsen in New York.

    Nielsen conducted conference calls in New York. It briefed management in New York. And Nielsen seized key evidence; brought it to the United States; and hired third parties to analyse it. That seizure simultaneously demonstrates Nielsen‘s control and the New York nexus.

    Also, the Nielsen Defendants licensed and provided the Nielsen Process to TAM from New York. Because TAM pays the Nielsen Defendants in New York for use of the Nielsen Process, the Nielsen Defendants receive funds in New York that directly result from their own negligence, fraud, and failure to honor binding promises.

    Emails and other communications regarding the misuse of the Nielsen Process were exchanged between NDTV and representatives of the Nielsen Defendants in New York. For the record, on January 31, 2012, Nielsen‘s Farshad Family, who represents himself as based in New York, wrote to NDTV‘s Vikram Chandra to schedule an â€?interim progress review; On February 29, 2012, Nielsen‘s Farshad Family emailed NDTV‘s I.P. Bajpai and Vikram Chandra to set up a meeting where Nielsen would explain the result of its internal investigation. Similarly, emails and other communications regarding the Investigation were exchanged between the Kantar Group‘s executives “ including Kantar Group CEO Eric Salama and the Nielsen Defendants in New York.

    NDTV said that the defendants do not deny that these acts occurred in New York. Instead, they argue that certain meetings between their representatives and NDTV occurred in India.

    Defendants argue that the pertinent documents and witness are almost entirely in India, such that litigating in New York would result in significant burden. However, NDTV emphasises that while some witnesses and evidence are located in India and the United Kingdom, the overwhelming majority of documents reside in the United States (likely New York) because this case concerns the control of the Nielsen Process and Defendants‘ U.S.-based investigation.

    NDTV is not seeking to prove the underlying acts of TAM, but rather that Defendants intervened in this matter; conducted an investigation; made promises to NDTV; and then failed to live up to those promises, while continuing to profit nonetheless.

    Nielsen argues that there are at least 27 witnesses who “appear to live in India.” According to NDTV, Nielsen ignores that at least thirteen of these witnesses are current or former employees of NDTV, which has chosen to bring this action in New York. “An additional nine witnesses are employees of Defendants or their affiliates, two of whom, Farshad Family and Eric Salama are incorrectly identified as living in India. Three witnesses are employed by TAM, and given Defendants‘ authority to seize TAM property and take it to the United States, these witnesses are presumably accessible to Defendants. As a result, there are (at most) two witnesses inaccessible to Defendants (neither of which is identified by name) in Nielsen‘s list of purported witnesses residing in India.”

    NDTV said that although the Kantar Defendants are not headquartered in New York, they are not headquartered in India either. “It is more convenient to bring witnesses from the United Kingdom to New York than to India. Any hardship to either plaintiffs or defendants in bringing potential witnesses into New York would be minimal since they are both large multinational corporations with ample resources. In fact, Martin Sorell, the CEO of WPP, uses New York as a “hub” and maintains a personal assistant in New York,” NDTV added.

    The Indian broadcasting company said that New York is highly sophisticated and fully capable of handling this matter. Moreover, New York has an interest in preventing its corporate citizens from conspiring with foreign companies like the WPP and the Kantar Group to perpetrate a massive fraud, the proceeds of which were received in New York.

    Defendants maintain that India has a strong interest and the ability to adjudicate NDTV‘s claims. India, however, as per NDTV is not an adequate forum for this case. The lack of an adequate forum outside of New York “is a most important factor to be considered” in a forum non conveniens analysis.

    Indian Courts do not permit pre-trial discovery from non-parties. Accordingly, if this case were in India, neither NDTV nor Defendants could obtain discovery from third-party witnesses like Nielsen‘s U.S.-based forensics experts. Also, the Indian judicial system is fraught with significant delays and NDTV seeks injunctive relief against the Nielsen Defendants.

    “This action should not be dismissed for forum non conveniens. NDTV chose to sue these Defendants in New York because it is where the Nielsen Defendants reside. The claims have a strong connection to New York, and relevant documents and witnesses are here. It is not clear that NDTV would be able to obtain effective relief against Defendants in India. Therefore, there is no adequate alternative forum. The case must remain in New York,” NDTV concluded.

  • NDTV firm on legal pursuit against TAM

    MUMBAI: The New York Supreme Court (NYSC) is expected to give out its verdict on whether the complaint filed by Indian broadcaster NDTV against TAM‘s owning companies – Nielsen, Kantar and WPP – holds jurisdiction in America by mid January.

    A source informed indiantelevision.com that NDTV plans to keep on with its efforts against the TV ratings agency TAM and its holding companies irrespective of the judgement. “If the New York Supreme Courts rules that the case has jurisdiction in America, they will continue with it there. If the Court says India is the right country for this litigation, the broadcaster will pursue the case in India anew,” the source said on condition of anonymity.

    The parties currently involved are filing their amended complaints and/or motions to dismiss NDTV‘s lawsuit according to the deadlines given by the NYSC in September this year.

    In a recent interview with liveMint, WPP CEO Martin Sorrell commented: “NDTV doesn’t have just their restaurant lawyers involved, they have others as well now. They have upgraded. There is no development. Not to my knowledge, no. NDTV seems to have gone quiet on it.”

    The source said that “there is no point in making noise over nothing till the issue of jurisdiction is settled.”

    On the matter of lawyers, the industry insider explained that there is always a team of lawyers involved in such cases. While a certain set of lawyers worked on the preliminary complaints, when it is time for discussion and arguing in front of the judge another set of lawyers are called in. In essence it is as simple as saying, “Different roles to different lawyers.”

    NDTV has expanded its legal team on the case by getting on board law firm Pepper Hamilton which has handled legal matters for the Indian news broadcaster in the past as well.

    In October, NDTV informed the NYSC that it has dropped action without prejudice against Cavendish Square Holding B.V., J. Walter Thompson, IMRB International, a division of Hindustan Thompson Associates Private Limited, and Kantar Market Research Services Pvt. Ltd. which were named in the original document.

    Earlier this week, Prasar Bharti had approached the Competition Commission of India against India‘s lone TV ratings agency TAM insinuating anti-competitive practices. The pubcaster had filed the complaint against TAM on 16 November alleging that the ratings agency has been using its dominant position in audience measurement by excluding markets where Doordarshan channels have strong presence. The complaint was filed under section 4 of the Competition Act 2002, which pertains to abuse of dominant position by a market player.

  • Nielsen files for dismissal of NDTV lawsuit

    MUMBAI: Global ratings and research company Nielsen has filed a petition in the New York Supreme Court seeking dismissal of New Delhi Television’s (NDTV) lawsuit over corruption in television ratings system in India.

    Nielsen’s contention is that India, not New York, is the appropriate venue for the lawsuit. According to Nielsen, NYSC is the wrong court of law for the legal fight as NDTV receives its TV ratings data from Tam Media Research, a company that works in India.

    Earlier in August, WPP had filed a similar motion with the NYSC to dismiss NDTV’s lawsuit. NDTV had on 26 July filed its lawsuit accusing 31 entities, including TAM, Nielsen, Kantar and their officials, of knowingly allowing continuation of manipulation of television viewership data in favour of broadcasters willing to pay bribes to its officials or representatives.

    WPP owns half of TAM in India through its subsidiaries – Kantar and Cavendish, and the other half of TAM is owned by The Nielsen Company.

    In its petition, Nielsen has said that the dispute concerns the quality of a TV ratings data subscription service. “NDTV—a company headquartered in India—receives in India from TAM, another Indian company, pursuant to an agreement executed between the companies in India,” Nielsen said.

    Nielsen further argued that NDTV had been subscribing to the TAM ratings service since 1998, which it used for promoting its TV shows to advertisers in India. It also pointed out that while the Indian broadcaster claimed it had evidence that the ratings data was flawed, it sued Nielsen and the uninvolved subsidiaries eight years after that.

    “None of the four entities sued is a joint venturer in TAM or has ever executed an agreement with NDTV regarding TAM’s subscription service—in this Court, asserting a grab bag of irrational and defective claims apparently under New York state law. According to NDTV, these Nielsen companies should be held liable under contract and tort law based on meetings NDTV had with a few Nielsen representatives in 2012—in India—concerning NDTV’s allegations about TAM’s TV ratings data,” the petition said.

    Nielsen also argued in the dismissal plea that NDTV failed to name
    TAM, with whom it has a contract for the ratings services, as a party to the suit. “In the Amended Complaint, NDTV viciously attacks TAM’s reputation and seeks damages because TAM’s TV ratings data ‘are not reliable’ and ‘tainted by widespread fraud and corruption.’ TAM has a right to defend against such attacks, and NDTV should not be allowed to suppress that right by bringing a lawsuit in another country, where TAM has no contacts.”

    Nielsen also stated that NDTV’s lawsuit “blatantly ignores” the company with whom it has a contract.

    “Instead, NDTV attempts to transform a potential contract claim against TAM into tort and oral contract claims against the Nielsen defendants. Nothing in the law supports such a magic trick. Simply put, NDTV fails to allege a legal duty independent of a contract and fails to allege all of the elements needed to support each cause of action,” argued Nielsen.

  • Kantar launches new marketing tool

    Kantar launches new marketing tool

    MUMBAI: WPP’s Kantar Media TGI launched a new marketing tool called The Why Code. The new initiative provides insight into what drives consumer choices.

    The Why Code illuminates every stage of the consumer decision making journey from the most conscious triggers of decisions to fundamental subconscious values. It has taken Kantar Media’s syndicated consumer media and marketing survey specialists TGI two years to develop the tool,.

    The Why Code comprises a suite of tools based on four logical steps in the analysis of consumer motivations. It builds upon the wealth of consumer insight that exists within TGI, combining it with consumer psychology techniques. Its marketing applications are virtually unlimited, informing everything from exploratory research, brand positioning and product design, to targeting and communication.

    Kantar Media TGI UK & Western Europe head Richard Poustie said, “The media and marketing industries have never had so much behavioural data to hand. Vast quantities are produced every day, highlighting consumer actions. Whilst such data can quantify certain aspects of a campaign they cannot satisfactorily explain why a consumer acts in a certain way. The Why Code brings what marketers have sought for a long time, giving them the opportunity to genuinely influence the consumer decision process.”

  • WPP: NDTV lawyers probed status of settlement

    WPP: NDTV lawyers probed status of settlement

    Mumbai: WPP, the global marketing communications agency, is making its confrontation with NDTV over alleged corruption in TAM’s television ratings louder.

    The agency, in a late night statement on Monday, made further revelations to prove that NDTV was seeking a settlement rather than pursue a costly legal battle in the US.

    WPP, which owns half of TAM Media Research in India through subsidiaries, disclosed that on 21 August NDTV’s lawyers wrote to Kantar’s lawyers enquiring about the possibility of a settlement meeting.

    It said the precise working of the email from NDTV lawyers was: “…..please let us know what the current status is in relation to settlement possibilities and/or a meeting, which we believe is the subject of certain email communications between Eric Salama of Kantar and Vikram Chandra of NDTV.”

    Kantar is a wholly-owned subsidiary of WPP and is engaged in media research in several countries as TAM Media Research is in India. Nielsen, the other 50 per cent owner of TAM, too is a media research agency and is a rival of Kantar globally.

    WPP stressed that in addition to Vikram Chandra’s email attempting to initiate a settlement meeting, NDTV’s lawyers have also referred to the possibility of settlement discussions on other occasions.

    The email was sent by Chandra to Kantar cEO on 27 July 2012, a day after the lawsuit was filed in the Supreme Court of New York.

    Though WPP welcomed NDTV‘s statement that it has no desire to get into a prolonged trial by media, it claimed it has issued statements only in order to correct selective and misleading statements in the media.

    WPP has selectively leaked some information in their feud with NDTV since it first issued a statement on 22 August but says it would not resort to an exchange of media statements over the questions posed to the communications agency by NDTV.

    WPP has taken up the cudgels against NDTV, which has accused Nielsen, Kantar, TAM, WPP and its officials of knowingly turning a blind eye to corruption in TAM’s ratings system. The other defendants in the lawsuit have so far kept silent and have not reacted to the lawsuit.

    As for the lawsuit, It said: “We remain of the firm view that it has not been served, the claims in that lawsuit have no merit whatsoever, and that it has been issued in an entirely inappropriate jurisdiction. However, we will deal with those issues in the courts, at the appropriate time.”

  • NDTV-WPP spat gets ugly; NDTV reveals Kantar CEO’s email sought end to litigation

    MUMBAI: The NDTV-WPP spat took an ugly turn on Saturday. In an onslaught against WPP CEO Martin Sorrel’s tirade against NDTV for its lawsuit against TAM TV ratings, NDTV has disclosed that WPP-owned Kantar has, via an email on 8 August 2012, suggested the Indian news broadcaster bring an end to litigation.

    A fuming NDTV went on an offensive as Sorrel continued his tirade against the broadcaster saying WPP, its subsidiaries Kantar and TAM Media Research were being subjected to trial by the media at the behest of NDTV.

    WPP is a global communications agency and owns half of TAM Media Research in India through its subsidiaries, with the other half owned by The Nielsen Company. NDTV filed a lawsuit in the US on 31 July 2012 accusing Nielsen, Kantar, TAM and WPP of knowingly allowing manipulation of TV viewership ratings in favour of channels that are willing to provide bribes to its officials.

    NDTV has sought $810 million as compensation for the loss in revenues it has suffered over the years and $580 million in penalty for negligence by Nielsen and Kantar officials.

    NDTV, in a statement on Saturday, said it did not wish to make public the receipt of mail from Kantar CEO Eric Salama. The broadcaster said it was forced to do so after Sorrel was reported in a newspaper as saying that NDTV has asked for a settlement of the dispute.

    NDTV said the biggest accusation against Sir Martin‘s TAM rating system in India has come from Nielsen‘s own global head of security, Robert Messemer, not just from Indian broadcasters and NDTV.

    “Messemer, formerly of the FBI, in a meeting in Delhi on 11th April, in front of two dozen people (including the CEO of Kantar), called Sir Martin‘s TAM India operations the most corrupt in the world – and that he has been to many, many countries to fight fires for Nielsen. Sir Martin needs to check his facts with Messemer or would he perhaps threaten to sue him for defamation?”

    The following is the full text of NDTV’s statement that seek to point out the errors that Sorrell has committed:

    Sir Martin Sorrell knows better than all of us that the first rule of any PR campaign is never to get your facts wrong. Hence we can only conclude that Sir Martin Sorrell has been misled by his team into making several incorrect statements. Let us list some of the errors.

    But first, we request Sir Martin not to take India lightly. We request him to clean up his ratings operation in our country and to refrain from using his global PR clout to perpetuate corruption in his India ratings operation; to respect our country and the serious issues raised in our very real lawsuit (Sir Martin referring to it as “hypothetical” was bizarre) and take real steps to correct them. We, like all other Indian broadcasters, are happy to work together with Sir Martin to establish an honest, reliable and credible institution to measure ratings in India. This has not happened, despite repeated requests by us and promises made by Kantar and Nielsen.

    The first error: Sir Martin has alleged that NDTV‘s lawyers reached out to his lawyers to ask for a settlement. This is completely untrue. There was no such approach after the Complaint was filed and communicated. In fact, it was his own CEO, Eric Salama, the CEO of Kantar, a WPP company, who sent a confidential mail to NDTV on the 8th of August, suggesting a meeting if NDTV would “halt litigation”. A further mail exchange followed. NDTV has respected Mr Salama‘s confidentiality by not making this public till now- but Sir Martin would do well to check with his own senior executives before making baseless charges.

    The second error: The biggest accusation against Sir Martin‘s TAM rating system in India has come from Nielsen‘s own global head of security, Mr. Robert Messemer, not just from Indian broadcasters and NDTV. Mr. Messemer, formerly of the FBI, in a meeting in Delhi on 11th April, in front of two dozen people (including the CEO of Kantar), called Sir Martin‘s TAM India operations the most corrupt in the world — and he has been to many, many countries to fight fires for Nielsen. Sir Martin needs to check his facts with Mr. Messemer or would he perhaps threaten to sue him for defamation?

    The third error: Sir Martin seems to have finally discovered that this is not a “hypothetical” lawsuit. It is available on the website of the Supreme Court of New York for his team to read if Sir Martin is busy. Strangely, Sir Martin contradicts himself by now applying to the New York court for dismissal of the real lawsuit, using a plea based on technicalities of jurisdiction. Sir Martin and his lawyers (presumably) are not refuting any facts; they are merely using legalistic technical grounds to challenge NDTV. Our request is for Sir Martin and his team to argue the substantive factual merits of the case, and demonstrate a desire to stop the bribery and corruption.

    As an aside, Sir Martin must know that his sudden outbursts have done even more to prove that jurisdiction is indeed in the US and not in India, as Sir Martin has openly acknowledged how deeply involved he and thus Nielsen ( his partner) are, in Indian TAM viewership ratings operations.

    The fourth error: No amount of maliciously false and defamatory statements will work against our lawyers. Sir Martin‘s 10 billion pound global operations – for which we normally have great admiration – may indeed be able to hire the biggest and most famous legal names, but Sir Martin should know that the truth wins in the end – not lawyers. We leave it to our lawyers to respond to the allegations made against them.

    We may not have a 10 billion pound empire backing us, but WPP should realize that a court case is fought on the merits. We urge them to read the 194 page lawsuit, which contains indisputable facts, and respond to it on the factual merits, not with personal attacks.

    The fifth error: Sir Martin keeps referring to NDTV‘s low market cap (vs. his 10 billion pound). Size matters? We would like to point out that it is indeed near impossible for an honest Indian media company to function in the dishonest environment his company has helped create in India. If Sir Martin had a similar corrupt system in the UK or US, he wouldn‘t be where he is at the moment. Yes, if NDTV‘s true ratings were reflected as 62% (see attached evidence for this) rather than TAM‘s corrupted 25%, the impact on NDTV‘s revenues and market cap would be hugely significant. Sir Martin, or rather his team, knows that too. The details can be found in our (non-hypothetical) lawsuit.

    The sixth error: Sir Martin said “We will do everything to improve the system but not with a gun to our head” In fact, Sir Martin Sorrell was personally informed about all the problems with TAM ratings at a meeting at The Oberoi Hotel in Gurgaon in August 2011, in the presence of a large number of media journalists and eminent people. That was a year ago, and there was no “gun to the head”. Why was nothing done?

    Finally, we would like to thank Sir Martin for respecting NDTV‘s editorial position. We are a fiercely independent Indian news operation and proud to be a leader in India. Sir Martin Sorrel has appeared on many occasions on our channels, which clearly shows a mutual respect (and perhaps an indicator that he actually recognises that NDTV is larger than his TAM ratings suggest).

    NDTV has provided enough fodder for WPP to react offensively. Watch this space for more in what promises to be another bout of war of words!

    Also Read: The fight gets vengeful; WPP discloses Vikram Chandra‘s email