In this episode of AI With SanketSanket Upadhyay spoke to S Srinivasan, Editor-in-Chief of The Federalabout the controversy surrounding the government’s decision to halt television rating points (TRPs) amid the coverage of the Iran war, the rise of sensationalism in war reporting, and the growing pressures shaping both television and digital journalism.
“Stopping TRP ratings will not suddenly make television channels responsible,” said Srinivasan, arguing that the deeper crisis in television journalism cannot be corrected through a single government directive.
Srinivasan, a veteran journalist who has witnessed the evolution of Indian television news over decades, said the current crisis reflects a structural shift in the media ecosystem driven by commercial pressures and the race for ratings.
Media decline
According to Srinivasan, the state of television journalism today reflects a long period of decline.
“We are living in difficult times where a lot has happened to media,” he said. “Having seen the industry over the years, I must say with regret that it has been a constant downslide.”
Also read: How Asian economies are coping with energy crisis amid Iran war
The government’s decision to suspend TRP ratings has triggered a wider debate on the quality of news coverage and whether such interventions can reform the industry.
Srinivasan said that before analysing the policy decision, it is important to understand what TRPs are and how they came to dominate newsroom decisions.
What TRP means
Television Rating Points were originally designed as a quantitative tool to measure viewership patterns.
“It started as an analytical metric to measure how much content was being watched on different channels,” Srinivasan explained.
Also read: Iran war puts USD 11.8 bn worth of India’s farm exports at risk: GTRI
However, he argued that the metric gradually evolved into a powerful commercial driver that shapes editorial choices.
“What began as a measurement tool has now become a weapon in the hands of those who use it in very nefarious ways,” he said.
As ratings became closely tied to advertising revenue, editorial priorities increasingly shifted towards content that attracts attention rather than informs audiences.
Commercial pressure
According to Srinivasan, the commercial importance of TRP ratings has fundamentally changed newsroom culture.
“These numbers have become a measurement for determining the value of a television channel and how much revenue it can pull,” he said.
Editors, he noted, often believe that higher ratings will please management and generate more advertising income.
“That has distorted the whole way journalism functions,” he said.
The result has been a growing emphasis on spectacle rather than substance in television news programming.
Performance journalism
Srinivasan said the pressure to attract ratings has transformed television anchors into performers.
“TV news anchors have become gladiators who come on screen every evening and scream, shout and perform,” he said.
Prime-time debates frequently resemble theatrical shows rather than journalistic discussions, he added.
“If I had to describe it in one sentence, television news has become a theatre of the absurd.”
This shift, he argued, reflects a broader erosion of journalism’s traditional values of credibility and public service.
Audience factor
While criticising sensational journalism, Srinivasan also pointed out that audiences play a role in sustaining the trend.
“It is easy to blame journalists alone,” he said. “We must also ask who is feeding this animal.”
Some viewers continue to watch sensational content, which keeps ratings high and encourages channels to produce more of the same.
“To say viewers are completely innocent is also slightly distorted,” he said.
This dynamic has created what he described as a “circular ecosystem” where sensational content fuels ratings and ratings drive more sensational coverage.
Alternative model
Srinivasan recalled an experiment from his own career that demonstrated audiences’ appetite for responsible journalism.
About a decade and a half ago, he helped launch a Tamil news channel that prioritised social issues such as health and education rather than sensational stories.
“We avoided absurd stories like snakes getting married or supernatural claims,” he said.
Despite scepticism from some industry insiders, the channel quickly gained popularity in Tamil Nadu.
“It is disingenuous to think audiences are fools,” he said. “They do understand and appreciate good content.”
War coverage
The debate around TRPs has intensified because of criticism of sensational war coverage by several television channels.
Srinivasan said some broadcasts exaggerate developments to create a dramatic effect.
“It sometimes feels as if bombs are exploding everywhere,” he said.
He also pointed to the use of artificial intelligence-generated visuals, dramatic sound effects and background music to heighten the sense of spectacle.
“That becomes a deadly combination,” he said, warning that such coverage can cause unnecessary panic.
Public anxiety
Srinivasan said sensational reporting has real-world consequences for viewers.
He cited instances in Kerala where families reportedly became anxious after watching alarming television coverage related to conflicts abroad.
“People were worried about their relatives living in the Gulf,” he said.
Television, he added, remains a powerful mass medium, especially in a country where more people are turning towards screens rather than print.
“Every evening people want to know what is happening in the world and they want to see it with their own eyes.”
Government action
Despite acknowledging the problems with sensational coverage, Srinivasan questioned whether suspending TRP ratings would bring meaningful change.
“I do not think stopping TRP ratings will suddenly change behaviour,” he said.
The practices that dominate television news today have developed over many years, he argued.
“This has become a kind of muscle memory in television newsrooms,” he said.
Expecting such habits to disappear overnight because of a government directive is unrealistic, he added.
Regulation concerns
Srinivasan also expressed reservations about government involvement in regulating media ratings.
“In my view, the government has no business getting into this,” he said.
Instead, he argued that the responsibility to address sensationalism lies with the media industry itself.
“This has to be self-regulated by the media,” he said, suggesting that editors and journalist organisations must collectively discuss and correct the trend.
Government intervention in rating systems, he warned, could indirectly influence editorial content.
Digital challenges
The discussion also turned to the implications of the debate for digital journalism.
Srinivasan said digital media outlets operate under even greater financial pressure than television channels.
“Digital media is perhaps the toughest space to be in right now,” he said.
Unlike television networks, many digital organisations lack stable revenue streams and depend heavily on reader contributions or external technology platforms.
These platforms control much of the advertising revenue, leaving content creators with a limited share.
Race for eyeballs
Financial uncertainty in digital journalism can also push organisations towards sensational content.
“When revenue is uncertain, the temptation is to produce content that draws eyeballs,” Srinivasan said.
For journalists committed to balanced and responsible reporting, he added, the environment has become extremely challenging.
“It is a very difficult time for those who want to maintain balance and perform their duty with a straight face,” he said.
Asked about possible solutions, Srinivasan acknowledged that the industry is still searching for answers.
“In one sentence, I really do not have an answer,” he said.
(The content above has been transcribed from video using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.)
Comments are closed.