Imagine watching your favourite television show a decade ago. Commercial breaks were an integral part of the viewing experience—moments when you either discovered an interesting TVC or instinctively reached for the remote to escape them. Today, that same advertising break sits within a much larger battle for attention, competing not just with another channel but also with other mediums.
The broadcasters have now been given permission to offer advertisers even more of that space. The government has removed the 12-minute-per-hour advertising cap—a rule that had been in place since 2006. The rationale is rooted in how dramatically the television ecosystem has changed.
Yet, the timing is curious. Recent TAM AdEx data shows TV ad volumes fell 7 per cent in January–July 2026, after a 9 per cent decline in the corresponding period last year.
The paradox is not simply that television now has more advertising inventory even as advertisers are buying less. It is that the very definition of valuable video real estate is evolving. The question that arises then is whether greater supply can create greater demand and enhance television’s value in an increasingly fragmented attention economy.
Where are advertisers putting their money?
More inventory may give television more to sell, but advertisers have more places to spend than ever before. The first piece of the puzzle then is to track the media wallet—has linear TV genuinely lost budget share?
Yasin Hamidani, Director, Media Care Brand Solutions, believes there has been a rebalancing, particularly as younger and urban audiences spend more time across digital video, OTT and social platforms. “But I wouldn’t call it an abandonment of television. TV still delivers mass reach efficiently for FMCG, automobiles and other large consumer categories. What has changed is that marketers are questioning whether every campaign needs television at the same scale and allocating budgets more selectively based on audience and objective,” he notes.
Swarali Halepeti, Senior Director - Strategy , dentsu India, echoes the view, highlighting, “We have seen a gradual rebalancing of media budgets away from linear TV, but I would not describe it as a loss of confidence in television. Media consumption itself has fragmented with viewers now moving fluidly across linear TV, CTV, social, short-form video and streaming, and these ecosystems are increasingly connected. This has changed viewing patterns as well as the way advertisers think about video investment.”
While television continues to offer scale, consumers are increasingly dividing their viewing time across multiple platforms. Digital strategy advisor Sanjay Trehan states that the shift is not surprising. “While linear TV may theoretically still have reach, it is on a declining curve. Data suggests that its viewership is on a decline. New challengers like digital platforms and CTV have taken away significant eyeballs, since they provide an immersive and interactive TV viewing experience, and do not get constrained by infrastructure and bandwidth.”
Business and brand strategy expert Harish Bijoor, who is the founder of Harish Bijoor Consults Inc., is more blunt in framing this shift. “Media is eating media. By that, I mean new media is eating old media, which is TV, print, radio and outdoor. There is certainly a decline in viewership for mass media.”
He further reveals, “In terms of media budgets, some of the big companies have moved as much as 45 per cent of their global spends onto digital, with Instagram in the lead.”
Experts believe that digital mediums provide a level of precision, flexibility and accountability that linear television cannot easily replicate. The data-based targeting and personalisation, and measurable outcomes are some key advantages. “The new genre of mediums is ‘one is to one’ as opposed to ‘one is to all’, which is represented by mass media like TV,” Bijoor states.
Yet, the shift in viewing habits has not diminished television’s role entirely. For several brands, TV continues to offer broad reach, strong regional penetration and the ability to build salience around major content properties.
Nitin Malhotra, Chief Marketing Officer, Livpure backs this. “Television remains a strategically important part of our media mix, giving us the scale to reach audiences across the country in a way no other medium replicates, particularly across Tier-II and Tier-III markets that are central to our growth journey. Our recent 360-degree campaign for Allura Premia Ultra with ClearDrop Technology was amplified through television for exactly this reason, to build mass awareness and recall. Digital, meanwhile, gives us precision and context, allowing us to engage consumers more closely in the moments that shape their decisions. As a brand committed to democratising access to safe and advanced drinking water, we see the two as complementary rather than competing,” he says.
The takeaway is that television’s appeal continues to rest on its ability to deliver scale, while digital fills in the gaps with precision and engagement. Any increase in television inventory, therefore, needs to add value to that equation rather than simply add volume.
More minutes, more buyers?
If brands are becoming more selective about their TV investments, will giving them more inventory actually encourage them to spend more, increasing revenue for broadcasters?
Not necessarily, Hamidani believes. “If demand is already softening, simply increasing commercial minutes could put pressure on rates and potentially create greater viewer fatigue.”
Sandeep Gupta, COO Broadcasting Business, Shemaroo Entertainment Ltd. also states that additional ad inventory will not automatically lead to more demand or more revenue for broadcasters. “The market today is very different, with advertising money spread across television, digital, social media and newer platforms. There simply isn't the same pool of money available for TV that there was earlier,” he says.
So, if additional inventory does not automatically translate into additional demand, where does the opportunity lie for broadcasters? Gupta believes the answer is flexibility rather than simply more volume. “What the relaxation does is give broadcasters more flexibility to optimise their inventory. If demand improves, particularly during periods like the festive season, channels can use the additional inventory to accommodate that demand and monetise it better,” Gupta notes, adding that he sees this as an opportunity to optimise revenue rather than as a direct revenue driver.
That distinction becomes particularly important when it comes to pricing. If supply expands without a corresponding increase in advertiser demand, the balance of power could tilt towards buyers. More inventory would give advertisers greater choice and potentially strengthen their negotiating position, putting pressure on broadcasters to compete through rates, packages and value.
For Bijoor, this pressure is amplified by the way traditional media inventory is already priced. “Every medium has a rate card, but what is sold to different players is a different rate. Discounting is certainly the norm, and in a discounted environment, there cannot be too much prosperity for traditional media channels,” he says.
Trehan, on the other hand, says that if there is additional supply without subsequent demand, the law of diminishing returns sets in. “Excess inventory would lead to price dilution.”
Halepati further elaborates, “I would expect some downward pressure on pricing if inventory grows materially faster than advertiser demand, but I don’t think the impact will be uniform. Television has always had a hierarchy of value i.e., premium content, audiences and moments will command a premium, while more interchangeable inventory will become more negotiable.”
She also points towards a bigger strategic question–what happens to viewing behaviour? “If additional ad minutes materially disrupt the viewing experience, broadcasters could weaken engagement and, over time, the value of the audience itself.”
So where does the real opportunity lie? Hamidani believes it is in how broadcasters leverage their greater ad-cap flexibility around premium programming, live events, festive periods and high-demand categories. “Additional supply can unlock tactical spending, but sustainable growth will come from better audiences, stronger measurement and premium advertising opportunities, not merely more ad minutes,” he states.
Ultimately, TV’s future may not be about selling more minutes, but making every minute worth more.
