Db Corp Limited - Dainik Bhaskar

Recommendation: Not Upheld | Medium: Industry Member

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claim in the advertisement, or alternately to substantiate the claim with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and submitted their response. The advertiser in their response stated that the campaign has been duly approved by ABC (Audit Bureau of Circulation). The advertisement is based on the latest ABC round (July–December 2025), which has been duly cited as the source, and clarified that it is not based on outdated data. The advertiser further submitted that ABC releases data twice a year and that the advertisement is based on the most recent release. In support of their response, the advertiser provided comparative ABC based figures relating to copies printed and published from Haryana for editions mentioned in the advertisement. The advertiser had a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat to discuss its submissions. The advertiser submitted that the claim is based on newspapers printed and published from Haryana, where it holds the leading position. It further submitted that the claim has been reviewed and accepted by the Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC). The advertiser also placed on record email communication exchanged with ABC in support of its submissions. The advertiser’s response along with the claim support data was referred to an independent technical expert of ASCI for their opinion. The expert opinion was thereafter shared with both the advertiser and the complainant to enable them to make further submissions. The complainant did not respond to the expert opinion. The advertiser subsequently submitted that it has modified the creative and provided a copy of the revised advertisement for reference. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the print advertisement, considered the complaint, the advertiser’s response along with the claim support data, and the expert’s opinion presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser, Dainik Bhaskar, has made the claim, “Haryana Se Prakashit No. 1 Akhbar”, with ABC July–December 2025 cited as the source of the claim. The complainant alleged that the leadership claim was based on selective publication data and did not take into account newspapers circulated in Haryana but published from centres outside the State, thereby creating a misleading impression of market leadership. The complainant further contended that the claim did not reflect the latest market position and submitted the latest ABC figures in support of its complaint. The CCC reviewed the ABC data submitted by both parties and noted that the phrase “Haryana se Prakashit” limits the scope of the claim. The CCC was of the view that, in this context, the comparison is limited to newspapers published from Haryana centres and does not extend to the overall set of newspapers circulated in the Haryana market. The CCC further noted the distinction between newspapers published from Haryana and those circulated in Haryana but printed from centres outside the State. It also observed that a Hindi newspaper reader would understand “Prakashit” as referring to newspapers published from Haryana. Based on the above observations, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Haryana se Prakashit No. 1 Akhbar”, is not misleading or objectionable, and is not in contravention of Chapter I of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC noted the advertiser’s response that the said claim has been modified