In the wake of the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) investigations into alleged media cartelization, pressure is mounting on media agency leaders to step down from their positions in the Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI). Industry stakeholders are demanding immediate resignations from AAAI board to ensure a fair probe and restore credibility to the sector.
The raids on March 18 sent shockwaves through the advertising world, as CCI officials stormed the offices of major agencies — including GroupM, Dentsu, Omnicom, Havas, Madison, IPG and Publicis. Key industry bodies, including AAAI, the Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA), and IBDF, were also under the scanner, with operations spanning Delhi, Mumbai, and Gurugram. The allegations against the media agencies center on anti-competitive practices and media cartelization, raising concerns about transparency and ethical governance within the industry.
AAAI’s leadership includes executives from the agencies under investigation. President Prasanth Kumar (GroupM), Vice President Rana Barua (Havas), Treasurer Vishandas Hardasani (GroupM), and board members Sam Balsara and Vikram Sakhuja, Shashi Sinha, Kartik Sharma and Anupriya Acharya from Madison, IPG, Omnicom, and Publicis Groupe now face growing calls to relinquish their positions. Critics argue that their continued presence compromises the integrity of AAAI, a body meant to uphold industry standards.
A seasoned advertising industry veteran minced no words: “How can we expect a fair investigation when top media agency executives under CCI scrutiny continue to lead AAAI? They must step down immediately to allow a neutral leadership to take over.” The demand for resignations is not just about optics but about ensuring a level playing field in the industry.
Industry voices echo similar concerns, emphasizing that the move should have come voluntarily. “This is about transparency and fairness. These leaders should have stepped aside on their own. That would have sent a strong message about industry ethics and cooperation,” said another senior insider. The reluctance of these executives to relinquish their positions has only deepened suspicions regarding the extent of cartelization within the media buying space. He added.
Advertisers are also weighing in, insisting that agency executives under investigation should not govern AAAI until they receive a clean chit from CCI. “They can remain members but should not hold leadership roles. Stepping down would rebuild trust and signal true cooperation with regulators,” a leading advertiser stated. The industry cannot afford to have key decision-making bodies run by individuals whose agencies are under suspicion.
Adding to the turbulence, smaller agencies are preparing to submit a formal representation demanding an overhaul of the AAAI board, as per multiple industry sources. Some are even pushing for a separate industry body to protect their interests. The disenchantment of smaller agencies with AAAI is not new; however, the ongoing controversy has given fresh momentum to their calls for reform.
“Independent agencies struggle to get a foothold in AAAI—it’s like an elite club controlled by a powerful few,” said the founder of an independent agency. “The high membership fees and restrictive entry barriers make it almost impossible for smaller players to join. It’s time for change.” The barriers have created an uneven playing field, with smaller agencies often finding themselves excluded from major industry discussions and opportunities.
Despite AAAI’s stated commitment to ethical business standards, its membership guidelines raise questions about transparency. The association’s website claims to accept only agencies that demonstrate financial stability, professionalism, and a commitment to ethical advertising. Yet, its leadership structure remains dominated by executives from the very firms now under investigation.
The AAAI’s Ethical Business Standard norms for accepting new members highlight the importance of fairness in industry practices, stating that member agencies should not engage in activities that harm clients, media entities, or competitors. However, critics argue that allowing executives from agencies under investigation to continue in leadership roles directly contradicts these principles.
With the industry at a crossroads, all eyes are on AAAI’s board. Will the embattled agency executives step down, or will the advertising industry be forced into a deeper reckoning over governance and accountability?
Read more: EXCLUSIVE: CCI examines emails of former IBDF President K Madhavan, key officials
Read more: CCI raids: Cloned data from GroupM, Dentsu puts Big Tech under scanner