What happens to brand building when television is no longer the hero?

New Delhi: For decades, television was the cornerstone of brand building. It united families, sparked household conversations, and helped products become household names. From jingles that defined generations to characters that shaped cultural memory, TV gave brands more than visibility. 

It gave them a sense of trust, familiarity, and belonging. But as marketers reduce their traditional media spends and audiences scatter across digital platforms, OTT screens, and private online communities, a new question looms large: can brand building truly happen without TV?

The changing definition of “mass reach”

In today’s fractured attention economy, the definition of “mass reach” has changed dramatically. The idea of one unifying medium is giving way to many smaller but more participative spaces. 

The brand stories that once unfolded between prime-time shows are now being told through creator-led narratives, digital ecosystems, and even community-based platforms such as Reddit, Discord, and WhatsApp groups. The shift is not just about where audiences are; it’s about how they engage. 

Yet, for many marketers, television still carries the credibility of scale and the power of shared experience. Priyanka Kapur, Managing Partner, Zenith India (part of Publicis Groupe), believes digital’s growing influence cannot yet be equated with brand building in its truest sense. “Brand building forever was attributed strongly to TV because that was the medium of the house and ads were watched, discussed, and remembered,” she said.

“With the reach of digital increasing, it definitely is aiding brands in getting recalled, but is it building brands? We don't know yet. It's an experimental phase that will take some time to deliver its verdict,” Kapur explained. 

She added, “It’s definitely a medium that’s driving impulse purchases for a lot of categories, but will that build brands? Yes, but only if the brand is truly powerful as a product, with its utility, and with its creatives to deliver that.”

Her words point to a critical distinction: digital can spark recall, but whether it can nurture long-term brand love is still being tested. The speed, spontaneity, and interactivity of digital make it ideal for short-term engagement, but brand building, as Kapur noted, requires consistency and emotional stickiness that can take years to form.

From persuasion to participation

Rashi Bhushan, AVP - Digital Planning and Buying, Mudramax, sees this evolution differently. She believes the core of brand building has not been lost, only redefined. “For decades, television was the undisputed engine of mass storytelling. It gave brands scale, credibility, and cultural ubiquity. But today, attention, not airtime, defines impact. And attention is now fractured, mobile, and deeply personal,” she said.

According to Bhushan, the concept of “mass” itself is evolving. “The shift we’re witnessing isn’t about abandoning TV; it’s about reimagining what ‘mass’ means. Digital and community-led ecosystems have democratised scale. A creator on Instagram, a meme on X, or a conversation on Reddit can generate the same cultural resonance as a 30-second TV spot, but through participation, not persuasion,” she explained.

She added that trust now comes from collaboration, not repetition. “Digital spaces allow brands to build equity through credibility and co-creation rather than repetition. When audiences feel part of a brand narrative, not merely recipients of it, the connection becomes far deeper,” Bhushan noted.

However, she cautioned that digital-first brand building is far from easy. 

“It’s agile but volatile, driven by algorithms and short-term performance metrics. While television offered predictability through reach and frequency, digital demands that brands earn attention every single day. Storytelling must evolve from ‘campaign bursts’ to an ‘always-on’ presence where creativity, authenticity, and agility outweigh scale,” she said.

Communities as the new media channels

Bhushan pointed out that communities are becoming the new currency of influence. “Platforms like Discord, Reddit, or even WhatsApp groups deliver depth over breadth, creating organic advocacy and long-term emotional ownership. For categories like lifestyle, gaming, and beauty, these micro-ecosystems can now rival traditional primetime impact,” she added.

Still, she believes this is not a battle between mediums but a shift in mindset. “Television remains unmatched in top-of-funnel credibility and cultural legitimacy, especially in a diverse market like India. The smartest marketers aren’t debating TV versus digital; they’re orchestrating both. The future of brand building belongs to those who merge reach with resonance and scale with soul,” she said.

Integration, not isolation

Megha Raturi, Chief Marketing Officer at Reliance Consumer Products Limited, echoed this idea of integration as the new strategy. 

“In India’s fast-changing media ecosystem, the smartest brands are no longer thinking in silos of TV versus digital; they’re thinking of integration,” she said.

“Television continues to deliver unmatched scale, credibility, and emotional resonance, while digital adds the power of precision, personalisation, and participation. When these two come together, brands don’t just reach audiences; they connect with them, in their language, on their terms, and across every screen that matters. That’s how modern India builds meaningful brand love and sustainable business growth,” Raturi told BestMediaInfo.com . 

For Raturi, it’s not about whether TV or digital wins. It’s about how effectively they work together. A single 30-second ad can spark mass awareness, but it’s the follow-up through digital touchpoints that reinforces the story, drives engagement, and converts audiences into loyal communities.

Recalibrating brand spend and strategy

From a marketer’s standpoint, budget allocation also reflects this balancing act. Smit Shukla, Head of Philips Personal Health - India Subcontinent, shared how the company divides its investments between activations, e-commerce, and brand equity. 

“Principally, 30 to 40% of our spending usually inches towards activations. And when I say activations, again, it's a complex question because the ratio changes by month. During festivities, for example, you sometimes have to double down on events. But what I can tell you, in crux, is that the majority of our spends are diverted towards creating brand equity and brand awareness,” he said.

“We try to maintain a healthy balance between events, e-commerce, and driving awareness, but the majority, upwards of 50%, goes towards driving awareness, consideration, and building brand equity,” he added.

Shukla’s insights underline that even in a diversified media environment, the intent behind marketing investments remains the same: to build lasting equity rather than chase fleeting impressions.

The changing brand-building playbook, then, is not about abandoning television but about rethinking what “mass” means in an age of personal screens and private communities. Television continues to provide legitimacy, scale, and a sense of shared experience, while digital offers agility, intimacy, and two-way participation.

The industry seems to agree on one thing: brand building without TV is possible, but it demands a different approach. It requires creative consistency across platforms, deeper audience understanding, and the courage to let consumers co-own the story.