Manisha Kapoor, CEO & Secretary General of the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI). ASCI is a self-regulatory body that is committed to the cause of fairness and honesty in advertising. She is also part of the leadership team of the International Council for Advertising Self-regulation (ICAS).
In our chat with her, Manisha Kapoor opens up about what it really means to represent women fairly, both in media and at the organisational level. From the voices behind the camera to the stories told on screen and the reality in India Inc., she talks about the gap in representation, the missed opportunities, and why it’s time the media industry stops playing it safe when it comes to diversity.
Meet Manisha Kapoor: Leading ASCI towards a more inclusive and diverse future
With three decades of experience in brand and business strategy, Manisha Kapoor brings both insight and intent to every conversation around media and advertising. Her journey with ASCI began over a decade ago as a member of the Consumer Complaints Council (CCC), and today, she leads the organisation through a rapidly changing advertising space. Her experience spans industries like consumer goods, media, automotive, and BFSI. Globally, she represents ASCI as one of the four vice presidents on the executive committee of the International Council for Advertising Self-Regulation (ICAS).
The decline of women in leadership roles: Manisha Kapoor’s thoughts
Manisha begins by sharing her insights on the decline of women in leadership roles within the media industry. While acknowledging the challenges, she stresses the need for organisations to genuinely value diversity and build a workplace where all voices are heard.
Q: Between 2000 and 2010, there were around 10 to 12 women in leadership positions across business, production, and creative roles in the top organisations in India. However, in the last decade, this number has significantly declined. Data shows that across media organisations—whether in radio, print, television, or digital—there are now rarely more than one or two women in leadership roles. What do you think led to this decline?
I think it is a significant area of concern. With the progress of the industry, there should have been more women in leadership roles. I think it really depends on the culture within different industries. Some sectors have historically leaned towards a certain type of manager and continue to feel comfortable hiring within that mould.
Any organisation that lacks diversity, whether in gender, perspectives, or lived experiences, is missing out. Without that mix, the workplace can become an echo chamber, where everyone thinks alike. It is especially true in industries like advertising, media, and entertainment, where the audience is constantly looking for fresh, diverse narratives, whether through programming or creative content. That’s what resonates with people. So, not bringing in diverse voices is a missed opportunity. It really comes down to how committed organisations are to building diverse teams, not just as a checkbox exercise, but because they genuinely value what different backgrounds can contribute.
In advertising, for example, you still see a fair number of women in senior roles. In creative industries, that kind of diversity in perspective is crucial. And when I look at the media more broadly, while I don’t have the exact numbers in front of me, based on what you’re pointing out, I’d agree. It’s a massive loss if the industry continues to draw from the same kinds of profiles instead of tapping into the larger and more diverse talent pool available.
Q: Do you think the lack of mentorship is one of the reasons women tend to exit after reaching the mid-management level?
That could certainly be one factor, but it’s often a combination of things. At the end of the day, people tend to stay in environments where they feel their experience is valued. If someone doesn’t feel appreciated in a particular place, they’ll look elsewhere. So, it’s not just about mentorship. It’s about whether organisations genuinely value their employees. This applies to everyone, not just women. If a man feels undervalued, he too will leave.
However, if more women are leaving than men, it’s a sign that management needs to address an underlying issue. Mentorship could be part of the solution, but ultimately, it’s about equal opportunity, valuing diverse ideas, and ensuring everyone has a voice in the organisation.
These principles should be at the core of any organisation. If diversity is truly valued, there’s no reason why more women would leave than men. If a particular group is leaving faster than others, it’s definitely something management should investigate.
Q: If this issue is happening systemically, do you think industry bodies should hold organisations accountable for maintaining balance in their workforce?
I think it’s definitely a cause worth pursuing, not just to support women but because it’s fundamentally about valuing talent. It’s a loss when talented people leave because they don’t feel appreciated or valued.
The real question is, do we genuinely see value in having women in the organisation? If we do and truly believe in that value, then we’ll act accordingly. If it’s just a checkbox for diversity or a superficial agenda, we’ll find excuses for why it’s not working or end up practising tokenism, or adding one person but not addressing the broader issue.
For me, it comes down to conviction. Believing that diversity, whether in gender, experience, or age, adds real value. If that conviction is there, then solutions will emerge, and there will be productive conversations between the organisation and its employees. These conversations will pave the way for meaningful change.
Q: How do you view the ongoing debate around a significant gender pay gap, revealing disparities in salaries among salaried women across Indian metros? A recent report shows that 23% of salaried women in Indian metros perceive a gender pay gap. What should organisations do to track and fix this?
You’re right. We keep hearing discussions about gender-based pay differences. Some people feel very strongly about it, while others claim it does not exist. That is why we need hard evidence, data that highlights pay gaps across different levels, and we must track it over time. Only then can we understand the scale of the issue and decide what kind of action is required. If it is a small or isolated problem, the response will be different. But from what I have seen, this is a widespread challenge across India.
To me, it’s simply unfair to have pay differences based solely on gender. If the work is the same, the expectations are the same, and the output is the same, then pay should be equal, unless there’s a valid reason like experience or performance metrics. Anything else is clearly discriminatory.
From an organisational standpoint, ASCI is a good example. We have a strong representation of women. In the past three to four years, we have grown significantly, taken on new challenges, and made a substantial impact in the industry. Our performance speaks for itself. There is a genuine sense of camaraderie, support, and kinship within the team. These qualities may not always be captured in traditional metrics, but they play a meaningful role in how organisations succeed and grow.
Manisha Kapoor on the misrepresentation of women in the media
While working women in the media industry face their own set of challenges, Manisha Kapoor also points to how everyday media and advertising continue to normalise regressive portrayals of women, often without realising it.
Q: What’s your take on the rise of regressive humour on social media that stereotypes women? Especially one that often shows women as dependent or materialistic, even promoted by influencers and celebrities with large followings?
Social media has made the narrative extremely fragmented. Everyone has a voice now, which means both progressive and regressive views get equal visibility. The real concern isn’t just the intentional use of sexist humour or stereotypes. What’s more dangerous is the casual, unintentional reinforcement of these ideas because we’ve normalised them.
We laugh at sexist jokes not always because we agree with them, but because we’ve been conditioned to see them as funny. That’s the bigger issue. Most content creators don’t even realise they’re reinforcing harmful tropes. For example, in auto ads, women are often shown in the passenger seat or worried about breaking a nail. In skincare ads, women seek validation from strangers. These seem harmless alone, but together, they shape perceptions.
Unless someone actively points these out, they go unchecked because copywriters, brand managers, and even audiences have internalised these portrayals. Changing this requires conscious effort and a willingness to unlearn what’s been seen as ‘normal’ for too long.
Q: Even in auto ads where women are shown driving, it’s often within a traditional family setup, say, a man beside her, a child in the back. Why do you think brands shy away from showing single women or single mothers as independent consumers? Even when women are shown differently, it’s often still within a conventional setup. Why do you think brands struggle to break out of that narrow portrayal?
The challenge is that one can’t expect every ad to show every kind of diversity. That’s not realistic. However, the issue arises when a large number of ads keep repeating the same limited portrayals. That’s when it becomes a problem. Collectively, advertising as a whole needs to reflect a wider range of realities. It’s not about ticking every box in one ad but about pushing the envelope and being intentional with representation.
Also, our study, “Mainstreaming Diversity & Inclusiveness in Advertising,” shows that stereotypical imagery doesn’t connect with progressive consumers. So it’s actually in the brand’s interest, both for business growth and audience engagement, to invest in learning about these shifts and start reflecting on them.
Q: Do you think digital-first brands are performing better when it comes to inclusive representation?
Some digital platforms do get it right, especially those led by younger people who bring a different mindset. The digital space also offers the advantage of tailoring messages for different audiences in various ways. But even then, these narratives aren’t entirely free from stereotypes.
Take, for instance, the portrayal of working women. Advertisements have started showing women in professional roles, but very few actually show them at work. More often than not, it’s always the “returning from work” trope. A woman walking in wearing a doctor’s coat or a teacher coming home. The message becomes more about her coming back home than her professional life. How many ads actually show a woman doctor in surgery or a manager actively making decisions at the workplace?
What happens instead is that we swap one stereotype for another. The woman is still shown doing housework, except now she also has a job. It’s as if we’ve just stacked more responsibilities on her plate without taking any away. The ad says, Look, she can do it all! But the reality is, she was already doing everything. Now you’re just glorifying that extra burden. And that’s not always aspirational. Many women don’t want to be seen as someone who can “balance it all” effortlessly. That narrative itself has become a burden.
We also need to accept that we won’t always get these portrayals right. It’s a journey. You might create something with the best intentions, thinking it’s progressive, only to realise later that it still has its problems. What matters is being open to learning.
The underrepresented demographics in media
Manisha Kapoor talks about how, beyond the poor portrayal of women, groups like people with disabilities, LGBTQIA+ individuals, and older adults are either overlooked entirely or included only as tokens in advertising.
Q: Why do you think organisations still struggle to represent people with disabilities in their advertising, except for on days like World Disability Day? Despite all the talk, we still see ads that often exclude certain groups, like trans individuals. For example, in advertisements, you rarely see these groups represented unless it’s for a specific day, and even then, the ads are typically limited and not mainstream.
There’s a study showing that less than 4% of ads feature people with serious disabilities. At the same time, 48% of people feel Indian ads don’t do a good job of representing people like them. Essentially, consumers are saying, ‘I can’t see myself in your ads.’ If marketers are genuinely focused on consumer understanding, it’s short-sighted not to include these groups. The same study found that ads with diversity perform better. They stand out, attract consumers, and positively impact brand equity and purchasing decisions. So, there’s a strong business case here.
Even if there’s no personal conviction on the issue, not showcasing diversity is actually hurting your brand. Consumers are responding to ads that reflect them, and brand managers and advertising agencies need to create systems to ensure this representation. One issue is the lack of diversity in casting pools, but unless advertisers demand it, it won’t change.
Q: So, how do you think the industry can shift towards more inclusive representation in advertising?
I think the shift happens when brand managers educate themselves on the value of diversity. For instance, if I told you that I have a tool that could increase your brand equity by 30%, there would likely be a queue of brand managers eager to use it because that’s their job. If that opportunity is available and they don’t act on it, it’s a sign they’re not doing their job effectively.
There’s evidence showing that ads with diversity and progressive representations of men and women deliver both short-term sales and long-term brand equity. As a brand manager, if I knew that something would give me better results, I’d definitely prioritise it. For example, our report shows that diversity in advertising has proven to deliver better outcomes, especially in India, where the results are even more pronounced. Specifically, the report highlights that ads that positively depict underrepresented groups amplify their potential with a 53% increase in brand equity and a 30% increase in short-term sales.
We’ve shared these studies publicly, and the media have reported them. We also send them to our members, conduct workshops, and work closely with the Unstereotype Alliance, a UN initiative focused on media and advertising representation. There’s plenty of material available for anyone who’s interested, and the evidence speaks for itself.
Q: Auto brands are starting to explore inclusive marketing, like highlighting vehicle features for people with disabilities. By being inclusive in designing vehicles, auto brands can increase sales. I am sure that is applicable to several other industries. Do you think brands are missing out by not tapping into these underrepresented consumer groups?
Absolutely. Even if the numbers seem small at first, any incremental revenue is a massive opportunity. When you break it down, say 20–30 additional vehicles sold in each market, it adds up quickly. These are economic markets with real spending power. However, advertising still tends to ignore these segments. Look at older adults; they’re everywhere. On flights, at tourist spots, and spending money. Yet they’re rarely shown in ads, even though they consume everything from food and fashion to vehicles and insurance.
Q: Yes, and older adults aren’t who they used to be. Many are active, aspirational, and have greater control over how they spend. Do you think brands are failing to recognise this shift in how ageing consumers behave?
Exactly. The 60+ demographic today isn’t what it was 20 years ago. It’s a very different life stage now. Many of them are liberal consumers with fewer responsibilities and more disposable income. They’re actively looking for experiences and making independent spending decisions. If advertisers keep ignoring this group, they’re not just missing representation. They’re losing real market value.
The responsibility of advertising, as per Manisha Kapoor
Manisha Kapoor says advertising has a responsibility beyond revenue, especially when influencing young audiences.
Q: International Women’s Day has historical significance, but now it often just means discounts, office events, and digital ads. With yearly themes and UN discussions, has it become redundant? Should brands rethink overemphasising March 8th and avoid exploiting women consumers on that day?
International Women’s Day was not created for advertising. Advertising often takes advantage of the day to create content, but the day itself serves a deeper purpose. It’s a rallying point for various groups working on important issues, and in that sense, it holds value. However, in advertising, it’s often overused, misused, and stereotypically portrayed, which is where the problem lies.
Ultimately, the impact comes from meaningful work, whether it’s done on Women’s Day or any other day. If the work is superficial and stereotypical, it won’t create any real impact. To me, the day matters in terms of the cause, not in terms of advertising.
Q: Returning to the responsibility of advertising, this year’s IPL has faced criticism across trade and consumer media, particularly regarding ads in the paan masala and betting categories. Where do you think this should end?
It has to end with a moral and legal solution. Right now, there are apparent regulatory gaps, especially around alcohol, betting, and gambling ads. For example, alcohol is regulated at the state level, not centrally, so there’s no single national law. Add to that the fact that the Cable TV Act doesn’t cover digital or open TV, and you can see how laws need to be updated for today’s media landscape.
Advertising today is personalised. What you see in your feed may be different from what I see. So, regulations have to catch up with how media is consumed now.
There’s also an ethical responsibility. Significant events like IPL know they attract young viewers. Platforms and broadcasters should set their internal standards to protect their own audiences. However, because the cost of airing events is high, their focus is on revenue maximisation. And the usual excuse is, “If I don’t take the ad, someone else will.”
So we need more than just laws; we need industry leaders to come together and agree on what’s acceptable. Right now, people exploit loopholes because the law isn’t clear enough to say, “this is not allowed.” That gives too much room for discretion and competition to override ethics.
We at ASCI aren’t a statutory body. We raise these issues and flag them to the government. The government is aware of the challenges, but a consensus is needed to update the laws. Once something is declared illegal, enforcement becomes stricter, and channels and platforms can’t justify airing it just for revenue.
Manisha Kapoor on career comebacks for women 50+ in media
Manisha Kapoor wraps up the conversation with a message. Age should never limit opportunities, and media companies must recognise the invaluable skills and perspectives that older employees bring to the workforce.
Q: How can media companies help women over 50 restart their careers and move into leadership? What steps can media companies take to embed diversity, equity, and inclusion into their culture and daily operations to prevent ageism?
Women returning to work later in life often bring a wealth of transferable skills and life experiences. Usually, organisations overlook the value of such diverse experiences. It’s not just about corporate or industry-specific experience. It’s the broader life and work experiences that prepare someone for leadership roles.
Since the media is a highly visible industry, it has the opportunity to influence what is considered valuable or aspirational. By promoting successful, empowered, and diverse figures, especially those over 50, media organisations can challenge stereotypes around ageing and show that career opportunities and leadership roles are not limited by age.
To me, it’s about understanding the job requirements and whether a person, regardless of age, can deliver what’s needed and is willing to work at the offered salary. I’ve seen younger people with immense maturity and older individuals who may not have the same level. Both bring different experiences to the table, which adds value.
It’s not about age. It’s about the fit for the role. If someone can deliver what’s expected, diversity is a plus. The more they differ from the rest of the team, the better. Closing off opportunities based on age or personality is a loss for both the individual and the organisation. Good talent is hard to find, and older candidates often come with loyalty, a strong work ethic, and experience that can benefit the organisation.
Manisha Kapoor: Making media accountability a DEI imperative
In our conversation with Manisha Kapoor, we discussed the urgent need for real diversity and inclusion in the media industry. As she highlights, brands and media companies must go beyond surface-level diversity initiatives and actively work to break down harmful stereotypes. This includes rethinking how they portray women, minorities, and older adults. At ChangeinContent, we stand by this vision and will continue encouraging such conversations.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are based on the writer’s insights, supported by data and resources available both online and offline, as applicable. Changeincontent.com is committed to promoting inclusivity across all forms of content. We broadly define inclusivity as media, policies, law, and history, encompassing all elements that influence the lives of women and marginalised individuals. Our goal is to promote understanding and advocate for comprehensive inclusivity.
