ITV

Category: TRAI

  • Broadcasters write to Bombay HC requesting timely verdict on NTO 2.0 case

    Broadcasters write to Bombay HC requesting timely verdict on NTO 2.0 case

    KOLKATA: Broadcasters have lodged an application before the Bombay high court requesting speedy pronouncement of verdict in the amended new tariff order (NTO 2.0) case.

    The petitioners have mentioned that detailed arguments on the case were heard in September-October 2020. Subsequently, the judgement was reserved via an order on 20 October. However, the revised tariff regime has not been implemented so far and TV broadcasting ecosystem has continued to operate under the NTO price regime implemented in 2019.

    “It is submitted that the judgement remains reserved and since the issues pending for adjudication before the honourable court are substantial, an early pronouncement of judgement will be in the best interest of all stakeholder,” the petition read.

    In this regard, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) also wrote to Bombay high court in late February requesting urgent listing of the case, so that a verdict may be passed soon in the matter. An industry source close to the developments in the court said at that time: "With this filing of application before the Bombay high court, the newly appointed chairman of TRAI, PD Vaghela has made it clear that the authority seeks to implement NTO 2.0 as soon as possible. “

    TRAI’s decision to implement NTO 2.0 in the beginning of 2020 came as a shocker for the broadcasting industry. In an unprecedented move, all major broadcasters came together to challenge the new tariff regime in court. Following continuous hearings from the end of February to early March 2020, the judgment was reserved on 4 March, after which the lockdown was imposed. A praecipe dated 15 June was filed by TRAI for the verdict. Post that, the matter was heard throughout September- October. The parties in conflict have wrapped up their arguments and written submissions have also been filed.

    The authority has defended its decision saying the amendments will usher in better consumer offerings. On the other hand, the industry stated the over-interference of TRAI, especially in the area of pricing, is hurting the stability of the sector. TRAI released directives for immediate implementation of NTO 2.0 even during the pandemic, which was restrained by the Bombay high court.

  • NBP draft ready for consultation with Prasar Bharati CEO

    NBP draft ready for consultation with Prasar Bharati CEO

    KOLKATA: A fresh broadcasting policy in India, that’s up to speed on the dynamic industry developments, has been on the cards for a long time now. Last month, the ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) intimated that work on the National Broadcast Policy (NBP) was in full swing. Now, the draft NBP is ready to be shared with Prasar Bharati CEO Shashi Shekhar Vempati for further consultation.

    The draft is also ready for consultation with scientific ministries like the department of telecommunication, ministry of electronics and information technology, ministry of science and technology on the lines of the utilisation of spectrum, emerging technologies, trends in the broadcasting sector, increasing outreach of TV and radio households, fall-back arrangement for broadcasting during emergencies like disasters and wars.

    According to the draft accessed by Indiantelevision.com, the policy is guided by the vision of a “functional, vibrant, resilient broadcasting sector in the country.”  To keep with the vision, it provides “specific goals, strategies and policy stipulations.” Broader goals as described in the draft include the universal reach of broadcasting, enabling environment for sectoral growth and level playing field, as well as enhanced global outreach.

    Back in December, MIB additional secretary Neerja Sekhar said that the ministry would soon come up with a draft for the much-discussed policy. “Though the consultations on the National Broadcasting Policy were held with the stakeholders and industry some time back, we have been putting together various parts… and (addressing) the emerging issues. I feel that we are getting pretty close to coming up with a draft version,” she had said.

    It was in 2019 that the MIB initiated talks with members of the Indian broadcasting and media industry about formulating a National Broadcast Policy. Although no timeframe was given, the ministry had said that the aim of the policy would be to address issues that are challenging the sector, with the aim of promoting more self-regulation.

    At present, the broadcast industry is regulated by the Cable TV Act, which many stakeholders consider outdated and inadequate to govern the newer challenges in this rapidly growing sector.

  • Old controversy, new chaos: The TRP scam and all that jazz

    Old controversy, new chaos: The TRP scam and all that jazz

    NEW DELHI: The broadcasting industry had already been reeling under the impact of the Covid2019 pandemic when the Mumbai police came down on it, hard. On 8 October 2020, Mumbai police commissioner Param Bir Singh addressed a press conference about its investigation into an alleged scam involving the television audience measurement system.

    The matter had come to light when ratings agency Hansa Services Pvt Ltd, a contractor of Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC), filed a complaint with the authorities, alleging that some TV channels had been manipulating their television rating points (TRPs). This had led to faulty calculations for advertisers and a major loss of revenue for stakeholders.

    Three channels were named in the complaint, namely Fakt Marathi, Box Cinema and Republic TV. According to police, the channels had allegedly bribed people who had bar-o-meters installed in their households. The owners of Fakt Marathi and Box Cinema were subsequently arrested and the directors, promoters of Republic TV were summoned for further questioning. Some of them were thrown in the cooler later.

    Three months down the line, the case has sent the entire industry into a conundrum of sorts. BARC has suspended the TV ratings for news channels till January. As many as 15 people, including several influential persons in the industry, have faced arrests, the latest being BARC’s former chief executive officer Partho Dasgupta. The media veteran was instrumental in setting up the BARC television ratings in 2015.

    Early stirrings of trouble

    It is not the first time a TRP measuring agency has found itself in a tight spot. The earliest instance of the tussle between broadcasters and data measuring agencies dates back to 2001. It began when then CEO of Zee Telefilms, Sandeep Goyal, openly declared his lack of faith in top rating agencies – ORG Marg's INTAM and AC Nielsen's TAM Research. Goyal wrote a letter to ORG Marg CEO Titoo Ahluwalia Goyal calling for an immediate suspension of TAM/INTAM ratings.

    “Zee has reasons to believe the data by the agency is ‘seriously influenced’,” he alleged. This was when Star India’s shows Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi and Kahaani Ghar Ghar Ki had been topping the TRP charts consistently for weeks.

    CNBC carried out its own investigation and released a complete list of peoplemeters’ information which was supposed to be ‘strictly confidential’. The same year in October, a merger was announced between TAM and INTAM and they decided to provide combined TV rating services. But the controversy did not die.

    Doordarshan director-general SY Quraishi wrote a column for a leading English daily, wherein he recalled how he got a whiff of alleged manipulation of TRPs in 2002-03. “DD National’s prime time news share was 92 per cent. But, a private channel which described itself ‘sab se tez’ and had just four per cent share was declared as number one channel by TAM,” he wrote.

    Quraishi said he also got a peoplemeter installed in his office TV to see how it worked. And later found out “how people were being incentivised with pressure cookers and dining sets to get the meters installed and later bribed to keep certain channels running.”

    Shockwaves hit the Parliament 

    In 2008, the issue rocked the Parliament. The standing committee on information technology demanded legislation for an effective oversight or regulation on the TRP system to make it credible and accountable to the choice of viewers. It also cited the 1995 Supreme Court judgement, wherein the court pointed out “that airwaves are public property which needs to be controlled by a public authority.” The government was asked to “fructify a self-enabling, people-friendly and comprehensive legislation on broadcasting services without wasting further time.”

    Stand-off with NDTV

    In 2012, news channel NDTV sued TAM India’s parent companies Nielsen and Kantar Media for $810 million for fraud and $580 million for negligence in a New York court. It accused the companies of deliberately publishing corrupt and tainted data, favouring certain channels over others for kickbacks. The case was later dismissed on account of jurisdiction.

    Back home, NDTV decided to unsubscribe from TAM’s services, but ended up subscribing again, citing lack of alternate sources which provided such data. Not surprisingly, the incident left a bitter taste. 

    The rise of BARC

    TAM was already facing flak for inaccurate ratings. It also came under the direct scrutiny of the I&B ministry which stated that its sample size of around 7,200 peoplemeters is too small to represent a country with over 122 million TV households. The NDTV legal suit hastened its downfall and eventually TAM had to sell its TV measurement business to BARC, which was accredited by the Indian government to measure TV audiences.

    BARC was founded in 2010 by the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), the Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA), and the Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI). In April 2015, it released its first set of data which was derived under the new consumer classification system (NCCS). It brought together the three key stakeholders in television audience measurement – broadcasters, advertisers, and advertising and media agencies. The new ratings included a sample size of 10,000 bar-o-meters, which has now been scaled up to at least 40,000 households.

    Five years since it started releasing data, there are still murmurs of discontent. The broadcasters are still not completely satisfied with the sample size, the division of audience set under the NCCS and the measurement points.

    The genesis of the 2020 controversy

    The current controversy erupted when the deputy general manager of Hansa Research Group Pvt Ltd, Nitin Deokar, made a police complaint stating that Vishal Bhandari, a relationship manager at the firm, had allegedly been manipulating the ratings. In his complaint, he mentioned how he found a bar-O-meter installed at the house of Bhandari’s parents. According to police, Bhandari has confessed that he paid people to watch certain channels on the directions of one Vinay Tripathi. He also identified five homeowners who were reached out by him, including his own parents, it said.

    What do the TV channels say?

    The incident has dealt a severe blow to the TV channels named in the case. Several top executives have been arrested and bailed out, including Republic TV’s editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami. However, the channel has maintained that the allegations are false and baseless, claiming that Republic TV is being targeted for its reporting against the Mumbai police and Maharashtra government in the suicide case of actor Sushant Singh Rajput.

    It is also not the first time that Goswami has gotten into loggerheads with the Mumbai police. In a virtual discussion with Indiantelevision.com’s founder, CEO and editor-in-chief Anil Wanwari in September, Goswami had questioned the police on several matters, including the attack on him in Mumbai when he was returning home from work late at night with his wife. In another incident, Goswami had alleged in a petition that Mumbai police’s investigation in his role in the Palghar lynching case was mala fide. 

    The controversy has also led to a war of words between rival channels. Republic TV alleged that India Today was initially named in the complaint as well as the BARC audit report, but the Mumbai police gave it a clean chit.

    The News Broadcasters Federation (NBF), too, has looked askance at the involvement of Mumbai police in the case, which according to it was “never a criminal offence.” It asserted that the case should have been looked into by either TRAI or the ministry of information and broadcasting instead of the Mumbai law enforcers.

    What’s ahead?

    BARC has stopped releasing TRPs for the news channels since 15 October to review its current process. The government has formed a committee headed by Prasar Bharati CEO Shashi Shekhar Vempati to assess the existing rating system for TV channels.

    The committee would conduct an appraisal of the current system, study the TRAI recommendations notified from time to time, take stock of the overall industry scenario and address the needs of the stakeholders. It will then make recommendations for a robust, transparent and accountable rating system through changes, if any, in the existing guidelines.

    The Mumbai police, on the other hand, is on the warpath. BARC’s former CEO Partho Dasgupta will remain in judicial custody till mid-January, his bail plea is slated for hearing on 1 January.

    In a recent press conference, following the arrest of Dasgupta, Mumbai police also charged that he was the ‘mastermind’ of the alleged multi-crore scam. He has allegedly conspired to boost the ratings of one news channel by reducing the viewership of rivals and taking lakhs of rupees from accused channels to rig the ratings of competitors.

    In its charge sheet filed in November, Mumbai police named 140 people as witnesses, which includes some BARC officials, forensic experts, forensic auditors, advertisers and bar-o-meter users.

    The investigations will continue. The faceoff between Arnab and the cops will not end until one waves a white flag and backs off from the other.

    For the industry, the key question is whether BARC in its current form will be able to withstand the intense scrutiny and glare of the spotlight? 

    Its current CEO Sunil Lulla is a professional with impeccable, unmatchable ethics and credibility, as well as great human management skills. 

    One of the suggestions given by an industry veteran is that the way BARC  is funded will have to change. Most of the funding for its monitoring operations comes from broadcasters which are its subscribers; the other two ecosystem players, advertisers and advertising and media agencies, contribute a minuscule amount to its annual revenues. And amongst the broadcasters, the top five or six national TV networks probably contribute a majority to BARC’s kitty annually.

    In such a scenario, can one truly and honestly, with a hand over one’s heart, affirm that subtly or otherwise no outside influence will come into play? Will advertisers and agencies also start subscribing in large enough numbers so that BARC has the money to expand its peoplemeter sample to iron out any tomfoolery that anyone might attempt in future, especially in the case of channels with smaller and niche audiences? 

    Sure, Shashi Shekhar Vempati and his committee may come up with some improvements and recommendations. Will they be radically different? Maybe. Maybe not. Because the BARC tech committee had got everyone’s buy-in when it went about setting up its monitoring system around six or seven years ago. And that took some doing as the intention was to set up a fool-proof operation by all the partners. It had to represent what India watches; hence the sample had to be statistically sound with all the diverse viewing individuals adequately represented. Yet in time, it too flopped, having similar systemic failures as its predecessor. Some say it was on account of the way it gets its funds. 

    Many may not like what indiantelevision.com is stating here. It is quite likely that after this clean-up, the industry may settle down with the new improved BARC system when it starts chugging out the ratings.  However, it could only be for a while. Will it be not too long before it unwarily strays into another controversy? Will history not repeat itself?

    (With inputs from Srishti Choudhary)

  • TRAI publishes consultation paper on platform service of DPOs

    TRAI publishes consultation paper on platform service of DPOs

    KOLKATA: Along with re-transmitting TV channels, the distribution platform operators (DPOs) provide certain programming services which are specific to their platforms. While the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has been working around the regulatory framework for those platform services for some time now, the authority has again issued a consultation paper after the ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) sent back references on earlier recommendations.

    MIB has referred back TRAI's recommendations on the framework published on 19 November 2014, and 13 November 2019 in its letter dated 23 November. The first set of recommendations have been accepted, except recommendation no.8 after consideration by inter-ministerial committee (IMC). However, certain addendums have been approved with modification.

    MIB had mentioned that some of the recommendations made by TRAI in 2019 regarding platform services (PS) offered by DTH operators, could be adopted with respect to MSOs/LCOs as well to have uniformity of guidelines in both segments. TRAI had agreed to the view.

    “Any person/ entity desirous of providing PS, or is already providing such services, must be incorporated as a company under the Indian Companies Act, 2013 and the rules framed thereunder,” TRAI had recommended earlier but that has not been accepted by IMC in the case of MSOs/LCOs.

    The committee is of the view that most of the MSOs/LCOs operated in small areas are either proprietorship or partnership firms which are not registered as companies. Making it obligatory for  MSOs/LCOs to convert into companies may not be in line with the promotion of ease of doing business. The IMC decided that anybody registered as a DPO, either with MIB or with post office, shall be eligible to carry PS channels.

    “In case MIB considers that there is no necessity to register as company for MSOs desirous to register their platform service, it should satisfy itself regarding the transparency of ownership and assurance of content of such platform services at the time of registration. MIB may ensure that registration of platform service channel may be made in such a way that the individuals provide full disclosure,” TRAI stated.

    Earlier, the regulatory body had recommended that a maximum number of five PS channels may be offered by the cable operators in non-DAS areas. In DAS areas and for all other platforms, a maximum of 15 PS channels may be offered by the DPOs.

    “With the completion of digitisation process, there is no distinction between DAS and non-DAS area. Further, it is noted while it is necessary to restrict capacity of PS channels carried by DPOs as recommended by TRAI, it is not in the interest of the evolving and dynamic market like cable TV to restrict the number of PS channels. Regulation may only intervene to the point of upholding customer interests, ethical business practices, ease of doing business and safeguard against violation of programming code and advertisement code. Taking note of this, it is recommended that the MSOs may be permitted to operate to a maximum of five per cent and LCOs to a maximum of one per cent, of the total permitted satellite channel being carried by them as permitted PS channels without any upper limit,” MIB said.

    The TRAI is of the view that the liberal regulatory framework of PS should not encourage the bypassing of the traditional broadcast routes. It further stated that it was not desirable to separately specify the limit on the number of PS channels that may be offered by the MSOs and LCOs. This may be left to the mutual arrangement among MSOs and LCOs. An MSO may remain responsible for all the platform service channels being offered on its platform.

  • TV witnesses highest ad volumes since 2015

    TV witnesses highest ad volumes since 2015

    MUMBAI: Week 43 of Broadcast Audience Research Council of India (BARC) data has witnessed the highest ever ad volumes on television since week 16 in 2015.

    It also highlighted that 38,705,978 million seconds is the highest ever ad volume since week 16 (2015) on television in week 43.

    According to BARC, the festive season and big ticket properties have led to this growth. It further mentioned that ad volumes are also returning to normal (compared to week 43 2018):

    *Ad Volume in Million secs

    The report states that growth in week 43 is over second highest week: 2.1 per cent. Whereas the growth in week 43 is over third highest week: 5.7 per cent.

    In week 43 of BARC India rating, the top ten advertisers are Hindustan Unilever, Reckitt Benkiser, ITC, Godrej Consumer Products, Wipro, Ponds India, Colgate Palmolive India, Amazon Online India, Cadburys India, and Brooke Bond Lipton India.

  • NTO 2.0 case: Judgement reserved, TRAI can’t take any coercive step

    NTO 2.0 case: Judgement reserved, TRAI can’t take any coercive step

    KOLKATA: The Bombay High Court bench today reserved its judgement on the NTO 2.0 case. After hearing both sides, the court has also ordered the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) not to take any coercive action against the broadcasters for non-implementation of the amended tariff order.

    Within a very short span of new tariff order (NTO) implementation, TRAI had issued a set of amendments at the beginning of 2020. It was challenged legally by the major broadcasters. Even while the case was sub-judice, TRAI had released fresh directives on 24 July, asking broadcasters to publish details including maximum retail price per month of channels and maximum retail price per month of bouquets of channels, the composition of bouquets and also amended RIO and other details. This further irked the broadcasters.

    In the last couple of years, the industry has been overburdened by regulations. According to a FICCI -EY report, NTO 1.0 reduced the number of TV subscribers by 26 million. While broadcasters are reeling from the impact of Covid2019 , it is of serious concern how another change will impact the industry.

  • TRAI extends deadline to share feedback on broadband connectivity CP

    TRAI extends deadline to share feedback on broadband connectivity CP

    KOLKATA: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has extended the deadline for receiving comments on a consultation paper concerning “Roadmap to promote broadband connectivity and enhanced broadband speed.” The last date for submission of written comments is now 9 November. Counter-comments can be sent in by 23 November.

    The authority released the consultation paper on 20 August. The last dates for receiving written comments and counter comments from stakeholders were fixed as 21 September and 05 October respectively.

    Initially, considering the requests from Industry Associations for extension of time, the last date for submission of written comments was extended to 19 October and for counter-comments to 2 November.

    Read more news on TRAI

    “Now, TRAI has again received request from Industry Association for extension of last date for submission of comments citing various reasons such as curtailed working scenario due to Covid2019 outbreak, need of expert analysis to respond to the issues raised in the consultation paper etc.,” it has stated in the release.

    However, TRAI has clearly mentioned it would not agree to any further delay.

  • Bombay high court questions TRAI on twin conditions, DPO bouquets

    Bombay high court questions TRAI on twin conditions, DPO bouquets

    KOLKATA: Within a very short span of the new tariff order (NTO) implementation, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) issued a set of amendments at the beginning of 2020. These have been challenged legally by the major broadcasters, and the litigation is still in progress.

    In an interesting twist, at today's hearing yesterday, the bench at Bombay High Court has questioned the relevance of a few important clauses of the regulation.

    The division bench of the Bombay high court comprising Justice AA Sayed and Justice Anuja Prabhu Desai asked whether the twin conditions were placed by TRAI for consultation. The industry regulator had introduced this clause citing “manipulation” of consumer choice by broadcasters.

    Read more news on Trai

    “The sum of the a-la-carte rates of the pay channels (MRP) forming part of a bouquet shall in no case exceed one and half times the rate of the bouquet of which such pay channels are a part. The a-la-carte rates of each pay channel (MRP),forming part of a bouquet, shall in no case exceed three times the average rate of a pay channel of the bouquet of which such pay channel is a part,” TRAI said along with introducing the Rs 12 cap for introducing a channel in a bouquet.

    TRAI has been upholding (amended tariff order) NTO 2.0 for bringing rationality between a-la-carte price and the bouquet price. But several reports have indicated that consumers opted for the distribution platform operator (DPO)-designed bouquets post NTO 1.0.

    Considerably, the bench also mentioned that more than 90 per cent bouquets in the market are DPO bouquets which do not appear to be under the same restrictions as the broadcaster’s bouquets. The bench asked TRAI's counsel to explain how and whether DPO bouquets are bound by restrictions as compared to the broadcasters.

    Giving an example of NTO 1.0 which was implemented without the discount cap on the formation of a bouquet by the broadcasters, the bench asked whether NTO 2.0 could be implemented without some of the provisions.

    Read more news on NTO

    The counsel appearing for TRAI has sought time to respond till the next date of hearing, 8 October.

     It is expected that counsels for the union of India and TRAI will complete their arguments during the next hearing. However, keeping in mind the rejoinder to be made by the broadcasters, the first half of Friday has been kept as reserve time.

    Over the past couple of years, the industry has been overburdened by regulations. According to a FICCI -EY report, NTO 1.0 reduced the number of TV subscribers by 26 million. While broadcasters are reeling from the Covid2019 impact, it is of serious concern how another change will impact the industry. 

  • Guest Column: TRAI needs to focus on sectoral hygiene rather than economic regulation

    Guest Column: TRAI needs to focus on sectoral hygiene rather than economic regulation

    MUMBAI: A silent crisis has been brewing in the residential segment of TV viewing sector. Even as its viewership increased during the Covid-induced lockdown, sectoral revenues took a severe hit. While Covid was termed an act of god, TV’s current state appears to be a man-made disaster. TV is an integral part of media, the fourth pillar of democracy. Therefore, it is crucial to respect and preserve it.

    TV accounts for over 40 per cent of the Indian media and entertainment ecosystem’s revenues, making it the sector’s largest contributor. As per pre-pandemic estimates, the M&E industry was slated to grow at 10 per cent CAGR to touch $34 billion by 2022. Covid’s impact has slowed down that march, particularly because advertisement revenues have shrunk, production of new entertainment programs remained suspended and the addition of new subscribers, by direct marketing, has become difficult. The alternative lies in adopting a subscription-led model.

    Broadcasters source content from content producers and manage its distribution over electronic media for viewer consumption. There are costs involved in this management such as content editing, server storage, opex for uplinking, transponder rentals and taxes. Broadcasters rely on meeting these expenses through advertisements inserted into and cheek by jowl with content.

    Besides these, distribution platform operators (DPOs) charge broadcasters a fee to carry programs and their placement in their electronic program guides (EPGs). TV players  have to pay this fee even for channels which are free for viewers. Advertisement revenue covers approximately 60 per cent of such costs. The DPOs, in turn charge subscribers for connectivity and pay content charges besides taxes.

    Read more news on Trai

    Since the nineties, business models were skewed in favour of ad-driven revenues because the amount of video content to be distributed over the  networks exceeded network capacity. Further, business practices were not transparent as broadcasters were unable to verify how many subscribers were watching their channels.

    2011 onwards, the TV digitisation process was supposed to usher in transparency and help overcome capacity constraints by relaying encoded and encrypted program streams from broadcasters to consumers via approximately 1,500 MSOs and over 60,000 cable operators. Digitisation improves picture and sound quality and allows more content to be transmitted using the same resources, thus enhancing consumer choice. Coupled with encryption, this system is called the digital addressable system (DAS), which means the facility to enable or disable program viewing selectively and remotely. Encrypted broadcasting signals can only be decoded via a set top box (STB) programmed uniquely for each consumer as per their indicated choice. Consequently, consumers can access and watch only those programs that they have chosen and pay accordingly. Empowering consumers to exercise choice was the intended first step to enable a subscription-led industry model.

    While the government claims that the entire digitisation process was over in March 2017, the truth is otherwise. MIB tracked DAS implementation using only the number of STBs reportedly shipped out of headend service providers’ warehouses. It did not consider if these STBs had been programmed to show only those channels that viewers had opted for. The STBs, therefore, functioned only as digital to analog converters that enabled viewers to watch all programs in the network’s stream. The task force to oversee DAS implementation did not seek proof to verify that ‘addressability’ had actually been implemented in the subscriber management system, which was the very essence of DAS implementation. Thus, a lot of TV subscribers do not have STBs which allow them to watch only those programs that they opt for.

    In 2017, TRAI issued a tariff order that supposedly aligns regulations with the new digital regime. However, the explanatory memorandum of the tariff order is full of contradictions, attributable to limited knowledge of ground realities.

    One possible infirmity, in TRAI’s demonstrated inability, could be that their staff consists of bureaucrats and professionals from the IT enabled services sector. Telecom generically facilitates one-to-one communication without any concern for the content it carries. The charges too cover fixed and variable levies based on usage time. With such a background, TRAI has been entrusted with regulation of broadcast, which is based on content that is intended for mass consumption.  Since 2004, they have not been able to acquire information about how broadcasters price their content.

    Read more news on broadcasters

    In the explanatory memorandum to the tariff order from March 2017, TRAI says that content pricing is a dynamic process, best understood by broadcasters. At the same time, it restricts them from deciding the price of pay programs included in bouquets. A commercial approach to determine prices requires an understanding of the expected channel viewership, and the cost of producing or acquiring content. Addressing ground realities is important to gather accurate data on channel viewership.

    One must understand that most subscribers use cable operators’ networks, which are local monopolies. Such operators get STBs issued in bulk without requisite programming and pairing them with subscriber details. These STBs enable access to all programs contained in the stream net casted from the MSO, since they are not individually programmed to cater to consumer choice. The cable operators then started charging subscribers a fixed monthly sum without any bill or receipt.

    To address this situation, multiple suggestions were made to TRAI. An important one was to incorporate broadcast expertise, which differs from telecom, into regulation. This is especially important for content handling to ensure that the deployed distribution networks meet desired addressability and content security norms. This author too has suggested that an eminent person, with broadcast video distribution experience, should conduct a demonstrative audit for all empaneled auditors. However, TRAI remains reluctant to change its telco-oriented mindset, where the concern for content has never factored in. The most glaring example is  the regulator’s latest list of auditors to audit the digitalization process. Almost all of them are charted accountants with no experience in broadcast audit. The regulations prescribe the employment of a graduate engineer in the empaneled auditors’ teams, without even mentioning his/her educational background. Finding suitable talent is also challenging, as broadcast engineering, in general, and wired line broadcasting, in particular, are yet to find a place in Indian academia. To sum up, one can’t get the TV business right without getting the number of consumers right.

    TRAI will therefore do well to pay attention to the safe and secure delivery of content, rather than economic regulation that is confined to subscription fund flow audits. As it is, the regulator’s misadventure since March 2019, has resulted in a loss of estimated 26 million subscribers, besides reported closing down of multiple video broadcast programs. It can’t and shouldn’t create a situation where more programs are forced to go off air.

    (The author of the article is Lt. Col. V C Khare, a cable TV expert. The views are personal and Indiantelevision.com may not subscribe to them)

  • The challenges & opportunities before incoming TRAI chairman PD Vaghela

    The challenges & opportunities before incoming TRAI chairman PD Vaghela

    KOLKATA: As the extended five-year term of Ram Sewak Sharma as chairman of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) concludes today (30 September), industry will be looking closely at his replacement, PD Vaghela. The Gujarat cadre 1986 batch IAS officer is the outgoing  pharma department secretary who celebrated his sixtieth birthday on 22 September. Prior to that, he was the chief commissioner of commercial tax in Gujarat. He is also believed to have played an important role in the roll out of the goods and service tax in 2017. Also

    Vaghela is taking the chair at what can be termed a very crucial time for both the telecom and broadcasting sectors. While his predecessor has been widely criticised by stakeholders for over-regulating, Vaghela will have to bring more balance if he wants to narrow down the gap and sense of distrust between industry and the regulator.

    A task which could be challenging as he apparently has not had much to do with the broadcasting sector during his 34 years of being a civil servant. A B.Com graduate from Gujarat, he has masters degree from an institute in the The Hague, a post-graduation in business administration and finally a doctorate in sociology.

    Vaghela has held senior positions in the Kandla Port Trust, with Gujarat tourism, with the industries and mines department, the rural development department, as municipal commissioner (Bhavnagar), and in the home ministry.

    Read more news on TRAI

    One school of thought in the industry is that given his background and the circumstances during his appointment, Vaghela will mostly follow Sharma’s path during his tenure.

    At this moment, broadcasters are indulged in legal battles with the industry watchdog on many fronts including the ad cap and the amended new tariff order.

    A senior executive at one of the big four broadcasters says while the court’s verdict will have to be implemented by both broadcasters and the TRAI, Vaghela’s first challenge will be the direction TRAI will take once the litigation between industry and the regulator is adjudicated upon.  According to him, the new chairman has to also look after the viability of small cable operators who are worried about their future.

    The executive also adds that everyone is now perceiving broadband, not broadcasting, as the future of entertainment. Hence, he adds that the new chairperson can play an important role in carefully steering the future of the broadcasting industry.

    While there is a high chance that a number of consumers will shift to IP-based streaming content via OTT services, Vaghela will have to tread carefully, balancing digitisation and safeguarding traditional broadcasters’ interests.

     “The RS Sharma regime has failed broadcasters. He served an important role in UIDAI implementation. Hence, we had huge expectations from him but we have been disappointed at the end,” a senior industry source states. 

     Although the executive is not very optimistic about the new chairman being able to dilute this sentiment, he thinks the industry should at least observe him for the next few months, before pronouncing any judgements.

    However, another industry veteran claims Vaghela is quite likely going to continue to carry on in the same vein as Sharma. Like his peers in the industry, he acknowledges that there have been frequent changes in regulation which have been challenging, but he also credits Sharma for bringing in some semblance of order in to the TV distribution ecosystem.

    Read more news on NTO 2.0

    “There was so much of scrapping between MSOs, LCOs and broadcasters,” he says. “By pushing cable TV digitisation and mandating some sort of price standardisation through regulation, he forced the industry’s hand to try and work together, which they are doing currently. Yes, there is some irritation from time to time, but the value chain is working closer together, keeping rules modernisation, upgradation and customer service in mind.”

    The veteran also adds that Sharma played a large role in pushing ahead the Narendra Modi-led government’s digitisation agenda, by allowing new pricing models as far as mobility is concerned. “The Jio phenomenon of cheap data, free calls, has been a game changer for the spread of the internet where incumbents such as Airtel and Vodafone and Idea were working with legacy business and consumer models.”

    The CEO of a TV network points out that even though the court cases against NTO 2.0 continue in the courts, Vaghela will very much have to “balance value for consumers with the interest of broadcasters along with operators. He will also possibly play a significant role in OTT legislation as the government is gearing up its efforts to regulate this rapidly growing vertical.”

    “Along with working on major rollouts like 5G implementation, enhancing fibre-to-home broadband connectivity across the country on the telecom side, Vaghela can choose to leave his mark as far as cable TV amendments, a national broadcaster policy, DTH licensing are concerned. Additionally, he could things take a step further and start looking at drawing up a national video policy encompassing TV, streaming, and possibly mobile delivery of video,” says the CEO.

    On the telecom side, Vaghela has contentious issues like super high 5G pricing (at Rs 492 crore per MHz in the 3500 Mhz band) which could deter the ailing telecom service providers(TSPs)  from making a bid. The adjusted gross revenue ruling has gone against at least two of them who have been reeling courtesy the price war that Jio has waged for the past few years. The consultation paper on whether a floor price needs to be put in place for telecom services will also take up his attention. Then, he will have to decide on interconnect usage charges that TSPs charge each other for calls made by customers. They are due to be scrapped by early next year.

    Of course, he will have a bunch of old hands who have been at the regulator for a few years. There’s the TRAI secretary Sunil Gupta, and numerous other advisers who provided back end support for almost every decisive direction, recommendation, and regulation the watchdog has given over the years. How he takes their advice and inputs and formulate these into law for broadcasting and telecom will decide whether he will be blessed or vilified by the industry.

    (This piece has been penned following conversations with real executives from the business of television. Most of them requested that their identity be kept secret while using their quotes and views in this piece)