|
NEW DELHI: Broadcast regulator Trai today paved the way for private players entry into terrestrial broadcasting by suggesting to the government it would stoke competition and choice for consumers. |
| In its recommendations on ‘Private Terrestrial Television Broadcast’, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) today said that “apart from commercial service, such a policy decision could also pave the way for community television.”
In respect of commercial television broadcasting, it has been recommended that for the present this should be permitted in both analogue and digital modes since at present there is sufficient spectrum to support a few players even in the analogue mode. Details of frequency allocation for analogue and digital service could be finalised at a later date once the major decisions are taken. Allocation of spectrum would also have to take note of the requirements of wireless based telecommunication services. No detailed eligibility conditions have been proposed except that the same disqualifications should apply as has been decided recently for private FM radio. Similarly, the licensing structure should also follow the parallel of FM radio. |
|
However, Trai has suggested against permitting any pilot projects on MMDS or other technologies before laying down a comprehensive policy and regulatory framework. Dwelling on a licensing regime, Trai has said licences could be given on the basis of cities after an in principle announcement is made. If in case there is interest shown in particular regions, then those regions should also be allowed to be put on bid. In the case of FM radio, no networking was permitted. However, the case of television is different where there are already a large number of private channels having national coverage and viewership. Therefore, networking for television should be permitted to allow for competition with established national cable and satellite networks. In view of the large number of private TV channels having national coverage, networking has been recommended. In respect of foreign investment it has been proposed that there should be a comprehensive review to bring about a greater consistency in the rules of various segments of media sector, Trai has conveyed to the government. During the consultation process, it was noted that the telecom sector is also interested in the rea of terrestrial broadcasting and, accordingly, this review would need to take note of the likely convergence in future between A consultation paper on this subject had been circulated in February, 2005. Some of the major reasons for making these recommendations are: • The Supreme Court judgment of 1995 on airwaves that no medium should be controlled by a monopoly either of the state or of any individual, group or organisation. • The private sector would complement the public sector and provide more resources for the development of this alternative. • This would give an additional choice to the consumers to view channels in a free-to-air mode. • The recommendations recognise that community television could also be permitted and detailed recommendations on this would be sent once government takes an in principle decision to allow the private sector for terrestrial In respect of commercial television broadcasting, it has been recommended that for the present this should be permitted in both analogue and digital modes since at present there is sufficient spectrum to support a few players The general disqualifications for a policy relating to private participation in terrestrial broadcasting, according to Trai, could be the following: • Companies not incorporated in India. Details of frequency allocation for analogue and digital service could be finalised at a later date once the major decisions are taken, Trai has said. Allocation of spectrum would also have to take note of the requirements of wireless based telecommunication services. However, these set of recommendations need not necessarily mean that pubcaster Doordarshan’s monopoly over terrestrial broadcast is immediately under threat. Before any action happens on this front, the government would have to take a view on Trai’s reccomendation and then, probably, seek Parliament’s okay too on the subject of allowing private players in terrestrial broadcasting, The full text of the recommendations is available on Trai’s web site, www.trai.gov.in.
• Trusts, Societies, non-profit oganisations controlled/associated companies. |
Tag: private
-
Terrestrial TV: Trai sets terms for private players
-
Private sports broadcasters seek clarity on ‘national interest’
NEW DELHI: How would you define national interest? And, is pubcaster Prasar Bharati trying to boost its revenues in the name of public interest at the cost of private enterprise?
While Prasar Bharati stood its ground on the issue of sharing of feed of any sporting event of national importance (read, cricket) with it by any rights holder, private broadcasters frothed at the mouth maintaining that if this is made mandatory by the government, not only would their business model go for a toss, but it would not be a fair game.
“Properties would get devalued and broadcasters would have to re-evaluate sporting properties that may impact investment in sports,” ESPN India MD RC Venkateish openly said.
Doordarshan director-general Navin Kumar, however, felt that any attempt to define `national importance’ would be “subjective” and that such an issue should be seen in the overall perspective of the event itself.
“If India is playing Pakistan in cricket, then riot-like situation could arise if maximum number of people are unable to watch the match… and this event could be called of national importance,” Kumar said, making it amply clear that exclusivity is a word not favoured by DD or the government and that DD’s terrestrial reach is still to be matched by others.
Kumar, along with other panelists were speaking at a seminar on “Sports Broadcasting & Content Sharing: A Reality Check” organized by the Confederation of Indian Industry, which was moderated by School of Convergence director Paranjoy Guha Thakurta. In short, the discussion revolved around a proposed legislation making TV feeds of listed sporting events being made available to terrestrial broadcaster, DD, irrespective of who holds the telecast rights.
Venkateish and Zee Sports CEO Gary Lovejoy were quick to rebut assertions made by Kumar pointing out issues like `national importance’ and `public interest’ should be debated thoroughly before any piece of legislation is enacted.
“Suddenly making a list (of sporting events) would be totally unfair,” Lovejoy said, adding that the UK, for example, has a list of protected sports (drawn up in 1956), but it had been given final shape after great deal of consultation with the private sector.
Pointing out that latest NRS figures of 61 million cable and satellite homes highlight increasing penetration of cable TV, Venkateish said, “It wouldn’t be right to say that access (to sports) is denied (to a large section of population).”
But Kumar stuck to his guns saying that ‘reach’ was an issue and in the name of commercial interest, a sizable portion of the population could not be excluded from viewing what is considered important for them. Incidentally, a major portion of DD’s revenues come from telecasting cricket matches and the next biggest grosser are the Hindi feature films aired on DD National and various regional channels of the national broadcaster.
Recently, when the I&B ministry went to the Cabinet with a proposal relating to DD and sports events, there was no unanimity on the issue and the matter was referred to a yet-to-be-formed group of ministers (GoM) to study the “must provide clause” for broadcasters who will have to share content of sporting events of national importance with the public service broadcaster.
That the issue is not so simple could be gauged from the fact that though DD’s Kumar reiterated on creating a win-win situation for all parties concerned through such a mandate — joint marketing of events was one instance cited by him — Venkateish finally admitted that such an arrangement would “upset the business model” of private broadcasters as subscription revenue would get impacted.
What was surprising that though DD made a strong case for such a law to be in place, quoting examples of the UK and Australia, it admitted that it would not be in a position to go out and bid for sporting rights outside India, especially cricket.
Kumar also took a swipe at the bidding process of the Indian domestic cricket last year — since then declared null and void by the court — indicating that Zee Telefilms’ bid of $ 308 million was “artificially high” and “unsustainable,” which attracted a counter-attack from Zee.
“It’s not correct for DD to dictate how Zee should conduct its business,” Lovejoy sarcastically shot back, making it clear that DD wants to have its cake and eat it too, while the money is paid by some private broadcaster.
The issue needs to be debated more intensely and extensively, most private broadcasters agreed, as this has commercial and legal ramifications on private broadcasters. Still, they insisted that it would be better if the broadcast industry, DD included, sorts out this issue amongst themselves without government interference.
For the record, in Australia, a public broadcaster has to bid for major sporting events deemed important for mass viewers. If any private broadcaster wins the rights it works out a content sharing arrangement with the public broadcaster on the basis of market value, reach and commercial viability of the event. Japan, Brazil, New Zealand, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Argentina and Mexico have no such ‘must-provide’ norm.