OFCOM CALLS FOR TIMETABLE FOR DTV SWITCH

The U.K. is “recognised as the global leader in [DTV] adoption,” OFCOM said. The report said switchover would benefit the country by: (1) Releasing spectrum for use by other broadcasting services or new communications services. (2) Ensuring that lack of access to spectrum isn’t a key entry barrier for new terrestrial TV channels. (3) Allowing nearly all homes to receive digital signals through their aerials compared with around 3/4 today, and providing many more than 5 free-to-air TV channels, interactive services, and new pay TV options on all sets. (4) Cementing the U.K.’s lead in DTV services.

But there are several obstacles to consumer takeup of the technology, OFCOM said. First, it said, only a minority now support the policy of full switchover, and many are “considerably less interested” in converting secondary than primary TVs. Public service broadcasters will need a “clear and unambiguous commercial incentive to drive switchover,” OFCOM said. Third, it said, free-to-view terrestrial TV will be a key feature of the TV market for the foreseeable future, but its coverage “will be far from universal” before the signal can be boosted during switchover. Fourth, said OFCOM, the timing for switchover hasn’t been determined. While the govt. and broadcasters are working on it, manufacturers, consumers, broadcasters and transmission companies “will be less willing to invest in equipment necessary” for switchover. In addition, the regulator said, while the “current loose confederation” of stakeholders has been effective in delivering the preconditions for the govt.’s decision to switch, more coordination will be needed as planning moves to implementation. Finally, OFCOM said, many of the wider benefits of switchover will come only if spectrum can be reused after the analog signal is turned off. Upcoming international radiocommunications conferences will determine how the released spectrum can be used.

To speed takeup, OFCOM recommended, among other things: (1) A gradual, region-by-region switchover in which one or 2 analog channels would be turned off first to boost the digital signal. “TV screens would not go blank overnight and DTT availability would be increased to near-universal levels,” OFCOM said. (2) Switchover not be delayed substantially so it occurs beyond the lifespan of existing analog transmission equipment. (3) The govt. announce a timetable for switchover. (4) OFCOM seeks commitments from broadcasters and consider including “appropriate and necessary additional obligations” for nationwide DTV rollout in the new digital public service broadcasting licenses set to be issued by year-end. (5) The regulator consider imposing spectrum pricing to spur incentives to promote switchover. (6) OFCOM considers whether regulations are needed to obtain a viable free-to-air satellite option before switchover. (7) A mass national ad campaign well before switchover to build public support. (8) An entity called “Switchco” be created to deliver switchover by a specified date. (9) The UK seek maximum flexibility of use for the TV band at global conferences.

The report is “quite useful” in setting out where the U.K. is on the road to switchover and contains several recommendations beneficial to consumers, such as addressing concerns about low-income homes and the availability of free- to-air satellite services, said Allan Williams, senior policy advisor at the Consumers’ Assn (CA). However, he said, CA is concerned about several key recommendations. OFCOM’s call for the announcement of a switchover date is “far too early,” he said. Before that happens, he said, several consumer tests must be met: DTV must be affordable, taken up by a majority of consumers and have adequate signal coverage. The bottom line, Williams said, is that switchover shouldn’t take place until consumers are ready for it -- and with 70-80% of U.K. TVs yet to convert, the time isn’t ripe.

The OFCOM report is one of a series outlining progress on the path to switchover, Williams said. The BBC is slated to produce a report later this week, he said, and the CA’s report is due out at the end of April. This is the beginning of “a long debate” on progress toward DTV switchover, he said.

“The current balance of public opinion is of opposition to switchover and mistrust of Government motives,” according to a March 30 report by the Generics Group for the Digital TV Project (DTP), a partnership of the govt. and consumer, broadcasting and industry groups. Before long, the report said, the govt. should clearly explain to viewers the rationale for the switchover as well as its timeline. Despite public wariness, analysts said, voluntary conversion is taking place, and if switchover is announced, the ‘vast majority” of households will convert at least one TV by that date. “Delaying switchover will not make it more successful,” the report said.

A survey of 1,500 U.K. viewers found digital channels less popular and less watched than the 5 analog terrestrial channels, and consumers unconvinced more TV will be better TV. The govt. “should put the content of [DTV] on the agenda alongside its practicalities,” the report said. Nor should DTV be promoted as an interactive information service akin to the Internet, the report said, because there’s little evidence it’s used that way now. The report also recommended the “supply chain” prepare for surges in demand as switchover occurs in given regions. Finally, it said, given that 5% of the British population says it will never get DTV, “the risk that switchover could be exclusionary should therefore be addressed.”

The Digital TV Group (DTG), whose members include broadcasters, consumer and other advocacy groups, manufacturers, retailers and govt. regulators, said the DTP report showed Britons had a “healthy attitude” toward DTV despite the “surprising” finding they were ignorant of and confused about govt. plans to turn off existing analog system. DTG shares the DTP’s “logical conclusion” that “the sooner consumers are alerted to government plans, the longer they and the supply chain will have to prepare,” said Dir.- Gen. Marcus Coleman.

The emergence of DTV in Europe is sparking fears about who will control access to it, the European Audiovisual Observatory (EAO) said in a report published last week. The report -- Vertical Limits - New Challenges for Media Relations? -- grew out of a Sept. 2003 workshop. While traditional media regulation is driven by the goal of preventing the formation of information monopolies and dominant media power, DTV introduces several new bottlenecks after a program is composed, an excerpt from the EAO report said. Technical bottlenecks in DTV are often the result of proprietary standards combined with market dynamics such as network and tipping effects, and the way services are marketed to consumers via new business models, on the basis of some sort of electronic access control, the report said.

Traditional media law isn’t well-prepared to deal with 3rd-parties’ control to market access, the EAO said. The European Union recently adopted a new communications framework that includes rules governing control over technical bottlenecks in DTV, the report said. The scope of the regulations is restricted to the conditional access system (CA), although the EU’s access directive also authorizes member states to extend regulation to cover other bottlenecks, the EAO said. But the access directive focuses mainly on technical aspects of bottleneck control, ignoring media policy, it said. General competition law and media concentration law might be better than communications laws for tackling bottlenecks, the EAO said.

One speaker at the workshop called bundling program packages the most critical bottleneck affecting pluralism and diversity. The speaker -- unidentified in the report excerpt -- suggested several solutions, including content regulation to directly influence a pluralistic media offer, particularly in the public service broadcasting arena, and a focus on common carrier obligations. The U.S. lacks a systematic approach to DTV bottleneck problems, another speaker said. However, the report said, the U.S. has opened the equipment market to competition, and further action by the FCC on interactive TV services can’t be ruled out if anti- competitive bottlenecks emerge. Moreover, the excerpt said, First Amendment protection is very strong, meaning the objectives of interference from access regulation must outweigh operators’ free speech rights.