Back in April, VideoAge (along with other industry publications) reported on the U.K.’s decision to make a future move to delivering TV content away from the historical tower/transmitter to a more modern online system, via Freely TV. On the surface it seemed a simple deal — turn off the tower, turn on the web! But on closer inspection it seems such a move isn’t going to be that easy.
Going back to that announcement, Freely TV is an umbrella name for the U.K.’s BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5 linear broadcasters. The BBC is the only broadcaster in that group not airing commercials, and a recent survey indicated that U.K. advertisers are turning off linear TV quicker than the viewers are. Plus, Brit viewers have the highest percentage of linear turn-off, according to a European survey by Audience Project.
Some critics may suggest that the BBC’s move to partner with other linear outlets may have been an attempt to boost revenues considering that it’s set to lose national TV license fee payments in 2027 under a decision by the former Conservative party government.
The new Labor government victory has thrown a financial lifeline to the BBC in rescinding that decision, so the BBC coffers are secure in keeping that revenue.
Some people had thought the move to an Internet delivery would have saved money in delivery costs, allowing that money to go toward content. The Washington, D.C.-based National Association of Broadcasters’ chief technology officer, Sam Matheny, was quick to point out that that would not be the case. “The idea to turn off the towers and we could invest in programming just doesn’t ring true to me,” he said.
In checking up on how America would deal with the possibility of U.S. linear channels going online, this reporter was surprised to learn that most calls and emails to terrestrial broadcasters resulted in having to explain the whole U.K. process with Freely TV. Which means it could very well take longer for the U.S. to make such a move.
NAB’s Sam Matheny was somewhat vague, but adamant that the Freely TV idea in the U.K. was not even something on the discussion table in the U.S. Numerous calls and emails to the FCC, the U.S. regulatory agency, failed to produce a single response. Sadly, the same has to be said for OFCOM, the regulatory organization overseeing broadband, phone, mobile, TV, radio, and postal services in the U.K.
However, Ed Leighton, OFCOM’s director of Strategy and Policy, has been quoted in a report as saying, “Digital Terrestrial Television faces big long-term challenges and audiences who rely on it deserve a solution that is sustainable and fit for the future. It requires a new vision and planning across industry and government.” The report also noted that, “a significant number of broadcasters had ‘voiced concerns’ that maintaining the current terrestrial infrastructure was ‘unlikely to be commercially attractive after the mid-2030s.’”
A BBC submission to the government regarding the future of broadcasting in the U.K. suggested it “expected a ‘tipping point’ in the ‘coming years’ where the ‘cost per head’ of terrestrial TV and satellite distribution ‘is no longer viable’ for many broadcasters.”
In a report to the government about a TV distribution future, OFCOM noted that “one of its proposed models would be to move towards switch-off (of traditional TV delivery) in the ‘longer term.’”
While delivery of all TV content in the future seems to be a given, how everyone gets there safely and what they do once there has not been addressed at all.
The BBC did respond to VideoAge, via Ian Watkins in its press office, who admitted, “This a long-term undertaking — at least a decade in the planning. That’s why we are so clear we won’t leave anyone behind as we move from broadcast to online viewing and listening. We do not believe that DTT [Digital Terrestrial Television] should be switched off until universality can be delivered.”
Obviously this includes several aspects needing to be reviewed and tested but they clearly haven’t been addressed (or even thought of in the U.S.).
The recent failure of cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike demonstrated one of the reasons to be wary of TV content being exclusively delivered safely and securely via the web. In the CrowdStrike case, TV channels were affected and went off air, several U.S. airlines were seriously affected, as were banking and healthcare facilities, along with many other different industries around the globe. The CrowdStrike outage reportedly affected around 8.5 million computers operating Microsoft Windows. Imagine that happening in an Internet-delivered TV world?
Flaws in a system delivering communications to a nation have to be at an incredibly high “water-tight” security level and that is not currently possible. So, how long will it take to make it possible — if at all?
Because of that the BBC’s Watkins admitted, “This change to an online-only world is a long-way off. We can’t and won’t make this transition alone. We are already working with other PSBs [Public Service Broadcasters] and we are committed to collaborating with the wider media industry and supply chains to ensure a positive future for TV and radio distribution and to maximize the opportunities of this once-in-a-generation shift.”
However, the BBC added that it expected a “tipping point” in the “coming years” where the “cost per head” of terrestrial TV and satellite distribution “is no longer viable for many broadcasters.”
(By Mike Reynolds)
Audio Version (a DV Works service)
Leave A Comment