The future of television distribution in the United Kingdom is the subject of much debate. Key to this the long-term prospects for digital terrestrial television and the progressive transition to online delivery. The government is due to publish the results of its review by a cross-industry stakeholder forum. However, techUK, which represents the consumer electronics industry in the United Kingdom, says that the way the recommendations have been made is “deeply flawed” and does not faithfully reflect the views of manufacturers and television operation system providers or the practical realities of how televisions work.

Representing over 1,000 member companies, from industry giants to small and medium-sized enterprises, techUK was founded in 2013 as a trade association to champion digital transformation.

Such is the concern of techUK members that its consumer electronics strategy and technology committee has produced a paper that is highly critical of the process adopted by the future of television distribution forum so far.

“We want to make it clear to Ministers that we as an industry do not endorse the current recommendations emerging from the FoTVD process, which has not been fair or representative, and believe key choices need to be revisited,” it says in its own position paper. “We want a solution which ensures universal access to PSB content on every TV via genuinely open standards — regardless of whether it is delivered via IP, DTT or hybrid — replicating the platforms we have access to today and ensuring continuity.”

The group, which represents leading consumer electronics manufacturers, says that it does not support switching off the digital terrestrial television network in 2034. It says all the audience benefits of an online solution are already available. It does not support cutting back the terrestrial transmission networks so that it becomes a second-class service. It supports more ambitious, but achievable, migrations to a full high-definition and ultra-high-definition service.

The paper presents five core safeguards that the government should put in place to protect audiences in the United Kingdom before any decision is taken on the timing or terms of any proposed switch-off of digital terrestrial television.

1. Guarantee universal access to public service broadcaster channels and streams on every television. All televisions sold in the United Kingdom must be able to present them through logical channel numbers and a guide, regardless of how they are delivered.
2. Back open standards, not proprietary platforms. Mandate open, non-proprietary standards for delivering the online streams and associated data of public service broadcasters, enabling interoperability across all compliant televisions.
3. Ensure unconditional access to the metadata associated with the channels of public service broadcasters. This must be made available to all compliant devices on fair, non-discriminatory terms.
4. Replicate the collaborative model of digital switchover, under Ofcom oversight and via an organisation like the Digital TV Group, to agree a single United Kingdom profile and compliance framework for IP services, just as the DTG D-Book did for digital terrestrial television.
5. Ensure a competitive United Kingdom marketplace, including fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory access to PSB services for device manufacturers that are not designated as Regulated Television Selection Services under the Media Act.

The paper is notably critical of the Freely platform from Everyone TV, which is supported and operated by the five public service broadcasters.

It says that any attempt to standardise television interfaces would inevitably rob audiences of their choice, narrow competition and freeze innovation. Any future television distribution system needs to ensure that a horizontal market is supported, allowing manufacturers to develop differentiated products that meet audience needs.

Without clear policy direction, the paper suggests, there will be an inconsistent app-based patchwork that fails the basic test of universality and ready access to trusted public service broadcaster programming. It says the switchover to digital terrestrial television worked because the government and the regulator oversaw a single, open, standards-based system, which created common technical standards and a simple, numbered programme guide that worked the same for everyone and was easy to use.

As the paper explains, the DVB-I specification that is being trialed in Europe and elsewhere enables an online distribution model which is very similar to digital terrestrial television, enabling a very similar user experience. As a standards-based solution, it would alleviate the barriers imposed by the limited and proprietary nature of options currently available from public service broadcasters in the United Kingdom.

The paper concludes that the universality of carriage of public service broadcasters is a critical dependency for any future transition to all-IP delivery. It advises the government that setting a non-negotiable carriage directive with universal access to the channels of public service broadcasters through logical channel numbers and a programme guide on all televisions is essential to safeguard the objectives of the Media Act and to deliver an inclusive, trusted, and future-ready IP television ecosystem.

www.techuk.org