The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on Tuesday released a consultation paper for inputs on the formulation of the National Broadcast Policy. The consultation paper, according to the regulator, aims to position India as a global content hub. While TRAI claims the policy acknowledges industry-wide challenges, stakeholders argue that it ignores crucial broadcast-specific concerns, and instead emphasises larger media & entertainment industry. 

"Issues such as overregulation, inflation, interconnection, licencing restrictions, litigations between broadcasters and DPOs have not been addressed. Instead of addressing these pressing issues, the paper appears to offer vague comments without clear solutions," remarked a senior executive with a prominent broadcaster on condition of anonymity.  

He in fact went on to say that considering how less the policy talks about the broadcast sector, the government should not call it National Broadcast Policy but instead rename it as Media and Entertainment Policy as that will better represent its content and scope.

"The consultation paper on the National Broadcast Policy seems to extend its scope beyond broadcasting by addressing issues related to films, OTT platforms, and AVCG, encompassing the entire media and entertainment industry," he said.   

In its consultation paper, TRAI has highlighted several key issues and sought stakeholder input by April 30, 2024. These encompass the need to provide affordable television services in underserved areas, bolster research and development along with indigenous manufacturing of broadcasting equipment, and stimulate employment within the sector. 

Additionally, the paper focuses on promoting Indian content for global recognition, strengthening public service broadcasting, and supporting the growth of various segments like OTT platforms, online gaming, and animation. It also emphasizes the effective utilization of radio and community radio stations (CRS), enhancing policy frameworks, combating piracy, improving audience measurement systems, and establishing efficient grievance redressal mechanisms to address concerns promptly.

Another industry expert too emphasised that the issues affecting the sector, especially relating to monetization, haven’t been addressed in the consultation paper. He mentioned that when TRAI released the pre-consultation paper, broadcasters had shared their concerns. Despite this, the second consultation paper appears to have not taken note of those concerns and is repeating those issues without offering new perspectives. 

A senior executive of another TV channel said that the consultation paper is similar to the pre-consultation paper. He remarked, “The IBDF had provided a thorough response to TRAI's pre-consultation paper on the National Broadcast Policy, and the industry's stance is expected to remain unchanged.”

Last year, the Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF) submitted its perspective on the pre-consultation on the proposed National Broadcast Policy. IBDF had said that the broadcasting bill would be more viable and responsive to the needs of the sector if it encompasses key objectives while addressing some existential concerns faced by the television broadcasting sector. 

The IBDF had expressed that the Draft Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023 should prioritize key objectives and address critical concerns facing the television broadcasting sector. They highlighted issues such as rigid price regulations and regulatory ambiguity. 

According to the IBDF, despite TRAI's Pre-Consultation Paper on the National Broadcast Policy, the draft bill was circulated for consultation without completing the process or addressing fundamental stakeholder concerns.

The industry body had recommended a robust principle-based broadcast bill that recognizes the integral role of broadcasting in India's economic landscape and includes: 

1. A stable and enduring self-regulatory framework with forbearance on economic regulation; 
2. The need to nurture creativity in content production and foster innovation in distribution and carriage technologies; 
3. The imperative to protect freedom of speech and expression;
4. The importance of market-driven licensing and negotiation for creative property; 
5. The need for flexibility and adaptability to changing consumption patterns and technological innovations in sectoral and regulator capabilities; and 
6. The need to recognise, protect and uphold the primacy of intellectual property rights protection in content-driven industries 
7. And the need for sector-specific copyright enforcement measures.

According to the IBDF’s submission to the pre-consultation paper last year, OTT platforms should not be covered under the bill, as they are distinct from traditional broadcasting platforms. The prescription of programme and advertisement codes by the Central government is viewed as an unreasonable regulation of free speech, necessitating their inclusion in the draft bill for consultation, it said. 

The IBDF had suggested that implementation of accessibility standards should be voluntary, and maintaining a single industry-led rating body is preferred to prevent conflicts in data. Excessive penalties, it argued, may have a chilling effect on free speech.