APB PANELLISTS
6 NEWS & VIEWS
April 2016
‘ Same same but different ?’
In recent years , television has undergone a comprehensive transformation . Delivery network digitisation , the wide availability of high-speed broadband , and technol ogical developments enabling digital devices , particularly mobile telephones , to handle data-heavy applications , have combined to revolutionise television .
More and more content companies and network operators are adopting multi-faceted business models , seeking to deliver content to consumers via over-the-top ( OTT ), as well as traditional platforms . Investments are being made that will determine the future shape and capabilities of networks in Asia .
Investment decisions are influenced by the policy environment — sometimes in ways governments do not anticipate . CASBAA is acutely aware of the complex policy environment for video distribution ; we have been examining and explaining the regulation of pay-TV in Asia for the past decade . Four years ago , we added OTT video services . The present study is an extension of that work , with more detailed information and insights about how policies are developing over time .
For the purposes of this study , we refer to “ pay-TV ” as the established pay-TV platforms of cable , satellite and IPTV , where operators provide both network infrastructure and content to their customers .
By OTT video , we mean video services supplied by businesses that do not necessarily provide the networks over which the video is being transmitted , although sometimes they do . OTT video providers use Internet infrastructure to deliver content to consumers . OTT services are diverse , covering local and international services ; using various business models including free , subscription-based or advertising-based ; being standalone services or linked to services supplied over other TV platforms ; featuring professionally created or usergenerated content , or both ; and supplying legitimate or illegitimate content , as in pirated or illegal content , or all of these .
Already , a high and growing proportion of consumer Internet traffic worldwide consists of OTT video . It has been predicted that Internet video streaming and downloads will grow to more than 80 % of all consumer Internet traffic by 2019 . In the Asia-Pacific region , it is predicted that video will comprise approximately 78 % of all consumer Internet traffic by 2019 , up from 62 % in 2014 .
cally , OTT video has remained subject to generally “ light-touch ” regulation of Internet services , while pay-TV is subject to a higher degree of regulation .
The current state of regulation can be summed up in the well-known regional phrase , Same same but different , that is , the same content ( for example , a TV series ) is subject to a range of different rules and different enforcement mechanisms , depending on the delivery platform , whether the service provider is local or offshore , and whether the service is legitimate or illegitimate . Such differences in treatment lead to competitive distortions and — in a world characterised by communications convergence — are increasingly difficult to justify .
The comparative levels of regulation for pay-TV and OTT TV in each country may be mapped on a continuum of regulation , with light regulation on the left moving towards strict regulation on the right . While a necessarily crude means of representing complex regulatory regimes , it illustrates the different and , at times , contradictory approaches taken to regulation of the various platforms .
Meanwhile , numerous OTT TV offerings — local , regional and international — are being launched across the Asia- Pacific region , including Netflix , iflix , HOOQ and Viu .
A variety of local services are also offered on a country-specific basis , often supplied by or partnered with established pay-TV and free-to-air ( FTA ) platforms , and mobile phone networks .
The diversity of OTT TV services gives rise to a range of practical responses to local regulatory regimes . Established broadcasters , network operators and other content suppliers respect clear rules ; compliance is implicit in the broadcasting ethos as well as their institutional cultures , and is necessary to maintain brand reputation — and value . Such businesses may , in fact , exceed the strict requirements of the law for reputational or other reasons . International services may do so for operational efficiencies , so that the one service complies across all relevant jurisdictions .
In addition , some local regulators are seeking to require a higher standard ; some pay-TV network operators , for example , may be compelled to extend
Typically , OTT video has remained subject to generally “ light-touch ” regulation of
Internet services , while pay-TV is subject to a higher degree of regulation .
Approaches to the regulation of pay-TV and OTT television services
CASBAA last conducted an in-depth study of the regulation of pay-TV and OTT television across the Asia-Pacific region in 2012 . Since our last review , there have been few major changes in the regulation of these platforms , despite significant changes in the market . Typipay-TV content rules to the operator ’ s related OTT TV services , although other local OTT TV services are not required to do the same .
Same content – different rules
From studying the regulatory frameworks in the various jurisdictions , it is clear that a video stream , delivered over a pay-TV network ( such as cable , satellite or IPTV ), must comply with various rules and restrictions . When the same video stream is delivered over the top of a broadband Internet connection , it is not typically subject to the same constraints .
Content regulation
Few of the requirements and restrictions placed on pay-TV operators also apply to OTT video services , with the situation in China being a notable exception . At the other end of the continuum , in various developing jurisdictions , there simply are no content rules ; pay-TV operators follow in-house guidelines and total discretion is allowed the OTT operator . In other countries , while rules are not generally strict , minimum requirements apply , such as prohibitions on obscene or indecent material or on tobacco advertising .
The dfference in regulatory frameworks for pay-TV and OTT TV leads to results that are contradictory to say the least , and even absurd at times . In Indonesia , pay-TV content is held to the same strict standards as FTA TV , even though the same content , available online , is completely unregulated and unrestricted . In China , uncensored video versions earn literally billions of views , while pay-TV is required to broadcast the same content in
Andrew Anderson
Head of Broadcast Operations Seven West Media
APB PANELLISTS
Stan Moote CTO IABM versions where plots are altered according to censors ’ whims .
The rules and restrictions applicable to pay-TV operators are a legacy of earlier regulatory approaches to broadcasting services . When TV was simply a mass media platform , involving content being programmed and scheduled by broadcasters and with consumers exercising little choice or control over the content being viewed , strict content regulation was justified by reference to the protection of vulnerable viewers , such as children . Most regulators tended to recognise that FTA TV services , being freely available and accessible to all , required the strictest content rules .
Pay-TV services were typically subject to rules which , while not as strict , were still extensive . This may have made sense in the analogue era , when subscribers typically received , as a minimum , a basic pack of specific channels providing scheduled , linear broadcasts and when there were no technical means to control access to particular channels or content .
However , pay-TV services have evolved considerably in recent years . While some content is still “ pushed ” through scheduled linear broadcast of channels , it can also be “ pulled ” by viewers accessing catch-up TV or videoon-demand ( VoD ) functionality . Through digitisation , there is greater scope for subscribers to individualise their viewing experience and channel selections , and to use parental controls and other access restrictions to protect vulnerable members of their households . In effect , pay-TV services now operate like OTT TV services , with customers exercising a high level of control over the content they wish to view .
With the same content available on both highly regulated pay-TV platforms and lightly regulated OTT TV platforms , and with similar technical tools available to control access , it is no longer appropriate to require of pay-TV operators that they comply with stricter content standards for all of their product lines . To continue to insist upon higher standards places local pay-TV operators at a considerable disadvantage to their online competitors .
This article is an excerpt from the CASBAA Same Same but Different ? Video Policies for Asian Pay-TV and OTT report , which is available for download by CASBAA members at http :// casbaa . hk / 1Lpz1sz .
Christopher Slaughter
CEO CASBAA