The great Indian TV tangle: policy chaos, power clash and a medium in limbo

New Delhi: “The Indian TV industry is not a jungle; it’s a maze.” That’s how a broadcast industry veteran summed up the current state of India’s broadcasting ecosystem - not collapsing, but trapped in layers of overlapping policies and inconsistent control.

His remarks, made on the sidelines of FICCI Frames last week in Mumbai, cut through the noise around the narrative of TV decline, placing the blame not on viewers or markets but on a regulatory maze where the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) continue to wrestle for authority.

A crisis made by regulation

Echoing the findings of BestMediaInfo’s recent report on India’s “policy-made” TV crisis, the veteran’s comments highlighted how uneven regulation has turned a once-stable industry into an obstacle course.

“The problem arises if regulations fail. If linear TV is controlled but others are left free, ignoring advertising codes, downlinking norms or content codes, TV will be at risk. But if TV is given a fair chance to compete, it will survive,” he added.

His argument underlined a long-standing grievance among broadcasters: while traditional television operates under stringent codes and licences, parallel ecosystems like OTT, FAST channels and YouTube are largely unregulated. The imbalance, he argued, doesn’t allow linear TV to compete on a level field.

Counting what isn’t counted

Contrary to the “TV is dying” narrative, another industry leader, speaking on condition of anonymity, insisted that viewership remains steady when measured correctly.

“Platforms like JioFiber and Airtel Xstream are TV delivery platforms but aren’t properly reported. Similarly, BARC’s non-reporting of IPTV creates major confusion. Without monitoring or reporting IPTV, investors hesitate, affecting ad revenue.”

This gap between reality and reporting has ripple effects. With the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) omitting IPTV viewership, advertisers lack clarity and investors lose confidence, resulting in declining revenue even as consumption stays intact.

A bureaucratic traffic jam

Part of the confusion, according to a distribution veteran, stems from an ongoing tussle between the DoT and MIB over control of broadcasting under the new Telecommunications Act, 2023.

“There is a tussle between DoT and MIB over control. Service authorisation issues leave regulation sidelined,” he noted.

That conflict, coupled with frequent bureaucratic reshuffles, has led to delays and uncertainty.

TRAI Chairman Anil Kumar Lahoti in his keynote speech highlighted that his dual structure creates challenges. 

“Unlike OTT, where the broadcaster’s content can be directly delivered to or accessed by consumers over the internet, linear TV has multiple players in the chain. This multi-player ecosystem throws its own challenges in facilitating a non-discriminatory and fair deal to all players, irrespective of their size or geography,” Lahoti said.

“Changes in government and officials have slowed understanding. New personnel need time to grasp the scenario,” the distribution veteran added.

The result is a governance vacuum where new forms of TV, such as IPTV, FAST and hybrid linear-digital channels, exist in a grey zone.

“Regulations often get challenged. The main challenges are ensuring all-encompassing regulations, not focusing only on linear TV, and managing ratings, which define business via advertising and subscriptions,” he added.

The uneven battlefield

In his keynote speech on the first day, India Today Group Chairman and Editor-in-Chief Aroon Purie sharply criticised broadcasting regulation.

Government’s role, he argued, should be to create a fair, level playing field and then step back.

While licensed broadcasters face compliance burdens, others enjoy unchecked freedom.

A senior industry observer pointed out that some platforms and FAST services carry content without regulatory oversight.

He warned that this lopsided approach is weakening linear TV’s competitiveness. “Unregulated platforms can show any content or advertisements without restriction. Linear TV is constrained, limiting its reach and competitiveness.”

The regulatory framework hasn’t caught up with the convergence of screens. The same television set can now deliver both regulated and unregulated content, yet the law treats them as entirely separate realms.

Fragmentation and policy drift

All the stakeholders BestMediaInfo.com spoke with agreed that a lack of unity among broadcasters and distributors is weakening the sector.

“There is a lack of unity in raising these issues. Consolidation on the telecom and linear sides suits major players, while others face challenges,” said one of the industry veterans quoted above.

Without collective advocacy, smaller networks and cable operators struggle to make themselves heard in policy circles, even as they shoulder the heaviest regulatory load, quipped the distribution veteran.

Beyond numbers: the reality of a maze

Despite all the obstacles, industry leaders believe the medium’s core remains strong.

“A holistic view shows overall TV consumption is stable, even if individual segments fluctuate,” said the industry observer quoted above.

Yet the path forward depends on restoring parity and clarity. Recent TRAI advisories on encryption, carriage fees and service authorisation have only deepened contradictions.

“TRAI has given conflicting opinions. The encryption advisory could threaten platforms like DD Freedish. Unregulated channels, including millions of YouTube channels, operate freely while linear channels face strict rules,” said a broadcast policy expert.

The sector, he added, doesn’t need protection; it needs coherence. Regulation must be platform-neutral, technology-agnostic and uniformly enforced.

In his message to the government and sector regulator, the policy expert said, “Overgrazing of content across platforms is an issue. Multiple screens in homes dilute television’s traditional role. Regulations on linear TV, while strict, are stifling it, whereas others have free rein.”

“India’s television crisis is not the end of broadcast; it’s a long, confusing maze built by fragmented policy. Until the DoT-MIB power tussle is resolved and regulation catches up with reality, the medium will continue in survival mode, not growth mode,” he added.

A former CEO of a large broadcast network summed up by saying, “Distribution is changing. Discovery on smart TVs, app stores and CTV operating systems is becoming a new gatekeeping layer. Commission rates and shelf placement can shape outcomes. India will need a “must find” and “must offer” approach for key categories so that consumers can actually locate Indian news and entertainment apps easily.”