Ro
En
Рy03 September 2015
1472 reads
Dorin SCOBIOALĂ, 
Director General of CAT Studio, Reuters Television correspondent
Director General of CAT Studio, Reuters Television correspondent
If the Republic of Moldova had complied with the commitments, undertaken under the Agreement signed within the Regional Radiocommunication Conference at Geneva in 2006, starting from June 17, 2015 the conventional analogical broadcastings would have ceased, passing to digital broadcasting. In fact, over two weeks from the deadline, on July 2, 2015, the Moldovan Parliament adopted only in the first reading the draft amendment to the Broadcasting Code, which sets out the stages of transition from analogue to digital television.
What do we win? What do we lose?
We all heard about the advantages of digitization, the main of them being the access to a much larger number of TV channels, with a high quality of images and sound. In practical terms this enables the consumer to get information from more sources and the radiobroadcasters to expand the coverage and to fight for audience under fair competition conditions.
The most widespread risk is the impossibility of owners of older TVs, without an incorporated DVB-T receiver to receive the digital signal and the need to purchase a set of top boxes for them. Researches show us that 7 of 10 households from Moldova receive the TV signal via antenna, but no study was carried out to reveal the number of Moldovans who still have an Alfa or Rubin TV in 2015, who would need an additional tuner. This is the reason why it is impossible to estimate the costs of a possible state subsidy to provide underprivileged groups with access to television. However, though, even if we did not observed the terms assumed to for implement the reform, the Moldovan officials stated that there will be a 2-3 year transition period, while in the Republic of Moldova it will be possible to receive both the analogical and digital signals.
Who is guilty?
The first stakeholders interested in the transition to the digital television to happen as late as possible are holders of current terrestrial broadcasting licenses. Digitization would deprive them of the advantage of national coverage, ensured by the analogical frequencies they hold or control. The emergence of multiplexes will put them in the same conditions with the televisions, which are now available only to subscribers of cable networks and to owners of satellite antennas. The current broadcasters with national coverage would lose their leadership (in some cases – even monopolies) on the market, as well as the huge investments made in the network of transmitters and other analogue equipment. It is not a secret that the largest televisions in Moldova are controlled by influential politicians, which largely explains the slow pace of transition. Since appointment of the CCA members is politicized, in the lack of some clear criteria, set by law, of eligibility of channels for inclusion in the multiplex, it is not hard to imagine that selection will be made according to the principle of “in new times still with us”. Being accustomed to play by their own rules, chiefs of the largest televisions are reluctant to accept new players in their club, with whom they should compete fairly for audiences and implicitly for budgets.
Digitization is less dangerous for operators of cable networks and IPTV service providers. The number of channels, which can be broadcasted via a multiplex is limited and represents a “strictly need”. Once a large number of local channels is available to the TV viewer wherever in the country “over-the-air” and free of charge, cable operators will lose an important lever of influence and income - the right of making decisions on whether to include or not some televisions in the grid. The multiplex will make impossible local interventions and will deprive signal distributors to limit the public access to certain information.
Questions without answers
They talk about high costs of accession of televisions to digital networks, since the amounts vary from 20 to 30 thousand euros per month for each channel. We do not know however the basis on which such estimations were made. On one hand, excessive rates will be an obstacle for the channels, which will not afford such expenses and will favor the current media magnates. On the other hand, the purchase, installation and maintenance of terrestrial broadcasting equipment are also expensive, which means that any broadcaster shall provide for in the budget costs related to bringing the signal to the viewer. The unanswered question is whether the state shall cover a part of costs, in the case of multiplexes, so as to provide its citizens with a larger variety of information sources?
We all heard about the advantages of digitization, the main of them being the access to a much larger number of TV channels, with a high quality of images and sound. In practical terms this enables the consumer to get information from more sources and the radiobroadcasters to expand the coverage and to fight for audience under fair competition conditions.
The most widespread risk is the impossibility of owners of older TVs, without an incorporated DVB-T receiver to receive the digital signal and the need to purchase a set of top boxes for them. Researches show us that 7 of 10 households from Moldova receive the TV signal via antenna, but no study was carried out to reveal the number of Moldovans who still have an Alfa or Rubin TV in 2015, who would need an additional tuner. This is the reason why it is impossible to estimate the costs of a possible state subsidy to provide underprivileged groups with access to television. However, though, even if we did not observed the terms assumed to for implement the reform, the Moldovan officials stated that there will be a 2-3 year transition period, while in the Republic of Moldova it will be possible to receive both the analogical and digital signals.
Who is guilty?
The first stakeholders interested in the transition to the digital television to happen as late as possible are holders of current terrestrial broadcasting licenses. Digitization would deprive them of the advantage of national coverage, ensured by the analogical frequencies they hold or control. The emergence of multiplexes will put them in the same conditions with the televisions, which are now available only to subscribers of cable networks and to owners of satellite antennas. The current broadcasters with national coverage would lose their leadership (in some cases – even monopolies) on the market, as well as the huge investments made in the network of transmitters and other analogue equipment. It is not a secret that the largest televisions in Moldova are controlled by influential politicians, which largely explains the slow pace of transition. Since appointment of the CCA members is politicized, in the lack of some clear criteria, set by law, of eligibility of channels for inclusion in the multiplex, it is not hard to imagine that selection will be made according to the principle of “in new times still with us”. Being accustomed to play by their own rules, chiefs of the largest televisions are reluctant to accept new players in their club, with whom they should compete fairly for audiences and implicitly for budgets.
Digitization is less dangerous for operators of cable networks and IPTV service providers. The number of channels, which can be broadcasted via a multiplex is limited and represents a “strictly need”. Once a large number of local channels is available to the TV viewer wherever in the country “over-the-air” and free of charge, cable operators will lose an important lever of influence and income - the right of making decisions on whether to include or not some televisions in the grid. The multiplex will make impossible local interventions and will deprive signal distributors to limit the public access to certain information.
Questions without answers
They talk about high costs of accession of televisions to digital networks, since the amounts vary from 20 to 30 thousand euros per month for each channel. We do not know however the basis on which such estimations were made. On one hand, excessive rates will be an obstacle for the channels, which will not afford such expenses and will favor the current media magnates. On the other hand, the purchase, installation and maintenance of terrestrial broadcasting equipment are also expensive, which means that any broadcaster shall provide for in the budget costs related to bringing the signal to the viewer. The unanswered question is whether the state shall cover a part of costs, in the case of multiplexes, so as to provide its citizens with a larger variety of information sources?
___________
The article was published within the Advocacy Campaigns Aimed at Improving Transparency of Media Ownership, Access to Information and promotion of EU values and integration project, implemented by the IJC, which is, in its turn, part of the Moldova Partnerships for Sustainable Civil Society project, implemented by FHI 360.
This article is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The content are the responsibility of author and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.
This article is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The content are the responsibility of author and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.
