After a promising start, digital TV must deliver: Thai editorial

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
After a promising start, digital TV must deliver
The Nation

Balance between commercialism and creativity is key

BANGKOK: -- We have had enough glimpses of the new TV channels to see how viewers will benefit. The launch of digital TV is a step into uncharted territory and there will be unavoidable pitfalls on the path ahead. But the past few weeks have also brought to our screens what has been previously "unseen". A big plus for all of us is that producers are leaving no stone unturned in their competition for advertising revenue. Some formats might be all too familiar, even awkward, but innovation and creativity are also being wielded in the ratings war.

Producers are digging deep, going to places rarely visited, talking to people never before interviewed, seeking talent previously hidden from view. Of course the broadcasting veterans remain ahead of the game in terms of production values and slick presentation, but don't write off the newbies. They might need to sharpen their technique, but some of their content and ideas are already cutting-edge.

The key for the new breed of producers, station owners, programme hosts and commentators is to avoid falling into the trap that has brought TV content to a virtual standstill in recent decades. There will be outrageous demands from the advertisers. There will be pressure from those worried about viewer ratings. The trick is balancing the need for money with the importance of creativity. As anyone in the TV industry will tell you, commercialism and creativity mostly go their separate ways.

And then there's the issue of honesty. The lack of integrity among producers involved in talent shows is notorious. Some try to fool audiences into thinking they are watching spontaneous moments when they are, in fact, carefully choreographed. This contempt for the viewer's intelligence ruins content in the long run. It's infectious and can quickly become endemic. And it starts off so easily, with programmers kidding themselves: "We'll do it just once."

Viewers are a lot smarter nowadays, and being offered more TV channels will likely sharpen their wits. Fewer will be fooled by old promotional tricks like shows made primarily for the sponsors, not them. With a brutal war over advertising money inevitable, the TV industry must take the issue of broadcasting values seriously. Revenue is important, but so is retaining the trust of the audience.

Many involved in the TV industry, both old-timers and newcomers, will be walking a tightrope. They will have to strike a balance between seeking crucial revenue and maintaining creativity and integrity. Fighting for the same pool of money while at the same time trying to offer something different for the benefit of consumers is not easy, but that's what the TV companies must do.

Over the past few days we have glimpsed the benefits of having more TV channels. Now, let's hope the expanded industry can navigate the tricky seas that lie ahead. Also crucial to the success of this journey is that advertisers, who are an essential part of the industry, work in tandem with the content providers. The Constitution dissolved state control over broadcasting in order to enrich the public's knowledge through a more diverse, informative and creative TV diet. That constitutional aim of benefiting the public through "liberating" the TV industry has not yet been achieved, but everyone concerned must strive to ensure that these first few baby steps evolve into a leap forward for Thailand.


-- The Nation 2014-04-30

[ChrisY1]

Yes.....I have new channels now.....they go to 680!

But, I must admit for starters there is a better selection......just that it takes endless clicking to find my regular channels now:)))

I'm developing RSI of the remote finger!!

[JSixpack]

We've had that vast selection in the USA for years, but, apart from a few programs, there's still nothing on worth watching.

[misterphil]

Heres the latest channels

[jacko45k]

Is this being broadcast by satellite only, or will there be terrestrial transmission?

[Greer]

There is a basic flaw in peoples understanding of the reasons for the switch and the so called benefits.

The reason for the switch is to free up bandwidth in the frequency ranges previously occupied by analogue VHF transmission by moving all television broadcasts into the UHF bands. The VHF space can be sold off to make more money.

As we are moving to UHF, and we have the capability to go to DTT, it has the added benefit of being able to carry multiple channels within the transport stream - in exactly the same fashion as a satellite transport stream does, but carried by a digital terrestrial transmission (DTT) instead.

So we reap the "benefit" of being able to add more channels in a more efficient way than analogue modulation will allow.

Sometimes being careful what we wish for is prudent advice, and in adding channels, we add a huge load to the broadcasters workload, because where they once had to fill 24 hours per day with programme material, a typical station might now have say 3 channels or more, so they now have to fill 72 hours PER DAY with programme material.

Now, think how a station makes money - advertising - and their income (how much they can charge) is based on how many people are watching.

If all the Bangkok stations added just three channels, then either, the advertising income per station will be divided by 3, or to compensate, the Bangkok population has to triple - as the latter is (we certainly hope) unlikely - then the impact is that per channel, the income has just gone to one third of what it was.

That is a little simplistic, and of course we change the technology, and we use different programming profiles and programme sources, to lessen the cost impact per channel so it probably isn't down to one third, but the end result is that the output on each channel might look better technically, but overall there is usually somewhat of a falloff in quality of programme material, and stations also sometimes find themselves having to cut staff to reduce costs.

Production budgets usually end up smaller too.

This is exactly what happened with satellite TV, as we went from 3 or 4 channels in a given region to 100's of channels, and that impacted the traditional terrestrial broadcasters (Channels 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 in Bangkok for example), and of course the people had to pay for the satellite services, so they tend to watch the service they have to pay for, and not watch the local terrestrial channels - this also gave rise to the "must carry" regulations that meant that satellite operators HAD to carry the local terrestrial channels as well - as obviously they would otherwise lose out on advertising income to their detriment, whereas satellite services were paid for, so no advertising was necessary (that was the theory in the early days anyway).

So now, we are bound to repeat the above on a smaller scale as terrestrial Free To Air broadcasts go digital, and we get more channels. I have a feeling that they are seeing some of this effect in Australia, which is I think, almost 100% DTT by now - only a few places left as far as I know.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Greer

[kurnell]

Cut all the Thai channels if you want to see improvement

[3NUMBAS]

you would need 100s of media production companies to increase their output to cover all the channels but instead it will be bilge to keep the thais in their moronic state of being

[Jdietz]

Nah the solution is obvious and has been used on most foreign channels for ages now. It's the magic word...

Repeats!

[Greer]

you would need 100s of media production companies to increase their output to cover all the channels but instead it will be bilge to keep the thais in their moronic state of being

I agree - but it's not just here in Thailand - try anywhere that has massively increased the number of channels available - be it via satellite, cable or just DTT.

Nah the solution is obvious and has been used on most foreign channels for ages now. It's the magic word...

Repeats!

Yes, that's what to expect!

Edited May 1, 2014 by Greer