Mumbai: A consultation paper released by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has triggered a sharp divide across India’s media and telecom ecosystem, as stakeholders clash over how emerging streaming-based television models should be regulated.
The paper, issued following a reference from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, proposes a regulatory framework for Application-based Linear Television Distribution (ALTD) and Free Ad-Supported Streaming Television (FAST)—two rapidly growing formats that deliver scheduled TV channels over the internet via apps, websites and smart TVs.
A Structural Shift in Television Consumption
TRAI’s consultation underscores how connected TV and internet-delivered linear content are reshaping viewing behaviour. FAST platforms, in particular, replicate traditional television by offering scheduled programming supported by advertising, blurring the lines between broadcast and digital distribution.
The regulator noted that, from a consumer standpoint, these services are increasingly “functionally indistinguishable” from conventional TV channels—raising questions about whether they should be governed under the same regulatory umbrella.
The paper also draws on global precedents, including frameworks in markets such as Italy, where FAST services have begun to fall under formal regulatory oversight.
Digital Players Push Back
Among the strongest voices opposing broadcast-style regulation is Jio Platforms, which argued that FAST channels are fundamentally part of the OTT ecosystem and should continue to be treated as internet services.
Jio emphasised that the mode of delivery—open internet versus managed networks like cable and DTH—is the defining distinction. It maintained that merely offering scheduled or “channel-like” programming does not transform an OTT service into a broadcaster.
The company also pointed out that streaming platforms are already governed under India’s IT Rules, 2021, and warned that extending broadcast regulation could create unintended consequences. According to Jio, such a move risks setting a precedent where even live streams, webinars or social media video feeds could eventually fall within the ambit of broadcasting laws.
Taking a more moderate stance, Tata Communications acknowledged the growing importance of FAST and ALTD but cautioned against imposing legacy cable TV regulations on internet-based services.
The company advocated for a lighter, future-ready framework focused on practical concerns such as piracy control, content accountability, grievance redressal and transparency, rather than rigid structural requirements designed for traditional distribution networks.
Broadcasters Demand Regulatory Parity
On the other side of the debate, traditional media players have argued that FAST platforms are benefiting from regulatory gaps.
Zee Entertainment Enterprises said FAST and ALTD services closely mirror linear television in terms of scheduled programming, simultaneous viewing and channel-based consumption. It called for “technology-neutral regulation,” where the same rules apply regardless of whether content is delivered via satellite, cable or the internet.
Zee also highlighted that broadcasters and DTH operators currently operate under strict obligations—ranging from programme and advertising codes to tariff and interconnection rules—while FAST platforms face significantly fewer restrictions.
DTH Operators Flag Economic Impact
Direct-to-home (DTH) players have raised concerns that the rise of FAST services is eroding the economics of the traditional pay-TV ecosystem.
Bharti Airtel described the situation as “regulatory arbitrage,” arguing that DTH operators remain bound by pricing, carriage and quality-of-service norms while internet platforms distribute similar content at lower costs or even for free.
The company pointed to the growing shift of premium content—such as live sports and exclusive programming—towards digital platforms, noting that urban broadband users are increasingly accessing such content without paying traditional subscription fees. Meanwhile, rural and semi-urban DTH subscribers continue to bear full channel costs.
Airtel also raised concerns about vertical integration across broadcasters, telecom operators, OTT platforms and smart TV ecosystems, warning that exclusive content strategies could distort competition. Among its proposals, the company called for pricing parity across platforms and suggested that channels offered free on FAST services should not remain paid offerings on DTH.
Dish TV echoed similar concerns, arguing that app-based platforms have effectively become television distributors by aggregating and delivering live channels across devices. It supported the idea that such entities should fall under the same authorisation framework applicable to traditional distribution platform operators (DPOs).
Gatekeepers and Growth of Connected TV
The consultation also highlights the rapid growth of connected TV households in India and the rising popularity of ad-supported streaming models.
Industry submissions flagged the increasing influence of smart TV ecosystems, particularly pre-installed apps that can shape content discovery and viewer access. These platforms, stakeholders argued, are emerging as powerful gatekeepers in the new television landscape.
What’s at Stake
TRAI’s final recommendations could significantly reshape India’s media and entertainment ecosystem, determining how broadcasters, telecom operators, OTT platforms and device manufacturers compete for audiences in the connected TV era.
At its core, the debate reflects a fundamental question: should television be defined by how content is delivered, or by how it is consumed?
The answer will likely define the regulatory and commercial contours of India’s next phase of television evolution.
