TRAI rules under fire as study flags rising pressure on TV broadcasters

MUMBAI: India’s television industry may be changing channels, but a new study argues that the biggest drama is unfolding behind the screen. A report examining the economics of broadcasting regulation has claimed that current tariff and carriage rules are increasingly stacking the deck in favour of distributors, while consumers and smaller broadcasters end up paying the price.

The study, titled An Empirical Assessment of Regulatory Design and Consumer Experience in Indian Broadcasting, takes aim at several regulations introduced by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, particularly the Network Capacity Fee (NCF), carriage fee structures, bundling restrictions and channel placement rules.

According to the report, the NCF, originally introduced as a fixed platform access charge, has evolved into what many consumers now see as a mandatory “entry toll” for television access. Under the 2017 tariff framework, viewers paid ₹130 for access to 100 standard-definition channels, while additional channel slabs attracted extra charges. In 2024, the regulator moved to a forbearance model, allowing distributors to determine NCF pricing independently.

That shift, the report noted, has already translated into higher charges from major operators. Tata Play reportedly increased its NCF by ₹10, while Airtel raised it by ₹15.

The study argues that while the fee was meant to improve transparency, many viewers do not connect it with better service quality or improved viewing choices. Instead, dissatisfaction appears to centre heavily around billing structures rather than the actual content available on television.

To back its findings, the report surveyed 2,037 consumers across 15 Indian cities in December 2025. Respondents included cable, DTH and multi-system operator subscribers spanning multiple income groups and language preferences.

Despite the rise of streaming services, television still appears firmly rooted in Indian households. The study found that most consumers continue to value linear TV because of its shared viewing experience across families and generations. However, frustration around pricing remains high.

One of the report’s standout findings is that nearly 96 per cent of respondents preferred large channel bundles over limited selections when prices remained constant. Consumers cited value-for-money, broader household appeal and easier content discovery as major reasons for favouring bundles.

That finding cuts directly against some of the regulatory assumptions underpinning a-la-carte channel pricing. The study argues that restrictions on bundling may actually reduce efficiency and limit broadcasters’ ability to support niche programming through stronger mainstream channels.

The report also highlights how smaller and regional broadcasters are struggling under the current framework. Since free-to-air channels cannot be bundled with pay channels under existing regulations, smaller broadcasters often depend heavily on inclusion within distributor-controlled channel packs to achieve scale and survive commercially.

At the same time, distributors retain significant discretion over whether channels are carried at all. The report says this creates an uneven bargaining environment where broadcasters must provide their channels to distributors, but distributors are not under equally strong obligations to carry them.

Carriage fees have emerged as another flashpoint. Under current rules, channels with less than 20 per cent reach in a target market can be subjected to carriage fees. The study argues this disproportionately hurts niche and regional language channels whose audiences may be smaller but deeply engaged.

The report points out that a Tamil-language channel serving viewers in Uttar Pradesh, for instance, may naturally have lower penetration numbers despite being highly valuable to its audience. Using broad subscription thresholds as a benchmark for popularity, it argues, risks penalising minority language and specialised content.

The study also questions the continued justification for carriage fees based on bandwidth scarcity. With digitisation significantly expanding transmission capacity, the report argues that technical constraints are no longer the bottleneck they once were.

Another concern flagged is the growing concentration of bargaining power with distribution platform operators, or DPOs. According to the report, the combination of NCF charges, conditional carriage obligations and distributor-controlled bundling allows operators to exert outsized influence over what consumers ultimately see and pay for.

The study estimates that under certain pricing structures, DPOs could capture as much as 80 per cent of average revenue per user through a mix of fixed fees, discounts and revenue-sharing mechanisms, while broadcasters shoulder most content creation costs.

Consumer behaviour in the survey also reflected a gap between “formal” and “effective” choice. While 51 per cent of respondents said they personally selected channel packs, many also admitted their decisions were shaped by what operators actually made available through menus, bundles and electronic programme guides.

The report further notes that disputes in broadcasting continue to outnumber telecom-related matters before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, signalling deeper structural tensions within the sector.

Against this backdrop, the study recommends sweeping reforms. These include removing pricing and packaging restrictions, abolishing carriage fees, making must-carry obligations unconditional and limiting the number of channels distributors can place in basic service tiers.

It also proposes a return to fixed-fee commercial arrangements between broadcasters and distributors, arguing that such a model would better align incentives and encourage broader content availability.

The report arrives at a time when India’s traditional TV sector is already facing pressure from digital competition. Around 50 television channel licences have reportedly been surrendered over the past three years, while television’s share of advertising revenue is expected to decline further by 2027.

For an industry built on content, the report’s central message is hard to miss: viewers still love television, but the economics behind the remote control may need a serious retune.