Stakeholder Forum Papers: IPTV - Requirements for a full transition to IPTV

Question 1

Section 1. Executive summary and conclusion

Accepted Answer

The aim of this paper is to examine the option of a full transition from DTT to IPTV by 2034. The paper initially focuses on the technical infrastructure and how to ensure that all current DTT viewers can continue to watch television via IP. However, we also recognise that in either a full transition to IPTV, or an upgraded/enhanced DTT, the vast majority of viewing to broadcasters’ channels/content will be via IP. Consequently, this paper also addresses relevant regulatory, policy and technical issues that will need to be considered, to secure a robust UK television sector and sustain the public service media (PSM) ecosystem. These issues are covered in sections 6, 7 and 11 and are clearly indicated as relevant to both a full transition and the continuation of DTT. An annex containing international comparisons sits alongside both this paper and the DTT Transition Paper.

A good transition to IPTV relies on the following: reliability of the IPTV infrastructure at a level equal to or greater than that of DTT today; universal access to broadband at sufficient speeds; ensuring that IP networks can sustainably deliver IPTV content; broadcasters’ content to be easily discoverable through user-friendly interfaces; continued prominence for public service media; increased functionality for audiences; additional opportunities for broadcasters to increase engagement and revenues; and a transition programme that addresses affordability and skills for DTT households that lack the necessary financial resource and abilities.

This paper demonstrates the UK has the underlying technical capability to support a transition from DTT to exclusively IP-based TV distribution. However, policy decisions should allow the IPTV ecosystem time to scale for increased demand stemming from a full transition in 2034. Any policy decision or other intervention should also ensure that IP networks can sustainably deliver TV content to the required level of quality and reliability. ISPs and Content and Application Providers (CAPs) will require adequate lead time to dimension and build their networks, caching solutions, and CDN infrastructures effectively (see sections 6 and 10). Research has shown IPTV can be more difficult to use than DTT for some users^{[footnote 1]} and there are also issues with IPTV and broadband set-up and affordability for some people that need to be resolved (see sections 4 and 9). These individuals will require additional support to access IPTV and benefit from its increased functionality including its greater accessibility features. Therefore a transition will need to be accompanied by a support programme (see sections 5 and 8). This will have the additional benefit of contributing to broader digital inclusion (section 8).

This paper details how a transition scheme should, at the very minimum, ensure that all households currently accessing DTT can watch TV via IPTV. Broadcasters, the telco sector and TV operating system (TVOS) platform owners bear much of this responsibility. However, a transition to IPTV could also catalyse digital inclusion across the UK, bringing significant socio-economic benefits to the country.

A transition scheme would require significant collaboration across various government departments and a myriad of other organisations. While this is clearly highly beneficial to the UK, we firmly suggest that funding should not be solely the responsibility of the TV or telco sectors, nor the DCMS. Therefore this paper sets out relevant opportunities to go beyond TV, for example proposing ideas to make progress on affordability of broadband for all low-income households, not just the DTT-only subset of this group.

Question 2

Section 2. Introduction and context

Accepted Answer

Television channels and content in the UK are currently distributed via broadcast or IP, resulting in a wider choice of platforms, services and channels for audiences, with TV increasingly viewed online. Ofcom’s Future of TV Distribution report^{[footnote 2]} noted that ‘to date, the significant migration of audiences online has been organic’. This report noted that an ‘unmanaged transition [to IPTV delivery] over the next decade could result in a poor outcome for the audiences who depend on it [DTT] today’. Ofcom then set out three broad approaches to delivering universal TV in the future.

This paper explores the third approach which is the full switchover from DTT to IPTV delivery in 2034. The optimal transition would address the needs of audiences, broadcasters/content providers and the infrastructure that will deliver this content. This paper takes into account six core decision factors: universality; audience impact; IPTV reliability; promoting a competitive TV industry; maintaining a sustainable PSB ecosystem; and innovation.

Without a managed transition, not all DTT households may adopt IPTV. This paper uses DCMS policy assumptions which are: the broadband speed threshold needed for IPTV in the future to be superfast broadband of 30 Megabit per second (Mbps); that 2028 is the baseline year for options to be costed; that this option will be fully implemented in 2034 and that by 2035 without any managed transition there could be 1.9 million TV households unconnected to IPTV.^{[footnote 3]}

Question 3

Section 3. Current position

Accepted Answer

Today most households can watch UK television channels delivered via broadcast (DTT, cable or satellite) or via IP. Live channels are more likely to be watched via broadcast (DTT, satellite or cable), and non-live content via IP. Over time more broadcaster viewing is taking place over IP, with 77% of UK households (22.6 million) currently having IPTV. As of Q3 2025, 93% of households (27.5 million) have a TV set, 95% (28.1 million) have fixed/mobile broadband while 10% (2.9 million) have DTT but no cable, satellite or IPTV.^{[footnote 4]} Current DTT-only and heavier DTT linear users are more likely to be over 55, C2DE, living alone, or have a disability.^{[footnote 5]}

Question 4

Section 4. Public good

Accepted Answer

Universality underpins public service media (PSM) in the UK, and one way this is delivered is through DTT. Universal availability in an IP world should match DTT’s, with at least 98.5% of UK households having the option to watch television. This requires access to a reliable and affordable internet service of sufficient speed.^{[footnote 6]}

By 2034, and based on current rollout projects, DSIT preliminary estimates are that superfast fixed broadband will be available to 99.6% of premises with a maximum of 130,000 premises (0.4%) where it is unavailable,^{[footnote 7]} although superfast broadband speeds through Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) and/or Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite should be available to these remaining households. Enabling these households to receive IPTV is discussed further in section 6.

Affordability will likely remain as a significant challenge for some households given that IPTV requires recurring broadband payment.^{[footnote 8]} A targeted intervention for these households is considered further in section 5, and has been discussed in several forum papers.^{[footnote 9]}

PSM plays an important role in reflecting all the UK’s nations and regions, and the many different communities and cultural interests and traditions throughout the UK. IP can serve local and regional provision at least as well as DTT and potentially presents options to enhance that. However, we note that regulation may need to evolve and/or industry standards put in place to ensure regional PSM discoverability.^{[footnote 10]} This is discussed in section 11.

A full IPTV transition would guarantee access to the full range of services provided by PSBs and other broadcasters.^{[footnote 11]} It avoids a two-tier system in which broadcast-reliant households receive a relatively shrinking offer as a growing proportion of channels and rights move to IP-only. IPTV can support advanced accessibility features—voice guidance, AI-generated sign language, dynamic subtitles, customisable user interfaces, neurodivergent-friendly user interfaces—that DTT cannot.

These features can benefit all viewers, especially the more vulnerable, older or less able audiences. However, these audiences are more likely to be digitally excluded.^{[footnote 12]} We recognise that digital skills training would be necessary for some viewers to use IPTV and access these features easily.^{[footnote 13]} Challenges for audiences can be reduced via good design standards.^{[footnote 14]}

Digital inclusion is integral to modern life and work, and enables access to employment, education, health and finance. Those living on no or low income, rural and/or remote communities, high-density urban housing, people with disabilities, and individuals with low levels of English literacy are some of the key populations facing compounded barriers to digital inclusion. Supporting a well-managed transition to IPTV includes an imperative to ensure both digital connectivity and television services will be available, accessible, and as usable as DTT is today, and so with coordinated policy making can catalyse efforts to bridge these wider digital divides which are being looked at by DSIT and other departments such as HMT, DWP, DfE, DHSC and the Cabinet Office.^{[footnote 15]}

Question 5

Section 5. Transition (audience perspective)

Accepted Answer

Any programme to transition people from DTT to IPTV needs to consider:

1. The technological availability of superfast broadband to homes 2. The reliability of internet and IPTV 3. The affordability of the internet and IPTV 4. The skills required to use IPTV 5. A public information campaign

As discussed in section 6 superfast broadband will be available to all households by 2034, due to full fibre investment by industry and government (Project Gigabit), FWA and LEO satellite services, which are becoming available from both ISPs and directly from LEO satellite providers,^{[footnote 16]} while the IP ecosystem has the technical capability to support a transition to IPTV. Reliability and in-home challenges are discussed in section 10.

Universal availability of superfast broadband does not equate to universal take-up of broadband.^{[footnote 17]} To ensure that everyone who can access DTT today continues to be able to access TV after DTT switch-off, a transition programme and/or other policy interventions must address affordability and skills for those who are dependent on DTT and would lack the financial resources and capability to access IPTV without support.

In this section, we set out the core components of a transition programme to address affordability and skills, drawing on available forecast figures, noting that audience behaviours may change in unexpected ways.

Affordability:

Affordability is a key barrier to accessing IPTV for low-income households, which are also more likely to depend on DTT.^{[footnote 18]} Access to IPTV requires a smart TV or connected device, plus ongoing costs for accessing superfast broadband. IPTV will mean some households without a compatible TV set and/or broadband connection of sufficient speed will need to upgrade their TV setup via a one off cost of £40 (stick/box) to £129.99 for a TV, ^{[footnote 19]} and pay more or start to pay for a broadband service, amounting to a monthly bill increase of £10 (those with a landline) to £20 (those without) - an additional £120 to £240 per year. However, as broadband is a multi-use service not all of these costs should be attributed to a TV transition, even if that is the motivator, since once installed, a broadband service will enable wider benefits such as accessing healthcare or banking services.

Of the 3.0 million UK adults aged 16+ living in a house with no internet access/plans to get it in the next 12 months, 5% are estimated to not be online because of the monthly cost of broadband, and 18% indicated a reason related to cost.^{[footnote 20]} Households move in and out of digital poverty, meaning that those currently able to afford broadband and access IPTV may find themselves unable to do so in the future (and vice versa). The position of the Audiences WG is that addressing the affordability of IPTV requires both financial support for those currently dependent on DTT who want to continue to be able to use TV but are unable to afford access to the internet and/or a connected device, plus ongoing financial support for broadband data from 2034 for those on the lowest incomes to ensure ongoing access to television. Other stakeholders have noted that the TV sector does not offer financial support today to households that can’t afford it (e.g. aerial installation or maintenance, electricity costs so the TV can operate), and that low incomes and affordability of IP connectivity are broader public policy questions.

There are several areas where affordability can be addressed, and should be explored further. These are considered below:

While there is currently wide eligibility, offers do not meet needs of a smaller group of households that cannot afford connectivity at these reduced price points and take-up is low.^{[footnote 21]}
The scope could be narrowed to more closely focus on the ‘cannot afford’ households group, and setting social tariffs within or just below the affordability range identified in recent research^{[footnote 22]} – say £10 per month. This would require government intervention, additional subsidy and would also need to be combined with a targeted communications campaign.

Targeted mobile connectivity:

The National Databank distributes free mobile connectivity SIMs across the country to those in crisis, through the community organisations that make up Good Things Foundation’s National Digital Inclusion Network, a temporary backstop solution for those unable to access connectivity any other way.
Due to network limitations, mobile is not an at-scale solution to connectivity challenges for all households. However, for various socio-economic and life-stage reasons, a small portion of the population remains mobile-dependent; especially during moments of social, personal, or economic crisis. Embedding the National Databank within organisations that support those in need may be beneficial for citizens in crisis and on low incomes who need to rely on mobile to access IPTV. Nonetheless, such solutions should be viewed as temporary and would likely require additional funding, and other options to support long-term access to broadband should be offered to people in such circumstances where appropriate.

Devices:

Current projections indicate that smart TV ownership will be at 96% of households by 2032, leaving c. 1.37 million homes without one.^{[footnote 23]} In 2025, around 46.5% of people without a smart TV are on benefits.^{[footnote 24]} It is likely that a higher proportion of those who have not transitioned to a smart TV by 2032 will be on low incomes and in receipt of benefits. Assuming 46.5% as the minimum, we expect at least 643,000 homes to need support to transition to an IPTV device, though this could be closer to 1 million in 2032 if those not taking up smart TV are on low incomes. This could be the provision of a subsidised ‘IPTV switchover’ connected device that could be attached to an existing ‘dumb’ TV and made available to the small number of households on benefits that cannot afford to upgrade to a smart TV or purchase a connected device. Assuming a unit price of £40 per device, this is a one-off national cost of between £26 million and £40 million.
This could potentially be integrated into the National Device Bank. It could also include trade-in programmes to exchange old devices for significantly discounted or refurbished smart TV sets, e.g. via the IT Reuse for Good Charter through DSIT. Additional public funding might be required.

Skills:

The ability to access IPTV currently depends on having (or having support from someone with) the following skills: setting up broadband, connecting a device to Wi-Fi, creating and managing passwords, downloading apps, updating software, navigating interfaces, and ensuring online safety. People from lower socio-economic backgrounds, older people and/or people with disabilities are more likely to lack these digital skills.^{[footnote 28]} Predicting digital skill levels in 2032 is challenging. Currently, 21.5% of UK citizens are limited internet users (this has remained relatively constant since 2015)^{[footnote 29]}, and 7% lack Essential Digital Skills for life (this rises to 11% for NRS grades C2DE and 32% for those over 65).^{[footnote 30]} Given these differing measures, 15% of older low-income UK households^{[footnote 31]} not having anyone with relevant basic skills in 2034 is a reasonable minimum. Therefore, a minimum of 352,000 households (appx. 528,000 citizens) may need basic support with skills just for IPTV (not wider digital inclusion skills).

Addressing skills challenges to ensure that all those who currently use DTT can access IPTV requires:

1. Provision of skills training and support from at least 2030 to ensure that those who need it have time to acquire relevant digital skills before DTT switch-off in 2034 (see below).

2. Ongoing provision of broader digital skills training and support for those most in need, recognising that people over the age of 60 are predicted to experience a drop off in digital capabilities and a linear drop of 10 points per every subsequent decade.^{[footnote 32]}

3. Mandated accessibility and usability features with standard minimal requirements (sections 9 and 11)

Skills training and support (dependent on funding availability and provider capacity):

A support programme for those lacking the confidence and skills to set up broadband and IPTV for the first time.
Face-to-face digital skills training tailored to the demands of IPTV use, and building, where relevant on existing provision and drawing on learning.^{[footnote 33]}
Training local trusted community members (e.g. councillors) and organisations (e.g. ACRE) to provide tailored support.^{[footnote 34]}
Build on existing provision, such as the National Digital Inclusion Network and Good Things Foundation’s Learn My Way Network hubs, but will require specific support for IPTV.^{[footnote 35]}
Ongoing troubleshooting support that is easy to access, such as a 24/7 helpline.^{[footnote 36]}

Where possible, skills barriers are best addressed through common usability standards designed for the needs of the most vulnerable. Addressing the affordability and skills barriers to accessing IPTV should be integrated into the government’s Digital Inclusion Action Plan and demands cross-departmental action from government, including the five signatories (DSIT, DoH, DfE, DWP and DHCLG) and other departments working on digital inclusion or financial inclusion (HMT and the Cabinet Office) as well as the DCMS.

Public information campaign:

Any transition programme will require a clear, coordinated communications campaign that commences at the very latest by 2030 to ensure households have time to acquire the technology and skills needed to transition to IPTV.
This campaign must be clear on what support is available, to whom and how to access it. For example, viewers should know that they can contact their ISP for advice if they have broadband or Wi-Fi issues.
A switchover help scheme that offers clear signposting, clarity and confirmation of which internet packages are ‘good enough’ for IPTV viewing (like the ‘tick’ marker for the DSO) could improve consumer confidence, particularly in social tariff packages.^{[footnote 37]}
This could be set up as a new scheme specific to IPTV or could build on, and be run in conjunction with, existing digital inclusion support schemes.
In the next few years, a campaign could be built into Get Online Week, the UK’s biggest digital inclusion campaign delivered by community organisations – working with Good Things Foundation and the National Digital Inclusion Network.

Question 6

Section 6. Platform/network

Accepted Answer

The UK’s IP ecosystem is technically capable of supporting a full transition from DTT to exclusively IP-based television distribution by 2034. However, with both a full or partial transition to IP delivery, some group members consider a number of fundamental questions remain about responsibilities, costs and technical rules/standards. These are noted in section 11.

The capacity of ISP core networks continues to increase and rollout and uptake of superfast and ultrafast access network connections will continue. By 2034, 99.6% of premises will have access to superfast fixed broadband and the remaining households should have access to superfast broadband speeds through Fixed FWA and/or LEO satellite (see section 4). The growth of core network capacity should enable it to reliably meet future peak traffic growth, including that driven by IPTV. However, some ISPs on this working group consider that measures are required to ensure that IP networks can continue to meet the needs of content providers and consumers, and that these measures should be explored.^{[footnote 38]}

For example, to meet this growing demand – especially in relation to the highest traffic peaks that can be driven by large scale, high demand, live events e.g. state events, significant news announcements, live sports – it is essential that the largest players in the IP ecosystem (broadcasters, streamers, other IP content providers including those that drive high data peaks such as gaming, CDN operators and ISPs) continue to collaborate to forecast demand and ensure sufficient capacity is available in time. This includes the need for advanced preparation and coordination, the consideration of multicast and implementation of CDN strategies, operational transparency and data sharing for continuous improvement, and the assessment of the impact of technology innovation to address operational challenges effectively.

For households unable to access fixed superfast broadband, mobile/FWA could offer connectivity, or provide essential backup in situations such as an access network fault affecting a single or small number of premises. In addition, LEO satellite constellations are increasingly providing broadband-type connectivity to a growing number of consumers. However, from a techno-economic perspective,^{[footnote 39]} LEO satellite broadband may not match the performance and cost advantages of a full-fibre network. Nevertheless, LEO satellites could serve as a valuable supplementary option in specific geographical areas where deploying fixed broadband or FWA networks is prohibitively expensive.^{[footnote 40]}

Question 7

Section 7. Service proposition

Accepted Answer

This section covers the service proposition of the broadcasters and IPTV platforms from a commercial perspective. This section is relevant whether there is a full transition to IPTV by 2034 or an upgraded DTT. The regulatory issues are covered in section 11. The consumer proposition is considered in section 9.

IPTV brings benefits to broadcasters and platform owners. Sign-in procedures and data-tracking enable broadcasters and platform owners to better personalise and promote specific content, while technology allows advertisers to benefit from addressability and significantly greater targeting opportunities.^{[footnote 41]}

However, there are many challenges for broadcasters, not least they are competing for audiences and advertising revenues on the TV set against other online video players, and TV platforms.^{[footnote 42]} This has contributed to declining audiences for traditional broadcast television.

The IPTV value chain is more complex than the DTT value chain. The emergence of the TVOS in smart TVs has led to an economic model in which broadcasters must negotiate with TVOS platform owners to determine whether and how their linear and on-demand services appear on the connected TV which can often result in sharing advertising inventory or revenue with the TVOS platform operator. Equally, platform operators must negotiate with broadcasters for the supply of broadcaster content and the terms on which it is supplied to the platform, and the form in which it is provided. Many TVOS operators are seeking to become platforms themselves by offering their own content, creating the threat of self-promotion at the expense of broadcasters. ^{[footnote 43]}

These commercial models can be complex, with each PSB needing to reach an agreement with each TVOS on any prominence they seek above that set out within the regulatory code to be set by Ofcom. Smaller and non-UK-wide content providers may have less leverage in negotiations. This can risk the visibility and availability of some UK content providers to UK viewers on some platforms which could threaten investment in some original UK content. Potential solutions to these challenges are discussed in section 11 and are relevant in both this and the DTT paper.

Question 8

Section 8. Business costs and funding/infrastructure costs

Accepted Answer

As set out in section 5, an effective IPTV transition for audiences requires support during transition to ensure that those currently accessing DTT can continue to watch television, as well as ongoing support to ensure that IPTV remains accessible to a similar number of households as DTT moving forward. This requires addressing affordability and skills as key barriers.

The costs for an IPTV transition should not be passed on to those on the lowest incomes, many of whom currently do not have access to broadband and IPTV. There will need to be a robust process in place to identify households currently dependent on DTT who will need support in transitioning to IPTV. Interventions should be piloted and evaluated to ensure funding goes to the most effective solutions. This will require a detailed understanding of the overlapping issues of accessibility, availability and affordability (see section 5), recognising that those in rural areas can face additional challenges, where the cost of living is often higher for those on low incomes and where those households unable to get fixed broadband may need to pay higher costs to receive the internet via satellite broadband.^{[footnote 44]} It is also likely that there will be households that need help with affordability but not skills and vice versa.

The costs associated with migrating remaining DTT-only households to IPTV (who otherwise would be unable to make the transition) should be explicitly assessed when comparing this option with maintaining a DTT service. It is beyond the scope of this paper to provide these exact costings. This section will examine the costs likely to be incurred across different sectors of industry and where government support will be needed.

Wider Financial Benefits of IPTV transition

Addressing the affordability and skills barriers to accessing IPTV has significant benefits beyond the TV sector. A Deloitte report for the Digital Poverty Alliance estimates that interventions in digital poverty could unlock £17 billion in additional earnings for individuals and create £2 billion in additional welfare benefits.^{[footnote 45]} A managed IPTV transition could be a catalyst for digital inclusion and help bring wider socioeconomic benefits to the UK. Analysis by PwC for the BBC estimated that a managed transition to IPTV, with an intervention to help digitally excluded groups, could help unlock some of the benefits of digital inclusion, including £21.2 to £30.8 billion in annual Gross Value Added, £4.0 to £9.4 billion in net gains to the Exchequer, and £26.6 to £31.3 billion in non-market wellbeing benefits for individual households supported to get online.^{[footnote 46]} The IPTV transition would also eliminate duplicate distribution costs for PSBs, freeing up funds for spending on PSM content and services.

Given these wider benefits, the costs of any transition programme should not be solely the responsibility of the TV or telco sectors, nor the DCMS. Asking PSBs to fund wider and ongoing digital inclusion initiatives would not serve audiences as it would undermine potential savings in distribution and ongoing investment in PSM content and services.

The costs specific to IPTV transition are:

Good quality user-friendly design for IPTV devices/services, with the most vulnerable at heart. This will likely place additional financial costs on device manufacturers and service providers.
Support for the most vulnerable in setting up and using IPTV, ideally tied into wider ongoing digital support schemes beyond IPTV.
Support for a small number of low-income households who do not have access to a smart TV/connected device, e.g. through the provision of low-cost connected devices.
A public information campaign. For the last Digital Switch Over (DSO), the government ring-fenced £200 million for a funded public information campaign, including tailored communication.^{[footnote 47]}

The costs required for an effective IPTV transition, but with wider benefits beyond IPTV use are:

Costs associated with addressing the affordability gap of broadband. This includes support for those with DTT who cannot afford broadband and ongoing support to ensure that TV remains accessible to 98.5% of the UK, e.g. social tariffs, connected homes discounts, and national databanks.
Costs associated with addressing the skills barriers for setting up broadband and accessing the internet, including skills decline, e.g. installation services, in-home and hub training.
Enabling internet access for those who currently access DTT but do not have broadband.
Ongoing troubleshooting support that is easy to access, such as a 24/7 helpline, best provided by industry, although this would depend on funding availability.

Question 9

Section 9.  Consumer proposition, user experience/usability

Accepted Answer

IPTV brings with it many benefits to audiences through significantly expanded content ranges, innovation in content delivery, aggregation, enhanced functionality such as watch-from-start, and the emergence of interactive and immersive features as well as accessibility features.^{[footnote 48]} However, IPTV can be more complex for some audiences, who may find it harder to discover UK content, navigate user interfaces or sign in to services.^{[footnote 49]}

The ease of use of the traditional EPG, with its familiar channel numbers, and the ability to launch content directly from the EPG or remote control without friction, remains at the core of many users’ experiences. Adopting similar principles across IPTV platforms would be very helpful for many audiences transitioning to it, noting that the IPTV platforms of Sky, VMO2, EE and Freely already so do.^{[footnote 50]} Even with a familiar EPG, discoverability of broadcasters’ content can be problematic given the abundance of choice. This can be even more difficult if the correct regional broadcast cannot be displayed or if the voice command cannot understand minority languages of the UK.^{[footnote 51]} The adoption of clear signposting of platforms that conform to simple usability standards would help consumers to identify those platforms that meet their usability needs.

There can be barriers for a specific cohort of audiences, typically (but not exclusively) older viewers or individuals with disabilities. Unclear navigation structures, complex remote-control layouts, and multiple sign-in are examples of the challenges they face.^{[footnote 52]} A recent DTG study^{[footnote 53]} found that simple design changes can reduce usability barriers by almost 50% - enhancing the experiences of older and digitally less-confident viewers. The study also found that those with low digital literacy, but high TV familiarity, navigated smart TV interfaces more successfully than those with high general tech confidence, but low TV usage. The focus should be on simplifying UIs and the layout, with appropriate prominence for PSB services. This will make IPTV easier to navigate, requiring fewer digital skills and reducing the size and scale of a designated help scheme.

Potential solutions to some of these challenges are discussed in section 11 and are relevant in both this and the DTT paper.

Question 10

Section 10. Spectrum and technology / technology considerations

Accepted Answer

As with the DTT network, the security and resilience of ISP networks is very high. For example, BT states that its core broadband network consistently achieves availability levels exceeding 99.99% to local exchange level, equating to fewer than 53 minutes of downtime for the network in a whole year. This is achieved through a combination of (i) multiple interconnected locations, (ii) duplicated equipment, (iii) vendor diversity and (iv) diverse and physically separate connection routes. BT analysis from March to June 2024 found that (i) content watched over BT broadband has an error rate 2 times lower than content over DTT and (ii) 3% of BT’s broadband customers are impacted by content delivery errors, compared to 5% over DTT.^{[footnote 54]}

Some ISPs^{[footnote 55]} also offer ‘unbreakable broadband’ which includes mobile back-up connectivity for their premium broadband products, at a speed that’s typically sufficient to watch IPTV, ensuring customers have service even if their fixed broadband connection goes down.

While core ISP networks demonstrate strong levels of technical resilience, the consumer experience at the end-user level is also affected by the reliability of the local access network (from the local exchange to the home), in-home cabling and Wi-Fi and end-user devices. Some DTT-only users face issues with broadband reliability, which can be a barrier in their uptake of IPTV.^{[footnote 56]} However, connectivity issues are generally solvable, and many ISPs offer help and guidance with this. An IPTV transition support programme (see section 5) should clearly communicate common solutions (such as connecting the main TV set to the router with a cable to support reliability and reduce latency, or the range of affordable solutions to improve Wi-Fi coverage around a home). A small number of homes on low incomes may need financial support to access solutions to improve Wi-Fi coverage in the home, which should be factored into any financial support offered as part of a wider transition programme.

Full fibre (FTTP) local access networks are being rolled out across the UK, with Openreach reporting that Full Fibre has a 60% lower fault rate compared to copper. This means IP network reliability will likely improve further as full fibre is adopted even more widely.

Many ISPs also offer a complete Wi-Fi guarantee, with coverage in every room of the home, enabled by mesh networks or Wi-Fi extenders included as part of premium broadband products.^{[footnote 57]} ISPs have also started rolling out the latest Wi-Fi 7 standard, which allows more devices to connect quickly and reliably simultaneously, and additional frequency bands that help reduce interference.

Recent advances in global standardisation efforts have reshaped how video, audio and interactive services are delivered and experienced across IP networks. Innovations (see Infrastructure WG Paper 2) can help sustain universality, improve service delivery efficiency, and foster innovation across platforms. They are particularly relevant to the delivery of public service media, advertising, accessibility tools, and immersive media.

As identified in the Infrastructure WG Paper 2, current known issues like latency (delay) of live sport delivery vs broadcast are expected to be improved in the next few years. Some of this work is already underway by organisations including BT, Sky and BBC. The BBC has already halved the latency of its IP-delivered content and expects further reductions over the next year, with iPlayer trials minimising delays to within one or two seconds of broadcast.

Question 11

Section 11. Regulatory considerations

Accepted Answer

Over the course of this Future of TV Distribution work, the three working sector groups have identified areas that may need to be addressed through regulation as television distribution transitions from broadcast to IP. Any regulatory solutions or industry standards that may need to be implemented will be necessary in a full migration to IPTV, and also if DTT were to remain. The regulatory considerations in this section below would apply under both scenarios.

The Media Act 2024 is currently being implemented by Ofcom. There was no consensus within the TV sector working group as to whether the measures within the Media Act would be sufficient in the long term to protect the PSB compact. Outside the Media Act, as viewing over the internet increases, and as the viewing environment continues to evolve, this could give rise to other regulatory considerations, and the success of any transition will rely on the regulatory environment being proactively reviewed to assess whether it should change to reflect the changing viewing environment.

Some of the regulatory considerations that the working groups identified included:

the rules around prominence for PSBs on regulated EPGs^{[footnote 58]}
whether to designate additional EPGs and other devices for regulation to make sure there are adequate protections for audiences^{[footnote 59]}
whether regulation may be necessary to curb the powers of intermediaries in the IPTV distribution chain where there is not effective competition^{[footnote 60]}
whether the accessibility requirements remain appropriate. Some members believe accessibility on digital services should be mandated, although there is not consensus^{[footnote 61]}
whether quality standards including all the relevant Ofcom Codes for any content that can be viewed via TV, including user-generated content, should be updated^{[footnote 62]}
whether delivery and associated responsibilities and privileges currently applying to the DTT system should transition to IP networks (and the consequences/conditions of that)^{[footnote 63]}
whether rules and responsibilities are required to ensure that IP networks can sustainably deliver TV or PSM content to a certain level of quality/reliability^{[footnote 64]}
that regulation on processing data to facilitate targeted TV advertising should be monitored to ensure it does not impact the viability of the ad financed streaming model^{[footnote 65]} and to ensure transparency around the use of personal data, and the option of opting out for users^{[footnote 66]}

There was not a consensus in the TV Sector WG whether further prominence regulation would be required to support the future sustainability of the PSB system. The PSBs believe it will definitely be required and “that prominence must be extended to all AV devices, user interfaces, operating systems, and algorithms. Local content providers must be easily discoverable via EPGs, app rails, voice search, and remote controls.”^{[footnote 67]} The Audience WG support this.^{[footnote 68]} Other members of the TV Sector WG did not hold this view.

While there is not a consensus view, some infrastructure group members believe considerations of net neutrality, potential charging frameworks, PSB privileges and cost allocation among stakeholders may become increasingly relevant to satisfying all stakeholders’ needs, including consumers - whereas other members consider that the current net neutrality framework and commercial framework are important for ensuring a successful transition to IPTV.

In addition, the working groups recommended within their papers that, at a minimum, industry and stakeholders should work together to set standards or guidance. This includes:

To best support audience and digital inclusion outcomes, government or Ofcom could issue guidance to platforms and content providers to support usability, accessibility and safety of design of all connected TVs, apps and services^{[footnote 69]} The Audience WG supports common usability standards and optional ‘simple’ modes for connected devices.^{[footnote 70]}
Industry standards or guidance for metadata and other discoverability factors to ensure relevant UK content (including nations/regions/local content and minority languages) is discoverable by all audiences.

We also note that regulation may be required to allow TV viewers in public/government buildings such as hospitals, care homes and prisons to access free-to-air TV channels.

Question 12

Section 12. Future innovation scope

Accepted Answer

IPTV technology and infrastructure will continue to evolve, bringing benefits to the TV industry and audiences. These will happen regardless of whether there is a full IPTV transition or whether DTT remains. Examples of potential innovations are included in the Infrastructure WG Paper 2 on innovation.

Question 13

Section 13. Impact assessment

Accepted Answer

The Audience WG Paper 4 highlighted key positives and negatives of a full transition to IPTV. However, we do not have the data to undertake an impact assessment of the downsides and benefits of a full transition to IPTV. We do not know the number of current DTT households that will be unable to afford broadband (see sections 4 and 5), how this may change over time, nor the detailed costs of any potential transition (see section 8). However, we note that, with appropriate support, a managed IPTV transition can serve as a catalyst for digital inclusion and help bring significant socioeconomic benefits to the UK (see section 8).

We would expect the DCMS to undertake an impact assessment when more data is available.

Question 14

Section 14. Risks

Accepted Answer

There are clearly risks for the TV industry and citizens as TV viewing transitions from broadcast to IPTV. Many of these can be mitigated (see sections 4 to 11). Given that viewing is naturally transitioning to IPTV many of these risks are also inherent in the DTT paper for viewers who will naturally move to IPTV.

Therefore, the risks below are those that have been identified that affect those households that otherwise would not have moved to IPTV delivery:

IPTV usability problems are not sufficiently addressed, making it difficult for some people, especially those who are older, female, or living with disabilities to watch TV
The transition support programme is poorly designed or executed and does not:

* address existing and ongoing affordability issues for all DTT households that cannot afford broadband and/or a connected device

* ensure that households have developed sufficient digital skills to access IPTV

The transition support programme has the potential to support broader digital inclusion initiatives across the UK. However, this requires significant cooperation across government departments and wider organisations, as well as sufficient funding. This plan needs to be developed and agreed years in advance if it is to succeed.

Question 15

Section 15. Conclusions

Accepted Answer

Technically, the UK infrastructure has the capability to support a full transition from DTT to IP (see sections 6 and 10). Policy decisions should allow the IPTV ecosystem time to scale for increased demand stemming from a full transition in 2034 (see section 11). Any policy decision or other intervention should also ensure that IP networks can sustainably deliver TV content to the required level of quality and reliability. ISPs and CAPs will require adequate lead time to dimension and build their networks, caching solutions, and CDN infrastructures effectively. ^{[footnote 71]}

A targeted transition support programme will be required to address affordability and skills for DTT households that lack the necessary financial resource and skills. This also aids broader digital inclusion bringing significant socio-economic benefits to the country (see sections 5 and 8). Funding for such a support programme should not fall solely on the media or telco sectors, given the benefits are far wider than just access to TV.

As online viewing increases, and as the viewing environment continues to evolve, this may give rise to additional regulatory considerations, and the success of any transition will depend on the regulatory environment being proactively reviewed to assess whether it should change to reflect the evolving viewing environment. Potential areas for review are noted in section 11. These are relevant regardless of whether there is a full transition from DTT to IPTV.

Stakeholder Forum Papers: IPTV - Requirements for a full transition to IPTV

Section 1. Executive summary and conclusion

Section 2. Introduction and context

Section 3. Current position

Section 4. Public good

Section 5. Transition (audience perspective)

Affordability:

Targeted mobile connectivity:

Devices:

Skills:

Public information campaign:

Section 6. Platform/network

Section 7. Service proposition

Section 8. Business costs and funding/infrastructure costs

Wider Financial Benefits of IPTV transition

Section 9. Consumer proposition, user experience/usability

Section 10. Spectrum and technology / technology considerations

Section 11. Regulatory considerations

Section 12. Future innovation scope

Section 13. Impact assessment

Section 14. Risks

Section 15. Conclusions

Is this page useful?

Help us improve GOV.UK

Help us improve GOV.UK

Cookies on GOV.UK

Section 1. Executive summary and conclusion

Section 2. Introduction and context

Section 3. Current position

Section 4. Public good

Section 5. Transition (audience perspective)

Affordability:

Broadband social tariffs:

Targeted mobile connectivity:

Devices:

Skills:

Public information campaign:

Section 6. Platform/network

Section 7. Service proposition

Section 8. Business costs and funding/infrastructure costs

Wider Financial Benefits of IPTV transition

Section 9. Consumer proposition, user experience/usability

Section 10. Spectrum and technology / technology considerations

Section 11. Regulatory considerations

Section 12. Future innovation scope

Section 13. Impact assessment

Section 14. Risks

Section 15. Conclusions

Is this page useful?

Help us improve GOV.UK

Help us improve GOV.UK