The Labour gestapo at work: the HTML-version

[AribertDeckers]

4.7.2026
The Labour gestapo at work: the HTML-version


Since the Labour gestapo hides its HTML-version, we can take the PDF-version instead:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a44d547fa72f76532a4e497/E03591532_TV_Green_paper_Accessible.pdf


Here is the ASCII text of it:

[*quote*]
----------------------
Watch this Space
A new strategic direction for UK media
June 2026
CP 1594Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Watch this Space
A new strategic direction for UK media
Presented to Parliament
by the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts
by Command of His Majesty
June 2026
CP 1594© Crown copyright, 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where
otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/
version/3/.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from
the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents.
Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
100 Parliament Street
London SW1A 2BQ
Email: enquiries@dcms.gov.uk
Tel: 020 7211 6000
ISBN 978-1-5286-6429-5
E03591532 06/26
Printed on paper containing 40% recycled fibre content minimum
Printed in the UK by HH Associates Ltd. on behalf of the Controller of His Majesty's Stationery Office3
Contents
Ministerial foreword 4
Executive summary 5
Chapter 1: Market and audience context 10
1.1 From broadcasting to content everywhere  11
1.2 Evolving information environment 14
1.3 How the TV sector is responding 15
1.4 The impact on the UK's PSM providers  17
1.5 The impact on the UK's production sector 20
1.6 Looking to the future 23
Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment 25
2.1 How technology is reshaping news and information 25
2.2 Prominence of news on social media 27
2.3 New media literacy duty for PSM providers 29
2.4 A new joint initiative to promote media literacy 30
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content 32
3.1 The future of TV distribution 32
3.2 The future of TV regulation 40
Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences 45
4.1 Prominence of PSM content in the platform age 46
4.2 A new system of public service media for television  48
Consultation questions 53
Introductory question 53
Market and audience context 53
Prominence of news on social media 53
Media literacy duty and joint venture 54
Future of TV distribution 56
Future of TV regulation 58
Prominence of PSM content in the platform age 58
A new system of public service media 60
Equalities impact 62
Annex: Future of TV Distribution 63
Annex A: Options assessment 63
Annex B: Challenges to be addressed prior to the switch-off of DTT services 65
Annex C: Cost-benefit analysis 69
Annex D: Bibliography 84
Glossary of terms 86
Endnotes 90

4 Ministerial foreword
Ministerial foreword
Like many of us, evenings in my home growing up were often spent
gathered around the living room TV set. Whether that was the whole
family glued to the Generation Game or Noel's House Party on
Saturday night, or cheering on Scotland in the football.
Our media is a central part of our civic realm. High-quality television
programmes – like culturally relevant drama and comedy – provide
common references and help shape attitudes to social issues.
Trustworthy news, subject to rigorous editorial standards, provides the
shared understanding and facts needed for people to trust one another.
The broadcast of national moments, such as the Olympic Games or
international sporting fixtures, bring the nation together for shared
experiences.
However, these benefits are under pressure in today's media environment where a limited selection of
broadcast channels has given way to an explosion of seemingly unlimited content, accessed primarily
via the internet. The digital age has seen audiences move away from traditional linear broadcasting and
into the online world where – rather than watching together – we are encouraged to consume content
in individually-curated feeds, and divisive and inaccurate narratives are more likely to thrive.
This green paper sets out a new strategic direction for the government's media policy to address these
challenges. The interventions we are consulting on will:
• foster a healthy information environment where trustworthy news is easy to find;
• ensure audiences can continue to enjoy universal access to trusted and high-quality television
content and benefit from our modern digital society more broadly; and
• support our public service media providers, who sit at the heart of our domestic TV industry
ecosystem, driving growth and inward investment.
Taken together, this work will ensure that our media continues to play its vitally important roles in
entertaining, educating, serving democracy and supporting social cohesion in the UK, while putting
audiences first.
Ian Murray
Minister for Creative Industries, Media and ArtsExecutive summary 5
Executive summary
At its best, our media provides the basis of a cohesive country and a healthy democracy. It has the
power to advance shared understanding, shared facts, and shared experiences which help people trust
and understand one another. It is this common ground on which a country is built.
However, like so many of our other civic spaces, it is facing fundamental challenges which are putting
these benefits at risk. Television is undergoing a profound and rapid transformation, having moved
from a system of limited broadcast channels to an environment of "content everywhere", where the
largest players are global streaming services, video sharing platforms, and social media companies.
Our domestic broadcasters, including our public service media, are fighting to be seen and heard in an
increasingly competitive and fragmented market. People are increasingly accessing news online, rather
than through more regulated spaces like Freeview on their TV sets. This is weakening the ability of
trustworthy news providers to reach audiences and shape informed public debate.
We are navigating a storm, but we have a strategy to address these challenges. One not designed to
stop change, but to put technology in our service, not us in its. This green paper is part of that strategy
and sets out an ambitious plan to ensure the media, and television in particular, can continue to
play its vitally important role in our society and our democracy, by ensuring high-quality UK content
and trustworthy news remains accessible and sustainable for the next generation.
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
The constraints that once defined television – finite spectrum requiring licensing and strict content
standards – are being removed by technology. Today's audiences have access to a near infinite amount
of content, and are shifting away from traditional live TV. This is particularly true for younger viewers.
This digital shift is blurring the lines between traditional, regulated TV and online content. Platforms
like YouTube are increasingly hosting high-quality, "TV-like" programmes. Crucially, global technology
platforms now often control the algorithms that decide what content people see. These algorithms
typically prioritise engagement over value, risking "filter bubbles" that erode the shared cultural
experiences once provided by broadcasting.
This environment puts significant financial strain on our domestic public service media (PSM) providers
– the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, 5, STV, and S4C.1 Their advertising and licence fee revenues are declining,
while competition for high-end content is intense. While our domestic production sector is globally
successful, it faces pressure from rising costs and challenges retaining intellectual property (IP), shifting
commercial value overseas. We must support the sector to diversify funding, retain IP, and ensure PSM
continues to champion high-quality, distinctive UK content that drives economic growth across the
nations and regions.6 Executive summary
Key facts
• In 2024-25, video sharing platforms and streaming services accounted for 74% of all video time
for audiences aged 16 to 24, and 69% for the 25 to 34s.
• YouTube is now the most-watched service for children aged 4-15, accounting for 28% of video
viewing for this age group.
• More than half of UK adults (16+) now include social media as one of the ways they get their
news.
• People who watch news on PSM providers are more likely to be politically active, well-informed,
and trusting of institutions.
Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
The shift to people consuming news online, with half of all news now being accessed through social
media, has created a turning point for our democracy. Algorithms that favour attention make it easier
for misinformation, polemic, and manipulated material like "deepfakes" to circulate widely. Overall
trust in UK news has dropped, and only 45% of adults feel confident judging whether a source is
truthful. This rise in untrustworthy news and corresponding decline in trust in news pose a risk to
the public's ability to access accurate information.
To promote an informed and media literate society, we propose three interventions:
• Prominence for trustworthy news: We will explore legislative options to require social media to
make news content from PSM providers – and potentially also national and local news publishers
– prominent and easily discoverable. This is crucial for countering misinformation, especially during
times of social unrest or crisis.
• New media literacy duty for PSM providers: We propose a new duty on PSM providers to develop
and report on media literacy strategies, leveraging their high level of public trust and reach to help
people critically assess the information they encounter.
• A new joint initiative to promote media literacy: To maximise impact, we will explore mechanisms
to support coordinated media literacy efforts across public service media, civil society, and the wider
media and tech sectors.
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality,
trusted television content
Future of TV distribution
The UK television market is shifting from traditional broadcast platforms to internet-delivered viewing
(IPTV). More households are accessing content via internet-connected devices, creating a hybrid
landscape that now includes IPTV, digital terrestrial television (DTT/Freeview), satellite, and cable.
While DTT remains vital for over 4 million homes, its usage is declining, and the cost of maintaining
the fixed DTT network is becoming economically unsustainable for broadcasters.
The shift to IPTV offers major benefits, including seamless access to more content, greater
personalisation, and improved accessibility features. The government is committed to maintaining
DTT until at least the end of 2034, but we are now consulting on a plan for what will come after this.Executive summary
To take this forward we will:
• Work with industry on a support programme: We will work with industry and audience groups to
design a package of support for audiences to transition their viewing to IPTV services and to make
the most of the additional benefits this provides. This package will depend on industry and a strong
ecosystem working together to develop and deliver it: PSM providers, platform operators, telecoms
providers, manufacturers and retailers, charities and local delivery partners – each playing their part.
• Bring forward a plan for the managed withdrawal of DTT services: This will be either on expiry of
current licences on 31 December 2034 or following a time-limited extension to 31 December 2044.
Any transition would be accompanied by consistent and accessible communications explaining what
is changing, when, and what audiences need to do.
What is IPTV?
Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) is a way of watching TV using your internet connection instead
of traditional digital terrestrial television (DTT), satellite, or aerial signals. Instead of broadcasting
all channels at once like regular TV, IPTV sends the specific show or channel you choose directly to
your device through the internet. This means you can watch live TV, on-demand films, or recorded
programmes on smart TVs, computers, tablets, smartphones, or streaming boxes. Services like
Amazon Prime Video or Netflix use similar internet-based technology, but IPTV often also includes
live TV channels for free, much like traditional DTT.
What is DTT?
DTT is a broadcasting system where television signals are transmitted over the air from
land-based transmitters and received by an aerial rather than via cable or satellite – how people
receive Freeview.
Future of TV regulation
The market trends we explore in this paper are fundamentally challenging the regulatory framework
for TV which was designed for an era of analogue broadcasting. As audiences increasingly move
toward smart TVs, video-on-demand and video sharing platforms, a significant regulatory imbalance
has emerged between traditional broadcasters – who adhere to strict standards around harmful
content, impartiality, and protecting younger audiences – and newer, less regulated content providers.
Furthermore, accessibility features such as subtitles, audio description, and signing (which allow
television content to be enjoyed by the widest audience possible) are not always available, or are
of limited quality.
How Ofcom regulates broadcast media
Ofcom has a legislative duty to draw up and enforce a Broadcasting Code, for television and
radio, to protect audiences from harm. Ofcom has a duty to keep the code under review, but
the standards objectives which underpin it are set out in legislation. The code includes rules like
ensuring content that is inappropriate for children is not shown before the 9pm watershed, and
that news is reported with due accuracy and due impartiality.
78 Executive summary
Audiences can complain to Ofcom if they see or hear content on a regulated service which
concerns them, and Ofcom has powers to investigate and issue sanctions where appropriate.
Between 2022 and 2025, Ofcom received an average of approximately 56,000 complaints
per year.
In the longer term, the regulatory framework is likely to need fundamental reform, so that it reflects
a wholly digital environment. Alongside this, the government has pledged to cut the administrative
cost of regulation on business by a quarter, making Britain the best place to do business and drive
economic growth.
As a first step we will:
• Undertake a period of stakeholder engagement: This will consider how best to take forward
necessary reform, to ensure the regulatory framework for TV continues to protect audiences from
harmful content, supports media providers, and allows our creative industries to thrive, by reducing
red tape, and driving growth and innovation across the UK. This could include a goal to eventually
shift away from a regulatory system based on how content is delivered, to one that focuses on
where audiences find and consume TV-like content, ensuring consistent standards and protections
regardless of the platform.
This new framework must be fair to both businesses and consumers, and be flexible and adaptive to
the rapid pace of technological change and evolving business models, ensuring the UK remains a global
leader in the creative industries while cutting unnecessary regulatory burdens.
Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible
and relevant to audiences
Prominence on third party platforms
PSM content needs to be accessible and prominent on all the platforms and devices people now use
to watch TV. If PSM content is not visible on the platforms where key audiences spend their time, the
principle of universal access is not being achieved.
What is prominence?
Broadcasting legislation incorporates a "prominence" framework which makes valued public
service content easy to find and watch. This is currently achieved for linear broadcasting through
rules set out by Ofcom that affect the position (channel numbers) of designated channels when
accessed via an electronic programme guide. The current legal framework guarantees that the first
five channels audiences find when they switch on their TVs are operated by our PSM providers.
The new prominence regime introduced by the Media Act 2024 provides an important first step in
delivering prominence for PSM providers' on-demand services (for example BBC iPlayer or ITVX).
As DCMS and Ofcom continue to implement this new regime, the intention is clear: to ensure high-
quality public service content is easy to find across the user interfaces of major smart TVs, set-top
boxes and streaming sticks.Executive summary 9
In response to changing audience viewing habits PSM providers have started making some of their
content available on third party platforms, like YouTube. The independent media regulator Ofcom has
recommended that third party platforms and PSM providers work together to ensure PSM content is
prominent and on fair commercial terms. They also recommended that the government should consider
underpinning this with legislation.
The government's strong preference remains for industry-led, voluntary agreements to achieve
increased prominence in a sustainable and robust way that satisfies all parties. In recent months
there has been progress in building partnerships. For example an agreement between the BBC and
YouTube was announced in January 2026 which will see the BBC making content specifically for
YouTube including entertainment, news and children's content. However, should these partnerships not
go far enough in delivering our objectives, we would need to consider legislating.
A new system of public service media for television
Our PSM providers are a central pillar of national culture and are key to driving growth in the TV
sector. Together they deliver high-quality impartial news and content that brings people together.
PSM providers remain among the most trusted news sources with research showing that users of PSM
news are more likely to correctly identify important factual information, have higher levels of trust in
institutions, and are less polarised. PSM providers are also required to make high-quality, original UK
content, which enables people across the UK to see themselves reflected as part of our national story.
The UK's PSM providers
Our PSM providers are the BBC, ITV, STV, Channel 4, 5 and S4C. The BBC is the UK's largest PSM
provider, with a mission to serve all audiences with high-quality, impartial content to inform,
educate, and entertain. ITV, and STV in Scotland, is the oldest commercial network, providing news
and regional programmes in addition to entertainment focused content. Channel 4 focuses on
innovative and distinctive programming for young and diverse audiences, including film and current
affairs. 5 provides a range of content, including documentaries, dramas, and has a unique focus on
children's TV. S4C is dedicated to providing Welsh language programming.
The PSM system is based on a compact where PSM providers meet certain obligations, and in exchange
receive benefits. Obligations include delivering a broadcast channel and quotas which require PSM
providers to produce a minimum amount of different sorts of content. In exchange the PSM providers
get benefits, most significantly 'prominence' – traditionally by being the first five channels on TV sets.
However this arrangement is under threat as the value of PSM benefits is shrinking as audiences move
online, risking the sustainability of the system.
To address this we will:
• Explore options for strategic reform to the PSM system with the aim of better reflecting how
people consume media and to address the regulatory and economic challenges this poses.
We want the system of PSM to be more flexible to changes in the market, and to allow for the
potential for a greater or different range of PSM providers that deliver content in different ways.
Ultimately, we want a system that encourages the creation of more public service content, reversing
the trend of recent years which has seen the output of our PSM providers decline.10
Chapter 1:
Market and audience context
One hundred years on from John Logie Baird's historic transmission on a device he called a televisor,
television continues to play a vitally important role in our society and our democracy, bringing people
together and telling stories from across our nations and regions.
By reflecting the diverse people and communities that make up the UK and bringing us together for
moments of collective experience, television has a powerful ability to support social cohesion. It does
this by shaping attitudes to social issues, providing common references, creating cultural icons and
setting the public agenda.2 Programmes such as Gavin and Stacey and Adolescence demonstrate that
the medium of television is still unrivalled in its ability to drive the national conversation and give voice
to our national story. Topical debate and current affairs shows, like the BBC's Question Time, provide
a shared space for constructive and reasoned deliberation. National moments such as the Olympic
Games or international sporting fixtures bring the country together. By promoting civic engagement,
shared values and a sense of belonging, television has the power to contribute to a healthy and highly-
functioning democracy.
Crucially, television also remains a highly trusted medium, with people who use television as a source of
news rating trust, accuracy and impartiality on it more highly than those who use online or social media
news platforms.3 That trust is largely as a result of the regulatory environment that has supported
broadcasters and protected audiences.
Our globally renowned domestic TV sector delivers hugely important economic benefits which are felt
around the country. We are proud to have one of the world's leading TV ecosystems, characterised by
a strong mixed ecology of public service and commercial broadcasters, streamers and content creators.
Our domestic broadcasters provide an engine room of creativity and support a strong independent
sector creating and selling UK content across the globe. This is supported by major inward investment
which creates jobs and nurtures our creative and technical skills, while the creator economy is
developing new models for the production, distribution and consumption of content. Thanks to our
world leading infrastructure and highly skilled workforce, the UK is a global centre for film and TV
production, drawing in £4.8 billion of inward investment and co-productions in 2024 alone. The trusted
and consistent nature of the regulatory environment provides certainty for that inward investment and
production spend.
To enable a thriving TV ecosystem, the government continues to support the sector on multiple fronts.
Our Creative Industries Sector Plan – published last summer as part of our refreshed industrial strategy
– contains the blueprint for how we will ensure this continues. The plan rightly identified film and TV
as one of four "frontier" subsectors, based on their high-growth potential, economic contribution,
employment levels and export performance that can drive growth in the wider economy.
We promised to build on the commitments in the sector plan by taking specific action to support
public service media and the wider TV sector. The interventions set out in this green paper demonstrate
how we will take that action to protect television's integral role in our society in a fast evolving mediaChapter 1: Market and audience context
environment. We will build on Ofcom's latest review of public service media, and support our PSM
providers. We will go beyond the changes introduced by the Media Act 2024, which we have made
significant progress in delivering.
The BBC sits at the heart of our system of public service media, and our wider TV sector. It is our
biggest intervention in the creative industries and acts as a national champion and anchor institution
for organisations throughout the creative economy. Its reach seeds production and broadcasting
ecosystems. As part of the plans set out in this green paper to support the TV sector and wider media
ecosystem, we are also taking forward a review of the BBC's Royal Charter. In December 2025 we
published a consultation on changes that we are considering to future-proof the BBC. That consultation
closed on 10 March 2026.
Through this process we want to ensure the strongest possible BBC; one which is more ambitious in
driving growth in the creative industries across the UK, while retaining its vital role as a trusted provider
of news and of broader content that shapes and supports a shared national story. We want the BBC to
use its market position and scale to enter into partnerships with other PSM providers, and the wider
commercial sector, to help support the delivery of these objectives. We believe the changes being
proposed in this green paper will support an overall TV and media sector that can work together with
the BBC to ensure that our public service media continues to serve audiences as viewers and citizens.
It will therefore be crucial that we consider the findings and conclusions of this green paper alongside
the BBC green paper published as part of the Charter Review.
1.1 From broadcasting to content everywhere
Television is unique. In the UK, to broadcast a channel, you generally need a licence which requires you
to be a fit and proper person. The content broadcast must meet specific standards, including protecting
younger audiences from harm and due accuracy and impartiality for news, which is overseen by the
independent regulator Ofcom. Television also benefits from public funding and support through the
licence fee, tax incentives, and infrastructure.
The origins of this lie in its constraints. TV spectrum – the radio waves that are used to transmit
television wirelessly – is finite and needs to be managed. These constraints are being fundamentally
removed by technology. Satellite and cable introduced in the 1990s provided the capacity to carry large
numbers of new channels. The transition from analogue to digital terrestrial television completed in
2012 allowed the same proliferation of channels over the aerial. While these new channels were brought
under the same regulatory regime, the set of six PSM providers has remained fixed, unchanged since
1997. Since the early 2000s, the internet has enabled an explosion of audio-visual content to be created
and shared without having to meet broadcast standards, to increasingly mass audiences. Video sharing
platforms with user-generated content were treated as different, and subject to a distinct lighter
audience protection and regulatory regime.
Today's audiences have access to a seemingly infinite amount of content at the push of a button, or the
swipe of a finger. The largest video-on-demand platforms contain tens of thousands of hours of content.
On average over 20 million videos are uploaded daily to YouTube, the world's largest video sharing
platform. Smaller services too have proliferated, from the English National Ballet's ENB At Home,
to Liverpool FC TV, and children's services like Ketchup TV. As a result, viewers are dividing their time
between an increasing number of services and devices, whether that is streaming the latest high-end
dramas on Netflix or Disney+ on their TV sets, or watching TikTok videos on their phones.
1112

[AribertDeckers]

Chapter 1: Market and audience context
Figure 1: Top 10 video content platforms by share of total identified viewing (%), Q3 2025
BBC19%
YouTube19%
ITV
11.7%
Netflix
10.4%
SKY
6.8%
Channel 4
5.9%
TikTok
4.4%
Amazon4%
Disney+3.5%
UKTV Media Ltd
3%
Broadcaster
SVOD/AVOD
(Subscription/Advertising Video on Demand)
Video-sharing
Source: DCMS analysis of BARB viewing data
Long gone are the days when the only way of watching TV meant sitting down for a 30 or 60 minute
programme in front of a TV set. Today's audiences want to find content that they connect with, in
whatever form that takes and wherever that may be. They are moving away from live broadcast TV, in
favour of more flexible and accessible ways of watching video content (see Figure 2). This is particularly
the case for younger audiences whose consumption of live TV is now dwarfed by the amount of time
they spend watching content on video-on-demand services, streaming platforms or video sharing
platforms. In 2024, video sharing platforms and streaming services accounted for 74% of all in-home
video time for audiences aged 16 to 24, and 69% for the 25 to 34 cohort. This is compared to 9% and
12% respectively for all live TV.4Chapter 1: Market and audience context
Figure 2: The shift from linear to on-demand and social across all ages
Percentage of total identified viewing by category: Q3 2022 vs. Q3 2025
59%
65.4%
17.8%
15.4%
23.2%
19.2%
Q3 2022
Live/Linear (Including BVOD)
Q3 2025
Streaming/VOD
VSP
Source: DCMS analysis of BARB viewing data
The lines between TV programming and other internet-delivered video content are becoming
increasingly blurred. Social media companies and video sharing platforms are seeking to capture the
"lean back" viewing experience of traditional TV with longer, more heavily produced content that is
watched on TV sets and that could be considered "TV-like". The genre mix of content on these platforms
is also changing, away from genres like music, and towards entertainment which was traditionally the
domain of large studios and broadcasters.5 In February 2025, YouTube's CEO Neil Mohan declared that
"YouTube is the new television", recognising how it is becoming increasingly common for audiences to
watch the platform's content on their TV sets.
This all means that the way we think about and define 'television' is changing before our eyes, which has
implications for how the government supports and regulates the TV sector. Broadcasters are no longer
competing primarily with each other, but with global technology platforms with significant resources.
Without change, regulation, such as the content standards that protect us from harm and ensure news
is presented with due impartiality and due accuracy, could struggle to keep up with the varied ways that
people are choosing to access content.
Changing audience viewing habits, and particularly the increasing popularity of video sharing platforms
and social media, has had profound implications for how and what content is delivered to audiences.
Increasingly, decisions about what content people see on screen are not being taken by teams of people
working as editors or commissioners, but by algorithms. These algorithms are hugely sophisticated
and help people discover content that they want to engage with, and that meets their needs and
interests more efficiently than ever before. By the same token, they are also an incredibly powerful
tool for helping creators find audiences for their content. Critically, audiences will largely be unaware if
the content they are watching is subject to a regulatory regime designed to protect them and uphold
quality and editorial standards.
1314
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
However, most – if not all – of these same algorithms are designed to prioritise content that keeps
users on a platform, for example content that triggers strong emotional responses. They encourage
engagement over accuracy, and are designed to show viewers more of what they know they like, so they
are less likely to expose audiences to content that challenges their existing views. This risks reinforcing
biases through individual filter bubbles and echo chambers.6
The consumption of content in individually-curated feeds is eroding the shared cultural and societal
experiences associated with traditional broadcasting, which have supported social cohesion. Television
still has the power to bring people together – from different backgrounds, from different generations –
but those moments are becoming less common.
For children in particular, viewing has moved away from linear TV and towards online and on-demand,
where algorithms and personalisation play a fundamental role in what content is surfaced to them.
YouTube is now the most-watched service for children aged 4-15, accounting for 28% of in-home
video viewing for this age group.7 While this has provided significant advances in consumer choice and
convenience, much of the content will be optimised for a global audience. Content that is made in the
UK, and culturally relevant to a UK audience may not always be prominently featured.
Research undertaken by Ofcom suggests that some children's content, particularly that which can be
found on video sharing platforms and social media, has become faster paced, highly edited, chaotic,
and often delivered to the user without context, which can lead to viewers feeling overstimulated.8
AI-generated content, which can often lack narrative structure and contain incorrect or misleading
information, is increasingly prevalent on social media and video sharing platforms, and is often targeted
towards children and younger viewers.
On 15 June 2026, the government made a crucial move to protect children online by banning social
media platforms for under 16s. The ban will include platforms like Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube,
Instagram, Facebook and X. There will be limited exemptions for some platforms which do not have
harmful features, such as YouTube Kids or other educational services. Beyond this there will be
restrictions on harmful functions such as livestreaming and stranger communication. Restrictions on
these functionalities will also be on by default for under 16- and 17-year-olds to prevent a cliff-edge
at 16. The government will also be looking in more detail at overnight curfews and breaks in infinite
scrolling for under-18-year-olds and will set out more detail in July.
TV has always provided a safe space for children. At its best, high-quality children's TV and video
content helps children learn about the world around them, expand their horizons, and see themselves
and their communities reflected back at them. It is essential that children can continue to have access
to high-quality, culturally relevant, UK-made content.
1.2 Evolving information environment
With audiences increasingly accessing news online, the boundaries between previously distinct
news media are being blurred. TV news, press and audio – often in the form of podcasts – all sit
alongside each other online. While the UK continues to benefit from a strong media sector, declining
trust, changing consumption habits and the growth of digital platforms are weakening the ability of
trustworthy news providers to reach audiences and shape informed public debate.
We must harness our UK news and media sector to produce quality content, given its effectiveness
relies on public trust. Since 2018, overall trust in UK news has dropped seven percentage points to 35%
and trustworthy media outlets are now part of a fragmented information ecosystem driven by changes
in content consumption.9 More than half of UK adults (16+) now include social media as one of the
ways they get their news. This includes accessing headlines or summaries rather than directly visiting
news publishers' websites. This percentage rises to 75% for 16-24 year olds.10 Media providers are
increasingly reliant on these platforms which optimise for engagement rather than accuracy.11Chapter 1: Market and audience context
At the same time, new creator-led distribution models, including subscription newsletters and video
platforms, are enabling individual journalists and commentators to reach audiences directly. As platforms
like Substack expand into audio and video streaming, they are further blurring the boundaries between
publishers, broadcasters and user-generated content on video sharing platforms. While this has expanded
the diversity of voices online, it has also increased the complexity of the information people see, in which
established news organisations sit alongside a growing range of independent commentators.
Despite higher levels of trust in traditional news platforms such as TV, radio and print, online news
consumption overtook linear TV for the first time in 2025.12 Half of all individuals watch news on any of
the main PSM providers each week, a 15 percentage point drop since 2018, and four of the top ten news
sources are now social media platforms.13 PSM providers are cornerstone sources of trusted news, and
their erosion risks creating a vacuum that misinformation and disinformation will fill.
Technological changes are also shifting how news is consumed, and impacting peoples' ability to find
accurate news. The advent of AI assistants and search overviews, which serve as information gateways,
have been found to misrepresent news content 45% of the time, regardless of region, language or
platform.14 Over two-fifths of UK adults already say they encounter misinformation or deepfakes and
only 45% of adults feel confident judging whether a source of information is truthful or not.15 The rapid
creation and dissemination of deepfakes threatens to erode trust in traditional media brands, risking
audiences questioning the authenticity of all audio-visual content, including genuine news reports.
In this new information environment, it is challenging for audiences to tell the difference between
news and polemic, and misleading or false content. This green paper seeks to explore how the news
and media sector can support the resilience of the UK's information environment. We want to harness
the strengths of our public service media, and work collaboratively across the whole sector to build
trust, strengthen media literacy, and guarantee access to accurate news for all audiences, including at
the local level. The work the government takes forward to address problems associated with the online
news environment will align with our broader work supporting trusted and accurate news, including our
Local Media Action Plan.
1.3 How the TV sector is responding
The blurring of boundaries between different sorts of video content is having profound implications for
the companies and people that make that content. Broadcasters, streamers and other content creators
are operating in an increasingly fragmented and competitive market, which rewards formats and IP that
can be adapted across multiple platforms.
Even prior to the explosion of video being consumed on social media, the TV and streaming sectors
were dramatically increasing their spending in response to increased demand from audiences for high-
end TV content. This began in the early 2010s and peaked in a period referred to as the "streaming wars"
in the years immediately before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This period was characterised by
streamers' debt-fuelled investment in exclusive content. While this was a global trend, the effects were
felt keenly in the UK, and particularly by our globally-renowned production sector. At its height in 2022,
the UK's independent production sector generated their highest revenues on record, reaching nearly
£4 billion, driven by record levels of international investment.16
However, we have since seen a correction in the market. Content inflation costs have proved
unsustainable, and in response to higher interest rates and decreased consumer willingness to pay
for multiple subscriptions, the sector has moved to prioritise profitability, and to protect their market
positions. Broadcasters, streamers, studios and producers have all sought to diversify their revenues,
cut costs and make consolidation plays. For example, many major broadcasters in the UK and Europe
have already launched strategies to rationalise their costs, often involving significant job cuts. Scale,
particularly when it supports access to data, is increasingly important as competition for advertising
1516
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
revenues intensifies, and to take advantage of opportunities for more targeted advertising and
personalisation that command a premium in the market. This has also led to price rises for consumers
who do continue their subscriptions. Most subscription streaming services increased their real terms
prices between 2020 and 2025.17
Global trends: consolidation and partnerships in the TV sector
Consolidation has been one of the key trends in the TV sector in recent years, with significant
mergers and acquisitions playing out in markets across the globe. In August 2025 Skydance Media
bought Paramount, one of the oldest studios in the US, for $8 billion. More recently, Warner
Brothers Discovery has been subject to takeover bids from Netflix and Paramount, with the latter
agreeing a takeover that is still subject to regulatory approvals. In Europe, the Italian-owned
company MediaForEurope is seeking to create a pan-European media group, taking control of
Germany's ProSiebenSat.1, and following this up by taking an initial stake in Portuguese media
conglomerate Impresa. The UK, which has a relatively unique broadcasting landscape with multiple
commercial PSM providers operating alongside commercial broadcasters and streamers, has not
yet seen the same level of deal making. However it is still subject to the same market pressures,
and public reporting suggests that similar developments could follow in the near future.
Broadcasters and streamers are also engaging in partnerships to increase reach and manage
distribution costs. In June 2025, Netflix announced a partnership with the French broadcaster TF1,
to enable audiences to watch TF1 channels and on-demand content directly on the streaming
platform. Shortly afterwards, ITV and Disney announced a strategic partnership to carry each
other's content on their streaming services, with the deal expanded to include ITV flagship linear
channel ITV1 in February 2026.
We committed in the Creative Industries Sector Plan to ask the CMA, supported by Ofcom, to set
out how changes in the sector, such as the convergence of broadcast, on-demand and video sharing,
could be taken into account as part of any future assessment of the television and advertising
markets. The resulting correspondence between the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts
and the Chief Executives of the CMA and Ofcom was published on 26 January 2026.
At the same time, other parts of the sector are still expanding rapidly, taking advantage of new
technology and opportunities to go direct to consumers. Digital-first start ups are injecting new talent
and energy into the sector, while the popularity of influencer videos from content creators in the UK
is increasing with both younger and older audiences. Lower barriers to entry associated with new
distribution platforms are enabling niche voices, independent journalists, and marginalised communities
to find audiences for their content at a scale that previously would not have been possible, including
internationally.18 The UK media company Goalhanger, known for its series of 'The Rest Is' shows,
including The Rest Is History, is expanding into the US and other global markets.
These changes have also impacted the content that the sector is making. Increasingly content is not
being created for a single distribution channel, but rather to be adapted across multiple platforms to
reach fragmented audiences and maximise revenues. This content is also making use of traditional TV
talent alongside the most popular stars of the creator economy. The BBC's hugely successful series
The Traitors is an excellent example of this. Episode clips and other short form content are used on
social media to drive awareness and build excitement, while a visual companion podcast, the Traitors
Uncloaked, deepens audience engagement for viewers who want more than the main episodes. By the
same token the companies creating this content are becoming more cross-media rather than focussing
on particular distribution channels (this trend is explored further in section 1.5). This cross disciplinary,
cross platform, cross format content further underlines the need to look at our approach to the sector.Chapter 1: Market and audience context
The Creative Industries Sector Plan is this government's blueprint for supporting the UK screen sector's
growth and driving inward investment in response to these shifts. Building on our wider creative
industries strategy, we are going further with a dedicated plan to make the UK the best place in the
world to create film and TV content. This means fostering the right conditions across the country for a
thriving, mixed ecosystem, of public service and commercial providers, that attracts inward investment
from major international players, sustains a vibrant production sector, and enables UK companies to
scale up and retain the value of their IP.
1.4 The impact on the UK's PSM providers
The UK's system of public service media is unique, and revered around the world. Six broadcasters
– BBC, ITV, STV, Channel 4, 5 and S4C – of different sizes, specialisms and business models, work
together, and compete, to bring significant benefits to the cultural, economic and democratic life of the
UK. They sit at the heart of our film and TV mixed ecology but this position is under threat as audiences
increasingly move online.
First and foremost, PSM providers make high-quality, original UK content, which enables people
and communities in every part of the country to see themselves reflected on screen as part of our
national story. Public service content from our PSM providers (PSM content) delivers significant social
and democratic benefits.19 Whether it is the BBC and ITV championing disability representation and
highlighting experiences of deafness in Reunion and Code of Silence, or 5 reviving Play for Today and
spotlighting such subjects as older relationships and workplace pressures in the education system. ITV's
Mr Bates vs The Post Office helped catalyse public and political opinion on a miscarriage of justice that
had been reported on in the press for over a decade, with a direct impact on proceedings in Parliament
and the courts.
PSM providers deliver a range of trusted and editorially robust national, international and regional news.
Ofcom research has also shown that users of news from PSM providers are more likely to correctly
identify important factual information, have higher levels of trust in institutions, and be less polarised
than those who do not get news from PSM providers.20 They also play a vital role as UK soft power and
cultural assets, by projecting British values overseas and driving favourable impressions of the UK. The
BBC is the country's most recognised cultural export internationally, and the BBC World Service remains
the world's most trusted international broadcaster.
At the same time PSM providers are central to driving growth and investment into the sector.
Their importance lies not only in their scale, but also in the levels of trust and reliable pipeline of
commissioning they bring. These are characteristics that are vital to securing stable and long-term
investment, which matters more than ever as the media environment becomes more fragmented and
complex. As a result they support the development of the UK's outstanding pipeline of talent both on
and off screen that has helped attract inward investment. The range of content they produce means
they can take risks with new and emerging talent. It is the case that without the catalyst and investment
in production from our PSM providers, much of the streamers' production output in the UK may not
have occurred.
They also play an integral role in driving growth outside of London and the South East and supporting
independent producers based in the nations and regions of the UK. In 2024, primary commissioning
spend in the nations and regions generated £1.16 billion in producer revenues, of which PSM providers'
network commissioning spend accounted for 68%.21 This investment and activity has supported the
sustainability of well-established screen clusters, such as MediaCity in Salford, or Cardiff which has
become an internationally recognised hub for high-end drama production with production company
Bad Wolf and the associated Wolf Studios being an anchor in the success of the local sector.
1718
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
The UK also benefits from a system of commercial local TV services, which broadcast in towns and cities
across the country. Since the launch of the first local TV service in 2013, local TV has complemented the
offer of the national PSM providers through the provision of local news and content to communities
across the UK, and has also proved to be a valuable training ground for new entrants seeking the
opportunity to gain experience of working in journalism and television production.
However, the media regulator Ofcom has highlighted that PSM providers are under pressure due to
their relative size and resources. They are fighting for their content to be seen and heard in a dynamic
and competitive market, where people are watching more content on third party platforms (such as
social media or video sharing platforms), rather than broadcasters' own channels or video-on-demand
services. The first five channels on the traditional programme guide are no longer the guaranteed
front door for TV viewing that they once were. Today, younger audiences are just as likely to turn to a
subscription streaming service when they first turn on the TV as they are to watch a linear channel.22
This is increasing their reliance on a new generation of intermediaries and aggregators.
Figure 3: Initial browse destinations, 2020-2025
"Now please imagine you're looking for something to watch. Where do you turn first?"
56% Any VOD (+13%)
43%
41%
33% Live TV (-8%)
29% Paid for VOD (+3%)
26%
16%
14% YouTube (+6%)
13% Free VOD (+4%)
9%
10% Recordings (-6%)
8%
H2
2020
H1
2021
H2
2021
H1
2022
H2
2022
H1
2023
H2
2023
H1
2024
H2
2024
H1
2025
Source: MTM 3 Reasons, MTM ScreenThink
PSM providers are starting to make their content available on these services, but the global technology
platforms that run these platforms now control the main routes to audiences and shape the economics
of distribution. This means it is increasingly difficult for PSM providers to get their distinctive, UK-
focused content in front of audiences. It also presents challenges for them to generate sufficient
financial returns, making it harder for them to fund the production and distribution of high-quality UK
content to all audiences.23
The finances of PSM providers are also coming under pressure from structural changes in the television
advertising market. With more competition, combined advertising revenues of the commercial PSM
providers (ITV, Channel 4, 5 and STV) was around £1.7 billion in 2024, more than £700 million lower
in real terms than in 2018. This trend is being exacerbated by streaming platforms, who previouslyChapter 1: Market and audience context
differentiated themselves from broadcasters by not carrying advertising, launching ad-supported tiers
as part of efforts to diversify their revenues and increase profit margins. In 2025 the number of UK
streaming subscribers on packages that include advertising overtook those on ad-free tiers.
The BBC is also facing funding pressures, partly due to fewer households holding a TV licence as
audiences move away from watching live TV. This has contributed to the BBC's licence fee income
falling by over 30% in real terms over the last decade.24 These developments are putting the future of
public service media, and the economic, social and democratic benefits PSM providers deliver, at risk.
Figure 4: Revenue from UK TV advertising and revenue from BBC licence fee, 2015-2025
(nominal vs. CPI-adjusted)
120
110
+2.9%
100
-1.9%
90
80
-25.8%
70
-29.4%
60
2015
2016
2017
BBC licence fee (Nominal)
2018
2019
2020
BBC licence fee (Real)
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
TV ad market (Nominal)
TV ad market (Real)
Source: BBC Annual Reports and Accounts, Advertising Association/WARC Expenditure Report, DCMS analysis
There are steps that we encourage PSM providers to be taking already in the face of these challenges.
We support Ofcom's recommendation in their latest review of public service media that PSM providers
need to adapt to audience preferences by testing and iterating new ways of distributing and creating
content, including on third party platforms.25 The government also set out in the Creative Industries
Sector Plan that we would support PSM providers' digital growth and transformation plans, and
encourage them to create deep strategic partnerships, where these benefit their financial sustainability
and audiences. The changes we are consulting on through this green paper will help PSM providers
undertake these activities with increased vigour and ambition. We are also consulting on options
through the BBC Charter Review to encourage the BBC to enter into more ambitious partnerships,
including collaborating with other PSM providers.
PSM partnerships
There have been a number of examples of ambitious and strategic partnerships involving PSM
providers in recent years. The government wants to build a framework for public service media that
encourages more of them.
Freely
The BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and 5 collaborated through their joint venture, Everyone TV, to launch
Freely, a combined streaming platform. The platform is setting out to future-proof free-to-air
television by delivering live linear channels and on-demand content – including high-quality public
1920
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
service content – seamlessly over the internet. This collaboration has since expanded to include
STV, S4C and UKTV, alongside global technology partners including Roku and Amazon Fire TV.
Adoption of Freely continues to grow and in December 2025 it surpassed one million weekly users.
BBC-S4C partnership
In January 2026, the BBC and S4C announced a new streaming partnership (effective from April
2026) to significantly increase the discoverability of Welsh-language content on BBC iPlayer. Under
the agreement, S4C programming will gain high-profile placement on the iPlayer homepage in
Wales, while flagship dramas and live sports will be promoted UK-wide for the first time. Beyond
improved curation, the partnership introduces enhanced technical features, including multiple live
sports streams with optional English commentary and expanded subtitling.
One of the most high-profile ways PSM providers continue to bring the nation together is for great
sporting occasions. We want to ensure that key sporting events remain available for people to watch for
free for years to come. The Listed Events regime seeks to ensure that audiences are able to watch the
"crown jewels of sport" – for example, Wimbledon or the FA Cup Final – live, without needing to pay a
subscription. However, audiences are increasingly choosing to watch sport, on-demand rather than live.
The current regime only covers live coverage rights. While live and on-demand rights are routinely sold
as a package, we are aware that this will not always be the case. We believe on-demand rights should
be protected under the regime, so that PSM providers are able to compete fairly with their larger global
competitors for those rights. Therefore, we intend to legislate to extend the regime to include on-
demand rights when Parliamentary time allows.
1.5 The impact on the UK's production sector
Our independent television production sector is a global success story. The UK is renowned the
world over for its creative spirit, highly skilled workforce and world-class production facilities.
The government continues to support the sector and our Creative Industries Sector Plan sets out a
number of commitments, including maintaining competitive tax measures for TV production through
the Audio-Visual Expenditure Credit and supporting screen sector skills development to strengthen
the workforce.26
Our PSM providers have been central to the strength and success of our independent production sector.
They provide a continuity of commissioning activity for independent production companies of all
sizes and specialisms. In 2024, PSM providers accounted for just over 80% of domestic UK television
commissioning spend.27 Domestic TV provides the employment continuity freelancers need to sustain
and grow their skills, and acts as a "nursery slope" for emerging writers, directors, crew and producers.
This in turn makes the UK attractive for inward investment from streamers and other international
commissioners wanting to take advantage of this ecosystem to make content in the UK. In 2025
inward investment productions accounted for £3.3 billion, or 81%, of UK production spend on high-
end television.28
Commissioning and production in the nations and regions
From The Responder and Riot Women to Blue Lights and Brassic, these are all stories made outside
of London and in screen clusters across the nations and regions (Liverpool, Yorkshire, Belfast and
Lancashire, respectively), told by local writers and showcasing the communities in which they
are set.Chapter 1: Market and audience context
In recent years, efforts have been made to incentivise commissioning and production activity in the
nations and regions, including encouraging our PSM providers to establish an increased presence
outside of London and the South East (for example, Channel 4 in Leeds and the BBC in MediaCity
Salford and Digbeth in Birmingham). However, the television sector remains highly centralised in
London and the South East with more than half of primary commissioning spend being made there.
We want to see our screen clusters go from strength to strength and grow sustainably and essential
to this is broadcasters and other commissioners being more ambitious in commissioning content
across the nations and regions. We have been engaging with industry to understand the barriers
to increasing activity and have commissioned research to establish the costs of production
activity across the different screen clusters in the UK relative to London and the South East. This
will support our next steps in considering how best to support growth of the production sector in
the nations and regions.
However, as referenced in section 1.4, the spending power of PSM providers is declining. This, coupled
with rising production costs and inflationary pressure in the sector, particularly for high-end content
such as drama, is affecting the ability of providers to commission and fund such content at the volume
it has previously. In 2024, UK primary commissioning revenues, the majority of which originates from
the commissioning spend of PSM providers, declined by 2.3%.29
PSM providers have also begun to adopt digital-first and 'fewer, bigger and better' commissioning
strategies to prioritise content that performs well on streaming platforms, which in conjunction with
shifting audience tastes and habits has resulted in some genres being commissioned less. Pact, the trade
body for independent TV and film producers, has cautioned that the combination of the slowdown
in commissioning, and the changing mix of genres being commissioned, could be part of a structural
change that alters the balance and characteristics of the production sector.
Figure 5: PSM content across genres by number of hours of first-run originated output
10.810.910.9
1.11.21.2
0.20.2
0.2
10.7
1.1
0.2
10.410.3
1.11.1
0.20.2
9.3
0.8
0.1
10.410.2
1.01.1
0.1
0.1
9.9
1.0
0.1
8.8
1.0
0.1
Drama
5.2
5.3
5.3
5.4
5.2
4.9
5.2
4.7
Comedy
4.8
Factual
Entertainment
5.1
4.4
Fact Ent
Children's
2.62.7
0.91.0
2.3
1.3
2.32.22.0
1.11.01.1
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.1
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.3
0.70.60.70.60.70.60.50.50.50.50.4
20142015201620172018201920202021202220232024
Source: Ofcom, O&O Programme Database, Oliver & Ohlbaum analysis. Chart shows PSM provider first run originated
output for all dayparts, by genre, in thousands of hours for 2014-2024, excluding news & current affairs and sport.

[AribertDeckers]

2122
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
As competition for commissions has increased, producers, like broadcasters, have turned to
consolidation in an attempt to reduce costs and compete with vertically integrated global streaming
services. For example, the French production company Mediawan recently acquired the US-based North
Road Company in January 2026 with the combined group now having a stake in around 100 individual
production companies. The largest production companies are now bigger than many of our domestic
broadcasters.
Under the UK's terms of trade framework, independent producers commissioned by PSM providers
retain ownership of their IP, allowing them to build asset value through international sales, format
licensing and secondary exploitation. We understand the importance of protecting a vibrant and
dynamic production market and the role the terms of trade regime plays in supporting this. It is also
important that we have strong and sustainable PSM providers to ensure the framework's continued
success. Reforms introduced in the Media Act 2024 have necessitated PSM providers to update their
codes for commissioning from independent producers, and Ofcom's guidance for PSM providers in
drawing up those codes. As a result the government is minded to allow time for these changes to settle
before considering whether further reforms would be appropriate.
When global streaming platforms commission directly, they typically retain the IP. Although this has
helped fill gaps in domestic production expenditure and generated wider spillover benefits, inward
investment increasingly shifts the residual commercial value offshore. While 74% of screen-based
businesses actively use some form of external finance (a higher rate than UK SMEs) 83% report
unmet finance demand and 77% feel underfunded. The sector faces a core challenge – balancing
inward investment with a domestic commissioning and IP ecosystem capable of serving UK audiences.
Producers must navigate immediate pressures for production finance amid a volatile domestic market
while safeguarding the longer‐term economic value associated with retaining IP.
In response to these pressures, and to help the sector capitalise on growth opportunities in an evolving
market, the Creative Industries Sector Plan sets out a coordinated strategy to strengthen the UK's
production landscape. A core priority is expanding alternative financing routes and export opportunities
for UK producers, recognising that "a mixed film and television ecology" underpins a strong and
internationally competitive industry. Better access to finance will put UK producers in a stronger
position to retain their IP, needing to rely less on selling that IP to secure financing and thereby ensuring
that they can generate more long term revenue and grow successful businesses.
The Plan also includes major investments in talent, innovation, and regional capacity. A £75 million
Screen Growth Package launched in April 2026, incorporating an expanded UK Global Screen Fund
of £18 million per year (2026–2029), to strengthen international business development, support
co‐productions and enhance the global distribution of independent UK content. As part of the Sector
Plan's commitment to build a resilient and skilled workforce for the future, the creative industries have
committed to tackling bullying, harassment and discrimination through cross-industry support for the
Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA), which will support the TV industry in
its first wave of operations. This is alongside the critical role played by the unions, such as Equity and
Bectu.
At the same time, changing audience viewing habits – and the growth of video sharing platforms in
particular – are opening up new opportunities for producers and other content creators who can build
relationships directly with audiences. New platforms enable producers and rightsholders to bypass
traditional gatekeepers (such as broadcasters and streamers) and monetise content directly. Demand
for new formats like YouTube originals and video podcasts are only likely to increase, and the dynamic
and entrepreneurial production companies that make up the UK sector are well placed to benefit.Chapter 1: Market and audience context
1.6 Looking to the future
The UK's media landscape is undergoing its most significant transformation since the invention
of television. As audiences move away from traditional linear broadcasting toward an online world,
the government is committed to ensuring that our world-leading TV sector remains a cornerstone
of our democracy.
Beyond the Media Act
The interventions being consulted on in this green paper build on the important reforms introduced
by the Media Act 2024, which support the long term success and sustainability of the TV sector
and our public service media in particular.
The Act made much needed changes to the regulation of public service media, which was last
substantively updated in 2003. For example, it updates the public service media framework to
allow our PSM providers to deliver more of their requirements using their on-demand services
(for example, ITVX or S4C's Clic app). The Act also creates a new online prominence framework
to ensure that valuable PSM content remains easy to discover on smart TVs. It also brings the
regulation of mainstream video-on-demand services more in line with broadcast television, to
better protect audiences and help ensure a level playing field.
The process of bringing the provisions of the Media Act into force is well under way. However, the
government has committed to ensuring the regulatory framework that our PSM providers operate
in keeps pace with changes in the media landscape. The Media Act began this journey but we're
aware that the sheer rate of change means we now need to consider where we need to go further.
As discussed in section 1.4, PSM providers are now making content not only for their own video-
on-demand services, but also for third party platforms like video sharing platforms and social
media. In general this is a welcome development which helps broaden access to high-quality public
service content. However, the varied ways that PSM providers are making their content available
makes it increasingly impractical for those providers to be regulated primarily through their
broadcast licences (this is discussed further in section 4.2). It also raises questions about the scope
of the prominence regime, which Ofcom has suggested could be extended to cover those third
party platforms, like YouTube (which is considered further in section 4.1).
The reforms in the Media Act did not extend to PSM providers' news and current affairs quotas
which must still be delivered through their broadcast channels. As set out in section 2.1, people
are increasingly consuming news online, and this could limit the incentives for PSM providers to
provide impartial and accurate news for those platforms.
There is also a risk that, despite the changes introduced by the Media Act, television regulation
struggles to keep pace with media innovation and changes to how audiences consume content
(section 1.1). The pace of change in this area, even since the Media Act was passed, means it is
necessary to look at a new framework for television regulation.
We cannot afford to wait before considering what further changes could be required in the future.
Interventions that require legislation may take years to bring about, so it is right that we start
consulting on those now.
As the developments in this chapter have shown, we are at a point of transformation rather than
evolution. This requires an ambitious approach to policy development. To do this we will take an
audience-focused approach, informed by what people consider to be TV or 'TV-like'. The traditional
definitions and silos that have prevailed in the sector have broken down, and the government's
2324
Chapter 1: Market and audience context
approach to support and regulation must respond accordingly, so that we are serving audiences by
meeting them where they are going to find content. The main players in the UK TV industry are no
longer only domestic broadcasters, but also US studios, international streamers, and social media
and technology platforms. This means that we will need to consider how new TV specific regulation
works alongside other interventions designed to respond to changes in rapidly changing consumer
markets, such as the digital markets competition and online harms regimes, to ensure a coherent
regulatory approach.
However, if we can harness this change the potential benefits are huge. Total advertising and
subscription revenues are strong, driving growth in overall content investment. Global content spend
is forecast to exceed $250 billion in 2026, the highest figure on record. Audiences remain as interested
as ever in content, with the latest figures from Ofcom showing that the average UK adult still spends
4 hours and 30 minutes every day watching video content in their homes.30 Alongside this, advances
in technology mean distribution costs have collapsed, lowering the barriers to entry for swathes of
new talent, often from backgrounds that have been unrepresented or marginalised in the past.
Our vision is to transition from a legacy broadcast environment to a modern, internet-led ecosystem
where high-quality British content is not only preserved but thrives. We want to bridge the gap between
traditional TV standards and the online world, ensuring viewers seeking out TV or TV-like content are
shielded from harmful content and misinformation. We will create an environment where news that is
held to high standards of due impartiality and accuracy is easy for audiences to find. We want children
and young audiences to explore content that informs and educates, without the risks associated with
uncurated platforms. At the same time, we want to make sure that broadcasters are not burdened with
outdated regulation which inhibits their ability to grow.
By reforming the regulatory framework for public service media, we will ensure that its social and
democratic benefits – bringing people together through shared experiences and trusted national
stories – are secured for the next generation. By providing long-term certainty for PSM providers
and commercial broadcasters, we will create a landscape that rewards bold, original UK storytelling,
and that the best of British television remains a shared and accessible part of our national identity.
This vision supports a diverse production sector that spans the entire country, from established hubs
to emerging regional clusters. A place where commissioners and a new generation of producers can
collaborate, leveraging new technologies to reach audiences in creative ways, while ensuring that the IP
and economic benefits remain rooted in the UK.25
Chapter 2:
Supporting a healthy
information environment
The way we consume news and other media has changed forever, creating a critical turning point in our
society. The digital age, shaped by algorithms, social media, and the emerging capabilities of generative
AI, has transformed how people access news and information. While offering unprecedented access
to information, this shift has also made it easier for inaccurate or manipulated material to circulate
at scale. The very definition of what is "news" is being challenged. This jeopardises public trust in
institutions and threatens access to the truth when we need it most.
A strong, trusted media and information ecosystem underpins a healthy democracy. The democratic
role of the media rests on its ability to provide reliable and accessible information, ensuring that diverse
perspectives can be heard. Citizens cannot easily make free and informed choices without a media
based on shared and accurate facts.
In this context, information is part of our democratic infrastructure. We need to protect our media
ecosystem just as diligently as we do other forms of public infrastructure. The goal is not to promote
a single narrative or limit disagreement. A plural media environment establishes a shared foundation
of verified facts, enabling diverse viewpoints to be challenged and debated. In an environment flooded
with misinformation and deliberate manipulation, the value of journalism grounded in professional
standards and ethics becomes even more important. The public benefit of such journalism depends
both on its accessibility and on the public's ability to engage with it critically.
There is also significant concern that the distinction between factual news reporting and political
polemic is being blurred in the UK media landscape. Whilst partisan reporting has an important place in
the information environment, it can be harmful if audiences cannot easily distinguish between objective
fact, and opinion or polemic. The rise in politicians being used as presenters has also contributed to this
risk, particularly in a regulated and trusted environment such as Ofcom regulated programming.
The integrity of our media and information ecosystem is a national priority that demands urgent
consideration to ensure that it keeps pace with the speed of digital transformation. To safeguard an
informed democracy and cohesive society, we must tackle these threats with interventions to support
a media ecosystem that is independent, accountable, plural and, crucially, trustworthy.
2.1 How technology is reshaping news and information
Recent technological developments pose both opportunities and challenges when it comes to ensuring
an informed society and a trusted media environment. Online intermediaries such as search engines,
news aggregators and social media, increasingly dominate how people access news online. Indeed,
according to Ofcom, 6 in 10 adults use some form of online intermediary (such as social media, search
engine or news aggregator) for their news.31 In some cases, algorithms prioritise user engagement and
popularity over promoting accurate or trustworthy content. Social media platforms also often present
professional and user-generated content side by side, masking differences in quality and eroding news26
Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
brand identity. This intermediation has made it harder for even well-intentioned people to understand,
assess and contextualise the information they are presented with, which underlines the importance
of media literacy.
It also makes it more difficult for trustworthy news providers to find, maintain and monetise an
audience, with repercussions for the commercial viability of public interest journalism. The CMA's new
digital markets regime will help address this issue, by boosting competition and helping rebalance the
relationship between major platforms and those who rely on them, including news providers. The CMA
recently imposed the first Conduct Requirement under the regime on publisher controls in Google
search and search advertising, aiming to ensure transparency, attribution and choice for publishers in
how their content, collected for search, is used in Google's AI features in search, such as AI Overviews.
More broadly, the recent rise of generative AI exacerbates these challenges because it makes it
even more difficult for people to understand whether information is trustworthy or not, as well as
accelerating commercial challenges. This makes the case for intervention more urgent than ever.
Generative AI also poses huge opportunities in the production, distribution and consumption of news
and information, but we also need to be mindful of the potential threat it poses to trust in the media
environment. AI-generated news summaries also intermediate the relationship between news providers
and audiences, but do so by seeking to fulfil the audience's information needs rather than simply
to facilitate access to the news provider's own service, thereby further eroding newsbrand identity,
audience traffic and consumer-derived revenue. This mediation is particularly concerning given the
potential for inaccuracy. Recent research by the BBC found that 51% of all AI answers to questions
about the news were judged to have had significant issues, and 19% of AI answers citing BBC content
introduced factual errors.32
Case study: AI Labelling
Steps are already being taken to help users online distinguish synthetic content. TikTok now
automatically labels inbound media when metadata is attached to it; YouTube has started to use
labels underneath videos that indicate whether it was filmed on a camera; Meta use metadata
to inform their "Made with AI" labels on Instagram and Facebook; and LinkedIn displays Content
Credentials on supported images and videos.
The BBC is also developing an approach to labelling AI content that is "rooted in audience needs,
designed to work across all our products, and focused on two main things: transparency and
trust." However, we know more needs to be done and that is why the government is establishing
a taskforce to put forward proposals to government on best practice for labelling AI-generated
content, with an interim report to be published in the autumn.
Indeed, the rise of "deepfakes", AI-generated videos, images, or audio recordings that make it appear
as though a person is saying or doing something they never did, also pose a threat to our information
environment. It is already becoming harder than ever for audiences to judge whether a piece of content
is real or not, raising concerns about a broader erosion of trust in all audio and audio-visual content.
This will worsen as more powerful AI tools are rolled out. The government will launch a consultation on
digital replicas in the summer. This will seek views on how to address the harms caused when someone's
likeness is replicated without their permission, while protecting legitimate innovation.
The media industry has certain tools at its disposal to verify the authenticity of its sources. Provenance
standards such as C2PA Content Credentials are being developed that embed metadata into images,
videos and audio to show when, where and how content was created. This helps journalists and users
online to understand where a piece of content has come from.Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
However, as deepfakes and other types of synthetic media become increasingly sophisticated
and harder to detect, we will explore whether we can support the sector to integrate new detection
technologies and ways of working.
The rise of social media and AI for news has deep implications for society and our media ecosystem.
There are three key areas where the government could support the media sector to tackle these
challenges:
• Continuing to support research and development (R&D) efforts, such as the Home Office-led
Deepfake Detection Challenge, to find the best detection tools, and work to ensure these can be
rolled out across the wider media industry including smaller news media organisations.
• Exploring the feasibility of technical solutions – such as provenance and labelling – for the
identification of AI-generated content and to support transparency. These technical measures could
enable high-quality media to clearly distinguish itself from misinformation and disinformation
online. As part of this, the government is establishing a taskforce to put forward proposals on best
practice for labelling AI generated content.
• Further engagement on technical standards with news media, AI developers, and other relevant
stakeholders, including via the AI Labelling Taskforce and through the Digital Replicas Consultation,
announced by the government in March 2026.
Alongside government support, sections 2.2 to 2.4 explore interventions to rebalance the information
ecosystem to prioritise high-quality, trustworthy news and ensure it is visible and easily discoverable
and empower users to engage with content online and offline.
Case Study: A new framework for deepfake detection
Bringing together leading technology companies, such as Microsoft, academics and experts,
the government is set to develop and implement a world-first deepfake detection evaluation
framework, establishing consistent standards for assessing all types of detection tools and
technologies. This will help position the UK as a global leader in tackling harmful and deceptive
deepfake content.
2.2 Prominence of news on social media
The UK's media landscape consists of a diverse array of news providers, encompassing PSM providers
alongside a wide range of national, regional, and local news organisations. While PSM providers
operate under independent Ofcom regulation for due impartiality and accuracy, the wider traditional
news media ecosystem is self-regulatory, underpinned by codes of practice, which govern professional
and editorial standards and are, in many cases, overseen by independently established regulators.
Trustworthy and reliable news, and the providers that deliver this, is essential to our democratic
foundations, ensuring a comprehensive breadth of coverage that reflects the lives and concerns of
communities across every nation and region of the UK.
News consumption increasingly takes place online, and often via social media platforms.33 This delivers
benefits in terms of the variety of news available, especially to international news sources, but also
means algorithms on social media platforms like Meta platforms have a significant role in determining
what audiences see and that high-quality, reliable or regulated news may not be easy to find.
In this context there is a risk that less accurate sources of news and information displace more
trustworthy news sources. In 2024, 43% of people said they encountered some form of misinformation
or deepfakes. 71% of those who were exposed to misinformation said this was online (including
2728
Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
websites and social media).34 While lots of users encounter misleading content, a third of UK adults
say they are not confident in their ability to identify AI-generated material.35 Furthermore, a recent
study suggests that people's confidence in spotting AI-generated material is often higher than their
actual ability.
A lack of consistent access to reliable, trustworthy information can pose chronic risks to our democracy,
public safety, and social cohesion. As reflected in the government's Protecting What Matters policy
paper, misinformation and disinformation and online-echo chambers can significantly exacerbate
polarisation, conflict and division, whilst undermining trust in our most important institutions and
making us more vulnerable to hostile and extremist influences.
Ensuring the prominence of trustworthy sources of news and information on the biggest social media
platforms is also particularly critical in ensuring resilience during periods of community tension, social
unrest and democratic events. With the online information environment being particularly susceptible
to misinformation and disinformation during these periods, it is therefore critical that the public is
supported to find trusted and accurate information and news. In fact, evidence shows that in times
of major news events or local incidents, citizens turn to more traditional forms of news outlets such
as the local newspaper, local radio stations or PSM news. While inaccurate information may often
be disseminated without malicious intent, malign actors increasingly exploit these times to deploy
disinformation campaigns. Trustworthy news is a crucial counter to both this misinformation and
disinformation.
For example, between 30 July and 7 August 2024, following the Southport stabbings, a wave of anti-
immigration public disorder and riots took place across the UK. Ofcom noted the pivotal role of
"algorithmic recommendations" in propagating and amplifying misleading and divisive narratives.
These recommendations often push misleading content to large audiences at the expense of
authoritative information, accelerating the spread of misinformation and disinformation and in this
instance, contributing directly to the escalation of real world violence.
DCMS-commissioned research into the nature of local media coverage of the riots highlighted the
role that local media played in de-escalating tensions by amplifying the voices of community leaders,
religious leaders and the police, in contrast to more inflammatory content on social media. The vital
role of local media in the fabric of our society, in providing high-quality and relevant local news and
information in our communities was highlighted in the government's Local Media Strategy, and we
committed in that strategy to explore the prominence of news content from commercial local media.
The government will therefore explore legislative options to establish a prominence regime
specifically for trustworthy news content on social media which is linked to, but distinct to the
wider prominence regime for PSM content discussed in section 4.2. This would require social media
platforms, as well as potentially video sharing platforms, to ensure news content is prominent and
discoverable within user interfaces. This would look to ensure people can access factual, accurate and
trustworthy news when online. These measures could include other news publishers at national and
local level, recognising the importance of citizens' access to a plural range of voices and ensuring we
capture local news and voice.
The government will take forward work in the coming months, alongside industry engagement and
assessing consultation responses, to explore what a news-specific prominence regime could look
like in practice. The government will shortly conduct research to test various methods for achieving
prominence on social media platforms, ensuring that these are proportionate and in keeping with
ensuring a diverse and pluralist information landscape. As part of this, the government will adopt the
following principles when developing this work and delivering any new prominence measures:
• Audience led: We recognise the need to balance prominence of news content with ensuring
user empowerment.Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
• Future-proofed: Any prominence for news content regime will need to be flexible and variable
across platform user experiences and able to evolve with technology and AI advancement.
• Outcomes based: Any new regime will need to be feasible for platforms to implement and any
measures should be outcomes-based, giving platforms the flexibility to deliver these outcomes in a
proportionate manner. The government will work alongside the sector to ensure this is achieved.
• Comprehensive and relevant: Any measures taken here should ensure that citizens across all parts
of the UK have access to news and information which is relevant to them, and we may therefore
need to consider, for example, what this means for regional and local news providers compared
with national news providers. The right balance will need to be found between the prominence of
national news media organisations and local providers, ensuring the right voice and expertise is at
the forefront of any prominence measures.
• Plurality of views: We are mindful of the need to ensure that any action only promotes high-quality
sources of news, while at the same time not being so prescriptive that we risk exacerbating the
commercial challenges faced by many news publishers online or impacting plurality of news.
• Criteria for a 'trustworthy' news provider, decided in an open and transparent manner with
regard to protecting media freedom: It is key that any process for determining news providers
prominence is decided in an open and transparent way and subject to necessary checks and balances.
As part of our policy process we need to look at how we develop criteria for a 'trustworthy news
provider'. We have not yet determined what criteria we will use and will want to engage stakeholders,
including as part of this consultation, to do this. A starting point for this may be the Recognised News
Publisher definition in the Online Safety Act 2023 which includes both broadcasters and UK based
entities whose primary purpose is publishing news-related material, created by different persons,
subject to editorial control, a standards code, and with a mechanism for resolving complaints.
The policy process will also want to understand whether the benefit of prominence should be explicitly
linked to further responsibilities for news providers in scope of any new regime to ensure that only
the most trustworthy news sources benefit from prominence. This could include greater transparency,
effective complaints processes, more stringent standards in AI content use, promoting media literacy
or adherence to evolving best practices.
Finally, while establishing prominence measures may help support access to reliable news sources, we
recognise that they will only be effective in ensuring audiences critically engage with those sources if
complemented by efforts to equip audiences with the skills needed to navigate the broader, complex
online environment. In this context, options around enhancing audience empowerment through new
media literacy interventions are discussed below.
2.3 New media literacy duty for PSM providers
Changes in how news is distributed online mean that many people now encounter information in
complex, algorithmically shaped environments. In this context, being media literate is essential. In
2025, Ofcom reported that only 45% of adults felt confident judging whether a source of information
is truthful.36 This erosion of confidence underlines the scale of the issue and the need for a co-ordinated
response. This matters not only for individual decision making, but for the health of our democracy:
research finds that higher levels of media literacy are associated with greater participation in civic
activities.37
We want to strengthen and build on the important work already being done to improve media literacy
in the UK. On 16th March 2026, we published the Media Literacy Action Plan, setting out a clear
direction and a more joined-up approach across government. Vital work to improve media literacy has
2930
Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
already begun; for example, the Department for Education is implementing recommendations from the
Curriculum and Assessment Review to help pupils identify misinformation and disinformation, including
AI-generated content, and to build critical thinking skills.
PSM providers in the UK have a long and proud tradition of providing impartial and trustworthy news.
The BBC has the largest cross-platform news reach in the UK, at 67% of all UK adults, and research
shows it is the most trusted news source among those surveyed in the UK.38,39 By delivering impartial
content that supports informed debate, PSM providers strengthen social cohesion and democratic
participation. They also play a vital role in supporting a healthy information environment, and
empowering audiences to critically engage with the content they see. PSM providers already make
valuable contributions to media literacy in the UK; for example, the BBC's existing media literacy
programme, Other Side of the Story, reached over 2.4 million young people in 2024.40
Research shows that people are more likely to engage with media literacy support when it is delivered
by organisations they trust.41 This combination of trust and reach places PSM providers in a strong
position to support media literacy across the system, ensuring people have the skills they need to
navigate today's information environment. We will therefore explore the introduction of a potential
additional duty on PSM providers to report on media literacy activity.
As our proposals earlier in this chapter set out, there is further action that platforms can take to tackle
misinformation and disinformation. The scale and complexity of the modern information environment
requires action across the system, and PSM providers should continue to draw on their strengths to
support this. Subject to consultation feedback, this duty would require PSM providers to both deliver
and report on media literacy activity, setting out their plans via a media literacy strategy, and reporting
on the effectiveness of their interventions. Guidance would set out the expected scope and ambition
of this activity. Any new legal duty on media literacy must be deliverable within a sustainable public
service media ecosystem. This option is therefore being considered within a broader package of reforms
designed to ensure PSM providers are on a sustainable footing for the future, and that the PSM compact
remains appropriately balanced between any new obligations and the benefits (set out in section
4.2). If prominence and discoverability of PSM providers' services are strengthened, it is right that
these providers hold a responsibility for supporting the public to engage critically with the information
they encounter.
2.4 A new joint initiative to promote media literacy
The UK has a rich and active media literacy landscape with multiple stakeholders contributing to
activity including government departments, schools, libraries and civil society. Ofcom, as the UK's
communications and Online Safety regulator, has media literacy duties and an established role in
supporting media literacy. Ofcom's current three-year strategy focuses on convening stakeholders,
promoting best practice, and strengthening the evidence base on what works for audiences. Ofcom
will soon publish its Media Literacy Recommendations. The recommendations, required by the Online
Safety Act, will set out for the first time Ofcom's expectations for how broadcasters and online services
can best promote media literacy.
Organisations delivering media literacy interventions often have strong sector expertise and can
deliver tailored interventions to a variety of needs and contexts. However, provision is geographically
dispersed. Organisations often work in silos, reflecting the diversity of actors and approaches across the
sector. Despite the breadth of media literacy activity, the 2025 House of Lords media literacy inquiry
found that the media literacy sector is highly fragmented.Chapter 2: Supporting a healthy information environment
Many factors shape the public's ability to make informed decisions and participate in our democracy,
including what they learn in school, what they see from broadcasters and news providers, their
experiences online, and the guidance they receive from families and communities. We want to support
coordinated media literacy activity that is shaped by shared priorities, and complements the role of the
education system.
To achieve this, we will explore the development of a new initiative to support coordinated
delivery of media literacy activity. Public service media and the wider media sector – both local and
national – will be central to this. We will also explore ways to engage a broader range of organisations,
including civil society and technology companies, to support a move beyond siloed approaches and
towards more joined-up, cross-sector working. We want to support more strategic delivery of media
literacy interventions, strengthen partnership working, and enable best practice to be shared more
widely across the media literacy ecosystem. Working closely with Ofcom, this could focus on identifying
priority areas, building on evidence of what works, and supporting proportionate evaluation.
Any new initiative will align with the principles set out in the Media Literacy Action Plan, and
complement rather than duplicate the wider activity already under way across the sector. We will also
ensure that this work aligns with the work already being done by Ofcom. We want to maximise the
investment being put into media literacy by increasing the impact of collective efforts, for the benefit
of both the sector and the public.
3132
Chapter 3:
How audiences will continue to access
high-quality, trusted television content
Television forms a foundation of our national identity and a vital engine for our democracy, society,
culture and economy. In an era of increasing digital fragmentation, television remains one of the few
places where the nation comes together to share major cultural moments, from series finales, royal
occasions and sporting triumphs to breaking news. It helps to bridge geographical and social divides by
providing a common set of facts and a shared window into the lives of others across the UK. Ensuring
that every household, regardless of where they live, can continue to access a wide range of high-quality,
trusted content – including news but also other genres like documentaries and culturally relevant drama
– is essential for maintaining a sense of belonging and a well-informed society.
For decades, the traditional "aerial on the roof" (digital terrestrial television) has been the primary
way we ensure this access is universal. It has provided a public square where the news is held to high
standards of accuracy and impartiality, and where UK stories are told with a voice that reflects our
own values. As more of us embrace the benefits of watching TV over the internet, we face a significant
challenge: how to harness the benefits of new technology without losing the access, cohesion,
protections and democratic safeguards that traditional broadcasting provides. If we do not manage
this transition carefully, we risk a digital divide where some members of society are left without the
shared information and social and cultural connections that help bind us together.
This chapter sets out how the government intends to navigate this shift from traditional broadcasting
to internet-based viewing. Our goal is to ensure that the television of the future remains a reliable,
accessible, and trusted space that continues to serve the public interest. We must guarantee that even
as technology changes, the principles of universality and high standards remain. By doing so, we can
ensure that television continues to support a healthy democracy and a cohesive society, providing
a trusted and safe platform for debate and a mirror in which all parts of the UK can see themselves
reflected.
3.1 The future of TV distribution
This section is supported by a set of annexes. These provide further detail on the policy process to date,
our assessment of the key challenges, and a cost–benefit analysis.
Case for change
The UK TV landscape is undergoing a profound shift from traditional broadcast to online linear and
on-demand viewing, collectively referred to here as 'internet protocol television' (IPTV). Audiences are
increasingly accessing content via internet-connected devices, creating a hybrid landscape between
IPTV, traditional digital terrestrial television (DTT), satellite broadcasting and cable.42Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
IPTV
Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) is a way of watching TV using your internet connection instead
of traditional digital terrestrial television (DTT), satellite, or aerial signals. Instead of broadcasting
all channels at once like regular TV, IPTV sends the specific show or channel you choose directly to
your device through the internet. This means you can watch live TV, on-demand films, or recorded
programmes on smart TVs, computers, tablets, smartphones, or streaming boxes. Services like
Amazon Prime Video or Netflix use similar internet-based technology, but IPTV often also includes
live TV channels for free, much like traditional DTT.
DTT
A broadcasting system where television signals are transmitted over the air from land-based
transmitters and received by an aerial rather than via cable or satellite – how people receive
Freeview.
Freeview
Freeview is a digital terrestrial television (DTT) service that delivers free-to-air TV channels through
an aerial. Freeview Play is an enhanced version of Freeview that combines broadcast TV with
internet-delivered catch-up and on-demand services.
This shift is delivering greater choice, convenience, and the proliferation of streaming platforms to
millions of households. An IPTV-based television system has the potential to enhance the viewing
experience for audiences across the UK. It can enable seamless access to live and on-demand content,
greater personalisation, improved accessibility features, and the ability to enjoy services across
multiple devices.
Being online is no longer a "nice to have". It is increasingly how people access healthcare, manage
money, keep in touch with family, apply for jobs, and use public services. People who are not online, or
who lack confidence using digital services, are more likely to pay more for everyday essentials, struggle
to access support, and feel excluded from parts of modern life. Managed well, supporting people to
access television over the internet can open the door to wider digital participation. Once households
have a reliable connection and the confidence to use it, they are better placed to:
• book GP appointments or order repeat prescriptions online;
• manage benefits, pensions or council services digitally;
• use online banking safely and conveniently;
• compare energy, broadband or insurance deals and save money;
• access learning, skills and employment opportunities; and
• stay socially connected, reducing loneliness and isolation.
However, the government also recognises that a significant number of audience members continue
to rely on traditional broadcast platforms – encompassing DTT (Freeview) and satellite – as their only
means of accessing television. These platforms remain vital for universal TV access, accounting for
4.01 million broadcast-only households in 2024, alongside 16.61 million 'hybrid' homes.43 However,
overall usage across these traditional methods is declining. The number of households without access
3334
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
to IPTV is projected to fall to 1.51 million in 2034. The number of hybrid homes is also expected to fall
as an increasing proportion of households choose to access both live and on-demand services over
the internet.
Figure 6: Household IPTV access types (millions)
27.66
28.5
29.37
7.04
20.68
IPTV-only
Hybrid
24.87
No IPTV
Access
16.61
6.31
4.01
2024
1.51
2034
3.98
0.52
2044
Source: 3 Reasons, MTM (2024 & 2034 figures); DCMS (2044 figures)
Despite this declining usage, the costs of maintaining the DTT network – borne by broadcasters – are
largely fixed. Maintaining the DTT network beyond 2034 means broadcasters will face the economic
challenge of carrying the costs of multiple distribution methods to an ever reducing number of
households relying on DTT.44 As the number of DTT households falls, the incentive to pay for carriage on
the DTT platform will fall, resulting in fewer channels being available and increased costs for remaining
providers. For those broadcasters who remain on the DTT platform, including PSM providers, these
increased costs will reduce the amount they can invest in programming and thereby reduce the social
and economic value they add.

[AribertDeckers]

PSM compact
Under the current 'PSM compact', PSM providers are required to ensure universal, free-to-air
availability of their services. Their TV channels must be free and available to everyone, especially
on traditional TV platforms like Freeview. In return, these broadcasters get benefits such as good
channel positions and visibility on TV platforms, which makes it easier for viewers to find them.
However, this also means they must keep broadcasting on traditional TV systems and cannot freely
choose how their channels are distributed. As more people move to online and streaming services,
fewer viewers are using traditional TV. Because of this, the cost of broadcasting on these older
systems may become higher than the advertising money they earn, ultimately resulting in the
obligations associated with being a PSM provider exceeding the associated benefits.
The government wants all audiences to be able to receive and access the full range of content and
services available through IPTV in an affordable and accessible way, ensuring that no one is left
behind (detail at Annex B). Ensuring affordability of connectivity, devices, and ongoing use, will be anChapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
important factor in supporting broad and timely adoption. Over time, we believe that a coordinated,
industry-led effort to support audiences to transition their viewing from DTT to IPTV will support these
aims, delivering a more inclusive, accessible and future-proof television ecosystem – one that expands
choice and improves quality, allowing the television sector to remain sustainable and continue investing
in content that benefits all audiences.
While significant progress is taking place, we recognise there will be challenges for some people in
accessing sufficiently fast broadband and having the digital skills to make best use of it. This has the
potential to create digital exclusion if DTT services are withdrawn prematurely. Decisions on the long-
term future of DTT, and the transition to IPTV, are therefore critical for ensuring we deliver for all
audiences, maintain a reliable television service, promote competition and innovation in the television
industry and support a sustainable future for PSM providers (more detail at Annex B). The ease of such
a change will also depend on the future role of satellite television as an alternative and economic means
of TV delivery.
The government is committed to the continuity of DTT until at least 31 December 2034 and a decision
on the future of TV distribution beyond this has not yet been made. DCMS has been undertaking work
to evaluate the future distribution of television, including by convening the Future of TV Distribution
Stakeholder Forum. The next section sets out the initial conclusions from that work and a proposed
way forward.
Proposed approach
The government has considered a wide range of potential long-term models for the future of UK
television distribution beyond 2034. We have explored options (see Annex A) to identify the best
outcome for a sustainable and successful UK television distribution ecosystem in the coming decades.
One thing that has become readily apparent is the significant benefits to households of adopting IPTV
services. As outlined above, it provides access to a wider range of high-quality content, much of which
is available at no additional cost. Audiences increasingly expect to watch live and on-demand content
seamlessly across devices, with greater choice, flexibility and accessibility. IPTV enables this in ways
that traditional broadcast platforms cannot: it supports more personalised and responsive services,
improved accessibility features, and new forms of innovation in content discovery and delivery.
Managed well, the transition from traditional broadcast to IP-based television represents one of the
most significant opportunities for public service media, audiences and the wider digital economy in a
generation. This transition can also act as a gateway to wider digital participation, if the transition is
designed inclusively and delivered with the right support.
In respect of the future of DTT services, the diverse interests of broadcasters, network and infrastructure
providers and groups representing audiences has meant that a consensus has yet to emerge on the
optimum outcome for all of UK society and business on the future of TV distribution. However, there
is now emerging stakeholder agreement on a number of key points, including:
1. Viewing habits and technology trends indicate a continued shift from DTT towards IPTV over time.
The benefits delivered by IPTV will continue to grow rapidly, as a consequence of further steps taken
by broadcasters and others in industry to develop new services, platforms and devices and to market
and explain those to consumers. Maintaining the DTT platform will therefore become uneconomic
within the next two decades, and potentially as soon as 2034;
2. If (and only if) the costs of carriage on DTT for PSM providers can be reduced to a manageable level,
there may be a place for DTT to continue beyond 2034, to make the transition more manageable
for audiences (especially those more reliant on DTT). In this circumstance there could be a role for
supportive policy or regulatory approaches (see Annex C);
3536
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
3. Any such continuation will present challenges for broadcasters due to the need to continue to
accommodate the DTT distribution costs, in the face of reducing viewer reliance on it, alongside
the growing cost of IPTV distribution associated with increasing uptake. So any extension of
DTT timescales needs to be affordable to those PSM providers who underpin the infrastructure.
Furthermore, PSM providers would be reluctant to bear alone the risks of continuing DTT if demand
from commercial DTT services were to decline over an extended period; and
4. Irrespective of when DTT services cease, the government and industry will need to work together
to address a number of key challenges that have already been identified (Annex B). There are also
potentially significant knock-on impacts on other users of the high mast distribution infrastructure
such as BBC and commercial radio services.
As explored in more detail below, the government's proposed approach is two-fold.
• First, we will work with industry and audience groups to design a package of support for audiences
to transition their viewing to IPTV services and to make the most of the additional benefits this
provides. This package will depend on industry and a strong ecosystem working together to develop
and deliver it: PSM providers, platform operators, telecoms providers, manufacturers and retailers,
charities and local delivery partners – each playing their part.
• Second, we will set out the plan for a managed switch-off of DTT services, either on expiry of current
licences on 31 December 2034 or following a time-limited extension to 31 December 2044.
DTT switch-off
A DTT switch-off is about turning off a specific delivery method (terrestrial broadcasting), not
about turning off channels themselves. The same channels would continue to exist and remain
available through other platforms, such as satellite or internet streaming.
The government is therefore of the view that television distribution will, over time, transition towards
IP-based services and this will result in the DTT platform becoming economically unsustainable.
The consultation we are undertaking as part of this green paper will support us in determining,
on the basis of evidence and stakeholder input, the most suitable timeframe.
To deliver this approach would require continued close and collaborative working with
audience groups, industry and across government. With this in mind the government is asking
these groups to come together to submit innovative solutions to deliver this transition via the
consultation. No assumption should be made at this stage that public funding will be available
to support a transition.
An IPTV transition
The transition away from DTT offers a significant opportunity to modernise how television is delivered
in the UK, building on strong foundations to create a more flexible and future-ready system. IP-based
delivery can enhance viewing experiences, broaden access to content, and support a more dynamic
broadcasting landscape, while continuing to bring audiences together through trusted news, major
national moments, and high-quality public service content.
Handled well, this shift can support a sustainable model for both audiences and industry. It creates
scope to improve accessibility, widen device choice, and make services easier to use across a range of
households, while enabling continued investment in UK content and supporting public service media
in a digital environment. However, the transition also raises a set of interconnected challenges around
delivering for all audiences, maintaining a reliable television service, promoting competition, and
supporting the long-term sustainability of PSM providers (more detail at Annex B). In particular, whileChapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
it may financially benefit PSM providers to not have to provide services on DTT, a full transition to IPTV
(alongside broader digital distribution) will require significant investment so they are able to deliver
products that best serve audiences and which can compete with offerings from international providers.
How IPTV services can improve accessibility and wellbeing
Working with partners including Alzheimer's Society and Dementia UK, the BBC used BBC iPlayer
to curate collections of familiar programmes from its archive, organised by decade, place and
shared experiences. These collections were designed to be easy to find and simple to use, and
aimed to help people living with dementia recall memories and start conversations with family
members and carers.
Evidence from the initiative showed that familiar, on-demand television content can help
people feel more confident and settled when watching TV, reduce confusion, and support social
interaction. Families and carers reported that being able to personalise content – for example by
grouping favourite programmes together – made television easier to use and more enjoyable.
Importantly, these benefits were enabled by IPTV features that traditional broadcast television
cannot provide, such as on-demand access and simple personalisation. The initiative demonstrates
how, when designed accessibly, IPTV services can improve quality of life and support inclusion
– particularly for older people and those with lower digital confidence – rather than making
television harder to use.45
A key priority is ensuring that households are not excluded as viewing moves online. This requires
widespread availability of reliable broadband connectivity, including superfast speeds for those who
currently rely on DTT, alongside affordable pricing structures. Low-cost broadband tariffs and targeted
support measures will play an important role in helping lower-income households remain connected.
Equal attention should be given to device affordability, with simple, low-cost IPTV equipment, such
as smart TVs or adaptors without ongoing fees, that replicates the ease and familiarity of traditional
television. This includes straightforward setup, direct access to live channels on start-up, and intuitive
navigation via remote controls and electronic programme guides, alongside reliable provision of
accessibility features such as subtitles, audio description, and sign language.
Major work is already underway to strengthen the infrastructure foundations needed for IP-based
services at scale, including progress toward near-universal access to high-quality broadband. The
government, in partnership with industry, is driving gigabit broadband rollout so that 99% of UK
premises can access high-quality, futureproofed broadband connectivity by 2032. The market for
alternative technologies is continuing to develop at pace, and the government will continue to monitor
and support these developments to help improve connectivity for more remote premises. This provides
a strong basis for government and industry to plan for a transition, while focusing collective effort on
the smaller cohort of households most likely to need additional support.
Beyond infrastructure and devices, IPTV services should be intuitive and inclusive. This includes
simplifying login processes, supporting a wide range of devices through open standards, and designing
interfaces that cater to varying levels of digital confidence. Broader digital inclusion will be essential,
requiring coordinated efforts across industry, government, local authorities, and community
organisations to provide training and practical support. PSM content should remain free at the
point of use, maintaining a baseline experience comparable to current DTT services.
Maintaining a reliable television service is also critical. Any replacement for DTT should meet or
exceed existing standards, particularly during peak viewing periods and major national events. This will
require continued investment in broadband infrastructure and content delivery networks, clear service
3738
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
standards, and robust contingency planning. Industry collaboration will be key to ensuring consistency
across the delivery chain, supported where necessary by government oversight and ongoing assessment
of network capacity.
We also recognise that some broadcasting infrastructure forms part of the UK's Critical National
Infrastructure. Key providers, including Arqiva, deliver services that support essential systems such as
smart metering, emergency communications, and public information in times of crisis. While the full
implications of a transition for these services require careful assessment, we will continue to ensure that
any move from DTT to IPTV takes account of wider societal and security considerations.
The transition also provides an opportunity to modernise the sector. Moving away from legacy
infrastructure could reduce costs, free up spectrum, and allow broadcasters to focus on content and
service development. This will depend on open, interoperable IPTV solutions that work across devices
without locking users or providers into closed ecosystems. Fair and transparent carriage arrangements,
together with broad device compatibility, will be important to maintain competition, diversity, and ease
of access. Regulatory clarity, including decisions on spectrum use, will also be important to support
investment and innovation.
Any new distribution model should support the continued reach and viability of PSM providers. Their
content should remain free, easy to find, and available across major platforms and devices. Sustained
industry collaboration, alongside an updated regulatory framework where needed, will help safeguard
prominence, accessibility, and long-term sustainability.
We intend to develop a transition plan, setting out the technical, regulatory, and consumer measures
required to ensure a smooth shift from DTT to IPTV. This will consider satellite viewers, continuity
of service, and potential impacts on radio, and will complement any audience support initiatives. An
outline of this plan will be published alongside the government's final decision on the future of TV
distribution later this year.
Overall, successful delivery will depend on close coordination between industry to ensure a smooth
transition that maintains access, supports resilience, and enables long-term sector development.
Timing considerations
As set out above, we believe a transition from DTT to IPTV at some stage is desirable. The choice for
government is therefore how to implement that industry-led transition, and on what timeframe to
deliver it. The options under consideration are detailed at Annex A, with 2034 offering the earliest
potential timeframe in which to begin the transition.
A move to full IPTV distribution in 2034 could unlock a range of strategic, economic and consumer
benefits. First, it could enable earlier realisation of cost efficiencies across the broadcasting value
chain. A 2034 transition could also deliver spectrum efficiency benefits at an earlier stage. Vacating
DTT spectrum would create opportunities for its reallocation to other high-value uses, such as mobile
broadband and emerging wireless technologies, supporting wider economic and connectivity objectives
(see Annex C).
We also believe a 2034 timeline would accelerate innovation in content, services, and user experience.
IPTV environments enable more advanced functionality than traditional broadcast, including
personalisation, interactivity, dynamic advertising, and seamless integration with on-demand and
streaming services. Bringing forward the transition would allow UK audiences and industry players to
benefit sooner from these capabilities, strengthening the competitiveness of the UK media sector in an
increasingly global and digital market. It would also act as a powerful starting point for helping people
take their first steps online so they can be part of and benefit from the digital society – including saving
money on bills, accessing the services they need more easily, and increasing social connections. WithChapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
the government's target to have 99% gigabit broadband rollout by 2032 and the market for alternative
technologies developing at pace, we expect connectivity to be in place to support a transition in 2034.
However, it could be more complex to address the challenges identified (Annex B) within this period.
An alternative option would be a transition by 2044, offering a 10-year extension to the DTT platform.
Maintaining a hybrid DTT/IPTV model until 2044 would preserve universal free-to-air access for
households that are slower to adopt broadband, including older and more vulnerable viewers. It would
also protect PSM provider prominence, and lessen impacts on other uses of the terrestrial transmission
network including radio and emergency communications. It would overall allow for a gradual, lower-risk
transition. This is in part because, while the vast majority of households are expected to have access to
reliable broadband capable of supporting IP-based television by the early 2030s, near-universal access
to IPTV is not anticipated until the early 2040s.46 In particular, IPTV sets providing easy access to linear
TV channels (particularly public service channels) should be widely available in the market and (given
the typical lifecycle of household TV upgrades) present in more of the households that require them.
This will reduce the need for a dedicated terrestrial broadcast platform. On the same timescale, levels
of digital literacy are expected to have improved substantially, further reducing the need for a dedicated
terrestrial broadcast platform.
The government does not see a further extension of DTT beyond 2044 as either economically
sustainable or as desirable. Maintaining DTT beyond this point would involve significant infrastructure
costs that would no longer be proportionate to its shrinking audience (see Annex C). By this point,
IPTV platforms are expected to be widely accessible and inclusive by design, while the continued costs
of maintaining DTT infrastructure for a diminishing audience are likely to outweigh its public value.
Indefinitely reserving spectrum for DTT at current levels also would not be optimum use of a finite
and strategically-important resource. Releasing even a portion of this spectrum for other sectors could
deliver significant growth benefits, for example by enabling better mobile connectivity for people across
the country.
Conclusion and next steps
The government wants to improve viewer experiences and help more people take their first steps online.
We also recognise the importance of providing clarity and certainty for industry and the public.
For the reasons set out above, the government believes there is a compelling case for a transition from
DTT to IPTV services by 2034. But, recognising the challenges that would need to be overcome, the
government is clear that the transition must happen in the right way, ensuring no one is left behind. A
transition on this timeline is contingent, among other things, on the government meeting its gigabit
broadband coverage target, and further work with industry and stakeholders – including on important
challenges like affordability and digital inclusion.
Through this green paper, the government is setting out the principles for the transition pathway, as
well as seeking views on 2044 as a potential transition date, in order to hear and consider a broad range
of perspectives.
Depending on the outcomes of this consultation, a next step for the government – working with
stakeholders – will be to formulate a comprehensive plan for transitioning from DTT to IPTV, which will
detail the technical, regulatory, and consumer measures required to ensure a smooth and inclusive shift
to IP-based television.
As part of this plan, and regardless of the eventual transition timeline, the government expects a
structured support package will be needed to help audiences move from DTT to IPTV smoothly and
with confidence.
3940
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
Learning from the last TV switchover
During the UK's last digital TV switchover (2008–2012), many older and vulnerable viewers were
initially anxious about the change. Research at the time showed that people worried they would
not cope with new technology or would lose access to television altogether.
In practice, the experience was different. A large-scale implementation project, with significant
public investment both in resource and in funding, led to clear information, simple standards
for equipment, and access to trusted help, which meant most people found the change far less
daunting than expected. One participant said "when it came to it, the instructions were so easy
that it wasn't a big deal".
By the end of the programme, millions of households had successfully transitioned, satisfaction
levels were high, and many people reported that they enjoyed new features such as better picture
quality, more channels, and the ability to pause live TV.
As with the digital switchover, experience shows that success depends not only on technology
readiness, but also on early communication, sufficient lead-in time and practical, trusted support for
those most likely to be affected. Unlike previous transitions, however, the move to IPTV also presents
an opportunity to support wider digital participation and to reduce long-standing digital exclusion.
Support should recognise that different audiences require different levels of help – from simple
reassurance and guidance through to more hands-on support. It should reflect audience needs including
those most likely to face barriers, such as unconnected or under-connected households, older people,
people with disabilities, and others with low digital confidence or skills.
Any transition plan will need explicitly to account for satellite viewers, maintaining continuity of service
and exploring ways to integrate satellite-delivered channels into emerging IP and hybrid distribution
models. It should also ensure that plans are in place to remedy any adverse impacts on radio from a
switch-off of DTT services, informed by findings from the Radio Review which was launched by the
government on 12 February 2026 and is due to report by the end of November.
The transition plan would also consider improvements to the regulation of infrastructure providers,
ensuring fair access, transparent pricing, and robust oversight to support a sustainable, competitive,
and efficient broadcasting infrastructure during and after the shift to IP-based distribution.
Final decisions will be taken in response to the consultation and set out in the white paper. Any
transition will involve a credible transition plan, working closely with industry and stakeholders, and we
would also review progress regularly throughout.
This green paper is the starting point for collective effort: to consult on the best transition pathway,
to set clear expectations, and to mobilise commitments that ensure universality, reliability, innovation
and our world-leading public service media are protected.
3.2 The future of TV regulation
Which TV-like services should be regulated in the future
Through whichever distribution infrastructure or platform audiences access TV content in the future,
we want to ensure our broadcasters and content providers continue to thrive in this new media
landscape. We also want to ensure that UK audiences continue to receive the best programming andChapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
are appropriately protected from potentially harmful or misleading content. Considering this rapid
technological change, it is essential that the government considers what action should be taken to
ensure consistent regulation of TV content and channels going forward.
Right now, audiences in the UK know that if they watch broadcast TV, there is a high standard of
rules in place to protect them through Ofcom's Broadcasting Code, including the 9pm watershed,
and requirements that news that must be duly accurate and impartial, and that children are shielded
from content that might harm them. There are also fairness and privacy rules that protect individuals
that appear in programming such as documentaries and reality television. Finally, UK audiences know
that there will be minimum requirements for accessibility features (subtitles, audio description and
signing) set out in Ofcom's Code on Television Access Services. If these high standards are not observed,
audiences, and affected individuals, can complain to the independent regulator Ofcom, who has powers
to take appropriate action.

[AribertDeckers]

However, the UK's television landscape is undergoing a rapid, technology-driven transformation,
fundamentally challenging the traditional regulatory framework originally designed for an era of
analogue broadcasting. Without change, UK regulation such as Ofcom content standards, will struggle
to keep pace with media innovation and changes to how audiences consume content. This could also
lead to an unfair and uncompetitive regulatory playing field between traditional broadcasters and
newer, less regulated, content providers.
Smart TVs now offer audiences the choice of hundreds of thousands of hours of content, across a
growing range of services and apps, at the touch of a button. For example, the proportion of time spent
watching YouTube in the home via a TV set has increased year on year, from an average of 34% in 2023
to 41% in 2024.47 According to Ofcom, 20% of children aged 4-15 now select a video sharing platform
– in particular, YouTube – as their first destination when switching on a TV.48 85% of adults use a video-
on-demand service every month, a larger proportion than the 67% who watch live TV on a TV set.49
However, despite offering an increasingly 'TV-like' experience to audiences, with more long-form, high-
production value content, these services are not regulated to the same standards as traditional services.
Some TV manufacturers, such as Samsung and LG, also provide their own selection of TV channels,
which are easily accessible and look and feel like traditional TV guides, but are generally unregulated
by Ofcom.
On 1 April 2026, legislation came into force to begin to address this potential imbalance. The Secretary
of State for Culture, Media and Sport designated mainstream video-on-demand services that have over
500,000 users, such as Netflix, Disney+, and ITVX, for enhanced TV-like content regulation, bringing
them closer in line with how Ofcom licensed broadcasters are currently regulated. Ofcom has launched
a consultation on its video-on-demand standards code which will be an opportunity for the public and
providers to set out their views on the rules that will be within that code.
The government has also increased the number of regulated electronic programme guides (EPGs),
bringing the most popular new services, such as Sky Glass and Freely, under Ofcom regulation. EPGs are
the on-screen, interactive digital menus that display TV scheduling guides that help audiences select the
programme and channel they want to watch. In addition, the government closed a loophole that has
allowed some unregulated channels to be easily accessed through a regulated service.
Taken together, these essential updates will ensure vital protections and accessibility features like
subtitles, audio description, and signing, can continue to be available to audiences no matter how they
choose to catch up on their favourite television. These changes will ensure the content standards which
audiences expect when they switch on their TV will apply more consistently. This measure also supports
our PSM providers, by extending prominence rules that ensure public service channels are easily found
on newer EPG services.
4142
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
However, what constitutes "television" continues to change. The lines between editorially curated and
user-generated content, and between content providers and content platforms are no longer clearly
defined. More importantly, advances in technology and the proliferation of newer services mean
that audiences are increasingly subject to an inconsistent, and potentially harmful, TV-like media
environment. Whilst much of the programming viewed through television sets, either live or on-
demand, continues to be regulated by Ofcom, this regulated, trusted safe space is getting smaller.
Changes in technology have also allowed providers to offer more services to their audiences, opening
up spaces on existing, regulated services that are out of scope of current legislation. For example,
services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video are increasingly moving into the provision of live sport
content. However, current legislation means that live content on these services cannot be regulated in
the same way as on-demand programming. Similarly, the user interfaces of smart TVs are increasingly
interactive. While these offer audiences a greater level of personalisation and interactivity, there are
currently minimal requirements for manufacturers to ensure that a home screen on a device does not
include harmful material that could, for example, be inappropriate for children.
How TV-like services should be regulated in the future
In addition to considering who should be regulated, it is equally important that we consider how
services should be regulated, to ensure regulation remains effective and proportionate as the media
landscape changes. Currently, Ofcom has broad statutory powers to license commercial TV channels,
enforce the Broadcasting Code and keep its rules up to date, and investigate complaints regarding
harmful or offensive content. They can issue fines, require corrections and remove content, and revoke
licences for serious breaches. Following the Media Act 2024, Ofcom has new powers to regulate
mainstream video-on-demand services to a similar standard. Whilst it will take time to implement fully,
Ofcom is considering how content standards rules originally designed for linear viewing can be updated
to an on-demand experience.
Currently, in general, linear channels that appear on regulated EPGs are licensed by Ofcom, meaning
that audiences can complain to Ofcom if they have seen something they are concerned about, and
Ofcom can choose to investigate and take action that it considers appropriate. Ofcom received almost
50,000 complaints in 2025 about more than 8,000 TV, radio, and on-demand programmes. This is
a clear sign that audiences care deeply about what they watch and listen to. Ofcom must carefully
balance the protection of audiences from harmful and offensive content with the fundamental right to
freedom of expression. The government strongly supports Ofcom as the independent regulator but is
keen to consider where Ofcom could be further supported in this role.
Under the Communications Act 2003 and the Broadcasting Act 1996, Ofcom is required to draw up
and enforce a Broadcasting Code to secure standards objectives that are set out in legislation. This not
only involves setting minimum standards to secure these objectives, but also such other standards as
Ofcom considers appropriate. These standards objectives include ensuring that persons under the age
of 18 are protected, that generally accepted standards are applied so as to provide adequate protection
against offensive and harmful material, and that news is reported with due accuracy and presented
with due impartiality. The Broadcasting Act requires Ofcom to ensure that broadcasters avoid any
unwarranted infringement of privacy or unfair treatment in programmes. Ofcom has responsibility for
the Broadcasting Code, and has a duty to keep it under review and make any amendments as necessary.
Access to duly accurate and duly impartial news on television and radio is fundamental to a democratic
society, and is therefore afforded a higher level of protection under UK law. However, the news
landscape continues to evolve and the distinction between news and current affairs content has become
less clear. As such, following consultation, in October 2025 Ofcom updated its rules and guidance
regarding politicians presenting news, to reflect the current landscape.Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
As well as protecting audiences, Ofcom's Broadcasting Code rules also extend to participants in
programmes, to ensure that broadcasters take due care over the welfare of people who might be at risk
of significant harm as a result of taking part in a programme. Ofcom updated its rules in 2021 to better
protect people who appear on television and radio shows and will conduct a timely review of their rules
and guidance to consider whether they need strengthening.
Ofcom also regulates accessibility standards and enforces minimum quotas for subtitles, audio
description and signing. Licensed broadcasters also have obligations, such as providing data, ensuring
they have appropriate systems in place, adhering to advertising restrictions, and paying fees to Ofcom.
Once fully implemented, designated Tier 1 video-on-demand services will also be under similar or
equivalent regulation – but through a notification system. Rather than applying for a licence, the
nature of on-demand services means that they instead need to notify Ofcom when operating in UK
jurisdiction. When taken together, this ensures that regulated television channels and mainstream
video-on-demand services available in the UK abide by a common set of rules and standards in relation
to the programmes they show.
Under the current system, regulatory standards are high for licensed broadcasters and mainstream
video-on-demand providers (after Media Act implementation). Video sharing platforms follow lower
standards through the Online Safety Act, set around audience protection principles, and other forms
of online TV and TV-like content have minimal to no regulation. This provides a confusing regulatory
landscape for businesses and audiences, and provides an unfair, uncompetitive regulatory playing field
for industry.
In the longer term, the regulatory framework is likely to need fundamental reform, so that it reflects
a wholly digital environment. In November 2025, Ofcom launched a call for input into a review
of broadcasting legislation. The regulator set the challenge that in an increasingly dynamic and
fragmented media environment, more needs to be done so that audiences are protected wherever they
are watching and listening to content. Regulation must be flexible for inevitable future market changes
and be able to support innovation and growth in the sector in the interests of citizens and consumers.
Alongside this, the government has pledged to cut the administrative cost of regulation on business by
a quarter, making the UK the best place to do business and drive economic growth. It is essential that
regulatory change does not just consider levelling everyone up in standards and protecting audiences,
but also alleviates our broadcasters and PSM providers from outdated regulation that is no longer fit
for purpose.
Next steps on the future of TV regulation
The government will now undertake a period of stakeholder engagement to consider how best to take
forward that necessary reform, to ensure the regulatory framework continues to protect audiences from
harmful content, supports media providers, and allows our creative industries to thrive, by reducing red
tape and driving growth and innovation across the UK.
This could include a goal to eventually shift away from a regulatory system based on how content
is delivered, to one that focuses on where audiences find and consume TV-like content, ensuring
consistent standards and protections regardless of the platform. However, this framework must be
fair to both businesses and consumers, and be flexible and adaptive to the rapid pace of technological
change and evolving business models, ensuring the UK remains a global leader in the creative industries
while cutting unnecessary regulatory burdens.
We have set out the following objectives that will provide an overarching framework to what we want
to achieve:
4344
Chapter 3: How audiences will continue to access high-quality, trusted television content
• Audience protection: Ensuring that there are appropriate protections for audiences from harmful
or misleading content, especially for children, and ensuring these standards are applied appropriately
across TV and TV-like services.
• Accessibility: Enabling all audiences, particularly those who have disabilities affecting their sight
or hearing, to access and enjoy TV and TV-like content, however they choose to consume it.
• Proportionality: Reducing barriers to growth and innovation, including a commitment to removing
unnecessary regulatory burdens and establishing a fairer regulatory playing field for competing TV
and TV-like services.
• Futureproofing the regulatory framework and Ofcom's powers: Ensuring Ofcom continues to
have appropriate powers and sufficient flexibility to effectively regulate TV-like services into the
future, wherever they appear.45
Chapter 4:
Ensuring PSM content remains
accessible and relevant to audiences
Despite the challenges presented by an increasingly complex and fragmented media landscape,
broadcasters are unparalleled in their capacity to bring people together for shared experiences; even
younger audiences for whom an increasing share of their viewing time is spent with streaming services
and video sharing platforms. Among 16-24s, 62% of TV set viewing to broadcasters is done with other
people, compared to 41% for streamers and 30% for video sharing platforms.50
The six broadcasters who provide PSM content in the UK are a vital part of the country's social fabric.
Together they make a wide variety of culturally relevant and democratically impactful content
universally available to audiences on a free-to-air basis. This includes a plurality of TV news and
current affairs, but also other socially and democratically important programming like children's and
educational programmes, and culturally relevant drama and comedy. In countries with strong and well-
funded systems of public service media, societal polarisation is lower.51
The current system of public service media
Audiences in the UK have access to hundreds of TV channels, but only a fraction of these are public
service channels. The main public service channels are BBC One, BBC Two, Channel 3 (currently
ITV1 or STV depending on region), Channel 4, S4C, and 5. These channels are operated by our PSM
providers: the BBC, ITV, STV, Channel 4, S4C and 5.
By virtue of their status as PSM providers, these broadcasters are required to collectively fulfil the
public service remit for television, which includes requirements to produce content that informs,
educates, and entertains; content that meets the needs and satisfies the interests of audiences.
PSM providers are also required to meet certain quotas for specific content, such as original
productions (content made specifically for the UK market), independent productions (programmes
made by companies not owned by a broadcaster) and regional content (programming that reflects
and serves the diverse nations and regions of the UK). Originally these obligations could only be
delivered via the PSM provider's main broadcast channel. The Media Act 2024 has now enabled
PSM providers to deliver these obligations via a wider range of services including their on-demand
programme services.
In exchange for these additional obligations, PSM providers receive specific benefits, such as
'appropriate' prominence on TV guides (for example, the first five slots are reserved for public
service channels). The Act will also introduce a new prominence regime to provide appropriate
prominence for PSM providers' streaming services on designated TV platforms such as smart TVs,
given viewers are increasingly watching content from PSM providers on-demand. This exchange is
sometimes referred to as the PSM 'compact'.46
Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
However, the way that people interact with public service media is changing. Audiences now switch
between PSM content provided on broadcast channels, in PSM providers' own video-on-demand
players, clips of PSM providers' content on video sharing platforms, and content that might have been
originally commissioned by PSM providers but is now available on streaming services. Audiences also
increasingly have access to content with distinct public value from a wide range of sources; whether
that is original high-end dramas on streaming services like Netflix, or balanced and well-researched
documentaries on video platforms like YouTube that help people understand the world around them.
As people increasingly consume content online and on social media – often on platforms that prioritise
attention over the public value – PSM content becomes less visible to audiences. This is contributing to
the financial pressures that our PSM providers are facing, which are making it harder for them to fund
the production and distribution of original UK content to all audiences.
The government remains strongly committed to the importance of public service media, but we must
be alive to the changing ways people interact with media and open to new ways that public service
media can change and innovate to stay relevant to audiences. This could include new definitions of
public service content, and opening up the system to new PSM providers.
Ofcom's latest review of public service media, Transmission Critical, recognised that as audiences move
online they are watching video content on a larger range of services. That is why Ofcom recommended
that PSM content needs to be prominent and discoverable on the third party platforms to which
audiences increasingly turn. However, new prominence arrangements alone will not be sufficient to
secure the long-term future of public service media in the UK. We therefore also want to consider
options for a new model of public service media; one that is less dependent on traditional broadcasters,
and one that is better set up to harness the public service value being created across our dynamic screen
sector.
4.1 Prominence of PSM content in the platform age
Ensuring universal access to PSM content is essential both now and in the context of any reforms to
the regulation of public service media. In a content-saturated ecosystem, access is no longer just about
infrastructure, it is about discoverability. This means that PSM content needs to be accessible and
appropriately prominent on all the platforms and devices people now use to watch TV. The government
is open-minded about how this can happen, and is therefore seeking views on whether it can be
achieved voluntarily, whether all PSM content should be prominent, and on which platforms ought to
be in scope.
PSM providers are held to higher regulatory standards than other content providers, and this in turn
increases their costs. Historically, the PSM compact has tried to balance these higher costs with a
guarantee that PSM content is sufficiently prominent to audiences. PSM content includes both core
democratically valuable content, such as impartial news, as well as encompassing a broad range of
output from high-quality children's programming to landmark entertainment, sport and cultural events.
Prominence is not just about the economic sustainability of broadcasters; it is also about the impact
on audiences. In a platform environment driven by algorithmic recommendations, media is frequently
optimised for engagement rather than public value. The risk of this is stark especially for young people.
There is broad societal consensus that young audiences should have guaranteed access to high-quality,
safe and educational content. Consistent with the government's recent action to protect children
online, without robust discoverability for this type of content, whether on dedicated platforms such as
YouTube Kids or wider platforms for over-16s, we risk failing our youngest viewers.Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
As set out in chapter 2, the government will look at options to establish a prominence regime for news
on social media platforms. We are also exploring whether PSM content, including news, and where
relevant, children's content and other genres, should be made more discoverable on video platforms.
Whilst certain genres like news are a priority, we need to consider whether all PSM content should be
covered so that a wider range of high-quality, UK relevant content is made more discoverable.
We know that PSM providers make up just one part of the UK's vibrant media sector; global providers,
content creators and independent producers all play a vital role in connecting audiences with
entertaining, relevant and appealing content. However, easily discoverable PSM content plays an
especially crucial role in supporting a shared cultural identity and preventing isolation. Without some
degree of discoverability or prominence for such shared national moments, we risk a media landscape
that is increasingly atomised.
Fragmentation in the viewing of PSM content is not necessarily driven by a decline in the appeal of
the programming itself, but by a structural shift in both audience demographics and platform usage.
Shifting audience behaviour has created a generational cliff-edge, as younger viewers may seamlessly
switch between platforms and we are starting to see this reflected in the population as a whole.
On average, across all devices, viewers spend 51 minutes per day on video sharing platforms, and
40 minutes per day on streaming services, compared to just 25 minutes on broadcast on-demand
services.52,53
Broadcast television now reaches just 43% of 16-24 year olds on a weekly basis, while video sharing
platforms now account for a quarter of TV set usage for under 35s.54 If PSM content is not visible on
the platforms where key audiences spend their time, the government is concerned that the principle
of universal access is not being achieved, and that this is fundamentally threatening the future of PSM
content.
Improving the prominence of PSM content through partnerships
In recent months there has been progress in building partnerships. For example, an agreement
between the BBC and YouTube was announced in January 2026 which will see the BBC making
content specifically for YouTube including entertainment, news and children's content. This
partnership debuted in February 2026, delivering dedicated coverage of the Winter Olympics.
Similarly, YouTube is increasingly being used as a distribution platform that showcases British
talent, with the Brit Awards streamed through ITV's YouTube channel.
We want to actively encourage deep partnerships between independent creators and PSM
providers, combining the agility and innovation of the creator economy with the scale and curation
of public service media. We can already see this model succeeding in practice. For example, Francis
Bourgeois transitioned from YouTube to present the series Mission to Space on Channel 4.
There has been an undeniable blurring of traditional boundaries between TV, broadcasters and
platforms which the government seeks to support all elements of. We want any partnerships
undertaken to improve prominence, to ultimately benefit all parts of the creator ecosystem,
creating a fairer, more sustainable market for PSM providers, platforms and creators alike.
The government is looking at options to ensure PSM content is prominent, discoverable and
promoted where audiences are watching TV, including within third party platform user interfaces. This
consultation will allow us to collect views on whether the public feels able to access and view enough
PSM content, and allow us to gather data from industry about whether current partnerships between
PSM providers and platforms are working effectively.
4748
Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
The government's strong preference remains for industry-led, voluntary agreements to achieve
increased prominence in a sustainable and robust way that satisfies all parties.
The government specifically notes the constructive dialogue currently taking place between YouTube
and PSM providers. We strongly welcome the engagement and commitment demonstrated by all
parties to date. As this consultation progresses, we urge that these collaborative efforts continue at an
accelerated pace to deliver meaningful industry-led agreements.
We do not view the outcome of this consultation as a zero-sum game between traditional broadcasters,
content creators and other video platforms. PSM providers are the cornerstone of the UK creative
economy and invest significantly in skills, talent and businesses across the whole of the UK. A
thriving public service media sector will have positive spillover effects for the wider creative sector
and community of creators they help support. PSM providers and creators also share many common
interests. Both groups require stability and predictability regarding how platforms operate and how
their income is generated. Both rely on data transparency to understand how they can reliably reach
their audiences. The government is clear that any work undertaken in this space should lead to a good
outcome for creators too.
To aid consultation responses, we would expect the following principles will be applied in the
development and delivery of this work:
• Audience led: we recognise the need to balance prominence of PSM content with users continuing
to feel empowered to choose the content they want to see.
• Future-proofing: any prominence measures will need to be flexible and able to evolve with
technology and changing business practices.
• Device-neutral: any measures must be capable of being applied across mobiles, desktops and
connected TVs.
• Outcomes based: Prominence measures should be outcomes-based, giving platforms the flexibility
to deliver the objectives in a way that works for their platform.
• Fair commercial terms: we also recognise the need to decide fair commercial terms in an open and
transparent way.
We are not making a decision about legislation at this point – we want to allow more time for voluntary
agreements to be developed and we want to collect more evidence, including via this consultation.
4.2 A new system of public service media for television
In addition to ensuring that PSM content is discoverable and prominent on the platforms to which
audiences increasingly turn, we must also ensure that PSM content is produced and distributed in a way
that is sustainable and future-proofed.
Our public service media system is globally admired, delivers significant social, economic and
democratic benefits, and has sustained for over a century. Our PSM providers each operate different
business models and reach different audiences, but all make distinctive, original UK content that fosters
community, and preserves cultural heritage.
PSM content must be universally accessible to all corners of society in order to successfully deliver its
objectives. However, the universality of PSM content is at risk in the platform age if its distribution
does not reflect the way people watch TV. Our PSM providers have already moved from delivering
public service value solely through their broadcasting operations, to a wider range of services. Channel
4, for example, has set out an ambition to be a 'public service streamer' by 2030. In 2025, contentChapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
watched on PSM providers' video-on-demand services accounted for a fifth of their viewing on TV sets.55
Increasingly they are also commissioning content specifically for their video-on-demand services and
for social media and other third party platforms.
As a result, PSM providers operate in a global market, and face increased competition for viewers
from streamers and video sharing platforms. As set out in section 4.1, while PSM providers continue to
benefit from prominence for their linear channels and on-demand services, PSM content on third party
platforms must compete for attention in algorithmically driven and individually-targeted user feeds,
raising challenges to its discoverability and its ability to tell positive and unifying national stories.
PSM providers' finances are under pressure. Revenues from the TV Licence fee and linear TV advertising
have declined by more than a quarter in real terms since 2016. As Figure 7 shows, the growth in
advertising revenue from video-on-demand services has failed to compensate for the decline in lost
linear revenues, impacting the revenues of commercial PSM providers. Rising costs, driven by the need
to provide content across linear and online services and investment in expensive high-end content, are
straining PSM providers' commissioning budgets, and as Figure 8 shows, production of PSM content
has reduced year on year since 2022, thereby risking the democratic and societal benefits we strive
towards.56
Figure 7: Comparison of annual absolute spend for TV spots vs video on-demand
Q1 2011 – Q4 2025, GBP Millions, Constant Prices
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
Total TV spots
Source: Advertising Association/WARC Expenditure Report
TV VOD
26
20
25
20
24
20
23
20
22
20
21
20
20
20
19
20
18
20
17
20
20
16
0
49Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
Figure 8: PSM content by hours across genres for first-run UK originations
32,988
31,770
32,188
32,712
31,770
30,999
29,800
18,991
18,824
18,884
18,561
19,129
19,113
19,374
18,955
20,000
3,455
3,498
3,321
10,000
3,063
0
31,626
31,531
30,000
Hours
50
2,9222,2762,3442,1862,034
1,3221,0971,0101,111
1,3971,3991,4211,558
1,093
718
6731,062
720
5751,037
743
664966
755
640
20182019
2017
2,712
2,073
1,517
1,642
1,125
1,282
834
514
520
2020
News & Current Affairs
General Factual
Sports
Entertainment
Factual Entertainment
Specialist Factual
Other
Soaps
Children's
3,123
3,139
2,896
3,411
2,251
2016
3,556
3,265
19,689
3,367
2,476
2,500
2,1692,0041,7521,5881,7491,756978
877
660
5251,213
965
660
5181,307
850
6491,212
829
597
20232024
2021
2022
1,635
1,261
Source: Ofcom/broadcasters from Communications Market Report 2025 – interactive. Figures are nominal and do not
include S4C, BBC Alba, BBC HD or nations'/regions' programming. This graph builds on Figure 5 in chapter 1 and uses more
detailed data available from Ofcom to break down the content hours of first-run PSM originations into more granular genres,
and includes additional genres such as news and current affairs.
The balance of obligations and benefits conferred on our PSM providers is known as the 'PSM compact'.
There is a risk this combination of mounting costs and diminishing benefits will result in a net loss
for PSM providers (and potentially for it not to be viable for PSM providers to continue or renew their
licences) unless we explore a broad range of options to rebalance the compact.
The government will explore options to reform the UK's system of public service media for
television. The current system of public service media regulation limits the options to diversify the mix
of providers and means it is heavily reliant on traditional broadcasters. Moving away from regulating
PSM providers through broadcast licences would give more flexibility as to who the providers are,
as well as the nature of the benefits and obligations conferred on them, reflecting the new media
environment. For example, it could lead to new requirements for PSM providers to create content
specifically for video sharing platforms or social media.
Local TV providers are also facing similar challenges regarding changing audience viewing habits and
declining advertising revenues. Like national PSM providers, they are regulated by Ofcom through
conditions placed in their broadcast licences. Any reform to our system of public service media will
consider the parallel system of local TV, and opportunities this could provide for those providers.
Any new regulatory model should result in the creation of more public service content, which has a
greater impact on audiences and helps to shape a more democratically engaged and cohesive society.
Below we propose four principles for what an updated public service system should deliver:
Potential principles of the public service media system:
• Universality: to ensure that public service content remains universally available, free of charge,
reflecting audience behaviours and media consumption habits.Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
• Public service content: to ensure provision of a wide range of high-quality, distinctive public service
content.
• Systemic sustainability: to ensure the system of public service media has a mix of providers to
increase its resilience to deliver public service media objectives in the long-term. It should also be
sufficiently flexible to adapt to the potential shifts of the current collection of PSM providers and be
open to opportunities of mergers, partnerships, and definitions of public service content.
• A sustainable PSM compact: to ensure the benefits PSM providers receive are proportionate to the
obligations they must deliver for PSM status so as to be attractive and commercially sustainable.
We also recognise that PSM providers are part of a diverse market, and dynamic mixed ecology that we
want to maintain. In particular, a strong independent production system, with sustainable production
centres across the UK, is important to ensure the provision of high-quality public service content.
PSM providers commissioning and investment via jobs and infrastructure helps build critical mass
and creates opportunities for domestic producers, crews, talent and other workers. The BBC has an
important role to play here. One of the key objectives of the BBC Charter Review is a BBC that supports
the sector, and drives opportunity and good jobs across the nations and regions of the UK which it must
do in collaboration with other PSM providers and the wider TV sector. Any changes to the system of
public service media should not come at the cost of wider sector growth.
Below we present three illustrative models to demonstrate how systemic reform could meet the
challenges and objectives laid out in previous sections. Each is a mixed model, retaining the BBC's role
as our largest PSM provider. The ecosystem around this then helps inform what role the BBC plays and
its remit, including how it can leverage its public funding to meaningfully partner and collaborate with
other PSM providers. The ways that the BBC partners with others in the sector, including PSM providers,
in a way that strengthens the wider media ecosystem, is also being considered through the BBC
Charter Review.

[AribertDeckers]

Illustrative models of a new system of public service media:
A model focused on PSM institutions would see institutions, such as broadcasters or streamers,
designated as PSM institutions. In this way, public service content would be, as it is today, clearly
associated with a defined set of institutions, so audiences would know who they are. In terms of their
regulation, they could still be subject to individual public service remits, as well as requirements to
contribute to an overall public service remit for television. This approach would be most similar to
the UK's current regulatory system, and so would preserve many of its strengths (for example, strong
institutional public service media ethos among providers). The system could provide for a two-tier
system of 'full' providers and smaller providers or services with corresponding levels of benefits and
obligations. This could help support a small number of additional PSM institutions.
A model focused on PSM services would allow specific 'services' to receive PSM designation if they
were to meet agreed requirements. In this context, 'services' could range from linear provision, such as
an arts-focused TV channel, to a high-quality video-on-demand service, or channels on video sharing
platforms, such as a history or documentary channel on YouTube. Having a wider range of providers
could mean it is less clear for audiences seeking public service content to know where to find it. It
could, however, increase the likelihood of audiences interacting with public service content, including
audiences who have become disengaged with public service media, particularly if algorithms can
be leveraged to deliver public service content to audiences on platforms. Regulation could involve
obligations and benefits (for example, prominence) being applied to individual services. This model
could open up the system to a wider range of providers, and enable more flexible and dynamic
regulation of public service media.
5152
Chapter 4: Ensuring PSM content remains accessible and relevant to audiences
A content-centric approach would determine whether something is public service content subject to
an agreed definition (which could evolve in line with cultural/societal needs) rather than a particular
institution or service. The value of public service media could extend to more audiences as people
engage with public service content no matter their viewing behaviours, reflecting an environment where
content is increasingly served algorithmically. It could be adaptable to audience and technological shifts
and not reliant on the success of specific organisations. Benefits, such as funding for and prominence
of public service content, would also be tied directly to the content itself. In practice, countries whose
systems of public service media are more content-centric tend to adopt a mixed model whereby a
small number of PSM institutions are supported by additional incentives to support the supply of public
service content.
The government's ambition for public service media
Despite the transformative changes to how people are consuming media, we believe there is still
strong demand, and an irrefutable need, for public service media. Audiences still value, and want
access to, accurate news, and informative and entertaining content that reflects the diversity of
the UK and brings audiences together. We want a regulatory system that encourages the creation
of more public service content, reversing the trend of recent years which has seen the output
of our PSM providers decline. We also want to make sure that the benefits public service media
delivers help to address the challenges associated with the modern media ecosystem. As discussed
in section 2.3, this might include adding new obligations to the PSM compact, such as enhanced
responsibilities for media literacy, which are crucial for society in the digital age.
To achieve this, our preferred model of public service media will need to work as part of the final
decision that is reached on the future of TV distribution (section 3.1). This is vital both for ensuring
that access to PSM content remains universal, and that the costs of being a PSM provider are
balanced with appropriate benefits. The final approach that the government sets out will need to
fully reflect the paradigm shift from broadcasting to content everywhere, as set out in chapter 1.
This change is fundamentally altering how and where PSM providers need to make their content
available, and where we want to ensure PSM content is accessible and prominent.
Our ambition is for a system of public service media that thrives and leans into the opportunity
of new technologies. Those technologies may lower the cost of distribution or potentially reduce
the cost of content creation, while the algorithmic serving of content allows for PSM content to be
offered directly to audiences we want to engage. We are supportive of PSM providers developing
algorithms in line with public service values, that strike the right balance between offering
audiences personalised services while still ensuring they are exposed to a wide range of PSM
content that keeps them informed about the world around them. The BBC Charter Review green
paper consulted on what further obligations the BBC specifically should have to ensure a broad
range of PSM content is promoted within its own platforms.
As set out in section 1.4, we are supportive of strategic partnerships among PSM providers
that benefit their financial sustainability and audiences. We would expect the adoption of new
technologies to present opportunities for such partnerships, with the potential to rationalise
costs and increase investment in creating PSM content. We want to encourage innovation that is
spearheaded by PSM providers. While this activity will be market led, we welcome views on how
our reforms – to PSM regulation and more broadly – can support this.Consultation questions 53
Consultation questions
Introductory question
1
The green paper covers topics relating to the future of UK television and media.
More specifically, it includes content on:
• The current market and audience context
• Prominence of news and of public service media
• Future of TV distribution and regulation
• A new system for public service media
• Media literacy
What are your overall views on the future of television and media in the UK, related to the
topics in this green paper?
Market and audience context
2
Chapter one of the green paper describes a series of challenges impacting the UK's TV
production ecosystem, including:
• The spending power of public service media (PSM) providers is decreasing, which impacts their
ability to commission new content.
• The sector faces rising production costs and inflationary pressure, particularly for high-end
content like drama.
• PSM providers are adopting "fewer, bigger and better" commissioning strategies, often
prioritising digital-first content, which has resulted in fewer commissions for some genres.
• When global streaming platforms commission directly, they typically retain the IP. This inward
investment, while filling production expenditure gaps, risks shifting the residual commercial
value offshore, creating a challenge for producers to retain IP and long-term economic value.
• Screen-based businesses report unmet finance demand and feel underfunded, despite a high
rate of actively using external finance.
What measures do you feel would be most effective for the government to take to overall
address these challenges?
Prominence of news on social media
3
How often do you encounter news you feel is untrustworthy when online (for example,
something you consider to be misinformation)?
Options:
• Never
• Rarely54 Consultation questions
• Sometimes
• Often
• Very often
• Not sure
4
Do you believe 'trustworthy' news content should be more visible on social media?
Options:
• Yes
• No
• Not sure
4a How would you like this to look in practice, so that audiences can access trustworthy news
more easily on social media?
5
If government gives prominence to trustworthy providers of news (meaning by making them
more visible online), should this prominence be ongoing, and 'always on,' or only active
during periods of crisis?
Options:
• Ongoing and 'always on'
• Only during periods of heightened vulnerability
• Not sure
6
Do you feel individual users should be given an option in whether prominence measures for
trustworthy news content are switched on or off for them?
Options:
• Yes
• No
• Not sure
Media literacy duty and joint venture
7
How concerned, if at all, are you about the impact of misleading or unreliable information on
society?
Options:
• Very concerned
• Somewhat concerned
• Not very concerned
• Not at all concerned
• Not sure
8
How concerned, if at all, are you about the impact of misleading or unreliable information on
democracy?
Options:Consultation questions 55
• Very concerned
• Somewhat concerned
• Not very concerned
• Not at all concerned
• Not sure
9
Public service media refers to organisations such as the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and S4C.
Which of the following statements most closely reflects your view on the role of public
service media in helping people critically engage with news and other information they
encounter online or offline? [select only one]
Options:
• Public service media has a role in supporting critical engagement, and is currently doing enough
• Public service media has a role in supporting critical engagement, and should do more
• Public service media does not have a role in supporting critical engagement
• Public service media is currently doing too much to support critical engagement, and should
do less
• Not sure
10 How important, if at all, do you think it is for people to be able to judge the accuracy and
reliability of information they encounter, for example online or in the news?
Options:
• Very important
• Somewhat important
• Not very important
• Not at all important
• Not sure
11 How valuable, if at all, do you believe collaboration between public service media, civil
society organisations (for example charities and education groups), and the media sector
could be in supporting people to critically assess information?
Options:
• Very valuable
• Somewhat valuable
• Not very valuable
• Not at all valuable
• Not sure
12 Which of the following models, if any, do you consider most effective for further media
sector collaboration in this area?
Options: [select all that apply]
• Informal coordination and sharing of learning
• A structured forum with agreed objectives and reporting
• Joint delivery of public-facing initiatives56 Consultation questions
• No additional collaboration is needed
• Not sure
12a Please provide any supporting evidence as to why you think the model(s) you selected are
effective for collaboration between public service media and the media sector.
Future of TV distribution
13 Chapter 3.1 of the green paper outlines the government's preference for an IPTV transition
from either 2034 or 2044. The following questions seek views and evidence relating to this
proposal.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the government's assessment of the case for
change relating to the future of digital terrestrial television?
• Strongly agree – audiences should definitely adopt Internet Protocol Television (IPTV)
and similar technologies
• Agree – audiences should adopt IPTV and similar technologies
• Neither agree nor disagree – no strong opinion either way
• Disagree – audiences should not adopt IPTV and similar technologies
• Strongly disagree – audiences should definitely not adopt IPTV and similar technologies
• Not sure
13a Please provide further rationale for your answer and any relevant evidence.
14 The green paper outlines two timing options for digital terrestrial television (DTT) switch-
off. These are 31 December 2034 (option 1 at Annex A) and 31 December 2044 (option 2 at
Annex A).
Which option do you prefer as timing for DTT switch-off?
Options:
• Strongly prefer 2034
• Somewhat prefer 2034
• No strong opinion either way
• Somewhat prefer 2044
• Strongly prefer 2044
• Neither 2034 or 2044
• Not sure
14a Please provide further rationale for your answer and any relevant evidence.
15 Do you have evidence that another timeframe is preferable to the ones specified in this
consultation? If so, please provide further details.
15a For industry / organisations only:
To deliver an IPTV transition would require collaborative working with audience groups,
industry and across government. Please outline your organisation's commitment to
supporting this work, including relevant experience, resources, and innovative solutions
as to how you would deliver this transition.Consultation questions 57
16 To what extent do you agree or disagree that the challenges identified in the green paper
(delivering for all audiences; maintaining a reliable television service; promoting competition
and innovation in the television industry and supporting a sustainable future for PSM
providers) capture all of the considerations when making a decision on whether, and how
best, to support audiences to adopt IPTV and other similar technologies?
• Strongly agree – the challenges comprehensively capture all of the considerations when making
a decision on whether, and how best, to support audiences to adopt IPTV and other similar
technologies
• Agree – the challenges capture all of the considerations
• Neither agree nor disagree – no strong opinion either way
• Disagree – the challenges do not capture all of the considerations
• Strongly disagree – the challenges definitely do not capture all of the considerations
• Not sure
16a Please provide further rationale for your answer.
17 In your opinion, which, if any, of the challenges are most important to you? Please rank in
order of importance.
Options:
• Delivering for all audiences – Any transition to IPTV and other similar technologies must
preserve universal access to TV, including public service media providers, regardless of income,
location, age, or digital confidence.
• Maintaining a reliable television service – The ability to communicate to the public in a national
emergency must be retained beyond a move to IPTV. Before digital terrestrial television is
switched off, industry must show that alternative technologies can deliver comparable or better
standards of reliability, resilience, and coverage.
• Promoting competition and innovation in the TV industry – A managed transition to IPTV and
other similar technologies offers an opportunity to modernise TV delivery, the transition should
free up resources and spectrum, and allow broadcasters to focus on content and innovation
rather than maintaining parallel legacy systems.
• Supporting a sustainable future for public service media providers – public service media
providers play a central role in the UK's cultural, civic, and democratic life. Industry must ensure
that new distribution models support, rather than undermine, public service media providers'
ability to play this role.
18 In the event of an IPTV transition, which of the following, if any, do you think are the most
important to ensure everyone can still access television from their own home? Please rank
in order of importance.
Options:
• Affordable broadband for all, suitable for television viewing
• Low-cost or subsidised broadband for people receiving benefits or on low incomes
• Low-cost or discounted internet capable television sets for people on low incomes
• Simple devices that connect older television sets to the internet with no ongoing fees
• Services and systems that feel the same as digital terrestrial television so they are easy to use
for people with limited digital skills58 Consultation questions
• Built-in, easy to use accessibility features for disabled users, for example subtitles and audio
description
• Digital skills required to navigate or set up IPTV
19 What are the likely environmental impacts associated with both a 2034 transition and 2044
DTT switch-off (transition to IPTV)?
In your response, please provide evidence where possible on:
• The comparative energy use and carbon emissions of different distribution technologies
• The environmental implications of changes in viewing behaviour (for example, increased
streaming or on-demand consumption)
• The lifecycle environmental impacts of relevant infrastructure and consumer equipment (such
as transmitters, network infrastructure, set-top boxes, and connected televisions)
• Opportunities to improve the environmental sustainability of television distribution, including
through technological innovation, infrastructure efficiency, or consumer behaviour
• Any risks that policy decisions on the future of TV distribution could unintentionally increase
environmental impacts
Please include any available data, modelling, or research that could inform the government's
assessment of environmental impacts.
20 Is there anything else you would like to add regarding the future of TV distribution that has
not already been captured?
Future of TV regulation
21 Chapter 3.2 of the green paper sets out some of the challenges regarding the future of TV
regulation, such as which TV-like services should be regulated going forward, and to what
standard. Is there any information or comment you would like to provide in relation to the
future of TV regulation?
Prominence of PSM content in the platform age
22 How easy or difficult is it for you to find culturally relevant content on video platforms,
including video sharing platforms like YouTube and TikTok and streaming platforms like
Netflix and Amazon Prime Video?
Examples of culturally relevant content could include stories set in Britain, with British
presenters, representing British values or referencing British events or customs.
Options:
• Very easy – I have no issues in finding culturally relevant content on these platforms
• Somewhat easy – I have very few issues in finding culturally relevant content on these platforms
• Neither easy nor difficult – no opinion either way
• Somewhat difficult – I have some issues in finding culturally relevant content on these platforms
• Very difficult – I have a lot of issues in finding culturally relevant content on these platforms
• Not sureConsultation questions 59
23 Prominence can be defined as giving certain content a privileged position, for example,
ensuring a specific channel appears at the top of search results or features on a
recommendation feed, within a user interface so it is particularly easy for audiences to find
and watch.
To what extent do you agree or disagree that content from public service media providers (like the
BBC and Channel 4) should be easier to find on video platforms?
• Options:
• Strongly agree – it should definitely be easier to find public service media content on these
platforms
• Agree – it should probably be easier to find public service media content on these platforms
• Neither agree nor disagree – no opinion either way
• Disagree – it should probably not be easier to find public service media content on these
platforms
• Strongly disagree – it should definitely not be easier to find public service media content on
these platforms
• Not sure
23a What do you see as the benefits of content from public service media providers (like the BBC
and Channel 4) being easier to find on video platforms?
23b What types of content from public service media providers do you think should be easier to
find on video platforms? (select all that apply)
Options:
• Arts and classical music
• Children's
• Comedy
• Drama
• Education
• Entertainment
• Factual entertainment
• Feature films
• General factual
• News and current affairs
• Religion and ethics
• Soaps
• Specialist factual
• Sports
• None of the above
• Other [please specify]
23c On which video platforms do you think content from public service media providers should
be easier to find?60 Consultation questions
24 Do you regularly create video content and upload it to video sharing platforms, such as
YouTube and TikTok?
Options:
• Yes, primarily for fun or as a hobby
• Yes, primarily for professional purposes or to generate income
• No
• Prefer not to say
24a As a content creator or someone who uploads content to video sharing platforms, are there
additional changes or features that you would want video sharing platforms to offer? For
example to increase the visibility of your content, transparency of systems or to make
content more discoverable.
24b Thinking about the video sharing platforms you upload and share content on, do you have
sufficient awareness of how content is shown to viewers through the algorithms?
Options:
• I have sufficient awareness of how the algorithm works
• I do not have sufficient awareness of how the algorithm works
• Not sure
A new system of public service media
25 Which of the following, if any, attributes of public service media content do you value the
most? Please select (up to) your top three.
Options:
• Diverse programming – content that features people like me, and people from different
backgrounds
• Quality news – news content that is accurate, and helps me better understand what is going on
in the world today
• Regional coverage – programming or content that keeps me informed about my area
• Quality content (non-news) – programmes or content that you see as high-quality and or
different in their approach to what is offered by other providers
• Range – the availability of a range of different types of programmes (for example drama,
comedy, entertainment, sport)
• Tailored to UK audiences – programmes that are specifically made for UK audiences, and are
relevant to me
• Shared viewing opportunities – programmes and broadcast events that I can watch and talk
about with others, for example family or my peers
• National cohesion – the broadcasting of events that bring the nation together for a shared
viewing experience
• None of the above
• Not sureConsultation questions 61

[AribertDeckers]

26 Chapter 4.2 of the green paper outlines the challenges public service media faces and how
the system tied to broadcast licences is relatively inflexible. The chapter suggests this
limits the options for benefits and obligations Ofcom can place on public service media
providers, and makes it harder to open up the system to new providers. It is argued this risks
the sustainability of the system as audiences move away from live broadcast TV to switch
between linear, on-demand, and user-generated content on multiple devices.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the suggestion that the public service media
system needs to be reformed away from the current model that uses broadcast licences?
Options:
• Strongly agree – the system definitely needs to be reformed away from using broadcast licences
• Agree – I agree that the system may need to be reformed away from using broadcast licences
• Neither agree nor disagree – No opinion either way
• Disagree – I do not agree that the system necessarily needs to be reformed away from using
broadcast licences
• Strongly disagree – I feel strongly that the system should continue to use broadcast licences
• Not sure
26a Please provide a reason and any supporting evidence for your view.
27 The green paper outlines four potential principles of the public service media system.
In brief, these are:
• Universality: to ensure that public service content remains universally available, free of charge,
reflecting audience behaviours and media consumption habits.
• Public service content: to ensure provision of a wide range of high-quality, distinctive public
service content.
• Systemic sustainability: to ensure the system of public service media has a mix of providers to
increase its resilience to deliver public service media objectives in the long-term. It should also
be sufficiently flexible to the potential shifts of the current collection of PSM providers and be
open to opportunities of mergers, partnerships, and definitions of public service content.
• A sustainable PSM compact: to ensure the benefits PSM providers receive are proportionate
to the obligations they must deliver for PSM status so as to be attractive and commercially
sustainable.
To what extent do you agree or disagree that each of the following should be considered by
government as principles of the public service media system?
• Universality
– Options: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Not
sure
• Public service media content
– Options: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Not
sure
• Systemic sustainability
– Options: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Not
sure62 Consultation questions
• A sustainable public service media compact
– Options: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Not
sure
28 The green paper outlines three illustrative models for our public service media system to
align with our proposed principles. These models are outlined below, and a more detailed
description on each is presented in chapter 4 of the green paper.
• A model focused on PSM institutions would see institutions, such as broadcasters or streamers,
designated as PSM institutions.
• A model focused on PSM services would allow specific 'services' to receive PSM designation
if they were to meet agreed requirements. In this context, 'services' could range from linear
provision, such as an arts-focused TV channel, a high-quality VoD service, or channels on video
sharing platforms, such as a history or documentary channel on YouTube.
• A content-centric approach would determine whether something is public service content
subject to an agreed definition (which could evolve in line with cultural/societal needs) rather
than a particular provider (institution or service).
Please rank, in order, your preferred model of the public service media system, where 1 is
your most preferred model:
Options:
• A model focused on PSM institutions
• A model focused on PSM services
• A content centric approach
• A combination of the models
29 Do you have any further comments you would like to add on the content covered by this
chapter, or any further information that will aid us in interpreting your responses?
Equalities impact
30 There is a duty on public authorities to consider how their policies or decisions affect people
with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
Do you have any evidence of the equalities impacts of any proposals set out in the
consultation?Annex: Future of TV Distribution 63
Annex: Future of TV Distribution
Annex A: Options assessment
Options assessment
This section outlines the case for a managed transition away from DTT, highlighting the risks of inaction
and the key considerations for government. The government considers such a transition inevitable
for reasons covered in chapter 3 (3.1). The policy choice is therefore between two managed transition
timelines, with 2034 offering earlier benefits but requiring earlier intervention.
The government is committed to ensuring that everyone can continue to enjoy high-quality television
services as technology evolves. As more households choose to watch TV over broadband, we want to
make sure viewers have the access, support and confidence they need to benefit from any changes.
With continued progress in rolling out gigabit broadband coverage nationwide and ongoing work to
improve digital inclusion, we believe any transition to IPTV could offer an opportunity to enhance
choice, reliability and viewing experiences for audiences across the country.
To support this work, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) first asked Ofcom to
undertake an early review of market changes that may affect the future of content distribution on DTT
and other distribution platforms.57 Their report identified three broad approaches for the future of DTT:
• Invest in a more efficient DTT service.
• Reduce DTT down to a core service (known as a 'nightlight').
• Move towards DTT switch-off over the 2030s.
DCMS has carried out extensive research and analysis to further develop these proposals. This work has
been done across government and in close collaboration with audience groups, industry representatives
and academics – including through the Future of TV Distribution Stakeholder Forum.
Drawing on this evidence, we refined a broad range of possible approaches into a shortlist of three
specific options. The proposed timings align with the rationale set out in chapter 3 (section 3.1),
particularly under "timing considerations."
Given the range of technologies involved and the different timescales for implementation, there were
many potential models and a variety of stakeholder views. Inevitably, some options were not taken
forward. However, input from the stakeholder forum – alongside wider engagement and additional
research – provided a strong and balanced evidence base to support the shortlist, as detailed below.
Option 0 (baseline for comparison purposes and not being considered) – Allow the market to
determine outcomes: In this scenario, the government would take only the action necessary to
ensure the continuity of public service broadcasting. This would include repealing requirements on our
public service media providers to distribute their channels via DTT, though they could choose to do so
if they wished. Internet Protocol TV (IPTV) would likely keep growing, mostly by taking viewers away
from DTT. Commercial TV companies might stop using DTT altogether, which would leave our public
service media providers having to pay more of the costs on their own, and increase the incentive on any
remaining audiences to migrate to other platforms. By means of comparison, TV companies in countries64 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
such as Finland and Sweden are beginning to cut back on or stop their Freeview-style TV services that
rely on aerial provision. In such a scenario in the UK, there is a risk that DTT broadcasting could cease in
an accelerated and disorderly manner that leaves people reliant on the platform without guidance or
support or with no access at all. Other TV platforms distributed via IPTV, satellite, and cable would also
decide for themselves whether it still makes business sense to keep operating. The government does not
consider this option viable due to the risk of adverse impacts on audiences and it is only included here
to serve as a point of comparison.
Option 1 (under consideration for consultation) – Managed transition to IPTV by 2034:58 Under this
scenario, the government would implement an industry-led transition to IPTV services. There would be
no extension of the DTT platform beyond 2034, so this transitional support would be put in place ahead
of that date, and all of the radio spectrum currently used by DTT could be released in 2035. The focus
would be on ensuring that everyone can continue to access and enjoy television, including live channels,
on-demand programmes and PSM content, as viewing increasingly moves online. This would include
practical assistance, clear information and targeted support for households who may find the change more
challenging. We recognise that some audiences, including older viewers, those living in rural areas, disabled
people and those on lower incomes are less likely to have reliable internet access or the digital skills
needed to watch TV online. Without appropriate support, these groups could face barriers to accessing
the television services they rely on and we would therefore direct support measures at them especially.
The intention is to ensure that the shift to IPTV strengthens, rather than diminishes, access to affordable,
high-quality television for all audiences. This would focus all stakeholders on addressing the challenges we
have identified to maintain universal access to television ensuring affordable, reliable broadband, usability,
and digital skills. The government anticipates that satellite and cable television would continue on a purely
commercial basis.
Option 2 (under consideration for consultation) – Managed transition to IPTV by 2044: As with
option 1, the government would implement an industry-led transition to IPTV services by 2044. However,
this option provides a 10-year extension to the life of the DTT platform, alongside targeted investment
intended to reduce the operating costs passed onto broadcasters.59 Instead of the six multiplexes in
operation today, the platform would operate with three multiplexes during this period. This approach
would maintain DTT as a service without reducing its overall reach. At the same time, reducing the
number of multiplexes from six to three would enable the targeted release of valuable radio spectrum for
alternative uses. Public service media providers would continue to have DTT broadcast obligations during
the transitional period, but according to pricing figures provided by Arqiva the cost of DTT carriage would
be considerably reduced in comparison to current annual charges. These lower carriage costs could also
encourage commercial channels to remain on the platform. Satellite and cable television services are
expected to continue operating on a fully commercial basis, as they do now. As audiences increasingly
migrate to IPTV, the economic case for broadcasting on DTT is likely to become more challenging. Linear
television advertising has traditionally depended on large, simultaneous audiences to secure premium
advertising revenues. As viewing audiences shrink and fragment, commercial broadcasters may need to
take commercial decisions about the long-term viability of remaining on the DTT platform.
For the reasons set out in chapter 3 (3.1), and following engagement with both the Stakeholder Forum
and other stakeholders, the government believes there is a compelling case for a transition from
DTT to IPTV services by 2034. But, recognising the challenges that would need to be overcome, the
government is clear that the transition must happen in the right way, ensuring no one is left behind.
Through this green paper, the government is setting out the principles for the transition pathway, as
well as seeking views on 2044 as a potential transition date, in order to hear and consider a broad range
of perspectives. The responses to this consultation will help to inform the decision as to which of these
options (or another option) will be pursued.
As part of this consultation, we are gathering information to inform our assessment of these options
under the Public Sector Equality Duty and to understand any potential impacts on individuals with
protected characteristics.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 65
Annex B: Challenges to be addressed prior to the
switch-off of DTT services
This section sets out the main factors that will influence a successful transition, and the role of any
supporting measures.
Despite the steadily increasing shift towards the use of IPTV, transitioning from DTT to a fully IPTV-
based system will require structured support.60 The government has identified four challenges that any
transition plan including an audience support package must overcome. These are centred around the
principles of 1) universality, 2) reliability, 3) innovation and 4) PSM sustainability. Regardless of the
eventual transition timeline, a support package will be needed to help audiences move from DTT to
IPTV smoothly and with confidence. These interventions will be co-designed with industry and other
partners.
As well as identifying the challenge to be addressed as part of that package, each pillar below sets out:
• proposed outcomes
• potential interventions to be led by industry61
• the role government could play
We have provided these to be illustrative and are looking to industry to work together and propose
solutions with their plan for delivering this against the intended outcomes.
Challenge 1: Delivering for all audiences
Everyone that wants to is able to access television in their home – no one is left behind.
Television plays a vital cultural and social role, providing trusted news, shared national moments, and
access to PSM content. Any transition away from DTT should preserve universal access to TV, including
PSM providers, regardless of income, location, age or digital confidence.
Stakeholders have highlighted a range of potential approaches that industry and government could
explore to address these challenges. The examples below are intended to illustrate possible areas for
action rather than a defined set of interventions. Industry intervention could include:
• Ensuring that households are not priced out of television as a result of the transition, for example
through financial support from wider industry likely to benefit from the transition.
• Ensuring affordable access to connectivity and services:
• Supporting the continued availability of low-cost offers (such as social tariffs) that enable
affordable access to TV content.
• Contributing to the shared ambition that all households who need broadband connectivity to
access television are able to obtain it, recognising the role of government intervention (including
programmes such as Project Gigabit) alongside industry delivery.
• Offering simple, low-cost IPTV devices (such as 'plug-in' or 'dongle' solutions), with clear pricing
and no unnecessary ongoing fees.
• Ensuring, with support from Government where appropriate, that households are not priced out
of television as a result of the transition.66 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
• Designing inclusive and accessible services:
• Ensuring IPTV services are simple to set up and easy to use.
• Working with device manufacturers, platforms, and service providers to promote inclusive design
that caters to a wide range of digital capabilities.
• Ensuring services are accessible by default.
• Supporting digital capability and confidence:
• Playing a role in improving digital skills through funding and delivering training initiatives.
• Working with local authorities, charities, and community groups to support digitally excluded
users.
• Ensuring easy access to content:
• Demonstrating that content from PSM providers, alongside a broad range of other content,
remains freely and easily accessible without requiring premium subscriptions or complex bundles.
Government intervention could include:
• Setting clear expectations for affordability and accessibility of IPTV services and devices, to ensure
households are not excluded from television as services evolve.
• Ensuring the delivery of nationwide connectivity coverage, in line with existing government targets
and programmes (including Project Gigabit).
• Coordinating and strengthening digital inclusion efforts, by drawing together activity across
government, local authorities, charities, and community groups to support the skills and confidence
needed to use IPTV services.
Challenge 2: Maintaining a reliable television service
Any replacement for DTT meets similar standards of reliability.
For DTT to be switched off, industry should demonstrate that alternative platforms can deliver
comparable or better levels of coverage and reliability. By reliability, IPTV should be able to provide a
service that is as consistent as DTT.
Relatedly, the government understands the importance of information access in times of national
emergency. Television and radio both play an important role in providing such access in a range of
different emergency scenarios, including scenarios where other communications may be disrupted. The
ability to communicate to the public in a national emergency should be retained beyond a move to IPTV.
Industry intervention could include:
• Investing in broadband and content delivery networks to:
• Support peak live viewing at national scale, alongside concurrent broadband use.
• Maintain service during major events and emergencies.
• Providing clear reliability standards and service guarantees.
• Demonstrating robust contingency planning for outages, congestion, or failures.
• Working collectively across the sector to avoid fragmented or inconsistent service quality.
Government intervention could include:
• Requiring evidence that standards are being met before DTT switch-off.
• Conducting research to evaluate broadband network capacity requirements in an IPTV-only
environment and determine how this differs from the existing situation.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 67
• Ensuring that effective plans are in place to address any adverse impacts on radio and on emergency
broadcasting relating to a potential DTT switch-off.
Challenge 3: Promoting competition and innovation in the television industry
The transition unlocks innovation and audiences continue to enjoy choice, diversity, and competition.
Moving away from DTT offers an opportunity to modernise TV delivery. The transition should free
up resources and spectrum, and allow broadcasters to focus on content and innovation rather than
maintaining parallel legacy systems.
Industry intervention could include:
• Developing and using open, interoperable IPTV solutions that:
• Work across networks, devices, and platforms.
• Avoid locking broadcasters or audiences into proprietary ecosystems.62
• Reinvesting savings from modernised distribution into:
• UK content.
• New services.
• Improved accessibility and user experience.
• Learning from international experience and adopting proven approaches.
• Agreeing on fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory carriage arrangements.
• Ensuring platforms can technically support a wide range of channels and services.
• Avoiding practices that limit competition, choice, or market entry and ensure consistency with
policies that safeguard net neutrality.
Government intervention could include:
• Providing regulatory clarity and long-term certainty.
Challenge 4: Supporting a sustainable future for PSM providers
PSM content remains sustainable and widely available.
PSM providers play a central role in the UK's cultural, civic, and democratic life. Industry should ensure
that new distribution models support, rather than undermine, PSM providers.
Industry intervention could include:
• Ensuring content from PSM providers is:
• Free at the point of use.
• Easy to find and that it is easy to navigate between services, on all devices.
• Available on all major IPTV platforms and devices.
• Supporting technical and commercial arrangements that allow PSM providers to:
• Reach mass audiences and be available in every UK home.
• Invest in high-quality UK content.
• Working collaboratively on sustainable distribution models.68 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
The government will look to:
• Ensure PSM providers retain universal reach and prominence.
The government will continue to refine these challenges and provide greater clarity on metrics and
targets following responses to this green paper.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 69
Annex C: Cost-benefit analysis
In the following section we have provided an initial cost-benefit analysis for the two main options:
Option 1, a managed IPTV transition by 2034; and Option 2, a managed IPTV transition by 2044. This
is not intended to be final analysis to inform a decision, but to allow the members of the public and
industry to understand and provide input on the government's current understanding of the costs and
benefits attributed to each option.
These two main options are compared to a set of assumptions that make up a baseline: Option 0,
allowing the market to determine outcomes. For this baseline, we assume for simplicity the following:
(1) by 2034, all broadcasters stop distributing over DTT infrastructure; (2) government/broadcasters
do not organise a communications or support programme to aid households in this transition; (3)
households without broadband adopt broadband at the same rate they would have based on current
forecasts; and (4) due to the unplanned nature of the loss of DTT infrastructure, there is no plan to
auction the now unused 500 MHz and 600 MHz bands of spectrum for other purposes. In future
analysis we will further develop this baseline.
A) Summary
For each monetised impact, we calculate a central figure representing the best estimate based on
available data. However, due to several unmonetised impacts; uncertainty of the baseline; and
uncertainty in some key variables, these estimates should be treated with caution, as each of these
could influence the value for money of either option. Small changes in inputs (for example, household
forecasts, broadband prices, future mobile network traffic) significantly change the monetised impacts.
As such, due to the overlapping monetised ranges and uncertainty in these numbers, as well as the
impact of the unmonetised impacts, this analysis makes no recommendation at this time between
the two options.
Where possible, we have provided reasonable low and high estimates to build a total high and low
scenario: with low indicating a pessimistic cost-maximising, benefit-minimising scenario; and high
indicating an optimistic cost-minimising, benefit-maximising scenario. Further sensitivity testing will
also be required, such as the impact of adjustments in household forecasts regarding the rate of IPTV
and broadband uptake, as well as testing the impact of higher and lower internet traffic usage on
mobile network operator cost savings. The figures in the table below are presented in Present Value,
2026 prices. They are discounted using the Green Book discount rate of 3.5%.63
Our initial cost-benefit analysis does not account for the need to upgrade legacy television
infrastructure in a number of commercial and non-domestic premises (such as hotels, hospitals, and
prisons). These costs will be evaluated in more detail during subsequent stages of policy development.
Monetised Impacts
PV, 2026 Prices (using GDP deflator), rounded
Appraisal Period: 2026-2044/54*
*Spectrum benefits only to 2054
Option 1: Managed IPTV Option 2: Managed
transition by 2034
IPTV transition by 2044
(w/ Low-High Range)
(w/ Low-High range)
Costs£2,135m
(£1,850m–£2,270m)£1,590m
(£1,435m–£1,615m)
Social costs of broadband for households
without broadband or IPTV-capable broadband£1,600m
(£1,500m–£1,700m)£200m
(£180m–£220m)70 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
PV, 2026 Prices (using GDP deflator), rounded
Appraisal Period: 2026-2044/54*
*Spectrum benefits only to 2054
Option 1: Managed IPTV Option 2: Managed
transition by 2034
IPTV transition by 2044
(w/ Low-High Range)
(w/ Low-High range)
Social costs of IPTV devices (such as a Freely TV
streaming device) for households without IPTV-
capable devices£125m
(£120m–£130m)£20m
(£15m–£25m)
Communications Programme (public awareness
campaign, user support, skills training, etc)£410m
(£230m–£410m)£290m
(£160m–£290m)
DTT Annual Network Costs (costs that
multiplex operators pay to infrastructure
provider)£0m
(No Low/High
scenario)£820m
(No Low/High
scenario)
DTT 600MHz Clearance Programme Costs
(transmitter and antenna replacements, labour
costs, etc)£0m
(No Low/High
scenario)£260m
(No Low/High
scenario)
£3,500m
(£3,300m–£3,600m)£3,260m
£2,960m–£3,360m)
DTT Radio Cost-Savings (mitigation of new
radio costs to broadcasters from loss of DTT
annual network fees)£0m
(No Low/High
scenario)£160m
(No Low/High
scenario)
Mobile Network Operators Cost-Savings, via
spectrum release (2026-2054)£3,500m
(£3,300m–£3,600m)£3,100m
(£2,800m–£3,200m)
Net Present Value£1,365m
(£1,030m–£1,750m)£1,670m
(£1,345m–£1,925m)
Benefits
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures, and totalled for summary figures.
Unmonetised Impacts
Costs
Option 1: Managed IPTV transition in
2034Option 2: Managed IPTV transition
by 2044
DTT infrastructure decommissioning
costs in 2035DTT infrastructure decommissioning
costs in 2045
N/AReplacing DVB-T-only televisions by
2035
Increased internet traffic costs (to
broadcasters)N/A
Potential additional wider (non-TV)
digital inclusion support programmePotential additional wider (non-TV)
digital inclusion support programmeAnnex: Future of TV Distribution 71
Benefits
Undetermined
Option 1: Managed IPTV transition in
2034Option 2: Managed IPTV transition
by 2044
Alternative PSM usage of annual DTT
funding savings (for example, content,
innovation)N/A
N/ACost-savings to other mast users
(excluding Radio) from mitigating loss
of DTT annual network fees
Use benefits from MNOs network
improvements due to usage of 500
MHz and 600 MHz spectrum bandsUse benefits from MNOs network
improvements due to usage of 500
MHz and 600 MHz spectrum bands
Digital inclusion benefits from
accelerated broadband takeup (2034
IPTV transition) Expected to be larger
in Option 1Digital inclusion benefits from
accelerated broadband takeup (2044
IPTV transition)
Change in advertising revenue from
rapid shift from DTT to IPTV in 2034Change in advertising revenue from
gradual shift from DTT to IPTV between
2034-2044
Environmental impacts from shift from
DTT technology to IPTV technology (for
example, energy usage)Environmental impacts from changing
DTT technology (for example, energy
usage)
B) Household forecasts
By the time of a potential 2034 IPTV transition, there could be c.1.51m households64 who remain reliant
on traditional broadcast platforms (including DTT and satellite) compared to c.0.52m65 by the time of a
potential 2044 IPTV transition (Figure A1).
Of these non-IPTV households, Figure A2 shows that c.880,000 will be unable to access IPTV without
a suitable broadband subscription66 in 2034 compared to c.510,000 in 2044. However, c.340,000
of these 880,000 households in 2034 (and c.360,000 of the 480,000 in 2044) have an internet
connected mobile phone, but lack a broadband connection; so these households will have some
internet access. The number of households that have suitable broadband, but choose not to connect
to IPTV (meaning they have chosen not to use an IPTV device), also falls from c.630,000 households in
2034 to an almost negligible figure in 2044.6772 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
Figure A1: IPTV connectivity of households, 2024-2044 forecast (millions)
Source: 3 Reasons, MTM (2024 & 2034 figures); DCMS (2044 figures)
29.37
28.5
27.66
IPTV connected
23.65
26.99
28.85
IPTV unconnected
0.52
4.01
1.51
2024
2034
2044
Figure A2: Households without IPTV, 2024-2044 forecast (millions)
Source: 3 Reasons, MTM (2024 & 2034 figures); DCMS (2044 figures)68
4.01
1.72
Has Suitable Broadband:
Chooses Not to Connect to IPTV
Requires Suitable Broadband
to Access IPTV
1.51
2.29
0.63
0.88
2024
2034
0.52
0.51
2044
0.01Annex: Future of TV Distribution 73
DCMS' household forecasts reflect a sustained transition to IPTV up to 2044, driven by organic market
uptake and the ongoing impact of existing infrastructure programmes. The reduction in the number of
homes with suitable broadband that choose not to connect occurs as households naturally transition
to IPTV. Simultaneously, the number of households with "unsuitable" broadband (less than 30Mbps,
see explanation above) also declines, underpinned by the continued national rollout of high-speed
broadband.
The 2024 University of Exeter Report highlighted that age is a defining factor in a household's
connectivity status; individuals in the report's unconnected TV segments were significantly older on
average than those in more connected groups. In 2023, over 90% of individuals without a broadband
connection were older than 55. This demographic concentration is expected to shift over time due to an
'age cohort effect', as younger, digitally native generations age into older brackets with a much higher
propensity for broadband use. In contrast, only 9% of individuals in IPTV-only households were aged 55
or older in 2023.69
Households without IPTV access were also found by the report to belong to lower socioeconomic
cohorts. As of 2023, 82% of households with no broadband connection were within the C2DE bands,
alongside 55% of households with broadband but remain unconnected due to the lack of an IPTV-
capable TV set. In contrast, Hybrid households demonstrated a more distributed profile with 41%-
44% belonging to C2DE bands, while 46% of the IPTV only households fell into these socioeconomic
cohorts, suggesting that affordability remains a primary barrier for the remaining households reliant on
traditional broadcast systems.70
The report also highlighted disparities between rural and urban areas. In 2025, approximately 9% of
rural households across the UK lacked access to superfast broadband, compared to only 1% of those
in urban areas. This gap was most pronounced in Scotland, where 13% of rural households remained
without superfast coverage.71 This suggests that infrastructure limitations in rural areas remain a
significant barrier to achieving universal IPTV adoption. However, via Project Gigabit, the government is
committed to achieving nationwide gigabit coverage and expects 99% of premises to have access to a
gigabit-capable connection by 2032 which should largely address this issue prior to 2034.
Furthermore, access to personal connectivity beyond television follows a similar pattern among the
most disconnected groups. In 2023, only 16-17% of individuals in broadband unconnected households
owned a smartphone, compared to 97% of those in the IPTV-only segment. Ownership of a computer
was even lower among these unconnected groups, between just 4-5 % compared to 88% of individuals
in the IPTV-only group.72 This sharp contrast highlights that the absence of IPTV is often part of a
broader trend of digital exclusion, where households lack the essential hardware to make use of
internet-based services even when coverage becomes available.
DCMS's forecasts for IPTV access differ from those in the University of Exeter report by accounting
for the accelerating decline in non-VOD-capable connections. The number of fixed-line connections
delivering less than 30 Mbps has halved over the last four years (from 1.18m to 0.61m), while ultrafast
connections have doubled from 8.3m in 2021 to 16.5m at the end of 2024. By 2034, DCMS anticipates
this momentum, coupled with the launch of new free-to-air IPTV services such as Freely (which
were not considered in the University of Exeter report analysis), significantly erodes the segment of
DTT-reliant households who previously chose not to connect despite having suitable access. Whilst
broadband take-up in our current household data for under-65s is already near saturation at 98.7%,
this model specifically targets the migration of the remaining demographic cohorts as user interfaces
begin to mirror familiar DTT navigation. Therefore, further work is needed to understand how the
demographic cohorts we discuss in the above paragraph have changed since 2023, and how we would
expect them to shift in the future.74 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
C) Social cost of broadband to households without broadband or IPTV-capable
broadband
The Present Value broadband costs are estimated to be £1,600m in Option 1 (2034 IPTV transition)
and £200m in Option 2 (2044 IPTV transition), which captures the effect of the social cost of adopting
broadband subscriptions. This difference is driven primarily by the 10 years of additional annual
broadband costs experienced by the 740,000 households in Option 1, reducing to 480,000 households
over the 2034-2044 period (see Figure 1). We calculate these broadband costs for all households
that are not forecasted to have broadband (which includes satellite-reliant households). We assume
households will adopt broadband of at least 30 Mbps, and use uplifted superfast listed prices from
Ofcom's report on pricing trends for communication services in 2025 to estimate this. We also consider
that many households may have existing landline/voice-only service and only cost the price difference
between a landline/voice-only service and a dual landline/voice-only and superfast broadband package.
Whilst Ofcom's report shows that broadband prices have fallen in real terms in recent years, there is no
evidence this will continue over a 19 year period, so we assume in the Central scenario that broadband
prices remain the same as they currently are in real terms. However, to account for potential changes
in prices, we assume in the Low scenario that broadband increases in cost by 10% over the appraisal
period, and for the High scenario, broadband conversely decreases in cost by 10% over this period.
We also consider that some (8.6%) eligible households will adopt social tariff broadband prices
(as per the most recent figure from Ofcom's 'Pricing and consumer engagement report'), which are
considerably lower than traditional listed broadband pricing and are taken from Ofcom's social tariff
listings.73 We identify eligible households by combining socioeconomic band information from the
University of Exeter report74 with eligibility data from Ofcom's consumer research annex.
Broadband costs to households without broadband or IPTV-capable broadband
Appraisal Period
(2026-2044)Option 1: Managed IPTV transition by
2034Option 2: Managed IPTV transition by
2044
ScenarioLowLow
Central
High
Central
High
2026 Prices£2,500m£2,300m£2,200m£400m£360m£330m
2026 Prices,
Present Value£1,700m£1,600m£1,500m£220m£200m£180m
D) IPTV device costs to households without IPTV-capable devices
We cautiously estimate that all the non-IPTV households at the time of either transition (see Figure 2)
do not have an IPTV-capable device and therefore will require one in order to access IPTV. We based our
calculations on the original £69.99 Freely puck price before high demand and a global parts shortage
forced a £20 increase.75 We have used this baseline rather than a market average on the assumption
that transitioning consumers will likely seek the most cost-effective option, and that the cost of this
technology will decrease over time. We assume in the Central scenario that prices remain the same
as they currently are in real terms. However, to account for potential changes in prices, we assume in
the Low scenario that broadband increases in cost by 20% over the appraisal period, and for the High
scenario, broadband conversely decreases in cost by 20% over this period.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 75
IPTV device costs to households without IPTV-capable devices
Appraisal Period
(2026-2044)Option 1: Managed IPTV transition by
2034Option 2: Managed IPTV transition by
2044
ScenarioLowLow
Central
High
Central
High
2026 Prices£160m£150m£140m£44m£37m£30m
2026 Prices,
Present Value£130m£125m£120m£25m£21m£17m
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures

[AribertDeckers]

E) Communications programme costs
The communications programme costs were estimated by uplifting the Digital UK's planned
expenditure for the Digital TV switchover communications campaign to 2026 prices, with updated
mailing costs estimated from the cost of letters sent out for ONS surveys. In both options, this
communications programme is conducted, but at different points to reflect the difference in transition
date. For the Central and High scenario, this accounts for TV, radio and press advertising; a call
centre and website; planning and production; regional mailing; trade support; research and tracking;
admin costs; as well as the operational costs of setting up an organisation (like Digital UK) to run the
communications programme. For the Low scenario, this list is restricted to only TV, radio and press
advertising; regional mailings; and the admin costs of running these two elements.
Communications Programme (for example, public awareness campaign, user support, and skills
training)
Appraisal Period
(2026-2044)
Scenario
Option 1: IPTV Transition in 2034
Low
Central
High
Option 2: IPTV Transition in 2044
Low
Central
High
2026 Prices£490m£490m£270m£490m£490m£270m
2026 Prices,
Present Value£410m£410m£230m£290m£290m£160m
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures
F) DTT infrastructure costs
As the DTT infrastructure costs considered below only apply for Option 2 (a 2044 IPTV transition with
10 years of some remaining DTT infrastructure between 2034-2044), we have only provided costs and
benefits for this option. The costs are primarily driven by the annual payments that multiplex operators
pay to use the DTT infrastructure which amount to c.£820m in present value over the appraisal period.76
However, Arqiva estimates that turning off DTT at the end of 2034 could see the cost of radio services
increase relative to the position if DTT continues to 2045, resulting in 'radio cost-savings' (meaning
a benefit) of c.£160m in Option 2.77 This increase is spread across ongoing BBC and commercial radio
services with the impact varying based on the extent to which the radio service currently shares sites
with DTT. The modelling takes account a high-level estimate of the anticipated capital expenditure
required to extend the life of radio services and includes an estimate of power costs.76 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
Arqiva also estimates a 600 MHz clearance programme could cost in the region of c.£260m based on a
similar methodology, approach and learnings from other clearance events including 700 MHz clearance
and digital switchover.78 The estimated programme captures the necessary technical work covering main
station and relay technical work – including transmitters – service continuity planning, transition works,
labour and contingency. It does not include any costs associated with managing or communicating with
viewers or handling any interference issues which may arise.
Whilst we have not produced High and Low scenarios for this impact, as these figures are quoted from
Arqiva and DCMS is not privy to negotiations between Arqiva and commercial users of the DTT mast
network. All these figures would be subject to necessary negotiations and could potentially change.
DTT Annual Network Costs (costs that multiplex operators pay to infrastructure provider)
Appraisal Period
(2026-2044)
Scenario
Option 1: IPTV Transition in 2034
Low
Central
High
Option 2: IPTV Transition in 2044
Low
Central
High
2026 PricesN/A£0mN/AN/A£1,300mN/A
2026 Prices,
Present ValueN/A£0mN/AN/A£820mN/A
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures
DTT Radio Cost-Savings (Benefit)
Appraisal Period
(2026-2044)
Scenario
Option 1: IPTV Transition in 2034
Low
Central
High
Option 2: IPTV Transition in 2044
Low
Central
High
2026 PricesN/A£0mN/AN/A£250mN/A
2026 Prices,
Present ValueN/A£0mN/AN/A£160mN/A
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures
DTT 600MHz Clearance Programme Costs (transmitter and antenna replacements, labour
costs, etc)
Appraisal Period
(2026-2044)
Scenario
Option 1: IPTV Transition in 2034
Low
Central
High
Option 2: IPTV Transition in 2044
Low
Central
High
2026 PricesN/A£0mN/AN/A£310mN/A
2026 Prices,
Present ValueN/A£0mN/AN/A£260mN/A
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures
G) Alternative PSM usage of DTT funding
In Option 1 (2034 IPTV transition) and Option 2 (2044 IPTV transition), PSMs would be paying no DTT
fees and reduced DTT fees respectively. Therefore a key unquantified impact is the opportunity cost of
how PSMs could alternatively spend the funding, particularly in Option 1 where there are zero DTT fees.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 77
PSMs could bank savings to reinvest in and support the delivery of existing services under constrained
funding pressures. Alternatively they could use the equivalent revenue for content and innovation,
which could bring about substantial benefits to all audiences and the media sector in the UK, in turn
promoting exports and growth.
As an indicative figure, BBC analysis prepared with assistance from EY indicates that, "for every £1 the
BBC directly adds to the economy [direct GVA], £3.55 is generated in the UK economy as a whole
[indirect and induced GVA]".79 PSM content is also important for bringing the country together and
promoting shared values.
H) Impacts of releasing the 600 MHz and 500 MHz spectrum bands
DCMS and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) jointly commissioned
a report from Analysys-Mason and DotEcon which sought to identify the value of the ultra-high
frequency (UHF) spectrum currently used by DTT (470-694 MHz) should some or all be released for use
by a range of likely alternative services. For these purposes, the UHF spectrum used by DTT is divided
into two bands, a 500 MHz band, covering 470 MHz to 614 MHz, and a 600 MHz band, covering 614
MHz to 694 MHz. This analysis does not imply that any decisions have been taken on future use of the
UHF band. Ofcom is responsible for spectrum management in the UK, including future decisions on the
allocation of different bands.
The DTT spectrum release options included:
i) Releasing all of the UHF spectrum (both the 500 MHz and 600 MHz bands) in 2035
ii) Releasing the 600 MHz band in 2035 and the 500 MHz band in 2045
iii) Releasing the 600 MHz band and part of the 500 MHz band not retained for DTT in 2035
The first spectrum release option corresponds to a full switchover to IPTV delivery in 2034. The second
option corresponds to an upgrade plan for the DTT multiplex arrangement, through the introduction
of more efficient transmission technologies, where the existing six national DTT multiplexes would
be reduced to a smaller set (of three) to deliver the same TV services. The frequencies used at DTT
transmitters could thereby be reorganised to release the 600 MHz band.
The alternative services considered included:
1. Mobile telecommunications services (mobile phone/data services)
2. Programme Making and Special Events (PMSE) i.e. audio radiomicrophones, talkback etc
3. Energy network Utilities services (i.e. wireless communications to support gas/electricity/water
networks)
4. Emergency Service Networks (ESN)
5. Transport services (wireless services that support public transport and other means of transport)
The UHF spectrum was found to have particular benefit for mobile telecommunications services to
increase the capacity of the network and to improve coverage in rural areas and within buildings. For
the consumer, this is expected to lead to a significantly improved user experience, particularly through
more stable connectivity when traveling and more reliable access if their fixed broadband fails or is
unavailable.
PMSE is an existing user that shares the spectrum intensively with DTT and is used to support music
events and festivals, broadcast programme production and theatre productions. The Utilities, ESN and
Transport services have other spectrum options available than the use of UHF, although UHF spectrum
would provide further options and benefits beyond the other bands they could use.78 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
Potential mobile network operators' cost-savings
For mobile telecommunications services, the study showed that in a cost-saving maximising scenario
measuring benefits between 2035 and 2055, the bulk (£3.1 billion) of the value80 to mobile network
operators (MNOs) would be delivered by release of the 600 MHz band in 2035 and 500 MHz spectrum
in 2045 (release option 2 above). An additional c.£400m of value would be delivered by bringing
forward the 500 MHz release to 2035 (with full switchover to IPTV in 2035) but this additional value
was highly dependent on a mobile ecosystem developing in the 500 MHz band from 2035 onwards.
DCMS adapted the analysis from this report to calculate suitable scenarios for the purposes of our
Cost-Benefit Analysis. There is one primary change we have made in comparison to Analysys Mason
and DotEcon's report. The report uses a 'cost-saving maximising' scenario for each option as its main
scenario. However, we have used this as the High scenario to reflect that MNOs may not acquire
all of the available spectrum in an collectively optimal way. To contrast this, for the Low scenario,
we identified the 'cost-saving minimising' scenario in which the least cost-savings are made whilst
still allocating the whole spectrum amongst the MNOs. Finally for the central scenario, we took
a symmetrical approach, dividing the spectrum bands evenly between the MNOs,81 with a light
preference towards the MNO who derived the most value from the spectrum when there was not an
even amount to distribute.
Rather than using the social discount factor of 3.5% used in the Green Book, we used Analysys Mason
and DotEcon's recommendation of a 7.2% weighted average cost of capital (WACC) as the discount
rate. We will explore these discount rates further in future analysis.
Potential mobile network operators cost-savings (via spectrum release)
Appraisal Period
(2026-2054)
Option 1: IPTV Transition in 2034
Option 2: IPTV Transition in 2044
ScenarioLowCentralHighLowCentralHigh
2026 Prices£14,200m£15,100m£15,900m£12,800m£14,100m£14,800m
2026 Prices,
Present Value£3,300m£3,500m£3,600m£2,800m£3,100m£3,200m
Final figures have been rounded to 2 significant figures (or 3 significant figures for the 2026
prices)
The result of this adapted analysis shows that for the central scenario we are considering, the potential
MNO cost-savings via spectrum release in Option 1 (2034 IPTV transition) are larger (c. £400m in PV)
than in Option 2 (2044 IPTV transition).
Additionally, the likely costs of clearing DTT from the 600 MHz band in 2035 (through reducing the
number of DTT multiplexes to three and making DTT transmitter frequency changes) are likely to be
significantly less than the benefits to MNOs. This suggests that there would be merit to committing to
clearing the 600 MHz band in 2035 if DTT were to continue until 2044.
Programme-making and Special Events (PMSE)
PMSE currently makes heavy use of the 500 MHz and 600 MHz bands, sharing with DTT, and delivers
significant value to the creative industries. Usage is concentrated in certain geographical locations, for
example, theatres and studios and in some locations may be restricted to periods of 1-2 weeks in the
year such as for music festivals.
The Analysys-Mason and DotEcon study identified the challenges to PMSE if DTT were to be cleared
from the 600 MHz band and that band were to be reallocated to mobile, and also if DTT were to be
switched off altogether. The study also identified alternative bands that could be used by audio PMSEAnnex: Future of TV Distribution 79
under these DTT clearance scenarios. In addition, the study recognised the steady growth in demand
for frequencies for PMSE, and how technology changes might help to support this growing demand. The
study also briefly considered sharing opportunities between mobile services and PMSE, which was only
thought possible with certain conditions and restrictions to ensure safe coexistence without harmful
interference.
Many of the alternative bands have limitations, such as lack of available equipment (if those bands
are not harmonised for use in other countries), higher levels of interference or relatively small blocks
of spectrum being available. The largest alternative block of additional spectrum available to PMSE is
in the 960-1164 MHz band that was previously made available in the UK to compensate for the loss
of the 700 MHz band to mobile. Usage of that band has started to grow although equipment is less
currently available than in the UHF band because other countries have yet to commit to use of that
band for PMSE.
Ofcom has issued a Call for Information and we believe that responses to this and any potential
future work should enable a clearer picture to emerge on the needs of the sector and the options for
appropriate spectrum access.
Utilities, Emergency Services Network (ESN) and transport
Where dedicated spectrum is identified to be the most appropriate solution for these sectors, the
amount required is expected to be significantly smaller than the spectrum needed to meet the needs of
the mobile or PMSE sectors. Therefore, this could potentially be met using a small allocation in the 500
MHz band. This would be subject to any decision taken on the 500 MHz band and any future work by
Ofcom on optimum spectrum usage.
I) Digital inclusion benefits
People who are digitally excluded often face worse outcomes than those who are not: they can pay
more for essentials (research shows those who are digitally excluded can pay up to 25%82 more for
essentials like home insurance, train travel, and food); face greater difficulty engaging with health and
public services; and experience worse employment outcomes (the digitally excluded are two to three
times more likely to be unemployed,83 and those with poor digital skills earn 3-9% less). Outcomes
consistently show that improving digital capability and confidence delivers both individual and fiscal
benefits, particularly when support is well timed and grounded in people's everyday needs.
DSIT has conducted an initial assessment of the potential benefits from a digital inclusion support
package. This has been modelled based on the scenario of supporting digitally excluded individuals to
gain Life Essential Digital Skills (those required to be digitally proficient in day-to-day life, including
setting up and using online accounts, and being safe online). The analysis draws upon the economic
research in Good Things Foundation's report on the benefits of digital inclusion,84 and uses population
data to account for the demographic characteristics of the digitally excluded (more likely to be older,
out of work and with a disability). These benefits are described in Table 1 below.
DSIT's initial analysis of these benefits has found that, in the central scenario, the modelled digital
inclusion support package could deliver benefits of c. £2,314 per supported individual over 10 years
(2026 prices, discounted), depending on the level of adoption of these digital skills. Given the evidence
DSIT has about the cost of delivering other digital inclusion support, we are confident that on average
it will cost less than this amount to support a digitally-excluded individual to gain Life Essential Digital
Skills, and therefore a digital inclusion support package is expected to be value for money. This analysis
has not been included in the quantified impacts (cost-benefit) analysis table, and will continue to be
developed as any support package is designed and more evidence becomes available. Whilst we have
not yet monetised the digital inclusion benefits due to the earlier transition in Option 1, we would
expect these benefits to be larger in this option.80 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
There is likely a significant overlap between those who are digitally excluded and those who exclusively
view DTT. The University of Exeter Report found that 92% of DTT-reliant households without broadband
were over 55, 58% came from the two lowest socioeconomic bands and 41% were people with a
disability.85 There is a wide range of evidence demonstrating how broader digital inclusion drives
personal and wider benefits.
Table 1: Assessment of Potential Benefits by Category
1. Individual benefits
BenefitApplicability and qualitative assessment
Increase in earningsLow impact. By the time of the transition (2034), a significant
proportion of the DTT-only households will be 65+ and less active
in the labour market.
Improvement in employment
outcomesLow impact. Similarly, due to the significant proportion of 65+
individuals.
Greater consumer savings
(for example, better info/
avoiding scams)Applicable but with caveats. Digital inclusion does not
automatically translate into increased digital literacy for this older
demographic; internet access could increase the risk of scams
rather than reduce it. However, Retail transactional benefits
are relevant. Although the average value of online transactions is
smaller for those aged 65+, this group is expected to drive more
than three-quarters of overall gains due to their sheer numbers
among those receiving "upskilling."86 Research by the Centre for
Social Justice in 2023 found that those offline often pay a premium
for everyday products and services.87
Time savingsApplicable. Conducting personal transactions online is expected
to provide time savings and is considered a welfare gain, allowing
individuals more time for enjoyable pursuits. ONS statistics show
increasing internet access and online shopping among adults aged
65 and over.88
Improved well-beingApplicable. Digital exclusion is associated with lower well-being
scores (0.8–0.9 points lower on a 10-point scale). Connecting this
group is expected to mitigate this exclusion-related deficit.89
2. Business benefits
BenefitApplicability and qualitative assessment
Corporate savings from job
vacancies being filledLow impact. The demographics becoming digitally included
(primarily 65+) will largely be less active in the labour market.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 81
3. Government benefits
BenefitApplicability and qualitative assessment
Government efficiency
savingsApplicable. This benefit is tied to the expected increase in the
uptake of online government transactional services as a result of
digital inclusivity. Assuming a number of adults are upskilled and
use these services, this is a realisable monetary saving for the UK
government.90
Improved government
revenueLow impact. This benefit relies on increased earnings and
employment, which is less relevant given the demographic
composition of those being digitally upskilled.
4. Other benefits
BenefitApplicability and qualitative assessment
Reducing demand for
avoidable GP consultationsApplicable. This is a quantifiable benefit tied to the monetary
value of reduced GP appointments via upskilling.91
Environmental benefitsApplicable but with caveats. Environmental benefits that are
based on assumptions of increased working from home are less
applicable to a demographic less active in the labour market.
However, environmental benefits from shifting consumers to online
retail; using GOV.UK and local portals cuts the environmental
impact of physical document production and distribution; and
reducing travel pollution by enabling access to healthcare and
government services via connected devices instead of physical
commutes could all be relevant.
The benefits to individuals of a transition to IPTV translates features into social outcomes across three
pillars:
1. Social inclusion (well-being)
Digital exclusion is linked to a 0.8 to 0.9 point deficit on a 10-point well-being scale.92 Broadband
adoption could mitigate this deficit by facilitating social connection and accessing essential
services. For rural residents, the inclusion benefit is the removal of geographic isolation. Broadband
connections enable remote support models, where caregivers or family can assist with device setup and
troubleshooting from a distance, reducing the feeling of being "left behind" in a digital-first society.
DCMS commissioned research shows TV can provide companionship for the socially isolated.93 IPTV
can address this by providing hyper-local and culturally specific content (for example, international
or faith-based channels) in a way that DTT cannot. Furthermore, the higher bandwidth of broadband
allows for remote support for TV setup and troubleshooting, which can be critical for maintaining social
connection.
2. Economic inclusion
The "economic inclusion" of broadband adoption and IPTV transition is primarily felt through retail
and time savings rather than employment, as 92% of the target group were aged over 55 in 2023, so
a similar proportion are likely to be aged 65+ by 2034. Thus benefits related to earnings, employment
outcomes, or corporate vacancy savings will have a reduced impact as the 65+ group will have less82 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
employment-related benefits. However, there will still be some employment impacts to this age group:
c.1.5m over 65s were in work in 2022 according to the ONS; retirement age will be 67 by 2034; and this
group may still engage in volunteering and unpaid work.
However, there are retail transactional benefits, as those "offline" often pay a "poverty premium" for
products.94 Broadband connectivity can upskill users to access online savings, which is significant given
the demographic prominence of the 65+ group. Furthermore, online personal transactions provide a
welfare gain through time saving, allowing more time for enjoyable pursuits. One caveat here is that
increased internet access for this demographic could increase the risk of scams if digital literacy does
not keep pace with technical access.
3. Functional inclusion (accessibility)
A current barrier to digital inclusion is cognitive accessibility, as many older users find DTT familiar and
safe. Additionally, a migration to IPTV does not inherently improve digital skills. Older individuals with
low digital confidence require structured support to overcome this hurdle. Transitioning these users
requires user interfaces (UIs) that replicate the "live-first" experience. By providing an interface (like
Freely) that mirrors familiar DTT navigation while utilising internet delivery, users undertake a gradual
digital introduction through familiar TV controls. This lowers the cognitive barrier to digital tools by
embedding them within a daily habit they already value, watching television. Adding AI-driven features
like advanced audio description and voice controlled navigation allows users with visual or physical
impairments to access content in a way that was technically impossible on limited-bandwidth DTT.
A managed transition to IPTV, with an associated support package, could also create wider benefits to
government efficiency or the environment allowing households to access digital services:
1. Government efficiency:
A primary component of this "digital dividend" is the reduction in demand for avoidable GP
consultations, as digital upskilling allows older and vulnerable cohorts to manage health requests
through more efficient online triaging and consultation tools. Furthermore, increasing the uptake of
online transactional services reduces the administrative burden on central government departments
and local authorities, providing a realisable monetary saving by decreasing the volume of paper-based
processing and call centre volume.
2. Environment:
The IPTV transition provides a unique opportunity to achieve environmental benefits by integrating
historically offline cohorts into the digital economy. By bridging the digital divide, this transition
facilitates a shift from physical to digital interactions, reducing the carbon footprint associated with
traditional retail and physical government service delivery. While environmental benefits of working
from home likely do not apply due to the demographic profile of the affected cohort, environmental
benefits can be achieved through:
• Online retail: Shifting consumers online reduces reliance on energy-intensive physical stores.
• Digital government services: Using GOV.UK and local portals cuts the environmental impact of
physical document production and distribution, saving resources and reducing mail waste.
• Reduced travel pollution: Enabling access to healthcare and government services via connected
devices eliminates physical commutes.
Other considerations on evaluating digital inclusion benefits:
It should not be assumed that 100% of the TV households without broadband will connect to the
internet in an IPTV transition. If even a small proportion do not connect to the internet, this creates
the risk of secondary exclusion. Even for those who do connect, there is no guarantee they will engageAnnex: Future of TV Distribution 83
digitally beyond usage of an IPTV. A key question for assessing digital inclusion benefits is determining
how many of this group will actually become digitally included under the IPTV transition. Additionally,
there is a lack of granular data on how users with cognitive impairments or neurodiversity will handle
the shift from linear DTT interfaces to app-based interfaces.
Therefore, while the IPTV transition solves the access problem for this cohort, which is a prerequisite for
achieving all digital inclusion benefits, it only generates Functional Inclusion and specific social inclusion
benefits (meaning, those directly related to TV). Realising the substantial economic, government,
and environmental benefits requires successful cross-device adoption and effective digital skills
development.84 Annex: Future of TV Distribution
Annex D: Bibliography
Assessing the value and alternative uses of DTT spectrum for the future of UK TV distribution. Analysys
Mason and Dot Econ. April 2026.
Award of 700 MHz and 3.6-3.8 GHz spectrum by auction. Ofcom. November 2024.
Connected Nations UP Report 2025. November 2025.
Digital Inclusion UK Economic Impact. Good Things Foundation. July 2024.
Future of TV Distribution Stakeholder Forum - terms of reference. Department for Culture, Media and
Sport. November 2024.
Future of TV Distribution, A report prepared by the University of Exeter with the University of Leeds,
MTM, 3 Reasons and Real Wireless. October 2024.
Future of TV Distribution: Early market report to government. A report prepared by Ofcom. May 2024.
Government Digital Inclusion Action Plan: First Steps. February 2025.
Government preparations for digital switchover. House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts.
Twenty–eighth Report of Session 2007to 2008.
Identifying challenges and solutions for improving inclusivity and usability in the consumption of
internet delivered television. Ofcom. September 2025.
Internet access - households and individuals, ONS. August 2020.
Is the government doing enough to tackle the impact of digital exclusion on unemployment? – Digital
Poverty Alliance. December 2024.
Left Out: Digital Inclusion and the Most Excluded, Centre for Social Justice. August 2023.
Memories and Dementia: Starting the Conversation season launches at the BBC. March 2025.
Ofcom Code on television access services. Ofcom. July 2024.
Ofcom DTT Multiplex licences.
Ofcom list of providers of social tariffs.
Ofcom television and on-demand programme services: Access services report. December 2024.
Ofcom work on implementing the 2024 Media Act.
Pricing and consumer engagement 2025: interactive report. Ofcom. February 2026.
Prominence and Accessibility on Connected TV Platforms - Consultation on our draft Code of Practice
and draft Guidance on the Agreement Objectives. Ofcom. January 2026.
Promoting competition and investment in fibre networks: Telecoms Access Review 2026 to 2031.
Ofcom. December 2025.
Public Sector Equality Duty: guidance for public authorities. GOV.UK. December 2023
Public Service Media Review. Ofcom. July 2025.
Sky response to Ofcom consultation on its draft report to the Secretary of State. September 2025.Annex: Future of TV Distribution 85
Socio Economic Impact of Digital Transition. June 2025.
Stakeholder forum paper. Universality in future of TV distribution. April 2026.
Stakeholder forum paper. Television Usability in the future of TV experience. April 2026.
Stakeholder forum paper. IPTV ecosystem readiness. April 2026.
Stakeholder forum paper. Television competitiveness and sustainability of PSB ecosystem. April 2026.
Stream On: The Future of UK TV: A report for Sky prepared by Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates Ltd,
January 2026.
Tackling the barriers to financial and digital inclusion. WPI Economics, December 2024.
The connected TV platform market - An update on our work. Ofcom. December 2024.
The Future of TV distribution. A report prepared by Revealing Reality. March 2025.
Transmission Critical - The future of Public Service Media. Ofcom. July 2025
Up next — the government's vision for the broadcasting sector. Government white paper. April 2022.86 Glossary of terms
Glossary of terms
TermDefinition for this paper
AccessibilityThe extent to which all users, including disabled people, are able to have
equivalent access to a product or service.
AffordabilityThe extent to which a household can reasonably take up and sustain the
broadband, devices and digital support needed to access IPTV services
without having to reduce essential spending elsewhere.
CarriageThe act of a service provider distributing a specific channel or signal on its
system.
ChannelA linear or live TV service.
Content Delivery
Networks (CDNs)A geographically distributed group of servers (specialist computers) that
work together to provide fast delivery of internet content to the user.
Digital InclusionEnsuring that everyone has the access, skills, support and confidence to
participate in and benefit from our modern digital society, whatever their
circumstances.
Digital LiteracyThe ability of an individual to find, evaluate, and communicate
information clearly through various digital platforms.
Distribution EcosystemThe network of hardware, software, platforms, infrastructure, and entities
that work together to deliver television to the end consumer.
Digital Terrestrial
Television (DTT)Digital terrestrial television (DTT) has been the most popular way to
receive TV in the UK since the digital switchover. Also known to audiences
as Freeview, it sends TV content to premises over radio spectrum via an
aerial.
Free-to-airBroadcast services that can be accessed without a subscription. For
example, BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and 5 are some channels that provide free-
to-air content.
Functional InclusionFunctional Inclusion is about making the new internet TV feel just like
your old television, especially for people who are less confident with
technology. It uses familiar channel buttons and TV guides, and adds new,
easy-to-use features like improved audio description and voice controls
HybridPlatforms capable of receiving more than one form of distributed content.
This can be achieved in a number of ways including via a user interface
which combines access to DTT and IPTV, or supplemental access to IPTV
such as through a 'smart stick'.
Distribution
infrastructure providersCompanies that own and maintain the physical assets that deliver
television to the consumer.Glossary of terms 87
TermDefinition for this paper
IndustryRefers to the full ecosystem of organisations that influence the
affordability, accessibility, and use of digital services. This includes, but is
not limited to: service providers (e.g. telecommunications, broadcasters,
and streaming services); technology platforms and device manufacturers;
financial and payment service providers; major retailers and e-commerce
platforms; infrastructure providers; advertisers and content distributors;
regulators and public bodies; and organisations representing consumers,
audiences, and digitally excluded groups. It also includes sectors that
may not traditionally see themselves as having a role in affordability, but
whose products, pricing, or business models shape the overall cost and
experience of digital participation, as well as those who stand to benefit
from the transition more broadly.
Internet Protocol (IP)A set of international standards which govern the distribution of content
over the internet in a way that allows receiving devices to access that
content in a consistent manner.
Internet Protocol
Television (IPTV)Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) is TV-like content delivered over the
internet, including on-demand services and live broadcast channels, for
example BBC iPlayer and Freely deliver free-to-air IPTV services to internet
capable televisions.
Linear TVRefers to content that is broadcast according to a schedule. It can be
watched either live (at the time it is scheduled) or delayed by pausing live
TV or using a recording device. It excludes on-demand services.
MbpsMbps means megabits per second, which is simply a way of measuring
how fast data moves through your internet connection.
Media LiteracyMedia literacy the ability to use, understand and create media and
communications across multiple formats and services.
MultiplexA DTT multiplex, or "mux," is a method of broadcasting multiple television
channels, radio stations, and data services simultaneously over a single
radio frequency.
Multiplex LicenceA multiplex licence grants broadcasters the right to use specific radio
spectrum frequencies to transmit digital television channels and services
over-the-air via antennas.
On-demand TVA way of watching television that allows users to access specific content
whenever they choose, rather than following a fixed schedule. For example
watching content after it has been broadcast on BBC iPlayer.
PMSEProgramme Making and Special Events. The ecosystem used to support
broadcasting, news gathering, theatrical productions and special events,
such as culture events, concerts, sport events, conferences and trade
fairs. This includes multi-channel in-ear Monitors (IEMs) and wireless
microphones.88 Glossary of terms
TermDefinition for this paper
PSM providersPSM providers is used in this document as opposed to public service
broadcasters (PSBs) to reflect how the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, 5, STV and
S4C have moved on from delivering public service value solely through
their broadcasting operations, to delivering this across a range of media
output, such as video-on-demand services.
PSM contentContent provided by PSM providers that meets the definition of public
service content and contributes to their public service remit.
Satellite broadcastingThe distribution of television via signals bounced off satellites in
geostationary orbit to antennas on the ground. For example, one way Sky
distributes television is via satellite.
Set-top BoxA set-top box is a small device that connects to a television to receive
digital signals from sources like cable, satellite or the internet. It allows
access to channels, streaming services, and on-demand content.
SpectrumSpectrum (or radio spectrum) is the range of invisible electromagnetic
waves that enable all wireless technology, from our mobile phones, Wi-
Fi and Bluetooth devices to aircraft navigation, satellite applications and
Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT), among many others.
Stakeholder ForumThe Future of TV Distribution stakeholder forum brought together
organisations and individuals from the TV industry, infrastructure partners,
audience advocacy groups, the regulator and government. The forum
produced 12 papers in total shortly to be published on GOV.UK.
UniversalityThe ability of people of all backgrounds to access TV content which is
valuable to them, through which they are connected to others across the
UK. Universality ensures not only that everyone has ready access to a
reliable source of news and information, but also to a range of differing
opinions and cultural experiences of life in the UK.
UsabilityAn umbrella term encompassing both traditional TV access services (e.g.
subtitling and audio description) and the ease of use of a TV user interface
for all audiences.90 Endnotes
Endnotes
1The term PSM providers is used in this document, as opposed to public service broadcasters (PSBs), to
reflect how the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, 5, STV and S4C have moved on from delivering public service value
solely through their broadcasting operations to delivering this across a range of media output, such as
video-on-demand services
2Enders Analysis, Broadcasting consolidation – European content needs scale, 2026, page 12
3Ofcom, News Consumption in the UK, 2025, page 12
4Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 19
5Enders Analysis, YouTube – Becoming more TV-like, 2024, pages 9-11
6House of Lords, Social media, misinformation and harmful algorithms, Second Report of Session 2024–25,
2025, page 16
7Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 22
8Ofcom, Children's Media Lives Summary Report, 2025, pages 54-55
9Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Digital News Report 2025: United Kingdom, 2025, page 26
10Ofcom, News Consumption in the UK, 2025, pages 8-9
11Luca Rossi et al., Algorithms, Attention, and the Spread of Misinformation, 2024, page 2
12Ofcom, News Consumption in the UK, 2025, pages 7-12
13Ofcom, News Consumption in the UK, 2024, pages 11
14BBC, Audience Use and Perceptions of AI Assistants for News, 2025, page 3
15Ofcom, Understanding Misinformation: UK Adults' Behaviour and Attitudes, 2024, page 4
16PACT, TV Television Production Survey, 2025, page 9
17Ofcom, Pricing and consumer engagement report, 2026, page 77
18Ofcom, Transmission Critical, 2025, page 16
19Public service content as defined by section 264 of the Communications Act 2003
20Ofcom, The relationship between the use of PSBs for news and societal outcomes: An empirical analysis,
2025, page 4
21Pact, TV Production Census 2025 – Nations and Regions Annex, 2025 page 2-7
22Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 35
23Ofcom, Transmission Critical, 2025, page 5
24Based on licence fee income reporting from annual TV Licensing, BBC Trust Statement: TV Licence Fee,
Trust statement for the year ending 31 March 2025, 2025
25Ofcom, Transmission Critical, 2025, page 5
26UK Government, Creative Industries Sector Plan, 2025, pages 43-47Endnotes 91
27Pact Census, Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates, UK Television Production Survey, Financial Census 2025, 2025,
page 15
28'High end television' is a drama, documentary, or comedy intended for public broadcast, with a minimum
core expenditure of £1 million per hour and a slot length exceeding 20 minutes
29Pact Census, Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates, UK Television Production Survey, Financial Census 2025, 2025,
page 15
30Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 18
31Ofcom, Top trends from our latest look at the UK's news habits, 2025, page 5
32BBC, Representation of BBC News content in AI Assistants, 2025, page 2
33Ofcom, News Consumption in the UK, 2025, pages 3-4
34Ofcom, Understanding misinformation: an exploration of UK adults' behaviour and attitudes, 2024,
page 10
35Ofcom, Understanding misinformation: an exploration of UK adults' behaviour and attitudes, 2024, page 4
36Ofcom, Understanding misinformation: an exploration of UK adults' behaviour and attitudes, 2024, page 4
37Park, S., Lee, J.Y., Notley, T. and Dezuanni, M., Exploring the relationship between media literacy, online
interaction, and civic engagement, 2023. This research was conducted with a national sample of 3,510
Australian adults, and measured media literacy using confidence in media abilities as a proxy
38Ofcom, News Consumption in the UK, 2025, page 5
39Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Digital News Report, 2025, page 67
40House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee, Written evidence from BBC Education and BBC
News to the Media literacy Inquiry, 2025, page 3
41The Behavioural Insights Team, Media Literacy Uptake Among Hard-to-Reach Citizens, 2023, page 5
42Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, 2024, page 7.
43Households that have both IPTV access and use another form of TV distribution.
44Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV distribution audience research 2025, page 9
45PWC, Socioeconomic Impact of Digital Transition, 2025, page 57
46The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution 2024, pages 8 and 65
47Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 5
48Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 4
49Ofcom, Media Nations, 2025, page 9
50Enders Analysis, Viewing Trends in 2025, 2026, page 3
51European Broadcasting Union, Public service media as an antidote to polarisation, 2024, page 20
52Ofcom, Transmission Critical, 2025, page 14
53Streamers include advertising on-demand and subscription on-demand services
54Enders Analysis, Viewing trends in 2025, 2026, pages 3-5
55Enders Analysis, Viewing Trends in 2025, 2026, page 392 Endnotes
56Ofcom, Transmission Critical, 2025, pages 5-13
57Ofcom, Future of TV Distribution Report, 2024, page 7
58Most major UK Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT) multiplex licences expire on 31st December 2034. This
option would mean no further extension
59A 2044 timeframe is informed by evidence on the lifespan of broadcast infrastructure, likely typical
changes in spectrum usage in Europe, ready availability of DTT-like functionality for those who need it, and
consumer equipment replacement patterns
60Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV distribution audience research, 2025, page 6
61Please see Glossary of Terms for full definition
62Software, hardware, and services, typically controlled by a single company
63Excluding the 'Mobile Network Operators Cost-Savings' which uses a 7.2% discount rate (see relevant
section)
64As estimated by 3 Reasons Ltd
65Based on DCMS extension of the 3 Reasons forecast
66Industry consensus is that 'superfast' broadband (at least 30 Mbps) is the minimum for reliable delivery of
video streaming over IP; Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, page 46
67N.B. All of these figures are estimations on the best available data, but there is a high level of uncertainty
when forecasting a 20 year time horizon
68This was done by extrapolating 3 Reasons data by an additional 10 years. Therefore, this forecast has higher
uncertainty in the later years of the forecast period
69Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, Figure 22
70Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, Figure 26
71Ofcom, Connected Nations UK Report 2025, Table 2.7
72Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, Figure 34
73Ofcom, Social tariffs: Cheaper broadband and phone packages, 23 February 2026
74Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, page 38
75Freely, Manhattan Aero 4K TV Streamer, price as of February 2026
76Arqiva provided DCMS figures on DTT Network costs, radio costs, and 600 MHz clearance programme
costs in 2024 prices which have been inflated to 2026 prices using a GDP deflator and discounted using
the Green Book recommended social discount rate
77This is an estimate only and does not represent an offer from Arqiva capable of acceptance
78This estimate may change based on the project's final timing and details. This document is for discussion
only and is not a binding contract offer
79BBC, A BBC For All: Our response to the government's Green Paper, 2026
80Note that this value is an estimate that all MNOs would derive from access to the spectrum, to save
on having to further densify their networks. It is not the likely price which would be paid at a spectrum
auction, which would be lowerEndnotes 93
81This is consistent with the sale of the 700 MHz spectrum where it was allocated evenly between MNOs:
Ofcom – Award of 700 MHz and 3.6-3.8 GHz spectrum by auction, 26 February 2026
82Left Out: How to tackle digital exclusion and reduce the poverty premium – The Centre for Social Justice
83Is the government doing enough to tackle the impact of digital exclusion on unemployment? – Digital
Poverty Alliance
84Good things foundation, UK Economic Impact of Digital Inclusion, 2024
85Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Future of TV Distribution, Figure 21
86Good Things Foundation, Digital Inclusion UK Economic Impact, 2024
87Centre for Social Justice, Left Out: Digital Inclusion and the Most Excluded, 2023
88ONS, Internet access – households and individuals, Great Britain, 2020
89WPI Economics, Tackling the barriers to financial and digital inclusion, 2025
90Good Things Foundation, 'Digital Inclusion UK Economic Impact', 2024
91Good Things Foundation, Digital Inclusion UK Economic Impact, 2024
92WPI Economics, Tackling the barriers to financial and digital inclusion, 2025
93Revealing Reality: Future of TV distribution: Research report, 2025
94Centre for Social Justice, Left Out: Digital Inclusion and the Most Excluded, 2023

Department for
Culture, Media & Sport
100 Parliament Street
London SW1A 2BQ
www.gov.uk/dcms
E03591532
978-1-5286-6429-5
-----------------------
[*/quote*]