Digital migration: right noises start to emerge

THE minister of communications, Yunus Carrim, demonstrated in parliament this week that the government may be dealing decisively — finally — with the digital terrestrial television impasse that is undermining efforts to get more South Africans connected to broadband.

Carrim’s remarks to parliament’s portfolio committee on communications indicate possible imminent progress in the migration from analogue to digital terrestrial television.

The minister provided the portfolio committee with what were clearly wellconsidered insights into what would inform the government’s decision on whether to support an encryption-based control system in the set-top boxes that it plans to subsidise for up to five million poorer households. The cabinet could make a call on the matter as soon as its next meeting early next month.

e.tv is lobbying hard for the control system. It said it was necessary to allow free-to-air broadcasters to compete more effectively with MultiChoice, which owns DStv.

MultiChoice, in turn, has accused e.tv of wanting the government to unfairly sub-

Is the SABC board deciding for the government? . . . No. It cannot

sidise its entry into the pay-TV market, something the free-to-air provider has strenuously denied.

Carrim has warned that no matter which way the cabinet goes on the issue, it is likely the losing party will sue.

The minister told parliament that factors the cabinet would consider included which approach would best protect the electronics industry, create jobs and benefit indigenous entrepreneurs.

It would also take into account how entrants into pay-TV — presumably leveraging a control system in a governmentsubsidised box — could “challenge a monopoly”. One can only assume he was referring to MultiChoice, but Carrim quickly said that this must “not be at the expense of the set-top box subsidy”.

Other factors the cabinet will consider include which of the options will be “fastest, simplest and most effective” to implement given that South Africa is already more than five years behind schedule. Another factor is which court challenge to the cabinet’s decision — from MultiChoice or e.tv — will prove “least strenuous” to defend.

Of course, any move by an aggrieved e.tv or MultiChoice could quickly turn into a public relations disaster.

It is unfair to pin the blame — as Carrim has done in recent weeks — for the unacceptable delays in digital migration on squabbling between the broadcasters.

That finger needs to be pointed squarely at the Department of Communications.

But when the government makes its decision, e.tv and MultiChoice will be well advised to swallow their pride and accept it.

Holding up the process again in the courts is unthinkable.

South Africa’s incumbent and prospective broadband operators urgently require access to the “digital dividend” spectrum that the broadcasters are hogging by not getting a move on with migration.

It is important that the government does not lose sight of the fact that delivering affordable broadband to South Africans is far more important than appeasing two bullyboy broadcasters. That said, big questions still remain about the recent channel-supply deal between the SABC and MultiChoice that prevents the public broadcaster from offering its free-to-air channels on any platform that uses an encryption system based on access control.

Carrim neatly sidestepped questions from Democratic Alliance MP Marian Shinn about this in parliament.

He did not comment specifically on whether the SABC’s acting chief operating officer, Hlaudi Motsoeneng, had “unilaterally”, as Shinn suggested, decided the government policy when he announced last month that the public broadcaster would not support a control system for set-top boxes.

Motsoeneng is clearly politically connected – he is said to enjoy the protection of President Jacob Zuma – and so one wonders what role he might play in whatever decision the government makes.

Carrim insisted this week that the government had not made up its mind. “Is the SABC board deciding for the government? The answer is a categorical no. It cannot,” he said.

The SABC “cannot decide policy for its shareholder, but what it says has to be taken seriously”. Read into that what you will. McLeod is editor of TechCentral.co.za. Follow him on Twitter @mcleodd