What the Broadcasting Report Indicates

■ What the Broadcasting Report Indicates

I would like to comment on the report from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.

Shared use of physical assets: Joint investment by NHK and commercial broadcasters

　In 2006, commercial broadcasters were openly opposed to separation of physical and non-physical aspects. However, Michisada Hirose, chair of the Japan Commercial Broadcasters Association at the time, quietly called me aside and expressed a correct understanding that the change would mean the possibility of joint ownership of regional transmission towers. Concrete planning should be carried out already.

IP and cloud adoption

　In the UK, wired/wireless, broadcast, and telecommunications are transmitted in mixed format by both the BBC and commercial broadcasters, with full IP and cloud adoption atop separation of physical and non-physical aspects. From a cost perspective, this is a natural direction. However, while the UK carries this out through a foreign (Swedish) company, how Japan views broadcasting security is a point at issue.

Replacement of relay stations with IP unicasts

 Under both broadcast regulatory structures and the Copyright Act, structures and business in Japan have been distorted by superficial actions such as whether to apply multicast or unicast to network transmission methods. There is now a prime opportunity for a top-to-bottom rethinking of the relationship between technical methods and regulatory structure application.

Elimination of regional restrictions

　Regional restrictions were regulations set against the backdrop of broadcasting's "strength." With the internet now surpassing broadcasting in advertising revenue, however, and amid onslaught by foreign firms, the position of broadcasting has been relativized, and the purpose of placing constraints on the domestic industry is being reevaluated. A move toward relaxation is appropriate.

The positioning of NHK's Internet utilization operations

　NHK should considered Internet utilization among its core, not supplementary, operations, with the aim of transforming itself into a digital media entity akin to the UK's BBC or China's CCTV.

I have no other objections to the report and look forward to the implementation of policy.

At the same time, I find dissatisfaction with two points: the scant mention of "the world" and "data."

Looking first at "the world," amid upheavals in media overseas as in the US, China, and South Korea, what sort of position and strategy should Japan adopt?

What should Japan do with its idiosyncratic regulatory structure?

Japan's meager awareness here has become an international issue.

Then there is "data."

More so than any division between telecommunications and broadcasting, the utilization or non-utilization of data is the challenge faced today.

Internet media entities commercialize data, while broadcasting does not make use of data.

Television, a decade behind in telecommunications convergence, may lag another ten years in data convergence.

I see no awareness of this issue in the report.

What should be questioned before all is individual companies' strategies. What these past 15 years have taught us is that even if regulatory structures are laid out, holes remain unplugged if management does not take action.

What do individual companies intend to do about this? That's what I want to hear.