It was a pleasure to take part in a thoughtful and well-grounded discussion at a recent Westminster Media Forum event. My thanks to the organisers, to my fellow panellists – Sarah MacDonald, John Whittle, Magnus Brooke, Konrad Shek and Iain Bundred – and to the audience for the quality of challenge and debate.
The conversation rightly focused on the practical realities of implementing the new prominence and accessibility regime. As the sector moves from legislation into delivery, a few reflections stood out.
Public service broadcasting as critical infrastructure
Public service broadcasting remains foundational to the UK’s innovation and growth ecosystem, spanning both Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology priorities.
Its value lies not only in content, but in the scale, trust and predictability it brings. Those characteristics create the demand signals that underpin long-term investment across production, platforms and devices. That stability matters even more as the media environment becomes more fragmented and technologically complex.
Prominence is a full user journey
One of the most important shifts in thinking is recognising that prominence is no longer a channel number problem.
It is a complete user journey – launch, find, choose, play and return – and it needs to work consistently across platforms and devices if it is to deliver meaningful outcomes for audiences. Fragmentation at any point in that journey can quickly undermine policy intent.
Evidence from practice reinforces this. Usability research carried out by Digital TV Group in partnership with Goldsmiths, University of London, as part of first-phase work for Ofcom, showed just how quickly outcomes fall away as journeys splinter – from EPGs to VoD apps, to search. Search, in particular, proved to be the most challenging route for older audiences.
The encouraging news is that these barriers are not inevitable. Tested design solutions showed that simple, inclusive approaches can significantly improve outcomes. Good design really does work – but it has to be applied consistently.
Search, metadata and the risk of policy failure
Search and navigation are also where policy most often struggles in practice.
Outcomes depend on metadata quality, persistent identifiers, relevance logic and clear attribution across broadcast, on-demand and online video results. These are not abstract issues – they directly shape what audiences can find and how easily they can find it.
That challenge will only intensify as the “front door” to television becomes increasingly shaped by AI-driven interfaces. If policy objectives are not translated into deployable technical requirements, there is a real risk that intended outcomes are diluted or lost altogether.
Implementation is an ecosystem activity
Above all, effective implementation is an ecosystem challenge.
Devices, data and distribution need to align. No single organisation can deliver universal outcomes on its own. That is where the role of the Digital TV Group comes in – helping to make policy deployable at scale, building on our legacy with innovation fit for the connected era.
This kind of collaboration is essential if regulation is to move beyond intent and deliver consistently for viewers.
The need for longer-term certainty
Finally, long investment cycles mean the industry needs clearer direction beyond 2034.
Greater certainty from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on the future direction of distribution will be critical if the system is to plan, invest and deliver in a coherent way. Without that clarity, there is a risk of misalignment between policy ambition and practical delivery.
These are important issues, grounded in real-world evidence, and the discussion reflected that. Exactly the kind of constructive engagement needed as we collectively move from legislation to implementation.
