A fuzzy picture
（The Economist, Jan 5th,2006）
“THIS is a really exciting time—a new era is starting,” says Peter Bazalgette, the chief creative officer of Endemol, the television company behind “Big Brother” and other popular shows. He is referring to the upsurge of interest in mobile television, a nascent industry at the intersection of telecoms and media which offers new opportunities to device-makers, content producers and mobile-network operators.
Already, many mobile operators offer a selection of television channels or individual shows, which are “streamed” across their third-generation (3G) networks. In South Korea, television is also sent to mobile phones via satellite and terrestrial broadcast networks, which is far more efficient than sending video across mobile networks. In Europe, the Italian arm of 3, a mobile operator, recently acquired Canale 7, a television channel, with a view to launching mobile-TV broadcasts in Italy in the second half of 2006.
Meanwhile, Apple Computer, which launched a video-capable version of its iPod portable music-player in October, is striking deals with television networks to expand the range of shows that can be purchased for viewing on the device, including “Lost”, “Desperate Housewives” and “Law & Order”.
Despite all this activity, however, the prospects for mobile-TV are unclear. For a start, nobody really knows if consumers will pay for it, though surveys suggest they like the idea. Informa, a consultancy, says there will be 125m mobile-TV users by 2010. But many other mobile technologies inspired high hopes and then failed to live up to expectations. And even if people do want TV on the move, there is further uncertainty in two areas: technology and business models.
At the moment, mobile TV is mostly streamed over 3G networks. But sending an individual data stream to each viewer is inefficient and will be unsustainable in the long run if mobile-TV takes off. So the general consensus is that 3G streaming is a prelude to the construction of dedicated mobile-TV broadcast networks, which transmit digital TV signals on entirely different frequencies to those used for voice and data. There are three main standards: DVB-H, favoured in Europe; DMB, which has been adopted in South Korea and Japan; and MediaFLO, which is being rolled out in America. Watching TV using any of these technologies requires a TV-capable handset, of course.
In contrast, watching downloaded TV programmes on an iPod or other portable video player is already possible today. And unlike a programme streamed over 3G or broadcast via a dedicated mobile-TV network, shows stored on an iPod can be watched on an underground train or in regions with patchy network coverage. That suggests that some shows (such as drama) better suit the download model, while others (such as live news, sports or reality shows) are better suited to real-time transmission. The two approaches will probably co-exist.
Just as there are several competing mobile-TV technologies, there are also many possible business models. Mobile operators might choose to build their own mobile-TV broadcast networks; or they could form a consortium and build a shared network; or existing broadcasters could build such networks.
The big question is whether the broadcasters and mobile operators can agree how to divide the spoils, assuming there are any. Broadcasters own the content, but mobile operators generally control the handsets, and they do not always see eye to eye. In South Korea, a consortium of broadcasters launched a free-to-air DMB network last month, but the country’s mobile operators were reluctant to provide their users with handsets able to receive the broadcasts, since they were unwilling to undermine the prospects for their own subscription-based mobile-TV services.
Then there is the question of who will fund the production of mobile-TV content: broadcasters, operators or advertisers? Again, the answer is probably “all of the above”.
1. The word “nascent” (line 3, paragraph 1) most probably means .
A. significant B. Time-consuming
C. apparent D. Brand-new
2. It can be inferred from paragraph 2 that .
A. communication companies welcome mobile TV
B. mobile-TV is not allowed in many countries
C. mobile-TV has already been served in many countries
D. mobile-TV is coming to an end
3. The author cites the example of Informa to demonstrate that .
A. the prospect of mobile-TV is bright
B. surveys and observations on mobile-TV is not quite credible
C. MTV has encountered great technology troubles
D. consultancy companies play an important role in MTV business
4. According to the passage, the author istowards the prospects of MTV .
A. optimistic B. impartial C. puzzled D. suspicious
5. Which of the following can be the best title for the passage?
A. MTV, a Foggy Business B. Embracing MTV
C. Business Models D. Ways for MTV
