Is TRAI chief Lahoti skipping FICCI Frames 2026 linked to last year's regulatory showdown?

The absence of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) chairman Anil Kumar Lahoti from FICCI Frames 2026, nearly a year after a public exchange over television regulation, carriage fees and the New Tariff Order, has raised questions in the broadcasting industry, even as the industry continues to face regulatory hurdles. 

Lahoti’s name does not figure among the publicly announced speakers for FICCI Frames 2026, scheduled for September 29-30 in Mumbai. Sources indicated that Lahoti was invited but decided to skip the event. Instead, TRAI will be represented by Ashok Kumar Jha, Principal Advisor (B&CS), who is scheduled to deliver a keynote address titled “From Regulation to Market Forces: Is it time for tariff forbearance in broadcasting?”

The session description says India’s broadcasting sector is facing rising content, technology and distribution costs alongside changing consumer preferences, while extensive tariff regulation continues to limit pricing flexibility and investment in high-quality content. The session will examine whether greater market-driven pricing can support industry growth, competition and consumer choice.

Jha’s participation means TRAI will continue to have a presence at the conference, although at a senior advisory level rather than through its chairman. The choice of topic is also significant as tariff regulation, pricing flexibility and the economics of television distribution have been among the key issues raised by broadcasters in their interactions with the regulator.

The development comes nearly a year after a closely watched exchange between Lahoti and India Today Group chairman and editor-in-chief Aroon Purie at the 2025 edition, where Purie raised concerns over the regulatory framework governing television broadcasting.

There is no indication from TRAI or FICCI that Lahoti’s absence this year is connected to the 2025 exchange. However, his non-participation is being noted by sections of the broadcasting industry, particularly as several of the regulatory issues discussed at last year’s event remain relevant to the sector.

A public debate on television regulation

At FICCI Frames 2025, Purie used his keynote address to criticise aspects of the regulatory framework governing television broadcasting. His comments came during an edition where Lahoti also delivered a keynote on the “Collaborative Growth of Broadcasting Sector”.

Purie said: “TRAI regulations are strangling the broadcasting industry.” He also criticised what he described as a lack of foresight in policymaking and argued that the government’s role should be to ensure a fair and level playing field rather than regulate the sector extensively.

A significant part of his criticism focused on the economics of television distribution. Purie questioned the continuation of carriage fees paid by broadcasters to cable operators and raised concerns over the impact of the New Tariff Order on broadcasters’ ability to monetise television content.

He also questioned the rationale for regulating television channel prices, comparing the approach with sectors where prices are more directly determined by market forces.

At the time, the comments brought into the open some of the long-standing differences between broadcasters and the regulator over the extent of regulatory intervention in the television distribution market.

Industry concerns remain

Broadcasting executives said the concerns raised at the 2025 event continue to form part of the wider industry conversation, although they cautioned against viewing the issue solely through the lens of the exchange between Purie and Lahoti.

“The larger issue is whether the regulatory framework has kept pace with the changes in the television business. Broadcasters are dealing with competition from digital platforms while continuing to operate within a much more prescriptive distribution environment,” said a senior broadcasting industry executive who did not wish to be named.

Another senior executive said the industry’s concerns extend beyond individual regulations to the overall economics of the television ecosystem.

“Broadcasters have been making the case for greater flexibility for several years. The issue is not about removing regulation altogether, but about ensuring that regulation does not make the traditional television business structurally less competitive,” the executive said.

A third senior broadcasting executive said the debate around carriage fees, pricing and distribution economics remains relevant even as viewing habits change.

“The television industry has invested heavily in content and distribution, but the economics have become increasingly challenging. The industry has a legitimate expectation that the regulatory framework should recognise these changes,” the executive said.

Lahoti’s position on regulation

Lahoti, speaking at the same Frames event, defended the need for regulatory intervention by pointing to the complex structure of the broadcasting ecosystem.

“Broadcasting is a system where we have thousands of players with conflicting interests,” Lahoti said. “We have to understand the requirements of everybody, why the overall growth of the industry sustains and ensure smaller players in the industry survive.”

The TRAI chairman’s position was that regulation had to balance the interests of broadcasters, distributors, local cable operators and consumers rather than being framed only around the requirements of large industry participants.

Lahoti also highlighted the scale and complexity of India’s broadcasting ecosystem, which comprised more than 300 broadcasters and over 900 channels distributed through multiple platforms, including MSOs, DTH operators, HITS, IPTV and local cable operators.

He pointed to the regulatory disparity between linear television and OTT services, with traditional television operating under a more prescriptive framework while internet-delivered content is governed under a different regime.

Regulatory landscape continues to evolve

The exchange at Frames 2025 came as TRAI was reviewing several aspects of the broadcasting framework.

In May 2025, Lahoti had spoken about the competing demands within the sector, with larger broadcasters and distributors seeking greater flexibility while smaller distributors and consumers often seeking greater regulatory protection. He said the regulator needed to find a balance between deregulation and consumer protection.

TRAI subsequently continued its pre-consultation on the New Tariff Order and worked on measures aimed at simplifying compliance and providing greater flexibility to distributors. Lahoti had also said the Authority had amended the Cable and TV Broadcasting Regulatory Framework in 2024 to reduce prescriptive requirements and compliance costs.

The regulatory debate has since widened as television faces increasing competition from connected TV, streaming, IPTV and FAST platforms. Traditional broadcasting continues to operate through a multi-layered distribution chain, while digital platforms can reach consumers without several of the intermediaries involved in linear television.

Against this backdrop, Lahoti’s absence from the 2026 Frames programme is likely to attract attention from the broadcasting industry. However, there is no public statement from TRAI or FICCI linking his absence to the exchange with Purie in 2025.

The contrast with last year is nevertheless notable. In 2025, the TRAI chairman had a dedicated keynote on broadcasting and subsequently responded to concerns raised during the event. 

This year, the regulator is represented by its Principal Advisor (B&CS), with the keynote itself focused on a question that goes to the heart of the industry’s long-running debate: whether greater tariff forbearance and market-driven pricing could provide broadcasters with greater flexibility.

FICCI Frames 2026 comes at a time when India’s media and entertainment sector has grown to ₹2.78 lakh crore in 2025 and is projected to reach ₹3.3 lakh crore by 2028, according to the FICCI-EY report cited in the event’s preview. The industry now employs about 2.75 million people, making the regulatory debate around television distribution increasingly intertwined with the economics of the wider M&E ecosystem.