Television has always been adept at cloning itself. Think of all those reality shows impossible to tell apart. Now, two rival satellite services, bizarrely both called Freesat, are going head to head in a contest of one-upmanship that looks like rivalling The Apprentice — the outcome of which, in Sir Alan Sugar’s words, saw the loser getting fired.

At stake are the remaining two homes in five that have yet to convert to digital broadcasts. Those historic rivals, BBC and ITV, have announced that they are launching a new satellite service for viewers unable to receive digital television through an aerial because they live in places the terrestrial digital signal cannot reach.

It is called Freesat and, when it goes on sale next year, will rival the dominant satellite player, British Sky Broadcasting (BSkyB). News Corporation, ultimate owner of The Sunday Times, has a 36.8% stake in Sky. For the baffled consumer struggling to make sense of the maze of multichannel services, the snag is that a year ago Sky launched its own cut-price offering, also called Freesat.

In both cases, an outlay of about £150 pays for the installation of a satellite dish and a set-top box, so viewers can receive all the BBC and ITV digital channels, and extra digital radio stations, alongside a rum set of television channels that are unlikely ever to win an award from Bafta.

The idea for the new Freesat, the BBC director-general Mark Thompson claims, is to “develop a consumer-friendly, subscription-free satellite proposition”, but what is consumer-friendly about offering a service barely distinguishable from one already on the market? The only significant difference between Sky Freesat and BBC/ITV Freesat is that the newcomer will need a “dumb” set-top box, which, coincidentally, will prevent audiences trading up to paid-for services.

BSkyB launched its own Freesat option last October. In reality, this was a ruse designed to attract new paying subscribers who, bombarded by promos, would give in finally and shell out for the “crack cocaine” of Sky’s pay packages, to quote BSkyB chief Dawn Airey.

The argument that Freesat will reach swathes of the population who lack a decent terrestrial signal is true only up to a point. As existing analogue transmitters are switched off region by region, starting in 2008, the strength of the digital signal will be boosted. When analogue signals die (the government’s optimistic target date for switch-off is 2012), Ofcom estimates that only a tiny minority, 370,000 households, will be deprived.

There is therefore some merit in having the service as a stopgap, though the existing Freesat from Sky could plug the gap equally well. Conspiracy theory says that ITV and the BBC are investing in Freesat because they need to protect their own viewing share in “free television homes” and dent the onward march of BSkyB as best they can.

To a remarkable extent, the terrestrial service Freeview, watched in 5m homes against Sky’s 8m, has already clipped Sky’s wings and helped ratings for channels such as BBC News 24 and ITV2, while inflicting pain on Sky News and Sky One. By contrast, in multichannel satellite and cable homes, the ITV1 audience share slips to below one-sixth, and even the stalwart Coronation Street suffers. To continue to thrive, the BBC needs to protect the long-term future of the licence fee and resist any attempts that may force it to introduce pay services.

For viewers, the BBC/ITV Freesat service is unlikely to provide any fresh viewing choices. Apart from the ITV and BBC channels, including the admirable BBC4, audiences can look forward to a surfeit of shopping and gaming channels.

So expect more blank looks in the high street as customers and under- trained staff struggle to get to grips with two rival satellite broadcast systems, both called Freesat. So much for digital television becoming more consumer-friendly.

Steve Clarke edits Television, journal of the Royal Television Society

Explore Tech & Web

• Personal Tech

• The Web

• Gadgets & Gaming