02.23
In a not totally unsurprising move given his track record, Broadband, Communications and Digital Economy Minister Senator Stephen Conroy has again put his foot in another steaming pile of shit by giving the commercial free-to-air TV networks a $250million discount on the licence fees they pay for the chunks of spectrum they broadcast on. This comes ahead of the release of an amended anti-siphoning list for sports broadcasts and suggests that Senator Conroy is likely to side with the commercial broadcasters over pay-tv provider Foxtel when it comes to determining what can and can’t be broadcast on pay-tv.
Here’s the thing: much like Conroy’s “SAVE THE CHILDREN!” internet filter, fixing the television broadcast environment in this country isn’t going to take a lot of work. The solution is straight forward. It merely requires a little bit of though and understanding of what the switch to digital television broadcasting will allow the existing commercial broadcasters to provide. Not surprisingly, Conroy doesn’t have a clue.
The first thing that he’s missing completely is that the switch from the existing analogue signal to a digital one will not be optional soon. As ballsed up as the process has been, by 2013 all of Australia should be receiving a digital signal. So, forcing measures to protect those that haven’t converted yet is a pointless measure as all you’re going to do is hold-back necessary change for people that will be forced into it within a small timeframe anyway. And with the realisation that digital free-to-air broadcasting is the way forward, you then open the door to a whole raft of other possibilities for the networks to capitalise on.
Like multi-channelling. The transition to digital television paves the way for the free-to-air networks to capitalise on their resources by offering multi-channelling. Granted we’re already starting to see this with channels like OneHD; Go!; 7TWO (or as it’s known in my part of the world: 7TWOONPRIMEWTFROFLRTFMBBQ); SBSTwo; ABC2; ABC3 and all the high-definition channels. But the problem at the moment, is that the networks are limited to what they can use their multiple channels for, because the anti-siphoning list requires them to show certain events on their analogue channel. This means that instead of showing Sporting Event A live on their second digital-only channel, they hold onto it and show it delayed after Singing Contest B program because that will rate better and bring in better prime-time advertising dollars.
If Conroy were to remove the multi-channelling restrictions then this would give the free-to-air broadcasters much more flexibility in their programming schedules that would see more of the sports on the anti-siphoning list shown live. Currently, being required to show these events on their analogue channel has resulted in the commercial networks holding the events back and showing them delayed in favour of better rating normal programming. Given that the entire country is going to be forced onto digital television keeping the free-to-air broadcasters restricted as to which if their channels listed events are shown on is just a stupid idea.
The second thing Conroy could look at, is requiring that the free-to-air broadcasters commit to showing listed events live and in full. If the government is going to use legislation to make sure that Foxtel can’t show a program, then the commercial networks need to be forced into providing adequate coverage of the programs they’re so desperate not to lose. Having anti-siphoning legislation is pointless if we’re never going to see a listed event live. Allowing the commercial networks to hoard event telecasts and show them at absurd hours of the morning does exactly the same damage that they’re trying to prevent.
Senator Conroy could also allow pay-tv to provide live coverage of listed events should a commercial network insist that they can’t show it live. This then gives us the benefit of both worlds. It will also highlight to consumers just how much contempt the commercial networks have for them; even though without viewers there would be no television industry at all. The basis of the anti-siphoning list is that there are some sporting events that are deemed to be in the national interest and that as a result then these sports should be easily accessible to the entire population. But, if the commercial networks decide that “in the national interest” means “after Australian Idol/Two and A Half Men/Whatever” then the option for the live broadcast should go to the pay-tv provider who will show it live. That way, at least some of the population get to enjoy the spectacle.
Then we come to the matter of a $250million rebate to the networks on the licence fees they pay in order to broadcast over the airwaves. In much the same way that the Rudd government handled the global financial crisis (drink!) last year their solution to an industry in trouble is to just throw money at it. There’s been no thought about it, and the motivation behind the cut can only be called dubious as it was announced days after Senator Conroy had a conversation with head of the Seven Network, Kerry Stokes. The reasoning further called into questions as Senator Conroy has also stated that the purpose of these rebates was to “protect Australian content”. If that’s the case, why aren’t you providing that extension of funding to content producers directly? Why give it to a broadcast medium that is slowly dying? Surely, there could have been a $250million program to look at creating new, digital video and audio productions. Why, if that was your reason, are you looking to protect the television industry, not the creative one behind it? I would have thought that feeding the creative minds that produce content would bring about better protection of their industry than giving Mr Stokes and Mr Packer a bigger pay packet this year.
Sadly for us, the consumers and tax payers of this country, the whole idea works on the assumption that the government understands and wishes to promote the evolving technological world in which we live. But, as Senator Conroy continues to demonstrate, they haven’t got a clue. They’re holding themselves to the mercy of out of date and out of time businesses who are struggling themselves to find their place in an internet-based future. Hopefully, eventually, without too much wasted time and effort, sensible heads will reign supreme and Australia will get both the content and delivery thereof that they want and deserve.