Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Quit your whining!

The March 30th release of the Federal Government's Final Report from the Convergence Review has ruffled not just a few feathers amongst the media moguls but I'd have to say the entire plume. From The Australian to The Herald Sun, commentators around the country have contributed their two cents worth focusing mainly on the negative effects certain aspects of this report will cause if implemented. This is all rather premature really considering Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has had less than 48 hours to read the 174-page report. Nonetheless, outrage left, right and center has erupted over some rather incredulous suggestions that the authors Glen Boreham, Malcolm Long, and Louise McElvogue have made. Kim Williams (News Ltd.) lay claim that the report was "exceedingly vague and imprecise"; Julie Flynn (CEO Free TV Australia) said that content quotas “should not be increased and they should be more flexible than they are”; whilst James Warburton (CEO Network Ten Holdings) cried over how “the higher content quotas for documentaries and children’s programs, for example, are yet another regulation that only applies to the free-to-air television industry" - interesting, coming from the guy who's company's earnings fell to just $15m this year. 

Basically, most of the individuals who represent the large corporations this report actively targets are causing most of the stink. Generally the report has many positive attributes such as removing license fees for free-to-air broadcasters (which the industry has been lamenting over for years), raising the producer offset from 20% to 40%, and redefining the terms used to describe the organisations that have many fingers in pies within the industry to "Content Service Enterprises." The biggest win throughout this report however and the part I am sure everyone will debate the most is the increased quota for content. 

Within the report, a proposal was made to produce the Universal Content Scheme, a program that would "require qualifying content service enterprises, with significant revenues from television-like content, to invest a percentage of their revenue in Australian drama, documentary and children’s programs." In fairness, Australian free-to-air broadcasters already do this quite a bit (55% of all programming broadcasts between the hours of 6am and midnight must be Australian content.) But this is not what's gotten everyone into a stink. Instead, the network heads are livid over the suggestion that there should be "a 50 per cent increase in Australian sub-quota content obligations for drama, documentary and children’s content to reflect the two additional channels each broadcaster currently operates that do not attract any quotas." This quota is a particular necessity considering that a majority of network expenditure goes towards the production of much cheaper programming styles such as news, current affairs, and documentaries. In fact, in a report from the ACMA evaluating the compliance of networks 7, 9, and 10 with the Content Standards Act of 2005, it can be clearly seen that all three networks were guilty of reducing their broadcast hours for both drama and children's drama whilst increasing their broadcast hours for non-drama productions and documentaries. Take a look at these two tables from the report to see yourself the difference in production between drama broadcasting and documentary:

(This entire report is a must see for anyone interested in how the Australian television content landscape actually looks)

At first I didn't quite get the maths on this one. If the networks were already required to broadcast 55% Australian programs, then does that meant this new 50% is added on top of that? The answer to this is yes but not just to the 3 major broadcasting channels. Essentially, what we are looking at is an increase in requirements for Australian content from 55% to 105%. This additional 50% though would be spread between the three major broadcasting channels PLUS their digital multichannels. This would mean, for example, that Channel Nine would have to start using GEM, and GO! to meet this new 105% quota. 

As well as this, there is the requirement for subscription channels to increase their quotas for documentary and children's channels to 10%. Currently, the only regulation on such networks is the requirement that a minimum of 10% of expenditure be spent on Australian drama production. Considering these were the only two adjustments suggested for subscription networks, I have to say I was quite disappointed with the panels' review of this particular sector of the industry. New regulations should reflect the fact that 34% of the Australian population subscribe to pay TV channels now, a suggestion I would make is that the quota percentage reflect the overall reach of a network. For instance, if Channel 7 are able to reach 75% of the Australian population, then Foxtel, Austar and other networks in their league should have to reach a 45% quota.

All in all, I'm not buying the bullshit the major networks are shovelling out to everyone with their "woe-is-us-and-our-fat-pockets" speeches. The bottom line is there is not enough Australian content on our screens. The networks have to stop being lazy by buying in international formats and programs for a 1/3rd of the price of producing their own and instead must work out new ways to combat increasing production costs. This not only will see a remarkable streak of ingenuity injected into the industry but it will also increase jobs, resources and the possibility of a more sustainable future for Australian within this new convergence culture. 

0 comments:

Post a Comment