CONVERGENCE REVIEW: MORE REGULATION & GOVERNMENT INTRUSION
The Convergence Review’s Final Report into regulation of the media is exactly what Australians should have expected from an inquiry set up by this Labor Government – a recipe for more intrusive regulation of speech, new rules about what content should be broadcast when, and an enlarged role for the public sector.
The Coalition will carefully study the Convergence Review’s recommendations, and will participate in the debate that will follow.
As with many industries, media regulation has built up over time. Many people welcomed the Government’s claim that this exercise would lead to a substantial reduction in industry-specific regulation, but the Convergence Review has done exactly the opposite.
Even though there is an existing industry-specific regulator with an annual budget of $109 million (the Australian Communications and Media Authority) the Convergence Review recommends creation of a new “independent communications regulator” with vast discretion over media ownership and competition, content standards, content quotas and technical standards.
The proposed regulator would have discretion to adopt industry content codes and standards or devise its own, and to determine how it will investigate complaints and enforce compliance.
The Convergence Review recommends outlets providing “professional news and commentary” should be subject to a separate self-regulatory body enforcing “news standards” aimed at promoting fairness, accuracy and transparency in professional news and commentary.
On content, the Review’s fundamental premise appears to be a firm conviction that it (and by implication the Government) knows better than existing media outlets, the marketplace or consumers what material should be delivered to Australians.
How else to explain its recommendations that:
• “The government should create and partly fund a new converged content production fund to support the production of Australian content.”
• “Content service enterprises that meet defined service and scale thresholds should be required to invest a percentage of their total revenue from professional television-like content in the production of Australian drama, documentary or children’s content or, where this is not practicable, contribute to a new converged content production fund.”
• Australian local content quotas currently applicable to analogue radio stations should be extended to digital radio.
• The 55 per cent Australian content quota currently applied to commercial TV during prime time should also be imposed on the ABC.
• “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.”
These requirements would impose an additional financial burden on enterprises which in many cases are struggling to remain profitable and viable.
The Coalition is very committed to Australian content and the continued development of the Australian film and television industry but incentives must also recognise fiscal reality.
The report proposes enlarging existing tax breaks for film and television production and extending them to the creation of online or interactive content. The Government must advise the Australian public as soon as possible what the fiscal cost of such an expansion would be.
Finally, on media ownership, the Convergence Review urges the scrapping of well-established black letter law in favour of an amorphous “public interest test” which would in effect mean the politicisation of decisions involving changes of control.
How many Australians would trust Julia Gillard to determine whether a media merger is in the national interest?
9 Responses to “CONVERGENCE REVIEW: MORE REGULATION & GOVERNMENT INTRUSION”
[...] been very critical of Malcolm Turnbull over the past few months, but he is out there being sound on the Convergence Review. The Convergence Review’s Final Report into regulation of the media is [...]
The Committee has released a very interesting but questionable report and one that perhaps, flows from over 2700 submissions to its Review Paper.
This is a issue that needs some careful reading and consideration and something that can’t be rushed. It’s also interesting to note that the Chairman of the Australian Communications and Media Authority has been quick to issue a Media Release/Statement on the Report.
I fail to see what’s wrong with creating level playing field for all media in the internet age which includes de-regulation?
[...] CONVERGENCE REVIEW: MORE REGULATION & GOVERNMENT INTRUSION | Malcolm Turnbull MP. Share this:ShareFacebookRedditStumbleUponEmailDiggPrint [...]
Turnbull would make a great labor leader.
He should apply for julias job,he would be a shoe-in.
1. about content regulation:
In oppressive regimes selfserving rules are made, monitored and enforced (usually bnrutally) by the government.
In free countries the concept of regulation appears to be in total opposition with the concept of freedom so the concept of selfregulation becomes acceptable.
The problem, in my view, is that selfregulation, in a culture where the maximalisation of profit is the driving force, does not work. All rules (if any at all) would be skewed in a selfserving fashion to facilitate the main objective ie maximise profit, and this would be rarely be in the interest of the community. If the LNP (and yourself) believe that such a situation would be serving well the community, themn I must strongly disagree.
Rules must be set and documented not by vested interests motivated by MAXIMISING profits but by an imput by the varios sections of the community through a moderator and, once agreed, monitored by an independent authority with sufficient power to guarantee compliance.
The problem in such a process is firstly to define the fundamental objetives of the rules to be developed. Secondly to appont the moderating authority and its scope, and it is here where politics come into play and the danger of kreeping censorship.
I do not know if there is a nation with such an ideal situation, I guess Switzerland is the one that is closer to it. But then swiss people in general have the tendency to be rule-abiding to written and unwritten rules.
2. about media ownership
If the ideal situation as above with set agreed rules and effective monitoring of fair balance and excessive bias , the issue of concentrated ownership becomes almost irrelevant, particularly in future, where printed press (that requires costly investments) is in clear decline and electronic publications are cheap and practically anybody can “publish” his opinion.
3 about TV programs local content
I would hate to be obliged to subscribe to a pay tv in order to see decent (in the intertainment sense) programs. On the other hand I think it is delplorable that in order to meet local content quotas ABC and SBS can only air such RUBBISH VULGAR and DESPLICABLE program like “at home with Julia”and the PIZZA (whatever it was called on SBS)
[...] Opposition’s communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull defends free speech from the latest threat: The Convergence Review’s Final Report into regulation of the media is exactly what Australians [...]
Given the changing nature of media, I think that the twenty-first century is being offered a twentieth century solution – a bad twentieth century solution.
I am increasingly concerned about the bowdlerization of the English language in the media so that certain groups are not offended.
I am also concerned that certain appointed rather than elected officials will be making decisions.
An outspoken member of the Reserve Bank Board was dumped from a role with similar governance.
This proposed regulation of the media is inherently self-defeating given the nature of the Internet, and the rapid development of cheap cloud storage in indeterminate jurisdictions.
Government subsidy of media content is a slippery slope, unless it is done through tax breaks or as a comparatively small percentage of the total. If people are not prepared to risk their own money then they should not be given any taxpayer money to pursue their own personal hobby or hobby horse.
Thanks for your reader friendly approach to this topic Mr Turnbull.
On one hand I agree with some aspects of this regulation, but on the other I get a sense communisim trickling through….