This article first appeared in AdNews in-print. Click here to subscribe to the AdNews magazine or download the digital version here.
The argy-bargy over media reform continues in the Senate, but if some changes aren’t made, and soon, a vibrant future for Australia’s media sector is in serious doubt, Rosie Baker warns.
Yesterday saw the Senate hearing over media reform take place in Canberra. Every man and his media dog has submitted evidence to the enquiry over the proposed reforms. At the time of writing, the hearing is in progress with just a handful giving evidence in person, including Seven CEO Tim Worner, subscription TV body ASTRA and Foxtel.
Suggested scenarios of what the proposed changes will mean, debates over potential mergers, the reach rule, the two out of three rule, impacts for regional players, mergers and acquisitions, investing in local content and anti-siphoning over sports rights all came up – as did licence fees – which are not on the proposed agenda. What's already obvious is that consensus over the right approach for media reform will never be reached. Not in a million years.
We can cry all we like about a level playing field, whether the reforms go too far, not far enough, if they tackle all the issues that exist, whether it favours pay TV or subscription TV, national or regional players, or that one change will create a cascading impact down the track. But what the industry needs to concede is that something has to change if Australia wants any kind of modern, future-proofed media industry.
One key point the Senate addressed was the “emotive” use of the word “piecemeal” in Seven's submission to describe the proposed changes.
Does Seven want “big bang, revolutionary” reform rather than evolutionary, Worner was asked. Basically, yes it does.
Nick Xenophon, independent senator for South Australia, asked Worner directly if he's suggesting the proposals are not fully considered, to which his “short and sharp” reply was “yes” followed by another “yes” to the suggestion that he is against passing the proposed bill in its current form.
And Foxtel took a similar approach. It's not against reform, but not in the proposed shape. It is in favour of “more holistic” changes to regulation that tackle the big picture, not rules and regulations “in isolation”.
Bruce Meagher, Foxtel's director of corporate affairs, aired his grievance that over the past decade whenever media reforms have been mooted they are “typically favouring one group” and give trade-offs to another.
“It's a series of bargains, rather than a holistic look at the way the sector operates,” he said. “Merely dealing with specific regulations that affect one part of the industry will not get the country where we need it to be to ensure a vibrant media sector.”
Meagher is correct. But, and there is always a but, whatever your view on each of the proposed changes, there is one fact that we should all agree on. Without reform, the Australian media industry can only slow down and go backwards. If we continue to stall until we find a perfect solution that addresses every element for every media player, no progress will be
made at all and everyone stands to lose.