CHAPTER EIGHT
Australian broadcasting has long been subject to regulations in three main areas: control of entry through licensing; restrictions on foreign and broad ownership; and control of content. The print media were not subject to special regulation until the cross-media ownership rules were introduced in 1987. The regulations affecting the media industries have evolved over the years in response to various forces including the advent of new technologies, changes in consumer demands and the decline of the "social responsibility" approach. While these changes have been broadly in the direction of greater liberalisation, the media industries remain heavily regulated compared with most other industry groups.
In this study I have described, explained and evaluated Australian media regulations. The approach is both retrospective and prospective. The regulations have not always served well what I understand to be "the public interest". While characteristics of public good, natural monopoly and spectrum scarcity have meant that the market cannot be relied on totally to produce an efficient outcome, regulations have not always led to an improvement or, when they have, not to the maximum possible improvement. In this concluding chapter I canvass some possibilities for alternative regulatory directions that avoid some of the shortcomings inherent in the existing regulatory structure. The recommendations are based on four guiding principles:
- Regulation should be retained or introduced only when correction of market failure is strictly necessary and justified or to achieve a clearly identified social goal whose benefits to society clearly outweigh all the cost associated with the regulation.
- Regulation should be based on a clear, well-defined, transparent and predictable framework.
- Regulation should be directed to outcomes and not to the way in which the outcomes are generated or delivered.
- Regulation should be neutral in its impact on delivery technologies and on services with substantially similar attributes.
SPECIFIC POLICY IMPLICATIONS
1. Freer Entry into Broadcasting
Regulation of entry into broadcasting has been overly restrictive, limiting the number of particular services in particular markets, and delaying the introduction of emerging services based on new technologies. Without these restrictions it appears that the present size, structure and performance of broadcasting services would have been substantially different from that observed. High licence values reflect the rents accruing to their holders and the presence of these rents is prima facie evidence of excessive restriction. There is also evidence that in the case of all new services based on new technologies (monochrome television, FM radio and pay-television in particular), introduction was unnecessarily delayed with consequent efficiency costs. Further, the combination of carriage (signal transmission) and content (programme production) in Australian broadcasting has been a source of regulatory difficulties and has restricted policy flexibility. There are several elements that could help establish a freer and more coherent approach to broadcasting licensing:
Reduce entry barriers
I recommend much freer entry into broadcasting. The only "public interest" grounds for limiting entry are those of natural monopoly (economies of scale or scope) and technical considerations such as spectrum scarcity. However, natural monopoly provides only a prima facie case for intervention (it provides only a necessary condition for restriction, not a sufficient one). New entry that duplicates investment in infrastructure is not necessarily wasteful. Its benefits such as greater programme diversity and choice to consumers or lower prices for advertising could well exceed the cost of the investment. Technological changes have greatly reduced spectrum scarcity constraints and new delivery platforms, such as the Internet and international satellite, are largely beyond the reach of national regulations. Increased adoption of these technological advances will continue to reduce the effectiveness of restrictive entry barriers and would make their retention increasingly questionable.
Continue the auction system
Where entry is to be restricted on public interest grounds, including spectrum scarcity, a market mechanism should continue to be used to allocate the available licences. However, there may be a case for consideration of alternative auction designs that facilitate a more efficient approach to market allocation and avoid some of the pitfalls experienced in recent years (e.g., allocation of satellite pay television licences).
Separation of carriage and content
There is a case for the means of carriage and the content of free-to-air broadcasting services to be licensed separately as is the case in the United Kingdom. This would be easy to apply to all new services immediately, but would be difficult for existing services. One approach for existing services would be a requirement that, after an appropriate period of notice, owners divest themselves of either the carriage or content element of their current licences.
Limit licence periods
Currently, although licences are issued for a nominal period, they are held virtually in perpetuity. Separation of carriage and content would help establish enforceable fixed licence periods. Unless completely free entry were justifiable, the content licences should be allocated initially, and re-allocated when they expire, by a market mechanism, such as an auction, to secure any scarcity value for the government. The government could also retain the right to impose obligatory content clauses and would then be free to amend them each time a licence is re-allocated. Owners of transmission facilities would not necessarily be excluded from holding a content licence. The effectiveness of this approach has been demonstrated in the United Kingdom where it is used to allocate programming licences for free-to-air television.
Spectrum management
Efficient use of the scarce radio frequency spectrum would require broadcasters to purchase spectrum rights in competition with users in other industries. It would provide broadcasters with the flexibility to choose alternative delivery mechanisms (e.g. cable, satellites) should they prove to be more commercially attractive. The introduction of a tradeable spectrum-access rights system would need to give special consideration to the terms and conditions under which existing broadcasters could continue to retain tenure of the broadcasting frequencies currently assigned to them.
Technological neutrality
The BSA sought to establish a technologically-neutral framework for the development of broadcasting. However, those intentions of the Act have not always been pursued in practice. In the short period since the enactment of the legislation the concept of technological neutrality has been overridden by two policy initiatives (pay television and HDTV), which have had major implications for the development of broadcasting services. Issues surrounding the management of new technologies were treated at length in Chapter 7. In brief, wherever regulation is justified, considerable care should be exercised to ensure that it is not distortionary in its application to different technologies. My recommendation is that any such regulation should be applied to outcomes irrespective of the technology by which they are delivered.
2. Fewer Restrictions on Ownership and Control
When evaluated on economic criteria, restrictions on audience reach, foreign ownership and cross-media ownership all have a number of adverse effects. In particular they have limited the development of industry structures exploiting economies of scale and scope, prevented the formation of multi-media groups, and given incentives to the creation of new financial instruments and other arrangements to avoid the regulations. At the same time, substantial diversification of the media industry has weakened the non-economic case for ownership restrictions, and, as the delivery of media services by non-traditional means becomes more widespread, the justification for continued restrictions on ownership of traditional media will be further eroded. In the case of restrictions on population reach, these have effectively been circumvented by television programming affiliation agreements. In the light of these considerations it is difficult to mount a case for continuing to restrict audience reach, foreign ownership and cross-media ownership.
3. Use More Efficient Means of Promoting Australian Content
Programme standards in television are quite extensive and include requirements for overall Australian content (type and quantity) of television programmes, children's programmes, Australian content in advertising (80 per cent must be produced in Australia) and limits on time devoted to advertising (maximum of 13 minutes an hour in prime time and 15 minutes an hour at other times).
The discussion of programme standards in Papandrea (1997) considered the desirability and appropriateness of Australian content requirements and found evidence that there was a willingness to pay for the additional cost of local content, but that the current means of delivery are inefficient. They distort broadcasters' programming decisions and provide a substantial, but hidden, level of assistance to drama production and employment.
Assuming that the current assistance is desirable, it would be possible to eliminate some of the current distortions and improve the efficiency of the scheme without significantly affecting its outcome. It is proposed that a direct and more transparent mechanism should be used to assist film and television programme production. A mechanism other than quota (e.g. a bounty or other direct assistance to production) which removed the relative price differential between Australian drama and foreign drama or other Australian programmes would allow programmers greater flexibility in choosing programmes on the basis of audience response.
OVERALL CONCLUSION
My broad conclusion is that, while there have been substantial improvements in the regulatory structure and its outcomes (especially with the BSA), there are still problems in the approach and results in the three major areas of regulation: licensing, ownership controls and content regulation. The traditional regulatory structure continues to be challenged by new technologies and the convergence of existing ones. The media industry needs to be managed very carefully to produce results that maximise the "public interest".
This leads us to reflect on how different the broadcasting landscape may have been with a more liberal, market based approach to the licensing of new services. Additional broadcasting services and new technologies such as FM radio, television and pay television would probably have been introduced much earlier. For instance, notwithstanding the invention of FM radio in the 1930s, its successful use overseas and in local test stations for decades, the existence of many unsatisfied applications for new radio services and 60 per cent receiver penetration by 1978 (Postal and Telecommunications Department, 1978), FM radio services were not introduced until 1980. The use of FM was prohibited by legislation in 1956 and the FM spectrum was allocated for use by television in 1961. Similarly, the introduction of television was delayed until 1956 even though the technology had been developed much earlier, and 20 applications for commercial television licences had been lodged as early as 1944 (Curthoys, 1986). The same pattern is repeated in the case of subscription television whose introduction "as soon as practicable" had been recommended as early as 1982 in a report by the ABT (1982). The government ignored the report until 1986 and then decided to impose a four-year moratorium on the introduction of subscription television. The moratorium was extended in subsequent years and pay television was finally introduced in 1995. A similar pattern is also evident with the introduction of digital television. Of course, had the timely introduction of these technologies occurred in response to market demand, the community at large, rather than a select few, would probably have gained substantial social benefits and the present size, structure and performance of broadcasting services would be very different.
APPENDIX: HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF MEDIA REGULATION
Different media are subject to different levels of regulation. The principle of press freedom, for example, has ensured the development of a print media largely unconstrained by regulation. New electronic media, such as online services, are also largely unconstrained by regulation, but for different reasons. In their case, the technological developments that have made the new media possible have also led to the demise of effective regulation using traditional means. Regulation, however, has always been a feature of broadcasting and many aspects of the industry are subject to extensive controls. This appendix outlines the development of broadcasting regulation in Australia highlighting the factors that have a significant impact on the current structure of the broadcasting industry.
EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF RADIO
Experimentation with radio broadcasting attracted increasing attention in the years following the First World War. By 1920 radio stations were already broadcasting regularly overseas. The first regular radio service was established in Sydney in late 1923 and was quickly followed by the establishment of another service in Melbourne in early 1924. The Commonwealth Government used the powers of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1905 to license transmission and reception of radio signals and to set operational standards for stations. The initial regulations introduced in 1923 were concerned with: technical and financial aspects of broadcasting; prevention of interference between stations; ensuring availability of frequencies for services throughout the country; and establishing mechanisms for financial compensation of service providers.
Initially, to access the service of a radio station listeners were required to pay a subscription fee to the broadcaster, including a receiver licence fee collected on behalf of the government for the right to use a radio receiver permanently tuned to that station's frequency (referred to as a "sealed" set). This arrangement was difficult to implement and control. Theoretically, listeners wanting to have access to more than one station were required to pay a separate fee to each station and to operate a separate radio receiver for each station. In practice, adjustments to a radio receiver to enable reception of more than one station were simple to carry out while enforcement of the sealed set arrangement was difficult. Also, many listeners quickly discovered that they could avoid payment of subscriptions to stations altogether by the simple expedient of purchasing an "experimental" receiver licence which enabled them to operate an unrestricted receiver that could be tuned to the frequency of any station.
New arrangements to replace the "sealed" set scheme were introduced in 1924. These authorised two types of stations, Class A, financed from receiver licence fees and limited advertising up to one hour per day; and Class B, financed solely from unlimited amounts of advertising. The establishment of a national radio service led to the government's takeover of the Class A stations as their licences expired in 1929 and 1930. Initially, programming for the national stations was contracted to the Australian Broadcasting Company, and then became the responsibility of the Australian Broadcasting Commission, later Corporation (ABC) when it was established in 1932. The legislation establishing the ABC incorporated most of the earlier established conditions of the programming contract assigned to the programming company (see table A.1 for details). Some, including provisions for programme diversity, adequate and comprehensive programmes, quality programmes, local content, and protection of good taste, are still clearly identifiable in the ABC's current charter.
Table A.1 Australian Broadcasting Company --
|
Source: Postmaster-General's Department (1931).
Cultural enhancement and protection of good taste were particular concerns of the early programming controls imposed on radio stations. Programmes on the national stations were scrutinised for suitability by the Postmaster-General's Department prior to transmission and those of commercial stations were kept under observation. Authorities were also concerned with ensuring equitable treatment of political broadcasts during elections, and the provision of educational, children's and religious programmes.
Although the government was initially anxious to promote the expansion of commercial services, particularly in non-metropolitan areas, demand for licences soon outstripped supply. By 1942, 99 commercial stations were in operation and 695 applications were unsatisfied. Increased ownership concentration of licences caused the government to become concerned about "the inherent dangers of allowing the control of commercial broadcasting to become a monopoly or a partial monopoly" and led to the introduction of ownership controls in 1935. However, the initial regulatory instruments were watered down within several weeks of their introduction following concerted action by the broadcasters (Gibson, 1942).
GIBSON COMMITTEE
In 1942, the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Wireless Broadcasting (Gibson Committee) completed a report to Parliament that was to have a major influence on Australian broadcasting for many years. The report led not only to the framing of the Broadcasting Act 1942, but also to the establishment of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Broadcasting. Many of the provisions of the Broadcasting Act remained in force for more than half a century and the Standing Committee exerted considerable influence on the development of broadcasting regulations throughout the 1940s.
The Gibson Committee's report raised several concerns about the power and influence of broadcasters. The Committee was particularly concerned about the potential of broadcasters to influence the political process during election campaigns and recommended prohibition of broadcasts of political speeches in the 48 hours preceding election day. Although not proceeded with immediately, the recommended prohibition was introduced in 1949.
The Gibson Committee was also influential in the establishment of domestic content quotas for broadcasting stations to promote Australian culture and to assist the development and employment of Australian artists.
THE AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CONTROL BOARD
The introduction of limits on multiple ownership of radio stations in 1935 stimulated demands for the establishment of a statutory authority to regulate broadcasting at arm's length from the government. Subsequent events, such as the 1938 revocation of 2KY's licence for being critical of the Minister and the 1941 revocation of licences associated with Jehovah's Witnesses for allegedly obstructing the war effort, kept alive broadcasters' fears of undesirable government interference in their affairs. The government's reluctance to allow increases in the transmitter power of commercial broadcasters after the war rekindled the campaign for a statutory authority and eventually the Australian Broadcasting Control Board (ABCB) was established in 1948.
The principal functions of the ABCB were:
- planning of broadcasting services;
- determination of technical operating standards for broadcasters; and
- ensuring the provision of adequate and comprehensive programmes by commercial broadcasters to serve the best interests of the general public.
Although a statutory body, the ABCB was largely confined to making recommendations to the Minister who continued to exercise most of the major powers with respect to broadcasting. Lacking significant independent powers, the ABCB was careful to remain in accord with both the government and powerful commercial interests. It largely confined itself to issues such as standards for programming and technical operations of services. From its early days, the ABCB clearly saw commercial broadcasters as its constituents; and its actions were largely concerned with protecting their interests. For example, as early as 1952, the ABCB indicated that its policy for the granting of new licences included considerations of the commercial viability of incumbent broadcasters. The effect of that policy was that virtually no new stations were established for more than a quarter of a century.
Foreign ownership of broadcasting became a contentious issue in 1951 when British press principals acquired a controlling interest in the Macquarie Network. The acquisition was the catalyst for a resolution by both Houses of Parliament declaring foreign ownership and control of broadcasting stations to be undesirable. Controls on foreign ownership of broadcasting, however, were not introduced until 1956.
INTRODUCTION OF TELEVISION
To cater for the introduction of television, the principal legislation was amended and became the Broadcasting and Television Act 1956. The Act extended the pre-existing radio regulations to television, and gave the ABCB an enhanced role in licensing. The amended legislation required the ABCB to hold a public inquiry before the responsible Minister could grant, revoke or refuse to renew a licence.
The period immediately after the introduction of television was concerned primarily with the granting of television licences and with related ownership and control issues. Foreign interests were precluded from owning or controlling television licences and domestic interests were prohibited from controlling more than two licences. As was the case for radio thirty years earlier, ownership of television stations was dominated by newspaper interests and revived the issue of the desirability of media concentration.
Television licences were very valuable assets in the hands of the lucky few who were allocated one. Each licence was allocated after a public inquiry by the ABCB to determine the best applicant for the licence (colloquially referred to as a "beauty contest"). Because of their value, licences were keenly sought and the public inquiry process was quickly demonstrated to be ineffective in determining the ultimate ownership of stations. Unsuccessful applicants wishing to enter the industry simply bought out the beauty contest winners after the licences were allocated. Provisions to regulate share transactions in stations were first introduced in 1960 and were strengthened in 1965.
Programming controls in the form of local content requirements for television were introduced in the early 1960s. Initially they required the broadcast of locally produced programmes in much the same way as the Australian music content did for radio. Eventually, as stations sought to reduce their compliance costs by producing inexpensive programmes, such as game shows, specific requirements for the broadcast of Australian drama were introduced. Subsequent changes introduced additional specific requirements for children's programming and, more recently, for documentaries.
TURMOIL IN THE 1970s
By the end of the 1960s the broadcasting industry in Australia had settled into a cosy relationship with the regulatory authorities. Television services had been extended throughout the country. Licensing of new radio services was strictly controlled and very few new licences, particularly in capital cities, had been issued for more than three decades.
Responding to the increasing pressure for additional radio services, the ABCB finally recommended the introduction of FM radio in Australia. However, its recommendation was for the introduction of FM radio in the UHF band rather than in the VHF that was reserved internationally for FM radio because a previous shortsighted decision had allocated part of that band to television stations. The internationally unique effect of the recommendation caused much debate and opposition culminating in the government's establishment of an independent inquiry into the issue. The inquiry recommended the use of the international FM band for radio services and the relocation of television stations using that band. The first FM station was licensed in 1974. Concurrently with the FM inquiry, the ABCB belatedly adopted "new planning guidelines" which led to a major expansion of AM radio services.
The early 1970s also saw concerted campaigns by acting and television production interests for effective domestic content quotas, particularly drama, for television programming. The domestic content scheme for television programmes was amended several times during the following decade.
Several other public reviews or inquiries concerning commercial and other broadcasting were conducted during the 1970s and had considerable impact on the structure of broadcasting in Australia. A major report comprehensively reviewing the structure of the broadcasting system was conducted by the Secretary of the Postal and Telecommunications Department in 1976 (Green Report). The report favoured a less interventionist approach to some aspects of regulation and provided the basis for many legislative changes in 1976 and 1977.
One of the changes was the abolition of the ABCB and the establishment of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (ABT) to implement the new regulatory approach. The ABT was assigned the licensing, ownership and control powers that had been held by the Minister since the inception of broadcasting as well as the powers and functions of the ABCB (other than the planning and technical functions, which were transferred to the Postal and Telecommunications Department). In something of a contrast to the less interventionist approach in other areas, one of the amendments to the legislation formally incorporated protection of the commercial viability of incumbent broadcasters as a consideration in the granting of new licences.
Attempts to introduce different forms of self-regulation in broadcasting in the late 1970s and early 1980s were largely unsuccessful. The ABT's inquiry into self-regulation recommended greater public accountability by broadcasters in return for reduced regulatory intervention in programming. Although the government announced it had accepted the recommendations, the legislative amendments introduced in Parliament in 1980 bore little resemblance to them. The proposals would have replaced the existing programme and advertising standards with self-regulation. Although the proposals were supported by commercial broadcasters and advertisers, they were strongly opposed by other groups and were allowed to lapse in Parliament without becoming law.
THE 1980s AND BEYOND
Ownership and control and pay television issues were prominent throughout the 1980s. Two major amendments to ownership and control regulations were made during this period. The first, in 1981, removed the requirement for prior approval of the takeover of a licensee company (one of the amendments commonly known as the "Murdoch amendments"). The second, in 1987, replaced the "two-station rule" with a rule permitting ownership or control of any number of stations provided that their aggregate audience reach did not exceed 60 per cent of the Australian population (extended to 75 per cent in 1992).
Cross-media ownership rules were introduced for the first time in 1987 and prohibited common ownership of television stations and radio stations or newspapers with the same geographic coverage. The prohibitions were extended in 1988 to include common ownership of radio stations and newspapers with the same coverage area.
The 1980s witnessed the transformation of an early interest in cable and pay television into a saga prohibiting the introduction of such services. In 1980 the government announced that it had decided that cable television services should be introduced and the ABT was asked to inquire and report on the best way to introduce the services. The ABT's report of 1982 recommended introduction as soon as practicable but recommended against monopoly control by the telephony network operator. It also recommended against the operation of subscription television services by the ABC and SBS. The recommendations were opposed strongly by commercial television operators and other interests and no action was taken by the government of the day. After its election in 1983, the Hawke Government decided that introduction of cable television was unjustified. In 1986 it went further and imposed a four-year moratorium on the introduction of pay television services of any kind. The moratorium was later extended to 1992.
In 1982, licensing arrangements prohibiting the control of more than one licence in any one area were loosened with the introduction of supplementary licences. The purpose of supplementary licences was to enable radio and television station operators in areas with a single service to provide a second service. This mechanism was used primarily for the expansion of radio services. For television, the government decided that regional centres should receive three commercial television services, as was the case for large metropolitan centres. This became known as the "equalisation" policy. It was announced in 1985 and legislation to implement it was enacted in 1987. The equalisation policy was implemented by aggregating the licence areas of three adjacent regional areas, each receiving a single commercial television service, and allowing each of the incumbents to provide a service throughout the aggregated area.
The late 1980s saw the introduction of auctions for the allocation of FM radio licences in metropolitan areas. This was the first time that auctions were used to allocate broadcasting frequencies and related to the allocation of rights to convert some existing AM stations to FM and introduce new FM services.
BROADCASTING SERVICES ACT 1992
The BSA followed an extensive review of the existing broadcasting legislation and introduced major changes in the regulatory framework for broadcasting. It also provided for the establishment of the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) to replace the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal. The new legislation represented a major step towards a more market based, less interventionist approach to regulation. For example, protection of the commercial viability of incumbents as a major consideration of the licensing of new services was repealed. The major changes instituted by the new Act included: the introduction of a price-based licensing system for new commercial radio and television services; a new broadcasting planning regime administered by the ABA; provisions for the introduction of new services such as subscription services and narrowcasting; and greater reliance on industry codes and standards.
CURRENT REGULATORY STRUCTURE
As in the past the principal elements of the current regulatory arrangements relate to ownership and control of licences and programming requirements.
Various provisions of the Act restrict the extent to which an individual may own and control commercial broadcasting in Australia. These provisions include limits on the number of stations an individual or a corporation may own or control within a licence area and cumulatively in Australia. They also restrict common ownership of television and radio in the same area or the common ownership of either television or radio and a daily newspaper in the same area, and the extent of foreign ownership and control of television licences.
In the absence of proof to the contrary, a person is deemed to be in a position to exercise control of a licence if that person holds directly or indirectly 15 per cent or more of the shares except in the case where another person holds over 50 per cent of the shares.
In summary, the ownership provisions of the legislation are as follows:
- A person must not control more than one television station in the same licence area or a combination of stations in different areas whose combined licence area populations exceed 75 per cent of the population of Australia (s 53(1)).
- A person must not be in a position to control more than two radio licences in the same licence area (s 55(1)).
- A person must not control a television licence and a radio licence in the same licence area (s 60(a)).
- A person must not control a television licence and a newspaper associated with the licence area of that licence (s 60(b)).
- A person must not control a radio licence and a newspaper associated with the licence area of that licence (s 60(c)).
- A foreign person must not control a television licence or have interests in a licence exceeding 15 per cent of the shares. Two or more foreign persons must not have combined interests in a licence exceeding 20 per cent of the shares (s 57). There are no restrictions on foreign ownership of radio.
Parallel provisions restrict the holding of directorships in licensee companies.
Commercial broadcasting licences are issued for a period of five years. Renewal, at least 20 weeks before the expiry date, is virtually automatic on payment of the prescribed fee. Commercial licences may be transferred freely without prior approval of the ABA.
As part of its decision on the introduction of digital television, the government has banned the granting of new commercial free-to-air television licences before the end of 2006.
The principal controls on programming take the form of licence conditions, registered codes of practice drafted by the industry and standards defined by the industry regulator. Both television and radio are subject to detailed codes of practice, administered by the respective industry association, on matters such as fairness and accuracy in news services, protection of children and community morals and decency, programme classifications, advertising codes, and requirements for minimum levels of domestic programming. The domestic content requirement for radio takes the form of an industry code and relates to the broadcast of minimum levels of music performed by Australians. The domestic-content requirements for television are administered by the ABA.
Reflecting the objective of the BSA, the ABA's Australian Content Standard states that its objective is "to promote the role of commercial television in developing and reflecting a sense of Australian identity, character and cultural diversity by supporting the community's continued access to television programmes produced under Australian creative control". The main programming obligations imposed by the current Australian Content and Children's Programmes standards require commercial stations to:
- Broadcast Australian programmes for at least 55 per cent of all programming broadcast between 6.00am and midnight.
- Broadcast sufficient first release Australian drama programmes between 5.00pm and midnight to score at least 775 points in each succeeding period of three years and at least 225 points in any year. The points are the product of a "format factor" and the duration of the programme. The format factor takes three different values depending on the type of programme. Serials and series produced at the rate of more than one hour a week are assigned a format factor of 1; for those produced at the rate of one hour or less a week the format factor is 2; and, for feature films, telemovies, mini-series and self-contained drama of less than 90 minutes, the factor is 3.2.
- Broadcast at least 32 hours of first release children's drama in the appropriate time band in 1996. In addition, stations are required to broadcast at least eight hours of non-first release children's drama each year.
- Broadcast at least 260 hours of children's programming per year of which 50 per cent must be first release Australian children's programmes.
- Broadcast at least 130 hours a year of Australian pre-school children's programming. A pre-school children's programme must not be broadcast on more than three occasions in a period of five years.
- Broadcast at least 10 hours of first release Australian documentary programmes a year of not less than 30 minutes each.
Different regulatory arrangements apply to subscription television services. Subscription television operators are not required to comply with any overall transmission requirements for Australian programmes. However, predominantly drama channels are required to use 10 per cent of their programming expenditure to fund first release Australian programmes. The BSA also imposes a special regime to prevent subscription television from securing exclusive rights to the broadcast of major events. Known as the "anti-siphoning" provision, it empowers the Minister to issue a list of events whose broadcast should be available free to the general public. The list includes most major national sporting events.
The amount of advertising is also controlled. No advertising is permitted during prescribed pre-school programme times and no more than five minutes per half hour is permitted during other children's programming times. Advertising time is restricted to an average of 13 minutes an hour between 6.00pm and midnight, and an average 15 minutes an hour at other times. Between 6.00pm and midnight no more than 15 minutes may be used for advertising in any hour, and no more than 14 minutes an hour in any four hours. A maximum of 16 minutes is permitted at other times. Overall, Australian produced advertisements must be used for at least 80 per cent of the total annual advertising time broadcast between 6.00am and midnight.
REFERENCES
ABA (1996), "Music, new music and all that: Teenage radio in the 90s", Sydney (Monograph No. 5).
— (1997), "Digital Terrestrial Television Broadcasting", paper for the Minister for Communications and the Arts and the Department of Communications and the Arts, Sydney.
— (1998a), Broadcasting Financial Results 1996–97, Sydney (diskette).
— (1998b), News Release NR 63/1998, Sydney, 26 June.
— Australian Content Standard.
ABCB (1952), Annual Report 1951-52, Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra.
— (1958), Report and Recommendations to the Postmaster-General on Applications for Commercial Television Licences for the Brisbane and Adelaide Areas, Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra.
ABT (1982), Cable and Subscription Television Services for Australia (Volume 1), Report, AGPS, Canberra.
ACNielsen (1998a), Metro Television Facts, Sydney.
— (1998b), Regional Television Facts, Sydney.
Alston, R. (1998), "Digital: A Personal Message", Media Statement (36/98) by Senator The Hon Richard Alston, Minister for Communications, the Information Economy and the Arts, 24 March.
Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983 (Cwlth).
Australian Financial Review (1998a), 25 March.
Australian Financial Review (1998b), 11 May.
Barry, P. (1993), The Rise and Rise of Kerry Packer, Bantam & ABC Books, Sydney.
Broadcasting Act 1942 (Cwlth).
Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cwlth).
BTCE (1991a), Economic Aspects of Broadcasting Regulation, Report 71, AGPS, Canberra.
— (1991b), Valuation of Commercial Broadcasting Licences, AGPS, Canberra (Occasional Paper No. 105).
— (1993), Elements of Broadcasting Economics, Report 83, AGPS, Canberra.
— (1996), Australian Commercial Television 1986-1995: Structure and Performance, Report 93, AGPS, Canberra.
Busterna, J. (1987), "The Cross Elasticity of Demand for National Newspaper Advertising", Journalism Quarterly, 64, Summer-Autumn, pages 346-51.
Carrol, S. and H. Howard (1998), "The Economics of the Cable Industry", pages 151-74 in A. Alexander, J. Owers and R. Carveth (eds)(1998), Media Economics Theory and Practice, Second Edition, Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey.
Carveth, R., J. Owers and A. Alexander (1998), "The Economics of Online Media", pages 247-73 in A. Alexander, J. Owers and R. Carveth (eds) (1998), Media Economics Theory and Practice, Second Edition, Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey.
CEASA (1998), Advertising Expenditure in Main Media Year ended 31 December 1997, Sydney.
Cole, B. (1966), "What's Really Preventing the Expansion of Broadcasting Services?", The Australian Quarterly, 38(3), pages 72-87.
Commonwealth of Australia Gazette (1991), No. GN44, 13 November.
Communications Update (1998), issue 140, February.
Curthoys, A. (1986), "The getting of television: dilemmas in ownership, control and culture, 1941-56", pages 123-54 in A. Curthoys and J. Merritt (eds), Better Dead Than Red: Australia's First Cold War, 1945-1959, Vol. 2, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
DTC (1989), Future Directions for Pay Television in Australia, Vols 1 and 2, AGPS, Canberra.
Duffy, M. (MP, the Hon.) (1987), "Second Reading Speech", House of Representatives Debates, 29 April, page 2194.
Gibson (1942), See Joint Parliamentary Committee on Wireless Broadcasting (1942).
Given, J. (1998), The Death of Broadcasting? Media's Digital Future, UNSW Press, Sydney.
Hotelling, H. (1929), "Stability in Competition", Economic Journal, 34, pages 41-57.
House of Representatives (1951), Debates, Vol. 215.
House of Representatives Select Committee on the Print Media (1992), News and Fair Facts: The Australian Print Media Industry, Report, AGPS, Canberra.
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport, Communications and Infrastructure (1989), To Pay or Not to Pay: Pay Television and Other New Broadcasting-Related Services, AGPS, Canberra (J. Saunderson, Chair).
Joint Parliamentary Committee on Wireless Broadcasting (1942), Report, Government Printing Office, Canberra (W.G. Gibson, Chair).
Jones, R. (1998), "Australia's Digital TV Giveaway", Agenda, 5(4), pages 521-28.
Maiden, M. and K. Simpson (1997), "Pay's $3 billion black hole", The Age, 15 November.
Mathieson, C. (1998), "Ten forces rethink of TV licence values", The Australian, 10 March, page 22.
Papandrea, F. (1997), Cultural Regulation of Australian Television Programmes, Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics, AGPS, Canberra (Occasional Paper 114).
Parish, R. (1968), The Political Economy of Broadcasting, University of New England (Inaugural Public Lecture delivered in Armidale, New South Wales, 30 September).
Pay TV News (1998), Vol. 5, issue 10, 10 July.
Picard, R. (1989), Media Economics, Sage, Newbury Park.
Postmaster-General's Department (1931), "National Broadcasting Service – General Report of Activities during the first year 1929-30" (unpublished manuscript).
Postal and Telecommunications Department (1976), Australian Broadcasting: A Report on the Structure of the Australian Broadcasting System with Particular Regard to the Control, Planning, Licensing, Regulation, Funding and Administration of the System (F.J. Green, Secretary), AGPS, Canberra.
— (1978), Research Report: Penetration of FM Radio Receivers, Canberra. Radiocommunications Act 1992 (Cwlth).
Royal Commission on Television (1954), Report, Government Printing Office, Canberra (G. Paton, Chair).
Special Broadcasting Service Act 1991 (Cwlth).
Television Broadcasting Services (Digital Conversion) Act 1998 (Cwlth).
Trengove, C. (1983), "Whither Communications Policy in Australia?", pages 83-111 in Centre of Policy Studies, State Enterprise and Deregulation, Monash University, Melbourne (Special Study No. 5).
Windschuttle, K. (1985), The Media, Penguin, Melbourne.
