SBS warns of cuts unless it can lift primetime ads
"SBS will be forced to implement immediate cuts to its programs and services, effective from 2015-16," it warns in a Senate submission.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News
SBS has warned it will have to will have to axe local programs and lay off staff unless Parliament passes legislation to increase its primetime advertising.
A Senate vote on legislations is expected to be tight, with Labor opposed to the changes and key cross-benchers uncomfortable with increased advertising, Fairfax reports.
The proposal which doubles the amount of advertising in primetime from 5 to 10 minutes caps overall advertising to its current daily level of 120 minutes, but will allow the broadcaster to lift its revenue. The moves have been opposed by commercial networks, already facing a flat advertising outlook, who claim it creates a 4th commercial network by stealth.
“Without the flexibility to generate further revenue, SBS will be forced to implement immediate cuts to its programs and services, effective from 2015-16,” the broadcaster says in a submission to a Senate inquiry.
“The impact of the bill not passing will not only be negative for SBS, but will affect the communities the organisation services and reduce SBS’s relevance in the broader media environment.
“The funding cuts will specifically impact major Australian programming and service areas that are traditionally expensive to produce and develop.”
SBS insists the increased revenue will allow it to reinvest in local programming to fulfil its charter.
Meanwhile a separate Fairfax article says a survey by CHOICE magazine lists cuts to public broadcasters as second on a target list of areas for the government to balance the Budget. 26% of respondents listed cuts as a savings idea, second only to 27% listing Unemployment benefit cuts as preferable.
But 45 per cent who, while acknowledging something needed to be done, called for action only in the next five to 10 years.
In 2013, Newspoll found that 85 per cent believed the ABC provided a “valuable” service to the community, with more than half rating it “very valuable”.
9 Responses
SBS has already had an efficiency review now they are asking for legislative changes which will effectively return them to their original funding levels. Every media company has had to undergo significant operational changes in the current climate, so why does SBS think they are immune? If they made a commitment to expanding local content there may be an argument for their increasing prime time advertising but asking for changes so they can be on equal footing with the commercial network makes absolutely no sense at all. The only part of SBS which services ethnic communities is radio, perhaps it’s time to simply close the TV service. Let’s face it, programs such as ‘Subways of London’ is hardly multicultural content!
I’ve enjoyed the news this week, with just their best newsreader, Anton, on his own (until tonight).
Why pay extra for a second person? Not needed. Huge saving here SBS!
It is time for SBS to be absorbed into the ABC. Multicultural Australia is not some side activity – it is the way we live now. Whatever SBS does that is special can indeed be programmed as one or two channels on the ABC – there is no need for two independent set of infrastructure to support continually declining content budgets – in the digital age it makes no sense. THe savings could then be allocated into desperately needed new Australian content – in all its diversity, to accurately reflect who we are today. Time for one properly funded national broadcaster – not two continually under-resourced and under seige and bizarrely at times competing with each other.
But there is no increase in advertising. There is a moving of ads to primetime and pros to non-prime time. Storm in a teacup, just just ideological games to create soundbites in the war of attrition till the next federal election.
SBS as a multicultural broadcaster is doomed in the digital age anyway. It’s trying to survive as a niche semi commercial English language broadcaster to wealthy people looking for something different. But only the Greens will even pretend they would fund that with more taxpayer money.
Who watches ad breaks these days? Everyone zaps through them, or jumps onto the internet during live shows. This is a ridiculous idea!
The audiences may be smaller than commercial FTA, but they are targeted. It means they can be worth a fair bit! Example 1 – Thursday night food night.
I’ve been really thinking whether SBS and ABC should merge? SBS ONE could become another ABC channel with the same programming. SBS TWO’s programming could split between all the other channels. Only because it just does not seem viable to run it separately with or without advertising
In fairness, Only slightly less viable than TEN I suppose!
Just what advertisers do they expect to pick up? Many of their ‘primetime’ shows have minuscule audiences compared to the commercial stations (even their digital multi channels often beat SBS).
If they want or need to cut back, I would suggest NITV for the chop-it features endless repeats to fill 24 hrs a day-original content could easily be fitted into the existing 2 channels that also suffer from a great deal of content padding.