Free to Air victory in prominence debate, govt expands anti-siphoning to Streamers
A double win for FTA networks with apps set to take prized place and easier to find for viewers.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News, Top Stories
- Legislation will give Free to Air networks prominence on new Smart TVs
- Anti-siphoning rules set to include Streaming platforms
Legislation to give Australian Free to Air apps prominence on television menus is being introduced into federal parliament this week.
The proposal is aimed at addressing pre-installing subscription apps on TVs, overshadowing Free to Air networks, including public broadcasters.
A fierce debate has descended into arguments supposedly around governments ‘taking control of what and how these Australians watch their TVs’ versus ‘big tech taking away your Free TV.’
The government will fall down on the side of Free to Air networks with Minister Rowland saying the new prominence framework would reduce the risk of free-to-air broadcasting services being crowded out by the larger, international services operating in the Australian market.
“Our existing analogue laws haven’t been updated to reflect the digital age,” Communications Minister Rowland said.
“The rise of global streaming services means Australians could miss out on the free content and services they have enjoyed for generations, with free local services becoming harder to find on connected devices.”
The fine detail is yet to be revealed.
The government is also expanding the Anti-Siphoning List, which gives free-to-air television first dibs on major sports rights, to encompass streaming platforms.
“Modernising the anti-siphoning scheme will mean the iconic sporting events and moments that bring us together as a nation won’t slip behind the online paywalls of international streaming services,” Minister Rowland said.
“These reforms have been informed by extensive consultation with industry and the community.”
Sports included on the anti-siphoning list include the AFL, the Melbourne Cup, the Australian Open and Test Cricket, as well as the Olympic and Commonwealth Games.
The minister can choose to add or remove events from the anti-siphoning list at any time, but legislation is required to expand the rules to include streaming services.
Seven West Media:
Seven West Media Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, James Warburton, said: “The new prominence framework ensures that free local TV services are easily discoverable and acknowledges the importance of these service in a modern TV environment.
“We appreciate the Government updating the anti-siphoning scheme to ensure online services cannot acquire the free-to-air TV rights before the broadcasters have had an opportunity. However, by not including the free digital rights, Australians who only access free TV services through the internet may be deprived of free iconic Australian sports.
“We look forward to working constructively with the Government to ensure these reforms are truly modernising and take into account how Australians are watching and will be watching TV into the future.”
Free TV Australia:
Free TV CEO Bridget Fair said “Right now, Australian viewers are being steered in the direction of services that favour the commercial interests of big tech and TV manufacturers rather than being given access to the full set of free local television services that they want to watch. This legislation is an important step towards ensuring that people are not being served up incomplete viewing choices based on who has paid the most money to be in the line-up.
“While we are still awaiting full details of the legislation it is clear that there are still a few issues to be resolved with the Government’s proposed model. We look forward to participating in the next stage of discussions around this important issue.”
“Being able to share in the sporting moments that bring Australians together as a nation is also fundamental to our community. It’s important that the Government has reaffirmed that live and free access to key sporting events remains a central part of the Australian way of life. With cost-of-living pressures top of mind for Australians, we cannot allow access to key sporting events to be limited by the subscriptions Australians can afford, their internet access or their data plan.
“The expansion of the current anti-siphoning rules to apply to subscription streaming services is an important new measure. However there is still an element of analog rules in a digital world with the failure to include free streaming rights in the proposed model. Australians should be able to watch key sporting events whether they choose to access our services through terrestrial broadcast or online streaming.”
Foxtel:
“We are pleased to see the Government has taken on board our concerns with restricting search and customisation on smart TVs which would have led to significant frustration for consumers. We will need to examine the detail of the legislation and in the meantime will continue to advocate for Australian’s right to control their TVs and connected devices they spend thousands on every year and enjoy with their families,” a Foxtel Group spokesperson said.
“Research shows that 1 in 2 Australians with a smart TV don’t know how to change the layout of their apps. This needs to be considered along with the implications of changing a user interface we have invested millions in across both our Foxtel and soon-to-launch Hubbl operating systems.”
On the Anti-siphoning extension they added, “This could have been a great opportunity for the Government to bring anti-siphoning laws into the 21st century to reflect viewing habits of Australians today and to protect the future value of much-loved Australian sport. The regime is already anti-competitive and clearly favours free-to-air broadcasters above Australians and above the needs of sporting bodies whose ability to invest in grassroots will be limited.
“Foxtel Group was advocating that truly iconic events of national significance could be streamed free via our free streaming platform that has been built and invested in locally and is used by more than a million Australians. The outcome adversely affects technology platforms like ours that have a greater capability to invest in world-class innovation to enhance the broadcast experience for Australians.”
Source: ABC
Updated.
18 Responses
Maybe I’m not completely understanding the problem. But why does it matter what order the apps are in. You just go to the one you want.
I agree.
This feels like an issue that someone has made up for no good reason.
The apps on my Smart TV are in a default order and I’ve never bothered to change them because I don’t see the need.
Surely there are bigger things in the world to worry about.
The apps are frustrating to use. Login, verify with your phone, error message, delayed low resolution image. I have them displayed prominently on my tv but rarely use them. Merge them all together and call it Freeview or something.
What an absolute joke, why should the commercial networks be given any protection or priority? the ads on the free to air TV apps are even worse, especially with the constant repeats of the same ads. Even iView spams previews between episodes, if you are watching a series.
People use the streaming apps to escape the advertising, and watch when they want.
There is prominence legislation in other countries for language and local programming quotas. In some countries, there is a requirement that a certain amount of content has to be in the local language. If Smart TV app prominence hasn’t been done yet overseas, it could set a precedent in which other countries could follow.
So this has to be altered within the software of each OS and television maker , Samsung is Tizen and LG WebOS and Sony , TCL to name a few Google TV , the onus will be upon them to change their software to accommodate Australian FTA apps ,has this been done for any other markets across the World.
There’s customisation in every country. In Australia you’ll find ABC and SBS pre-loaded but not always up front. Go to the UK and there is BBC and ITV etc.
Thanks for that , will be interesting to see what’s required and how it pans out.
I don’t have a smart TV.But no surprise the government continues to have a stranglehold on FTA.Foxtel cops a very unfair deal in this country.It’s no where near a even playing field.
Foxtel are a pay subscription service what is unfair their competition is other pay services not free tv.
I would expect a Labor government to take every chance they could to get one back at Rupert.
All of those sports have always been on FTA and are contracted to FTA, in some cases along side Fox Sports, out to 2032 already. Despite all these false claims of people being blocked from watching FTA, 7.5m people watched a Matilda’s match (that wasn’t on the anti-syphoning list) and MAFS and Home & Away are still the highest rating shows with large FTA and catch-up numbers this year. 45% of streaming in on computers, laptop tops, tablet, phones which come where nothing is preinstalled and users install what they want.
Your stats around streaming may be true across Subscription but FTA streaming is 80% from smart TV’s.
Prominence is a necessity.
They’ll be legislating what we eat and wear soon……………not impressed at all.
Looks like one campaign message has worked.
I am assuming both sides campaigned and one used this line of thinking….personally I did not see any campaigning I was merely stating how I feel about it.
Hopefully we still have the ability to personalize the apps row and shift the FTA ones to after the subscription services. For someone like me who has a PVR, the FTA apps are a last resort viewing option if a recording fails.
Nobody has campaigned for apps to be unmovable, all parties agree it is challenging for most viewers to undertake.