0/5

“Analog rules in a digital world”: Networks react to Prominence, Anti-siphoning recommendations

Free to Air networks welcome Prominence rules in a 12 month timeframe -but that's where the satisfaction ends.

A government committee has recomended Prominence rules putting Free to Air on Smart TV devices be introduced in a 12 month time frame, instead of 18 months, but not recommended they are required of sets and devices already in Australian homes.

Free to Air networks have welcomed the shorter time frame but urged for a retrospective requirement.

They are particularly disappointed that anti-siphoning recommendations, after urging free broadcast and free digital streaming rights be acquired by a free broadcaster before the event can be acquired by a pay TV or subscription streaming provider.

In other recommendations, Codes of Practice should be extended to online services including 7Plus, 9Now, 10 Play etc.

These are the recommendations of the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications:

Recommendation 1

2.142 The committee recommends that the Minister for Communications and the Australian Communications and Media Authority consider options for a phased approach to the proposed prominence framework and or a reduction to a 12-month timeframe.

Recommendation 2

2.146 The committee recommends that the Minister for Communications request that the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, and the Arts prioritise the implementation of radio prominence on devices such as smart speakers.

Recommendation 3

2.148 The committee recommends that the Minister for Communications amend the bill to extend free-to-air codes of practice to online services.

Recommendation 4

2.152 The committee recommends that the Minister for Communications, on advice from the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, and the Arts amend the bill to allow the review of the prominence framework to be conducted within two years of implementation, as necessitated by rapid technological change.

Recommendation 5

2.154 The committee recommends that the Minister for Communications consider, either before or as part of the prominence framework review, other related reforms in the industry, to reflect the growing role of the internet, online service provision, and consumer behaviour.

Recommendation 6

2.156 The committee recommends, subject to the recommendations contained earlier in this chapter, that the prominence provisions of the bill be passed.

Recommendation 7

3.80 The committee recommends that the anti-siphoning provisions of the bill be passed.

Free TV Australia:

Bridget Fair, Free TV CEO, said “Overall the Committee recommendations represent a major missed opportunity to ensure that all Australians can benefit from free local TV services into the future.

“While we welcome the Committee’s recommendation to reduce the implementation period for the new prominence framework from 18 to 12 months, the report misses the mark by not applying the new requirements to existing sets in the market. Every person with a connected TV sees the look and feel of their existing set updated on a regular basis. The changes required to implement the new prominence rules are no different.

“Unless we incorporate existing sets in the prominence framework, only those who buy a new TV will see any change, and people who can’t afford to upgrade their sets will miss out, even though their connected TV sets can be, and regularly are, updated over the internet.

“If we don’t make this important change, the legislation will not make any meaningful difference until late this decade.

“The Committee misses the mark on ensuring iconic sport remains free for all Australians too.

“The increasing number of Australians who watch their free sport on TV using the internet, because they have no aerial, will miss out unless the new laws are amended to stop paid streaming services buying up exclusive digital rights and putting sports behind a paywall.

“We’re running a real risk that in the not too distant future, if you want to watch your favourite sports, you will need to pay multiple streaming services to do so. Knowing that every Australian can freely access the big footy finals or gather around the TV for the Boxing Day cricket will be a thing of the past.

As the proportion of households watching TV online grows to half by 2027, the anti-siphoning list will be fundamentally undermined if it does not apply to digital rights,” said Ms Fair.

“Bidding for sport will become commercially unviable if free-to-air broadcasters can only acquire a narrow range of terrestrial rights, leaving paid services to acquire exclusive digital coverage. This is exactly the nightmare scenario the government is trying to avoid with this bill – so it must be amended to reflect modern viewing habits.

“The Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023 is an important piece of legislation that should ensure that all Australians can continue to access their free local TV services and free sport. But unless these critical changes are made, we’re going to continue to have analog rules in a digital world.

“Our industry is ready to work constructively with the Government and other key MPs to support these important amendments,” Ms Fair said.

Seven West Media:

Seven West Media Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, James Warburton, said: “The committee’s recommendations totally misunderstand the needs of the Australian viewing public in 2024 and beyond. The recommendations are doing the Australian viewing public a disservice.

“The Senate committee has released a report that does not see merit in ensuring free sport for all Australians, particularly those who don’t have an aerial.

“As the Minister considers the report, Seven strongly urges the Government to ensure that the anti-siphoning scheme includes the free digital simulcast of the broadcast stream and that Australians see the benefits of the Prominence Framework sooner.

“We appreciate the report reducing the introduction of the Prominence Framework from 18 to 12 months, however, for it to be effective over the coming years it needs to apply to TV screens already in the home.

“Seven welcomes the input of the Greens through Senator Hanson Young who see the merit in a shorter introduction for prominence, reducing it from 18 months to six months and including the digital simulcast in the anti-siphoning framework,” he said.

7 Responses

  1. I hope they are looking at Netball as the example of what happens to sport when it goes off live TV. Nobody talks about it any more, it is not mentioned on the news whereas it used to be prominent at least on the ABC. The national players are unknown, and I am not sure how many people even know what the national competition is called anymore. As a previously passionate fan, I don’t.

    I pity the fans of other sports that never made it to FTA at all.

  2. Silly question re Recommendation 3. Would this mean broadcasters can’t place uncut edits of shows on their catch-up platforms? For example, 10 edits ‘The Bold and the Beautiful’ for tv broadcast, but they place the uncut edit (M-rated) on 10play.

  3. Yeah, I don’t buy their complaints. They want the recommendations on the telly to be bombarded with their apps, their apps to be front and centre everywhere, as the choice is made more confusing.
    Furthermore, allow us first access to sporting events is a grab to get these events on the cheap. Will 10 answer to the fact why are many A league games exclusive to Paramount+? Will 9 answer why more than half the games in Wimbledon, French and US Open exclusive to Stan Sports?
    These FTA providers exploit loopholes to win the rights and then move it to their subscription services, same as paytv.

  4. A government committee has recomended Prominence rules putting Free to Air on Smart TV devices be intoruced in a 12 month time frame

    Should that be “recommended Prominence rules putting FTA on Smart TV devices be introduced in a 12 month time frame”?

    As far as radio prominence on smart speakers you can already tell a smart speaker to play a radio station and it does it. Issue with this is some networks have chosen to get taken off a smart speaker (eg NINE stations on HomePods)

    Getting back to TV however, every country who has a Pay TV market, including NZ has a free market and can buy rights to sport. Why should Australia be any different?

  5. If this is really about giving Australians their sport for free – a big LOL tbh – how about a clause that would require channels to broadcast home team games to regional areas? Excuse the NRL example, but believe it or not most fans in FNQ or the ACT don’t care about watching two Sydney teams play while a concurrent Cowboys or Raiders game is relegated to pay TV.

    1. Most of of the AFL teams are in Melbourne, the rest are in capital cities with two teams, though they will have Tasmania as a one club small market soon. ACT and FNQ are much smaller markets. What’s happening in the US is that MLB and NFL are selling streaming passes direct to fans cutting out middle men for minor games. What 7 and 9 are desperate for is the government to legislate them in as middle men, getting them them monopoly broadcast and streaming rights below market value while serving up low quality coverage outsourced to one the two major sports producers. No other country would start with the idea that the NRL and AFL are incapable of running their own business so political parties should claim to be doing for them, while trying to benefit themselves. Which has always resulted in Foxtel putting most of the games behind a paywall.

Leave a Reply