No, 10 was not looking to quit Regional Australia
Confusing headlines, politics and trouble in regional Australia -it's time for a little clarity now.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News, Top Stories
“Channel 10 set to abandon entire state”
“Fears ‘entire state’ of Tasmania could lose access to Network 10”
“Network 10 wavers on turning off broadcast across swath of WA”
“Fears Channel 10 could be axed in TWO Australian states – after shutdown in major city caused outrage”
Headlines in the past week have arguably thrown 10 under the bus around the shutdown of Mildura Digital TV …and potentially Regional WA and even Tasmania.
Alarmist headlines may be great for generating traffic, but are they factually correct?
The short answer is no.
In all cases the broadcasters concerned are joint ventures, none of them owned by 10 which is the content supplier.
While the situation in regional areas is indeed concerning, there is also considerable politics at play together with some articles where a little knowledge is dangerous….
Mildura.
MDT joint venture was switched off last week, a decision which is understood to have been led by WIN Corporation. In a statement the board said, “the financial position is no longer tenable” and indicated it had been “running at a loss since its inception” in 2006.
TV Tonight understands the costs to upgrade ageing transmission equipment was too prohibitive and a major factor in the decision making.
10 was the content supplier only and had no say in the outcome, forced to recommend viewers turn to 10Play to continue watching favourite shows.
A belated decision by the government to allow VAST (which covers Eastern Australia and Remote Central Australia) access was deemed “not realistic” by Free TV Australia, given the $800 costs to households to install satellite dishes and set top boxes.
Regional WA
An AFR story last week correctly referred to a last minute reprieve for regional WA viewers thanks to government funding to West Digital TV, a joint venture operated by WIN / Seven. It operates WA Satco across regional WA (the western equivalent of VAST).
A satellite contract funding boost of some $500,000 a year was committed over a period of seven years.
But AFR’s headline “Network 10 wavers on turning off broadcast across swathe of WA” was somewhat misleading -again 10 is the content supplier to a broadcasting joint venture owned by others.
It’s also important to remember WA funding is ongoing, yet is no guarantee one of the joint venture owners could still decide it is no longer viable at any point.
Tasmania
Tasmanian Digital Television is owned by WIN / Southern Cross Austereo.
Interestingly a Southern Cross Austereo spokesperson went on the record last week telling Pulse, “TDT is profitable. There are no plans for TDT to shut down in the next three years. SCA is focused on audio and has considered various options for sale of its television assets in recent years.”
Was that a strategic statement to absolve them of any blame should a shutdown come to pass? Or was it a sales pitch talking up the very TV assets they are currently seeking to sell? Or both?
Free TV Australia
All Free to Air networks, via their advocacy body Free TV Australia, have lobbied the govt to “Abolish the outdated and unjustified spectrum tax.”
Free TV CEO, Bridget Fair said, “With content spend going up, and revenue going down, the costs of providing regional TV services across the wide Australian land mass are a serious concern—particularly when you consider the excessive spectrum tax they pay every year. The tax was introduced as a temporary measure in 2017 and should have been abandoned years ago.
“The solutions to keeping the lights on for regional TV are squarely in the hands and control of the Albanese Government.”
Network 10 Statement:
A Network 10 spokesperson said: “We strongly support the 4-step plan put forward by Free TV Australia and reiterate that the immediate survival of free-to-air television in regional Australia is now squarely in the hands of the Government.
“We remain bitterly disappointed that the people of Mildura won’t have the same access to all free-to-air broadcast channels as people living in cities.
“This is grossly unfair for those people but also for all regional Australians.
“With the ongoing cost of living crisis impacting every Australian, their access to the full array of broadcast free to air TV remains important as ever.
“We continue to call on the Federal Government to intervene and ensure that every Australian, no matter where they live or how much they earn, has the same access to all local free to air TV broadcast channels and the local content they love and enjoy such as vital news and emergency information, epic sports, comedies and entertainment.
“It’s also a reality check for the Federal Government who must listen and act now to update the impending prominence laws to ensure every connected TV in Australian homes today and in the future, has local free to air apps like 10 Play automatically downloaded and easily accessible on screens.”
11 Responses
Couldn’t Mildura set up a community VAST retransmission facility? It’s only a small area to cover so few watts would cover it. Fair upfront equipment cost of course but it would make far more sense than having each premises that wanted to access the transmission needing their own VAST dish + STB.
In a similar fashion to the TV blackspot translators dotted around Sydney and the low-powered all-channel translator at Kurrajong Heights in the Blue Mountains that services Western Sydney and reaches to my backdoor some 10+Km away. It seems that everyone is waiting for someone else to pay for it.
If only there was a TV licence available in the Mildura / Sunraysia area that Paramount could buy for 10? I wonder whether WIN / Seven even gave Paramount first rights to buy MDT off them?
This whole campaign is starting to sound orchestrated and MDT with its 60,000 viewer catchment used as a sacrificial lamb due to it’s small market to get Government and national media attention. WIN and Seven are two of the biggest regional broadcasters (after the ABC) and they couldn’t afford to retain MDT – effectively just a relay service of 10 Melbourne? It’s all a bit too convenient.
And it turns out Ten and Seven were just playing chicken with the Federal Government to more money from taxpayers.
In addition to what I mentioned earlier in regards to fairness and neutrality in broadcasting and funding, and what I have mentioned before in relation to the potential for neutrality legislation, I think a good way to deal with the issues of double-dealing and upholding broadcasting standards is to legislate bipartisan funding arrangements for public broadcasting, and possibly also for the retention of commercial broadcasting, particularly for regional Australia, where there is more of a requirement due to the provisioning of communications infrastructure. Political parties could be able to negotiate the terms and come to a mutual agreement.
This would be a way to safeguard public broadcasting, which could be at risk due to differing funding policies that could potentially be at risk of double-dealings and political biases, as well as other needed or required broadcasting into the future.
A point that needs to be made, at least in my view, this is the most in a very long time I’ve seen regional television in Australia put on the discussion agenda, let alone national mastheads and getting even the government in the picture. On a broader sense, could this be a positive thing? We’re talking! So often online and in general public regional folks comment they’re ‘ignored’ or ‘invisible’ etc. Especially with the VOZ total tv measurement data now.
But this is why other companies should not be using the main brands, when they make decisions good or bad, it directly reflects on the metro broadcaster, cannot blame them at all. All they see is Seven, Nine and Ten.
It the simple fact of a slowing economy, declining advertising revenue and the Government broadcast tax. The Government granted subsidies to stop this happening before but are now withdrawing some of them. Ten wouldn’t gain anything but shutting down their feed. But they don’t lose much if affiliates go out of business either as 10 play will get some of the views. And it will happen eventually anyway as the broadcast spectrum is much more valuable to the mobile market than for old style broadcasting.
… and to think this could so easily have been avoided if politicians hadn’t interfered in the market in the first place, but some apparently think it can be resolved by more government action?
When I read these articles they are coming from the News Corp press. News Corp and DM press often tend to bag Channel 10. Most of these articles are incorrectly written and their cohesion is poor.
I think politics is involved because when there are shows like The Project that have a bias towards a particular government, agenda, or narrative, which is also a concern with ABC, then there’s a risk of favouritism that negatively affects neutrality and broadcasting standards with funding policies. Any funding from the government to Ten, or any other mass media broadcasting companies which are privately owned, could be seen as connivance, underhandedness, or double-dealing. Especially for companies involved in mass broadcasting that could be used for government propaganda purposes.