tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/cross-media-ownership-15631/articlesCross-media ownership – The Conversation2020-10-13T05:01:29Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1479962020-10-13T05:01:29Z2020-10-13T05:01:29ZPaper chase: why Kevin Rudd’s call for a royal commission into News Corp may lead nowhere<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363081/original/file-20201013-17-1borure.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Glenn Hunt/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Kevin Rudd’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/oct/11/kevin-rudd-petition-royal-commission-news-corp-media-domination-australia">petition to parliament</a> for a royal commission into the dominance of the Murdoch media in Australia is entitled to be seen as more than an embittered ex-politician’s desire for revenge.</p>
<p>The fact is that in the three mature English-speaking democracies where Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has a dominant presence – the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia – politics are deeply polarised and conducted with a toxicity and dishonesty that is harmful to the public good.</p>
<p>There are differences in degree, of course. Australia has not elected a reactionary extremist such as US President Donald Trump, nor found itself riven with political divisions of the kind shown up by the Brexit referendum. Neither has Australian political discourse descended to the depths of racism that have scarred politics in those two countries. </p>
<p>Australia has not seen its national leader equivocate over white supremacy, <a href="https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/apr/26/context-trumps-very-fine-people-both-sides-remarks/">as Trump</a> did after the Charlottesville protests of 2017. It has not seen a political campaign poster about immigration modelled on a Nazi poster on the same subject, as the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants">produced during the Brexit referendum</a> campaign.</p>
<p>Yet there is one fundamental similarity among the three countries that reflects the anti-democratic influence of the Murdoch media: in each country, political leaders see Murdoch as a decisive factor in electoral success.</p>
<p>He controls about two-thirds of Australia’s capital city daily newspaper circulation, owns The Times, The Sunday Times and mass-circulation The Sun in England, and Fox News, the most-watched cable TV service in the US.</p>
<p>A procession of Australian prime ministers or would-be prime ministers from Bob Hawke onwards, including Rudd, have openly and publicly paid court to Murdoch, on occasion travelling to the other side of the world to do so.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=611&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=611&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363082/original/file-20201013-21-14i5mj0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=611&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Successive leaders have paid court to Rupert Murdoch, including Kevin Rudd when he was prime minister.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the UK, Tony Blair travelled <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/murdochs-courtship-of-blair-finally-pays-off-1144087.html">all the way to Hayman Island</a> to obtain Murdoch’s blessing in the lead-up to the 1997 election. He obtained the blessing and won the election.</p>
<p>In episode three of the recent television documentary, <a href="https://iview.abc.net.au/show/rise-of-the-murdoch-dynasty?gclid=CjwKCAjw_Y_8BRBiEiwA5MCBJsLseKz0ans_OVVbDlowATUE6keqWrZgUmF4lkmHq1-QX3ZIn1yqCRoCaZkQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds">The Murdoch Dynasty</a>, Nigel Farage, who led UKIP in the Brexit referendum, said Murdoch’s support was crucial to the success of the “Leave” campaign.</p>
<p>In the same documentary, a Trump campaign insider from 2016 said Murdoch’s Fox News was indispensable to Trump’s success in that year’s US presidential election.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/james-murdochs-resignation-is-the-result-of-news-corps-increasing-shift-to-the-right-not-just-on-climate-143799">James Murdoch's resignation is the result of News Corp's increasing shift to the right – not just on climate</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The benefit of a royal commission would be to lay bare the nature of the interactions between the elected politicians and the unelected Rupert Murdoch.</p>
<p>Details of the supplications, threats, deals, promises, attitudes and motives that are the stuff of these interactions would shed extraordinarily valuable light on a highly influential aspect of the way Australia’s democracy works.</p>
<p>It would enable the public to assess just how extensive Murdoch’s influence is, and what effect it has on public policy and electoral outcomes.</p>
<p>It’s highly improbable it would lead to greater diversity in media ownership. If it created a public clamour loud enough to make politicians think there were votes in it, then it might be possible one of the main parties would adopt media diversity as policy, and propose ways to achieve it.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363100/original/file-20201013-15-1aoyevf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">News Corporation’s support was vital to the ‘Leave’ campaign in the Brexit vote.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/EPA/Neil Hall</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, history tells us this is extremely unlikely.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_the_Press">royal commission in England in 1947-49</a> dodged the issue; <a href="https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C9116">another in 1961-62</a> resulted in significant mergers being referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission. However, this was circumvented by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1981, when <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/28/how-margaret-thatcher-and-rupert-murdoch-made-secret-deal">she pushed through Murdoch’s acquisition</a> of The Times and The Sunday Times.</p>
<p>In Australia, both main parties have been complicit in creating the present state of affairs.</p>
<p>The Hawke-Keating government <a href="https://cosmiccauldronbooks.com.au/p/media-mates-carving-up-australias-media-paul-chadwick/">created the conditions</a> that allowed Murdoch to take over the Herald and Weekly Times group, giving him Melbourne’s Herald Sun and daily newspaper monopolies in Brisbane, Adelaide and Hobart.</p>
<p>The Turnbull government made the situation worse in 2017 by <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-14/media-law-changes-bill-passes-senate/8946864">abolishing rules</a> about cross-ownership, market dominance and audience reach.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-media-reform-in-australia-has-been-so-hard-to-achieve-77392">Why media reform in Australia has been so hard to achieve</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>For another thing, the Australian public has shown an astonishing complacency and lack of interest in the health of the media. This has remained the case even as media freedom has been directly assaulted by a <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-raids-on-australian-media-present-a-clear-threat-to-democracy-118334">succession of laws since 2001</a> that criminalise journalism in the name of national security.</p>
<p>Perhaps the rush to sign the Rudd petition, which is credited with causing the parliamentary website to crash, indicates a change of attitude, or it might just be clicktivism.</p>
<p>Finally, Australian parliaments have shown little interest in, and less appetite for, fixing the problem.</p>
<p>In 1980, the Victorian government of Rupert Hamer established <a href="https://researchdata.edu.au/general-records/152910">a committee of inquiry</a> under the chairmanship of Sir John Norris, a retired Supreme Court judge, into the ownership and control of newspapers in Victoria.</p>
<p>The Norris report was presented in September 1981. It recommended an independent statutory authority be established to scrutinise proposed newspaper acquisitions, to ensure undue concentration of ownership would not result.</p>
<p>It aroused indignant opposition from the newspaper companies and went nowhere.</p>
<p>In 1992, the federal House of Representatives established a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=reports/1992/1992_pp53report.htm">Select Committee on the Print Media</a> to examine many of the same issues. It produced a report called <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representatives_committees?url=reports/1992/1992_pp53report.htm">News and Fair Facts</a>, a laboured pun on “Fairfax”. It too disappeared without trace.</p>
<p>Even if Rudd gets his royal commission, its report risks going the same way, unless it probes deeply enough to tell us something important about the way Australian democracy works.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/147996/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There have been regular calls and inquiries into media ownership in Australia. But despite the howls of outrage, there has bene little political appetite to do anything about it.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1005922018-07-30T06:09:33Z2018-07-30T06:09:33ZStarter’s gun goes off on new phase of media concentration as Nine-Fairfax lead the way<p>The <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-26/what-the-fairfax-and-nine-merger-means-for-you/10039236">Nine-Fairfax Media deal</a>, billed as the biggest shakeup in the Australian media landscape for decades, was widely anticipated once the Turnbull government <a href="https://theconversation.com/government-set-to-win-senate-support-for-media-deregulation-84017">repealed the main anti-concentration laws</a> in 2017. It may well result in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-modern-tragedy-nine-fairfax-merger-a-disaster-for-quality-media-100584">loss of a highly respected independent quality media voice</a>. It has certainly fired the starting gun on a new phase of media concentration.</p>
<p>It’s the latest and arguably the most dramatic episode in the media concentration saga in Australia. This is already among the <a href="https://theconversation.com/factcheck-is-australias-level-of-media-ownership-concentration-one-of-the-highest-in-the-world-68437">most concentrated media markets in the world</a>, behind countries like China and Egypt. These developments signal that media diversity policies need a major overhaul to take account of the impact of the media-tech platform giants on traditional news media businesses.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-australias-media-market-one-of-the-worlds-most-concentrated-68437">Is Australia’s media market one of the world's most concentrated?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In many ways this by now <a href="https://theconversation.com/nine-and-fairfax-media-streaming-towards-a-full-tango-30862">widely telegraphed process of media convergence</a> has been the strategy of two of Australia’s largest legacy media companies to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-26/fairfax-nine-merger-comes-at-a-cost/10039040">survive a bit longer</a> against the onslaught of the Silicon Valley FAANG (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google) behemoths. If approved it will create Australia’s largest media company – and presumably the loudest private media voice with the most political clout in the country.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1022375568094846977"}"></div></p>
<p>Former prime minister <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jul/26/the-fairfax-takeover-is-exceptionally-bad-news-nine-has-the-journalistic-ethics-of-an-alley-cat">Paul Keating notes</a> that this could have been predicted from the first implementation of cross-media rules back in the late 1980s. Communications Minister Mitch Fifield <a href="https://www.minister.communications.gov.au/minister/mitch-fifield/transcripts/interview-patricia-karvelas-abc-rn-drive">says he’s “ownership agnostic”</a> – if we can just park the fact that it was the government’s horse-trading efforts directed towards crossbench senators that led to precisely this outcome. And the Coalition and its supporters would welcome regulatory <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/ninefairfax-merger-accc-to-examine-impact-on-competition/news-story/e6511274137e317d78da6f90a61b8f18">approval of the deal by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission</a> (ACCC).</p>
<p>Many believe that subsuming Fairfax Media will assist in muzzling the edgier, more critical journalism in the group’s mastheads and generally advance an editorial position that is favourable to the government. After all, former Coalition treasurer Peter Costello chairs the Nine board. In the lead-up to a federal election in 2019, the timing could not be better for the conservatives. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-modern-tragedy-nine-fairfax-merger-a-disaster-for-quality-media-100584">A modern tragedy: Nine-Fairfax merger a disaster for quality media</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Clock’s ticking for local news</h2>
<p>The deal, if it goes forward, has also fired the starting gun on a process of further dismantling media in the bush. As print media audiences are reaching their expiry dates, we can expect to see the loss of important local newspapers such as the Newcastle Herald and the Launceston Examiner. </p>
<p>Newspapers like these play a key civic journalism role in those communities. They have, for example, pressured governments to set up royal commissions such as the <a href="https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/">inquiry into institutional responses to sexual abuse</a>. </p>
<p>So local, regional and suburban journalism will be among the losers in this convergence of media platforms. Even major metro titles like The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age are under a cloud as Fairfax’s more profitable digital media assets, such as the Domain real estate site and streaming service Stan, have <a href="https://www.afr.com/opinion/columnists/nine-takeover-of-fairfax-is-about-domain-stan-20180726-h136hm">become the focus of the business</a>.</p>
<p>While some sector-specific <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-changes-to-australias-media-ownership-laws-are-being-proposed-55509">ownership and control rules remain in place</a>, these are limited in number and scope. They apply only to legacy media of commercial television, commercial radio and associated (print) newspapers. The rules would not affect the combined reach of <a href="https://www.9news.com.au">Nine News</a> and Fairfax’s <a href="https://www.fairfaxmedia.com.au/">well-recognised online news brand</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/media-reform-deals-will-reduce-diversity-and-amount-to-little-more-than-window-dressing-83957">Media reform deals will reduce diversity and amount to little more than window dressing</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Who’s left to defend diversity?</h2>
<p>So will the ACCC’s inquiry come up with any public interest regulatory antidotes? Its <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/inquiries/digital-platforms-inquiry">digital platforms inquiry</a> does <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Ministerial%20direction.pdf">extend to investigating certain aspects of pluralism or media diversity</a>. This was one of several outcomes of the legislative and policy changes of 2017, which included the repeal of cross-media ownership laws. </p>
<p>However, such a decision by the ACCC would be surprising. That’s because effective media pluralism policy that is capable of addressing these kind of integrated cross-platform deals requires bipartisan support at the highest political levels. That’s not something that tends to happen much in Australian media policy.</p>
<p>Yet the ACCC review and the possibility of regulatory intervention using competition law is the only alternative policy lever available to regulate the adverse consequences of cross-media concentration. </p>
<p>The ACCC inquiry is focusing mainly on market power in relation to advertising on digital platforms. But it is also examining the role of search engines, aggregators and social media platforms and their implications for the production, delivery and consumption of sustainable quality news online.</p>
<p>An <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/inquiries/digital-platforms-inquiry/issues-paper">issues paper</a> noted that the inquiry would consider “the impact of algorithmic selection on the plurality of news and journalistic content presented to Australian consumers”. Recommendations about the implications of automated news delivery will be critical. </p>
<p>But this new baked-in logic of an automated public sphere is very different to the voice concentration that has arisen out of the calculated deregulation of cross-media laws. As US legal scholar <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3067552">Frank Pasquale argues</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>New methods of monitoring and regulation should be as technologically sophisticated and comprehensive as the automated public sphere they target.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Although it is still early days, the regulator is unlikely to stand in the way of media businesses whose rhetoric is all about “scale” and “survival”. In other words, media voice concentration is recast as a second-order issue compared to the survival of these traditional Australian media corporations. </p>
<p>Perhaps that survival duration should be measured in election cycles? Even better, why not look at laws and policies to ensure that the instruments of media policymaking maintain media ownership, pluralism and diversity objectives?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100592/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Dwyer receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a project studying media pluralism and online news.</span></em></p>Australian media ownership is already among the most concentrated in the world, but if the competition regulator approves the Nine-Fairfax deal, expect the race for survival to produce more mergers.Tim Dwyer, Associate Professor, Chair, Department of Media and Communications, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/684372016-12-12T04:07:42Z2016-12-12T04:07:42ZIs Australia’s media market one of the world’s most concentrated?<blockquote>
<p>Australia’s level of media ownership concentration is already one of the highest in the world. <strong>– Shadow minister for communications, Michelle Rowland, <a href="http://www.michellerowland.com.au/media_release_media_reform_deserves_better_than_government_s_poor_effort">press release</a>, November 8, 2016.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The government’s <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Environment_and_Communications/MediaReformBill45/Report">Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Media Reform) Bill 2016</a> proposes cutting a rule that stops commercial TV networks from broadcasting to more than 75% of Australians. The House of Representatives passed the bill, which will now go to the Senate.</p>
<p>Labor has said it supports repealing the 75% reach rule but opposes changing the “two-out-of-three rule”, which prevents companies from holding a controlling interest in more than two firms that operate television broadcasting, radio broadcasting or newspaper publishing in the same region.</p>
<p>Labor’s shadow minister for communications, Michelle Rowland, said repealing the two-out-of-three rule would reduce “the diversity of voices across the media landscape”.</p>
<p>She said Australia’s level of media ownership concentration is already one of the highest in the world.</p>
<p>Is that true?</p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>When asked for a source to support her assertion, a spokesman for Michelle Rowland sent The Conversation a detailed response drawing from a wide <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/22/68437-2016-11-22-media-concentration-and-public-concern-in-australia-Research_-_Media_concentration_and_public_concern_in_Australia.pdf?1518059940">range of sources</a>, including the 2012 <a href="http://apo.org.au/resource/report-independent-inquiry-media-and-media-regulation">Finkelstein inquiry</a> into media and media regulation. That inquiry’s report noted that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia’s newspaper industry is among the most concentrated in the developed world.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You can read the full response <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/22/68437-2016-11-22-media-concentration-and-public-concern-in-australia-Research_-_Media_concentration_and_public_concern_in_Australia.pdf?1518059940">here.</a></p>
<p>Rowland’s assertion that Australia’s media ownership concentration is among the highest in the world is well supported by a range of credible sources, some of which will be expanded upon below.</p>
<p>As this <a href="http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/media-interests-snapshot">infographic</a> from the Australian Communications and Media Authority shows, a handful of corporations and interconnected family interests control much of Australia’s media:</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148540/original/image-20161205-25645-14enkqu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Media Interests Snapshot, ACMA, current at October 2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/media-interests-snapshot">Australian Communications and Media Authority</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Newspapers</h2>
<p>Newspaper ownership in Australia is particularly concentrated. The <a href="http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2016/australia-2016/">Australian section</a> of the University of Oxford’s Reuters Institute <a href="http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/">Digital News Report 2016</a>, which covers 26 countries, said that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia has a high concentration of traditional media ownership dominated by News Corporation and Fairfax Media who together own the majority of national and capital city newspapers. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Market research firm IBISWorld noted in June 2016 that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The industry’s four largest players, News Australia, Fairfax Media, Seven West Media and APN News and Media, are estimated to account for over 90% of industry revenue in 2015-16. The Australian media landscape is one of the most concentrated in the world. An extremely small number of firms, most notably News Australia and Fairfax Media, publish content that reaches the large majority of Australians.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>New Zealand researchers <a href="https://www.comcom.govt.nz/dmsdocument/14481">told</a> a New Zealand <a href="http://www.comcom.govt.nz/dmsdocument/14943">commission considering a proposed merger</a> between NZME Limited and Fairfax NZ that only five countries have one owner with more than 50% ownership of the daily newspaper market, and that Australia was one of them:</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148533/original/image-20161205-25645-jbdpxw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.comcom.govt.nz/dmsdocument/14943">Submission by Dr Julienne Molineaux et al. to the NZ Commerce Commission (July 2016). For overseas market shares academics sourced Noam (2016). 'Who Owns the World’s media?: Media Concentration and Ownership around the World'. Oxford: OUP.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The data in this table was drawn from <a href="http://internationalmedia.pbworks.com/w/page/20075656/FrontPage">an international study</a> led by US scholar Eli Noam. This study found that Australian newspaper circulation was the most concentrated of 26 countries surveyed, and among the most concentrated in the democratic world. </p>
<p>In the the 2014 book <a href="http://scholarly.info/book/400/">Companion to the Australian Media</a>, I wrote that News Corp Australia, Fairfax Media and APN News and Media together hold the vast majority of the sector. By contrast, people in the <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/media-ownership/">US can choose from a broader range of media</a> controlled by a bigger pool of firms. The UK market, <a href="http://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Who_owns_the_UK_media-report_plus_appendix1.pdf">criticised by media reform activists</a> for its level of concentration, is also <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/21/uk-media-plurality-threatened-by-dominant-group-of-large-firms-report">less concentrated</a> than Australia’s.</p>
<p>It is important to distinguish between media ownership and circulation, a problem former prime minister Kevin Rudd ran into when he incorrectly <a href="https://theconversation.com/factcheck-does-murdoch-own-70-of-newspapers-in-australia-16812">said</a> in 2013 that Rupert Murdoch owns 70% of the newspapers in Australia. In fact, he was closer to the mark on the circulation of News Corp Australia’s capital city and daily newspaper titles.</p>
<h2>A steady decline in newspaper titles since 1900</h2>
<p>In 1903, there were 21 daily newspapers across Australia’s eight capital cities, and 17 different owners. By the 1950s, there had been a gradual consolidation to <a href="http://scholarly.info/media/">15 daily newspapers and ten owners</a>. </p>
<p>As IBISWorld <a href="http://www.ibisworld.com.au/industry/default.aspx?indid=169">noted</a> in 2016, there are now ten metropolitan or state-wide newspapers are published in Australia. News Australia and Fairfax Media own these newspapers, with the exception of The West Australian, which is owned by Seven West Media.</p>
<p>In 2015, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-19/news-corp-takes-14.99pc-slice-of-apn-news-and-media/6332662">News Corporation took a 14.99% stake in APN News and Media</a> – a nominal .01% below the point that it’s deemed to be a “controlling interest” under Australia’s <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/bsa1992214/sch1.html">media ownership laws</a>. This further increased News Corp’s print media ownership. </p>
<h2>TV and radio</h2>
<p>A June 2016 <a href="http://www.ibisworld.com.au/industry/default.aspx?indid=1816">report on Australian free-to-air TV broadcasting</a> by market research firm IBISWorld said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The industry displays a high market share concentration … Australian media and broadcasting industries are highly concentrated in comparison with the rest of the world. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The report said that the four largest players in the local free-to-air TV industry, Seven West Media, Nine Entertainment, Ten Network Holdings and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, are estimated to account for more than 70% of total revenue (including both advertising and government funding) in 2015-16. The other significant players are SBS and commercial network affiliates Prime Media, WIN Corporation and Southern Cross Media, the report said.</p>
<p>Another IBISWorld report on the Australian radio industry <a href="http://www.ibisworld.com.au/industry/default.aspx?indid=638">said</a> in 2016 that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The radio broadcasting industry is highly concentrated. In 2016-17, the industry’s four largest players – Southern Cross Media, the ABC, APN News and Media and Nova Entertainment - are expected to account for 70.9% of industry revenue. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>In 2015, Fairfax bought a <a href="http://www.fairfaxmedia.com.au/Company/corporate-profile">54.5% interest in Macquarie Radio Network</a>.</p>
<h2>Online and pay TV</h2>
<p>Back in 2011, the Centre for Policy Development <a href="https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Centre_for_Policy_Development_Issue_Brief.pdf">reported</a> that Australians regularly look at 12 websites that could be classified as “news based”, saying that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… of these 12 websites, eight are owned by News Limited or Fairfax, with the rest owned by the ABC, BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation), PBL media and Microsoft.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=194&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=194&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=194&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148765/original/image-20161205-25724-1vbcjs7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Where did Australians seek their online news in 2011?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Centre_for_Policy_Development_Issue_Brief.pdf">Centre for Policy Development report -- Media Ownership and Regulation in Australia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While those websites remain important, <a href="http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2015/australia-2015/">new sites</a> have entered the market in recent years – and no outlet can safely assume readers will go to their homepage to read the news. Instead, as the <a href="http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2016/how-audiences-discover-news-online-2016/">Digital News Report 2016</a> showed, many Australians are turning to social networks such as Facebook or search engines like Google first to find out the latest news. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=328&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=328&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=328&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148790/original/image-20161206-25727-10vl6da.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How people around the world discover news online is changing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2016/how-audiences-discover-news-online-2016/">Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2016</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>News Corp <a href="https://www.foxtel.com.au/about/the-company/company-profile.html">owns controlling stakes in Foxtel</a> – which <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/who-owns-the-worlds-media-9780199987238?cc=au&lang=en&#">has a monopoly</a> in the pay TV market – and Sky News, which is <a href="http://www.skynews.com.au/connect/about-sky-news.html">carried by Foxtel</a>. </p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Michelle Rowland was correct. A number of reputable sources show that the concentration of media ownership in Australia is one of the highest in the world. <strong>– Tim Dwyer.</strong></p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This FactCheck author has produced an accurate, fair and impartial account of the facts on this matter. It follows that the verdict is correct. This assessment applies both to the absolute degree of media concentration in Australia and to the comparison with the rest of the world. <strong>– Denis Muller.</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><div class="callout"> Have you ever seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68437/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Dwyer receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a project about sharing news online.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Was shadow minister for communications Michelle Rowland right when she said Australia’s level of media ownership concentration is one of the highest in the world?Tim Dwyer, Associate Professor, Department of Media and Communications, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/666832016-10-11T05:14:16Z2016-10-11T05:14:16ZBuyouts mean the future of Australian video-on-demand is hard to picture<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/141174/original/image-20161011-3903-1y6nqdd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The hugely popular Game of Thrones could be a crucial drawcard for Foxtel Play's new viewers.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Village Roadshow Production</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The dust is showing no sign of settling on Australia’s video-on-demand (VoD) media landscape. The past week has seen two seismic shifts which will have a flow-on effect on almost anyone who watches subscription-based television.</p>
<p>First came the news of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-04/presto-to-disappear-as-seven-sells-stake-to-foxtel/7900778">Foxtel’s takeover of Presto</a>, with the latter’s customers being transferred to Foxtel Play when Presto shuts down next year.</p>
<p>Then the ailing VoD service <a href="https://www.quickflix.com.au/">Quickflix</a> gained a surprise stay of execution, being <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/quickflix-snapped-up-for-13m-by-us-entrepreneur-20161004-gruqoq.html">saved by a US buyer</a> after going into <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-shake-up-in-australias-busy-tv-industry-as-quickflix-calls-in-the-administrators-58487">voluntary receivership</a> earlier this year.</p>
<p>The shakeup has left viewers wondering where their subscription fees are going to end up, and what content they will be able to access once the merry-go-round stops.</p>
<h2>Quickflix’s future?</h2>
<p>Quickflix’s problems began in 2014, when former stakeholder HBO sold its shares to Nine Entertainment. The following year the shares were transferred to Stan, Nine’s new joint VoD venture with Fairfax Media. </p>
<p>When Quickflix went into voluntary receivership, it stated Stan’s unwillingness to bargain with potential buyers as a key reason for its <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-shake-up-in-australias-busy-tv-industry-as-quickflix-calls-in-the-administrators-58487">demise</a>.</p>
<p>Quickflix has now been saved, although it is not clear what it will become or what its focus will be. US media entrepreneur Erik Pence has paid A$1.3 million, and the holding for the purchase, Karma Media, plans to retain 24 employees and pay entitlements to former employees. </p>
<p>There will <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/quickflix-snapped-up-for-13m-by-us-entrepreneur-20161004-gruqoq.html">reportedly</a> be more investment in marketing and a shift towards more niche content. This latter strategy has been a globally successful tactic for other VoD and online platforms such as <a href="http://netflix.com">Netflix</a>, <a href="http://youtube.com">YouTube</a> and <a href="https://www.fullscreen.com">Fullscreen</a>. </p>
<p>But it is unclear whether Quickflix’s new service will support the production of Australian content in any way – or even whether it will primarily offer movies, television series, or both. This makes it difficult to analyse the impact its re-emergence will have on the Australian VoD landscape.</p>
<h2>Hey Presto</h2>
<p>In contrast, the future of Presto has been made very clear indeed. Foxtel has acquired Seven West Media’s interests in the service and confirmed that it will cease on January 31, 2017. </p>
<p>This arguably makes Presto the first real casualty of the battle that has sprung up in Australia’s crowded VoD landscape.</p>
<p>Presto has been constantly reported as struggling for subscribers against competition from Netflix and Stan. A recent Roy Morgan <a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6839-netflix-stan-presto-subscription-video-on-demand-may-2016-201606141025">report</a> from this year showed how far Presto was behind its competition. </p>
<p>Presto had 142,000 subscriptions, less than half of the 332,000 signed up to its local competitor Stan. Even combined, these numbers are far short of international giant Netflix, which has <a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6839-netflix-stan-presto-subscription-video-on-demand-may-2016-201606141025">1,878,000 Australian subscriptions</a>.</p>
<p>Foxtel plans to move Presto’s subscribers over to its internet-delivered service Foxtel Play by the end of this year. In a <a href="https://www.foxtel.com.au/about/media-centre/press-releases/2016/foxtel-revamps-its-streaming-video-service.html">media release</a> Foxtel promised that “Presto customers will get access to more premium first run television programs and more recent movies than ever before” – raising the question of whether they were holding back on content before the takeover.</p>
<p>The Foxtel Play service also may not be what current Presto customers are expecting, nor is there a guarantee that it will end up costing the same.</p>
<h2>Does Foxtel really want to compete?</h2>
<p>It is clear that Foxtel is trying to compete with current VoD services, as underlined by its <a href="https://www.foxtel.com.au/about/media-centre/press-releases/2016/foxtel-revamps-its-streaming-video-service.html">recent announcement</a> that Foxtel Play entry prices will be cut to A$10 from the current A$25. But Foxtel Play’s <a href="https://www.foxtel.com.au/content/dam/foxtel/foxtelplay/support/pp-change/foxtel-play-pp-changes.pdf">subscription pricing structure</a> is much more complicated than other VoD services. </p>
<p>Unlike <a href="https://www.netflix.com/au/">Netflix</a> or <a href="https://www.stan.com.au">Stan</a>, which charge a flat fee for all content (although Netflix charges extra fees for more screens and HD qaulity), Foxtel Play has different prices for different content packages, much like Foxtel’s pay TV pricing structure. The content on Foxtel Play is not HD, although will <a href="http://decidertv.com/page/2016/10/7/foxtel-play-foxtel-go-will-make-the-switch-to-high-definition-foxtel">reportedly</a> be upgraded in 2017. </p>
<p>Foxtel Play’s <a href="https://www.foxtel.com.au/about/media-centre/press-releases/2016/foxtel-revamps-its-streaming-video-service.html">packages</a> include a basic offering of Documentary, Lifestyle or Kids programming at A$10 each per month, plus Premium Drama and Premium Entertainment options at A$15 each per month. Customers can also add Sport (A$25 per month) or Movies (A$20 per month) on top of these. So it seems likely that many customers end up paying more than those subscribing to other VoD services.</p>
<p>At first glance, Foxtel shutting down Presto could appear to be a way in which it can gain new Foxtel Play subscribers while dissuading viewers from defecting to Stan or Netflix. But the actual numbers may be small, according to Roy Morgan’s recent <a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6990-most-presto-subscribers-already-have-netflix-stan-or-foxtel-too-august-2016-201610050930">research</a>. </p>
<p>Of the 143,000 Australian homes with Presto, 77% already have an alternative VoD or pay TV service, which could include Netflix, Stan and Foxtel. Of Presto households, 55% also use Netflix and 27% have signed up to Stan. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, almost half of Presto subscribers already have Foxtel, mainly through its traditional set-top box service. Foxtel itself has <a href="https://mumbrella.com.au/foxtel-admits-subscriber-figures-include-presto-users-but-claims-cable-still-biggest-growth-driver-311968">admitted</a> to using Presto subscription numbers to bump up its own quoted subscriber growth numbers for 2015. </p>
<p>But Foxtel has two key advantages over Netflix and Stan. The first is HBO content, most notably the wildly popular series Game of Thrones. Next year Foxtel will <a href="https://www.foxtel.com.au/about/media-centre/press-releases/2016/foxtel-revamps-its-streaming-video-service.html">significantly increase</a> the amount of HBO content it offers.</p>
<p>The second advantage is sport, which fittingly is where the fiercest competition is set to play out among rival platforms.</p>
<h2>Into the sporting arena</h2>
<p>Sport streaming is poised as the next battleground in Australian video streaming, VoD and video subscriptions. If planned changes to <a href="http://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Broadcast/Television/TV-content-regulation/sport-anti-siphoning-tv-content-regulation-acma">anti-siphoning rules</a> are made, the battle will become even more intense.</p>
<p>Foxtel Play’s pricing will allow access to Foxtel’s sports package for A$35 a month, A$15 cheaper than its pay TV sports package. But is it cheap enough?</p>
<p>Telcos themselves have now become sports broadcasters, with both <a href="https://www.telstra.com.au/tv-movies-music/sport">Telstra</a> and <a href="http://www.optus.com.au/shop/entertainment/sport">Optus</a> heavily invested in sports streaming – the latter after <a href="https://theconversation.com/optus-the-new-player-in-australias-sports-media-rights-battle-50069">sensationally pinching</a> the rights to the Premier League from Foxtel. </p>
<p>Seven’s recent broadcast of the Rio 2016 Olympics also <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-rio-olympics-are-a-test-case-for-the-future-of-sports-broadcasting-63589">raised many questions</a> about future sports broadcasting and media rights. With Seven no longer involved with Presto, it could set its sights on sport and furthering its partnership with Telstra.</p>
<p>If Telstra were to <a href="https://theconversation.com/bed-fellows-no-more-its-foxtel-versus-telstra-in-battle-for-online-subscribers-56672">sell its stake</a> in Foxtel, it may decide to invest more money in becoming a direct competitor to Foxtel Play.</p>
<p>This will open opportunities for streaming not only for major international competitions, but leagues that currently enjoy less funding and publicity. The Women’s AFL could be a perfect place to start – offering a homegrown product to homegrown viewers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66683/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc C-Scott is a board member of C31 Melbourne (Community Television Station).</span></em></p>With Quickflix saved but Presto on the way out, it’s hard to predict who will emerge as the winners as battle for video-on-demand viewers intensifies.Marc C-Scott, Lecturer in Screen Media, Victoria UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/545402016-02-16T18:22:46Z2016-02-16T18:22:46ZRegional TV fights back as more programmes are ‘broadcast’ online<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111606/original/image-20160216-22587-1oguh5u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Nine's new online streaming service means it can reach beyond its metro boundaries, and regional broadcasters are not happy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock/Antonio Guillem</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australia’s broadcasting regulations are under question again following the announcement last week that a regional broadcaster has <a href="http://mumbrella.com.au/win-takes-nine-to-court-over-live-streaming-345668">launched legal action</a> against live streaming online by a rival metro broadcaster, with which it has a programming deal.</p>
<p>WIN television’s owner, Bruce Gordon, argues the Nine Network’s <a href="https://www.9now.com.au/live">9Now</a> service violates an agreement with the metro broadcaster by live-streaming its channels into regional areas in which WIN holds commercial TV broadcast licences.</p>
<p>Nine’s streaming service allows anyone in Australia access to the station’s broadcast via any device with an internet connection. The definition of “broadcast” will be a key argument within the case and whether live-streaming is the same as the traditional broadcast of television stations.</p>
<p>The aim of the legal action is to prevent the Nine’s live stream from being accessed within regional areas where the WIN network’s broadcast is available. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=534&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=534&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111245/original/image-20160211-29185-1k1jvoz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=534&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bruce Gordon’s media interests.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ACMA</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Essentially Gordon is hoping to <a href="https://theconversation.com/unlocking-the-geoblock-australians-embrace-vpns-32373">geoblock</a> Nine’s stream, similar to the debate associated with <a href="https://www.netflix.com/au/">Netflix</a> since the US-based Video on Demand (VoD) service went <a href="https://theconversation.com/netflix-is-everywhere-almost-so-what-does-this-mean-for-local-media-52857">global</a>. </p>
<p>But this increase in live streaming and VoD online continues to raise questions over the future of linear broadcast television in Australia.</p>
<h2>Australian live streaming services</h2>
<p>Nine’s streaming service was <a href="http://mi9.com.au/article.aspx?id=9080034">launched</a> at the beginning of February this year. But Nine was not the first Australian free-to-air (FTA) station to start live streaming its broadcasts. </p>
<p>The Seven Network’s live stream, <a href="https://au.tv.yahoo.com/plus7/live/">Plus 7</a>, launched <a href="http://www.mediaweek.com.au/live-streaming-for-seven-7two-and-7mate/">late last year</a>. Seven also used the tennis and its 7Tennis app as a way to <a href="http://decidertv.com/page/2016/1/17/7-tennis-app-now-available-on-the-big-screen-with-appletv-7tennis-appletv">entice the Australian audience</a> to use the live stream services. </p>
<p>The Ten Network is the only commercial broadcaster to not provide a full live stream. Although the station has a limited <a href="http://tenplay.com.au/live">live stream</a> service that includes programmes such as The Bold and the Beautiful, TEN Eyewitness News First at Five and I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here!. </p>
<h2>Winners and losers</h2>
<p>Gordon is the first to launch legal action over the streaming services by metro based commercial FTA broadcasters. It was made very clear last year that regional broadcaster were <a href="http://mumbrella.com.au/prime-and-other-regional-tv-networks-take-aim-at-new-plus7-mobile-app-in-media-reform-push-313297">less than supportive</a> of the Seven Network’s Plus 7 launch. </p>
<p>Seven launched the new service by asking viewers: what if you could take your TV anywhere?</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vvBRgR_9rDA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Seven TV everywhere TV ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But if you can take your TV everywhere, then there are issues associated with media ownership. Regional broadcasters currently don’t have live-streaming services, meaning any viewer who watches a live commercial television stream would be watching the metro-based service. </p>
<p>For the regional broadcasters, this means they are losing out on any advertising revenue they receive with their traditional broadcast business model. For the viewer, it means they will not receive the any local regional content, such as local news.</p>
<p>The regional broadcasters are fighting back and have launched a campaign called <a href="http://www.saveourvoices.com.au/">Save Our Voices</a>, arguing the media laws are “stuck in the last century”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/drm6vEkS0u8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Save Our Voice Campaign.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Media ownership laws outdated?</h2>
<p>There have been a number of changes in the television industry within Australia in the past few years. The current media ownership laws <a href="http://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Broadcast/Media-ownership-and-control/Ownership-and-control-rules/statutory-control-rules-media-ownership-control-acma">say</a> no commercial television license holder can broadcast to more than 75% of the Australian population.</p>
<p>Currently the three commercial networks have the following <a href="http://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Broadcast/Media-ownership-and-control/Ownership-and-control-rules/statutory-control-rules-media-ownership-control-acma">population reach</a>:</p>
<ul>
<li>Seven 73.81%</li>
<li>Nine 73.55%</li>
<li>Ten 66.70%.</li>
</ul>
<p>In addition there are also rules on the <a href="http://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Broadcast/Media-ownership-and-control/Ownership-and-control-rules/statutory-control-rules-media-ownership-control-acma">cross ownership of media</a>, including television and radio broadcasting.</p>
<p>The snapshot below shows the interlinking across the media ownership in Australia. What’s absent is the ownership of the Australian VoD services, <a href="https://www.presto.com.au/">Presto</a> and <a href="https://www.stan.com.au/">Stan</a>, in which Foxtel, Fairfax, Seven and Nine have interests.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/111418/original/image-20160214-29188-1uu72gx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australian media interest snapshot.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ACMA</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It is clear that these ownership laws are outdated and do not factor in the immense changes that have occurred recently in the television industry. Television stations now not only broadcast linear content to a television set, but also use the internet as a method allowing streaming to internet connected devices.</p>
<p>All Australian television stations now have catch-up services, including the ABC’s <a href="http://iview.abc.net.au/">iView</a> and SBS’s <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/">On Demand</a>.</p>
<p>That means all stations now have access to a potential audience beyond the broadcast restriction of no more 75% of the Australian population.</p>
<p>I would suggest the ownership laws need to be reviewed in light of these developments. Not only is the ownership an issue, but also the platforms that are incorporated into the ownership laws.</p>
<h2>Live streaming of sport</h2>
<p>In addition to the policy factor, there are questions associated with the live stream of FTA broadcasts and the impact this has on recent sport media rights deals.</p>
<p>Both the <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-the-afl-gets-richer-who-gets-richer-with-it-46321">AFL</a> and the <a href="http://www.nrl.com/nrl-broadcast-rights-deal-announced/tabid/10874/newsid/91023/default.aspx">NRL</a> have completed <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-the-afl-gets-richer-who-gets-richer-with-it-46321">billion dollar media deals</a>, with the digital rights encompassed as part of these rights.</p>
<p>How will the live streaming by Seven and Nine impact these deals? Seven is involved with <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-the-afl-gets-richer-who-gets-richer-with-it-46321">AFL deal</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/foxtel-boxed-into-a-corner-as-sport-streaming-takes-hold-46074">Nine with NRL</a>. Nine will soon start discussions with Cricket Australia as the media rights <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-future-of-sportscasting-cricket-australia-launches-on-apple-tv-35253">will soon expire</a>. Will the new live streaming service by the FTA broadcasters play a part in these discussions?</p>
<p>Telstra <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-afl-nrl-win-live-footy-court-battle-20120426-1xoth.html">successfully sued</a> Optus over a copyright breach for both the NRL and AFL in 2012. So there is evidence of live streaming being an issue in association to media right deals, particularly sport.</p>
<h2>Australian television will continue to change</h2>
<p>The local commercial broadcasters involved in VoD services are battling with the global Netflix to gain subscriptions. Ten is also the only one of the three metro commercial FTA broadcasters not to have involvement with a VoD service. </p>
<p>This is a market that is yet to get any easier. I have <a href="https://theconversation.com/netflix-is-everywhere-almost-so-what-does-this-mean-for-local-media-52857">said before</a> that I believe we would see more reality and sport on commercial television as a way to focus on a service not provided by the new VoD services. </p>
<p>But now even the reality programmes are about to have another spin in Australia with the launch of <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/gadgets-on-the-go/nbcuniversals-hayu-streams-reality-tv-overdose-as-pay-tv-bundle-is-reborn-20160212-gmsd3j.html">Hayu</a>, a new VoD service specially focused on reality TV. The <a href="http://www.nbcuniversal.com/">NBCUniversal</a> service will have many of the titles which are available Foxtel and on Nine’s 9Life.</p>
<p>In addition, Disney is planning to <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/disney-plots-australian-svod-service-20160212-gmsuye.html">launch a VoD service</a> in Australia, possibly in a deal with a local telecommunications company. This could impact on Foxtel, which currently has four dedicated channels containing Disney content. </p>
<p>It is clear the Australian television industry, including the VoD services, is continuing to change at a far greater rate than we have ever seen. Policy changes will not be able to keep up pace with this rate of change. </p>
<p>The live streaming services by metro broadcasters have again brought Australian media ownership laws into focus. If television stations can now stream online, therefore effective reaching all Australians (with internet access), then the media ownership reach rule is redundant.</p>
<p>But what impact will this have on regional broadcasters, their content and regional audiences? We may find out some answers when WIN’s case against Nine reaches the NSW Supreme Court, due in April.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/54540/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc C-Scott is a board member of C31 Melbourne (Community Television Station).</span></em></p>The rise on live streaming of television programs is breaking down the protected geographical barriers on what you can watch, and the regional broadcasters are not happy.Marc C-Scott, Lecturer in Screen Media, Victoria UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/389792015-03-24T19:15:18Z2015-03-24T19:15:18ZHeed Fraser’s warning on Australian media concentration – it’s getting worse<p>The passing of former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser last Friday prompted me to recall his warning about the state of Australian media ownership <a href="http://electionwatch.edu.au/australia-2013/election-rewind/malcolm-fraser-contemporary-media-and-politics">in an interview</a> I did with him during the last federal election.</p>
<p>He said: “In my term, there were seven print proprietors. Now there is one and a bit. We have the most concentrated media in any democratic country, anywhere in the entire damn world. That is dangerous.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Malcolm Fraser for The Conversation: <a href="https://theconversation.com/malcolm-fraser-does-it-matter-who-owns-our-papers-yes-it-does-7738">Does it matter who owns our papers? Yes it does</a></p>
<hr>
<p>Malcolm Fraser’s warning is one we should take seriously. As Fairfax Media finalises union talks this week to cut 80 local jobs across its regional newspapers, and federal communications minister Malcolm Turnbull is again flagging relaxing media ownership laws, local news is particularly under threat in the global media environment where large audience reach matters.</p>
<h2>More regional cuts</h2>
<p>In Victoria, to remain competitive in this environment, Fairfax has proposed cutting 62 editorial jobs among the 80 full-time positions earmarked for redundancy across 13 regional mastheads including Albury Wondonga’s Border Mail, The Ballarat Courier, Bendigo Advertiser and The Warrnambool Standard. </p>
<p>Local MPs and city councillors in these regions have spoken out against the cuts with independent MP Cathy McGowan telling the <a href="http://www.bordermail.com.au/story/2955199/cathy-mcgowan-stands-up-for-the-border-mail/">Federal Parliament last week</a> that regional newspapers such as the Border Mail play an important role providing local news and any job cuts could impact on this service.</p>
<p>The union representing local reporters, the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, will meet Fairfax in Sydney today to discuss the cuts. It is understood that the Border Mail will lose up to 23 staff, the Wimmera Mail will lose 40% of its workforce, the Ballarat Courier will lose some reporting staff and its news director, and most of the newspapers will lose some photographers and sub-editors.</p>
<h2>Diversity being squeezed</h2>
<p>Fairfax’s regional publishing business Australian Community Media (ACM) is also proposing a common newspaper template with opportunities for content sharing. Journalists spared from the sackings will be required to do more with less including taking photographs, sub-editing their stories and uploading them online. </p>
<p>The implications of these changes are concerning for the diversity of local reporting, its accuracy and future print circulation figures, which until now have remained buoyant compared to their city cousins. A well-functioning democracy requires an informed citizenry and, to do this, journalists find and verify information in the public interest, rather than just selecting information from press releases. Citizen journalists can fulfil some of this local news gathering role, but subject coverage can be patchy and lacking editorial authority.</p>
<p>The all-too-soon forgotten <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/1205_finkelstein.pdf">Finkelstein media inquiry in 2012</a> reminds us that some local communities are already the poorer for losing local news outlets. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is some evidence that both regional radio and television stations and newspapers have cut back substantially on their news gathering, leaving some communities poorly served for local news. This may require particular support in the immediate future, and I recommend that this issue be investigated by the government as a matter of some urgency.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Changes mooted for media laws</h2>
<p>Yet, Malcolm Turnbull, photographed last year standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the nation’s media executives and flagging changes to media laws, has this month again raised the prospect of such reforms in a submission to the Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Turnbull’s argument essentially is that the internet has lowered the barriers to entry and enabled greater competition and more media diversity. At face value this sounds promising. Yet, such changes would make possible further media mergers and acquisitions and what such reforms would mean for local news reporting requires careful consideration.</p>
<p>Veteran journalists can readily recall the days when Canadian Conrad Black divested his stake in Fairfax because foreign ownership laws in 1996 prevented his company owning more than a 25% share of an Australian media outlet. </p>
<p>Today, among Australia’s top 10 news websites, all are digital iterations of traditional media outlets. The only new entrants to this list are not new Australian start-ups but large, foreign-owned companies such as Britain’s Daily Mail (fourth) and the Australian version of the British-owned Guardian (sixth).</p>
<h2>Foreign arrivals</h2>
<p>Foreign-owned media companies are reaching out to Australian shores as never before — not only do we have Australian versions of the Guardian and Daily Mail, but BuzzFeed, and very soon the Huffington Post (in a 51-49 partnership with Fairfax). In the broadcast media sphere US-owned Netflix announced it will undercut local competitors — Presto, jointly owned by Foxtel and Seven West Media; and Stan, a Fairfax and Nice Entertainment Co. partnership — to stream video content to Australian subscribers for $8.99 a month.</p>
<p>The arrival of foreign-owned media is interesting in the context that we once had specific laws to guard against it in the name of protecting Australian news content and its democratic function. Oddly, in 2015 when local newspapers are experiencing financial duress, there is little examination about what these offshore arrivals mean for Australian audiences and Australian news content, particularly in terms of local news. </p>
<h2>Start-ups struggling to survive</h2>
<p>Perhaps, the important question arising out of this global media environment is not how to limit competition and potential sources of news diversity; but rather, what can be done to encourage growth in Australian news media start-ups? The current environment makes it very difficult for them to succeed long-term, as Wendy Harmer identified yesterday when announcing her online outlet <a href="http://thehoopla.com.au/">The Hoopla</a> will close. In the US, start-up news reporting entities are tax-exempt non-profits recognised by the IRS under section 501(c)(3) of the tax code.</p>
<p>Australia’s Finkelstein media review also included suggestions for tax breaks for non-profit news outlets. Another idea was to allocate a proportion of Australia’s multi-million dollar government advertising and public notices expenditure for new news ventures.</p>
<p>Of course, the ABC plays a unique role delivering local Australian news across the nation’s states, but it too has suffered recent substantial funding cuts and journalism job losses.</p>
<p>The right formula to preserve the diversity of Australian local reporting might lie elsewhere, but shouldn’t we at least engage in the conversation?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38979/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrea Carson is part of a research team based at the University of Melbourne's Centre for Advancing Journalism that is investigating the civic impact of journalism and local news reporting.</span></em></p>if anything, media concentration is worsening and diversity won’t be improved by changing Australia’s media ownership laws.Andrea Carson, Lecturer, Media and Politics; Honorary Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism , The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.